Re: Musket Explosion
> From: "Leonard E Heidebrecht" <lheidebrecht@L...>Yes and this leads to a whole series of questions. Was the guy using
> I heard something on the radio this morning about a woman in the
> Kitchener Ont area, being injured by a musket ... the owner had all
> his other firearms (which were safe and not involved) seized by the
black powder or modern powder? Did he put a ball down the muzzle? If
so was it rammed all the way?
The article also states that the owner's legally owned and stored
other firearms were removed by the police. Why?
Now I just hope that some nutbar politician in Ottawa does not use
this incident as a rallying cry to legislate flintlocks into some
kind of stupid law.
- In reviewing my message #13236 below, I must admit I don't think it
is particularly appropriate to the discussion. Teddy was discussing
artillery. We are talking about muskets or rifles.
But I would say that the reproductions we use have modern
steel barrels of much greater strenght than the originals. And being
recent, have not suffered the depredations of time, neglect and
uncertain maintenance. Anyone using a 150 year old plus original in
re-enactment is an accident waiting to happen.
--- In WarOf1812@y..., "colsjtjones2000" <colsjtjones2000@y...> wrote:
> Teddy Roosevelt in his "The Naval War of 1812" mentions the
> of breech explosions of American forged guns, due to structual
> problems in American foundries. Doug
> --- In WarOf1812@y..., Angela Gottfred <agottfre@t...> wrote:
> > We needn't look to modern explanations (e.g. use of smokeless
> powder) for
> > exploding muskets. Sadly, I have found many fur trade accounts of
> > hands and arms as a result of exploding trade guns, c. 1800-1820.
> Why did
> > they explode? Presumably as a result of incorrect loading or weak
> > The same problems can occur today.
> > In haste,
> > Your humble & obedient servant,
> > Angela Gottfred