British 24 pound siege gun... (1 Viewer)

mikemiller1955

mikemiller1955

Lieutenant General
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
17,490
John is making a 24 pound siege gun for the British for his Chippewa series...

he was nice enough to share it with me...so I thought I would pass it along...

I thought maybe the Nap collectors might also enjoy a look at it...

his artillery crew offerings should be pretty good sized too for it...

a large crew is planned I think...

anyway...hope this gun is released soon...

it's just a massive piece...it's huge...

the emblems on the barrel are especially attractive to me...

great detail on the strappings and hardware too...


BCHGUN02b.jpg
 
Wow - that's going to be huge, but spectacular. I ordered the Frech cannon from Quebec City and think that is large.

I'm not sure the 24 pdr gun would work in the NAP period as there was a change in cannon design and carriage design by about 1800. But I'm not sure as they may have still used the old 24 pdrs for sieges on the peninsula?

Terry
 
Phantom Warrior said:
Wow - that's going to be huge, but spectacular. I ordered the Frech cannon from Quebec City and think that is large.

I'm not sure the 24 pdr gun would work in the NAP period as there was a change in cannon design and carriage design by about 1800. But I'm not sure as they may have still used the old 24 pdrs for sieges on the peninsula?

Terry
Click to expand...

Terry, I believe this gun was designed with the Battle of Chippewa in mind, so North American theatre, definitely unusual for a British battery, but I believe historically correct (and all the more reason for me to get one!!). By the looks of it, this gun actually weighs 24 pounds!
 
Scarlet Pimpernel said:
Terry, I believe this gun was designed with the Battle of Chippewa in mind, so North American theatre, definitely unusual for a British battery, but I believe historically correct (and all the more reason for me to get one!!). By the looks of it, this gun actually weighs 24 pounds!
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with a 24 pdr at Chippewa. Was it used as a fortress gun and did it actually get into the battle. In the field the Brits were using 6 pdrs with their single tail gun trail.

Terry
 
Phantom Warrior said:
I am not familiar with a 24 pdr at Chippewa. Was it used as a fortress gun and did it actually get into the battle. In the field the Brits were using 6 pdrs with their single tail gun trail.

Terry
Click to expand...

Terry...this might help...

Early on July 5, British light infantry, militia and Indians crossed the Chippawa ahead of Riall's main body and began sniping at Scott's outposts from the woods to their west. (Some of them nearly captured Scott, who was having breakfast in a farmhouse.)[12] Brown ordered Porter's brigade and Indians to clear the woods. They did so, but they met Riall's advancing regulars and hastily retreated.

Scott was already advancing from Street's Creek. His artillery (Captain Nathaniel Towson's company, with three 12-pounder guns) deployed on the portage road and opened fire. Riall's own guns (two light 24-pounder guns and a 5.5-inch howitzer) attempted to reply, but Towson's guns destroyed an ammunition wagon and put most of the British guns out of action.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chippawa
 
Phantom Warrior said:
I am not familiar with a 24 pdr at Chippewa. Was it used as a fortress gun and did it actually get into the battle. In the field the Brits were using 6 pdrs with their single tail gun trail.

Terry
Click to expand...

Hey, Terry. Yes, the British (under Major General Phineas Riall) were in possession of two light 24 pound guns and a 5.5 Howitzer...I know that is odd, given that British units typically took 6 and 9 pounders into the field. Beats me why they had them (unless they were expecting to siege American strongholds), but it is apparently correct. Sorry I can't provide more accurate historical perspective...American theatre is really outside my knowledge, but I am familiar with Napoleonic artillery. As far as the trail goes, you are correct that the British were by now typically using single trail gun carriages in the field for both 6 and 9 pound guns as prescribed under the Congreave system. However, the larger guns (usually used for siege) typically required a more robust platform, and so the double trail on the 24 pounder would have been quite correct.
 
Scarlet Pimpernel said:
Hey, Terry. Yes, the British (under Major General Phineas Riall) were in possession of two light 24 pound guns and a 5.5 Howitzer...I know that is odd, given that British units typically took 6 and 9 pounders into the field. Beats me why they had them (unless they were expecting to siege American strongholds), but it is apparently correct. Sorry I can't provide more accurate historical perspective...American theatre is really outside my knowledge, but I am familiar with Napoleonic artillery. As far as the trail goes, you are correct that the British were by now typically using single trail gun carriages in the field for both 6 and 9 pound guns as prescribed under the Congreave system. However, the larger guns (usually used for siege) typically required a more robust platform, and so the double trail on the 24 pounder would have been quite correct.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to get over the Brits taking 24 pdrs in the field. They had stopped doing that in Europe unless it was for a siege. In fact, no European army was using 24 pdrs in the field as a rule by then. And they had roads in Europe - not cart paths like in Niagara.

The 2 tail trail is correct for a 24 pdr, but there probably should be a couple of cross pieces in the open area.

Terry
 
For those of us stuck in the "FIW", we can only dream of these in a "French" paint scheme. Hello, Fort William Henry!!
 
I have not seen a picture of the "big gun" posted yet...

and yes it is big...

here's a few pics of JJD's artillery guns for comparison...

even though one of the guns is a US gun...

I used British artillery crew on all the pictures...

this gun is HUGE!!!

the British 1814 24lb siege gun...

101_2051.jpg


the US Army 1814 8 lb gun...with British crew...

101_2052.jpg


the British 1814 6lb gun...

101_2054.jpg


the British FIW 6lb gun...

101_2053.jpg
 
Fraxinus said:
Any chance to see the 6, 8 and 24 pounders side by side?
Click to expand...

For you Ken...my favorite model builder and good friend...(with the beautiful fort you're working on)...anything...it's a pleasure...

(did you get my message on ballast)...

note the wheels on the 24 lb gun...the smallest of all...

the colors...blue...grey...sky blue...light grey...they are all close enough to work together...

I see no reason why a FIW 6 lb gun can't be used at 1814...

or any reason why a 24 lb field/siege gun can't be used at FIW...(other than there were none in country at that time and maybe they were not even manufactured yet)...the color is close enough...I'm not a rivet counter...


blue...grey...blue...grey...blue...grey...they look the same to me...my eyes aren't that good...

101_2070.jpg


101_2069.jpg


101_2068.jpg


101_2074.jpg


101_2073.jpg


101_2072.jpg


101_2071.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just what I wanted to see. Thanks, Mike!!!

The 24-pounder looks like a total beauty. It is too bad that only 2 of these guns were made by the British, but as things display best in odd numbers, I am thinking at least a minimum of 3 of these beauties for the collection.

Somewhat strange that the British tried this experiment with short 24-pounders at least twice ----- once during the French & Indian War and then around the time of the War of 1812.

You would think the British would have shipped the guns back to Britain and simply tested the "Canadian" cannons for suitability, rather than going through the expense of than having two manufacturers produce similar guns around 1812.

Now we need some garrison and siege cannons and carriages, plus 12-pounders on a field carriage. And a howitzer!!!

I am not picky as it regards the color the British blue/grey versus the American sky/blue --- just need the double tails for the FIW period.

A big plus for me would be the release of oxen to substitute out for horses. At the Battle of Fort William Henry, Montcalm had a considerable number of oxen to help in moving his artillery and capture more from the British, but was unable to keep the Indians from eating them.
 
Playing around with the 24 pounder.....What if captured by US troops and set up outside the walls of a fortification??

Comment as the possibilities bounce around your imagination

Walt Damon
DSC06298.JPG

DSC06300.JPG

DSC06273.JPG
 
mikemiller1955 said:
the colors...blue...grey...sky blue...light grey...they are all close enough to work together...

the color is close enough...I'm not a rivet counter...

blue...grey...blue...grey...blue...grey...they look the same to me...my eyes aren't that good...

I could never get my blue and grey to ever work close together . . they ususally end up fighting each other . . . we are talking about the ACW aren't we . . . . we're not!!!!! Oh well never mind then . . . . .
:) Mike
Click to expand...
 
I believe an earlier thread had made note of oxen to pull some of these heavier guns. I risk this post being in the wrong category, but I really would love to see John come up with some oxen pulling one of these behemoths. As an example I have attached some photos of a gun sled vignette I did up a few years back of the Knox movement of artillery from Ticoderoga. I realize it is a sled, from the AWI and it is in winter so may not fit the FT McHenry suggestion made earlier, but such a more time appropriate variation of the concept would certainly make an interesting addition to anyones collection from this period.
Do you think we should suggest John add some oxen and means of transport to the mix??

Walt Damon
Complete.jpg

Gunsledtoploaded.jpg

Gun%2BSled%2Bbefore%2BRopes.jpg

Yoke%2Band%2Bbase%2Bfit%2Bup.jpg

Oxen%2Band%2BTeamster.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top