cannon fire

[Amish John]

Chris G. wrote:

Cannister blast is the only in game sound that actually makes me cringe when i hear it, especially when i am uncertain as to where it's coming from.

NSD - I know this is more TC2M related, but where did the canister sound come from in TC2M and will it be the same in GB?

[BOSTON]

estabu2 wrote:

You will be happy to know that the artillery is MUCH improved over TC2M. Long range artillery does a little damage, while middle range say 300-600 does some pretty good stuff. Canister is still as deadly as ever.

Would my math be correct that cannister is good from 0 yds. to 299 yds., then middle ground would be 300-600 yds.?

[norb]

It won't be the same, as all MMG assets remain with MMG. VonViper is doing our sounds, so he'll be able to tell you where he's going with the NSD sounds.

[Hancock the Superb]

I would like to see a longer range firing for cannister - 300 yards was very common. However, for the infantry, often troops would start to fire at 400+ yards, very inaccurate, but if 1 hr was spent, several batteries could be wiped out.

One last request - can routed guns not move? I think that the men should run away - the gun should stay as a reminder of what actually happened.

[estabu2]

hoistingman4 wrote:

estabu2 wrote:

You will be happy to know that the artillery is MUCH improved over TC2M. Long range artillery does a little damage, while middle range say 300-600 does some pretty good stuff. Canister is still as deadly as ever.

Would my math be correct that cannister is good from 0 yds. to 299 yds., then middle ground would be 300-600 yds.?

I guess middle ground would be 200-600 then.:dry:

[BOSTON]

estabu2 wrote:

hoistingman4 wrote:

estabu2 wrote:

I guess middle ground would be 200-600 then.:dry:

Have'nt researched it yet, somewhere along the line I understood that rifled cannons could shoot cannister farther than smoothbores, but were'nt as effective as smoothbores using cannister. Any truth to that analagy?

[Armchair General]

hoistingman4 wrote:

estabu2 wrote:

hoistingman4 wrote:

estabu2 wrote: Have'nt researched it yet, somewhere along the line I understood that rifled cannons could shoot cannister farther than smoothbores, but were'nt as effective as smoothbores using cannister. Any truth to that analagy?

I've read that too and believe the idea goes something as follows. The rifling on the inside of the cannons caused the canister charges to spin, as they were supposed to, but in doing so made the canister blasts rise up in elevation just enough for the shots to whip above the attacking force's heads. On the other hand, smoothbores were just giant shotguns on wheels where the canister spanned out in great waves.

[Jim]

Another explanation is that the spin has two effects. First it concentrates the shot towards the outer edge of the pattern 'overkilling' those caught by the edge of the pattern and leaving few shot in the middle of the pattern. Second, is that the spin made the angle of divergence higher so that the shot spread out faster. It is important to remember that there were only 27 shot in a canister round in 1863. While the individual shot would carry to beyond 500 yards, at that range, the pattern was so wide that perhaps only a few shot would pass through the frontage occupied by marching soldiers.

I spent a lot of time doing numerical modeling of this issue and have the spreadsheets to prove it. The one missing item is hard data on the angle of divergence. I would pay cash for an artillery reenactor unit to fire an 1863 grade canister round at a large target at 200 yards from a 12 lb Napoleon and from a 3 in Ordnance rifle. This would provide the hard data needed to make the modeling really accurate.

-Jim

[BOSTON]

Jim wrote:

Another explanation is that the spin has two effects. First it concentrates the shot towards the outer edge of the pattern 'overkilling' those caught by the edge of the pattern and leaving few shot in the middle of the pattern. Second, is that the spin made the angle of divergence higher so that the shot spread out faster. It is important to remember that there were only 27 shot in a canister round in 1863. While the individual shot would carry to beyond 500 yards, at that range, the pattern was so wide that perhaps only a few shot would pass through the frontage occupied by marching soldiers.

I spent a lot of time doing numerical modeling of this issue and have the spreadsheets to prove it. The one missing item is hard data on the angle of divergence. I would pay cash for an artillery reenactor unit to fire an 1863 grade canister round at a large target at 200 yards from a 12 lb Napoleon and from a 3 in Ordnance rifle. This would provide the hard data needed to make the modeling really accurate.

-Jim

Sounds like a good Challange to demonstrate on the History Channel or that show where those two kooky guys on the Learning Channel do experiments on how something was done, cannister would be right up their ally, they're always blowing something up.

Hoistingman4

[Hancock the Superb]

Mythbusters is the name.