Superimposed firearms
 

I couldn't find to much information on superimposed firearms on this forum, so i hope i am not repetetive :D

Not to much information from my side for the moment, only pictures i want to share. Hopefully this will spark some discussion ;)

http://i42.tinypic.com/scwf34.jpg
http://i44.tinypic.com/igl0zr.jpg
http://i44.tinypic.com/140ikm.jpg

The correct term is superimposed load firearms ;), just like the title of D.R. Baxer's standard reference work (hard to find and extremely (!) expensive - I paid 300 euro; a copy is in my own library).
P.S. I just noted it's offered at 180 € at abebooks ...

The reason of course is that the loads in these guns were superimposed, not the firearms themselves.


BTW, sometimes the SEARCH button on the forum is of some help :rolleyes: - please see my threads:


http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...erimposed+load

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...erimposed+load

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...erimposed+load



Attached please find a scheme of the superimposed load principle of a four-barreled mid-17th c. wheellock carbine, from D.R. Baxter, 1966.




Best,
m

Aaaah darn (sorry ) i knew i had seen something similiar before, sorry michael :(

Hello:

Just to say that I think that the two arms of the beginning of the thread, are not superimposed loads, but two guns (barrel)

Fernando K

Although I did not author this thread: exactly, Fernando K, thanks!
Of course these are locks from over-and-under-barrel guns, not from superimposed-load firearms.
Marcus? ;)

Best,
Michael

correct again, ouch not a good day for me. :(
The multiple bullets on a row configuration is know to me, but i doubt it was used to often. I read that the bullets tended to get stuck inside the barrel?
On the other hand, i have seen replica's beeing fired without trouble. (not because they where replica's but because there is a lot of sense in the idea).

if i remember correctly (and that is pretty hard for me today apparently) i recall a firearm which used a trail of gunpowder in the middle of 2 barrels. With multiple holes in the barrel with a corresponding load of powder and bullet lined up.

Many horrible accidents must have happened when firing superimposed load guns. The tiniest mistake in the loader's concentration must have lead to a gore ...
I basically assume that it was literally impossible to flawlessly load them in the thick of a fight, so to speak ... And they of course were much too expensive and rare to voluntarily expose them to such a risk as well.


m

quit right indeed, especially since manpower was very cheap and even a "simple" farmer in a feudalistic society would have been able to shoot with the same accuracy as the pistol with the superimposed load (train of bullets / "roman candle" ).

Some other pictures than, quit a neat pistol, but horribly imbalanced i think (book: wheel lock firarms of the royal armouries, Craeme Rimmer, page 25) :(
http://i42.tinypic.com/2yl64g2.jpg

Some twenty years ago, I handled another triple-shot superimposed-load wheellock pistol from that same series by the very same maker, preserved in as-new condition and retaining all its original bluing, in the world-famous Habsburg Collection in Vienna, while the museum was closed to the public.
It was rather ill-balanced but please remember that these actually were arquebuses and were always held with two hands, with the buttstock touching the cheek!

The date assigned by Graeme is exactly correct: ca. 1555, most probably Augsburg.

Best,
Michael

I would like to add that the inside of the first detached wheellock mechanism posted by Marcus in this thread is for a ca. 1630 North Italian two-shot superimposed-load military carbine on the Bossi system.

I attached images of a Bossi carbine, formerly in the W. Keith Neal colln., from a Czerny's sales catalogue, and of three other superimposed-load wheellock guns from the W. Keith Neal colln., Christie's. Please mind that the flintlock musket, French, ca. 1640, obviously has severe working problems in both its locks as the cocks are not in the correct upright position for half-cock but they lean forward too much so that each flint actually touches the steel instead of standing clear off it!


Best,
Michael

And the description to the ca. 1640 flintlock superimposed-load musket.

m

Another image of the fine military carbine on the double-shot superimposed-load Giuliano Bossi system, sold from the W. Keith Neal colln., Christie's, 12 Dec 1997.
It fetched 15,000 Deutsche Mark, auction fees included.

m

Just an aside concerning the last picture attached in post #10:

The cock and steel of this ca. 1655-60 flintlock carbine are absolutely in the correct angle for mid-17th c. half-cock position demonstrating the malfunction of the superimposed-load flintlock gun in the above post (repeated here)!

m

yes, check christies Sale 9776 lot117

And another instance of a ca. 1645 Westfalian flintlock haquebut (wallgun), the barrel about 100 years earlier, ca. 1540, the cock and steel (frizzen) in the absolutely correct position for half- and full-cock.
From Christie's Schloss Dyck museum sale, part I, April 15, 1992, lot 48. I bought it at Christie's sale and for about ten years, it stayed in my collection.

m

A Four-Shot Superimposed-Load Military Matchlock Musket, ca. 1600-20
 

In the Koninklijk Leger Museum (Army Museum Brussels).

Please note the fact that - as is the case with many unusual and experimental guns! - all the serpentines are shaped and work differently! While three of them are snapping matchlocks and are released by the small, short trigger, the forward serpentine that initiates the first (topmost) shot is activated by the long tiller trigger that actually acts as a guard for the small trigger.


m

To the moderators!
 

On my own account, and as I pleaded in post #2 above, the main title of this thread really should in any case be altered to

Superimposed Load Firearms.

It does not make any sense the way it reads now! The loads were superimpsed, not the guns!


Thanks, and best,
Michael

:) not quite the same topic, but close: the superimposed load was the bane of the sergeants in a massed formation of muzzle loading muskets/rifles during volley fire.

excited soldiers would frequently forget to actually prime their weapon, and not notice they hadn't really fired a projectile, and, to maintain the 'flow' of their rank's motions, would reload a new charge, wad and ball on top of the existing one.

sergeants would, during lulls, have their squad drop their ramrods down the bore to see how much stuck out. one recruit was found (american civil war) to have had six loads in the barrel.

the sergeant would not have been amused. worming out charges is not fun. especially if you are being shot at. even worse, while being berated by an angry noncom.

i haven't decided if the recruit would have preferred to at some point in the making of the stack, to have primed and fired (and blown himself up) rather than suffer the wrath of his 3-striper.

oddly enough, the advent of self contained cartridges did not stop this effect, just reversed it a bit. recruits would forget to actually reload and would merrily recock their actions and dry-fire their way through a battle... again, if caught their sergeants would not be amused.

Superimposed charge drawn by Ghiberti Bonaccorso (about 1500 year)

Great catch, Alexander.

I must be repeating myself but, notwithstanding the veracity (and plausibility) of the above said, i have learnt of episodes occurred over year during the Peninsular war with a different approach in similar scenario. Large numbers of troopers were not volunteers but 'taken' from their houses to active war, including consciencious objectors. So what the late did in battle was, instead of actually shooting the gun, only repeatedly load it, to give the sergeant the idea that, with such gesture, they were acting 'normaly'; hence the same superimposed result.