Reporter finds out that the gun laws she wanted already exist.

[Francis Urquhart]

Alright. When you use earplugs it did not impede you when you have to communicate with your fellow military?

To quote Colonel Jeff Cooper (to whom we raise our hats) "Recoil is 90 percent subjective." Holding the pistol or rifle properly can limit the perceived recoil and practice in handling the weapon in firing can do so as well. How does this affect sound? Well, the problem with the sound of a shot isn't volume, its the form of the sound-wave. Mostly sound in nature tends to rise relatively slowly, peak and fall again. The sound of a shot (usually) rises and falls much more quickly so it gives the perception of being much louder than it really is. What hearing protection does is shield the ears from that sudden rise in intensity. One can hear perfectly well while wearing ear-muffs. In my opinion, wearing plugs as well is a bit much but there's no particular problem with doing so other than the inconvenience and discomfort (which varies from person to person - some people have no problem at all, others find plugs quite unpleasant. It's quite surprising though how much difference ear muffs make by cutting out that sudden abrupt ride in pressure though - to the point where finding out what shots sound like without wearing them comes as a shock. Also, by the way, people voices sound different because of some frequencies being absorbed.

 

[Edgeplay_cgo]

Had a feeling I heard of that new article somewhere or maybe it was a different one about getting traumatised by a shooting videogame. What a pansy.

That said. It does pose an interesting question when guns were less advanced up to muskets when nobody had ear muffs for sound protection.

I presume gun users those days besides hunting and using it against other people will retain possible damages of using a gun that may damage their ears excluding other hazards during wartime.

Sound protection as a serious issue for shooters until about the sixties. I would expect infantrymen and artillerists from before that to mostly have had nerve damage to the auditory system. it is incurable, and hearing aids don't help. Onr primary and really irritating symptom is tinnitis, constant ringing of the ears. I got mine from sitting under the transmissions of Chinooks.

Getting recoil from a musket I'm not sure of unless I search that.

They typically recoilled severely. Recoil is a function of momentum. Large, heavy projectiles travelling at moderate velocities have much more momentum that light projectiles zipping along. The old British Martini rifles , think Zulu and Zulu Dawn, was called by Tommy, "The rifle that kills at both ends." I guess it kicked a bit.

Modern military rifles are sweet shooters, but I enjoy shooting the .30-06 of WWI and WWII provenance.

 

[S'task]

The old British Martini rifles , think Zulu and Zulu Dawn, was called by Tommy, "The rifle that kills at both ends." I guess it kicked a bit.

Those kinds of weapons aren't muskets, nor even a Muzzleloader. It is a breech loaded, cartridge fed rifle. This makes a MASSIVE difference in weapon performance. The cartridge helps contain the explosion and the lack of lock means that the explosion is even more contained than in the earlier Caplock or Flintlock weapons (which have a hole in the back of the weapon where the spark that ignites the main charge is introduced, which also bled off some of the force of the propellant explosion). Further, late 19th century weapons were made with much tighter tolerances and higher quality metals than earlier weapons (thus allowing larger powder charges than the older weapons), and didn't require any wadding like most muzzleloaders which allowed the explosion to be more contained.

Late 19th century weapons often had more kick than earlier weapons due to the rapid advancement of firearms technology starting about the mid-19th century. They fired similar powder loads with larger bullets like earlier muzzleloaders, but had much tighter tolerances and didn't bleed as much of the explosive force of the propellant explosion*. They also started slimming down from the earlier weapons too. The Martini-Henry weighted in at just under 8.5 lbs., while firing a similar sized bullet to the old muzzleloaders with an LARGER powder load.

You can just look at the effective ranges of late 18th / early 19th century rifles (which were all muzzleloaders) and late 19th century rifles to see how much things improved. Muzzleloaders rarely kick all that much in common use, while the pre-semi-automatic rifles often had more of a kick due to the things having advanced forward, but not so far as to make modern cartridge and metallurgical technology available.

 

[Edgeplay_cgo]

The recoil velocity of a free gun (Vg) is a pretty good way to measure felt recoil. comparing three rifles:

Martini Henry. Rifle weight 3.83 Kg firing a 31 g bullet at 410 M/s, gives a Vg of 3.32 M/s.

1861 Springfield (Civil War). Rifle 4.1 Kg Bullet 29.9 g @ 300 - 400 M/s --> Vg @ 400 M/s = 2.92 M/s

Brown Bess (Revolutionary War). Musket 4.8 Kg. Ball 38.9 g @ 400 - 550 M/s --> Vg @ 400 M/s = 3.24 M/s
@ 550 M/s = 4.45 M/s

So the three weapons should be quite similar in their actions on the shoulder, although the Brown Bess can be quite a beast if it's loaded to the max.

I think we're pretty far into the weeds, here.

 

[Deleted member 1]

@Francis Urquhart it's probably always pretty wise to fire a few rounds without ear protection every so often just to desensitise yourself to it. You won't get the chance to put in ear-plugs before a fight.

 

[FriedCFour]

Those kinds of weapons aren't muskets, nor even a Muzzleloader. It is a breech loaded, cartridge fed rifle.

Yeah, just to be clear here is what a muzzleloader looks like.

And here is a Martini-Henri

Though they look similar you can see distinct differences in that the musket has a caplock and the martini Henry has a lever action.

 

[S'task]

The recoil velocity of a free gun (Vg) is a pretty good way to measure felt recoil. comparing three rifles:

Martini Henry. Rifle weight 3.83 Kg firing a 31 g bullet at 410 M/s, gives a Vg of 3.32 M/s.

1861 Springfield (Civil War). Rifle 4.1 Kg Bullet 29.9 g @ 300 - 400 M/s --> Vg @ 400 M/s = 2.92 M/s

Brown Bess (Revolutionary War). Musket 4.8 Kg. Ball 38.9 g @ 400 - 550 M/s --> Vg @ 400 M/s = 3.24 M/s
@ 550 M/s = 4.45 M/s

So the three weapons should be quite similar in their actions on the shoulder, although the Brown Bess can be quite a beast if it's loaded to the max.

I think we're pretty far into the weeds, here.

I doubt that either the 1861 Springfield or Brown Bess were every being fired at those speeds (the Brown Bess especially, the way those were actually loaded in fired in practice was VERY different than the ideal method to load for optimum range*), and you're forgetting a critical point: the weight of the weapon itself reduces recoil. After all, for recoil to happen you have to overcome the rest energy of the weapon itself, and a heavier weapon has more rest energy. As such, the fact that the Brown Bess and Springfield can both generate similar force is meaningless as they are both heavier than the M-Henry and thus similar force ends up generating less recoil since the gun itself absorbs more.

---------------
* To explain, for the pre-mineball muzzleloaders you had a fairly complex process to prep to fire. With an unloaded weapon the ideal method was as follows:

1. Pour the powder down the barrel.
2. Mount the bullet in wadding.
3. Ram bullet down the barrel until its set on the powder.
4. Tamp the bullet to ensure a good set.
5. Prime the weapon.
6. Aim
7. Fire.

However, this is a LONG process and is not actually required for muskets. You could cut out Steps 2 and 4 from this process for muskets and still successfully fire. However, this meant that the explosion is not going to be as tightly contained (since there's not firm wadding containing the explosion) nor is the powder burning as uniformly (since you didn't tamp it down). Thus lowering the muzzle velocity of the round (and also making it less accurate), however, cutting those steps is how you could get up to the three rounds per minute that the Redcoats were famous for with the Brown Bess. Meanwhile, going through each of these steps is REQUIRED for rifles which is why they were so much more slower firing, but also why they ended up much more ACCURATE (along with the rifle grooves, obviously).

 

[Edgeplay_cgo]

I doubt that either the 1861 Springfield or Brown Bess were every being fired at those speeds (the Brown Bess especially, the way those were actually loaded in fired in practice was VERY different than the ideal method to load for optimum range*), and you're forgetting a critical point: the weight of the weapon itself reduces recoil. After all, for recoil to happen you have to overcome the rest energy of the weapon itself, and a heavier weapon has more rest energy. As such, the fact that the Brown Bess and Springfield can both generate similar force is meaningless as they are both heavier than the M-Henry and thus similar force ends up generating less recoil since the gun itself absorbs more.

---------------
* To explain, for the pre-mineball muzzleloaders you had a fairly complex process to prep to fire. With an unloaded weapon the ideal method was as follows:

1. Pour the powder down the barrel.
2. Mount the bullet in wadding.
3. Ram bullet down the barrel until its set on the powder.
4. Tamp the bullet to ensure a good set.
5. Prime the weapon.
6. Aim
7. Fire.

However, this is a LONG process and is not actually required for muskets. You could cut out Steps 2 and 4 from this process for muskets and still successfully fire. However, this meant that the explosion is not going to be as tightly contained (since there's not firm wadding containing the explosion) nor is the powder burning as uniformly (since you didn't tamp it down). Thus lowering the muzzle velocity of the round (and also making it less accurate), however, cutting those steps is how you could get up to the three rounds per minute that the Redcoats were famous for with the Brown Bess. Meanwhile, going through each of these steps is REQUIRED for rifles which is why they were so much more slower firing, but also why they ended up much more ACCURATE (along with the rifle grooves, obviously).

The Martini Henry was a bit lighter than the others, but not much. Anyway, the weight of the weapon is factored into the Vg calculation. Vg = p/Mg. Now, we are way out in the weeds.

 

[EdinoiZ]

While certain parts of the tone in this thread is... let’s go with “raw on my sensibilities”, as an EU citizen I’ve had a bit of a turn-around on gun laws in the US. I mean, of course everyone of the proper mental faculties should have the ability to apply for a gun, you can’t even rely on your own damned police to respond/save you in an emergency situation!!!

EDIT: And apologies in advance for any thread-derail. This is what I get for not catching that there was another two pages of content to the thread.

 

[Battlegrinder]

While certain parts of the tone in this thread is... let’s go with “raw on my sensibilities”, as an EU citizen I’ve had a bit of a turn-around on gun laws in the US. I mean, of course everyone of the proper mental faculties should have the ability to apply for a gun, you can’t even rely on your own damned police to respond/save you in an emergency situation!!!

EDIT: And apologies in advance for any thread-derail. This is what I get for not catching that there was another two pages of content to the thread.

I don't think anyone can rely on the police to save them, or should. There's a popular say along the lines of "when seconds count, police are minutes away" or something, and I'm pretty sure that even in Europe, police response times are not that much faster than in the US. The role of the police is to capture criminals, not necessarily to stop them.

 

[khatun]

I don't think anyone can rely on the police to save them, or should. There's a popular say along the lines of "when seconds count, police are minutes away" or something, and I'm pretty sure that even in Europe, police response times are not that much faster than in the US. The role of the police is to capture criminals, not necessarily to stop them.

Back before I was forced to move to the city blech us rural folk had a saying: "If you call the police, the ambulance, the fire department, and the pizza delivery guy, they'll arrive in reverse order."

 

[Edgeplay_cgo]

Back before I was forced to move to the city blech us rural folk had a saying: "If you call the police, the ambulance, the fire department, and the pizza delivery guy, they'll arrive in reverse order."

There was an incident in Nam, where their LZ was taking so much fire that the battalion commander closed the LZ to medevac helicopters. The company commander ordered pizzas (Their unit had a pizza chopper.) and put their casualties on the choipper. The company commander was nearly court martialled, but he threatened to go to the press. But the story was too good to stay hidden.

 

[Kitsune9]

So how does it feel to use a gun? Fun experience when used responsibly? I suppose the recoil when experienced for the first time would strain the arm?

It's fun for the first hour each time but then it starts to lose it's shine until you can have some time away from the shooting range. Policing brass can get annoying as well. I will say for me I went from a bow and arrow to a shotgun for my first shot and yes the recoil sucked but for other people who weren't as dumb it was workable.

 

[Shipmaster Sane]

As always, the anti gun side is founded on pure ignorance of reality.