|
Post by darthdract on Feb 7, 2012 22:51:01 GMT 8
Are these Muzzle Loading Guns
|
|
|
Post by fortman on Feb 8, 2012 0:19:53 GMT 8
Hi Darth,
Yes, those are definitely muzzle loaders. You can see, especially with the furthest gun, that there is no breech opening or mechanism. Compare these guns with the old 17th and 18th century cannon and you will note the same rear ends. The short barrels are also indicative of black powder cannon that one associates with the muzzle loading eras.
Regards
fortman
|
|
|
Post by darthdract on Feb 8, 2012 0:26:40 GMT 8
Thanks, it seems that these Photos where taken Late 19th Century and these guns are just ceremonial or the Spanish and Filipinos are just to lazy to remove them hehehe. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Feb 8, 2012 7:33:34 GMT 8
These guns are not cermonial. Look at the gun nearest to the camera, it has its traverse mound still in place. The Spanish gunners would sometimes call this "luneta" (not to be confused with the park). There could have been a number of "lunetas" located in other areas of the fort for strategic reasons but with no guns. Its just like the Panama Mounts (PM) for the 155mm guns in Corregidor, there were more PM than actual guns.
|
|
|
Post by darthdract on Feb 8, 2012 10:52:10 GMT 8
Thanks for that Insights, before I thought the Vacant Panama mounts where just due to the Guns where Scrapped and Looted to Shreds by the Enemy or the Magbobote,
So it seems that the Spanish did not update all their guns, I think they are already poor interms of military tech if they are still Using Muzzle loaders or they stick to the old School of thought that Muzzle loaders are better than Breach Loading Gun
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Feb 8, 2012 21:14:25 GMT 8
I would not say that the Spaniards did not (at all) upgrade their weapons. Note that some of the guns (artiller that predate the revolution were still in the Philippines. They were never removed nor dispatched as they still can be used. They did upgrade a number of their weapons to Krupp guns. Their 4.7-inch naval guns were breech loaders and can have a good rate of fire.
Note that the Spaniards had a very superior rifle in the form of the Mauser. These were more advance and reliable than the trap-door Springfield and Krag Rifles that the US had when they came to the Philippines. In fact, Philippine Insurgents had better rifles (although few in numbers and the ammunition quality deteriorated due to the number of reloads per shell) that their US counterparts during the Philippine American War. Believe it or not, the Insurgents even had a Maxim gun and it was used against the Americans during their defense of Calumpit. It caused casualties.
So the Spaniards did try to upgrade their armaments but they were few in numbers to make a real impact.
|
|
|
Post by darthdract on Feb 8, 2012 21:31:32 GMT 8
I have read somewhere about the Superiority of the Mauser that led the US to develop the M1906 Springfield ( is that correct? ) But I have never heard about the Maxim gun in the Span/Am war nor during the Insurrection. Thats amazing its like a Grand Buffet of different Arms. The Americans have Browning and Gatling while the Spaniards have Muzzle Loaders and Maxims, Its like a taste of things to come.
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Feb 9, 2012 7:41:58 GMT 8
It was the M1903 Springfield that fired the standard .30-06 round that was developed from the designs of the Mauser. It was said that one Germany's "win" after WW1 was that the US had to pay them for the royalties when they patterned the Springfield from the Mauser
|
|
|
Post by darthdract on Feb 9, 2012 7:46:38 GMT 8
^^hahaha
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2012 1:01:18 GMT 8
It is Spanish Coast artillery,Rifled Muzzle Loandig Howitzer 21 cm. (8.4 inchs), converted from smooth bore, Model 1870, with 6 groovs, and maximun range 5.000 meters (5.500 yards) at 42ยบ degree. Was normaly used during at the end of the XIX century.
|
|