It requires no gift of prophecy to predict that machine-guns are destined to play an important part in future wars.
They hold the same relation to other arms that the railway bears to the stage-coach, the reaper to the sickle, the sewing-machine to the needle, etc.
Of this class of arms, there is none that excels the Gatling gun in originality of design, rapidity of fire, and capabilities as a weapon of warfare.
The main features of the gun may be summed up as follows:
It has, usually, ten barrels and ten corresponding locks. In working the gun, the barrels and locks revolve together; but, irrespective of this motion, the locks have a forward and backward motion of their own. The forward motion places the cartridges in the chambers of the barrels, and closes the breech at the time of each discharge, while the backward motion extracts the empty cartridge cases after firing.
The gun is loaded and fired only when the barrels are in motion from left to right ; that is, while the handle, or crank, is worked forwards. When the gun is in action there are always five cartridges going through the process of loading, and five cartridge-cases in different stages of being extracted, and these several operations are continuous while the gun is being worked. Thus, as long as the gun is fed with cartridges, the several operations of loading, firing, and extracting are carried on automatically, uniformly, and continuously.
THE POSITIVE FEED.
The earlier model Gatling guns had cartridges fed to them by means of feed-cases, or by a drum, but recently a new method for supplying the cartridges to the gun has been devised, which is positive and certain in its action. In the old methods of supplying ammunition to the gun, there was a liability that the cartridges would become jammed in feeding down from the feed-cases into the carrier or receiver; but in this newly-improved feed, the mechanism never loses control of the cartridges from the time they leave the feed magazine until they enter the chambers, are loaded, fired, and the empty cases extracted. With this new feed it is impossible for the gun to fail in its operation, even when it is worked by men unacquainted with its use. This new improvement not only greatly increases the rapidity and certainty of fire, but also enables the gun to be fired at the rate of over 1200 shots per minute, and at all degrees of elevation or depression, which is something no other machine-gun can do. By firing the gun at proper elevations, ascertained by means of a quadrant, the bullets discharged from it can be made to fall upon men behind breastworks or entrenchments, at all distances, from 200 to 3500 yards from the gun. This "high-angle," or "mortar" fire adds greatly to the effectiveness of the gun, and will, no doubt, prove of inestimable value in future warfare.
Experiments have proved that musket-size balls, fired from a Gatling gun at high angles, strike the ground with a force sufficient to penetrate from two to three inches of timber. About 1200 shots per minute can be fired from the gun, raining down a hailstorm of bullets on the heads of men behind entrenchments, thus making such positions, in a short space of time, untenable. Open breastworks, or uncovered entrenchments, would furnish little or no protection to troops against the fire of this formidable weapon. Trials were made with a Gatling gun, having this improved feed, at Sandy Hook, N. J., during the months of July, August, and September, 1882, and in January, 1883, by the United Sates Ordnance Board, composed of the following officers: T. C. Baylor, Lieutenant-Colonel of Ordnance, President of the Board; George W. McKee, Major of Ordnance, and Charles Shaler, Captain of Ordnance.
The following extracts are taken from their report of the trials:
"The object of the experiments was two-fold: first, to test the new feed magazine; second, to ascertain the effect on targets placed horizontally on the ground, at distances of from 200 to 3000 yards, as regards penetration and accuracy."
In speaking of this new feed, the Board says in their report:
"The action is, as claimed in the inventor's description, positive and continuous as long as the gun is worked. The substitution of a positive action for one depending upon the carriage of the projectiles to the grooves of the carrier-block by means of gravitation, modified by friction, is a great improvement. The gun works as well when the feed 'magazine' is horizontal as it does in an inclined or a vertical position. No jamming, or interference of any kind, occurred during the trials, and the rate of discharge varied uniformly with the revolution of the crank necessarily."
In speaking of penetration, the report says: “The penetration from 3000 to 1000 yards was through two inches of spruce plank, and from three to five inches into the sand, the projectiles striking point foremost."
The gun used in the trials was 45-inch caliber, with barrels 24 inches in length; and the ammunition used contained a charge of 85 grains of powder, and a bullet weighing 480 grains.
In firing at high elevations, to have the bullets strike the ground at various distances, the following elevations were given the gun: At 200 yards range, the gun was fired at an elevation of 88 degrees, the bullets so fired remaining up in the air 57 seconds from the time they were discharged, until they struck the ground.
At 500 yards range, the gun was given an elevation of 85°.
At 1000 yards range, the gun was given an elevation of 77°.
At 2000 yards range, the gun was given an elevation of 66°.
At 2500 yards range, the gun was given an elevation of 56°.
At 3000 yards range, the gun was given an elevation of 24° 40'.
At all ranges, when the gun was fired at and below 85° of elevation, the bullets struck point foremost, and retained their rotary motion, as was proven by spiral scratches on them, caused by friction in their passing through the boards.
Extracts from the official report of the United States Army Ordnance Board, on the trial of the model. United States caliber (0.45-in.), Gatling gun, at Sandy Hook, N. J., in January, 1883:
The gun is similar in general to the one described in the last report of the Ordnance Board on the subject.
The lock is called a rebounding one, the intention being that the firing-pin shall not project in front of the face of the lock until, when released from the cocking-ring, it flies forward and discharges the cartridge.
A device allows the cocking-ring to be thrown out of action at will, and prevents the cocking of the hammers. This is of advantage during drill, and allows firing motion to take place without snapping, and thereby injuring the hammers.
The object of the experiments was to test further the new feed-magazine in its adaptability to the use of the service cartridge, both with the 500 and 405 grain bullets, and also to test some new features of the gun and carriage above described. The Board, in its report of October 11, 1882, on this "feed-magazine," when applied to a gun using the English bottle-shaped cartridge, states that it "is all that is claimed for it, and adds very considerably to the value of the gun." In that experiment the gun was fired at various degrees of elevation from 1° to 89°, but in these experiments the gun was fired several times, as rapidly as possible, with 8 and 9 feed-magazines previously filled, and with both kinds of cartridges. The gun was finally dismounted, placed upside down on a staging, and one feed-magazine inserted from below, when the gun was fired with as much facility, and the feed worked as well as when placed on top, showing clearly that its action was positive and entirely independent of the force of gravity. No other feed that is known would operate in this manner, and, though this is an exaggerated case, and one not likely to occur in service, yet it shows how effectually the cartridge is held from the time it is placed in the feed-machine to its delivery in the carrier-block, and how impossible for any clogging or overriding to occur, as is the case at times with other feeds.
T. G. BAYLOR,
Lieutenant-Colonel of Ordnance, President of the Board.
GEORGE W. McKEE,
Major of Ordnance.
CHARLES SHALER,
Captain of Ordnance.
General S. V. Benet, Chief of Ordnance, United States Army, in his endorsement of the above report, says:
"The great improvement is in the feed, which is positive in its action, and 'entirely independent of the force of gravity.' It is believed that the modified Gatling gun, with the new feed, has about reached the utmost limit of improvement."
Extracts from the official report of the United States Naval Ordnance Board on the trial of the new model, U. S. caliber (0.45-in.) Gatling gun, at the Navy Yard, Washington, D. C., January, 1883:
RAPIDITY OF FIRE.
Five drums (each holding 102 cartridges) to illustrate feed action :
No. 1.—Drum emptied in 2.8 seconds.
No. 2. —Drum emptied in 2.6 seconds.
No. 3.—Drum emptied in 2.8 seconds.
No. 4.—Drum emptied in 2.6 seconds.
No. 5.—Drum emptied in 2.6 seconds.
Number of cartridges expended 510.
The mechanism and feed worked well in each case.
Two trials of eight drums each for rapidity and endurance :
First test—Eight drums emptied in 41.4 seconds.
Second test—Eight drums emptied in 42.2 seconds.
Cartridges expended, 1632.
The mechanism and feed worked well.
A supplemental test was here made with members of the Board at the crank, to determine if it be possible to cause an accidental stoppage or imperfect action in the feed by an irregular or jerking method of turning the crank. Two drums, 204 cartridges, were expended in this manner.
The Board were unable to produce any imperfect action in either mechanism or feed.
One drum at 75 degrees elevation. Expended 102.
Two drums at greatest depression (56 degrees) permitted by the mounting.
Expended 204.
Two drums with feed 90 degrees to the right. Expended 204.
Two drums with feed 90 degrees to the left. Expended 204.
Two drums with feed underneath. Expended 204.
Total number of rounds fired, 4014.
W. M. FOLGER,
Lieutenant-Commander and Member,
J. H. DAYTON,
Lieutenant and Member.
F. II. PAINE,
Lieutenant and Member.
It is evident that an accurate vertical fire from Gatling guns, delivering a storm of bullets descending under a slight angle of arrival, would, by grazing the superior crest of parallels erected by besiegers approaching a fortification, or those of ordinary rifle-pits or entrenchments, destroy their occupants much more certainly and rapidly than can be done by the shells or case-shot fired from mortars or field guns.
This "high-angle" or mortar fire from a machine-gun opens up a new field in the science of gunnery, and is well worthy of the highest consideration of military and naval men of all nations.
It is well known that the Turks, in the Russian-Turkish war, inflicted great injury upon the Russian forces at long ranges, by firing their muskets at high elevations, so as to deliver what is known as "high-angle" fire; but it is quite evident that in such firing there must have been a great waste of ammunition, for the reason that the infantry soldiers could not well determine what elevation to give their muskets in order to have the bullets reach the enemy. This great waste would not take place with the Gatling gun, which, being mounted on a carriage, does not move when being fired. A table of distances and elevations being established for the service of the Gatling gun, all that would be required of the men who use it would be to ascertain first the distance at which the enemy was entrenched, and then to give the gun the required elevation (by the use of the quadrant) in order to have the bullets fall within the line of entrenchments of the enemy. The Gatlings could be protected from the direct fire of the enemy by entrenchments or by a pit dug for each gun, so that not even the muzzle of the gun would be exposed.
Among the prominent advantages claimed for the Gatling gun may be enumerated the following : Its adaptation to the purposes of flank defence at both long and short ranges ; its peculiar power for the defence of field-entrenchments and villages ; for protecting roads, defiles, and bridges; for covering the crossing of streams; for silencing field-batteries or batteries of position ; for increasing the infantry fire at the critical moment of a battle ; for supporting field-batteries, and protecting them against cavalry or infantry charges ; for covering the retreat of a repulsed column ; and, generally, for the accuracy, continuity, and intensity of its fire, and its economy in men for serving, and in animals for transporting, it.
It is conceded that small-caliber Gatling guns, which use the service-musket ammunition, will prove invaluable in naval service when used from top-gallant forecastle, poop-deck, and tops of ships-of- war for firing on an enemy's deck at officers and men exposed to view; for firing down from tops upon the roof of turrets; for firing into an enemy's ports; and, in boat operations against an enemy, either for passing open land-works, or for clearing beaches and other exposed landing-places.
Exhaustive official trials of the gun have been made in many countries, under the supervision of officers of high standing, who have strongly recommended its use, both for land and naval service. The reports of such trials are too extended for a paper of this kind.
Gatling guns have been sold, in greater or less numbers, to most of the governments of the world. A few extracts are given of their use in warfare.
In the late Prussian war, the French used the Gatling gun conjointly with the mitrailleuse. From the London Journal we clip a correspondent's description of its efficacious use in action:
Up to this time we had not seen any Prussians, beyond a few skirmishers in the plain, though our battery of Gatlings had kept blazing away at nothing in particular all the while; but now an opportunity of its being in use occurred. A column of troops appeared in the valley below us, coming from the right—a mere dark streak upon the white snow; but no one in the battery could tell whether they were friends or foes, and the commander hesitated about opening fire. But now an aid-de-camp came dashing down the hill with orders for us to pound at them at once—a French journalist having, it seems, discovered them to be enemies, when the general and all his staff were as puzzled as ourselves. Rr-rr-a go our Gatlings, the deadly hail of bullets crashes into the thick of them, and slowly back into the woods the dark mass retires, leaving, however, a trace of black dots upon the white snow behind it. This, their famous and historical four o'clock effort, and its failure, has decided the day. That one discharge was enough.
The Russians used Gatling guns in the siege of Plevna. A special correspondent of the London Times, writing under date of November 26, 1877, from the headquarters of the army of Bulgaria, at Bogot, says:
The mitrailleurs [Gatling guns] were in constant action until midnight, splitting the air with their harsh, rattling reports. Another account (November 26th) says: The Russians are using their mitrailleurs [Gatlings] a great deal now at night, probably with the intention of keeping the Turks occupied, so as to relax the tension on the infantry in the trenches.
No other arms in the world are equal to Gatling guns for night service. They can be placed in a position in the daytime so as to cover any point desired, and as they have no recoil to destroy the accuracy of their aim, an incessant fire can be kept up during the night with the same precision as in daytime.
In the naval engagement that took place in Peruvian waters on May 28, 1877, between the Peruvian rebel iron-clad ram Huascar, and the British men-of-war, the Shah and Amethyst, a small Gatling gun, stationed in the foretop of the Shah, rendered excellent service.
The correspondent of the Illustrated London News, in a semiofficial report of the conflict, says:
About five o'clock, the Huascar being clear of the shoals, we seized the opportunity to close. The enemy likewise closed, with evident signs of ramming, firing shell from her 40-pounder. Our Gatling gun then commenced firing from the foretop, causing the men on her upper-deck quarters to desert their guns.
Captain Aurelio Garcia y Garcia, one of the most distinguished officers of the Peruvian navy, in his account of the above engagement, says:
The firing became even more severe from the English frigates, and, as the distance between the antagonists had been reduced to two cable-lengths, more or less, the Admiral brought to bear all his attacking forces, which, on board the Shah, were very formidable in character. From the tops, a Gatling gun threw a hail of bullets at the decks of the Huascar, together with steady volleys of musketry and rifles.
Another account from Peruvian sources says :
A small Gatling gun stationed in her tops very seriously incommoded the combatants on the ram, and her smoke-stack is riddled with bullets. It is evident that Gatling guns, when used on shipboard or in tops of war-vessels, would be of inestimable service in firing into the portholes, or in clearing the decks of the ships of the enemy.
THE NAVAL FIGHT OFF IQUIQUE, PERU.
New York Times, July 20, 1879.
The Huascar attacked us again, directing her bow to the middle of our ship. I steered to prevent the shock, but our want of speed made it impossible, and the iron-clad struck our vessel midships. In that moment, Lieutenant Serrano, followed by a dozen sailors, jumped on the deck of the Huascar, and they were all killed by the shots of musketry and Gatling guns fired from the turret, and behind the parapets of the stern.
THE CHILENO-PERUVIAN WAR.
New York Herald, December 17, 1879.
A letter from Lima, describing the defeat of the Peruvian army, at San Francisco heights, says: "The earthworks were defended by a strong Chilian force, plentifully supplied with Krupp field-pieces and Gatling guns. Here Buendia committed the error which has cost the allies the best division in their army. Instead of making a detour, which he could easily have done, and thus compelling the enemy to descend to attack him in the pampa at the rear of the hill, or submit to having his communications with Pisagua cut off, Buendia gave the order to charge up the rugged hill and carry the works by storm. The attempt was gallantly made. Three times the shattered regiments, which had undertaken a feat which it was impossible to perform, were compelled to fall back and re-form, leaving the hillsides thickly covered with their dead and dying, who had fallen in masses before the Krupps and Gatlings long ere they could make their rifles tell."
THE ZULU WAR.
London Army and Navy Gazette, February 22, 1879.
The Gatling guns, landed with the naval contingent from the Active and Tenedos, have astonished the Zulus, who have been trying an engagement with our blue-jackets. They found the fire much too hot, and the naval force has had the satisfaction of carrying more than one contested position. It is a pity that Gatlings are not more plentiful with Lord Chelmsford's army. The naval brigade have got some, but the artillery have none. If there had been a couple of Gatlings with the force annihilated the other day, the result of the fight might have been different, for Gatlings are the best of all engines of war to deal with the rush of a dense crowd,
FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
London News, August 22, 1882.
I have returned from Chalouf, fourteen miles up the canal, where I witnessed the conclusion of a fight in which 250 men, including the 72d Highlanders, with the blue-jackets and marines from the gunboats Seagull and Mosquito, brilliantly defeated a force of twice their number. The fighting lasted from eleven until nearly five. The Gatling guns, in the tops of the gunboats, worked with admirable precision, doing much execution among the enemy, who had advanced to within 100 yards of the canal-bank.
New York Herald, August 26, 1882.
In a telegram dispatched at 2 o'clock this morning, General Wolseley adds: "I omitted to say that I had with me, yesterday, two Gatling guns, worked by seamen, who did their duty admirably."
London Broad Arrow, September 2, 1882.
On all sides it is acknowledged that the Gatling has proved itself an effective arm of service in the present campaign. At Chalouf, and at Mahuta, the naval Gatling was admirably served by our blue-jackets, and afforded "invaluable assistance." Indeed, it may be broadly affirmed that, in the encounter with the enemy at the former place, the results attained were chiefly ascribable to the action of the Gatlings from the tops of the gunboats Seagull and Mosquito. One hundred and sixty-eight Egyptian soldiers, out of 600 which composed the outpost, were placed hors de combat. Under these circumstances, it is not unlikely that Sir Garnet Wolseley will employ Gatling batteries extensively in future operations.
London Army and Navy Gazette, October 14, 1882.
The naval machine-gun battery, consisting of six Gatlings, manned by thirty seamen, reached the position assigned to it in the English lines on September 10th, and, on Tuesday, September 12th, received orders to advance. They came within easy range of the Tel-el-Kebir earthworks, and observed guns in front, guns to the right, guns to the left, and a living line of fire above them. Nothing daunted, the order, "action-front," was given, and was taken up joyously by every gun's crew. Round whisked the Gatlings, r-r-r-r-r-rum ! r-r-rr-r-rum ! r-r-r-r-r rum !—that hellish noise the soldier so much detests in action, not for what it has done, so much as for what it could do, rattled out. The report of the machine-guns, as they rattle away, rings out clearly on the morning air. The parapets are swept. The embrasures are literally plugged with bullets. The flashes cease to come from them. The Egyptian fire is silenced. With a cheer the blue-jackets double over the dam, and dash over the parapet, only just in time to find their enemy in full retreat. That machine-gun fire was too much for them. Skulking under the parapet were found a few poor devils, too frightened to retire, yet willing enough to stab a Christian, if helpless and wounded. The trenches were full of dead. But few wounded were found. Captain Fitz Roy led his men most gallantly, and followed up the retreating foe until the main camp was reached. Here the halt was sounded. Admiral Sir Beauchamp Seymour and staff now came up and addressed the battery, complimenting the officers and men on their gallantry.
LORD CHARLES BERESFORD ON MACHINE-GUNS.
London Army and Navy Gazette, November 4, 1882.
In my opinion, machine-guns, if properly worked, would decide the fate of a campaign, and would be equally useful ashore or afloat. When the Gatling guns were landed at Alexandria, after the bombardment, the effect of their fire upon the wild mob of fanatic incendiaries and looters was quite extraordinary. These guns were not fired at the people, but a little over their heads, as a massacre would have been the result had the guns been steadily trained on the mob. The rain of bullets, which they heard screaming over their heads, produced a moral effect not easily described. I asked an Egyptian officer, some weeks afterwards, how on earth it was that Arabi, and his 9000 regular troops, who were within five miles, did not march down upon the town in the first four days after the bombardment, when Arabi knew that Captain Fisher's Naval Brigade, which held the lines, numbered less than 400 men. The Egyptian officer replied, "That he knew no army which could face machines which 'pumped lead,' and that as all the gates were defended by such machines, as well as having torpedoes under the bridges, such defences could not be faced." This certainly was the case. I believe the Egyptian officer spoke the truth, and that the moral effect produced by the Gatlings on the people in the first landing prevented the army from attacking the diminutive force which held the lines afterwards.
Replying for "The Navy," at a dinner of the Cutler's Company,
Lord Charles Beresford said:
The great value of machine-guns has also been shown. With the Gatlings, the landing parties had cleared the streets of Alexandria and prevented Arabi from returning, and, if they had been allowed to land immediately after the bombardment, they might have dispersed the crowds laden with loot, have captured Arabi, Toalba Pasha, and other leaders, and saved the town; but the government had promised that no man should land, and they were bound by the promise.
Notwithstanding these favorable comments, showing the great value of the Gatling gun in warfare, this distinguished officer, in a paper on Machine-guns, read before the Royal United Service Institution, Whitehall, London, takes occasion to criticize the Gatling gun, and point out what he claims to be its defects. He says:
Revolving machine-guns are excellent in their way, and we owe the father of them, Ur. Gatling, a great deal for his valuable invention, but their principle invites an accident; they have to do five things nearly simultaneously, any one of which by going the least bit wrong interferes with the other four, and the gun is instantly out of action. The five things are:—revolving the lever, revolving the barrels, loading the gun, withdrawing the empty cylinder, firing the gun—all to be done nearly simultaneously.
Now the casual observer would hardly suppose that all machineguns have to do substantially the " five things " spoken of; for instance, the Nordenfeldt gun has to have the lever moved forward, which moves the breech supports towards the barrel chambers, which push the cartridges in front of them; then the breech is locked, the cartridges fired, the lever moved backward, the breech unlocked, and the fired cartridge-cases extracted by the retiring breech-plugs—all of which "things," or movements, have to be done quickly in order to obtain rapidity of fire, whereas the simple movement of revolving the crank loads and fires the Gatling gun.
There are several valuable features of the Gatling gun that should not be overlooked; for instance, a ten-barrel Gatling gun fires ten times in one revolution of the group of the barrels. The action of each part is therefore quite deliberate, while collectively the discharges are frequent. Another valuable feature in the Gatling is, that the cartridges are fed into the carrier at the top, and are carried around to the under side of the gun before they are loaded and fired. Thus, it will be seen, the point where the cartridges are fired is far removed from the supply of cartridges used in feeding the gun, so there is no liability of the escape of gas, which may occur by the bursting of the head of a cartridge, and which might communicate with the magazine, causing a dangerous explosion. Most other machine-guns have their magazines, used for feeding cartridges to them, placed in close contact with the firing-point, hence the liability of premature and dangerous explosions. Several accidents of this kind have occurred, resulting in death to the operators of such guns.
The Gatling gun is dangerous only to those in its front.
Sir Garnet Wolseley, in discussing the subject of machine-guns, has expressed his conviction that the general, who, in the next big war, utilizes machine-guns to the best advantage, will have an immense opportunity to gain great fame.
Machine-guns are closely allied to metallic cartridges, which are of modern invention. Without the latter, the former would be of little use.
The art of making metallic cartridges is now so well understood that they work perfectly, and their use makes the machine-gun of immense practical value.
The French mitrailleur did not use metallic cartridges. It used paper-cased cartridges, which were imperfectly made, and this fact, coupled with the imperfection and great weight of the gun, together with want of skill in its use, led to its failure.
The same class of men who doubted that rifle-guns would ever take the place of the smoothbore, and who declared that the breech loading musket would never supersede the muzzle-loader, object to machine-guns. Their objections are, that such guns are liable to get out of order, and to become disarranged, by means of a hostile shot, lack of care, ignorance in management, or from similar causes, etc.
Without defending machine-guns in general from these objections, it may be said that the simplicity of parts in the Gatling gun, the protection given to the working mechanism, and its absolute working, make it as secure from accident as any gun can well be, even if it be worked only by brawny hands.
A trial of a 0.50-inch caliber Gatling gun (old model) was made at Fort Madison, Maryland, in October, 1873, under the supervision of the late Lieutenant-Commander J. D. Marvin, U. S. N.; during the trial 100,000 cartridges were fired, and of this number 63,600 were fired without stopping to wipe out or clean the barrels. The Official Report says:
"The working of the gun throughout this severe trial was eminently satisfactory, no derangements of any importance whatever occurring."
Surely, such a severe test should prove that the Gatling gun is not liable to get out of order.
The value of an invention is to be determined by the results it can accomplish. The Gatling can fire more shots in the same space of time than any other gun. With it, three men can do the work of hundreds armed with ordinary guns. Its use will, to a great extent, supersede the necessity of large armies; hence its use will be in the interests of economy.
It is evident that in the future wars are to be waged with all the aids that modern science can afford, whether they are the results of the discoveries of chemists, or of the inventions of mechanics. The record of wars and isolated engagements in which the Gatling gun has borne an important part within the last fifteen years, is sufficient to establish the value of machinery in warfare, and the superiority of the gun over the ordinary individual arm.
History furnishes abundant evidence that it is to the improvement of arms that nations have owed their successes in war.
The First Napoleon was enabled to conquer most of the nations of Europe by the use of improved guns.
The Prussian army, in like manner, was enabled to defeat the Austrian forces by the use of breech-loading "needle-guns."
It behooves all nations to furnish their soldiers with the best arms that can be procured, and they should be taught their use in times of peace.
Intelligent men, who have carefully watched and noticed the march of improvement, and the steady development of new ideas, will perceive and acknowledge that the day is not far distant when machineguns will be extensively employed in warfare; and the nation which is best supplied with them, and which best understands their tactical use, will best preserve the lives of its soldiers, and be in the best condition to make favorable treaties, and to preserve the integrity of its own dominions.
DISCUSSION
The Chairman.—This most interesting subject is now open for discussion, and members of the Institute and others are invited to present to the meeting their views upon the points suggested by the lecturer. Officers of the army present are cordially requested to take part in the discussion. Attention is especially invited to the somewhat novel feature (as applied to machine-guns) of high-angle fire.
Without presuming to add greatly to the interesting lecture of the distinguished inventor, I would beg to note that he has not mentioned all the good points apparent in the present development of the Gatling system; and he has modestly abstained from special reference to its adaptability to naval uses.
A statement of the principles that demanded the changes resulting in the present improved feed would have been much more interesting coming from the inventor himself, but I may perhaps be pardoned in making a hasty reference to them. This I shall do in view of their importance, and also in view of the logical manner in which certain grave defects in the system have probably been definitely eliminated.
It is clear that a machine-gun is almost worthless if not reliable; if not ready at all times for instant use, if ever unready. In an action on shore, a machinegun that has jammed, as the expression goes, is a captured gun, if unsupported by others; the enemy well knows that if he does not charge he cannot take it, as its sustained fire is irresistible. Afloat, certainty of action at a given moment will be, if possible, even more important than on shore, as the use of a small arm caliber piece will be limited to the cases of emergency of a close action between ships, to offensive and defensive auxiliary employment in ramming, and to defence against a torpedo attack by boats. Failure at such times might be disastrous.
The original feed, as you all probably remember, depended upon gravity alone for its action. The cartridges were dropped into a hopper, in the earliest model, falling undirected through a considerable interval. This first feed was a single vertical column of cartridges, similar to the tin case used until within a few months. It was found to be defective, in that accidental stoppages occurred, and that it contained too small an amount of ammunition to sustain a fire for any length of time. An Austrian officer suggested the drum feed (so called from its shape), which carried a number of columns of cartridges, each of which was in turn brought opposite the hopper, the whole drum being turned either by the revolving carrier or by hand. This feed corrected the defect of insufficient quantity; but the action, as before, depending on gravity, there were as frequent stoppages as in the earlier feed, and in order to relieve the gun the heavy drum had to be first removed.
The feed was again changed to a single column of cartridges, placed over the axis of the piece, and as near the bottom of the carrier as possible, in order that the fall of the cartridge might be reduced to a minimum. The performance of the gun was improved, but the old difficulty was still present. There was at any moment a liability to jam, which destroyed confidence in the gun. It might fail at a vital instant; and, as usually occurs, it probably would so fail.
The problem of overcoming this difficulty was by no means a simple one, and some of the best inventive talent of all lands was concentrated upon it. Nobel, Gorloff and Baranovsky in Russia, Hotchkiss and Broadwell, to say nothing of a score of clever mechanical minds in this country (among whom should be named Bruce of the Springfield Arsenal), have all attempted a solution.
The desideratum was: A magazine (susceptible of being quickly charged, and containing such a number of cartridges that while the weight loaded would not be too great for ready handling, it would still be sufficient for an effective salvo) which should possess such mechanical features that, while grasping each cartridge firmly to prevent movement in any but a desired direction, the cartridge would be guided along a given path, ending at the carrier, preserving its parallelism to the latter throughout the journey. Thus 2, positive action, as it is termed technically, would be gained, in spite of gravity, if necessary.
After years of practical experience and study, the present feed was proposed by Mr. George Accles, the firing expert of the Gatling Company. It has withstood the tests of many official trials in this country and abroad, and has, it would appear, corrected the most serious defect in the Gatling system, thereby, in all probability, quadrupling its value. The feed is simply a wheel, actuated by the revolving carrier, carrying the charge of (100) cartridges around in a spiral groove in the enclosing cylinder ends; the groove holds heads and points against movement in any direction but its own, and ends as a tangent to the revolving carrier, where the cartridges are successively, and without possibility of derangement, deposited for the action of the plunger-locks.
The method of filling these magazines (a feature nearly as important as the rapid delivery itself, since, the supply of prepared ammunition exhausted, the gun becomes useless) is ingenious, but is a natural consequence of their own mode of action. The test of feeding up against gravity with the feed under the gun, referred to by the lecturer, suggested this feature to a clever mechanic at Colt's (Mr. Goodall). It was to utilize the revolving feature of the gun in order to feed the feed. A crank turns a toothed wheel, which in turn revolves the feed wheel in a direction reverse to that in delivery upon the gun, the cartridges being stripped into a flange-way grooving above, from the usual packing cases. In this manner there is given a rapidity in filling cases about equal to the delivery of fire of most of the rival systems of machine-guns, and, with a moderate supply of filled cases to begin with, the fire may be rendered continuous for the limited period of naval action emergencies, or for the duration of the critical moment of an engagement on shore.
I do not think the office of machine-guns of the caliber of the Gatling extends farther than this. Artillery of much greater power in range and accuracy will always hold its place in Wit feeling stage of an engagement, and in giving the hard knocks. The importance of machine-guns for this special purpose, however, is hardly contestable, even though the failures of the French with an imperfect weapon prejudiced the military world for a time against them.
It seems, too, in considering their employment on board ship, where the question of transportation of ammunition is somewhat secondary, that the effectiveness of machine-guns will increase with the number of shots per minute of delivery of fire. If within range, the greater the delivery, the more demoralizing will be the effect upon an enemy, whether he be charging, standing his ground, or retreating. In this the Gatling system stands quite alone. Its delivery is undeniably greater than that of its rivals.
The question also frequently arises as to the relative merits of the volley and the continuous fire. With our usually unsteady platform, I think most naval men will agree that the chances of damaging the enemy are greater with the continuous fire. The delivery should, however, in my opinion, be made in salvos of thirty shots each, or three turns of the crank, if the piece be used afloat, as the jet of balls would be greatly dispersed with a longer effort.
A very serious feature of machine-gun fire is the production of smoke, which is unavoidable with rapid delivery; frequently three turns are all that can be made before the target is obscured; therefore, captains should strive for the weather-gage.
Gun-servants should be carefully instructed in the proper method of delivering Gatling fire. The crankman soon finds with practice that there is a position where the least output of work on his part will accomplish the object; and it is fortunate that this result of least labor corresponds to the best performance of the gun.
The leverman or pointer should be taught the principles of wing-shooting, as here he not only has a moving enemy, but is unstable himself, and he delivers a stream of projectiles of which only a portion may be effective.
Although the inventor of the Gatling system feels that the present gun is nearly a finality in development, it seems as if we were likely, in the not very distant future, to hear of progress, if not in mechanical features or rapidity in delivery, at least in ballistics. Machine-guns are now shielded with steel aprons, which, like all else in the direction of armor, must be pierced by the gun. It is not improbable that we shall hear ere long of high-power musket caliber machine-guns, using charges equal in weight to one half that of the projectile, and steel or steel-cased bullets. I think we should hear of such guns now.
Rear-Admiral C. R. p. Rodgers.—It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that a subject as interesting as this is should be fully discussed at a meeting where so many, both of the Army and Navy, high in authority in matters relating to ordnance, are present.
To us who began long ago the profession of arms upon the sea, when nothing could be brought into action effectively except the heavy guns with which our ships were armed, it seems immensely important, now that we have arms of precision, that machine-guns should be brought prominently forward in naval actions that are to take place hereafter.
I happened to serve not very long ago in the Pacific, where, between certain ironclads, Peruvian and Chilian, and between unarmored ships and ironclads, several engagements that attracted the attention of the world took place. No one cognizant of the facts could doubt for a moment the immense advantage gained by the Chilians in filling their tops with riflemen armed with breech loading guns. In these encounters, as the ships approached each other, it became impossible, on the uncovered decks, for men to stand to their guns. They were driven time and again to shelter, and those of us who observed the engagements could but remark how greatly exposed those gunners were, and how terrific was the fire to which they were subjected.
In the English and French ships of war, and our own, then in the Pacific, the men at their guns were much exposed to this fire from an enemy's tops. This was especially the case in the smaller French ships, whose pivot-guns were unusually high. The Shannon, a superb English ironclad, carried most of her battery exposed to this fire; and with machine-guns and well-trained riflemen in an enemy's tops, the gunners of the Shannon could have stood to their guns only with great loss of life and a great strain upon the steadiness of their aim.
I had no thought of taking part in this discussion, but the very interesting and valuable statement of our chairman was followed by a long silence, and I have spoken simply to break the ice, and to induce the distinguished ordnance officers now present, to favor us with their views.
Brigadier-General S. V. Benet, U. S. A.—I certainly shall not attempt to add anything to what has been said by my old friend. Dr. Gatling, in his lecture, nor to what has been so well and appropriately said by the Chairman of this meeting. The fact is I am wholly in accord with everything that has been stated on this subject, and I will therefore only give you a few historical recollections. I believe I was the first officer of our services that had any connection with the Gatling gun. The year of the termination of the war, 1865, I knew nothing of this gun and had never seen it. Dr. Gatling, its now distinguished inventor, came to the Frankford Arsenal, where I was then in command, with the Gatling gun, which I was instructed by the Chief of Ordnance to inspect and improve if possible. I remember that it was a very crude affair, for I recollect particularly that the Doctor told me he had first got a cartridge and then built the gun around it, and it seemed to be so. I can say of him also that he had but little idea of the science of gunnery at that time, and I attempted during the several months that he remained with me to teach him the little that I knew. I am very happy to say that the pupil has far outrun his teacher. Very soon after my attention was called to the gun I found that there was one thing which was absolutely necessary to do to insure its success and that was to make it a central-fire gun. The gun was of one-inch caliber, adapted to that famous cartridge around which he had built the gun. The cartridge had a folded head with rim-fire. It had in its rim three grains of percussion powder, and every time it was fired there was danger of injury to the cartridge, if not of destruction to the gun. This was about the infancy of the manufacture of metallic cartridges in this country. As you all know, metallic cartridges are at the best very troublesome things to make. During the war the rim-fire cartridges were principally used, and especially with the Spencer guns. The idea of a centre-fire cartridge had been broached and experimented with, and I remember telling Dr. Gatling that the success of his gun depended very largely on his changing it to a centre-fire. He demurred, and we had quite a number of discussions upon the subject; but, finally, I was able to convince him. With many misgivings he decided that he would attempt to make the change, and certainly the result was most creditable to his mechanical and inventive faculty. Within forty-eight hours he brought me a drawing of a new centre-fire lock, and I presume that the principle involved in that lock, made nearly twenty years ago, will be found in the present perfected gun. After worrying over the subject for several months and doing the best I could with it, I finally recommended to the Chief of Ordnance that the gun should be sent to Fortress Monroe, to be examined and reported upon by disinterested parties. The result was that the report was so favorable that Secretary Stanton at once gave an order for the purchase of a hundred of these guns, fifty of which were to be of one-inch caliber and the other fifty of half-inch caliber. That was the first boost that the Gatling gun received. Since that time I have been a strong advocate of machine-guns, and I have used whatever influence I have possessed in getting appropriations for their construction and in having them issued to the army. Through the influence of Colonel Williston of the 2d Artillery, who has probably more practical knowledge in the use of the gun than any other man in the army, the interest felt in machine-guns has been largely increased. Upon my recommendation. General Sherman had Williston's battery, which is one of the ten in the Artillery service, made into a battery of machineguns, and I believe at my suggestion that General Sherman had that battery sent to the School of Application at Fort Leavenworth, in order to be able to prove by practical tests whether the machine-gun is not a proper weapon to be used in connection with infantry and cavalry in active service.
I do not know that I have anything further to say, but I am very sure that Dr. Gatling is the father of machine-guns. I believe the use of the Gatling gun will become a permanent and prominent feature in our military system and an important factor in future wars. A large portion of the credit for the introduction of such arms is undoubtedly due to my old friend. Dr. Gatling.
Commander W. S. Schley.—In regard to the high-angle fire suggestion, an idea presents itself to my mind with regard to the inaccuracy of such a system, and the impracticability and difficulty of ascertaining the range that attends its use.
If we introduce an explosive shell, the fire of a shower of projectiles will accomplish the results sought. The conditions under which high-angle fire would fail appear to me to be when no definite range could be determined. If explosive shell were used, the piece would be fired certainly with much better effect. So far as high-angle fire is concerned it is not a matter of much importance. On board ship we generally elevate the piece into tops and fire at low angles down upon decks; consequently, the rifle-bullet would answer our purpose; but if the Gatling is to be used for general purposes in naval warfare, it would seem to me to be necessary to adopt explosive shells similar in weight and penetrative power to those used in Nordenfeldt or Hotchkiss guns. At present the Gatling has only a special use—that connected with the shore operations of naval forces; but, I think, if it is to maintain its place in our armaments, it must have its caliber increased so as to give it effective power against torpedo boats as well as against men simply. I merely suggest these points in the hope of drawing out further discussion on these interesting questions.
Doctor R. J. Gatling.—In England they have "range-finders" and other means by which distances can be determined with greater accuracy, I think, than can be done by the explosion of shells fired from field-guns. Be that as it may, when men become entrenched, there will be time to ascertain how far the enemy is from you. You could get up near enough in the night to place your Gatling guns in pits or under cover, and then give the guns proper elevation by the use of a quadrant, so as to have the bullets discharged fall on men behind the entrenchments. The bullets so discharged descend nearly perpendicularly, and strike the ground with a force sufficient to penetrate two or three inches of timber. In this way men can be killed behind entrenchments—thus making such positions untenable.
These are points that I am glad have been brought forward in this discussion, as their consideration will be useful.
I have witnessed a great deal of shell firing from field-guns, both in this country and in Europe, and in my opinion it is difficult to determine accurately the distance of an object by such firing. To the eye, the shells seem to burst just in front of a target or near the object, when, in truth, they burst far short of the target or object fired at. I have seen field-guns fired at targets at one thousand yards range, and the shells seemed to explode in front of the target, and I have imagined that the target was riddled with missiles; but when the target was examined, a few hits only were noted. In such instances the shells had exploded before reaching the proper point in front of the target. I have witnessed some trials in target practice with field-guns, in competitive trials with the Gatling gun, where the number of hits of the former were so few as to be unworthy of note.
A competitive trial took place at Shoeburyness, England, between 9-pounder and 12-pounder English field-guns, and 1-inch, 0.65- and 0.42-inch caliber Gatling guns. Colonel Wray (now General) conducting the trials. Targets placed at various distances from the guns, as far as 2070 yards range, were fired at, and although the Gatling guns used on that occasion were not nearly so perfect and effective as the improved Gatlings now made, they hit the targets oftener at all ranges than the field-guns, which greatly astonished the members of the committee. General Wray, in his report of these trials, states that a Gatling gun is equal to three field-guns in effective killing power, up to sixteen hundred yards. And he further says, one battery of Gatling guns will take up only about one-fourth of the road space required for a battery of 9-pounder field guns.
I wish to say, Mr. President, a few words about my friend, General Benet. He is very kind in his remarks, and I am glad to see that his memory is so clear as to our experiences at the Frankford Arsenal. I was worrying over the rim fire cartridge. The trouble was that the heads of such cartridges were liable to burst and come off when fired, and I had no device that would extract the balance of the shells remaining in the chamber of the barrels. The General put me on the right track. "I would surely," said he, "change the cartridge to a centre-fire," and he insisted upon it. To make such change would involve some time and expense, and I was in a great hurry to get the gun into practical shape and general use, but he overcame every argument that I could bring forward and insisted on his idea of centre-fire. That centre-fire cartridge belongs to him, and was the first one made. He is justly entitled to the credit of his suggestion, and the perfect working of the gun to-day arises in a great degree from the adoption of the centre-fire and the metallic cartridge. It is with pleasure I give him the credit due him. I thank the General for his remarks, as they will greatly aid in preserving the history of the gun and cartridge.
The Gatling gun is the original arm of its class, and whatever merit there is in it belongs to the United States.
It is with pleasure I state that our own government has recognized the importance of this gun, and has given it a place in the field, in its forts, and on its ships. But it is stating only the truth when I say that the leading foreign governments have recognized the true worth of this gun, and that they are to-day better armed with it than our own government.
Rear-Admiral C. R. P. Rodgers.—I would like to ask a question as to the penetrating power of the Gatling gun when used in this way against steel clad torpedo boats.
The Chairman.—Torpedo boats, as they are built at present with steel plates, cannot be penetrated by the fire of the Gatling gun. They can be penetrated by the projectiles of machine-guns of a larger caliber.
Commander W. S. Schley.—In the discussion of this matter of machine-guns, and their general introduction into the service of various nations, the object in view has been to obtain a gun that would be effectual as a torpedo-arrester; it therefore seems to me that the Gatling gun, if it is to be of general use to us, should be adapted not only for infantry operations on shore, but also for naval operations, such, for instance, as preventing the placing of torpedoes. If it fails therefore to penetrate, it must of necessity give way to guns that will penetrate. The Hotchkiss, for example, and the Nordenfeldt, have the penetrating power, and they make use of it most effectually. At the battle of Alexandria it was a noticeable feature of the battle that the machine-guns, such as the Gatling, were not within range. No bullets from these guns were found in the two days' fight at that place, whereas balls fired by the Nordenfeldt guns were picked up on the beach. I believe that some of the prisoners of the English stated in a conversation with some of the English officers that their defeat was entirely due to the screeching of the shells over their heads. If the Gatling guns that were used in the engagement had been actively used, as it appears they were, and discharged at the rate of 1000 a minute, it seems to me very strange that some balls were not found on the battle-field, if the guns accomplished the purpose intended, as did other guns in use at the time.
Doctor K. J. Gatling.—I will say in reply to the remarks just made, that my lecture would have been too long, had I taken up and discussed the merits of both the larger and smaller size caliber guns. I have therefore confined myself to the smaller caliber guns, which are light and effective, and well adapted for service in our navy, and for warfare of any kind.
Gatling guns can be, and are, made of large caliber. The 1-inch Gatling discharges half-pound balls, and has a range of over two and a half miles; but such guns are heavier than the musket caliber Gatlings, which are light and easily handled, and which have a range of 3500 yards.
In the bombardment of the forts at Alexandria recently, by the English, Commander Schley says he has seen it stated that, although Gatling guns of the small caliber were used by the ships of the attacking fleet, it was a curious fact that none of the balls from these guns could be found anywhere near the battle-field. To that statement I desire to say that I have had extended correspondence with gentlemen who were present when these naval engagements took place in front of Alexandria. I am informed that some persons assert that not only were no bullets found that had been fired from the Gatling guns, but that there were none of any kind to be found that were fired from the Nordenfeldt guns, which were also used in the action.
This is explained in this way: The bullets, fired from the ships at some distance, and coming down with considerable force, would naturally and necessarily sink in the earth. Especially would this most likely be so where the oil is sandy and loose, and where little pressure is required to sink anything in the ground. Then again, after the bombardment was over, before the English forces landed, the Egyptian soldiers and pillagers visited the battleground to see if anything of value was left, and it is not at all unlikely that, if any bullets had been in sight (which I think very improbable in view of the facts I have just stated) that these people would have collected them and carried them off as relics.
It is a fact, however, worthy of note that the Gatling gun is highly spoken of by the English officers who have used it, and who are in a position to know its merits as a weapon of war.
I do not think the English have adopted or purchased any Hotchkiss guns. My information is that the English on that occasion used no other machineguns than the Gatling and the Nordenfeldt.
Lieutenant R. F. Nicholson.—I should like to ask the Chair if any experiments have been made in this country with the view of developing the power of small arms in the direction he referred to in his remarks.
The Chairman.—A few experiments have been made at the Experimental Battery by direction of the Bureau of Ordnance, Navy Department, with a .50 caliber Remington rifle, old model, using considerably heavier charges than usual, in a longer chamber, and modifying the character of the powder grain. The results were quite satisfactory, a velocity of 1880 feet being obtained with 185 grains of powder and 450 of lead, without undue distress in recoil. The energy of a musket caliber bullet possessing such a high velocity was illustrated in the impact upon an iron plate one inch in thickness, against which the bullet was fired. Although the bullet was of lead, the indent was three-eighths of an inch in depth by one inch in diameter.
Lieutenant-Colonel Jas. M. Whittemore, U. S. A.—With the introduction of the positive feed to the Gatling machine-gun, two kinds of high-angle fire are made effective. These may be classed as direct and indirect: direct, when the gun is aimed at the object; indirect, when the bullets are fired up in the air, in order to hit the object in their fall. The direct fire should be used when practicable, as it is the more destructive and saves time in its death dealing mission. To protect men on the spar-decks of ships-of-war from the deadly effect of the fire of machine-guns, the exposed parts ought to be bulletproof, either permanently or temporarily. Iron shields, hinged at the sides of the deck to fold down upon it when not in use, might answer a good purpose. When required to shield the men they could be raised to an angle of about forty-five degrees and supported by struts; they would form a very good sloping protection from bullets; when hit by large projectiles they would stand a '—chance of being knocked down as well as knocked to pieces. They could be balanced at any angle by chains and weights attached near the hinge and running to the lower deck. When raised, they should be so arranged that if struck by heavy shot they would not be knocked down upon the deck, thereby possibly crushing men behind them. This could be done with bolsters. When folded down, they would assist in protecting the deck from indirect high-angle fire. These high-angle fires, made effective by the positive feed, increase the power of the gun as an important weapon for the suppression of riots. Mounted upon a movable platform on rollers, protected by shields, and pushed along from the rear, buildings and streets could be cleared with little exposure to the men maneuvering the gun. A platform could have two guns mounted upon it; one to clear the streets and the first stories of houses, the other to clear upper stories and roofs by direct and indirect high-angle fire.
The Chairman.— In resuming the discussion, the Chair begs to note particularly the point raised by the Chief of Ordnance on the necessity for reliability in the ammunition for guns of the class in question.
No system of machine-guns can furnish even an acceptable performance with bad ammunition. In spite of the various plans for eliminating the disadvantages of burst cartridge shells, a cessation of the fire is the result of such an accident, with a delay more or less long, dependent generally upon the coolness of the operators. Many of the failures in official trials have been due solely to the ammunition. In this connection we have in this country great reason to congratulate ourselves upon the present high development in excellence of the U. S. cartridge as manufactured at the Frankford Arsenal.
The question of high-angle fire is extremely interesting, and it may develop even afloat, where its usefulness would at first seem to be limited, into a feature of considerable importance.
We can all recollect many cases during the Civil War, particularly in river service between high, overhanging banks, where high-angle lire would have been an effective factor. An opportunity for testing its value was also presented in the Corean expedition. Moreover, it will be useful at low angles in repelling an enemy close aboard.
With regard to its accuracy at high angles, there will doubtless be much to wish for. The projectiles at the great altitude reached where motion of translation and rotation nearly ceases are greatly affected by even a very light breeze, and except in calm weather a range-table would be of slight utility. A further disadvantage in correcting the range, as suggested in the remarks of Commander Schley, is found in the very slight disturbance of the surface of the water by the fall of musket caliber projectiles fired at high angles. There is, perhaps, no disturbance at all on land.
In conclusion, the Chair begs to tender the thanks of the meeting to the lecturer for his interesting essay, and also to the officers of the Army for their participation in the discussion.