Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
Cannons
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Aloof Nudist (U1727083) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
What is the strategic military advantage of cannons that made it worthwhile hauling these huge, heavy objects for miles over rough terrain, across rivers and up and down mountains. In pre-twentieth century warfare, cannon balls did not explode on impact. So they were really just a big bullet. Sure they could kill a man or a horse if they hit directly. But so could a musket ball or an arrow which could be launched by a much smaller piece of equipment.
Iβve seen wooden buildings in Gettysburg PA that were hit by cannon balls in the American Civil War. Other that a big (6β diameter) hole in the wall, there is no structural damage and the building is still standing after 140 years!
The only advantages I can see for a cannon over, say, a handheld musket are:
1.) Range.
2.) Intimidation- theyβre bigger and louder and leave in bigger hole in you if they hit.
Am I missing something? -
Message 2
Posted by DrkKtn6851746 (U2746042) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Explosive shells & shrapnel were invented well before the C20th.
Range is hugely important & often defines who can shoot at whom, & remember that a cannonball would kill as many people as were in its path.
Your Gettysburg building was lucky - cannon led to the decline of medieval castles (tall, relatively thin walls), which were very vulnerable to them. -
Message 3
Posted by Stoggler (U1647829) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Good question!
As Dark Kitten mentioned, cannons brought about the end of medieval castles - they could brings walls down. It was aoften a lengthy process but as most sieges were over time periods of weeks or months then they had the time to do it.
On the battle field, they did have some use. As you mentioned, there is the psychological aspect, it intimidates the other side. Also, in the days of armies slowly marching in ranks and in formation across a battle field a well aimed cannon shot could kill, maim, or incapacitate a large proportion of a units strength. The cannon balls were generally fired to bounce (Γ la The Dambusters) along the ground into massed ranks of men for greatest effect. As a result of this threat from cannon, a unit would often deploy in long lines to minimise the damage done by a cannon, although as such they became vulnerable to cavalry attacks. -
Message 4
Posted by stuart (U3340781) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Explosive shells were used in napoleonic wars as was shrapnel based shells (which were invented by a brit).Also congreve rockets were used at this time.I think even cannon balls were of use as most of the armies around the 18th and 19th century advanced in mass columns as well as formed a dense square when there were calvary about.So a 6 or 12 pound led ball fired at these columns or squares would tear through the ranks.For a building they would use a howitzer with a timed fuse and for breaches in walls they would brinb up a siege train of massive cannon.
-
Message 5
Posted by stuart (U3340781) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Explosive shells were used in napoleonic wars as was shrapnel based shells (which were invented by a brit).Also congreve rockets were used at this time.I think even cannon balls were of use as most of the armies around the 18th and 19th century advanced in mass columns as well as formed a dense square when there were calvary about.So a 6 or 12 pound led ball fired at these columns or squares would tear through the ranks.For a building they would use a howitzer with a timed fuse and for breaches in walls they would bring up a siege train of massive cannon.Β
-
Message 6
Posted by Aloof Nudist (U1727083) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Your Gettysburg building was lucky - cannon led to the decline of medieval castles (tall, relatively thin walls), which were very vulnerable to them.Β
There are a lot of wood buildings in Gettysburg, and elsewhere in the US, that were "lucky". I can see how a cannon ball could topple a stone wall whose structural integrity depended upon the bearing weight of stone upon stone. Knock out one key structural member and it all comes down like a house-of-cards.
But against a wood or brick structure it's not so easy. A high velocity projectile can rip right through a wall, leaving a big gagping hole, without compormising the building's structural intergity.
I remember seeing a TV spot about some Civil War re-enactors who were hired by a farmer to topple a 100+ year old brick silo that had to be demolished. They fired their cannon at the structure MANY times from a few hundred yards away. Each time it made two clean holes in the masonry where the ball passed through (in one side adn out the other). But the silo remained erect until it was hit a few times on one side, setting it off balance.
It took the team all day and dozens of rounds to bring down one silo! And from a range closer than you would want to be to someone shooting back at you. -
Message 7
Posted by Stoggler (U1647829) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Explosive shells were used in napoleonic wars as was shrapnel based shells (which were invented by a britΒ
By a Mr Shrapnel funnily enough! Lt Henry Shrapnel to be more accurate -
Message 8
Posted by Mick_mac (U2874010) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Prior to the invention of exploding shells, etc., cannon were supremely important for pulverising masonry, i.e. demolishing (at long distance) the walls of towns and other fortified locations.
Instead of sitting around hoping to starve the defenders out of their fortification cannon gave the attacker an aggressive edge. Before cannon, attackers used trebuchets to fire stones at the walls, or lob dead bodies (human and animal) and all kinds of foul substances into the town or fort to spread disease.
Cannons sounded the death knell for castles because of their increased power over trebuchets and defenders knew it would only be a matter of time before the besiegers would breach their walls. The strategy was to concentrate the firing on the most vulnerable part of the walls and keep blasting away until the wall started to fall apart.
A fortification was only as secure as the walls that surrounded it. Cannon removed that security. -
Message 9
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
trouveur,
Further to other answers, they were developed in part to overcome the stone fortifications of the preceding period, developing a breach as it came to be known by the Napoleonic times.
Also because of the technical difficulties of producing the cannon and paying for them they became a status symbol. (Some one will be along in a bit with some pseudo Freudian My siege train is bigger than your siege train comment no doubt).
One development not mentioned so far is that of cannister (or grape) which turned the cannon into a huge "shotgun" and was a very effective killer at short range (from memory this range would be about 400 yards for single shot, 200 or less for double shot, and in extremis, triple shot and a prayer from all involved).
Cheers AA. -
Message 10
Posted by Aloof Nudist (U1727083) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
Prior to the invention of exploding shells, etc., cannon were supremely important for pulverising masonry, i.e. demolishing (at long distance) the walls of towns and other fortified locations.Β
I can see how this could be accomplished using scores of cannons in a coordinated effort. As I pointed out, a single cannon is just about useless for knocking down a farm silo. -
Message 11
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
you know the medieval cannons couldnt cut it against a decently fortified position, it was actually after the end of the middle ages that cannons became seige winners (as it where)
-
Message 12
Posted by Hasse (U1882612) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
When the Cannon first came in use was it mostly as a sieg engine and a defender of the new type of castles,two great examples of this type is Rhodos 1521 and Malta 1565.
The greatest impact had the cannon naturally in seabattles where it for all future changed tactics.
As an important and effective,part of the running battlefield did it come with the early 17cent,not at least in the Swedish army under Gustaf Adolph.
The Swedish army of the 30 year war was build on firepower,instead of the pike tertico,changing the tactics for the next 200 years.
The heavy siege guns was suported with a train of standardsised fieldguns.
They where comperatly light,and the tactical advantage was inmense.
As previously stated is the range of a cannon longer than a musket,did take higher toll and at short range able to shot chain grape/musket or plain nailshot making an attack especially with a heavy closed pike tertico near to suicide.
Another thing while the musket went from a rate of fire from 1 every two minutes around 1600 to Brittish 4 round/minute at its heigh in Napoleonic war.
The fieldcannon kept it rate of aprox 3 rounds every two minutes,so well into 18 cent had the cannon higher rate of fire than the musket.
The Swedish army defeated a Prussian army many times its size in the great Nordic war early 18 cent,by putting the cannons on a sledge and moving them along with the advance,and by using readymade sabotshots managing keeping a fire rate for the best gunners to five shots per minutes.A cannon could naturally just keep up thise rate for a couple of minutes,before blowing,but this day was it enough.
So the gun has been important,both in siege war and att the battlefield for some 500 year.
Hasse -
Message 13
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 1st March 2006
A cannonball may only blow a hole in a wooden building. But god help you if you happen to be on the other side. Splinters cut men to ribbons. If you read the results of Wooden ships of the line fighting. More men died because of those splinters.
Fred
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ iD
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ links
ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.