Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jervoise t1_ja019b5 wrote

Reply to comment by Dirt_E_Harry in TIL about the only double barrel cannon in the world. When it was its first tested during the American Civil War, the chain snapped immediately and one ball tore into a nearby cabin, knocking down its chimney; the other spun off erratically and struck a nearby cow, killing it instantly. by ExpertPreference8481

Increasing the weight of the payload without extra force reduces the range. Also the chain doesn’t really help against infantry.

−19

eLonLonRanch t1_ja06qnn wrote

Oh it most definitely would. Chain shot was already a thing long before, you would just use smaller caliber balls or half balls for it.

31

TatonkaJack t1_ja0i98y wrote

Yeah but it wasn’t for infantry, it’s primary use was for destroying rigging. Grapeshot was used for infantry

16

Poopy_McTurdFace t1_ja12kw9 wrote

It used to be used against infantry and fortress garrisons, but the carnage it created was so nasty a treaty was signed to ban it's use on land.

−4

TatonkaJack t1_ja14v99 wrote

All I can find is that it was used a handful of times on land. What treaty are you talking about?

3

Poopy_McTurdFace t1_ja19vc7 wrote

The instance I'm thinking of was the 1631 destruction of Magdeburg. I was mistaken on the attackers using it as it was actually the defenders using it instead. The Wikipedia page for chain-shot has a brief mention that the use of chain on land against infantry angered the attackers, but isn't specific on exactly why or how. Edit: Here is the bit that was written containing mention of the use of chain on the attackers.

After some googling, this is the closest thing referencing what I remember, that the use of chain on land was seen as especially nasty, and connects those sentiments to Magdeburg. As for a treaty, the treaty signed after the war ended made no mention on weapon or munition bans, so I must be mistaken on that front too. Not to mention that use of chain against infantry in a few instances in the 19th century suggests that no recognized bans were in place.

4

Ragnar_Lothbruk t1_ja2d0g6 wrote

>The Wikipedia page for chain-shot has a brief mention that the use of chain on land against infantry angered the attackers, but isn't specific on exactly why or how.

Angering the attackers is an amusing choice of words.

1

jervoise t1_ja0gyfk wrote

this is in comparison to two shots. a chain shot can only spread itself out about 2 feet wide. dont get me wrong, it was nasty, but there's a reason it was primarily used for naval combat, and never was consistently used on land.

2