|View single post by Johan Steele|
|Posted: Wed Sep 26th, 2007 08:11 pm||
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352
|Michael, no disresect received, I have no doubt fouling was at times an issue, especially after rapid fire or prolonged firing w/ no opportunity to clean between rounds. Add to that cases where men were not properly trained or were issued wrong ammo (.58 works in .577 but is a touch more difficult to seat)but I think fouling issues is a overstated problem. .577 or .58 in a .54 is a problem.
One of my favorite stories of fouling was a letter referencing the Battle of Atlanta. An amused Sgt wrote home about witnessing a rather embarassing and apparentlt quite disabling injury. A Pvt needed to clean his Springfield in a hurry and also felt the need to empty his bladder. Deciding to kill two birds w/ one stone he had a rather painful mishap allowing a quite hot barrel to contact a portion of his anatomy... I can only imagine the talk about that incident!
To add, one of the more common injuries was to the right hand, where a man would slam his hand down on the ramrod... on a severely fouled weapon the ramrod might not budge but the hand would continue leaving a rather painful wound.
The fist on the ramrod thing to me stands out as possible but extremely rare. Men who had experianced the issue usually never repeated the mistake. Some fashioned a wooden block to assist w/ their ramrod if it became fouled.
I can easily see it in a situation that is quite intense and men are rapid firing their way through 100 rounds, after 30 or so you had best start worrying about fouling. But as I said I believe most men were adept at field cleaning the weapon... it can be done in seconds if the situation warrented and the man didn't even have to leave the line.
A hot barrel, loose powder... a real danger of a cook off and I think most would rather lose a finger than the hand.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that while severe fouling happened I believe it was an exception rather than a norm.