THE EQUIPMENT OF FIELD ARTILLERY. 
551 
thus, for example, one horse artillery battery fired 1164 rounds, or 
194 rounds per gun; but in this particular action the work that fell 
upon the guns of the III. Corps was altogether abnormal; it therefore 
appears that we can rest satisfied with the number of rounds we at 
present carry, which gives an average of 124 rounds per gun through¬ 
out the Army Corps, but this amount should not be in the least 
diminished. Let us assume, therefore, that we shall still carry 148 
rounds per gun with the horse artillery equipment, and 100 rounds 
per gun with the field battery equipment, and that in each case it will 
be convenient to carry one-fourth part actually with the guns. Con¬ 
tinental powers have gone far beyond us in the construction of carriages 
and limbers, and their latest improvements in these respects have 
admitted of Jth of the total weight of the equipment behind the 
splinter-bar being ammunition : let us adopt this proportion as a basis 
to determine the possible weights of metal we may expect in our future 
guns. In the light equipment, therefore, we shall have the Jth of 
37 cwt., or say 520 lbs. available for ammunition; and in the field 
batteries the Jth of 50 cwt., or 700 lbs.; thus in the former case we 
should have 36 rounds of about 15 lbs. each, in the latter 25 rounds 
of 28 lbs. each. Thus, with due regard to a suitable and therefore 
heavy charge of powder, we cannot expect to fire a heavier projectile 
than one of 12 lbs. from the horse artillery gun, and one of 20 lbs. 
from the field battery gun.* 
6. It is true that Kruppf has produced a gun, the equipment of Muzzle _ 
which is nearly 3 cwt. less than that of our 16-pr., which fires a 27 lb. thereat 8 
shell with a muzzle velocity of 1440 f.s.; but, on the other hand, the de3lderatum 
French 12-pr. has a muzzle velocity of 1600 f.s., and the new Yavasseur 
13-pr. one of 1900 f.s. Muzzle velocity governs flatness of trajectory, 
and as this is of the greatest importance, rendering, as it does, time shells 
effective at increased ranges, and checking the tendency of percussion 
shells to bury themselves in the ground on impact, we must not 
sacrifice it in any great degree to increase the weight of the shell; 
for a consideration of the tactical duties of artillery will show the low 
relative value of a large bursting charge as compared with high 
velocity. It also appears that two ammunition wagons per subdivision 
are required to carry a sufficiency of ammunition with the Krupp gun. 
In spite, therefore, of a comparatively light 27 lb. having been produced, 
it will be wiser to keep to the limit of 20 lb. for the projectile, and then, 
if possible, to increase the powder charge. It may be convenient here 
to note the proportions between weight of powder charge and weight 
of shot in various guns, and the corresponding muzzle velocities, 
remembering always that the energy, or hitting power, of the gun 
varies as the weight of the shot, but as the square of the velocity:—J 
* It is assumed that the question of ammunition must practically decide the weight of the gun, 
as there does not appear to he much difficulty in the production of the latter within moderate 
weights ; but very great difficulty exists in providing for the transport of the ammunition. 
Compare also the remarks on this head in the “ Mobility of Field Artillery,” R. A. I. Proceedings, 
Vol. IX., pp. 458 et seq. 
f See Paper on “ Modern Field Artillery,” by Capt. James, R.E., E.U.S. Institution Papers, 1880. 
j Vide tables in “ Modern Field Artillery,” Capt. James, R.E., It. U. S. Institution Papers, 1880. 
