re: #286 William Barnett-Lewis

Actually, that’s not especially true. While formal military tactics were based on the line and the square, that had less to do with flintlocks and more to do with their single shot nature. As a result, the real battle was fought at close distance with bayonnete. That was also when the militia usually turned and ran because they did not have the discipline of Regulars to stand there and disembowel one another. In America, jaeger armed riflemen were common and rarely fired their expensive rifles from the line.

And while the flintlock could misfire, the most common kind was the “flash in the pan.” A weapon that had any percentage chance of exploding would not have supplanted sword and pike.

I own and have hunted with a flintlock. They are much less antiquated than they seem.

The issue of “flash in the pan” misfires is also why armies adopted the percussion cap so rapidly when it appeared. With flintlocks, a regiment of 500 muskets would some times only fire 375-400 shots, with the others being “flash” misfires. With percussion caps, the misfire rate plummeted from 15-25% down to 2%. That’s a smaller part or why US Civil War engagements were so much deadlier that those of the American Revolution: A great deal more shots were being fired, and commanders could count on that fire being delivered reliably.