“The rockets’ red glare”

This post is one of the reasons I keep visiting Culver’s Gun Talk.

I watched a little of The History Channel’s story on the War of 1812. I was a bit astonished to see them showing common fireworks as “the rockets” in our national anthem.

The rockets Key wrote about were a far cry from the (usually) harmless rockets fired to entertain crowds on holidays.

The 25 hour bombardment of Fort McHenry, which began on Sept. 13, 1814 and lasted through the night, was from British ships in Baltimore harbor. It was intended to reduce the fort and allow the British to capture Baltimore. Aside from ordinary warships and troop ships, two special kinds of ships were involved.

One type fired large mortar shells fused to burst above and behind the fort’s walls, killing or wounding the defenders, dismounting guns and perhaps, by burrowing into the fort’s magazine, destroy the fort entirely. These mortar shells were called “bombs” at the time, and indeed through WWII by the British. Those were the “bombs bursting in air.” Today, when Americans use word to mean explosives dropped from airplanes, many people don’t understand the anthem’s phrase, or even think that some kind of primitive aircraft was involved.

The “rockets” were Congreve rockets, designed by Sir William Congreve, of Woolwich Arsenal. These were impressive weapons. Though not as accurate as artillery, the rocket did not need a heavy iron casing to protect against the shock of firing from a gun, so a much larger explosive charge could be carried than in the same size artilley shell. Congreve rockets were stick stabilized, and the largest, the 8″ rocket, had a stick over 20 feet long. The bombardment rockets, which were basically cans of powder, were made in 8″, 7″, 6″, 42 pounder, and 32 pounder. The 32 pounder was the smallest used as a bombardment/seige rocket, and the largest used as a field rocket. Smaller field rockets were made in 32, 24, 18, 12, and 6 pound sizes, and were made as case shot as well as shells.

Congreve field rockets were fired at the battle of Bladensburg, and the psychological effect on the Americans (who had never encountered them before) was so great that they are often credited with the British victory. The British went on, as we know, to capture Washington and burn the sandstone president’s house. When it was restored, paint had to be used to cover the scorch marks – white paint.

On land, rockets were fired from an iron trough mounted on an “A” frame, whose legs could be spread out or brought together to change elevation. The arrangement was called a firing frame. Maximum range was at 55 degrees.

The rockets fired from British “rocket ships” (yes, that is what they called them) were the larger sizes, and were fired from frames built into the ship.

So the rockets Key saw passing his ship on their way to Fort McHenry were not harmless fireworks, but very deadly weapons, the best the British had. The Congreve rockets remained in service with both the Royal Navy and the Army until the mid-1800’s, and were used in the Crimea.

But Fort McHenry held, and the dawn of Sept. 14 showed the “Star Spangled Banner” to yet wave. Long may it wave.

(Another post ripped off from Culver’s Gun Talk, where it was posted by Jim Keenan, a long-time, frequent and great participant)

How Serious of a blogger are you, anyway?

Not too serious. I’ll never be a big dog with five digits of hits a week. I just don’t have time. This is a hobby… It has a plac ein my life behind work, kids, the lady up the road a ways, the house, guns, you know… A life…

I read the morning paper. I listen to talk radio on the way to and from places work might take me. I watch the occasional news show. and if I have time, I read a few internet news sources, the guys on the blogroll over there, and that’s about it.

My job, while interesting to me, is not conducive to generating the subjec tmatter that will bring thundering hordes to this site. I mean, how many people are just DYING to hear about protective relay upgrades and synchronous motor problems? Not many…

Even my mis-spent youth, my army days are not the stuff of legend. They’re memories back int eh ever-darkening mists of my personal history. Fortunately, the mists attenuate the pain and misery, leaving me with the happy and funny remnants of that nine years… But again, not the stuff to draw huge crowds.

Since the move over here from Blogspot, I’ve been hovering around the hundred hits a day mark. That’s nice. It means I have quite a few friends who visit often. Hey guys and gals, I appreciate every one of you. and for those of you who are also bloggers, I appreciate the links, too.

So that’s where it will stand…

The “Plan to Win the Peace” and othe fables

That’s a (hauugghhhh! spit) John F. “Let me start my political climb over the bodies of dead American soldiers” Kerry phrase. And it is pure unadulterated bullshit! It’s hot air. It’s the kind of catchy little verbiage of which the Left is so fond. It’s a pleasant-sounding set of words. A catchy platitude created by speechwriters who have no criteria for creating the truth, only something that rolls well off Kerry’s tongue. But call it what it is: pure crap!

We never went into a war before with a “plan to win the peace”. Kerry is trying to sell himself to Americans who think that world problems can be solved in neat time frames like TV dramas. it doesn’t happen that way. It didn’t happen that way after WW II. And it’s not happening that way now.

As far as winning the peace, we’ve won it. Ask yourself: Does Iraq still have offensive capabilities for its military? Nope. They are plagued by a silly rabble with small arms and lumps of explosive that gets its collective butt kicked whenever they get audacious enough to think they want to fight the greatest military force on the planet today. That’s all. If we left today, they’d be generations from building Iraq into what it was three years ago.

What we’re doing now is what we did for Germany: Watching to make sure that order arose out of the chaos created when we removed the enemy in their midst. Just as removing a cancer creates a weak and unsteady body throughout the recovery period, Iraq is week and unsteady. If we didn’t stay on, although the cancer (Saddam and the Baathists) is gone, the patient might die of infection (from the Sadr version of militant Islam). So we’re there. You got a better plan? Let’s hear it.

And my comment: If you see a mad dog threatening your children, you kill it first, then figure out a way to dispose of the carcass. Such is Iraq, Afghanistan, and whoever else might want to line up in the way of defanging international Islamic terror. (Are you listening, Syria? Iran?)

How HillaryCare Fares in Canada

Remember when “We are the President” Hillary (hauggghhhh! Spit!) Clinton was trying to push her version of universal health care? And the Left would get the vapors and point north to Canaduh as a fine example of the way things would be? Well, Skippy, bounce on over and read this little presentation on Eternity Road. It will give you a peep into what the Left won’t tell you: Canadian healthcare is headed for the bottom. Similar stories come from Great Britain, and I was hearing these tales from my German friends in the seventies.

Our system isn’t perfect. Here in Louisiana we have an under-funded charity hospital system, but this is a state that signed a ten-year deal with a professional football frnachise to keep them in New Orleans, at a cost of $187 million, so think about that when you read about services being cut in the charity hospitals.

And also remember the fact that NO emergency room can turn away a patient. Having been to the emergency room of a large local hospital on a Saturday night, I was amazed to see the number of “emergencies” there, who all seemed to be able to afford cigarettes, big-name sportswear and $150 athletic shoes but couldn’t afford to pay for healthcare. That, folks, is a matter of priorities and personal choices, and I for one am not too willing to subsidize poor choices in life.

We’re not perfect in the healthcare biz here in America, but we do have the best in the world. Do you honestly think that the likes of Houston’s M.D. Anderson Center or New York’s Mayo Clinic, or the like would have been developed under the careful and concerned eye of a government bureaucracy? You do? Then Why haven’t they?

Just think about this: Public toilets. Public housing. Do you think public health care will be any different?