Trapdoor springfield problems

[charliek]

What were the problems reported for the trapdoors performance at the Little Big Horn and in the Philippines which led to its replacement?

[elk hunter]

Early on the problem was with the copper cased ammunition. The soft cases would stick and the extractor would cut the through the rim leaving the case in the chamber. I understand that many of the troopers resorted to prying cases out with a knife.

The ultimate reason the trapdoor was replaced was the rest of the world was leaving us behind by switching to bolt action, magazine fed, repeaters using small caliber smokeless cartridges. The Spanish in Cuba using the model 1893/95 Mausers proved the superiority of that concept.

[Scharfschuetze]

Very few of the recovered 45/55/405 cases recovered at the Little Big Horn (1876) showed any evidence of the extractor tearing through the rim or having been pried out. No doubt a few were though. As noted by Elk Hunter, the soft copper case was not as sturdy as the brass case that was adopted later on. In addition to that, the two battalions and pack train element under Reno and Benteen do not mention that to have been an issue. They held out for two days a few miles south of "Last Stand Hill" constantly firing their carbines to hold off the Sioux and Cheyenne until relieved by the Gibbons and Terry column from the north.

I had a good friend who was one of the county coroners invited by the US Park Service to scour the battlefield following the big fires in the late 70s that cleared much of the sage brush and grasses off of the area. He had quite an insight into the relics recovered on the battlefield. There are a couple books documenting their efforts and for those interested, they are probably listed or available for sale at the US Park Service's web site.

I believe that the use of the copper case in the early Trapdoor ammo was due to the Bennett priming system used. The primer was internal and not visible. The soft copper allowed the heavy hammer strike to impart enough energy to ignite the primer.

By the time of the Spanish American War (1898), Trapdoor rifles had brass cases and a more conventional Berdan style primer.

[charliek]

thanks for that information. I had heard of an analysis of the ammunition remains at the Custer site. I'll try and find the reference.

[curator]

The biggest problem with the Trapdoor Springfield at Little Big Horn was it being a single shot rifle where a significant number the opposing forces were armed with repeaters; that and being seriously out numbered. Mostly National Guard units were armed with trapdoors in the Philippines. By then regular army units were issued Krag rifles. Frankfort Arsenal was loading the .45-70 cartridges with smokeless powder by 1898 so a major problem with clouds of smoke was eliminated. The single shot Springfields were adequate against the Moro tribesmen, and the complaints about armaments were about the 1892 Army pistol in .38 long Colt caliber.

[tbx-4]

Custer's Last Stand and the Springfield Trapdoor.
Go here and read this thread. Excellent info starting in post #7.
https://30eca00a039f-002391.vbulleti...r-s-last-stand

[Scharfschuetze]

Custer's Last Stand and the Springfield Trapdoor.
Go here and read this thread. Excellent info starting in post #7.
https://30eca00a039f-002391.vbulleti...r-s-last-stand

I was a participant in that study. Larry and I were both assigned to the same unit at the time of that battlefield study of the Little Big Horn.

[charliek]

Thanks to you both.

[tbx-4]

Scharf,
You and Larry did an excellent job too. That has to be the most informative write up of what happened and excellent research on Custer, the Little Bighorn and the Trapdoor Springfield. Bravo!

[13Echo]

Well the problems at the Little Big Horn depends on your side. For Custer it was his tactics or lack of tactics or proper assessment of the enemy before splitting his command and attacking 5,000 Indians with 250 men. For the Indians it was not setting out scouts to warn of approaching troops. The Trapdoor Springfields actually performed quite well, however the troops had been given very little training shooting the damn things so a lot of their fire was ineffectual.

Custer was a glory hound. During the Civil war his troops consistently sustained very high casualty rates in battle due largely to his reckless tactics or lack of tactics. He seemed to count battlefield success based on his casualty rate. His was higher than anyone else so he must have been fighting the hardest. A commander that willing to sacrifice his men for his personal glory is a bad commander.

[Scharfschuetze]

For those wanting to study up a bit more on the Frontier Army during the 1870s and Brevet Major General Custer; may I recommend the following books:

"A Terrible Glory" by James Donovan
"The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn" by Nathaniel Philbrick
"Frontier Regulars" by Robert Utley
"Forty Miles a Day on Beans and Hay" by Robert Utlely
"Indian Wars of the Great Plains" by Stephen Longstreet
"Little Big Horn" (Classic Battles series) by Peter Panzieri
"I Fought with Custer" by Sergeant Windolph, US 7th Cavalry
"Crazy Horse and Custer" by Stephen Ambrose

You'll find differing opinions and accounts in the various books, but that's the nature of history and an author's attempt to write it from the research available at the time of his writing. My favorite books dealing with just the Little Big Horn are: "A Terrible Glory" and "The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn." Both of these books take into account the recent research following the fires of the late 70s that burned over the battlefield and exposed much new material for study.