Frizzen lock open

[lscrep]

I dont understand why figure makers show flintlock weapons with the Frizzen pan in the open position all the time.! Except when loading a flintlock weapon the frizzen is back in the closed position. The saying keep your powder dry applies!!!!! I recently viewed a beautiful dio of Valley Forge the colonial soldier was posed in a wind swept position clutching a blanket for warmth, but the Frizzen pan was fully open (forward). I realize a stock weapons was used but I have witnessed this common error in many other figures. Even mountain man figures mounted and unmounted. No sane mountainman would wander around with an unloaded flintlock with the frizzen pan in the open position!! Lets try for some realism here.

 

[Dan Morton]

Although muskets are kinda not my thing, I appreciate members of this forum pointing out such errors! There are probably hundreds of them captured in miniatures made by sculptors who just didn't know and would gladly have corrected the error had they known. Hence the need for posting WIP and for constructive critique.

Members - What other errors have you identified?

All the best,
Dan

 

[1969]

You are quite correct, Frizzen should be closed over the pan unless pan is being primed. I also tend to have the hammer as a separate part on my flintlocks so it can be added in the cocked or un-cocked position depending on what the modeller needs/wants.
Good observation
Steve

 

[peedee]

Because I am obviously pedantic,

I started to cast my own some years ago so I can change them as I need.

However now look what you've gone and done,

I can't be as smug anymore now
Paul

 

[tock24]

Not wanting to steal the thread, but Dan did ask! When standing at ease/rest etc, quite often the hands of figures are clasped over the top of the barrel of the weapon. I was always taught NEVER to put hands over the barrel as it might be loaded, and go off. Even though it might have been my weapon and as safe as possible. There is a position for the hands when 'at ease', and its nowhere near the muzzle!
OK - Rant over!

From an 1812 reenactor

Ian

 

[peedee]

Good man, safety first. I was also taught Never to prop a weapon against a wall, but always to lay it down flat.
It always makes me wince when you see it in films.

I was also thinking ref frizzens: it does mean that all weapons of all types of 'lock' would have to be
made in both positions. Ie two weapons, otherwise the firing poses would be wrong too !

I've never thought about it much before, that's probably why they don't/ haven't done it.

Keep it dry boys :rolleyes
!

 

[Huw63]

I used to shoot flintlocks and lying them down, keeping the powder dry and not putting hands over barrels were taught. The other things was always to "ping" the barrel by dropping the ramrod down it if you wanted to double check it was safe and nit loaded - of course barrel facing a safe direction.

Other things I notice is sometimes flintlocks have no flint!!

Of course flintlocks gave rise to some sayings such as "keep your powder dry", "going off half cocked" (unplanned discharge of the weapon)and "pin money" (barrels were connected to the stock by pins and the quantity of pins produced gave rise to pin money).

For British flintlocks I recommend Blackmore's "British Military Firearms". The French equivalents are well covered in many publications.

Ok enough of boring all and sundry.

Cheers

Huw

 

[peedee]

The other things was always to "ping" the barrel by dropping the ramrod down it if you wanted to double check it was safe and nit loaded - of course barrel facing a safe direction.
.....Ok enough of boring all and sundry Cheers Huw[/quote]


Not at all mate great stuff, I thought I'd heard of ramrod pinging.
I was lucky enough to fire a Kentucky long rifle sort of weapon. Years ago, but hadn't loaded it.
Paul

 

[Huw63]

Another sprang to mind today - "lock, stock and barrel" - obvious (sort of)...

Cheers

Huw

 

[theBaron]

...Members - What other errors have you identified?

My pet peeves are mustaches on officers in 18th century European armies, and drinking vessels, especially beer mugs.

Officers generally didn't wear mustaches, from about 1730 or so, up to the changes in fashion triggered by the French Revolution. They were gentlemen, and a clean-shaven face was the fashion. There were specific exceptions, of course, such as hussar officers, who were copying the Hungarians. But it just gives me a rash to see a Hessian officer circa 1775 with a mustache.

And as far as drinking vessels go, so many sculptors take the easy way out and depict a simple metal mug. They ignore the changes in material and in fashion, and what's more appropriate to any given time. Even worse is someone who does take a shot at depicting something more appropriate, but gets the period wrong. There was once a figure in 90mm, I think, of a Hessian dragoon officer circa 1776, holding a tankard, but it was something that would not be designed until about 100 years later. I collect beer mugs (steins as we call 'em), tankards, glasses, and have over 200, so I notice this.

Prost!
Brad

 

[Huw63]

Another one that gets me are gaiter-straps, and I'm talking eighteenth and nineteenth century and the straps have no buckles.

Equally military shoes are sometimes depicted without nails and that bugs when the sole of the shoes is showing.

Cheers

Huw

 

[Dan Morton]

Ian - Yeah, I don't want to rant either, but I was taught the same thing in USAF during weapons qualification courses and annual small arms training. On a figure of any period if it shows the hand over the barrel end of a rifle - it just looks wrong to me.

All the best,
Dan