The groundbreaking Belton flintlock repeater, with firearms & weaponry expert Jonathan Ferguson

This pair of pioneering flintlock muskets are like none we've shown on this series before. They represent an 18th century attempt to create a genuine repeater weapon. Not only were these weapons actually purchased in not insignificant numbers by one of history's most controversial organisations, their story is also associated with some of the most recognisable names in US history.
This really isn't an episode to be missed.
0:00 Introduction
3:00 Replacement chamber
5:15 Terminology & history
6:20 1784 Repeating flintlock
7:15 Firing process
12:15 1786 Repeating flintlock
16:25 Portfire mechanism
17:40 Firing process
20:40 Firearm history
22:40 Outro
Find out more about these objects here:
collections.royalarmouries.or...
collections.royalarmouries.or...
Join us and many more firearms KZbinrs at the History of Weapons & War channel:
www.weaponsandwar.tv/browse
Subscribe to our channel for more videos about arms and armour
Help us bring history to life by supporting us here: royalarmouries.org/support-us...
Sign up to our museum membership scheme here: royalarmouries.org/support-us...
⚔Website: royalarmouries.org/home
⚔Blog: royalarmouries.org/stories/
⚔Facebook: / royalarmouriesmuseum
⚔Twitter: / royal_armouries
⚔ Instagram: / royalarmouriesmuseum
We are the Royal Armouries, the United Kingdom's national collection of arms and armour. Discover what goes on behind the scenes and watch our collection come to life. See combat demonstrations, experience jousting and meet our experts.
Have a question about arms and armour? Feel free to leave us a comment and we'll do our best to answer it.

[@fire_tower]

The Belton gun is really interesting I didn't know there still were any left. The letters exchanged between him and the Continental Congress are pretty funny. He basically said "If one of my guns makes one man as effective as sixteen you should use all the money you would have saved by not hiring those fifteen extra men to pay me".

[@samholdsworth420]

Valid point 👉

[@Kevin-mx1vi]

Well, I can see the logic, but the flaw is that the enemy would likely be shooting back, and it only takes one of their bullets to take down "sixteen" of yours.

[@fire_tower]

​@@Kevin-mx1viThere's quite a few flaws in his reasoning. Like the fact the government at the time wasn't very cash positive, or they don't want to fire 15/16ths of the army, or that they'd never give him that much money just because he asked for it because the world doesn't work that way. I suppose you don't know unless you ask though.

[@Kevin-mx1vi]

@@fire_tower Indeed. Nice try, but he obviously didn't understand how governments think.

[@orbatos]

​@@fire_towerIt was a very common (and stupid) ploy of people who thought of themselves as entrepreneurs and master salesmen both then and later. No small number of innovations were gatekept or missed as a result of this brand of greed.

[@Willy_Tepes]

"Time is tight and we have wars to fight" I'm gonna steal that quote.

[@jonathanferguson1211]

Totally unintentional, I assure you :)

[@user-oy9zy4ds9m]

Money was tight. Thanks to all the taxes which is why they started the war in the first place 😂

[@bostonrailfan2427]

@@user-oy9zy4ds9mno taxation without representation! open the western border!

[@abeherbert6603]

Absolutely fascinating. The kind of weapon you would see in an alternate-history film or video game and think "well, that's just ridiculous."

[@BradTheAmerican]

I got really excited when I saw "flintlock repeater" in the title because I was just recently researching this kind of stuff for an alt history story.

[@rattlestormrepublic4874]

Don't even get me started on the Chamber's volley machinegun, basically it had 7 barrels/chambers and all were loaded with 32 conical bullets that would ignite the power of the bullet behind it. You literally couldn't stop fireing untill either all bullets were spent or the gun itself exploded, they were never used by infantry as they were too unreliable but the navy purchased a couple hundred to mount on ships.

[@noth606]

@@rattlestormrepublic4874 I believe there is a record of one being used 'in anger' as it were, the chambers continual bullet spraying device, where it initially worked as intended, and went wrong towards the end, it's unclear what happened, but if I recall correctly the gun partially blew up, crew below got hit, and the operators of the thing were lost, but it's unclear in which order 🙂 and if the result is exactly those events or some variation. Cool thing, but I'm hugging my nuts behind a berm if anyone touches one off.

[@rachdarastrix5251]

They also did actually have bullet proof armor in the 1700s but it fell out of style because supply could not meet demand. However after the industrial revolution it has been reconcepted and made a comeback in the end of the late 19th century and early 20th century until it was in time replaced by material that weighs less than iron.

[@BigRedRocket]

Battlefield 1774

[@MythicMagus]

Very interesting gun. I've seen volley guns with their multiple barrels but THIS is far more interesting. I'm amazed that the inventor thought of having blowout plugs to protect the user.

[@JoeBLOWFHB]

Look up the Chambers Flintlock Machine Gun here on KZbin. They were used by the USN in the war of 1812.

[@isaiahcampbell488]

It makes sense that these would be useful when firing from crowsnests and rigging on ships. They had sharpshooters anyway but it sounds like muzzle loading would have been difficult. This thing would be a Godsend for the people up in those awkward spots.

[@classicalextremism]

American frigates like the USS Constitution had Chambers repeating flintlocks in their crows nest position. Ian of Forgotten Weapons goes over that and some Dutch museum has a few examples of it, US Navy has the one off Constitution herself. 224 rounds of fire per loading.

[@glueguzzler9548]

I wish more people knew about this kind of stuff. Our ancestors were just as smart as us and could predict many things to come, they were only limited by their technology at the time, not by their smarts or inability to imagine

[@Trenz0]

This is why community and collaboration is so important, especially in STEM. Technology would not be where it is today without collaboration. Sometimes it takes a different perspective to take something that's been right in front of everyone and do something completely different with it

[@glueguzzler9548]

Exactly

[@yoeyyoey8937]

They weren’t limited by tech. The tech is a product of intelligence. They were limited by economics and logistics

[@yoeyyoey8937]

@@Trenz0no, money is important. The reason no one collaborates is because of money anyways

[@GusCraft460]

To an extent. In the year 1900 they thought that we wouldn’t have heavier than air flight until the year 3000. It was invented three years later. J.K. Rowling said that when she was writing Harry Potter, even in a world of magic, she couldn’t imagine something like the internet. After palm pilots failed, I don’t think there was much expectation that there would be a return to touch computing, but now we have smartphones.

[@nonamesplease6288]

I can't imagine the PBI who would've had to carry that monster around, do the manual of arms with it, and fire it in battle, much less carry around loaded tubes. It looks like an absolute beast.

[@ChaseBlackmoon]

What does "PBI" stand for? Poor B*stard Infantry?

[@Mechpilot0790]

I imagine they might have started treating something like a squad automatic weapon, in a very basic fire-suppression system, especially in seige defences

[@allangoodchild8989]

It’s the LMG of its day, an M60 weighing more.

[@mnk9073]

It's fascinating because this would actually allow you to fire from cover or prone without ever needing to stand up to reload, a huge advantage in the age of muzzle loading. I think it was the Dreyse needle rifle that finally allowed it properly almost a century later.

[@Joseph-kq9zc]

That’s not gentlemanly

[@krockpotbroccoli65]

Fascinating arms. On a side note, I am so glad to hear a British guy admitting that "assault weapon" is a nonsense newspeak phrase that can mean everything or nothing, depending on the agenda of the person uttering it. You, sir, are a class act. Cheers!

[@kevinoliver3083]

I think you mean "agreeing" not "admitting". "Assault weapon" is not a common usage in the UK. And those of us who know about guns have always used the term "assault rifle" correctly.

[@Dunkopf]

​@@kevinoliver3083what's an assault rifle?

[@aristedes9449]

​@@Dunkopf In generalized technical terms, an intermediate-cartridge rifle with higher capacity and smaller form factor than a battle rifle, typically used for offensive tactics. In reality, it's a meaningless nothing-word used by subhuman gungrabbers in reference to whatever gun they want banned at that moment. When one gun is banned, they'll just shift the goalposts to the next on the list until the populace is disarmed and they can go full mask off with boot-on-face tyranny.

[@jacklurcher5813]

⁠@@aristedes9449Selective fire rifle using an intermediate cartridge and a box magazine.

[@yoeyyoey8937]

@@kevinoliver3083assault rifle is not a real thing outside of specific tactical jargon

[@aaronbasham6554]

That thing! I saw that thing in a book on random guns years ago, and instantly fell in love with them! I never found the book again at the library and had people, including other "gun experts" tell me there was never anything like them! Thank you so much for showing them off!

[@BradTheAmerican]

This is a timely upload. I recently started researching various historical matters, particularly unusual and failed-to-catch-on firearm designs, in preparation for writing an early-1800s alternate history "musketpunk" story where the American Revolution never happened and the Industrial Revolution kickstarted vast and quirky innovations in military technology, and the Wikipedia pages for this gun and superposed loads were among those that I stumbled upon and took inspiration from. I was also quite surprised at how early certain firearms technology existed, such as rifled barrels, that didn't enter commonplace in militaries until much later because they were not yet entirely practical, budgetary and manufacturing reasons, and even matters of preference for soldiers to simply keep using the worse technology because that's what soldiers were already well-trained with.

[@isaiahcampbell488]

That's very interesting. Where could a person read your stuff?

[@BradTheAmerican]

@@isaiahcampbell488 I haven't uploaded or published anything. I just have pile of unfinished stuff that I intermittently work on when I have any sort of energy keeping me out of bed.

[@devmeistersuperprecision4155]

The US “military” had access to a variety of firearms. While smooth bore was used esp. with captured Brown Bess etc, many irregular milita had to use their own guns. These hunting rifles were common place and rifled. Colonial Williamsburg has a neat wooden rifling machine. These rifled squirrel guns were quite handy by snipers in dispatching British officers in hit and run tactics. I use the term “military” in quotes as it’s a controversial term today regarding military common use. A typical hit and run squad would be irregulars while uniformed guys would be regulars. But both having a unified command structure and cross pollination for personal as needed. It presents legal issues today in terms of common use and civilian common use regarding our second amendment.

[@douglasfur3808]

The Hon. Co. Buying an expensive gun makes sense in that they had the cash but the number of soldiers available was limited by their expense. To a government, with limited cash and easier access to soldiers, the gun was practically not affordable.

[@Wolfshead009]

I would image on ship the reduced manpower need would be helpful as you would need fewer supplies and space spent on troops, yet still retain a firepower advantage. Plus on ship, the added weight of the weapon and "magazines" would be less of an issue.

[@OnlyKaerius]

@@Wolfshead009 And a marksman with one of these in the crowsnest would be much more effective than otherwise, I imagine muzzle loading up in the crowsnest of a rocking ship, during combat, would be quite difficult. Sliding the lock, and when empty, sliding a new magazine in however...

[@MrGrimsmith]

Absolutely fascinating feat of engineering there, not a thing I would have thought and I certainly wasn't aware that stacked munitions was a thing that far back. I don't know if it's been there a while or if I only just noticed the subtle flex of filming in front of a full rack of EM2 rifles. "Yes, they're incredibly rare but we have all of them" :D

[@ivankrylov6270]

Sometimes in 2123: Johnathan Ferguson lll discusses the Arcflash rail gun in the same context

[@justinheron1114]

Wow. Definitely the most surprising firearm on the channel so far. Thanks for sharing!

[@BenCarpenterWrites]

So cool. I love this era of firearms development. Thanks Jonathan!

[@modakkagitplugga]

People have been saying no physical models exist for years, with some even calling the gun a hoax Thanks for proving its existence

[@Mullins23]

More people need to know about the Kalthoff repeater! It was arguably the most advanced rifle when it was invented.

[@richardfromontario]

What a fascinating piece of history! Very interesting video (I was unaware this sort of flintlock setup was even a concept)

[@derekp2674]

Really fascinating, thanks Jonathan and team.

[@karenalletson9767]

Thank you. Very interesting. I am ex Military and know a fair bit about weapons. i simply had no idea that such weapons existed. The later upgrade could reasonably be called a repeating match lock.

[@aviatornic2839]

Just watched the whole video and Im stunned, that is genuinely one of the coolest things Ive ever seen.

[@HughBarton-yc9uu]

Jonathan, you have( in a typically English, polite, careful manner) clawed your way to the top of my "favorite presenters" list! I have never watched one of your videos without learning 1 new thing, at least

[@Paelorian]

Do the trials results exist? Is there an apparent reason it wasn't more broadly adopted after trials except for cost and general concerns about reliability due to it's complexity? I also think the wood attaching the stock looks thin and weak, such as on the Ferguson rifle (on which the stock breaking off was notorious, although they could be fixed). This video is tremendous. What an exceptional piece of history. That 1786, oh boy. I had no idea a functional semi-automatic weapon existed this early. It's wondrous to know that in the 18th century there existed functionally semi-automatic and fully automatic (Chambers machine gun) firearms firing multiple shots frim a single barrel. Rather experimental and very expensive, but they existed in a form in that time well before the percussion cap, the metallic cartridge, and smokeless powder! Thank you for this video. It's inspiring. This is my favorite presentation I've seen you do, because I learned something new that changed my timeline of firearms development. And what a fascinating and unique mechanism, as well as interesting history with the East India Company. Few such wildly innovative and unique firearms saw actual adoption and use. I'd love to see the Company's handgun version of the 1786! I read that the Jennings rifle further developed this system. I'm off to go learn about that now, because of my interest in this. I'll go and watch the old video you did on this gun, too. Keep up the great work! You are recording and revealing to the public fascinating forgotten history and rare historical artifacts no one else has access to or examples of, or, in some cases, even knows about.

[@jonathanferguson1211]

No trials results per se, no. They didn't really record that sort of detail from what I've seen. Harding repeats this from the Board of Ordnance Minute Books for July 1784 (UK National Archives): 28th. July 1784. Upon reading a Report dated 20 Instant & signed by Colonel Jones Comptroller of the Laboratory, Major Bloomfield, Inspector of Artillery, Colonel William & Stephelein, Lieut Colonels Farrington & Williamson & Major Lloyd of the Regt. of Artillery deciding upon the merits of a Gun which has been invented by Mr. Joseph Belton. ORDERED that Joseph Belton proceed to Woolwich with the Gun of his Invention and that he do instruct the Comptroller of the Laboratory, the Inspector or Artillery, the several Field Officers who have examined the said Gun, in the use of it and every particular relating to the manner of loading & Firing it And when the Officers are in full possession of all the particulars relating thereto that they cause the same to be deposited in the Royal Military Repository at Woolwich and that they do give him a Certificate that they do fully understand the use of his Gun; when he will be paid the Sum of £15.15.0 as a Reward for his Invention together with the Sum of £16.6.0 for the piece.

[@Kar4ever3]

You keep bringing these wonderful weapons out. I'm in an roleplaying group, and the amount of frustration we bring our DM everytime we want new toys are hillarious.

[@OnlyKaerius]

Fascinating. From descriptions I've read of these before I always took them for roman candle run-away full auto rifles, like an 18th century Metalstorm. Based on the specific timings described of the different magazine versions. Also I seem to remember a description of paper cartridges for these, reloading the whole thing with a single, long, paper cartridge.

[@tripogden880]

Absolutely stunning!

[@barbarossarotbart]

Well, you need all three firing modes of the later Belton repeater: - Port fire mode with seven shots in up to one minute. - Sliding lock mode if you did not manage to fire all shots in that minutes. Slide the lock in the correct position, insert a new port fire and re prime and recock the lock. And you can use the remeining shots for another minute. - Muzzle loading mode if you have used up all your magazines and have no time to reload them.

[@18robsmith]

One can imagine the smoke and fun that Rob from British Muzzle Loaders or Chappie from Bloke on the Range would produce with one of those while perforating a bit of paper a few yards down range.....

[@jonathanferguson1211]

I would be too afraid for their personal safety :D

[@garavin]

Perhaps with a modern re-creation, though...@@jonathanferguson1211

[@j0njn]

I had to pause so I could finish laughing at the description “a pipe bomb with a handy shoulder-stock attached” 🤣👏

[@chadliggett7988]

Awesome Review! Thank you Brother!

[@sbrunscheon]

How have I not heard of these before! Thank you for the outstanding video

[@Willian_Boa_Tarde]

Fascinating gun! Thanks for showing us such a piece of history and engineering, and teaching us about it.

[@uncletiggermclaren7592]

That is just about certainly* the most interesting production of yours I have seen. * As one ages, one finds less *absolute* certainty, especially in ones memories.

[@aulusflavius9635]

The Kalthoff repeater, the Cookson repeater, the Lorenzoni Repeater, the Ellis-Jennings Repeater, the Chelembron repeater, the Girandoni Repeating Air Rifle (the service rifle of Austria at the time) and others were all well known by the Founding Fathers, yet oddly enough, were never banned. This is EXACTLY why historical text and tradition matters.

[@lambsauce5312]

This was still manually operated and in the era of black powder w/o cartridges with much much much lower population density, also worth noting the founding fathers were scum of the earth

[@boomerkobold3943]

@@lambsauce5312get bent Commie. They were better than you’ll ever be.

[@kabob0077]

Don't forget the Chambers...

[@devmeistersuperprecision4155]

Interesting comment. What and why did you say “we’re never banned”. Why would they consider banning them?

[@aulusflavius9635]

@@devmeistersuperprecision4155 They didn't and they didn't.

[@Ramonatho]

Port firing seems like one of those missed opportunities in small arms innovations, seems useful for the technology available at the time.

[@daves8665]

Learn something new every day. Well I certainly did thank you.

[@REXOB9]

Thanks. What a fascinating and impractical firearm.

[@Chablar89]

What a fascinating weapon. We take it for granted now, but seeing this and how you would have to reprime after ever round was fired its very apparent how revolutionary the pre assembled cartridge was for firearms.

[@gpa3080]

Amazing video, thank you. I can imagine being one of the first to come up against an enemy so armed, and being quite shocked at his ability to continue firing at what would have been an alarming rate.

[@Voxphyle]

First saw this guy on his video game stuff.. and I'd like more of this. I own some firearms, and I really like old, odd, or unique collectible ones, and I can absolutely appreciate the vast knowledge base of this fellow.

[@mebymyself2816]

Very interesting thank you.

[@northumbriabushcraft1208]

If this had one of those cap dispensers I've seen on some caplock hunting rifles, it would essentially be a semi auto musket. So damn awesome.

[@edwardscott3262]

Too early for caps but it could have incorporated an automatic priming system. They had them back then.

[@enoughofyourkoicarp]

That is a brilliant set of solutions for the time.

[@Kez_DXX]

It's just so fascinating all the different ways folks have innovated gun technology through the centuries.

[@Brian-lg1ui]

This is awesome

[@lukedogwalker]

Another use: repelling boarders. The small crews of East India Company ships were always worried about pirates and privateers. If one man can down seven boarders in the opening moments of an attack, that's a very significant force multiplier... and would be highly likely to destroy the morale of the attackers.

[@thatdudeinasuit5422]

I'd say it makes quite al9t of sense for a group like East India Company to buy them despite them being turned down by national militaries as a force multiplier where a national army would be able to bring many times the amount of troops to the field so even with single shot muskets it doesn't matter but if the East India Co. troops are using Beltons the smaller forces that the IECo. would be wielding would still have suitable firepower.

[@barbarossarotbart]

I disagree, they would have been very useful in the national armies of that time. Remember that over have a century later the Prussians defeated the Austrians because they were already using breech loaders while the Austrians were still using muzzle loaders. The Prussians were able to reload their weapons while lying in cover. The Belton repeater could also been reloaded while the soldiers were lying in cover. This ability had changed the ways battles were fought.

[@thatdudeinasuit5422]

@barbarossarotbart I'm not suggesting that they'd have not been useful in national armies. What I'm suggesting is that in a smaller force such as with the East India Co. Any sort of force multiplier would be important as opposed to national armies where wielding an equivalent amount of fire-power through sheer weight of numbers is much easier, cost effective and carries the added bonus of the fact that more troops are capable of occupying more land.

[@barbarossarotbart]

@@thatdudeinasuit5422 Sorry, but you sound like the typical general of the late 18th and early 19th century, who believed that the musket does not need to replaced by more advanced weapons, which should only be used by specialized units (but not the common soldiers). The Austrian generals believed that in 1866 and thus Austria lost against Prussia where the generals saw the advantages of the then modern breechloaded rifles and changed their tactics.

[@thatdudeinasuit5422]

@barbarossarotbart This is exactly the point it's not about analyzing with hindsight what could have been done (still obscure until battle proven) it's about looking at the reasons why generals of the age made the decisions they did. So regardless of whether or not we would later go on to understand the value of innovative ideas for equipment, these are my thoughts on decisions made based on the military thinking of the day.

[@barbarossarotbart]

@@thatdudeinasuit5422 But it only takes one progressive thinking general (or monarch) ... And then at least one major battle which proves the superiority of the new gun ... This happened with the breechloaders. The Dreyse neddle gun was invented in 1840 and its introduction as the main infantry weapon of the Prussian army began in the same year (by order of Prussian king) but it took until the German War of 1866 that all other armies also swapped to breechloaders because that war was won by Prussia because of the superiority of the breechloaders. If an army had introduced the Belton repeater as main infantry weapon near the end of the 18th ecntury and won major battles (not skirmishes) because of it, then all other armies would have adopted similiar wepons soon thereafter.

[@jamestregler1584]

Impressive thanks from old New Orleans 👍

[@philipsalama8083]

One of the things I love about firearms history is seeing the various different ways people have tried to get around technological limitations.

[@SwordFighterPKN]

Very cool tech

[@MulleDullen]

I absolutely adore these kinds of weapons, very creative! And to think, about 100 years later i 1888, Madsen would introduce a Blackpowder Semi-auto rifle. Great video.

[@Chaosrain112]

One of these with one of those dope magazine frizzens I'm forgetting the name of would be SWEEEEEEEEEEET. Thank you for your boundlessly illustrative presentation Jonathan!

[@micumatrix]

Really never heard about such system. 🥇👍🏻

[@ralach]

Really remarkable firearm :)

[@crwydryny]

Forgottenweapons has a few vids on early repeater designs. One was a chain fed pistol firing a .22 BB with a preloaded black power cartridge

[@jubb1984]

I can only imagine how cool and fun these were to practice with, considering the time to load otherwise at that time.

[@M.M.83-U]

This is astonishing.

[@carbo73]

thrully amazing

[@jebdunkins6796]

I wonder how much these guns cost compared to a Brown Bess. I would imagine they were insanely expensive (like Thompson Sub-Machine Gun levels of expensive). They do seem to have been pushing 18th century firearms engineering to it's limits with these guns

[@OnlyKaerius]

Well, considering Belton was trying to charge the US government as much for these as it would cost to hire and arm 15 soldiers, so I expect they cost quite a lot, probably 20x or more of a Brown Bess.

[@torchofkckch.2928]

Thanks for sharing & closer look at the 1786 belton. Regrettably had to miss some of information due to having to skip the personal political views & opinions in the beginning.

[@Karrot001]

I think i found a candidate for my next 3d model project.

[@fire_tower]

I'd print it. I wish someone like Traditions made kits for them.

[@Starless85]

So cool

[@jerrysanchez5453]

As impractical as these are I have a weird special place in my heart for firearms with crazy designs like this

[@richardtaillon1616]

Never thought I'd get to see a Belton, let alone such a great video on such an interesting design. Now if only you told us you had a Girandoni air rifle to show. I'd be utterly amazed.

[@MrJustinOtis]

There is, or at least used to be, a video floating around of a guy shooting a reproduction Girandoni.

[@isaiahcampbell488]

Amazing design. A chain fire would be devastating to all involved.

[@snappa_tv]

This firearm is fascinating. It’s actually really clever how this thing is made and designed. I can see why it was so expensive back then but this definitely would be a massive time saver in firing line formation warfare. It’s a shame that there are almost none left.

[@middleclassthrash]

This man has the best job in the world.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Although not the same idea with mutiple touch holes, but during the age of sail it was common to bascially standard praticd to double or triple load a cannon referred to as double/triple shot. So that you had more shot going down range at enemy ships which is, all possible because it's muzzle loading. In some cases espcially when they worried about boarding attempts at night, they would fill a couple of cannons or cannonades (short range, shorter length cannons that are therefore lighter and can but up higher in the ship without causing stability issues even though they carry heavier weight shot than the equivalent full size cannon on that deck) to the brim with hundreds of musket balls, canster shot, case shot etc. As a sort of huge anti-personnel shotgun.

[@jonathanferguson1211]

Yes - the same was true of small arms, more than people realise. Double-shotting with muskets was common in the English Civil War period and basically everywhere outside of regulation British musketry later on too. Obviously the famous "buck and ball" of the ACW.

[@narm_greyrunner]

There has always been someone trying to build a better mousetrap. I really enjoy seeing how clever some of the inventions have been.

[@kepanoid]

Jonathan, when describing the first version and counting the motions, you mentioned the unsafety of fully cocking when re-priming. Wouldn't a safer method be *first* cocking and re-priming, and *then* pulling the "secondary trigger" to make the weapon ready to fire, with the same number of motions?

[@echomande4395]

Looks interesting. I would almost call it a muzzle loader capable of 'burst firing' of a sort. The main advantage is likely to be that you can load, prime and fire it kneeling because you don't have to ram home the charge and ball. Facing a block of troops with these would probably have been quite terrifying due to the rate and weight of fire.

[@jonathanferguson1211]

It's not burst firing though - it's one shot for each pull of the trigger :)

[@echomande4395]

@@jonathanferguson1211 I realise that, though the rate of fire, even for the older example, would be very significantly higher than a single shot.

[@jonathanferguson1211]

Yes, it would. Not sure of your point, sorry.@@echomande4395

[@barbarossarotbart]

The widespread use of the Belton repeater would have led to the same revolution of infantry tactics which happened after the introduction the breech loader.

[@dariuszrutkowski420]

My question is: How do the extra holes for the flame to fire ithe thing affect the guns performance when you fire the nex round and so on til you are at the last shot/ muzzleloader mode? Will the escapeing gas lower the performance/ is it a danger to the user like chain fire in revolvers?

[@Madhijz]

this is a great video and such a treat to see such early gun up until some years ago I always had this very vague and static idea of the history of the gun before say the wild west era but as silly as it is I think the game Bloodborne got me interested in all the designs and innovations before the percussion cap.

[@vintagecapgunsatyourmomshouse]

17:14 i got the portfire right away! It's genius!😮

[@jamiecurran3544]

Crazy indeed!🙂👍

[@Crazycoyote-we7ey]

That's cool

[@Nikolapoleon]

That is unbelievably innovative. Clever, simple, effective. I've never seen anything like it. And you know what's really funny? If I were a military leader during that period I do NOT think I would want to buy it.

[@jakeoreilly9627]

the assault part of the musket is called the bayonet

[@robertaylor9218]

Ok, I probably would’ve rejected it too. Not only because of the cost, but the complexity of the weapon’s operation and service would mean a LOT of training. Additionally there would be the considerable expense of developing a new training doctrine for the weapon and for troops that used it. All of this for what seems realistically to only double the firing rate. A doubled firing rate might be worth the investment we’re it not for the fact that the weapon seems a massive liability if the shooter is less than expert. At that point you could be looking at months of training. Anything less and under battlefield conditions I’d expect the weapon to be a net liability. Any combat veterans feel free to correct my assumptions.

[@casualsleepingdragon8501]

Writes this down for d&d

[@RoyalArmouries]

Don't forget to roll for misfire 🤞

[@captainscarlett1]

'Repeater' isn't a fuzzy term, one loading multiple shots. If you have to re-prime it isn't a repeater, it's a faster single shot. Priming is part of loading.

[@kotori87gaming89]

I expect it would have been quite useful if massed in a defensive position. Like early magazine-fed weapons with magazine cut-offs, you could muzzle-load for sustained fire, then engage the rapid-fire capability when the enemy begins a charge.

[@luisantolafrancis519]

WOW!!! THIS ONE TAKES THE CAKE!!

[@thurin84]

thanks for addressing the "assault weapon"/"assault rifle" controversy. its one of my pet peeves. most 2A supporters cite the belton flintlock, not as any sort of "assault weapon" but as a clear example of something more advanced than a single shot flintlock rifle and that the founding fathers had direct knowledge of such technological advances to counter the ignorant argument that 2A applies to only single shot muskets. thanks for featuring this fascinating weapon. ive never actually seen one before.

[@yoeyyoey8937]

Which is a silly argument anyways because even if the FF only thought it single shot firearms, they would still be agreeing that civilians should have access to military level tech

[@thurin84]

@@yoeyyoey8937 no, its not silly because it address nonsense arguments that normies, unfortunately buy. but if you give them proof to the contrary, they will then know otherwise. and with some luck, it will send them down an information rabbit hole that will educate on the real meaning if 2a.

[@yoeyyoey8937]

@@thurin84 you’re right in terms of providing good counterpoints to arguments but idk it it’s good for long term discussion of the topic cause then you’re eventually playing into the rhetoric game and they’ll just move the goalposts

[@thurin84]

@@yoeyyoey8937 then move right along with the goalposts all the way into the endzone and off the field. leave them no ground for their false position. as long as youre reasonable along the way, you make them look like an ignorant lunatic while you look like a reasonable person. this can have a positive effect on others reading the commentary. ive had people compliment me on being civil and say that it got them thinking more about the issue as opposed to basing opinions on emotion.

[@yoeyyoey8937]

@@thurin84 sure but what do you tell them when they say that the founding fathers didn’t know we’re gonna have 30 round magazines with automatic or even semi auto fire?

[@STB-jh7od]

I always wondered how these worked.

[@fourgedmushrooms5958]

Wow I didn't realise that part of the metal Storm was that old. Firearms development and history has constant suprises

[@anthonyjackson280]

The blasts out of each touch hole as a bullet passed (after the first shot) must have been dramatic. Would not wish to stand too close beside the chap shooting. Each shot would also have lower muzzle velocity from gas loss at each touch hole. Also how would erosion of the touch holes develop with heavy use?

[@OnlyKaerius]

That would be true of all guns at the time. All the -lock mechanisms used touch holes, matchlock, wheellock, flintlock, all had touch holes.

[@tihruytssgjjvsavcxtbvhj3429]

Not much loss from the touch hole. Ported rifles and pistols often have very minimal loss of energy.

[@phillipmele8533]

5:58 “Times are tight, and we’ve got wars to fight.” That there’s a song lyric waiting for a tune.

[@michelguevara151]

very interesting piece, but one wonders how it avoids chain fires.

[@JanoTuotanto]

Medieval fused button bullets , that were used for stacked shot roman-candle hand-gonne loads, are quite common collector items.

[@OnlyKaerius]

There's a run-away machinegun version from the early 19th century(1820s IIRC), using superposed loads. 200 shots, IIRC. Once you pull the trigger, it would just keep going for a few minutes. Multiple barrels too. Predates the Gatling gun. Can't find the link right now, pretty much gotta have the name of it to find it, and I don't remember.

[@rashkavar]

Can you imagine being a soldier in a line of battle in the 18th century (that's before the Napoleonic Wars, mind) and you're expecting the opposing line to fire their one shot, duck back, reload, let the next line fire, standard thing....and no, you hear this roar of sound as the enemy line somehow rips out 7 times as much firepower as you expected...and then the next line starts their 7 rounds...etc. Today's militaries expect most weapons to put a good deal more bullets down range in rapid succession, and they train their soldiers in the appropriate tactics to compensate for that. But that took a long time to figure out. WWI still had plenty of generals who thought advancing on the enemy over open ground in orderly formations at a determined walking pace was a good idea...some of them learned differently, others are folks like Luigi Cadorna who are remembered for getting truly absurd numbers of soldiers killed. Back in those days, nobody would have a clue how to respond to something like this. Troops didn't even carry trenching tools or operate with the concept of taking cover in mind. An army equipped with guns like these would rip any other army of the time to shreds. That is, of course, assuming it was reliable enough and affordable enough to be issued to an entire army. From the fact that it's the East India Company that was the one group to adopt these in any quantity, I have a suspicion they were not particularly affordable. (The EIC is known for having rather a lot of wealth to splash around.) From the fact that the EIC "only" ordered 500 and other militaries did not follow suit, I suspect it also wasn't particularly reliable - there's rather a lot of war going on in the late 18th/early 19th century that could employ such a weapon. Or of course, I could be incorrect in assuming the later, more commonly known repeater rifles of the 19th century are more towards the latter half of that century. My gun knowledge is quite limited and my understanding of the musket-and-field-cannon era of warfare is not very strong in general - my understanding of tactics kinda skips from the pike/archer/cavalry/occasionally early firearm designs of the late medieval period forward to the entrenched riflemen/artillery/machine gun style of WWI.

[@bluelionsage99]

What keeps the exploding powder moving the force in only one direction ? Would it pack the rounds loaded behind the fired one further back ? Could they call go off ?

[@jonathanferguson1211]

It would definitely "set back" the loads behind it, yes. You'd have to be METICULOUS about your loading. But pressure alone won't ignite black powder. You'd need excessive windage and a lack of a wad between loads (which for all we know, there wasn't!) for a flash-through to occur. The real risk is firing out of sequence.

[@LYLEWOLD]

Maybe I missed it, but what stops a chain reaction firing? Is it just the ball and wad below the shot above that stops the burn from going downward through the stack of shots? Was there any effect to the last shot(s) due to compressing from the shots prior? Very cool guns, thank you for showing them. :-)

[@kingdarkem]

Wish I could get my hands on one of these to take apart and scan to recreate replicas...

[@NomadShadow1]

Neat

[@mattparker9726]

3:25 HMMMMMMM Technically correct, the BEST kind of correct.

[@TheAncientAstronomer]

The central Bureaucracy agrees with you statement! 😁

[@mattparker9726]

@@TheAncientAstronomer I'm sorry in order to acknowledge the validity of your comment, you need to sign the documents in triplicate. And have them turned in by 11 AM, monday.

[@TheAncientAstronomer]

@@mattparker9726 Well I'm only a level 42 bureaucrat,but I'll try my best! I'm no Hermes you know! 😁

[@PaulP999]

Very interesting - though I would also like details of how each loading was made safely separate from its companions, was it just a fire proof wad?

[@worldprop4314]

this gun goes unbelievably hard

[@HootOwl513]

Looks like Bernard Corwell needs to get cranking on ''Sharpe's Extraordinary Repeater.''