Help support TMP


"Russian Unicorn Guns" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Napoleonic

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Napoleon's Battles


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

GallopingJack Checks Out The Terrain Mat

Mal Wright Fezian goes to sea with the Terrain Mat.


Featured Profile Article

First Look: Barrage's 28mm Roads

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian takes a look at flexible roads made from long-lasting flexible resin.


2,953 hits since 29 Aug 2009
©1994-2026 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

138SquadronRAF29 Aug 2009 7:06 a.m. PST

Does anyone have any technical specification for the Russian Unicorn artillery that compares its effectiveness to normal guns of the same poundage.

I know they supposed to have had a longer range and could fire bombs – suggesting horizontal shell fire.

Did they also fire canister?

I presume they are not a continuation the 7YW Russian oviod bore guns that only fired canister.

Any information gratefully received.

lebooge29 Aug 2009 7:47 a.m. PST

TMP link

link

There are others I'm sure.

Long story short: it's a hybrid between a normal howitzer of the period and a long gun. They did fire cannister. I have yet to find accurate range information… don't have any technical books on artillery in my library. I'm sure that information can be dug up though.

NOTE: the following thread has an anecdote about licornes being outranged by French Howitzers… if you can make it through the usual TMP thread-crapping it's in there.

TMP link


Bart

Connard Sage29 Aug 2009 8:19 a.m. PST

You just don't get vitriol of that quality any more :(

summerfield29 Aug 2009 2:35 p.m. PST

Dear 138
The Unicorn was an excellent piece. It was the precursor to the later shell guns of the 1830s being . There were the 3-pdr (soon withdrawn), Horse 10-pdr, Field 10-pdr (120mm) and 20-pdr (152mm) unicorn.

20-pdr unicorn, 152 mm, 8.5 calibres, 129cm, 688 kg
10-pdr unicorn, 122 mm, 11 calibres, 135cm, 360kg
10-pdr horse unicorn, 122 mm, 10 calibres, 123 cm, 316kg
3-pdr unicorn, 83 mm, 8.5 calibres, 70.6 cm, 106kg

The unicorns were derived from the M1757 Unicorns but simpler dolphins. They were nor from the Secret Russian oviod bore howitzers.

It fired at am elevation of up to 12 degrees. Being longer than the gribeauval howitzer, it was more accurate. The 20-pdr had the same calibre length as the AnXI 24-pdr howitzer. Both were far superior to the Gribeauval Howitzer that ceased to be used by about 1800 by the French. The Long Porte howitzer derived from a Prussian design was introduced to the French in 1795. This was only retained with the 12-pdr batteries.

The Unicorn fired shell, shot and cannister. You can find drawings and technical details in DDS (2007) Napoleonic Artillery. I have range charts if required somewhere.

As to quality that is very subjective. They were respected by the British and French in the Crimea. The 10-pdr howitzers fired 12-pdr cannister. The ranges would be slightly less. They could fire 12-pdr cannister. The 20-pdr Unicorn could fire 24-pdr shot.

Stephen

rmaker29 Aug 2009 8:55 p.m. PST

The Napoleonic era unicorns were the equivalent of ACW howitzers. They could fire shot, but usually didn't (only a few were included in the normal ammo load). When they fired standard shot for the similarly sized guns, as opposed to their own special shot, they added the disadvantages of a smaller charge AND rather large windage (since they took their name from the weight of the shell and were rather larger in the bore than the guns). Unicorns had their own canister rounds.

The oval bore piece was the Shuvalov "secret howitzer" (sekretni gaubitze), which was strictly a Seven Years War weapon, and was normally equipped only with canister and employed as a regimental piece. Of course, it was no more effective than a normal howitzer of the same bore, and rapidly fell out of use.

summerfield30 Aug 2009 1:51 a.m. PST

Dear rmaker
The Shuvalov secret howitzer was more effective than a normal howitzer as the distribution of the cannister balls was flatter. It was difficult to load and did not have a long range.

Stephen

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.