Quote Originally Posted by KineticDiplomat View Post
I have to agree with Mike G here. Every now and again someone will go run a Picatinny test on musket or blackpowder rifle, clamping it in place with a bench and adjusting it to a perfect angle for a given range, and find out it can hit targets at far, far beyond the historical record. They will typically conclude "aha, they must have shot farther than we thought" or "it was just dumb leaders who didn't realize you could shoot that far."

They almost inevitability look stupefied when they hear that soldiers who shoot reasonably frequently, using easy to handle weapons with very flat trajectories and low recoil, smokeless powder with consistently manufactured rounds, often with a combat optic, firing from a prone position on a range, are far from guaranteed to hit a man sized target at 300 meters. And that many support troops, who despite being undertrained by modern standards, still fire far more practice rounds than a redcoat or civil war draftee, can struggle to consistently hit beyond 150 meters or so.

The next step is they blame modern weapon design, usually on the idea "well, the US/Russians/Whoever designed them to fight at under two hundred meters and optimized for that." Which, while true, ignores the actual ballistics. Which is to say the comparatively small rounds of modern assault rifles do tend to have a substantially degraded flight after six hundred meters or so (whereas you can expect a modern hunting caliber to reliably go out much further), but that within those six hundred meters they have trajectories that are very easy to shoot. Because no one wants to mess with working on range holds and bullet drop mechanics in a firefight; they want shooting to be "get ight picture, squeeze trigger, the same way at 100 meters as it is at 300". Compared to the NATO 5.56 or RU 7.62x39, blackpowder weapons look like you're lobbing a catapult.

The final argument usually goes: "but formations were BIG targets", which is true. But most people don't miss left-right. They miss under-over. A problem which is definitely exacerbated by fat slow bullets on loping trajectories. And formations are still man height, though they do have a larger hazard area for near overshoots can create a beaten zone which hits rear ranks.
Yup, getting an accurate range is tough when you're standing up, aiming a heavy gun with very crude sights, and have a significant delay between when you pull the trigger and when the bullet comes out the other end. And of course when you miss you can't just try again immediately afterward, and adjust your aim appropriately, you've gotta reload the gun, and the next shot will be made harder by exertion and the cloud of smoke your first volley made, not even mentioning the bullets coming in your direction. Also the number of rounds allotted for training purposes would be pretty heavily limited if conflict was not imminent.

Even today, you're shooting at fleeting or moving targets, sometimes just muzzle flashes. Exposing yourself for too long puts you at significant risk, making it tricky to align your sights or get a clear bead on the target, and all sorts of other factors like stress, exhaustion, sudden incoming fire, or ordnance can confound your aim.