“Reply: And windage? Ammunition was often ill made and never, of course, fitted the bore properly. My best source are Prussian tests conducted during the wars when a battalion fired their muskets at a target 100 feet wide and six feet high. These were trained troops, not under pressure. At 75 yards 60% hit the target. At 150 yards the hits were down to 40%. At 225 yards only 25% hit the target. I guess you’re saying the glass is half full, and I’m claiming it’s half empty! And, of course, it is the inherent inaccuracy of a musket that forced it to be used as a volley weapon, rather than as a sharp-shooter’s gun. ” Yes, Sir. That’s it. For me the glass is half full, exactly! And of course I do see, that muskets WERE inaccurate weapons. But I don’t compare them with modern rifles, not even with the rifles used in the Napoleonic Wars and therefore for me the theoretical efficiency of muskets is magnificent! I mean for a smooth-bore weapon with windage. I guess you misunderstood me, dear Mr Cornwell, as I didn’t want to criticise you, not at all! Please keep in mind that I love your books and think that you are a great author! But one more thing: Is it possible that concerning those Prussian tests you talked about it isn’t yards but metres? I know a Prussian test from 1810. It was done by good shooters with different muskets (Prussian, British, French, Russian). Well, summing up: At 75 metres 50-75% ; at 150 metres 40-50% ; at 225 metres 25-30% ; at 300 metres 20-25%. Well, if those results could be reached in battle the strategies wouldn’t have been like they were, do you agree? Well, that’s it. :) Your loyal reader Kai-Arne