|
Post by yanmacca on Aug 18, 2015 19:01:56 GMT
I agree Tom, better then the 1x2 that I used to make a garden trellis to hang my honeysuckles from.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 19, 2015 15:55:20 GMT
I think at some point in this thread we need to examine the ammunition fouling and clearing problem. Godfrey in his Century article lists it among the top three causes of the defeat at LBH. Don't know if I would go that far.
Was the problem unique to this battle and the 7th Cavalry?
Why had the problem not been identified previously?
Was it a problem of the cartridges or was it a problem of failure to maintain that ammunition under harsh conditions?
Was it a problem with failure to maintain the weapon?
Was it, in the end, a problem a problem of same old, same old, a lack of supervision, training, and adequate leadership on the part of both officers and non-commissioned officers?
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Aug 19, 2015 18:06:41 GMT
Chuck there is another reason and that is fear, in fact not only fear but also having a one shot weapon that would render itself useless one fired, especially if the enemy was close enough to rush you.
I bet that quite a few dropped their carbines to draw their pistols once the Indians got close, which would be fine until the dam thing run out of bullets as they were far slower to reload then the carbines.
Imagine the fear as your last round discharges and figures are rushing towards you.
Yan.
|
|
colt45
First Lieutenant
Posts: 439
|
Post by colt45 on Aug 19, 2015 18:50:39 GMT
There were a couple of Indian accounts of soldiers dropping their rifles and using their "little guns". Yan has it right about fear entering into the equation. With a single shot rifle, and the attendant slow loading time, it is natural to resort to the pistol and either 5 or 6 shots before reloading. When that runs out, and the baddies are in close, running would be the most natural reaction. Taking time to reload would let them get on top of you.
If the training had been up to par, they would have had teams of between 2-4 members each. Half the team fires while the other half reloads. It reduces the overall fire output, but allows for a more continuous volume of fire and allows the team to never be without someone able to fire. I doubt anyone at that time even considered that as an option for training.
As to the ammo, we know the copper cases of the cartridges had a tendency to expand to the point of wedging into the chamber, requiring a tool such as a knife or cleaning rod to dislodge it. This appeared to only be a problem when the rifle was fired in rapid succession and the chamber itself became quite hot. The archeological evidence from the mid 80's only indicated that about 3% of the casings found exhibited signs of having been pried from the chamber, so that was probably not a major factor in the battle. Indian casings indicated about the same percentage of problems with firing or extraction, so consider that issue a wash.
Dirty rifle chambers would tend to exacerbate a jamming problem, and could have been some of the problem, but the evidence indicates jamming was not a major factor. Most likely the biggest issue was the slow reloading speed, coupled with the superior numbers of Indians closing the distance to the point soldiers had to forget the rifle and switch to the pistol. At least until it ran dry, then the troops were in a world of hurt. Hand-to-hand combat with no weapon other than the rifle used as a club.
One last thing would be the original condition of the ammo itself. If taken from the crates at FAL and distributed, it would not have had time to corrode to the point of uselessness. If, however, coming right out of the boxes, it was already corroded, then it is possible the troops would have had feed and firing issues with the rounds themselves. I don't think that bad ammo right out of the shipping boxes would have been a problem.
My guess is the rifles and ammo themselves weren't a major factor. The overwhelming numbers of Indians and the slow reloading speeds of both the rifle and pistol, coupled with fear, were the factors involved. In testing the Springfield, I don't think the army ever envisioned a fight such as LBH occurring where the slow reload speed would be a factor.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Aug 19, 2015 20:21:02 GMT
Was there reports of excessive jamming at Rosebud or other battles that year? If not then perhaps we need to look at how the 7th either treated their ammo, training or perhaps if it was stress.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Aug 19, 2015 22:26:47 GMT
I think at some point in this thread we need to examine the ammunition fouling and clearing problem. Godfrey in his Century article lists it among the top three causes of the defeat at LBH. Don't know if I would go that far. Was the problem unique to this battle and the 7th Cavalry? Don't think so but in how many other engagements were the troopers under so much pressure.Why had the problem not been identified previously? Copper is softer than brass and corrodes faster.
Was it a problem of the cartridges or was it a problem of failure to maintain that ammunition under harsh conditions? See above.SS Was it a problem with failure to maintain the weapon? Could be
Was it, in the end, a problem a problem of same old, same old, a lack of supervision, training, and adequate leadership on the part of both officers and non-commissioned officers? Leave that to you
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2015 22:49:44 GMT
The 1873 Springfield Carbine was fielded to the 7th Cavalry Regiment in 1874 through 1875. Marksmanship training in the 7th was minimal. Reno conducted some weapons training in March/April. This consisted of companies firing at a sheet 50 feet long and four feet high. For individual marksmanship, totally useless.
A factor at LBH is that many soldiers were doing normal combat activities for the first time in their lives. They did not know how the 1873 carbine performed after firing more than 10 rounds, because they had never done that. The jamming problem was very insignificant in pure volume. But because it was a total surprise to the troopers concerned, it became a mental problem, effecting morale and trust in senior leaders. Figuring this out in war meant people died.
Here is a comparable example. Vietnam era vets had no trust in the initial fielding of the M16. It had a very serious stoppage problem. Eventually, they figured out is was actually a bad magazine design.
I came into the Army after Vietnam. The immediate action drill for a stoppage is an acronym called SPORTS. I had this drilled into me again and again by Nam vets. Any post nam military folks recall what this means. I kid you not, I can do this in my sleep. Though 90% of my stoppages were doing blanks, I can only recall one day I had this problem in combat, and in that fight had 6ish stoppages. Not sure why.
How many soldiers at LBH had never conducted individual weapons training with the 1873 carbine?
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Aug 20, 2015 11:39:02 GMT
Will,
As late as early to mid 70's I had people telling me the government and Colt never should have bought that patent from Mattel. Obviously way after issues were worked out. Some had lost friends, to what they considered a poorly crafted piece of $hit. Also we have had issues with firearms training, somebody came up with training on a 1,000 inch range with clips converted to shoot .22 long rifle. I wonder who made out on that boondoggle, only did it once, 1980. I got in in 1969 and was trained hard on the 16 and it paid off.
Regards, Tom
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Aug 20, 2015 14:43:38 GMT
I went through boot camp in San Diego 1969. We had the fine M-14 issued to us. Every once in awhile I can remember the serial number.
We transitioned to the M16A1. My first impression was not good. Especially after CQB training with the M14. The Air Force had been issued the M16 without the forward assist and it was added to the modifications which resulted in the M16A1.
I can't understand why the troopers did not take care of their issued weapons and ammunition on at least a daily basis. I suspect the care of the horses took time away from being ready to fight as far as equipment but I don't think I could sleep worrying if my weapon system would function. So my conclusion is that the troopers had no experience with weapon and ammunition sufficient to be concerned. Ignorance is bliss but it sucks when you find out about the problem in combat.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 20, 2015 16:30:08 GMT
All very valid points. I suspect that these soldiers did not maintain their weapons primarily because they did not have officers and noncommissioned officers insisting that they did, which goes back to training. I am happy that Steve mentioned care of ammunition along with weapons. It is equally important.
There is a scene in Victory at Sea showing a Marine on board a ship heading for Guadalcanal removing, cleaning, and replacing the rounds of ammunition in one of those old cloth machine gun belts. It made a very positive impression on me.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Aug 20, 2015 17:14:00 GMT
Gene Sledge in his classic With the Old Breed mentions marines cleaning their weapons after each engagement and at nightfall. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Aug 20, 2015 17:56:50 GMT
Ah the dreaded M14, I have learned so much about it from you guys. It was developed to allow for the new NATO 7.62x51 round and was really a modified Garand with detachable magazine, they wanted a fully automatic, which put too much strain on the weapon due to the heavier round.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Aug 20, 2015 18:08:01 GMT
The US Marines were famous for their firepower, when you see my new web site (yes it will be along in due course) you will notice how well armed they were, but this brave guys like Corporal Tony Stein took things further with his customised M1919 called the “Stinger” which he put to great use on Iwo Jima. Corporal Stein was later killed on Iwo Jima. Yan.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Aug 20, 2015 19:22:01 GMT
With The Old Breed is a classic. If memory serves he was also an educator Dave from down your way somewhere. It is one of those books, like Company Commander, that is on the "Very Special Shelf" of my library. Good Infantry in combat books at that level are very few and far between. The emphasis there is on good.
Ian, the M14 was a soldiers rifle. I loved the M1. I adored the M14. A rifle to a Marine is more than a rifle, it is a religious experience.
|
|
colt45
First Lieutenant
Posts: 439
|
Post by colt45 on Aug 20, 2015 20:19:16 GMT
With The Old Breed is a classic. If memory serves he was also an educator Dave from down your way somewhere. It is one of those books, like Company Commander, that is on the "Very Special Shelf" of my library. Good Infantry in combat books at that level are very few and far between. The emphasis there is on good. Ian, the M14 was a soldiers rifle. I loved the M1. I adored the M14. A rifle to a Marine is more than a rifle, it is a religious experience. I have to agree that the M14 was a wonderful rifle. I much preferred it over the M16. I have a civilian version, the M1A, which is almost an exact replica of the M14 I used in training. It is my go-to gun if I ever find myself in a combat situation in the future. I also much prefer the 7.62 round over the 5.56, as the kick-ass factor is sooo much higher with the 7.62.
|
|