dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 6, 2015 2:28:15 GMT
Don't know much about Camp Kilmer but I have cleaned out the grease trap at the restaurant I worked while getting my Bachelor's. In Mississippi during the Spring semester in May it gets hot, damn hot and old burned grease is God awful to deal with. I gag thinking about it. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 6, 2015 3:20:20 GMT
Beth: The reference was to Captain John Paul Jones, Continental Navy who my UK naval oriented friends refer to as "That Damned Pirate"
Dave: Some people have lofty motivation for seeking positions of leadership and commission. Mine was not wanting to see a grease trap ever again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 4:04:43 GMT
Keogh to the rescue seems much less likely, and assumes that Custer himself knew of the plight of Companies C and L, and I don't think we have anything that would support this. I've seen it repeated a few times from different people that Custer must have had no idea what was going on with Cos. C and L. I don't know where this assumption comes from. I find it more unbelievable that Calhoun and Harrington would be under increasing pressure without sending a messenger to Custer alerting him to the fact. Agree completely. No matter what, Co. I happened to be in the safest direction left to travel/flee. Cheers, conrad
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 6, 2015 4:21:12 GMT
Calhoun and Harrington might have sent messengers, on the other hand messenger might not have gotten very far been treated like Custer treated Reno's messengers which seems to have been to continue on with what he was doing.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Dec 6, 2015 12:15:47 GMT
That is why I stand by what I said above, the markers themselves tell us squat about the flow of battle in that area. What frightens me to death is in these last few days I am starting to sound like DC. Exactly what I was thinking! Not necessarily a bad thing in this case. Messengers to Custer is an interesting notion and may be a possible explanation of men from those companies being on LSH. The more I think on it the more likely it seems there was no Keogh battalion. I cannot see why Custer would feel the need. Also true that Boston may never have seen into the valley. Porter is a good case in point here. He was not found but his marker is with the northern group in the swale. So clearly a speculative location. I suspect based on the notion of one group with each officer. This perhaps suggests that the groups themselves were actual groupings of bodies. This grouping suggests to me that they were not mounted. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 6, 2015 13:04:38 GMT
What frightens me to death is in these last few days I am starting to sound like DC. As long as you don't refer to me as "pond life" and turn obnoxious then it will be fine. Yan.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 6, 2015 13:22:29 GMT
Mac where do you think that all five companies re-grouped before Custer moved off north, as I don’t think battle ridge would hold this many troopers, would it be easier for Keogh and I-L-C have come from LNC ridge and halted in swale before Custer came over to join them? I was just trying to established the period when everyone met up again and events that led to companies being place in certain areas, as the more I look at it Calhoun and Harrington had more of a role to play together and L Company was acting in a totally different manner.
I don’t know about you lot but the last few weeks I have looked at the Keogh sector in a totally different way and this is all down to the debate we have had here, which just goes to show that the more you look at things, that more crucial evidence is there right before your eyes.
If I ever got over there and stood on battle ridge, I would study the drainages around the area of Calhoun-battle ridge-Keogh sector, as any flat open areas would not have been used by the Indians, so just looking at these natural pathways would give you a great insight to how the Indians infiltrated the soldiers positions and how Calhoun had an impossible job of keeping tabs on them all, in fact I learnt just by watching CA that there is a gully that ran from the back of Calhoun’s position right down to the swale and I reckon that Custer moved through this very same gully before he went north and using battle ridge to mask his movements.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 6, 2015 14:08:55 GMT
To Carl and Chuck, I reckon you two are old enough to remember this; link
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 6, 2015 15:31:34 GMT
Only small changes from 42 to 62. All the basic concepts portrayed in the film are valid, well and understandably presented. Highly recommend that all view that film.
Conrad: I think it probable that either Calhoun or Harrington send someone to Custer. I sure would have. The point was that would have to happen, for Custer to cut out a company (I) and send it as help.
I can't see why Custer would feel the need to form either a Yates or Keogh battalion Mac. You echelon to reduce span of control. The original span of control for a regiment is 12 to 1. No one man can handle that. The optimum is 3-5 to 1. Custer had a five to one span, so there would be no need at that point.
Do not and never have though Company I to be mounted. They may have been initially, and I think being mounted would be consistent with what Montrose says about the probable mission, keeping the lanes clear, but as things grew bad for Company I, they would have had to dismount to place any kind of accurate fire from their primary weapon.
Ian: I think it most probable that the five companies themselves were when they met east of (behind) battle ridge. I would suspect Calhoun Hill was the place the commanders probably met so Custer could briefly explain what he wanted them to do.
Can't overemphasize watching that film. It presents contemporary best practices, and I think you all will get a lot from it that is applicable here.
Very good find Ian.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 6, 2015 19:48:40 GMT
No problem Chuck, you are correct about the principles included in that short film, I know it is about infantry platoon tactics but Custer's companies were roughly the same strength as a infantry platoon, and all of them fought on foot at some point just as infantry.
Yan.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 6, 2015 21:13:28 GMT
Tactics don't change from one branch to another. Tactics are universal, applicable to all. You find the variations in the techniques and procedures used to employ those tactics. That is why you always include the T and the P in TTP, Tactics-Technique-Procedure.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Dec 7, 2015 3:53:14 GMT
Very interesting Ian. I note the role played by the ubiquitous actor Harry Morgan. I wonder how long and how much was seen before Custer left Calhoun area and moved on. I also suspect he underestimated the degree to which the village would react to their presence. I note in Ian's video the primary caution to be unseen. Accounts suggest that they were anything but. I think they were meant to be seen. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Dec 7, 2015 9:32:35 GMT
I don’t know how much we can rely on Indian accounts but some of the ones I have read have said that soldiers [Custer command] announced their arrival as they entered the area facing the river by blowing their bugles, so much for being inconspicuous.
Yan.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Dec 7, 2015 10:33:53 GMT
Yes Ian, I should not have strayed from the topic, perhaps for another thread later. For now I am feeling much happier about the Calhoun part of the battle with the realisation that Keogh probably was not doing much more than commanding his company and waiting for Benteen. The feeling I had there was exactly that. That there was not a lot happening in that swale and then a whole lot of warriors arrived. So what about Custer's choice of who to leave at Calhoun Hill. This was a spot that was sure to see action as they were being followed from Ford B by the warriors. Knowing this he left Company C under Harrington and took their commander Tom Custer with him. Why would you not leave a more senior man like Smith (E) or Yates (F) at that location and take C along to the north with their commander in the HQ group? Numerically it makes no difference. I would not want to leave a junior officer at a pressure point when I could easily leave a more senior man. Cheers
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 7, 2015 18:21:15 GMT
To me it says that Custer didn't believe that it would be a pressure point.
|
|