Could a Change of Weapons Have Changed the Outcome?

[quincannon]

The only thing it seems you left off your list for Mac, Dave, seems to be thermo-nuclear device, and I would highly recommend he do it from extended range.

You neglected the classic Infantry weapons as well, The Springfield 03, Mauser 98, M-1 Garand, and the ever popular spitball through a straw.

[yanmacca]

You cannot talk about infantry rifles without mentioning the SMLE, I have never fired one but all the experts say that it had the smoothest bolt of any bolt-action rifle ever built and its magazine could hold ten rounds, the Springfield and Mauser plus all the other rifles from that era held five, the accounts of it being used against the Germans in 1914, say that the German infantry thought that they were under machine gun fire, but no it was rifle fire.

The commander of one regiment of Prussian guards that faced the British in 1914 said that the number of men that suffered head shots was extraordinary high, just goes to show that the combination of long hours on the practice range and an exceptional rifle will knock people down and that is what went wrong at the BLBH, the cavalry never achieved fire superiority.

Having said that, to try and shoot a moving man from 200 yards away is hard enough, but just imagine that you have only a split second to see your target and draw a bead on him, I bet that Calhoun's men were shooting at shadows from 200 yards and most of their bullets simply flew over the heads of their enemy, plus (and this is very important) they were using black powder, which would obscure you view after you fired, so you probably couldn't see the fall of shot.

So we must take in consideration that the Indians never presented the cavalry with a clear target and their fire and maneuver tactics along with the use of the terrain to act as cover gave the poor shooting troopers armed with single shot carbines no chance at all.

Yan.

[quincannon]

They had no chance because the Quartermasters that armed them, armed them for a stand up fight against Confederates, instead of "uncivilized savages" that turned out to be "uncivilized savages that were pretty damned smart" who did not particularly care to stand there and be shot at. So much for civilization.

Nothing is so clear in man's vision, as what worked well in the last war. Nothing is so hard to visualize as what you will need for the next.

[yanmacca]

The Indians were not like the Mahdi army or the Zulus, as they would stand and face the bullets, the Indians would not give up their lives so easily especially if they knew they had you by the balls. Custer’s men were there for all to see and in penny packets and to add insult to injury some of them were dismounted and fixed into place.

All the Indians needed to do was keep their distance and use the terrain to encircle their enemy and once they had sufficient numbers in place, then they needed a spark to ignite the fuse and this came with charges like the suicide boys, Lame White Man and Crazy Horse, these attacks acted like a magnet and drew every warrior in the area to join in.

Yan.

[yanmacca]

Chuck, you are being too hard on the Quartermaster, He issued them with the standard cavalry carbine of the period and as we have discussed before, cavalry are not designed for this kind of fight and their weapons reflect that. A carbine is designed as a light weight weapon which has a shorter barrel then the larger and more powerful rifle. Cavalry formations are usually smaller in structure and the men are supposed to be smaller too.

Yan.

[quincannon]

Well at the time a full strength cavalry regiment had 12 companies, and an structured strength of 1200 plus or minus, while the Infantry regiment of the same period was structured at 8 companies and a structured strength of just topping 800.

You can never be too hard on Quartermasters, particularly their lowest rung, the company supply sergeant, who value beautifully arranged supply rooms, many times letting the troops get along with battered weary personal equipment, while the new stuff sits on the supply room shelves. Fired more than one in my time.

In the American Army the company commander is signed, meaning financially responsible, for every piece of equipment belonging to that company, from the vehicles that move them to the rifle cleaning kit. If you do not keep a close eye on that Quartermaster, and make sure all that property is further signed for by the person or the sub-unit using it, you can go broke very fast. You personally inventory 10 percent of what you have each month if you are any good as a company commander, and woe be to the supply sergeant that tries to pencil whip the process.

[deadwoodgultch]

Ian,

The Winchester 73 came in 20" 24" and 26" barrel, not to mention a 30" musket, which held even more rounds. The Colt was chambered not only in the .45 but the 44-40 as well, which was the same chambering as the Winchester 73.

Regards,
Tom

[deadwoodgultch]

Interestingly, a personal opinion of mine is the increased firepower and interchangeable ammunition might have enabled Reno's troops may have been to maintain the skirmish longer and hold the timber more effectively. It also may have been easier for GAC to secure the northern fords. Having said this I go back to GAC entering the valley as a follow up to Reno's initial movement in the valley, that initial shock and increased firepower, in better terrain, may have carried the day.

[yanmacca]

I thought an infantry regiment was ten companies of 100 EMs and 20 officers?
I know that before the BLBH a cavalry regiment had 12 companies each containing 70 all ranks and after 1876 they increased the strength by 30% to 100 all ranks.

Tom how long does it take to fully reload a repeating rifle, now I don’t know the answer but I would guess that once you fire your last round then you are vulnerable as hell until you can get each round out one by one and insert them, all that and under pressure.

I would think that repeaters would suit cavalry better than infantry as the cavalry can mount up and keep their distance when their repeaters have ran dry, but the infantry are fixed so having single shot weapons would help maintain a steady volume of fire without using up all their ammo.

[quincannon]

They may have changed to 10 Ian after the downsizing of the number of regiments in 1869, which was actually a merger of existing units from I think 48 down to 25. I will have to check, my table of tables. Does not matter a lot though, because none, Infantry or cavalry, were anywhere near required (meaning full wartime) strength.

Required strength is what the TO&E says a company/regiment should look like the day it goes to war. Also sometimes referred to as the structure or structured strength. Cavalry companies of that day were at about 100 all ranks.

Authorized strength is what Congress will provide funds for. In 1876 that was about 70 for a cavalry company

Assigned strength is the number of soldiers a company actually has on its rolls.

Present for duty strength is the number that company actually has on the firing line. The sick, the lame, the lazy, those personnel detailed away, don't count if they ain't out there shooting.

Infantry and cavalry companies had about the same required strength. Infantry companies had a lower authorized strength, and their assigned and present for duty strength is anyone's guess.

As a rifle platoon leader I was lucky enough to have a full wartime required and authorized strength - 44, including myself. I was always short a few, no more than three or four though in my assigned strength. What I could take to the field though rarely climbed above 35.

Not Tom, but the answer is too damned long when someone is shooting at you, no matter if it takes two seconds or sixty seconds. The way to compensate is working closely with your buddy. You are reloading yours while he is keeping up the fire, and you return the favor.

Not new, not at all, muzzle loaders, single shot breech loaders, Winchester repeaters, or M-4 Carbines. Reread your Sharpe, those are the techniques of the Rifleman (and I am not talking about someone who stand in a line and allows himself to be shot at), but a Rifleman, and you can thank your own Sir John Moore, for taking back the technique, learned in America from people like Robert Rogers, for making it standard practice in your Army (eventually) and the rest of the world as time went by.

[deadwoodgultch]

Apr 9, 2016 20:04:27 GMT yanmacca said:

Tom how long does it take to fully reload a repeating rifle, now I don’t know the answer but I would guess that once you fire your last round then you are vulnerable as hell until you can get each round out one by one and insert them, all that and under pressure.

I would think that repeaters would suit cavalry better than infantry as the cavalry can mount up and keep their distance when their repeaters have ran dry, but the infantry are fixed so having single shot weapons would help maintain a steady volume of fire without using up all their ammo.

Ian, to yours above Officer/NCO fire control would probably negate this issue, having said that, these weapons can be loaded singly as well. What are the chances they would all run out at the  same time? Would the NA's be close enough to rush, would they be wary? To give you a real answer I just loaded a model 92 with 12 rounds in just shy of 28 seconds, as a test, never done it under time pressure before.  They eject much faster than that. The 20" model 73 also held 12 rounds. You bring up a good tactic though, if you stop firing, would you be rushed, if so 80 men with 12 rounds each, with proper fire control could put one hell of a dent in the mass rushing you. Having said all of this you give up range with the 44-40, but I do not think that would have been an issue here, or in most cavalry actions. As a matter of fact, not even most infantry battle actions are at long range, not even today with weapons that can really reach out and touch someone. No this would not a sniper weapon make.

Regards,

Tom  

[yanmacca]

Tom, I was not clear with my post, sorry, but when I said “you are vulnerable as hell until you can get each round out one by one” I meant from you ammo pouch and fiddling around taking each round out one by one and inserting them, while keeping your eyes fixed on you enemy.

Good going though 28 seconds.

I would expect that cavalry don’t need a long range weapon and anything with an effective range of 200 to 300 yards should be enough and that is why they armed the cavalry formations with a carbine.

I remember when I working on the web site and noticing that apart from Britain, Germany and the USA, every other nation designed a carbine for cavalry use , the Brits, Germans and Americans just used their standard infantry rifles (SMLE, 89K and M1 or M03).
The Dutch developed nine variations of the same carbine, each with minor differences for cavalry, bicycle troops, artillery and engineers.