|
Post by herosrest on Jun 21, 2019 14:08:18 GMT
Hi colt45, I'm going to counterpoint your thoughts, which I enjoyed and accept..... but!
1 I understand the point you make but the skirmish line could have fought longer from cover. They carried half their ammunition and the rest was in the timber where they went. Your example leaves 75 rounds with each man and his horse. Caveat - Peter Thompson stated that he carried only 17 rounds on him in going into the fight but that may just be a Company C thing.
2 Enemy pressure forced the skirmish line to withdraw to the timber. Agreed. However, the warriors to the west saw a company disappear and then a platoon and then another and moved en masse as French pulled back. That's what I see and is what the Sioux saw and they follwed up the retreat into the timber but not into close quarter. They stood off although a few were hovering around the fringes of bush and trees.
3 The reverse fire and movement tactic was not appropriate in that instance. Reno broke out by charging 900 warriors with about 50 men.
4 The Indians did flee from the charge but the charge did not pursue them so.... they pursued it (so it isn't BS). As long as troops were on the warriors tails the warriors would run. Please just accept this. They would run until their ponies faltered or those of their pursuers did. That's a whole game in itself of charging and counter-charging cavalry movement rather than firepower.
5 I feel that Reno was handed an excellent opportunity to fight Indians and gain experience.
6 Custer intended to have his entire force in the valley and the Indians prevented it happening. So the tactics were flawed is one way of looking at it.
Be well. Long live complexity.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jun 21, 2019 15:22:03 GMT
I must admit that the ammo problem is being over played. G company was already in the woods. M had their horses with them so no need to run to the woods to get any bullets. That leaves only A.
I was always under the impression that the main reason for dragging soldiers off that skirmish line was the threat of Indians in the timber and chasing off the cavalry mounts.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jun 21, 2019 18:02:20 GMT
A retrograde while in contact may be made two ways. You may retrograde by ALTERNATE bounds or by SUCCESSIVE bounds.
ALTERNATE bounds is just as Colt described, a leapfrog process where one portion of the force in retrograde remains in place while the other portion moves to the rear to take a position where it can cover the movement rearward of the portion of the force that initially remains in place. The force that remains in place then moves to a position located behind the force providing covering fire, and when in place provides covering fire for the withdrawal of the initial covering force. That force then moves to position behind the force covering them and the process is continued until contact is broken. Alternate bounds is the fastest way to break contact. but it is also the most difficult to control.
SUCCESSIVE bounds is when a portion of the retrograde force remains in place, and the initial portion that withdraws moves to the rear to establish a new line to support those left behind. Once done, the force that initially remained in place, moves to the line that the withdrawing force now occupies. Both forces remain on line until once again the force that made the initial movement reward, moves reward again, and the process repeats itself until contact is broken. Successive bounds offers two advantages. It is easier to control, and it places the most firepower forward for the greatest length of time.
Had Reno chosen early on to withdraw from the valley in some orderly fashion, the successive bounding method would have almost certainly been the method chosen.
I refer you to Field Manual 3-21.8 Chapter 3, Section III for a discussion of movement techniques either offensively or defensively. and you will indeed find that what Colt has explained as fire and movement in reverse is absolutely true, and the technique is exactly the same the only difference being if you are going forward or backward.
HR I do not think you understand the difference here between a retrograde and a breakout from encirclement. If you do you have kept it well hidden. Retrograde is a defensive maneuver to break contact, and a breakout from encirclement is an offensive maneuver to break contact. In short a breakout is an attack aimed at the perceived weakest portion pf the enemy encirclement, using shock action and effect, to breech the encircling force and escape while the enemy is temporarily pushed back. There is no question that Reno conducted a breakout from encirclement, leaving the timber and breaking through. Two things are in play here which must not be confused. Reno's decision to breakout and the method used was completely correct, but his execution of correct left a lot to be desired. Please do not confuse the correctness of the decision with the sloppy, unprofessional manner in which it was executed. So yes it was BS on your part. You do not understand that the intent was to breech and escape, not breech and pursue.
A breakout from encirclement is rarely successful if history is any judge, and never without cost, often great cost. It is characterized by confusion, and a high rate of casualties. It is never a decision that is made lightly and normally the last of last resorts. Judging again by history, you may say or think anything you wish to about Reno the person, but he is one of histories few that ever did it successfully. Custer was another who did it once and succeeded and I wish I knew more about Trevillan Station so we could compare what he did there, to what many of us think he did when encircled up north. Tom probably can give us chapter and verse, and I will ask him to do it when he returns from his annual pilgrimage.
Ammunition: If Private Thompson only had seventeen rounds on his person, then there is some NCO or officer that did not exercise his leadership responsibilities. Reference Richard III. Shakespeare understood the difference between victory and defeat was attention to detail on the part of leadership. Read the last act and absorb the wisdom. Then read Henry V and see what leadership in combat is all about.
|
|
benteen
First Lieutenant
"Once An Eagle
Posts: 406
|
Post by benteen on Jun 21, 2019 20:59:24 GMT
4 The Indians did flee from the charge but the charge did not pursue them so.... they pursued it (so it isn't BS). As long as troops were on the warriors tails the warriors would run. Please just accept this. They would run until their ponies faltered or those of their pursuers did. That's a whole game in itself of charging and counter-charging cavalry movement rather than firepower. HR, Yes the Army in those days felt the Indians were nothing but stone age savages and would not stand up to Cavalry but would run. This was a false mind-set which I believe was born out of arrogance. These Indians were a warrior society, they gained their laurels and standing in the tribe by their actions in combat. When they were not busy fighting soldiers, they were fighting each other. I would like to present the following to support my opinion--- Fettermen--Indians didnt run when he attacked, but drew him into an ambush and killed him and his entire command. Custer at the Yellowstone---Same as Fettermen, only Custer realized at the last minute what was happening and retreated into a stand of timber. LBH--Reno attacked but the Indians didn't run but attacked him and drove him into the timber. Whether you believe North to South battle flow or vis versa doesnt matter, the fact is they didnt run from Custer but attacked and wiped him out. Gen Crook--Crook was not a fool but I think he fell prey to the same arrogant mind- set. He was deep into enemy territory but to my knowledge, had no patrols, no OPs, no LPs. nothing the Indians wouldn'tB dare attack him they would run. If it weren't for the Crow and Arikra scouts attacking the Sioux and alerting the camp, I think Crook would have suffered massive casualties HR you have outstanding resources and I am sure you read were Indians ran away until their pursuers horses gave out but if so I believe that was the exception not the rule. Indians fought. Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Jun 22, 2019 11:48:50 GMT
Danny they also used siege tactics, Red Cloud War, Beecher Island, and Adobe Walls to name a few. At all three location there were continuous attacks.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jun 22, 2019 15:55:41 GMT
Arrogance, elan, self belief, its an awkward topic when things go wrong. You would not lead forth a mission by admonishing your command that they were rubbish, would you? Or maybe that is a worthwhile approach to getting the best from people..... Confidence was high in 1876. It still is. There's a brief and interesting few pages here, or the book if you refer but it drolls on. I did not intend to give a poor impression of Siouxand Cheeyenne prowess and apologise that. The Crook fight was a mounted action of charges and counters and after several hours of this it petered out.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jun 23, 2019 9:18:48 GMT
A retrograde while in contact may be made two ways. You may retrograde by ALTERNATE bounds or by SUCCESSIVE bounds. ..... Lovely response QC. 1.All actions require their context. That is, you take the book and apply it to the situation at hand which you hinted at but didn't really get into - 'The art of war or warfare' and application of experience. Reno conducted a breakout with a portion of his command and he charged 8-900 hostiles. I suggested that same action and drew ire and criticism although I couched it in a fashion unrrelated to Reno and rather offered Company C, I think. I don't mind the criticism or criticisms but both Reno and T.W. Custer or Harrington charged into superior force and paid the price. Company C dismounted to fight and were overwhelmed. Reno's battalion could not defend their rear and flanks. My example of doing just this raised eyebrows and probably a grin and yet that is accepted opinion of Cavalry action during this battle. You mildly criticize Reno but what about Harrington and or Custer? It was a bad day for the Army and requisite lessons were learnt. Why did the general do what he did? 2. I prefer study of the Battle at Hastings (Senlac) and the Normans overcoming a Saxon shield wall with cavalry and archers. Be well.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Jun 23, 2019 12:39:33 GMT
Precisely. Fighting the Sioux and Plains Indians was different. Attacking superior numbers had been done before by 7th Cavalry in very similar circumstances. This is counter intuitive to thinking and experience but is the way it was. The way of Plains fighting. When the men Reno had with him emerged from the timber the warriors backed off. This is record given in the Wooden Leg account which Marquis published. Another practiced tactic was the irregular skirmish line which Custer did in 1873 with odds 90 to 300+ but I can see how that goes wrong. Charge Indians and they backed off until your horse winded or stumbled. That's how the mounted fighting went at the Rosebud battle. This was what QC was getting at in challenging me. Attack to retreat by bounds. I was on my phone but at PC now which is much easier. Reno had to charge or stand and risking some ire, Phil Sheridan discussed this battle in his memoires and when he is saying that Reno panic'd I am quite happy to accept that. I have a first addition of Sheridan's memoirs I never read those words, could you get me the page #. I will re read it when I get home. Actually he gives the battle rather short shrift. He goes into more detail about his trip to Europe to view battle tactics. I also have Sherman's !st addition I remember nothing in his book, to speak of. Both books are fairly valuable, maybe changes in second edition, it happens sometime.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jun 23, 2019 15:53:45 GMT
HR: You keep saying that Reno attacked 900 hostiles as he broke out of the timber. That is not accurate.
Reno attacked to breakout on a very narrow thrust line. He was attacking southward, and was most probably in a column formation when he started, him being in the lead, at a position where he could effect the direction of the attack. His aim, his objective if you will, we think was to retrace his original axis of advance, back to Ford A on the river. So from that we know that he was not attacking the entire Indian force of 900 or whatever the actual number was, but rather to attack and break through only those Indians that were to the south of the timber. The odds there were probably even or just about. The Indians position to the north and west of the timber, as well as any that had worked the east side of the river to fire into the timber were initially largely irrelevant.
Some of those irrelevant Indians became relevant fairly quickly and joined in the pursuit of Reno, and most probably some of those Indians, well mounted on fresh mounts got in front of him (south and between Reno and Ford A) which caused Reno to turn eastward, cross the river at a less than ideal point and gain the bluffs.
The only numbers then you may accurately cite are the numbers of both opponents at the initial point of contact. My belief is had you said Reno charged a hundred or so with about seventy five, then Indian numbers built during the pursuit to three or four hundred, you would paint a much better word picture of what actually happened.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Jun 23, 2019 23:53:32 GMT
The 900 estimate is from Benteen I think, happy to be corrected, and so is not the number at the time of the breakout. This does not matter that much but the point illustrated above is a better picture of what Reno actually charged through.
Regarding the question of Reno holding longer and being relieved by Benteen entering the valley; the timing is interesting.
Reno holding the timber for another 20 minutes or so, a long time perhaps in the circumstances, would make no difference as Benteen would still be just arriving. Benteen would then have to decide if was going to enter the valley. I do not believe this would be a romantic sound the bugle and charge to the rescue.
Could Benteen actually save the day for Reno in the valley?
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jun 24, 2019 15:28:37 GMT
Hi Mac.
I wouldn’t have liked to been in Benteen’s shoes if he stubbled across Reno surrounded in the timber. Whether or not he would be in the valley is still open to debate, and don’t forget he was ordered to bring the packs forward. Would the pack train be able to navigate the river at ford A?
Benteen would have one hell of a dilemma with what to do with the packs if the valley ahead of him was controlled by large bands of Indians.
Here is a scenario of what could have happened if he reached the river at ford A. Reached the river with lots of firing in the valley ahead. River deep enough to reach the horses sides. Pack train still a mile behind.
Crossed the river and advanced down the valley, soon hit Indian activity and found hundreds of warriors blocking our path. Concerns over the packs becomes paramount as Indians are enveloping my battalion. Shots are coming out of the timber ahead and troopers are spotted in the area. So, my situation is that I have a valley full of enemy, plus a friendly force hemmed against the river. My left flank is wide open and I still have the pack train on the other side of the river.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jun 24, 2019 18:07:17 GMT
In this scenario Ian, it would really be more of a difficult decision than you present, which is difficult enough.
At the point where Benteen reaches Ford A with the pack trains spread out a mile or more behind, he has every right to think that both Custer and Reno are engaged in the valley to his front, and that Indians have already surrounded the regiment (minus Benteen's battalion). Nothing Benteen decides to do would be right is someone's eyes. He would be then the only help available, but he also must consider if he assaults and breaks into Custer/Reno, the trains would most certainly be lost, and their is no guarantee that anything he might do would change any outcome. On the other hand if he decided to let Custer/Reno fight it out to a conclusion, and his primary responsibility was the security of the trains, he would be cashiered regardless of if Custer/Reno made it out or not.
A Catch 22 if ever there was one.
|
|
mac
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,790
|
Post by mac on Jun 24, 2019 22:14:56 GMT
How about Benteen sends a message for the packs to send up ammunition then to back up and seek concealment. He then enters the valley with much fanfare and seeks to panic the warriors into backing off; with the view to release the troops from the timber so that they can retrograde to Benteen. They then all retreat back across Ford A. Bold or suicidal ? Cheers
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Jun 24, 2019 23:03:22 GMT
Once again we are forced to consider just how much of a ball and chain those trains are to any offensive minded commander.
Using my brand new map that arrived from Tom in Montana today. I would say that the chances of what Mac suggests are about 75 percent against. Benteen would have to occupy an assembly area south of Ford A, get that message to the packs, bring Company D and all the pack trains detail men forward, get his now reinforced battalion under control, move to and cross the river then launch a surprise attack over more than a mile of open ground, all while being undetected until virtually the last moment. Could it be done? Yes, but it would have to depend on the Indians being sound asleep. Any self respecting Indian would be on the lookout for such a move I would expect.
Were the pack trains, and all the time delay they would cause in the reinforced battalion assembly process not present, in other words the packs stashed well before hand, the chances of something like this being able to be pulled off rise to about 50/50, but certainly no more.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Jun 25, 2019 19:07:34 GMT
Chuck, I would guess that Benteen would try and do a bit of everything to try and save the pack train, save his own men and also try and save the troopers in the timber.
First off, I can’t see him directing all his focus in helping just the train, but I think that he would have sent word to the train to halt and find suitable defensive ground plus give instructions to Capt. McDougall and Lt. Mathey to defend themselves. Capt. McDougall could deploy his company as mounted skirmishers between the river and the train. So Benteen has now dropped the Albatross from around his neck, but still has trapped US forces in the valley.
Benteen has three companies to work with. Looking at his companies, we can see that Capt. Weir’s D, has two officers and 43 EMs, Benteen’s own H company has two officers and 37 EMs. Lt. Godfrey’s K company is the weakest with only one officer and 31 EMs.
So, what if he left Godfrey in skirmish guarding ford A, then moving forward with H and D, to a point that they urge the troopers in the timber to attempt a breakout towards his men. That way he has covered his ass is things go wrong and if anything did, he could still try and get away to the pack train and form a defense with the 250 or so men left.
|
|