Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 20:50:51 GMT
Do really mean me? I last rode a horse when I was in about 8th grade. Never again. Tanks are much more reliable and can’t think for themselves...yet.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 3, 2021 22:24:05 GMT
Crossed Bull Run several times on a horse Steve. In fact fifteen or twenty times I would think. My daughter is an expert horsewoman till this day, having started to ride at age seven. She better damned well be for all the money I spent in lessons. I would ride with her every Saturday, duty permitting, for all the years she was in Junior High and High School. I do not consider myself very good, and probably with my present back situation I could not stay in the saddle very long, but I did have my day.
So yes I have crossed water on horseback, and at certain times of the year Bull Run is about as deep as I would suspect LBH was at the time of the battle, but not quite as wide.
I am curious as to why you are asking though.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 3, 2021 22:59:49 GMT
Pay no mind to those two Mike. They live in one day 145 years ago and have not much of a clue what either of us are talking about, most of the time.
Good Infantry, under the conditions you describe for the EIB test, is good for about 30 kilometers a day and is ready, and in condition to fight, once they arrive. They can do more than that, but I do not think it is wise to expect that more day after day. Like the tracks on a tank, the combat boot is every bit as much a weapon as the main gun on your tank or the rifle the Infantryman carries into battle.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2021 23:36:18 GMT
Good Infantry, under the conditions you describe for the EIB test, is good for about 30 kilometers a day and is ready, and in condition to fight, once they arrive. They can do more than that, but I do not think it is wise to expect that more day after day. Like the tracks on a tank, the combat boot is every bit as much a weapon as the main gun on your tank or the rifle the Infantryman carries into battle. Of course, we're not talking about infantry, we're talking about tired cavarlryman leading their weary horses upill, but perhaps not under pressure. On the other hand, they would be in a hurry to get to the new position and get ready for whatever. I dunno about the times/distances. Hm. I have crossed rivers and other water bodies by fording my tank up to the fenders or my M113 halfway up the hull, swimming my M113, on a raft, and on a ribbon bridge (after the other companies of the battalion had rafted across). As a cavalry platoon leader I conducted dismounted patrols along the border, inserted by helicopter. Even planned a hasty river assault using bridge boats after the aviation battalion ran out of flying hours claiming they needed crew rest. No one cared that our tankers and mech had been awake at that point for about 40 hours more or less with only 3 - 5 hours of sleep even though we were trying to enforce sleep plans.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 4, 2021 2:22:04 GMT
I guess I misread the context of your post then. Nevertheless I posted what I did as a means of pointing out that Infantry, that period and the present, are many times just as mobile as mounted troops. It just depends upon the circumstances they find themselves in. The 10th Mountain Division in the Po Valley advanced further and faster than the 1st Armored Division in that final campaign in Italy.
During the period here in question though I would argue that Infantry was just as mobile as horse cavalry, and did not have the millstone of the horse tied around there necks. The only advantage horse cavalry of that era had was short duration speed, but were extremely limited in combat. They were not designed to slug it out. They were designed to define the battle field and let others slug it out. Horse cavalry was next to useless as a main battle force, and would remain so until horse gave way to track, and the FM radio replaced the trumpet. Then they became a mounted main battle force. Not before
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2021 3:19:54 GMT
I understood your first response. Infantry’s mobility since ancient times has been remarkably stable and amazing. Napoleon got to Moscow faster than Hitler. Actually, hitlers troops never got there. An 1876 troopers load was much less than a Roman legionaries.
I wonder if the cavalry boot was really different than the infantry boot. I wonder what, if any, diffeeence that would make. Perhaps only in long foot marched would it come to bear.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 4, 2021 9:12:14 GMT
I'm sorry, haven't followed the entire thread, so....
Infantry do 30 miles a day in boots.
On the Plains, Indian camps travelled 50 miles per day when they needed to. Hence the only means available to apprehend them was mounted pursuit.
The Indians operated irregular tactics against military tactics and only engaged with advantage or when surprised.
In terms of attacking the camp at LBH, it is twice the distance to the village by Ford D, than Ford B; from point of seperation with Reno's move into the valley. Here's a good ford... no, lets go same distance again down and back up river.
Custer was not interested in hostages. That is insane.
If a battalion was deployed through Frod D, then the tactics were a repeat of the succesful attack made at Washita. Problem here, not one officer identifies that taking place so you have the mother of conspiracy theories.
A coherent strategy cannot explain how we understand how we understand where the bodies lay on the ground. It is that simple.
As an example, I offer the bigger mystery which is ignored. Reno is supposed to have advanced three companies line abreast. from the left as G, A, M.
This force then deployed to skirmish as M, A, G from the left.
Would someone care to common sense this march and deployment?
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 4, 2021 9:51:17 GMT
Hi HR, enjoying your chocolate . Well as I read, G was in reserve with A and M abreast. When Reno saw what he was facing, he brought G up into the line on the left flank of A, with M on the right. Once the line reached a bend in the river, G took up position with the river bend to their right, whilst A moved to the left of G, M then swung behind and ended up to the left of A. So the river bend cause the battalion to pivot.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 4, 2021 14:02:51 GMT
HR: Not to be knit picking here.
What I said was "Good" (meaning well trained and physically fit) Infantry can move consistently 30 KILOMETERS (not miles) per day, day after day, and more importantly, be in shape to fight when they arrive.
American Infantry, to the best of my knowledge, never wore BOOTS, until late in World War II. They wore shoes, usually with leggings, or sometimes very heavy pairs of socks with the bottoms of their trousers tucked into the tops of the socks for protection against insects. This was done in the Infantry so more flexibility could be attained in the ankle, which is essential for marching. I understand that the use of the word boot in the UK may mean something different there, than in the US. As a sidebar if you happen to be in need of a good pair of ACW (19th Century) American Infantry shoes, my son would be happy to make you a completely accurate to the period pair, for about $750 US Currency. He learned the trade at Colonial Williamsburg over thirty years ago and has a side business of supplying such items to civil war reenactors all up and down the East Coast.
Now when that Indian village moves 50 miles per day, what are they going to do the next day, and the day after that? I could readily buy the idea that a party of mounted Indian warriors could move 50 miles a day, but certainly not a village, that would travel, at best, two miles per hour.
Did Custer tell you that he was interested in hostages. Did anyone say Custer told them he was interested in taking hostages. If Neither is the case, how do you know what Custer intended?
Sometimes in life what one wants to believe, and what is believable are two different things.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 4, 2021 15:54:14 GMT
You are knit picking. You enjoy it! Interesting. I have long favoured the Monkey Boot but we cannot call it this anymore. Modern, Roman... when ever you like. 30 miles a day. 12 hour march. 2 hours either end camp and 8 sleep. 30 over 12 for as long as efficient armies have been marching. Boots, shoes, sandals.... whatever. Your son follows a noble tradition - A strategy of the feet. The 1876 Cavalry wore boots, and the leather uppers were cut from them by Indians scavenging the field. Pouches and bags were made with them. Some were in Marquis's collection of battle stuff. I seem to remeber comment that the leather soles did not play well on the greasy grass but don't ask me for the source. Hostages at Washita were collateral damage during the attack. There was a practiced policy of this where a few notable males were held captive to ensure compliance but that is not battlefield, guns a popping sense because you are holding onto your enemy while they are trying to kill you. Sit down there lady and child and shut up, while we shoot your partner and father..... Did Custer tell you anything about his intentions? No - you are entirely ignorant of his intentions unless he obeyed his orders or you listened to Trumpeter Martin. Indian camps were able to uproot and cover 50 miles in a day if they had warning of imminent threat. This happened to 7th Cavalry in 1873 and to top it off, the Sioux turned around once they felt safe and dawn attacked Custer'd camp. eally. This was on the Yellowstone, where Fellows D. Pease built his fort, two years later and where Terry camped after the battle.
The Mutt's Nuts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2021 17:13:00 GMT
I decided to buy Archeological Insights into The Custer Battle and because a reviewer on Amazon said make sure you get a new one with the fold out map, I bought a new one. Alas, it does not have Figure 9 in it (skipping from 8 to 10) but has many references in the text to it. Naturally I am bothered and by the time I figured it out, I had already marked up my copy with notes.
Does anyone have a copy of this book with that figure in it and if so, would you be willing to scan the figure and send it to me?
I did learn (or most likely relearned) that 69 Springfield .45/55 casing. Of these, only 12 have two or more recovered casings enabling one to reconstruct a path., so not as many as I would have liked. I then consulted Archeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle and refound the maps showing the pathways for the weapons they could map. Sometimes you just have to get gob-smacked in order to see something clearly. Blah.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Apr 4, 2021 17:34:11 GMT
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 4, 2021 18:18:49 GMT
HR: I think you missed my point. Custer told NO ONE of his intentions to my knowledge, including you and I. If he had, which is certainly a possibility, those he told either died with him, or have never said a word about in in 145 years. So then I fully admit I am just as ignorant of Custer's intentions as you are, and that is the point.
I don't give a rat's behind what cavalrymen wore for footwear. I specifically addressed Infantry. Presumably you understand that someone who rides into battle requires different equipment than those who walk.
You try walking 50 miles a day, and at the same time carrying with you everything you own. You could not do it when you were 20 and full of piss and vinegar, and neither could the Indians, and be in any shape to move the next day and probably the day after that. I also doubt if you could have done a sustained 30 miles over a twelve hour period on foot. On horseback probably, but what shape would a man on foot, or a horse be to fight once they arrived? That is the key point I am trying to make here. You must not only march distances, but be ready to fight when you arrive. Otherwise the marching does you no good from any military perspective.
Yes Knit Picking what you post is meat and drink to me, mainly because you make a great effort in trying to bring out information for all of us to ponder. So consider what I do as refining, or as Ian, Mike, and I say in our modeling efforts - dry brushing - to bring out the finer details.
|
|
azranger
Brigadier General
Ranger
Posts: 1,824
|
Post by azranger on Apr 4, 2021 19:00:33 GMT
Crossed Bull Run several times on a horse Steve. In fact, fifteen or twenty times I would think. My daughter is an expert horsewoman till this day, having started to ride at age seven. She better damned well be for all the money I spent in lessons. I would ride with her every Saturday, duty permitting, for all the years she was in Junior High and High School. I do not consider myself very good, and probably with my present back situation I could not stay in the saddle very long, but I did have my day. So yes I have crossed water on horseback, and at certain times of the year Bull Run is about as deep as I would suspect LBH was at the time of the battle, but not quite as wide. I am curious as to why you are asking though. It was tongue in cheek but based it upon your comment: You asked earlier my preferred method of conducting a river crossing. Given my druthers I would just as soon never cross a river. No one ever gets their druthers though, so to answer your question my preferred method would be the use of the 'Spitz".
Chuck I try to keep everything limited to what they knew and what they did in 1876. Crossing a river under fire is not anything you listed in your experience. I don't even want to know how much I have spent on my horses because it doesn't matter to me. I would guess in the day Spitz was something you do to spittoon. On the day of the battle, the Indians could cross anywhere. They would be limited only by ingress and egress. In many of their crossings, they had concealment, yet it was just the opposite from the east side of the river for the soldier. Only Ford B 1,2and some of the Ds would the crossing have visibility about the same. The riparian zone also favored the Indian side of the river. Moving north of MTC until the Ford Ds, the only fording place where there are significant land and trees on the east side is where Deep Ravine drains into the LBH. Regards Steve
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 4, 2021 19:30:41 GMT
Steve: The concept of the Spitz was known. John Churchill used such a maneuver at Blenheim. Had a Spitz been used at Ford D, the Spitz would have probably arrived in the very early morning hours of 25 June, about 0100 hours early, I suspect.
So no, I am not going to tell you what it is. You will have to find that out for yourself, but it has nothing to do with a spittoon, and everything to do with gaining and the maintenance of surprise.
I keep telling you that if you want to understand what happened on 25 June, you must understand the art of battle itself, and you seem not to have any desire to do that, so you are therefore doomed to a state of misunderstanding, because of you state of narrow focus. People trained in that Art do things certain ways. They do them out of a combination of doctrine, adherence to best practices, and force of long habit. That's why I maintain that Custer would not do this or that, and would do thus and so, in any given situation you wish to name.
If you ever ask anyone in the military if they like to cross any river tactically, or under fire, they will look at you as if you have a couple of screws loose, and they would be correct. You would have a couple of screws loose just for the asking. River crossings, disengagement while in contact, and breakouts from encirclement are to be avoided like the clap in a whore house.
|
|