Author |
Topic |
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2005 : 5:04:53 PM
|
Happy Christmas to all, ;look forward to many informative discussions in the new year (oops big village) Look out DC, the paddies are back |
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 26 2005 : 8:52:21 PM
|
The Springfield Rifle, lets be honest, the troops of the 7th could have had state of the art, the AK-47 but it would have made little or no difference. Custer choose to ignore all warning and once 212 odd men were thrown into the situation they found themselves in well lets be honest, it was over before it started. (It took as long as it takes a hungrey man takes to finish his dinner) Min 2000- 3000 indians on foot against 200 odd horse bound , tired, knackered, hungery troops and also ill-trained, in fear of the Indians and what they may do. It doesnt matter how they were armed, panic sprend like wild fire, even if they had state of the art weapons, it was over, panic will kill the best |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2005 : 09:32:40 AM
|
quote: The Springfield Rifle, lets be honest, the troops of the 7th could have had state of the art, the AK-47 but it would have made little or no difference
I learned something new. There was AK-47s in 1876?
quote: even if they had state of the art weapons, it was over, panic will kill the best
If you are talking current state of art then maybe 212 tanks or helicopters would be used since the modern cavalry does not use horses. The best don't panic. That is why they are the best. I don't believe that the civilian era 7th Cavalry was the best. Some good officers, NCOs and troopers but a lot of new recruits and troopers of limited experience. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2005 : 09:47:23 AM
|
Yes. Well, see, yesterday was Boxing Day in the Home Islands. This, combined with Pub's R Us being open 24/7 by new law, has kept the bounders off the streets and on line.
I'm not sure, but I think this could be a reference to my past suggestion that the training of the 7th was so low that subbing out the Springfield for AK47's wouldn't have improved anything except more rapid ammo loss. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
Dark Horse
Private
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 27 2005 : 12:59:23 PM
|
Dark Cloud , I hate to say it but it was St Stephens Day here and to make use of the 24/7 pubs, I would have had to take the old rubber dingy and gone across the sea. The pubs in Ireland are not open 24/7 and the 26th is known as Boxing Day only in the UK. But that aside, the ref. to the AK47 , was just that I dont believe the type of rifle would have made much difference on the day except as you said, it would have resulted in slightly more Indian dead and a lot more ammo loss. Custers command was doomed, due to the nature of the battlefield and the hugh Indian numbers. Custer was solely responsible in my view, for allowing his command find themselves in this predictament |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 28 2005 : 11:34:28 PM
|
quote: Custer was solely responsible in my view, for allowing his command find themselves in this predictament
What happened to following the advice of some of his scouts. They told him if he did not attack the village the Indians would either attack him or run off. I am not sure waiting till the next would have had much impact on the outcome either. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 11:18:00 AM
|
I'm pretty sure Custer thought they'd either attack him or run off without anyone telling him that. That was Army hardwired dogma.
What's not given enough coverage is the fact the village was inert: too large to react, too unorganized to be proactive. Schlubville.
I've encouraged the theory that NA enthusiasts and Custerphiles have found love in convenient, mutually attractive - if highly unlikely - theory. The village, while large, wasn't too large, and was peaceful when Satan came down on them and got what he deserved due to heroic deeds by men not unlike (ahem) ourselves. Not being too large, then Custer was correct staying on the offensive and it would have worked if subordinates hadn't either been cowards or traitors. Of course, everyone was heroic and died for their country as they saw fit at The Last Stand. Cue the bagpipe.
I think the battle was a bollux of the first water by both sides. The Sioux were so inept they seem to have absorbed all these warnings and did nada about it, which they've had to pat into shape through the years because their incompetence led to civvie deaths. If they'd hit the 7th during the descent from Crow's Nest to the LBH, they could have walloped him at distance.
And again. Found casings on the field - even the very few that were produced during periods that would allow them to have been battle utilized - are indicative of that alone, and are not proof they were fired during a two hour period in June of 1876, and it's silly to pretend to that. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 11:50:08 AM
|
quote: I think the battle was a bollux of the first water by both sides. The Sioux were so inept they seem to have absorbed all these warnings and did nada about it, which they've had to pat into shape through the years because their incompetence led to civvie deaths. If they'd hit the 7th during the descent from Crow's Nest to the LBH, they could have walloped him at distance.
If you compare the Sioux to, say the reaction of New Orleans to Katrina, they don't look so bad.
If Gray is correct, the Sioux got little warning -- most of the indians who saw Custer's approach were going away from the village.
quote: And again. Found casings on the field - even the very few that were produced during periods that would allow them to have been battle utilized - are indicative of that alone, and are not proof they were fired during a two hour period in June of 1876, and it's silly to pretend to that.
I'm not aware of any sausages found on the field.
The cartridge cases found, by their type, caliber, and distribution, tell a story. After all, this isn't the first archeological investigation -- archeologists have dealt with uneven deposit of artifacts before and managed to distinguish between original deposition and later chance deposits. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 1:55:17 PM
|
You got that right about Katrina. But you'd think with any sort of lookout system, the Sioux would easily have had hours of warning and no civvies would have been killed.
You know, I looked through the web to see if I'd been alone in misuse or if I picked it up somewhere, but it seems pretty much divided between case and casing. But I'll acknowledge error. I never knew such a difference existed, I don't think. Seems like I hear shell casing a lot.
I'm not being argumentative, but the cases found can tell any number of stories, and so tell none. They're just furniture able to be moved around without conflict to dress up theory. They can only prove manufacture date and match it to a firing pin and weapon. These weapons became Indian weapons, and who knows after that? They cannot always tell the powder load of the Springfields, they cannot distinguish who fired them, or when, or at what.
Look at all the shell cases (harump) found on the field that could not have been part of the battle. How'd they get there? And how do you mesh that with the various times it seemed all the casings had been stripped from the field by people looking for them? I think it pretty clear the field was salted, and those casings don't necessarily indicate Indian weapons at all, at least during the battle.
Have you seen WCF yet? I'd be most interested in your thoughts on the marble markers after reading it. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on December 29 2005 1:58:27 PM |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 2:17:36 PM
|
quote: You got that right about Katrina. But you'd think with any sort of lookout system, the Sioux would easily have had hours of warning and no civvies would have been killed.
The Sioux were quintessential Horse Culture Plains Indians. Their organization was very loose, to say the least. They had no duty roster, no sergeant of the guard, and no system of security. By and large they depended on the fact that people out hunting, looking for stray horses, etc., would be good enough.
quote: You know, I looked through the web to see if I'd been alone in misuse or if I picked it up somewhere, but it seems pretty much divided between case and casing. But I'll acknowledge error. I never knew such a difference existed, I don't think. Seems like I hear shell casing a lot.
You hear "casing" a lot because that's what they say on TV. But go where the knowledgeable people are -- say Winchester, Remington, Starline (who make cases) and they never refer to a case as a "casing."
quote: I'm not being argumentative, but the cases found can tell any number of stories, and so tell none. They're just furniture able to be moved around without conflict to dress up theory. They can only prove manufacture date and match it to a firing pin and weapon. These weapons became Indian weapons, and who knows after that? They cannot always tell the powder load of the Springfields, they cannot distinguish who fired them, or when, or at what.
Archeologists deal with this all the time -- and the answer is that when you put different elements of information together (collate them) you begin to get the story. Fox, for example, points out that on places like Greasy Grass Ridge you find lots of odd caliber cases, often in small concentrations, and lots of 405 grain, .458 bullets.
When you put that together, it tells you indians (with the odd caliber guns) occupied Greasy Grass Ridge, and exchanged fire with cavalrymen who fired the .458 bullets.
quote: Look at all the shell cases (harump) found on the field that could not have been part of the battle. How'd they get there? And how do you mesh that with the various times it seemed all the casings had been stripped from the field by people looking for them? I think it pretty clear the field was salted, and those casings don't necessarily indicate Indian weapons at all, at least during the battle.
When we find cases from a specific rifle, and match it to the pattern of movement indicated by other evidence, that's pretty strong. When we find the rifle itself, documented as captured from the Sioux and Cheyenne, that's even stronger.
There are four rifles in the Rock Island Armory collection so documented -- and they are part of the first collection (1909.) It's hard to believe that in 1909 someone mis-documented those weapons to fool people in the 1980s when the cases were found and studied.
quote: Have you seen WCF yet? I'd be most interested in your thoughts on the marble markers after reading it.
I've read Fox, and seen his opinions. He points out that most of the "spurious" markers can be accounted for by accidentally doubling -- the markers were put where pairs of graves were found. It turns out that these marked a single grave. Dirt was scooped up from beside the actual grave to provide additional covering and that looked like two graves later. This is verified by actual excavation -- ten such double graves were excavated, and nine of them contained small bones from only one body. The tenth had no bones.
The big argument is the South Skirmish Line -- Fox says there was no skirmish line there, but only bodies striken down in flight. He bases this on the lack of cartridge cases. But men who saw the bodies before they were buried say it was a skirmish line. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 3:12:59 PM
|
The Greasy Grass Ridge scenario makes sense and I have nothing to contest it, but there are other possibilities.
However, I still don't follow your rebuttal about the matched bullet/rifle. What pattern of movement could possibly distinguish whether Indian or soldier fired it? We know from Indian tales and soldier observation that Indians used soldier guns to fire up the dead and dying among Custer's men. I'm not suggesting misdocumentation, just saying we don't and cannot know who was firing those weapons, or when, or at what.
Which men say it was skirmish line, and when did they say it? Everyone says, although there is some question on the amount, that about 28 soldiers and therefore their markers should be in Deep Ravine. Plus any spurious. Camp says it was a construct, and he interviewed everyone, pretty much.
When you look at the marekers in the Fouche 1877 photos, the one thing you do not see is any mound or indication of a body by the markers, and supposedly only the officers had been disinterred at that point. There are no visible scrapings on either side of a grave suggesting a later confusion. You do not see, in any photo, great concordance between wooden stake and later stone. Fox's theory may or may not be correct for all the spurious markers, but that's not the only problem. I'm also having trouble melding the Marshall map of 91 with the stones with the photos.
And again: how did all those cases that could not have been part of the battle arrive there?
At this point, what is the most up to date compilation of artifact findings and analysis of LBH? |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on December 29 2005 3:15:29 PM |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 3:36:22 PM
|
What's not given enough coverage is the fact the village was inert: too large to react, too unorganized to be proactive. Schlubville. I think the Rosebud would disprove this. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 3:42:48 PM
|
quote: The Greasy Grass Ridge scenario makes sense and I have nothing to contest it, but there are other possibilities.
However, I still don't follow your rebuttal about the matched bullet/rifle. What pattern of movement could possibly distinguish whether Indian or soldier fired it? We know from Indian tales and soldier observation that Indians used soldier guns to fire up the dead and dying among Custer's men. I'm not suggesting misdocumentation, just saying we don't and cannot know who was firing those weapons, or when, or at what.
By putting information together (collating it) we get a fairly reliable picture.
For example, there are places where small piles of cartridge cases were found, each pile from the same carbine. Spacing indicates a skirmish line. Clearly, this is a cavlary position.
Next, we find odd caliber bullets lying in the same general position -- bullets fired by the indians at that skirmish line.
Finally, we find expended cases from one or more of the identified carbines in another position -- one where only government (.45-55 or .45-70 cases) are found, and where odd caliber bullets are found.
This tells us fairly reliably it was a trooper who carried the carbine to the second position.
quote: Which men say it was skirmish line, and when did they say it? Everyone says, although there is some question on the amount, that about 28 soldiers and therefore their markers should be in Deep Ravine. Plus any spurious. Camp says it was a construct, and he interviewed everyone, pretty much.
Wallace, for one, says it looked like a skirmish line. Fox claims it was not, but displaces the "South Skirmish Line" to Cemetary Ridge, basing his interpretation of bullets found that appear to have been fired from Cemetary Ridge (no archeological examination of Cemetary Ridge itself is possible, due to disturbance in establishing the cemetary.)
quote: When you look at the marekers in the Fouche 1877 photos, the one thing you do not see is any mound or indication of a body by the markers, and supposedly only the officers had been disinterred at that point. There are no visible scrapings on either side of a grave suggesting a later confusion. You do not see, in any photo, great concordance between wooden stake and later stone. Fox's theory may or may not be correct for all the spurious markers, but that's not the only problem. I'm also having trouble melding the Marshall map of 91 with the stones with the photos.
At least part of the problem is due to the distortion induced by low oblique photography and low resolution. Much evidence would be visible only to someone standing directly above a suspected grave site.
I think Fox's excavation of ten double grave sites can be accepted to offer strong evidence for two points:
1. There were human remains at most such sites.
2. Most double markers represent only a single burial.
quote: And again: how did all those cases that could not have been part of the battle arrive there?
Specifically which cases do you have in mind?
quote: At this point, what is the most up to date compilation of artifact findings and analysis of LBH?
So far as I know, Fox continues to have the best data -- I believe he published in the mid-1990s. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 5:24:23 PM
|
1. "For example, there are places where small piles of cartridge cases were found, each pile from the same carbine. Spacing indicates a skirmish line. Clearly, this is a cavlary position." Where are these piles from the same guns in skirmish formation? And wouldn't a Sioux picking up the weapon and firing at retreating soldiers leave the same pile?
2. "This tells us fairly reliably it was a trooper who carried the carbine to the second position." Or a Sioux advancing with captured weapon....
3. "At least part of the problem is due to the distortion induced by low oblique photography and low resolution. Much evidence would be visible only to someone standing directly above a suspected grave site." Likely, but this is one year after with the soldiers still there, and there is no rise to the ground at all, and this a year after notional burials where no hole was dug, but just dirt scraped over.
4. "Specifically which cases do you have in mind?" Any and all cases and bullets manufactured after 1876. Fox and Scott had a list of them. |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 5:45:05 PM
|
quote: 1. "For example, there are places where small piles of cartridge cases were found, each pile from the same carbine. Spacing indicates a skirmish line. Clearly, this is a cavlary position." Where are these piles from the same guns in skirmish formation? And wouldn't a Sioux picking up the weapon and firing at retreating soldiers leave the same pile?
Fox cites Calhoun Ridge in his discussion. Why would only one indian stop at a site occupied by the cavalry? How is it that we don't find other evidence of indians taking that same route?
quote: 2. "This tells us fairly reliably it was a trooper who carried the carbine to the second position." Or a Sioux advancing with captured weapon....
Only if we assume this Sioux took a route no other Sioux is known to have followed. If we found intermixed .45-55 (or .45-70) case with, say .44 Henry cases, we might make that hypothesis. But when we follow known indian cases, we find a different pattern of maneuver.
quote: 3. "At least part of the problem is due to the distortion induced by low oblique photography and low resolution. Much evidence would be visible only to someone standing directly above a suspected grave site." Likely, but this is one year after with the soldiers still there, and there is no rise to the ground at all, and this a year after notional burials where no hole was dug, but just dirt scraped over.
It would still be difficult to restitute these photographs -- and we would not see any vertical shots, nor any color in any case.
quote: 4. "Specifically which cases do you have in mind?" Any and all cases and bullets manufactured after 1876. Fox and Scott had a list of them.
Are you saying that Fox and Scott deliberately included cases and bullets manufactured after 1876 in their evaluation of data, presenting them to the world as deposited on June 25th, 1876? |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 6:13:54 PM
|
1. Indeed. If one, why not others?
2. There is no such thing as "known" Indian cases. There are only cases not cavalry that were manufactured before the battle. Is all. See #4 below.
3. It would be helpful if you looked at the photos before disparaging them.
4. I didn't say Fox and Scott included cases and bullets manufactured after the battle in their analysis at all, much less deliberately. I said they listed their findings from the field, and there were many from after 1876. How and why would they get there? And, if someone scattered them, why wouldn't they include some from before 1876? |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 6:31:06 PM
|
quote: 1. Indeed. If one, why not others?
Then we have to conclude that only indians with cavalry carbines followed that route, and that doesn't make sense.
quote: 2. There is no such thing as "known" Indian cases. There are only cases not cavalry that were manufactured before the battle. Is all. See #4 below.
Given that we can pretty much account for privately-owned rifle caliber weapons, any cases not left by the cavalry and deposited on June 25th, 1876 would have a very high probability of being from indian weapons. quote: 3. It would be helpful if you looked at the photos before disparaging them.
I have. Nor have I disparaged them -- they are what photo-interpreters call "low obliques," which are notoriously difficult to restitute. And they do not show things which could be seen by looking straight down. Nor do they show color. quote: 4. I didn't say Fox and Scott included cases and bullets manufactured after the battle in their analysis at all, much less deliberately.
Let's take it systematically.
1. Fox and Scott have a database of cases found at the battlefield.
2. They identified cartridge cases made after 1876.
3. If they do not include these cartridge cases in their interpretation of the battle, why should we?
Or to put it another way, since they discounted the post-76 cases from their analysis, the question of later deposition of these cases is irrelevant.
quote: I said they listed their findings from the field, and there were many from after 1876. How and why would they get there? And, if someone scattered them, why wouldn't they include some from before 1876?
What has this to do with the issue? Fox and Scott identified post '76 cases and segregated them from their analysis. They play no role in interpretation of the battle. |
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 6:53:48 PM
|
1. That doesn't make sense, nor does the evidence compel it.
2. We can? Really? Who owned all those weapons, Mr. Humphrey? Start with those .22 cases.
3. Where did you see the Fouche pictures?
4. LET's take it sytematically.
a.Fox and Scott have a database of cases found at the battlefield.
b. They identified cartridge cases made after 1876 not military. These were not included in their analysis.
c. They cannot identify the source or motivation for the appearance of these cases on the field after 1876. They cannot say that the same sources didn't place cases made before 1876, either.
d. The presence of those cases weakens blanket assumptions about all of them.
You're saying: Fox says there were piles of cartridges fired from the same gun on Calhoun Ridge? If not, where are these piles of cartridges fired from the same gun? |
Dark Cloud copyright RL MacLeod darkcloud@darkendeavors.com www.darkendeavors.com www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 7:53:12 PM
|
quote: 1. That doesn't make sense, nor does the evidence compel it.
Have it your way -- I just don't see only indians with captured carbines following those routes and ending up where no other indians went during the actual fighting.
quote: 2. We can? Really? Who owned all those weapons, Mr. Humphrey? Start with those .22 cases.
Who cares? If they're identified as post-1876, they are not used to reconstruct the battle and are therefore irrelevant.
quote: 3. Where did you see the Fouche pictures?
Gosh, what did you have for breakfast on Feburary 11th, 1998?
Are you denying they are low obliques?
quote: 4. LET's take it sytematically.
a.Fox and Scott have a database of cases found at the battlefield.
b. They identified cartridge cases made after 1876 not military. These were not included in their analysis.
c. They cannot identify the source or motivation for the appearance of these cases on the field after 1876. They cannot say that the same sources didn't place cases made before 1876, either.
Only your last point has any relevance. And for it to assume the importance you give it, we have to assume that somehow all the other physical evidence is faked.
For example, where we have both .45-55 (or .45-70) cases, non-regulation bullets, and human remains together, we have to assume that the non-regulation bullets and human remains were planted there, too. quote: d. The presence of those cases weakens blanket assumptions about all of them.
Which is precisely why statistical projections and other qualifying statements are used. The probability that .45-55 (or .45-70) cases, non-regulation bullets and human remains all found together represents deposition during the battle is high.
quote: You're saying: Fox says there were piles of cartridges fired from the same gun on Calhoun Ridge? If not, where are these piles of cartridges fired from the same gun?
Take a browse through his book -- he makes a case for some elaborate meneuvering. |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 9:37:14 PM
|
Good to see you back Vern. DC needs a good workout once in while. My grandfather William Begsley grew up in Minnesota and Wisconsin. In the mid 1950s he showed to me cartridge cases he had found at the Custer Battlefield earlier in his life. I was very young but I held one and it was larger than the palm of my hand. I would have to believe that they were 45-70 in size. I recall he had numerous cases but not sure how many. I just wish i had inherited them now. He died in 1957 and had served in the Th Cavalry in Texas in the 1920s. I think I have him to blame for my curiosity about the Little Bighorn. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 9:48:45 PM
|
What my grandfather did not have were any expended bullets to the best of my recollection. I would not rely on the lack of 45-70 cases to indicate the lack of a prolonged skirmish line engagement. It would seem to me the easiest thing for treasure hunters to find would have been piles of cases in a line. Fox does not rely on the expended cartridges alone. Bullets were found and I would believe less likely to been recovered by souvenir seekers. Of course bullets are harder to find and I am sure some them were carried off in Indian bodies and horses. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 9:57:31 PM
|
Since we are back to the Springfield rifle, I read recently that Indians stated the found Springfields with the case stuck in it. I wonder if this was a misinterpretation by the translator and what they found was a rifle with a expended cartridge in the chamber and the trooper just hadn't reloaded for whatever reason. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 10:09:57 PM
|
There has been a lot of discussion on this board about the failure of the Springfield to eject spent cartridges. I'm sure that some of the Indians found carbines with cases stuck in the chamber. The problem seemed to be largely with the soft copper alloy used for the cases at that time.There were later improvements in the carbine and the ammo. |
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - December 29 2005 : 10:39:47 PM
|
quote: prolar Posted - Today : 10:09:57 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------- There has been a lot of discussion on this board about the failure of the Springfield to eject spent cartridges. I'm sure that some of the Indians found carbines with cases stuck in the chamber. The problem seemed to be largely with the soft copper alloy used for the cases at that time.There were later improvements in the carbine and the ammo.
Thanks prolar and I am aware of the issue regarding the soft copper case having a failure to extract. I read somewhere lately, I am currently going through five books, that it was not as great of an issue as once proposed by some who needed some type of an excuse. My thought was that if troopers were shot after they fired but before attempting to extract and eject the cartridge it would still have the case in the chamber of the carbine. Not sure it means anything but it could account for some of the carbines having a case in the chamber without it having to be stuck. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|