| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 22 2005 : 4:20:27 PM
|
quote:
If they couldn't fire the thing, then what were they doing there?
The rifle/carbine is by and large a form of placebo.It creates an illusion among the human sandbags of being able to defend oneself.
Cavalry have only one function on the battlefield and that is to deliver the coup de grace to broken infantry by shock and sabre.
That's simply not true. American Cavalry has deep roots in mounted infantry tactics, not classic shock action. It was also heavily influenced by the Texas Rangers in the Mexican War, who invented revolver tactics. During the Civil War, cavalry actions were fought dismounted more often than not -- and cavalry was the only arm that got breechloaders and even repeaters in quantity.
I might point out that there wasn't a single saber carried by the 7th on that campaign. |
  |
|
|
Benteen
Lt. Colonel
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2005 : 4:26:09 PM
|
Wild, I have to say for once, I agree! :)
I know most people don't like the comparison. But it must be made. Had Patton had no tanks in WWII, but cavalry instead, would he have lived? The tactics the indians used were indeed unique to the circumstances that day. The accounts of that battle give us a different picture than what has been traditionally thought of as Indian fighting. The single shot rifle was of little use no matter how many thay had on the battlefield that day. Give each warrior society repeaters and charge! |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 22 2005 : 7:14:30 PM
|
Okay, Wild ceased school the day after hyperbole was written on the board. Used correctly, it can incite such confusion that no greater enjoyment can be had. Not that I'd know, of course. But the chances are good he's pulled up the Paddy Lounger and the Irish equivilant of popcorn (which from the teeth I saw in Dublin had to be gravel)to watch the reactions.
I would also like to suggest that on average the Indians were, if anything, likely worse shots or no better than as bad as the 7th. They didn't have tons of ammo to practice with either. And it could be that significant number of Indian and soldier dead on Custer Hill came from the battle at Calhoun Hill and/or vice versa. This had to have been a real horror show.
I'm again smitten by the fact that none of you - not one - has come forward to suggest the amount of practice that it would take to produce a 7th of adequate shots for their job with their given weapons. Which is to say, the 7th that Myth and Malarkey project from time to time on this board. Surely, there must be enough experience in the military here to suggest something relevant that we can compare to what we can prove they received. Of course, I'm quite sure it's far more than they could have received, and that at some point the admission is going to have to be made that ballistics is as pointless a discussion for the LBH as a Victory Parade Committee has been for the Irish military...... Just sayin'. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 04:53:15 AM
|
Its a good job this discussion came up, otherwise I might never have known the 7th were a joke outfit. Terry must have been mad to send such an idiot with his poor starving farm boys on a seek and (if you find) destroy mission.
Thanks DC for getting the point about the heavy firing. It never occurred to me that the volley fire was a signal until I read it from Godfrey, who believed it regardless of whether it was at the time or in retrospect. What would he know, though - being another dunce when it came to firearms. If you agree with the timeline and the Reno Hill boys' assessment that, at least, there was heavy firing (if not exactly volleys), then what is your assessment of the action at that time? |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 05:21:45 AM
|
Newcomers to the board may not realise that DC is the only licenced practitioner of hyperbole on this board and anyone transgressing this protocol is lible to get a quick flash of his tartan which really is too horrible to contemplate.
I would also like to suggest that on average the Indians were, if anything, likely worse shots
I don't know about that.They inflicted 35 casaulties on Benteens/McDougals troops alone [excluding Reno's men]not bad shooting.
I'm again smitten by the fact that none of you - not one - has come forward to suggest the amount of practice that it would take to produce a 7th of adequate shots for their job with their given weapons.
30 rounds grouping/snap from different ranges every 2 months.
Vern
What you are saying is that cavalry tactics were defunct and that the only use for cavalry was as mounted infantry.
That's simply not true. American Cavalry has deep roots in mounted infantry tactics, not classic shock action.
Shock action was the only tactic open to Custer at the LBH.
I might point out that there wasn't a single saber carried by the 7th on that campaign.Wrong.De Rudio had his.
|
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 07:53:14 AM
|
In the Marine Corps boot camp we spent 2 weeks at the range to become basic riflemen. I shot over 500 rounds. Then in basic infantry training about 200 rounds. In staging right before going to Viet Nam we transitioned to the AR 16 and shot around 500 rounds.
In Viet Nam I had unlimited access to ammunition. In the Marine Corps we qualified at ranges to 500 yards.
Currently in my job we shoot 400 rounds of handgun, 180 rounds of rifle, and 15 rounds of shotgun ammo per year. We also use a firearms training simulator.
Proficiency with a handgun requires constant practice. The rifle to a lesser degree. We require all hits to be on target with the rifle out to 100 yards. We shoot the handgun to 50 yards.
To me the real questions are did the 7th have indians that they could see clearly, did they shoot, and what was thier state of mind. Under extreme stress fine motor skills are lost. Accurate shooting and reloading require fine motor skills unless practiced hundreds of times which from what I am learning here could not have occurred.
|
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
dave
Captain
Australia
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 09:10:37 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Cloud
[quote]
I'm again smitten by the fact that none of you - not one - has come forward to suggest the amount of practice that it would take to produce a 7th of adequate shots for their job with their given weapons.
Well DC, I haven't answered personally, because I have not the slightest idea what a reasonable allowance of practise ammunition would have been. But even had the 7th been good shooting outfit, I'm not sure that it would have made a huge difference.
I don't pretend to know what happened after Curley/Martini departed the column - I have theories of course - I'm sure that most of us that have read about the battle for any period of time have developed some. But it seems to me that however events unfolded there was no co-ordinated stand by all 5 companies. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but the picture I get, is one of complete chaos, with companies strung out unable to effectively support each other. I can easily imagine confused officers, uncertain whether to stand and shoot, or run, chivying their equally confused charges across a dusty battlefield with bands of Indians flitting up gullies on every side, so to me questions of training or weapon accuracy become largely academic.
To me, as Vern has already stated on this thread, the main cause of the defeat was Custer's poor leadership - well that and too many Indians. What I can't get past, is that the next day 400 odd men at the Reno Hill siege were able to see the Indians off, and apparently with the exception of one scare, without too much trouble. You would think that on the heels of such a significant victory, and with the addition of 200 odd carbines and a similar number of pistols, that the Indians should have been able to smash the 7th.
The fact that they didn't suggests to me that Custer really mismanaged his deployments prior to the battle commencing, and that to me, is the main reason they lost. If its true that the 7th was inadequately trained, and the balance of evidence so far presented on this forum suggests that they were far from being an elite or even an adequately trained unit, then that wouldn't have helped, but I don't see it being a leading reason for the defeat. |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 09:47:09 AM
|
| I'd go along with most of that. Its the bit before the chaos I'd like to get more of a handle on. Given the evidence available, it might be possible to at least argue a more detailed picture of the Custer episode before the fog finally came down. |
Edited by - Smcf on November 23 2005 09:47:57 AM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 09:55:44 AM
|
What I can't get past, is that the next day 400 odd men at the Reno Hill siege were able to see the Indians off, and apparently with the exception of one scare, without too much trouble.
The Indians would not have had the ability to launch coordinated attacks on Reno's position.The action here was an example were organisation wins out over the individual.You would also have to factor in the fact that this was the third action for the Indians that day also the approach of Terry and of course the availibility of loot takes the edge off an undiciplined force |
Edited by - wILD I on November 23 2005 09:59:12 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 10:22:49 AM
|
AZ Ranger, Dave, and Vern, thank you. That corresponds almost exactly with my "military sources", composed of family, friends, and acquaintances, with military experience. I myself have no real clue beyond rumor, but everyone I know who is a good shot (and far from pro sniper material by their cheerful admission) says that you cannot sorta/kinda be a good shot and sorta/kinda practice. It's athletic, and you have to train and practice as for anything.
The confidence that comes with good repetitive training gives you the speed under pressure that preparation grants. The fact that the 7th 'discovered' problems with the weapons (and I'm not convinced the problem was the weapon)after vaguely rapid fire shows just how awful and insufficient the training had to have been. And how terrifying for the soldier to discover this.
It's because of this sort of actual info based on experience (and the weapons AZ uses are light years better than the Springfield and STILL require lots of practice)that I think blows away all these concerns with the weaponry. And what I think that does is underline the fact these discussions are designed and cherished methods of deflecting attention from Custer's errors, or those of whoever made them in his name on the field.
SCMF, the 7th was a joke outfit for the job required, but no more so than the rest of the Western Army, with the possible exception of the highly motivated and unified 9th and 10th regiments, who got the worst stuff and yet always seemed to win and scare the hell out of the enemy. Huh. If you think the 7th was terrific, explain their pathetic showing at the Wa****a, where they had every advantage and it still took them all of daylight to kill few, capture few, and still found themselves at risk, their escape being due an incompetent and frozen enemy.
Reno Hill did hear heavy firing periodically. Whether it was the cavalry or the Indians or both together is unknown. But your attempt to damn them for not moving to the sound of firing is curtailed by the actualities.
1. the size of the enemy was unknown, but clearly motivated and large. It is still unknown.
2. the 7th had an assigned mission; at what point were they to abandon it to rescue a lesser unit they had no reason to think was in desperate trouble, but probably had had a fight and moved on after failing to complete a mission their own commander had promised?
3. how much of Reno's three companies were still mounted on undamaged horses, how many wounded; in short, what percentage of them were remotely capable of regaining the offensive even physically, much less emotionally? What percentage of the wounded would require four soldiers to carry them in a blanket?
4. having seen Reno's fiasco, and knowing Custer is north somewhere in unknown condition, and knowing the quality of the units at hand, and that losing the train would be the absolute end of the road, and that wounded had to be sufficiently protected, explain why Benteen should have ignored all that and rushed to attack the unknown with the insufficient?
5. Godfrey had bad hearing, we're told, so what he actually heard is unknown. In any case, other equally experienced officers didn't share his views, which were affected by Benteen's later story about Reno's (quite rational if unheroic)concerns about leaving the wounded and escaping the night of the 25th.
Nobody looks all that great in this battle, which I suspect makes it quite typical. Nobody is always heroic, including the Custers. People flinch because of physical exhaustion, lack of blood sugar, as much as anything. It is rarely a reflection on character. The insistence of using terms like "coward" and "hero" are childish and reflect a deficiency in the heart of the observer more than the observed from this distance of years. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 12:21:58 PM
|
| Again - who's calling who a coward or hero here, certainly not me. There are compelling reasons for Benteen and Reno to have behaved exactly as they did. That they attended to the immediate crisis does not, however, preclude the possibility that Custer was signalling for help. No officer who expressed a view on the heavy firing intimated that it came from anyone but Custer, unless they all suffered from bad hearing. With that in mind, the question still remains to be answered properly. |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 1:50:09 PM
|
If the argument is rising again amongst us that Reno and/or Benteen should have rushed to Custer...Puh-leeze. They could barely get to the river for water--handing out Medals of Honor to all who did. Exhaustion--man and beast,overwhelming disadvantage of men and weapons, the need to protect the train, distance (three miles), ect. ect.
A mounted column charging from that hill wouldn't have made it 500 yards before becoming the victims of yet another killing field.
|
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 3:45:33 PM
|
quote:
If the argument is rising again amongst us that Reno and/or Benteen should have rushed to Custer...Puh-leeze. They could barely get to the river for water--handing out Medals of Honor to all who did. Exhaustion--man and beast,overwhelming disadvantage of men and weapons, the need to protect the train, distance (three miles), ect. ect.
First of all, Reno couldn't move -- he had just been chased out of the bottoms with heavy losses.
Secondly, even when Benteen arrived, the situation was perilous. Benteen had to have his men share ammo with Reno's survivors, and not until the pack train arrived was there sufficient ammo to even contimplate movement.
Third, by the time the ammo was distributed and preparations made to move, Custer and his five companies were dead.
The correct tactical solution to the problem facing Reno and Benteen was to maintain a defense and await the arrival of Terry and Gibbon. |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 5:28:08 PM
|
I would not presume to comment on how much pratice is necessary to maintain Vern's level of proficiency, but DC's comment was in regard to hitting a standing man sized target at 75 yards. I haven't fired a rifle in years, but I would be greatly suprised if I missed such a target.Also I know several people who manage to bring down a deer or two most seasons and they never practice.
I remember seeing a recovered sheet of paper from LBH with Indian drawings on one side and a NCO's list of "best shots" on the other. Also Benteen picked his best marksmen to provide covering fire for the water carriers. If they never had firearm training how did anyone know who could shoot?
One other question, If Custer's leadership skills were as poor as some of you claim, how did he manage to become a general at age twenty-three? |
|
|
|
Heavyrunner
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 6:06:59 PM
|
Vern,
My point(s) exactly... As I wrote, if they could barely get down to the water and, at that, barely a few at a time, a full-blown counter-attack would seem a bit out of the question..
|
Bob Bostwick |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 23 2005 : 9:22:59 PM
|
You may or may not be able to hit someone at 75 yards, Prolar, but that's not relevant. Could you do it with that Springfield under circumstances that don't allow you a prolonged setup with their lousy sights, as the soldiers would need to do? I could do it, but I'd need a Sterling Street Sweeper. And two magazines. Extra. In any case, a discussion about Custer and the 7th do not reflect on the abilities of posters in the manly arts, good or bad.
And with telescopic sights, lasers, satellite tracking, helicopter platforms, and weapons that could blow a hole in a Panzer in the next Area Code, hunters, these days, do not impress. Since they can only legally take one deer, I thought, let them be allowed one bullet per season. If they call themselves "hunters." And the culling of cows, other hunters, pregnant llamas in pens, and dogs speaks volumes about their skill across the country. Go duck hunting in New England and listen to hunters blast away with 12 gauge at formations only slightly lower than Telstar's first circumnavigation. Even in Colorado, there are times I've heard barrages during deer season that suggest the height of the Rosebud.
And I know: there are excellent hunters that could make do with one bullet. But I'd bet on average, the hunters in the US couldn't hit Bloody Knife's tent from the inside, which means in Bloody Knife's phrase, they're no better than Custer himself was. He was kidding, I guess.
And how good were the best marksmen under Custer? The best under him could be no better than me. I don't think that, but the evidence doesn't suggest great skill, let's be blunt. Calling a bunch of guys "sharpshooters" doesn't make it so, and might only reflect that these guys hit the target once out of ten shots and were the best of a sad lot.
How did actual idiots like Pickett, Pope, and McDowell get to be generals at all? Custer and Pleasonton were made generals to kick ass and instill the thought that results and not social connections or acceptable age were the key to advancement. In any case, nobody is questioning Custer's leadership ability. I don't understand the decisions - if decisions they were - after MTC, and have bored you saying I don't think Custer made them, and that it suggests companies fighting separately with command confusion as the actual Friend and Family command structure took over catch as catch can from the formal one. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
Edited by - Dark Cloud on November 23 2005 9:24:47 PM |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 01:41:50 AM
|
| Dark Cloud: Earlier in this thread you said that the 7th troopers were poor marksmen because they could not hit Indians on Sharpshooter ridge five or six hundred yards away. I and others said that would be a very difficult shot with a carbine.You later stated your belief that the average trooper could not hit a still man sized target at 75 yards.My point was that would not be a difficult even with a carbine. Of course there are circumstances that could make it tough or impossible, but it is not a feat that would require extensive training.My point was that the average person can be a pretty fair shot without constant practice. Apparently Vern has a job that requires skills way beyond average, but few people train as he does.I am not a hunter, but I have no problem with those that are, and I'm I don't really care what your views are.All the generals you mentioned were older and took much longer than Custer to reach their rank. |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 05:26:25 AM
|
DC wrote "And what is the question SMCF? Post it exactly"
Apologies for not making myself clear - I'll try again. I'm interested in what the heavy firing heard on Reno Hill meant from the Custer point of view i.e. what could feasibly be happening at that point in time. I don't see how my posts can be construed as damning anyone. Its obvious that had Reno and Benteen moved to the sound of firing immediately, they'd either have ended up back were they came from, or been killed in the attempt. That's what happened a short time later, after all.
Given the time taken for the mass of Indians attacking Reno to get back down and then up to Custer, the distance from the MTC ford to the ridges, the reports of light skirmishing until the mass of warriors arrived from the Reno episode, the range of Indian guns/7th's carbines, the lack of bodies until Calhoun, etc etc - it seems to me that the heavy firing must have come from
the high ridges and that means Nye Cartwright. To have mentioned volleys plural, there must have been a recognisable pattern in the firing which caused the officers on Reno to assume it was Custer. But surely, it was too early in the Custer battle to have been engaging the Indians in a hot struggle at that point in time, or have I got the timelines wrong?
Again, at that point in time, if Custer had gone to MTC and been taken out of the equation, then I still don't see why a retreat to support wasn't attempted - quite the opposite happened. |
Edited by - Smcf on November 24 2005 05:39:22 AM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 06:28:05 AM
|
I'm interested in what the heavy firing heard on Reno Hill meant
From the positioning of Custer's units it is obvious that he would have had fire control over only a very small proportion of his troops. A volley of at the most 50 carbines would not really be distinuished over the incoming.
Perhaps if Custer was using different loads for each volley then the reports could have spelt out SOS. |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 07:52:34 AM
|
It depends on what your view of the positioning of the troops were at that time, rather than later on.
SOS? - now if 3 distinct volleys were heard ...
BTW - off-topic and you being Irish and all - "Horslips - the Return of the DanceHall Sweathearts" 2-disc DVD - you should get your hands on it. For all you Americans who want to know what the Irish are all about, you couldn't get a better potted insight (if its released on NTSC that is). |
Edited by - Smcf on November 24 2005 08:03:17 AM |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 08:19:05 AM
|
No, Prolar, I did not exactly say "the 7th troopers were poor marksmen because they could not hit Indians on Sharpshooter ridge five or six hundred yards away." I said they could not hit a target within range of their weapon, that it was beyond them, and Ryan tried it with a telescopic sight on a personal weapon to unknown result. There were hundreds of troopers there; you'd think some of them could do it. I also said that shooting uphill was tough. If the troopers were trained as well as you apparently choose to believe, had experience in either volley fire or sharpshooting, that shouldn't have been necessary, should it?
I don't know where your belief in the average person's shooting ability comes from, but it's not in my experience. In any case, you're assuming there was training once to a certain level, and I don't think that applies to the 7th. In any case, the proof is in the pudding.
Pleasonton was younger or the same age as Custer, wasn't he? And you get promoted faster in a war rather than peacetime. The Feds were trying to get rid of the dead wood and incompetents who religiously lost to inferior armies, and promoting talent from below tends to work as it shames those who deserve to be shamed. And Custer and Merritt and all those guys were good. But you know, the 7th was involved in a massive police action, it wasn't like the previous war, and you get the feeling the CW officers longed for another big battle rather than the current assignment.
I'm mortified, of course, you don't care about my opinion, but since you entered the concept of hunters as evidence for your own, it wasn't untoward of me to respond to it.
SMCF, that isn't precisely a concise question, is it? Are you saying "Since there are theories that Custer's back three companies were not engaged at this time, any firing ID'd as volley fire on Reno Hill must therefore be assumed to be a call for help?"
If so, this is the Custerphile Indecision: Whether to proclaim it as a monstrous village too large for the 7th (in which case Custer has to be protected by formulating absurd reasons for attacking), or was it an entirely doable attack that Custer bolluxed (in which case blame has to be shifted to Reno and Benteen ASAP)? We can't know. We don't know if Custer was doomed with or without those released from Reno. We have no idea.
As to volleys, however, recall Gall saying that there was a group of soldiers that went down in a clump when Indians stood up and fired at once. If true, that would be mistaken for a volley, now, wouldn't it? Just not by the soldiers. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Smcf
Captain
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 09:49:16 AM
|
DC - the question "If you agree with the timeline and the Reno Hill boys' assessment that, at least, there was heavy firing (if not exactly volleys), then what is your assessment of the action at that time?" was I thought, pretty concise - but then its difficult to look at your own posts objectively.
I'm convinced there was no significant action within range of either Indians or troops at that time. Gall was nowhere near the action until much later (wasn't he looking for his relatives?) - unless I've got the timelines confused. |
|
|
|
Vern Humphrey
Captain
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 10:15:32 AM
|
quote:
We don't know if Custer was doomed with or without those released from Reno.
If he could have won an offensive action with those three extra companies (which is unlikely), then he was wrong to split them off from his force and ride out of supporting range. |
|
|
|
AZ Ranger
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - November 24 2005 : 10:19:51 AM
|
I would find it hard to believe that most troopers could not hit a man-sized target at 75 yards on a range with no stress. The carbine is more than adequate for that range.
What I don't know is the mental attitude of the 7th at the time of engagement and subsequent defeat. Certainly there is some insight to the Indians. They had just been successful in their engagements and ready to fight.
I like to use football as an analogy of the momentum that I feel happens in battles sometimes. Most players are reasonably competent in the use of their equipment but there is a mental attitude that sometimes changes the outcome of a game. The team that loses on any given day is not composed necessarily of new recruits,cowards or lack of proficiency in the use of the equipment. Next week the same team that lost may win by a wide margin. Fortunately for football players losing in the extreme does not always result in injury or death.
So what are the clues to look for? That is why I am here. I believe there is quite a bit of knowledge here on this board. Certainly the loss of a leader could produce results that would be disastrous in the short term. Unfortunately in combat when you lose you may not get a second chance. |
“ An officer's first duty is to his horses.”
SEMPER FI |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Springfield Carbine
