|
Post by AZ Ranger on May 6, 2017 7:01:03 GMT -6
Hello Tom how are you ? My firm belief is that you must dispell the probability of the command being caught in motion ,in line astern with no time to take counter measures before you cnan progress on to the more exotic. I know I'm a spoilsport ..there are great stories to be writ out there on Battle Ridge but..... Best Regards Richard Richard The direction of travel can not be determined to any degree of certainty from a single location. So the flow of markers could be south to north or north to south. What Tom stated was an example of a north to south flow which is not a more exotic theory. In fact it fits within your "probability of the command being caught in motion". The only difference is the direction of travel prior to being destroyed to the last soldier. Archeological discovers identify 4 carbines north of LSH belong to these companies among a lot of other artifacts. I believe it is in Doug Scott's book A Walk Around the Boundary. We have a tendency to only look at artifacts found within the NPS boundaries and then from opinions based upon these artificial boundaries. Regards Steve
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on May 6, 2017 13:23:29 GMT -6
Hello to you as well Richard, I am well as I hope you are. Those stories you mention may actually be written, maybe sooner than later, then again maybe not!
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by wild on May 12, 2017 12:45:33 GMT -6
Hi AZ and Tom, Apologies for not replying sooner but the board is really on a life support machine.
I don't see a flow of battle . What happened to Custer happened to Keogh simultaneously. A flow of battle would suggest that either Custer or Keogh [depending on the flow] had time to deploy for defence . The makers suggest otherwise.
I pay no heed to artifacts as just about everything of use passed into Indian hands . Using one of the artifacts location maps some time ago, I scaled the distance of a large shell find to the Reno defence position and found it to be in the region of 600 meters. This find was offered as an Indian firing position. 600 Meters would surely rule that out. When you get beyond Benteen's description of a field without form or organisation you get into lala land. Very best wishes Richard
|
|
|
Post by benteen on May 12, 2017 14:05:06 GMT -6
[quote author=" wild" source="/post/118965/thread" timestamp="1494614733" I don't see a flow of battle . What happened to Custer happened to Keogh simultaneously. A flow of battle would suggest that either Custer or Keogh [depending on the flow] had time to deploy for defence . The makers suggest otherwise. I pay no heed to artifacts as just about everything of use passed into Indian hands . Using one of the artifacts location maps some time ago, I scaled the distance of a large shell find to the Reno defence position and found it to be in the region of 600 meters. This find was offered as an Indian firing position. 600 Meters would surely rule that out. When you get beyond Benteen's description of a field without form or organisation you get into lala land. Very best wishes Richard [/quote] Richard, I agree Keogh had time to deploy for a defense, however, I dont think it made a difference. Keogh had no intention of forming a defense or fighting a battle there. L company was to fire a couple of volleys which would send the Indians running back to their camp and his battalion (If in fact he was a battalion commander) would quickly catch up with Custer to attack at Ford D. When he realized that the warriors werent running but attacking, it was to late. L Co was in one place, C in another and his I co in yet another. He was not in control of the other companies and there was now no time to do much of anything except die in place which is what they did. Good to see you again my friend Be Well Dan
|
|
|
Post by wild on May 12, 2017 17:03:36 GMT -6
Hi Dan nice to see you alive and well.
You could be right Dan. It is possible to suggest a dozen stories for each company, and for each battalion . But the further you get away from the fact that the Indians had the strenght and speed and motivation to bring about a rout and total collaspe of the command in less than pissing time the more improbable that scenario becomes. The Indians could achieve such an outcome without any help from Custer or Keogh. Most of the scenarios here abouts put the defeat down to Custer's mismanagement or Keogh alleged incompetence or a combination of both. "The 7th was a functioning entity in the process of manuevering to attack"?I just don't buy it . Custer had everything in the air , he was minutes from hundreds of Indians ,his line of march left his entire left flank open to counter attack.And cavalry are useless while in motion in any direction except towards the enemy. For the Indians closing in on such a "follow my leader" formation it was show time.
I'm reading Rick Atkinson's An Army at Dawn. It is the first of a trilogy and simply unputdownable. I'v seen his lectures on youtube and he is a most interesting storyteller.If I have a criticism it is only that I think he is unfair to the Italian soldier.
All the best Dan take care. Richard
|
|
|
Post by wild on May 17, 2017 12:36:38 GMT -6
Just in passing guys
Keogh is the victim of the boards inability to accept the overwhelming dynamics ranged against him . Instead incompetence is used to explain the absence of tactical logic in the Keogh sector.
The probable scenario is that Keogh was the rearward battalion following Custer. He has no idea where they are going or what are his co's intentions . There is no communication with HQ. There is no drill for a half regiment being hit up. If Custer had hit a wall he should have fallen back on Keogh instead he dismounts, this allows the Indians to seperate the two battalions. Keogh having no instructions and simply following in Custer's wake cannot choose the ground on which to make a stand .Thus the god awful location in which he finds himself.
It is the gap between the two battalions which gives rise to the double mission theory. But the distance from Keogh to Calhoun is not much shorter than that from Keogh to Custer . So it is much more likely that we are looking at a fragmented wreck rather than two defeated missions. Cheers Richard
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 28, 2018 11:00:31 GMT -6
Has the role of the colt45 single action 1873 revolver been over looked in our investigations? If the battle had been fought at longdistance ala Reno Hill there would have been evidence of organisation among Custer's units? There is no such evidence. If it was fought at short distance then why did the gun that won the West not win the fire fight or at least hold it's own and allow for organised resistance? Regards to all
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jul 28, 2018 13:47:56 GMT -6
The Colt 45 is a fine weapon for close range, however, it is slow to reload when empty. That is its biggest disadvantage, plus the fact each trooper only had 24 rounds of ammo for the pistol. When the enemy is close enough for hand-to-hand combat, once your 6 shots are gone, it is not possible to reload before being killed.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Jul 28, 2018 18:13:25 GMT -6
PLUS THE FACT MANY OF THE TROOPERS COULD NO SHOOT AND RIDE AT THE SAME TIME, MANY DROPPED THEM IN RENO'S RETREAT.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 28, 2018 19:33:45 GMT -6
Hi Tom Colt Just revisiting my old theory that it was a train wreck , no organisation and with troopers fighting as individuals. If there had been time the command would have dismounted ,set up an all round defence and won the opening firefight with combined carbine and colt fire. Switching from carbine to revolver as the range closed. But no evidence of that. Best Richard
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jul 28, 2018 19:55:16 GMT -6
There are a few Indian accounts of soldiers using their Colts as clubs in the Custer sector, and this would be due to the inability to reload rapidly enough to prevent being engaged in hand-to-hand. Couple that handicap with the fact the soldiers probably did not have much experience with the pistol (due to lack of ammo for practice) and you have the train wreck Wild referenced.
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 29, 2018 4:23:08 GMT -6
The Colt 45 is a fine weapon for close range, however, it is slow to reload when empty. That is its biggest disadvantage, plus the fact each trooper only had 24 rounds of ammo for the pistol. When the enemy is close enough for hand-to-hand combat, once your 6 shots are gone, it is not possible to reload before being killed. What would you say is a reasonable time to reload 6 shots for the Colt for a man with experience in using the weapon? If one takes into account 1. lack of training and 2. stress especially among the freshest troops, the reload time would be many times longer. All the best, Noggy
|
|
|
Post by Colt45 on Jul 29, 2018 6:46:19 GMT -6
Noggy, When the gun has just been fired, the brass cases are quite warm, therefore slightly wedged into the cylinder due to expansion. To reload before they have cooled down a little generally requires using the ramrod attached to the side of the barrel to extract the spend cartridges. To remove the 6 rounds when warm can take 4 to 8 seconds when the person is not under stress. Add stress and it can take longer.
Now each new round must be inserted individually, which can take about 5 seconds if all 6 rounds are already in hand. Add more time if the rounds have to be retrieved from a holder. Again, if under stress, this can take much longer due to the tendency to fumble when trying to load in a hurry.
I shoot two Colt 45s in cowboy action shooting matches so I am quite familiar with the loading/unloading process. It takes me about 5 seconds to load the revolver with all the rounds laying on a table in front of me, and I am not under stress. After firing, it takes about 8 seconds to unload it as most of the time the brass sticks in the cylinder and requires use of the ramrod.
I have tried simulating the reloading process under stress (i.e. trying to go as fast as I can unloading then reloading) and it almost always takes longer than 10 seconds. If I simulate having to retrieve new rounds from a pouch such as the troopers would have had, it easily doubles the time to empty then reload. And I am really not under the kind of stress the troopers would have been under. I was only trying to go fast. No one was trying to kill me at the time.
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jul 29, 2018 7:09:19 GMT -6
I have tried simulating the reloading process under stress (i.e. trying to go as fast as I can unloading then reloading) and it almost always takes longer than 10 seconds. If I simulate having to retrieve new rounds from a pouch such as the troopers would have had, it easily doubles the time to empty then reload. And I am really not under the kind of stress the troopers would have been under. I was only trying to go fast. No one was trying to kill me at the time. Thank you for your answer. I reckon it`s safe to say that reloading a Colt in many instances could easily take half a minute. In close combat that`s very long time... All the best, Noggy
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jul 29, 2018 8:06:02 GMT -6
It would be unlikely that all 120 troopers would have to reload at the same time thus at any given moment a fair number would still be firing. However I feel that if the Indians were not stopped and driven back by the first load a second would be futile. But the point I'm making is that with organisation the carbine and colt combination might have saved the command . The blame cannot be attributed to the carbine but rather to lack of organisation. Best RIchard
|
|