|
Post by clw on Feb 7, 2008 18:05:35 GMT -6
All true, Horse. But there are some differences, one being the size of the camp which may have resorted their priorities some. I think defensibilty was always considered, but I don't think they considered it anymore than usual at the LBH. And the sheer size of the camp made it a lower priority.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Feb 25, 2008 15:02:31 GMT -6
This map looks over the Cavalry's shoulder at Luce Ridge towards Ford B. For visualization and scale purposes, I've sized out typical troop formations: - Three companies are deployed as dismounted skirmishers with their mounted horseholders behind the line along Luce and N-C ridges. A range indicator towards the ford is included. - In the distance, one company is advancing down the probable lodge pole trail towards the ford in column of fours. - Behind it, with the red flag, is the regimental headquarters party. - On the trail behind it, is a company in column of twos, for perspective.
|
|
|
Post by spokunnee on Jun 12, 2009 3:02:45 GMT -6
<how easily it could flee if attacked - how easily intruders could be detected so that they could be attacked.> The Indians had the river on 1 side and a wide open plain on the other. I wonder at what point they detected Reno's charge. I believe there was at long open stretch of land after crossing the river until you get to the village. Apparently warriors had enough time to gather in front of the village and put enough concern (fear) in Reno to cause him to halt. The other side of the village was a wide open plain which would make it easy to spot anyone coming from that direction and/or an area to flee. Whether the Indians deliberately set up their camps that way, it did play a factor in the outcome.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jun 12, 2009 13:11:03 GMT -6
I think you've got me mixed up with somebody else.
The story of my life!
|
|