alanw
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by alanw on Mar 28, 2015 14:09:46 GMT -6
Another 'What if' thread. The scenario is that Reno stays in the timber rather than retreating/charging out and his command is still reasonably intact, albeit starting to run low on ammunition when Benteen approaches the valley. Benteen is still unaware that Custer has split his command further and believes that his whole wing is engaged in the valley.
Benteen needs further intel on what lies ahead before just charging in and of course he is still bringing the pack train up. It is hypothetical of course, but what choices do you think Benteen would have had, and what do you think he should have done under the circumstances?
Some of my thoughts, coming from a non-military man, who is no expert on the battle:
1) Benteen tries to make contact with Reno, (if possible, as the NAs may be able to prevent messengers getting through) and anyhow attempt to get a fuller picture of the situation. 2. Benteen rushes the pack train up and tries to place it somewhere safe(ish) - maybe up on Reno Hill? He doesn't want to head into the valley with his command too stretched out & vulnerable to flank attack. 3. I'm sure I read somewhere that Benteen stated that if he had gone into the Valley that his battalion would have been wiped out. However, in this scenario he needs to at least support a withdrawal of Reno's force. One possibility is to muster as many men as possible - his 3 companies, plus Co. B, & men detached to pack train and charge the NAs hoping that initially they are startled into pulling back and regrouping. That might possibly allow Benteen to make contact with Reno and either consolidate position or move to a better position - maybe or maybe not on Reno Hill. 4. Make a diversionary manoeuvre elsewhere, hoping to pull NA forces away from Reno so he can move out of the timber. 5. All the while try to make contact with Custer, updating him on the situation - preferably not an ambiguous hand-written note carried by an Italian with a limited grasp of the English language.
In summary, Benteen could try any of the above, but what would be the likely outcome? My conclusion, and it is only a gut feeling, and anyhow we cannot know for certain, is that Reno & Benteen's commands would likely be wiped out to a man and the only survivors being from the pack train, and then only if they do not leave it too late to get the hell out of there.
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 28, 2015 14:22:48 GMT -6
That would be my conclusion as well. Reno and Benteen survived in the Reno Hill position because they presented no direct threat to the village(s), and there was no need for the Indians to assault and take that position with the inevitable heavy (for them) casualties such an effort would entail. Containment was the correct solution.
Being in the valley on the other hand does constitute a clear and present danger, and there would have been a fight, ending badly for the USA, and that fight would have been one of necessity for the Indians, regardless of the number of casualties sustained.
|
|
alanw
Junior Member
Posts: 74
|
Post by alanw on Mar 28, 2015 14:47:02 GMT -6
That would be my conclusion as well. Reno and Benteen survived in the Reno Hill position because they presented no direct threat to the village(s), and there was no need for the Indians to assault and take that position with the inevitable heavy (for them) casualties such an effort would entail. Containment was the correct solution. Being in the valley on the other hand does constitute a clear and present danger, and there would have been a fight, ending badly for the USA, and that fight would have been one of necessity for the Indians, regardless of the number of casualties sustained. You bring up a very important point, and I agree. The NAs might well have been willing to take 100+ plus casualties in a backs against the wall situation like the valley, but not in needless full on frontal assaults on Reno Hill. However, was the NA approach to Reno Hill partly based on their non-awareness of Terry's impending arrival. Did the NAs believe, albeit wrongly, that they just needed to bide there time till thirst, hunger, lack of ammo, snipers bullets took their toll on the defenders?
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Mar 28, 2015 15:16:07 GMT -6
The containment effort was to give their infrastructure a 24-36 hour head start without interference. There were a couple of relatively small attacks made against the hilltop, but nothing serious, and I conclude those were made to maintain the illusion that the big one was just around the corner. Good move on their part. When you have your adversary in a box holding the axe of impending doom over their heads, lest they get too frisky, is always the right thing to do.
Playing with the other guys mind, makes up for certain deficiencies in combat power.
|
|
|
Post by tubman13 on Mar 28, 2015 17:23:29 GMT -6
Death to all engaged in the valley and Custer may have lived another hour, unless he beat feet. Remember the initial NA's to engage Keogh and Custer were not the ones engaged in the valley fight and the village contained more than 800-1000 additional males of fighting age.
Regards, Tom
|
|
|
Post by welshofficer on Mar 28, 2015 18:07:45 GMT -6
That would be my conclusion as well. Reno and Benteen survived in the Reno Hill position because they presented no direct threat to the village(s), and there was no need for the Indians to assault and take that position with the inevitable heavy (for them) casualties such an effort would entail. Containment was the correct solution. Being in the valley on the other hand does constitute a clear and present danger, and there would have been a fight, ending badly for the USA, and that fight would have been one of necessity for the Indians, regardless of the number of casualties sustained. You bring up a very important point, and I agree. The NAs might well have been willing to take 100+ plus casualties in a backs against the wall situation like the valley, but not in needless full on frontal assaults on Reno Hill. However, was the NA approach to Reno Hill partly based on their non-awareness of Terry's impending arrival. Did the NAs believe, albeit wrongly, that they just needed to bide there time till thirst, hunger, lack of ammo, snipers bullets took their toll on the defenders? Alan,
I think that scenario unlikely. They would know that the 7th Cavalry would be unlikely to attack them from the south unless there were other troops defending the Yellowstone to their north. Terry and/or Gibbon could easily be close by. There wasn't a sudden all out attack on Reno Hill when Terry was first spotted some way to the north. There was simply no need to incur the heavy casualties that an all out assault on Reno Hill would entail. Just move southwards up the LBH unmolested.
WO
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Mar 29, 2015 8:52:47 GMT -6
Alan,
I think we need to look at sequencing and timing.
When Reno went into the timber, the majority of the Indians facing him were between Reno and Ford A. There was no way to coordinate actions between the battalions.
Look at Gerard's testimony, as recorded by Camp. He said initially the valley was full of Indians. Gerard thought rejoining the Rees was too dangerous, so he fled to the timber, behind the G Co skirmish line. From here he says there were only 2-300 Indians, all the rest were gone.
The problem is he was seeing 2-300 Indians between G Co and the village. The rest of the Indians had swept around the open flank and had cut off the battalion.
The argument on the defensibility of the timber rests on Gerard's brow. You have a ditch facing open fields to the west. If the Indians had massed shoulder and shoulder and conducted a charge here, they would be annihilated. How many Indians attacked here. Not a single one. The Indian main attack was coming in from the south. The supporting attack was coming from the north. The Gerard's brow area is as relevant as the fields outside the Alamo, where the majority of the garrison died. The Indians would have welcomed a breakout to the west, it would be over in 5 minutes.
How do you defend a 5 to one attack from the south. Constricted fields of fire and limited OCOKA means it will be a hand to hand fight.
The Reno battalion was too small to achieve anything in the valley. The advanced guard needed support from the main body. By doctrine GAC should have been 100-500 paces behind Reno. How long would it take him to support Reno if he had been where his OWN orders required him to be. GAC should have court martialed himself.
|
|
|
Post by montrose on Mar 29, 2015 9:19:25 GMT -6
Consider this.
The plains Indians traditions and culture were as light infantry, fighting in forests.
One tradition had a warrior wear a long sash around his waist. One end was staked in the ground. He could not leave this spot unless another warrior hit him with a quirt. This symbolically whips him into retreat. This tradition makes no sense in mounted warfare.
They acquired horses and adapted to the Plains, only because they were kicked out of their homelands.
I do not believe they were decent cavalry. Certainly not the finest cavalry on the planet. Cavalry is all about Force equals Mass times Acceleration. You charge the enemy, reform, charge again. Only melee when they run, then butcher them.
They never got that.
Look at the tactic of forming a circle a few hundred meters from the enemy. They shot when closest then circled back around. Their mobility minimized their own casualties. But also minimized enemy casualties. Go google what a carocole is. This tactic was obsolete by the 30 years war (1618-1648).
The Indians were dangerous when they could get close. Either through use of cover and concealment, or horse mobility to close the gap. Notice they show a marked tendency to dismount when close, which no true cavalrymen would do.
No wonder Chuck likes this battle.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 3, 2015 8:54:13 GMT -6
"Which no true cavalryman would do" That's why we don't have cavalry anymore Will. They all got their wish in "Death before Dismount" and the world is a better place for it.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Apr 3, 2015 12:35:13 GMT -6
Are all US Brigades armoured? Had a look before and here are both the Armoured and Infantry Divisions together;
1st US Armoured Division: Headquarters Fort Bliss, Texas is regionally aligned with Central Command. 1st Brigade Combat Team (Stryker BCT) at Fort Bliss 2nd Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Bliss (Army Evaluation Task Force) 3rd Brigade Combat Team (Infantry BCT) at Fort Bliss (Scheduled for inactivation) 4th Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Bliss 1st Armored Division Artillery Brigade at Fort Bliss (reflagged from 212th Fires Brigade)[15] Combat Aviation Brigade at Fort Bliss
1st US Infantry Division: Headquarters Fort Riley, Kansas 1st Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Riley 2nd Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Riley 3rd Brigade Combat Team (Infantry BCT) at Fort Riley (Scheduled for inactivation) DIVARTY, 1st Infantry Division Combat Aviation Brigade at Fort Riley
1st US Cavalry Division: Headquarters Fort Hood, Texas 1st Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Hood 2nd Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Hood 3rd Brigade Combat Team (Armored BCT) at Fort Hood 41st Fires Brigade at Fort Hood (to reflag as DIVARTY, 1st Cavalry Division) Combat Aviation Brigade at Fort Hood
They all seem to be armoured except for one (3rd BCT 1st INF) so are all the BCTs the same except for which division they are attached too?
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 3, 2015 17:00:33 GMT -6
U S Brigade Combat Teams are classified as Heavy-Light-Stryker-Airborne-Airmobile.
We are currently in a period of transition, going down from four weaker brigades in a division to three stronger brigades. The 1st ID, 2nd ID, 3rd ID, 4th ID, and 1st AD will contain a mixture of heavy, light, and Stryker, in various configurations, no two alike. The 1st CD will have three heavies, the only one so configured. Everything else is light-airborne-airmobile.
For the most part today, division designations are honorifics, just keeping the name alive.
Don't believe all the wiki data. A lot of those scheduled for inactivations means the flag will go away, but the unit will stay under a different designation. Generally speaking when it is all said and done the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd brigades of each division will be flagged and active in that they mostly trace their histories to WWI and the birth of the division itself. The 4th brigades will disappear, either by real inactivation, or by reflagging them as one of the more senior brigades. In the U S Army the history follows the colors.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 3, 2015 17:47:24 GMT -6
U S Brigade Combat Teams are classified as Heavy-Light-Stryker-Airborne-Airmobile. We are currently in a period of transition, going down from four weaker brigades in a division to three stronger brigades. The 1st ID, 2nd ID, 3rd ID, 4th ID, and 1st AD will contain a mixture of heavy, light, and Stryker, in various configurations, no two alike. The 1st CD will have three heavies, the only one so configured. Everything else is light-airborne-airmobile. For the most part today, division designations are honorifics, just keeping the name alive. Don't believe all the wiki data. A lot of those scheduled for inactivations means the flag will go away, but the unit will stay under a different designation. Generally speaking when it is all said and done the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd brigades of each division will be flagged and active in that they mostly trace their histories to WWI and the birth of the division itself. The 4th brigades will disappear, either by real inactivation, or by reflagging them as one of the more senior brigades. In the U S Army the history follows the colors. Just for clarification. ID infantry division? A--armor, C-cavalry? What is Stryker? Airborne vrs Airmobile? Feel free to PM the answers if feel it would take the thread to far off subject.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 3, 2015 18:07:49 GMT -6
Simple answer and short.
1st line all correct
Stryker is a wheeled armored vehicle, crew two, dismounts nine. Airborne = parachute////Airmobile = configured primarily for helicopter mobility. Airborne and Airmobile are two specialized variations of light and on the ground they are all light.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Apr 3, 2015 19:57:13 GMT -6
Simple answer and short. 1st line all correct Stryker is a wheeled armored vehicle, crew two, dismounts nine. Airborne = parachute////Airmobile = configured primarily for helicopter mobility. Airborne and Airmobile are two specialized variations of light and on the ground they are all light. Thanks! Beth
|
|