Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons... Something more...

Expand Messages
  • Tom Mix
    Nor is the often felt notion that the Poles were stupid and backward accurate. The attack was supported with available modern ordinance. True, the Lancers
    Message 1 of 23 , Apr 1, 2004
      Nor is the often felt notion that the Poles were "stupid" and "backward"
      accurate. The attack was supported with available modern ordinance.
      True, the Lancers were outmoded but there was a reason for the attack
      but there was also a logical reason for its failure.
      Tom Mix

      -----Original Message-----
      From: John Beatty [mailto:jdbeatty.geo@...]
      Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 10:07 AM
      To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Real Cavalry VS Real Dragoons...
      Something more...

      >The last cavalry charge in Europe, that I know of,
      was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
      in 1939.

      WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
      German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
      by howitzers. The romantic vision most of us have
      from that incident ain't quite right.

      =====
      _________________________________
      John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
      AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
      "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"

      __________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway
      http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/




      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • James L. Choron
      Mike, Being a Texan, I m fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry, both United States
      Message 2 of 23 , Apr 2, 2004
        Mike,
         
        Being a Texan, I'm fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry, both United States regular troops and Texas Rangers, broke up charges by lancers and compeltely routed them, even though outnumbered significantly, simply because the Rangers and U.S. troops were armed with pistols.
         
        I can see where the 6th would take lances, because there was no other option, but I can't see them choosing that weapon as a "first choice". I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once better weapons came available.
         
        Jim
      • NPeters102@aol.com
        In a message dated 4/2/2004 10:30:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@rol.ru writes: I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once
        Message 3 of 23 , Apr 3, 2004
          In a message dated 4/2/2004 10:30:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, lordjim@... writes:
          I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in service, once better weapons came available.
          Jim:
           
          The lances of the 6th PA Cavalry were exchanged for Sharps carbines prior to Gettysburg. Tom Smith of the unit wrote the following in a 2 June 1863 letter to his brother:
           
          "The regiment have turned in their lances and ordered carbines."
           
          The full letter is found in "We Have it Damned Hard Out Here" The Civil War Letters of Thomas W. Smith, 6th Pennsylvania Cavalry," edited by Eric Wittenberg.
           
           
          Sincerely,

          Mike Peters
          npeters102@...
        • jblake47
          One must also remember that the armament of the American Plains Indian consisted mostly of lance and bow. While there is a lot of discussion on this, it is a
          Message 4 of 23 , Apr 3, 2004
            One must also remember that the armament of the American Plains
            Indian consisted mostly of lance and bow. While there is a lot of
            discussion on this, it is a known fact that the Plains Indians were
            one of the best light cavalry ever produced in the world. One of
            the main reasons the Plains were the last to be conquered was
            because these horsemen could outfight the whites on most occasions.

            Inroads to the plains began in the southwest with the Texans moving
            into Apache and Commanche territories, somethings the Mexicans
            couldn't do. As they did so, they quickly found out that the
            armament they carried was inappropriate for the type of warfare the
            Indians capitalized upon. Once a single shot rifle or pistol was
            discharged, the person was unarmed for quite some time. In the
            meantime a well trained warrier could have as many as 3 - 4 arrows
            in the air at the same time. A definite advantage of firepower.
            The lance was the coup de gras to save arrows when the enemy had
            fired their weapon.

            The most significant change in plains warfare occured with the
            multiple round handgun. The Texas Rangers quickly found out that
            this weapon at least put them on equal footing with the superior
            weaponry of the Indian. Walker even went so far as to get his hands
            on as many revolvers that were available throughout the US,
            traveling east to collect as many as were available. He even
            designed one for specific use from the Colt Mfg company which was
            heavy enough to be used as a club when emptied.

            Only when the handgun was developed could the full use of cavalry be
            attained. This applied with the saber in Civil War combat and as
            time went on specialty handguns were developed to improve the life
            expectancy of the trooper. The LaMat was a classic example of such
            a weapon. It was too heavy to carry on a belt and had to be carried
            in a saddle holster. It fired 9 rounds of ball and a 20 guage
            shotgun round. This along with other side-arms began to change the
            tactics of cavalry operations. This was something that had been
            learned from the Texans the the earlier years dealing with the
            plains Indians. Off horseback, the shortened, repeating carbine
            held an advantage. The increase in firepower against mounted enemy
            again changed the face of the cavalry. The Lancers were on their
            way out as were the traditional saber armed troopers. Being mounted
            offered a quick manuvering ability, but until small, repeating
            weapons were developed, limited them the increased firepower of the
            enemy.

            Jeff

            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "James L. Choron"
            <lordjim@r...> wrote:
            > Mike,
            >
            > Being a Texan, I'm fairly up on the Mexican War. The reason I
            mentioned it was because I know of several instances where cavalry,
            both United States regular troops and Texas Rangers, broke up
            charges by lancers and compeltely routed them, even though
            outnumbered significantly, simply because the Rangers and U.S.
            troops were armed with pistols.
            >
            > I can see where the 6th would take lances, because there was no
            other option, but I can't see them choosing that weapon as a "first
            choice". I would also tend to wonder how long the lances remained in
            service, once better weapons came available.
            >
            > Jim
          • Mark Peters
            ... Don t patronise. War is not romantic, and if you have that vision ...
            Message 5 of 23 , Apr 5, 2004
              --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@y...>
              wrote:
              > >The last cavalry charge in Europe, that I know of,
              > was by the Poles in an attempt to halt German tanks
              > in 1939.
              >
              > WAYYY off topic...the Polish cavalry that attacked the
              > German panzers were heavy infantry on horseback backed
              > by howitzers. The romantic vision most of us have
              > from that incident ain't quite right.

              Don't patronise. War is not romantic, and if you have that
              vision ...
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.