|
Post by garyzaboly on Nov 19, 2010 16:10:16 GMT -5
I just made an experiment on this issue. In GOOGLE Books, I selected "19th Century" books only, after typing in DRAGOONS DISMOUNTED, and got over 40,000 hits. Reading just a few and perusing many dozens, I saw that cases of dragoons being dismounted in battle occurred in the UK and Europe and the U.S., from the time of Roundheads and Cavaliers to the Franco-Prussian War. Evidently they dismounted when required to perform in that manner, whether then-current tradition dictated it or not. I suspected this was the case, since it was the impression embedded into my brain over decades of readings.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck T on Nov 19, 2010 16:31:52 GMT -5
Gary: I know next to nothing about European cavalry, except that they during the period cited, seemed to have much more of a specialized role for each "type" regiment than the U S counterpart. To my limited knowledge of their affairs, the dragoon seems to be the most flexible. One knock on American cavalry (armored) in the modern era, say the last 70 years, has been the consistant complaint that there are never enough dismounts for the multitude of tasks at hand. As Herb has first hand knowledge of this, I think he will fully agree.
|
|
|
Post by garyzaboly on Nov 19, 2010 16:48:14 GMT -5
Relative to the specific discussion at hand, at Coleto Creek Urrea ordered his cavalry (he mentions dragoons elsewhere) to fight Fannin's square on foot, after a mounted charge had failed.
Texian participants also noted the Mexican cavalry fighting them on foot.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck T on Nov 19, 2010 18:06:31 GMT -5
If memory serves the Texians at Coleto Creek were in a square. Think that's true. Mounted charges against unbroken infantry did not work in Spain or a Waterloo. Maybe Urrea should re-take Cavalry Tactics 101. At least he adjusted and tried something else that obviously must have worked.
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Nov 19, 2010 18:34:12 GMT -5
Relative to the specific discussion at hand, at Coleto Creek Urrea ordered his cavalry (he mentions dragoons elsewhere) to fight Fannin's square on foot, after a mounted charge had failed. Texian participants also noted the Mexican cavalry fighting them on foot. Bravo!
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Nov 19, 2010 18:39:02 GMT -5
Alan: The Light Brigade 4th Light Dragoons 13th Light Dragoons 17th Lancers 8th Hussars 11th Hussars Heavy Brigade 4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards 5th Dragoon Guards 6th Inskilling Dragoons Scot's Greys (Formerly Scots Dragoon Guards) Are the 112th and 124th still alive in the 36th ID? No doubt the 26th Cavalry (PS) were the last to fight mounted, although I think that most of them fought in a dismounted mode, using the horse for a means of transportation. Once they got to Bataan I don't even think they did that. I will have to check my references. Again if memory serves the last horse mounted action of the U S Cavalry in any strength was during the Punitive Expedition, and I think the unit was the 11th Cavalry. There is a memorable part in the movie "They Came To Cordua" (spelling) that depicts this or a similar action. Decent flic. I think Mort Kunsler or someone did a print of this action also. Speaking about the border. I recently attended my 50th high school reunion. On the plane back to Colorado Springs from Dallas I was seated next to an Army pilot (LTC) assigned to Task Force North at Fort Bliss. We got to talking as soldiers do, and she was expressing her frustrations about the total scope of her mission. After listening to her I suggested that what you need is air cavalry. She said they have a squadron now and again but they are of little use beyond surveillance. I said no you need air cavalry, not what the Army now called air cavalry. I then explained to her what air cavalry used to be back in the day (1-9, 2-17, and others) a mixture of scouts, guns, and dragoons all within one troop. She looked at me in surprise and said that's exactly what we need. I thought to myself, a pox on Aviation Branch, and a very poor showing for history and institutional knowledge. Yes, the both regiments are alive and well--112th just got back from Iraq and the 124th went last year. The really good news is the 112th is no longer armor but a squadron again. Don't get me started on A-CAV and Blues Platoons. I think the 26th ended up eating their horses, IIRC. I love THEY CAME TO CORDOVA. One of the very few Punitive movies and a darn good one. So few have seen it and fewer still appreciate it. Good discussion, guys.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck T on Nov 19, 2010 19:29:19 GMT -5
Alan: Is "don't get me started" a negative or a positive? Their use was quite bad from what I understand in the old D Troops of the Armored Cavalry Squadrons. Quite a different story in the Air Cav squadrons. Some would argue though that it would have been better to group the 3 Blues platoons of the Air squadrons into a seperate dragoon troop for mission command purposes. Just don't know. I expect like everything else it depends on the situation.
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Nov 19, 2010 19:43:45 GMT -5
Alan: Is "don't get me started" a negative or a positive? Their use was quite bad from what I understand in the old D Troops of the Armored Cavalry Squadrons. Quite a different story in the Air Cav squadrons. Some would argue though that it would have been better to group the 3 Blues platoons of the Air squadrons into a seperate dragoon troop for mission command purposes. Just don't know. I expect like everything else it depends on the situation. I am pro Blues Platoon in concept (11D?), but almost every headache I ever had in the Cav was from the air troops.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Nov 19, 2010 20:47:28 GMT -5
I will have to check my references. Again if memory serves the last horse mounted action of the U S Cavalry in any strength was during the Punative Expedition, and I think the unit was the 11th Cavalry. The old 11th liked to claim that, but don't forget that portions of the 2nd Cavalry conducted a mounted pursuit at St Mihiel in WWI, andf there is some sketchy information that some portion of the 26th counducted a mounted attack in the Philipines - I seem to recall it was part of a delaying operation ... covering the withdrawl.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Nov 19, 2010 20:49:00 GMT -5
. I expect like everything else it depends on the situation. Or the Commander
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Nov 19, 2010 21:07:42 GMT -5
If memory serves the Texians at Coleto Creek were in a square. Think that's true. Mounted charges against unbroken infantry did not work in Spain or a Waterloo. Maybe Urrea should re-take Cavalry Tactics 101. At least he adjusted and tried something else that obviously must have worked. Cavalry did break infantry formed in lined at Quatra Bras nad there were a few occsions in Spain and elsewhere squares were broken, but they basically were freakish actions. Urrea actually did a pretty good job of tactics 101 at Coleto. using his cavalry to force the Texians to stop, deploy in square. then bringing his artillery up and threatened to blast the square apart if they didn't surrender. Check out Perryville. 1862, The 8th Texas Cavalry (Terry's Texas Rangers) broke a formed Union infantry line, that basically unhinged the Union defense on the left and began the Confederate drive on that portion of the field.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Nov 19, 2010 21:23:45 GMT -5
I personally would argue that the US Cavalry tradtion is indeed a Dragoon tradition - but not at all a mounted infantry tradtion (and yes I know that's how European Dragoons began life).
I may be wordsmithing and splitting hairs, but US Cavalry was never envisoned as riding to the battle and then fighting dismounted as infantry did. They were always envisioned as primarily a mounted arm that could fight dismounted as the situation dictated. The regiments of mounted rifles organized at different times were just the opposite, primarily foot organizations that rode to battle - but could fight mounted. The old 1st Cavalry and 2d Cavalry (today's 4th and 5th) were originally intended to be purely mounted regiments. But. as most of you know, because of limited funds and understanding, all of the mounted regiments eventually came to be pretty similarly equipped and used. And were reorganized basically as Dragoons, but called Cavalry, and renumbered based on senority right before the Civil War.
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Nov 19, 2010 21:50:36 GMT -5
I personally would argue that the US Cavalry tradtion is indeed a Dragoon tradition - but not at all a mounted infantry tradtion (and yes I know that's how European Dragoons began life). I may be wordsmithing and splitting hairs, but US Cavalry was never envisoned as riding to the battle and then fighting dismounted as infantry did. They were always envisioned as primarily a mounted arm that could fight dismounted as the situation dictated. The regiments of mounted rifles organized at different times were just the opposite, primarily foot organizations that rode to battle - but could fight mounted. The old 1st Cavalry and 2d Cavalry (today's 4th and 5th) were originally intended to be purely mounted regiments. But. as most of you know, because of limited funds and understanding, all of the mounted regiments eventually came to be pretty similarly equipped and used. And were reorganized basically as Dragoons, but called Cavalry, and renumbered based on senority right before the Civil War. I agree. Point is they had the option of dismounting and fighting on foot. A good point on the original 1st and 2d Cav, but they still carried the M47 carbine and formed by fours for dismounting purposes. I see what you are saying though.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck T on Nov 19, 2010 22:10:38 GMT -5
Agree with both of you sort of. Mounted infantry are not dragoons, any more than mechanized infantrymen are the same as cavalry dismounted scouts. I think the real difference though is not in the men or the mount, but in the mindset.
My take on the Quatre Bras thing is that Slender Billy's Belgians did not wish to fight men they had soldiered with under Napoleon a year or so before.
On the other hand there is Farnsworth on the last day of Gettyburg trying to overcome deployed infantry. I seem to remember that he holds two dubious titles 1) Youngest Brigadier to be killed in action and 2) Brigadier with the least time in grade to be killed in action. To give him due credit though, he did not want to do it but was ordered to do so by Buffoon in Chief Kilpatrick, and he died gallantly at the head of his men.
I think the 2nd and 26th are correct. The claim of the 11th is the last regimental size cavalry charge.
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Nov 19, 2010 22:40:14 GMT -5
Agree with both of you sort of. Mounted infantry are not dragoons, any more than mechanized infantrymen are the same as cavalry dismounted scouts. I think the real difference though is not in the men or the mount, but in the mindset. I think the Mounted Infantry an outgrowth from the dragoons. The difference would be MI would use the horses only for transportation and then fight as infantry (not dismounted cavalry) and dragoons kept the option of fighting mounted or dismounted depending upon the circumstances.
|
|