"Infantry vs Cavalry" Topic

"Throughout the War for American Independence, infantry reigned as the primary martial arm of the conflict. Their principle weapon was the smoothbore musket, followed with the bayonet. A musket had an effective range of approximately eighty yards – meaning a fired musket ball would typically land somewhere on a man sized target at eighty yards.[1] A musket ball was slightly undersized so that during combat it would still easily fit down the barrel to facilitate quick loading, this was necessary because the barrels would quickly foul with black powder residue after multiple shots were fired. This meant the unpatched ball literally bounced and scraped its way down the barrel when fired: that last bounce would determine the ball's course to target. However, this under sizing allowed for quick reloading, a crucial element in single shot musket warfare, and a trained infantryman could fire three to four rounds a minute. Opposing forces of infantry would generally trade volleys with one another until one side or the other gained an advantage through attrition, terrain, frontage, or some other turn of event. Whichever side was at a disadvantage, would then typically withdraw, or suffer a bayonet charge. But, what would infantry do if charged by cavalry?The key to a cavalry charge was its momentum, derived through the speed of its horses. An average light dragoon horse weighed eight hundred pounds, and with trooper and kit aboard became a thousand pound missile that closed at over thirty miles an hour. However, a company, or battalion, of muskets was a fearfully destructive engine. They were essentially mobile artillery batteries spitting out land borne broadsides of one ounce lead round balls, with a muzzle velocity of around 1,500 feet per second.[2] When in proper range, any living thing on this planet would be cut down by the collective power of a formed infantry volley: which is why infantry fought in what we view today as stiff, mechanical formations…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

This is very much an explanation according to the laws of physics, there is of course an equally important mechanism in play thar is driven by psychology.

A good article. Thanks T.

A votre service mon ami!. (smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Assuming steady infantry, only flank or rear could succeed.

A later war, but consider the Union charges against the Texas brigade on July 2, or against Pickett's retreating division on July 3. The Texans were on broken ground and simply took cover behind boulders etc. and then shot the troopers after they had passed.

Based on the topic,I considered actions only during the American Revolution and not the ACW or war of 1812.
Still an interesting read.

"Assuming steady infantry, only flank or rear could succeed"

Could implies that the cavalry didn't have the capacity to break steady infantry. Given the more open formations that certain British units adopted during the AWI I think cavalry did have the capacity to succeed. What was lacking was an adequate number of horse to mount the effort and suitable terrain.

Glad you like it too my friend!.

Amicalement
Armand