"Flying to the Little Big Horn?" Topic

"Lieutenant Colonel (Brevet Major General) George Armstrong Custer, the General who won against overwhelming odds in one of the most important fights in the Battle of Gettysburg, led the 7th Cavalry to the worst military defeat in the history of the U.S. Army at the Battle of the Little Big Horn. While this assessment is debated, one of the reasons for this was that his troops were carrying single shot breach loading carbines while his adversaries carried a variety of weapons, including repeaters. The Springfield single shot breach loader had problems, and the "Indians had superior firepower." At least a quarter of them had repeaters. In light of the large Indian numerical advantage, this was a lot of firepower. The disparity was made worse by the fact that Custer left his Gatling guns behind. The Army had selected a single shot breach loader over repeaters because of lower procurement and ammunition costs ("efficient use of ammunition"). They used less ammunition because they fired slower. In the 1860s, the 7th Cavalry had carried seven-shot repeaters. The senior surviving officer from the Battle of the Little Big Horn, Major Marcus Reno, said that "The Indians had Winchester rifles and the column made a large target for them, and they were pumping bullets into it." Within about 15 years, all modern armies had switched to repeaters. A key factor in the decision to procure a single shoot breech loader was that "Army appropriations were at an all-time low, and a key factor in the Springfield's favor was its low production cost."[1] Three years after the Battle of the Little Bighorn, all of the Springfield carbines were recalled and rebuilt.

This decision is eerily reminiscent of the new Air Force policy of procurement of fighter aircraft, apparently based largely on peacetime operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Worse still, the performance differences between the guns used at the Battle of the Little Big Horn were much less significant than the difference between the all 5th generation U.S. fighter force that was previously planned and what is now going forward in the Biden administration largely due to its defense cuts. There seems to be a large disconnect between the threat assessment and the objectives of procurement. Secretary of the Air Force Frank Kendall told Defense News that our goal should be to field the kinds of leap-ahead technologies that would "scare China." This is the right objective, but the new Air Force fighter program is unlikely to achieve this goal…"
Main page
link

Armand

This is one of the most moronic articles I've read in a long time. Custer didn't lose because he was enamored with technology or adherence to army doctrines, current or developing. He lost because he made some really stupid decisions after basically blinding himself to the information his scouts were providing him combined with a 19th century mindset about indigenous tribes that refused to believe that they could organize and fight on the level they did.

Custer was a bad commander on that day (regardless of any previous brilliance) and paid the ultimate price.

I'm not sure he was ever a good commander.
His past experience was that the Indians would run if they could. Surround them and attack with surprise to avoid that.
Don't give your presence away by using scouts. They wouldn't have been much use in previous battles anyhow.

There were way more indians than he assumed would be there. Most of the other failings are related. His forces were split up so he couldn't co-ordinate them. His approach was rushed because he was more concerned about surprising the indians than security.

Leaving the machine guns behind wasn't totally stupid. The approach was pretty tough terrain and the guns tended to get stuck.

Yes, agree with both posts. Custer may be made out to be "incompetent", regardless of his past. Albeit he was not that popular with many of his troops. However, on this day he made some very bad decisions and it cost him his life and those of many of his men.

Leaving the machine guns behind wasn't totally stupid. The approach was pretty tough terrain and the guns tended to get stuck.

The Gatling Guns were left in the supply/field trains. With the terrain there was really no place to put them in a support by fire position, etc. And like most artillery at that time. They were not that mobile per sa in closed terrain, etc.

The Indians had Winchester rifles

However from a tactical standpoint the US Army's single shot Springfield rifle vs. the repeating Winchesters, etc., gave Indians an edge. Note: not all of the Indians had rifles but many used the bow & arrow effectively. Plus the Indians used the terrain to their advantage, as it was "their backyard".

Some interesting things here link

Very good link Andy ! Thanks !!!

At this time it was usual to expect artillery to be unusable with a declination over 10 degrees.
Gatlings were classified as artillery.
So you could expect the guns to slow you down so much the indians were likely to spot you approaching. Once you get there you have to allocate men to drag em around so hou have less men.
Then you have to get the things down into the valley before they could shoot anything.
Always assuming they didn't get so hung up on the "trail" that you had to abandon them.
And you had to take less men because of limited horses.

All in all the feeling that gatlings were a liability understandable once you read up on the cavalry's recent practical experience with the things.

Yes, I and others I know agree and have said similar. The Gatlings were mounted on a standard type artillery carriage design. They were not that mobile, etc.

Custer's performance at Gettysburg may have saved the battle for the Union (and the Union as a whole). He was superb that day.

He did not plan on fighting the day of the battle. He was going to rest and wait for Terry's column. The army was only worried about the Indians running away. Tactics were based on that premise. The LBH is almost the exact opposite of most battles they fought.

He did lack knowledge of the ground, size of the camp and numbers of his enemy. Dividing your forces was all about preventing the Indians from escaping. They had not banded together in such numbers before or ever again. He also made some decisions that cost them dearly. But Reno and Benteen did not support him that day at all. Benteen hated his guts. Reno may have been intoxicated. I could do a deep dive into this but Custer was an easy scapegoat. He was certainly not alone in blame for this defeat.

Thanks

John

Yes, all that is not well known … but AFAIK is true.