weapons at the LBH Jul 11, 2013 7:24:25 GMT -5
Post by tunkasila on Jul 11, 2013 7:24:25 GMT -5
I guess the issue given below, will never be resolved.
'That extraction failure did occur is not debatable but it was not significant to the outcome of the battle.' Fox, Connor, Harmon.
An able summary of the causes of Custer's defeat is made by Major Godfrey as follows:
3. The defective extraction of the empty cartridge shells from the carbines of the soldiers, rendering them in many instances useless.
If only there was reliable first hand evidence. Charles DeRudio did mention something or other concerning weapons jamming but that was in ....1879, under oath. At an official inquiry. l may be wrong, but didn't Godfrey have something or other to do with 7th Cavalry?
HR you're cheating by not quoting what Godfrey wrote in full.
He actually stated, - 'The question has often been asked: ‘What were the causes of Custer’s defeat?’ I should say:…Third. The defective extraction of the empty cartridge-shells from the carbines…Of the third we can only judge by our own experience. When cartridges were dirty and corroded, the ejectors did not always extract the empty shells from the chambers, and the men were compelled to use knives to get them out. When the shells were clean no great difficulty was experienced. To what extent this was a factor in causing the disaster we have no means of knowing.'
He was right on that count because in fact the Scott/Fox work demonstrates that at worst the extractor failure was in the region of 4%. At that level, the Custer battalions, would've had a failure level of about 10 carbines. The Reno force would've been much the same so not a compelling reason for the defeat.