Cavalry in Twilight 2000

[irishboy]

This might take the conversation in a new direction, but I would think that as far as a mounted infantry version of cavalry goes, riding a bicycle would be superior to horseback in many situations.

First, minimal extra training. Most of the soldiers would be familiar with bicycles from childhood.

Second, significantly less specialized gear needed. And what is needed is often light weight and bike-portable.

Third, easier maintenence. Especially when you consider all the tangential apects of 'horse maintenence' like a breeding program, training the animals for combat, and feeding a large number of large & hungry animals.

Fourth, compare speeds & daily travel rates. A soldier on horseback has a significant short term speed advantage, but over a daylong march, probably covers 2 to 3 times as much ground as he would on foot. A soldier on a bicycle is slower in a the short term, but still faster than on foot. Over a full day of travel though, bicycle troops could travel up to twice as far as mounted troops.

I did a few quick minutes of research and found this site:
http://www.ultimatehorsesite.com/info/farandfast.html

It seems legitimate. Estimated average top speed of a horse 30 mph (48 km/h). It also lists daily distance traveled by cavalry troops (in a race) to be 60 miles (96 km).

Judging from my own experience, most people would be able to reach a max speed of 20 mph (32 kph) on a bicycle, but should be able to cover over 100 miles (160 km) total over an 8 hour day.

Another link: http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/u...ent/index.html

I'll be the first to admit, a bike trooper would not be a trained and conditioned cyclist like a Tour De France rider, but I think it gives a good basis for comparison. A quick check through a handful of stages shows that they typically travelled 180-200 km per day. Most of the winning times (for just that day) were in the neighborhood of 4h40mins to 5h. Even considering the difference in fitness, allowing an extra 3h time to finish seems very reasonable.

End of my thoughts on the subject. And I won't take credit for this idea. I recently reread the Emberverse series by S.M. Stirling. Post-apocalyptic, with strong elements of fantasy that grow throughout the series. But he does try to make the situations as factually-based as the setting allows. And bicycle cavalry vs. horse cavalry is a recurring question in the various novels.

[Panther Al]

All very good points, and by and large correct, though I think comparing the TDF to anything a soldier could do is a bit more of a stretch than you think, just my opinion. But the one advantage that horse has over bike is load. Horses simply carry more. And you can always hook a couple of horses to a wagon for bulky supplies - rickshaws don't count the same - that would demand the addition of trucks to a bike unit. That said, I can very easily see the presence of large numbers of bikes in units for those reasons as mentioned in the post, but they wouldn't be in the cavalry role that horse units would.

[Matt W]

Bicycle cavalry in WW1


http://www.canada.com/story_print.ht...8ee33&sponsor=

The mention of Baden-Powell and his kite photography is also interesting. Who needs a UAV?

[Webstral]

Although I hate to hasten the end of the world by agreeing with Leg six or more times in a single 12-month period, I have to agree with him about the effects of the war on horses. 1998 is going to be very tough on anything with a pound of meat on its bones, even if we ignore the effects of nukes and chemical weapons on horse stocks in Europe. The western US will get off fairly lightly, and so the capture of wild mustangs might be practical. (Who gave me that idea? Thanks, whoever it was.) Between the Irish Sea and the Urals, though, the horse population is going to take a real beating.

There’s nothing wrong with having a few cavalry units. I just tend to agree with all the posters who argue that cavalry units in Europe will have to wring the maximum utility out of the horses that are available. Also, cavalry might be restricted to fairly small units (like 4-12 CAV). A so-called cavalry division might have only a couple of hundred cavalry troopers. The rest (the support types) might use light vehicles or bicycles.

I seem to remember a thread on bicycle use. The Japanese made tremendous use of them on the Malay Peninsula in 1942. With very little modification, bicycles can be used to pull carts and small trailers, thus being transformed into cargo haulers. This is how most civilian traffic moves between Sierra Vista and Tucson by 2001. During the summer, a rider starts one leg at first light. The return trip is started as late in the day as the length of trip and light will allow.

Webstral

[Abbott Shaull]

The Soviets would probably expand their Cavalry units into Divisions, (Brings back Corps (OMG)), and Armies to be use for internal security much like the Germans used it Cavalry Division on the Eastern Front. By 1998 I can see more and more of these units being used in front line areas due to the lack of replacement vehicle in many of the Armor and Mechanized Division as they start merging the units.

I for one never bought into the fact that so few Divisions had be merged with other units or disbanded to bring other units up. Also I see the Soviets reverting back Brigades and Corps for Tanks and Mechanized forces after Early 1997 due to losses they had suffered on both Fronts and bring in pure Infantry (Rifle) Division and Armies back into style with towed artillery in support of these unit to hold the front, keeping the Tank, Mechanized, and Cavalry Brigades and Corps for here they plan on striking for their break through much like how they fought WWII against the Germans.

Just some thoughts on the Pact side. Also it was interesting that Hungary, and many of the the Pact member to the South rarely had few of the Tank Divisions and Heavily Motorized Divisions and even Hungary had revert their Divisions into Brigades before the end of the Cold War.

On the NATO side, by the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall, very few nations other the US, UK, France, and Germany had anything that represented a Divisional size level organization except on paper. Even the the French and the UK Divisions had been argued to be little more reinforce Brigades Groups depending on who article you were reading.

As for Lancers Polish had tradition going back to WWII even if it was part truth and forklore of taking on German Armor Cars. Another place I would think a lancers would be seen in PA State Guard, they had during the Civil War several Regiments that had carried Lances, they weren't used much, but like Polish Cavalry of WWII, it help make the unit meld into effective unit.

Like I said after late 1998, I can see more and more units on NATO going to find and build a horse mounted units. Even units fighting in South West in the US will start to converting units to horse mounted. In all cases they would operate as a mixture of Mounted Infantry in that they fight dismounted with limited support weapons, and traditional Cavalry mission of eyes and ears of their parent unit. In many, cases these units would go out and find enemy position and keep an eye on them while all along trying to to get spotted themselves. I see more US units being converted due to the non-existent supply chain by 1998.

The only reason I don't see many of the US Division being merge with other is influx of cannon flodder into each Division own Infantry Replacement Depot from other service members being pushed into them and limited local recruiting.

Just some thoughts...

[Legbreaker]

As has been mentioned before, yes it's good practise to try merging under strength units in the absence of reinforcements, however there are three very important requirements to meet before this can take place.
Time, Opportunity, and Fuel.
Without all three of these factors being available in plenty, it's just not possible.

[Abbott Shaull]

With the Soviet operation system it wasn't much about opportunity or time. Fuel would be limited factor too.

OT I guess the Osama Bin Laden is dead...and the US has the body...WOW.

Back to it: In the way the Soviets operations are carried out you get supplied once before you leave for offensive or if you on the front line of defensive. During Offensive Operations once a unit is spent another unit is pushed through it to take up the offensive. Behind the next echelon is another one to take over. Behind all echelon is enough transportation and supply units and maintenance units. The supply bring up ammo and fuel, maintenance fixing what ever they need to rebuild units that have been passed.

If there isn't enough troops and equipment left in these units will be merged with the remain of the units they had previous passed through or those that had just passed through them when the next Echelon has moved to forward edge of battle. So for Soviet it would be second nature, especially considering their involvement in China for up to Year before fighting in Europe started.

[Legbreaker]

We know units were stripped of equipment which was then transferred to other units. My guess is those receiving units were on the front line (or near to it) at the time.
We also know by looking at the SOV 10th TD that personnel were also stripped, leaving little more than a cadre of officers and NCOs which were supposed to absorb and train several thousand Kazakh conscripts. Many of these deserted even before reaching the 10th with more disappearing soon after. By Winter of 2000 only a few dozen were left.
I'd imagine many units were treated similarly during the course of the war.

[bobcat]

the US does have a small breeding program located at Fort Sill. other units may also have informal horsemanship programs. by the 90's its is probable that most US special forces have their own horsemanship and breeding programs to support their operations.

also Mules will likely be used more than horses to transport material. and in some cases men. while they are slower than horses the amount they can move is much higher thereby allowing a mule unit to move more supplies faster than an equally sized horse unit.

[Targan]

James, I just thought of an appendix you could include in your PDF for cavalry operations in Thailand, Vietnam and some other parts of SE Asia and the Sub-Continent - elephant-mounted forces! Not as easy as horses to obtain, train, care for and feed but imagine the shock value. And it's a damn sight harder to shoot a mahout's mount out from under him than a horse cavalryman's.

Granted, it's a limited geographic area that elephant cavalry could be found in, but there have been a few discussions over the years about campaigns set in SE Asia. Imagine a group of foot or truck mounted infantrymen facing down a troop of the Royal Thai Elephant Cataphract Corps! I'd be fetching my brown trousers.

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by Targan

James, I just thought of an appendix you could include in your PDF for cavalry operations in Thailand, Vietnam and some other parts of SE Asia and the Sub-Continent - elephant-mounted forces! Not as easy as horses to obtain, train, care for and feed but imagine the shock value. And it's a damn sight harder to shoot a mahout's mount out from under him than a horse cavalryman's.

Granted, it's a limited geographic area that elephant cavalry could be found in, but there have been a few discussions over the years about campaigns set in SE Asia. Imagine a group of foot or truck mounted infantrymen facing down a troop of the Royal Thai Elephant Cataphract Corps! I'd be fetching my brown trousers.

Now that will be a mammoth task to research...

[WallShadow]

Originally Posted by James Langham

Now that will be a mammoth task to research...

A mammoth _tusk_ to research?
No doubt you'd come away with a trunk full of data!

[Canadian Army]

Originally Posted by Targan

James, I just thought of an appendix you could include in your PDF for cavalry operations in Thailand, Vietnam and some other parts of SE Asia and the Sub-Continent - elephant-mounted forces! Not as easy as horses to obtain, train, care for and feed but imagine the shock value. And it's a damn sight harder to shoot a mahout's mount out from under him than a horse cavalryman's.

Granted, it's a limited geographic area that elephant cavalry could be found in, but there have been a few discussions over the years about campaigns set in SE Asia. Imagine a group of foot or truck mounted infantrymen facing down a troop of the Royal Thai Elephant Cataphract Corps! I'd be fetching my brown trousers.

In Challenge #52; Going on Safari it has the following unit:

1st Alternative Cavalry Regiment
This unit was formally organized in May of 2000. What makes it unique is that instead of relying on tanks and APCs for transportation, members of the first rides elephants. The elephants, originally belonging to the Bishop Brothers Circus, were set free in Bellingham, Washington in late 1999 when the crew and performers fled into the countryside. Many of the animals died in the interning months. Roberts found the elephants grazing in a field in April and rounded them up with the aid of an infantry platoon subordinate to the 47th Infantry Division. In May Roberts went to the divisional HQ with his idea for an elephant-borne "cavalry" unit-and was surprised to find his idea readily accepted. Roberts was given command of the 1st Alternative Cavalry Regiment. Including leaders, the regiment consists of 45 members (20 Veteran, 15 Experienced and 10 Novice NPCs).

[Lundgren]

Interesting thread

There was a comment about the problem of maintenance of bicycles. But with so many other things, it is when you look at the modern variants. Something like this tend to keep working http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_military_bicycle but it is sure not as fun to use as a more modern one. The royal guard regiment was just getting rid of them back in 1992. But there was still a few that we could borrow, to get to a supermarket nearby, if we had some free time.

They were used back in the days for infantry units, and they trained to be towed behind a tractor or a work horse. Basically the same tactics used by our northern brigades to tow infantry on skis during winter.

Might be a good option for infantry units working together with cavalry units.