Tachankas

[simonmark6]

Another option would be to go the way of the light horse artillery that lasted until the First World War and still exists in ceremonial units. The artillery piece is attached to a two wheeled carriage called, I think, a limber. Two of the gunners would ride on the limber and four more on four of the eight horses that towed the limber and gun.

One rider would stay on the team and ride them to a safe distance and the gun and limber would be kept near each other as the limber carried ammunition.

Mounting guns on wagons should be fine as long as you move the horses away from close proximity to the firing.

[Mohoender]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

Another option would be to go the way of the light horse artillery that lasted until the First World War and still exists in ceremonial units.

Of course but the main advantage of the Tachanka is to provide mobile fire support even when on the move. With the light artillery you have to stop and deploy it. With the Tachanka, you simply put your support weapon in firing position, you can leave the position as needed (and you don't lose the equipment in the process), and it provides cover fire while you are on retreat as you still can fire it while moving (with highly reduce accuracy but covering fire nonetheless).

[simonmark6]

That is a possibility, but cavalry in the Twilight period is highly unlikely, in my opinion, to fight anything resembling a battle from horseback. The would, I think, be more likely to act as Dragoons, leaving their horses a safe distance behind the line and fighting on foot.

If this is the case anything fixed to a wagon would be a liability as it wouldn't be either man portable or more able to take the advantages of terrain. That leaves you with a weapon that's only really effective when you get ambushed and are trying to get away.

This would make them an interesting proposition for convoy escort duty, but in a combat unit, I'm not sure of their effectiveness. In essence they'd be like a very poor technical that would lack the speed to get out of the way once fighting started.

Light mortars that could be kept on wagons behind the lines might be a possibility, but I can't see direct fire weapons dashing around a battlefield pulled by horses being that effective.

[Mohoender]

That's exactly what it's all about. Tachankas were extensively used by the Red cavalry from 1920 up to the 1940's. These cavalries were in fact fighting as dragoon (cavalry charge are memories from the US civil war) but the main advantage of cavalry remain it's hability to conduct hit and fade tactics and to strike deep behind ennemy lines with little need for support. The weapon on the Tachanka is not directed toward the front, it is directed to the back. (Sorry I have tried to put pictures but it seems i can't do it for know, If someone can,please feel free, Kato we need you back, Heeellppp !!!!)

A cavalry unit of the time was about a third/quarter of an infantry division but it was designed to cover 70 miles a day if needed. In addition, the Soviets had very little means of support for these units much as it would be the case in T2K. As a result, most of the force was dedicated to combat with a single support company which mission was to provide everything necessary to feed and supply the unit.

In addition, the Soviets had no fuel and an insuficient number of armored car. Tachankas were then filling this role. The carriage was brought in support position before action and, then, provided heavier fire support to the troops. It still had the hability to get away as soon as the action was over and it had the hability to remain with the fighting force, as I said covering the retreat. Light artillery (and the like) were used in case of large scale actions, Tachankas were used for more limited but particularly anoying guerilla-like actions. And they proved highly efficient tools as they contributed to the defeat of the entire world. They were used with success against white russians, english, french, germans, americans, japanese, czech and poles. They were highly instrumental in bringing victory to the soviets. However, they proved highly ineffective if used for regular actions. There is no doubts about their efficiency as there are plenty of offical reports on them through military archives (Russian, French, British...). In the way it was fighting, the red cavalry was indeed fighting on foot, but it was getting as close as possible to its objective and horses were not left that far behind. Basically, they were rushed to the field, they were getting off horses and fighting on foot. Finally, they were quickly getting back on their horses before infantry reinforcements could arrive. It was a very risky tactic but it proved highly effective against hill prepared, understrength and carefully chosen objectives. Extensive recon before action was more than important and was conducted carefully (In a division, a full company was only dedicated to recon missions). Then, they had designed specific instruction/tactics to use these Tachankas (sorry I have no time to translate you the official instructions that I have stored in my own archives. I should go through at least 3 boxes of paper and 1500-2500 pages of archives to find about 60 pages and drawings on how to use them: official instructions from the soviet army in the 1920's). I'll do that sometimes but not now.

I know that plenty among us think of cavalry in T2K as being very unlikely but I don't share this view. Of course, you would not have cavalries numbering 10.000 horses but smaller units (100-2000 horses) should be around and not only among Russians. Actually, US might be more capable of building such units (and Americans are no more stupid than Russians). They would not be used to conduct large offensive but they would be effective recon units and perfect tool to put a mess within supply lines. In addition, in many area cavalry will be the only units that you could dispatch fast enough to support sensitive sectors.

Of course, civilians will start eating horses but what military leadership (even local) that remain will quickly put an end to this under the threat of death penalty (except if the commanding officer is a fool and an idiot). If I was a local commander in T2K I would rather kill civilians trying to eat horses, feed them to pigs and eat the pigs. It's even ecologically responsible and healthy (no risk with prion).

In fact, without cavalry, the Twilight War is simply over (IMO). You still have vehicles and armor but you lack the fuel for any significant action (not to talk of ammo and spare parts). Without horses, you are stuck were you are. Krakow OOB is a perfect exemple of what regular T2K OOB should be. You have a few tanks for emergency, most of them being pillboxes. You have a heavily defended perimeter forming a good stronghold. You have a few lighter armor for sensitive escorts. Most of the recon and daily supply work is conducted with horses (mules, donkeys, oxes...), however. You need horses to fill the gap and retain some mobility.

[Mohoender]

This well made report dates back to 1946 but I think it can give a good idea of what the soviets could do with cavalry even in T2K. Building such units would prove, however, more difficult than in WW2. Nevertheless, these tactics were still taught (as military history) in soviet officer school and the return of cavalry would be more in the tradition of the soviet army.

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/cavalry/index.html