Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: lazs2 on April 01, 2004, 01:36:12 PM
-
Was watching the History channel "wild west tech"...
In the 1860's or so.. A foraging party of soldiers and civilians left a Wyoming fort to gather hay for livestock and ran into a very large war party of indians.
The solddiers were armed with single shot rifles but one of the civilians, who was considered a marksman, was armed with a Henry lever action 15 shot and "hundreds" of rounds of ammo.
The indians attacked and the small band of about 25 defended from behind a temporary corral...
The civilian with the Henry reportedly killed or hit an indian every time he shot (at between 50 and 100 yards) He fired continuously from 0800 till like 1630...
When the hostiles were finally run off it is estimated that this one man killed between 275 and 400 indians!
I have never heard of a rifleman racking up such a score.
lazs
-
Chuck Connors would've kicked all their buttocks.
I'll have to keep my eye out for more of that "Wild West Tech" show. Is it a regular feature?
-
I saw that same episode. Out of 25 guys, 23 survived an all-day assault by what sounded like a thousand Indians.
275 people... that's a lot of shooting.
Btw, how is one of those reloaded? Looks like an ammo tube under the barrel... do you just drop more rounds into the front of the tube? Or do they go in at the receiver end of the tube, like a pump shotgun?
-
yep... the Henry was a 44 rimfire... like a big 22.
The plunger in the tube waspulled up toward the muzzle and then flipped over into a notch and the rounds were just dropped in like a modern tube feed 22.. ver fast and effective.
didn't they say the guy killed between 275-400 indians? seems amazing to me.
lazs
-
(http://www.emf-company.com/images3/1860-henry-rifle-blue-24.jpg)
Replica
-
Yeah, that looks like the same webpage pic I was looking at. Although those are chambered in .45, IIRC.
275 is the number that sticks in my head, lazs. But there was a qualifier, an "at least" or "or more" or something like that.
-
Do a little search in the web with words Simo Häyhä.
-
Originally posted by Staga
Do a little search in the web with words Simo Häyhä.
505 in a career is pretty damn impressive, but 275 in a day in just insane.
-
not if it was Mr. Black
he could do it
-
Way to kill them injuns.:aok
-
hey now... careful there pale-face :)
-
LoL the henry rifle! The first assualt rifle!
Interesting. Hopefully I will have cable in a month and can watch cool shows like this!
:)
-
Wow, why isnt this as famouus as Rourke's Drift?
-
What about Tom Horn
-
Originally posted by lazs2
In the 1860's or so.. A foraging party of soldiers and civilians left a Wyoming fort to gather hay for livestock and ran into a very large war party of indians.
The story is just a legend.
Only 270 Henry Rifles were produced in 1860 and none of those seen Wyoming.
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
The story is just a legend.
Only 270 Henry Rifles were produced in 1860 and none of those seen Wyoming.
Are you saying only 270 were produced in the one year 1860, or 270 in all the 1860s?
-
270 in 1860, 14,000 (1860-1866)
-
so these thousands of indians just lined up and formed an orderly queue while the 25 men shot them.
yah right.
"next!"
"oh darn, i need to reload, wait there a minute"
.
.
.
.
"next!"
-
Originally posted by gofaster
Chuck Connors would've kicked all their buttocks.
The Rifleman's weapon was "in actuality " an 1892 .44-40 Winchester carbine specially modified with a large loop and metal tab to turn his rifle into a rapid firing machine. It was fitted with a large loop lever that enabled it to be spun and cocked in a dramatic fashion. The trigger guard incorporated a screw that tripped the trigger every time the lever was closed.
(http://www.riflemanconnors.com/images/no_menace_lucas_rifle4.JPG)(http://www.riflemanconnors.com/images/sharpshooter_match.JPG)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Was watching the History channel "wild west tech"...
In the 1860's or so.. A foraging party of soldiers and civilians left a Wyoming fort to gather hay for livestock and ran into a very large war party of indians.
The solddiers were armed with single shot rifles but one of the civilians, who was considered a marksman, was armed with a Henry lever action 15 shot and "hundreds" of rounds of ammo.
The indians attacked and the small band of about 25 defended from behind a temporary corral...
The civilian with the Henry reportedly killed or hit an indian every time he shot (at between 50 and 100 yards) He fired continuously from 0800 till like 1630...
When the hostiles were finally run off it is estimated that this one man killed between 275 and 400 indians!
I have never heard of a rifleman racking up such a score.
lazs
Verry possible with that kind of rifle,
But his barrel would of been red iron hot shooting that long, I shoot rounds from a single shot rifle -civil war reenactor- 1 about every 2 mins or so, for about an hour or two, and I have to take hits -pretend to die- just to let the barrel cool off before I can hold it...
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Yes it must be Mr. Black.
You silly piece of euro trash have you ever had an original thought?
Or do you just use someone elses joke and think its funny the 1.000.000.00 time it is told.
Geez what a TARD:aok
-
Yeah and with a hot barrel the hamonics are way off so your accuracy goes dones the toilet.
Just makes it more incredible how he could kill so many of my ancestors.
-
Originally posted by LAWCobra
Yeah and with a hot barrel the hamonics are way off so your accuracy goes dones the toilet.
I think your keyboard must be overheating.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I think your keyboard must be overheating.
Do you even know what barrel hamonics are?
Or are you by showing us your ignorance again trying to wow us with your wit.
-
Originally posted by LAWCobra
What about Tom Horn
http://www.geocities.com/vanpatten.geo/thorn.html
-
Thx Bigsky.
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
The story is just a legend.
Only 270 Henry Rifles were produced in 1860 and none of those seen Wyoming.
Lazs said in the 1860's, not in 1860.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
Lazs said in the 1860's, not in 1860.
Don't wanna split the hair, but there was no such battle.
-
I still think Carlos Hathcock's mission into the enemy camp to take out the commander has to be the all-time greatest feat by a sniper. Took him about 3 days or so to get into position to get an 800 yard shot. Got in and got out without being detected.
-
Originally posted by LAWCobra
Just makes it more incredible how he could kill so many of my ancestors.
your indian too? what nation/tribe?
Im comanche
-
Originally posted by WilldCrd
your indian too? what nation/tribe?
Im comanche
I've figured it out!!! This guy is John Kerry, a different person every day of the week!!!
-
I'm Cherokee.
I look german, but I def. feel my indian blood.
-
Originally posted by Hawklore
I'm Cherokee.
I look german, but I def. feel my indian blood.
What do you mean by that? How do you feel it?
-
Originally posted by WilldCrd
your indian too? what nation/tribe?
Im comanche
I am German Jew scottish and cherokee.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I've figured it out!!! This guy is John Kerry, a different person every day of the week!!!
LOL and yer just a B(>)(<)B
-
Back in the day there was lots of stories made....
It really doesn't sound to me like some ~500 indians couldn't have made short job of 25 men, after all they most likely had bows and various kinds of hand to hand weapons.
Unless these guys were in a bunker with firing slits and no way to smoke them out.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Back in the day there was lots of stories made....
It really doesn't sound to me like some ~500 indians couldn't have made short job of 25 men, after all they most likely had bows and various kinds of hand to hand weapons.
Unless these guys were in a bunker with firing slits and no way to smoke them out.
Hell son all they had to do was circle the wagons.
Aint you ever seen a wetern movie Geez:aok
-
Err, Fishu, I can't tell whether you're being sarcastic or not.
But a lot of the indians were just as well armed as the settlers out there.
-
Weird!
I'll have to look that show up.
Sounds like they have mixed the wagon box fight (Wyoming) up with the hayfield fight (Montana) Both were in 1867.
Wagon box was vs several thousand Indians and the defenders had several repeating rifles.
Hayfield was vs several hundred Indians and had no repeating rifles, just copper cartridge breach loaders.
Whites lost only 4 to 6 people (depending on source) in both fights.
-
definetely a veteran ww2ol player that man.
-
The Henry would have used black powder and needed many cleanings during firing, at least cleaned once every 10 - 15 shots. They probably had cleaning bullets to scrape out the fouling in the barrel, which would have been considerable, and caused dangerous pressures because of reduced barrel diameter.
However seems like the action itself would be gunked up as well after many firings. I've never heard that the Henry was bad about jamming, which testifies to its fine craftsmanship.
It did have one flaw I believe, in that the magazine tube beneath the barrel had a viewing slit, so the shooter could see how much ammo was left. I may be mistaken about this, but if true, it would allow dirt into the magazine.
I've read that due to the nature of the Henry's construction, with its (brass?) receiver and great usage of metal parts throughout, it got very hot to handle after a few shots. Some of those Henry shooters in combat would keep a bucket of water handy to dip the barrel into to cool it off a bit.
The centerfire falling block Sharps appeared in 1873 as an Army weapon and was in use for 6 months, when it was replaced by the Winchester '73. Bear in mind smokeless powder was not to be invented 'til the 1880s, so even the '73 would have used black powder.
Lots of smoke and heat and probability of ammunition "cooking off."
Les
-
I am clearly the all time most deadly marksman.
122 kills in Unreal Tournament, Onslaught, in just 25 minutes of play.
Don't mess with me! You're risking a head-shot or worse.
-
Originally posted by Capt. Pork
I am clearly the all time most deadly marksman.
122 kills in Unreal Tournament, Onslaught, in just 25 minutes of play.
Don't mess with me! You're risking a head-shot or worse.
Except you died few times over during the course :D
-
so these thousands of indians just lined up and formed an orderly queue while the 25 men shot them.
Was thinking the same thing... 25 men would get overrun badly vs 1000 indians hehe....
-
That's true, unless they used psychology.:) With those repeating rifles, they may have made the Indians think either there were more than 25, or could have been the Indians didn't all attack at once...may have been intimidated by the fire rate, especially if there were several Henrys there.
This reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode where the guys in the tank go back in time to the Little Big Horn. They were wondering how they could have changed the battle using the tank. Man that was a good show!
Les
-
Ambrose's book Crazy Horse and Custer : The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385479662/qid=1080896668/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-2178499-0434211?v=glance&s=books)
is an excellent reference on Indian tactics and fighting, and even a few losses on a raid was considered extremely excessive.
The Indians allowing themlseves to take those kind of losses against a fixed position without taking flight sounds fanciful indeed.
Tronsky
-
Depends on the Indians. There were Cherokee Confederates who ambushed a Yankee column in Bishop's Pass, Tennessee 1862. They fired a volley from their muskets, and threw them down, and attacked the Union column with knives and spears, and they killed a lot of Union troops and even took scalps.
Cherokee Indians are considered fierce warriors. Right up there with the Creeks when it comes to war.
Les
-
Study up on Chief Joseph's excellent leadership and tactics of the Nez Perce in their retreat from Wallowa. The manuever is still studied at US Army War College and West Point.
Another little known but important battle is the Modoc War of 1873.
Under the leadership of Kentipoos, or Captain Jack, about 70 Modocs held off the US Cavalry for several months by using a lava bed as a natural fortress.
It is the only time a US General officer was killed in an Indian campaign. (Custer was a LT Col when killed) and due to Captain Jack's tactics it was the most expensive cavalry campaign in history.
-
maybe it was Montana. I am going by seeing the show one time. They were talking about Wyoming earlier so I might have gotten em mixed up. Anyone see the show that recalls?
2 bighorn.. I don't know what year but it was not 1860. Do you have any info that would debunk the History Channel story?
Black powder guns were sticky and messy and fouled barrels but the 44 rimfire was a low powered round with less fouling than most.... seems about perfect for the task as shown. not much fouling and light recoil.. fireing from cover behind logs... easy reload. The biggest problem would have been if the extractor tore the soft rim on the rimfire round. Can't imagine the rounds cooking off if say even 300 rounds were fired in 8 hours.
curval...I have no doubt that if they hadn't killed those indians that they would not have been arrested by said indians and fined or imprisoned. Indians were very unpleasant to captives. noble or not.
Mrbill... do you have info on the 'hayfield fitght'? That sounds more like it... There were like 25 guys of which about a half dozen were civilians armed with civilian rifles... might have been more than one henry in the bunch. They were gathering hay in order to feed the livestock at the fort. What indians did they run into?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Maniac
Was thinking the same thing... 25 men would get overrun badly vs 1000 indians hehe....
Look up Rorkes Drift battle, something like is possible given western technoligical and tactical superiority combined with fixed defenses.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Look up Rorkes Drift battle, something like is possible given western technoligical and tactical superiority combined with fixed defenses.
I believe that battle is still re-enacted today, for the general public's education.
-
Here, there's a big to do about Choctaw Indians. They want to be recognized as American Indians, as part of the southern Indians. We call em ******s, but they are bad news, anyway you look at them. Seriously doubt they are legitimate Indians.
They want casinos and money. Did you know here in Alabama, an Indian doesn't need a hunting or fishing license?
Les
-
was this the "wagon box" fight? 1868? oh wait, lasz mentioned the haystack fight....coulda been that one. Both occurred during the combined sioux / cheyenne / arapahoe effort to close a string of US forts being built in thier territory. They won BTW. the forts were abandoned, and for a little while their lands were safe. Red Cloud then went "peaceful" afterwards.
Read "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" for some details.
I believe the numbers were somewhat fanciful, but thats just my opinion. Red Cloud had some 5000 warriors at his disposal during this war, laying seige to 2 forts and racking up the biggest massacre up until Little Bighorn. The Fetterman massacre cost the US army 101 men. I seem to recall a story that a youngster named Crazy Horse was involved in laying the trap.
Anyway....at Adobe Walls, Texas, a fellow with a sharps performed a pretty amazing feat, killing a large number of the attacking comanche at a range of out to 1000 yards.
-
Ok.. got this from a quick searh..
"The Indians struck on 1 and 2 August at both Fort Phil Kearny and Fort C. F. Smith. Some 500 Cheyennes caught 30 civilian hay cutters and soldier-guards two miles from the latter post on 1 August. The soldiers, sheltered in a log corral, shot the first rush of men to pieces. Only one warrior made it to the barricade and he was shot dead. The Cheyennes set the grass afire, but the flames stopped 20 feet short of the logs, 'as thoght arrested by supernatural power', one of the defender said. The smoke blew back on the Indians, who used it to retrieve their 20 dead or wounded warriors.
The Indians had been stung badly in the six-hour Hayfield Fight, when a dozen civilians and 20 soldiers fought off odds of at least 20-to-one for six hours. (9) "
This sounds like the fight as the History channel did say that the indians were massed and attacking several forts at the sme time.. The smoke and fire would explain a lot of the inability of the indians to mass an attack... 6 hours of shooting from cover at indians in the open would explain the slaughter. No rifle would be too stressed firing 2 or 300 rounds in 6 hours and no chance of ammo cooking off. The first rush killed 20... that left 5 or more hours to shoot the rest.
lazs
-
Originally posted by LAWCobra
Do you even know what barrel hamonics are?
Or are you by showing us your ignorance again trying to wow us with your wit.
Ignorance is wit.
I wonder if you heard a distinctive 'whoosh' sound passing over your head.
let me help...
You see, you were commenting on heat throwing off accuracy. In the midst of your thread were numerous mistakes. So I wondered if your keyboard was getting hot. See? It's kind of a play on words thing. A joke.
Get it?
-
Well I find you offensive MT, and that ought to be good enough for you.
Les
-
Here are two links that briefly describe both fights.
Sorry I posted the weaponry backwards in my first post.
As you can see the story's differ somewhat, as do most of the accounts of the Indian fights. Even the official army records are thought to be, ummmm enhanced, when it comes to most of the fights.
To bad no one had the foresight to ask the Indians, and record their take.
We will never know how many Indian dead there truly were in any fight, but "most" accounts, that are considered accurate, (to some extent) claim some 60 or so dead. Even the large scale fights (Custer, Fetterman, Rosebud et el) that Indian people did talk about afterwards seem to indicate that the Indians would withdraw somewhere between 50 and 100 dead.
http://home.hiwaay.net/~dbennett/tiowhaug.html
http://www.annebell.com/Bighorn.htm
-
This thread is garbage.
Laz i dont blame you for starting this thread as I dont think you had the intention of it turning into a big racism festival.
Thumbs down to this thread and a few who posted in it.
-
It's not that bad loser. If you responded, you know it has to be stupid. Don't worry about it.
Les
-
Originally posted by Leslie
Well I find you offensive MT, and that ought to be good enough for you.
Les
WTF?
:confused:
-
MT, I think you're an bellybutton and that's all there is to it.:)
Les
-
Okee Doke.
Thanks for sharing.
-
You're welcome. Scumbag:D
Les
-
MT
Don't feel bad, I like ya!
...
Did I miss the racism part in this thread? Or is having a discusion about a guy shooting American Indians that attacked him racist now?
-
Sorry Goat, maybe im a little too sensitive. I just dont like hearing about "Indians"(I dont like that word) being refered to as "cannon fodder." (no one said that, but please.)
I also am pretty sure what Lesie was trying to type when it came up as "******"
I am ashamed enough what happened in my country to native people, let alone what happened in the South.
Goat were they really attacking? Or were they defending. :(
-
Loser
No doubt what we did to the indians was bad, but they had their moments as well as I understand it.
No sense getting upset about this in anycase since we are not sure if it is true and all.
I think over all the US had made up for her bad deeds in good ones.
-
My Dad had some experiences with racism when he was a boy of 10 years old. This was back in the 30s on a rural country road, when his friends ambushed two Negro boys and threw potatos at them. Now that may sound funny to you, but my dad at the time was very concerned because he figured the other boys were trying to hurt the nigs, trying to hurt them bad with potatos, which were hard as rocks and could have hurt bad. I think he started walking away and the other boys went along with him. I asked him if those boys would have killed, and he said yes he thought they would if they could. Those were extremely violent and racist boys. Not like any we see today.
This was back in 1917 or so.
Les
-
Should I continue to try and fugure out where I went wrong in our relationship Leslie? I mean, You've called me an bellybutton and a Scumbag, and Offensive. I wonder why?
I don't recall once calling you anything derogatory or mentioning that Leslie is a girly name.
-
I think you're a **** disturber MT, with the religion thread "Debunking Christianity." You should be ashamed of yourself, and maybe me too, for getting upset about it. No one benefits from it, so leave it here and please don't do it again.
Now you know.
Calling you a scumbag was entirely out of line. I don't think you're a scumbag.
And Leslie is not a girly name.:D
Les
-
hmmm....Leslie, you seem to be quite ate up ;) But I think i see your view, its just too far off line with most of this thread for me to understand why you are pointedly attacking MT
Those guys were ATTACKED and defended themselves. This was war, in the minds of both sides. We're not talkin about a Sand Creek massacre here. It was a battle that went wrong for the home team.
Native Americans deserve respect, Blacks deserve respect, everyone else too. Hugging that tree will not help them. I love the history of that period, and I cheer that the outnumbered white guys beat off the attack. I also cheer that in the N.A.'s eventually threw them out. Red Clouds war has got to be one of the most interesting stories of that time, and both sides killed people on the other side.
As for the South .....yes, issues there are regrettable. Trying to bury those issues under an umbrella of silence will not help anyone. There are plenty of things from our past to be ashamed of...but there are also plenty to be proud of. And its not a matter of race or culture....its OUR history, every one of us.
.
.
.
.
Soapbox vacated
-
MT may be a left-leaning, knee-jerk liberal...but he's OUR left-leaning, knee-jerk liberal.
His jabs at our expense are well-written, lucid, and often funny.
So stuff it Les.
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Look up Rorkes Drift battle, something like is possible given western technoligical and tactical superiority combined with fixed defenses.
Zulu Impi's were excellent fighting formations as demonstrated with the destruction of the british at Isandlwana.
But obviously the British armies technological/logistical advantage put paid to the Zulu's fighting ability in the long run.
Tronsky
-
They want casinos and money. Did you know here in Alabama, an Indian doesn't need a hunting or fishing license?
full blooded indians can hunt and fish any state they live in,, without any license and any time of year,,i dont think thats a bad price for taking there country from them
Sorry Goat, maybe im a little too sensitive. I just dont like hearing about "Indians"(I dont like that word) being refered to as "cannon fodder."
every man was cannon fodder back in those days,,doesnt matter what race you was,,look at pickets charge,,eeeeek,,talk about guys being cannon fodder<~~part indian my self,,only a quarter Cherokee,,my granny was full,,but i didnt see anything really offensive in this thread,{besides a few peoples remarks and attacks},just people talking about a battle,,and a very cool one indeed,,25 people able to hold them off is impressive,,lots of wild battles in the west,,impressive and repulsive ones on each side
-
Sometimes you don't need weapons.
Tecumseh and a few hundred of his Shawnee warriors with some face paint ,war cries and running in and out of the bush alot, they scared General Hull and his garrison of two thousand men into surrendering at Fort Detroit in 1812.
top that!
-
well... war is war. I don't care who is attacking you and trying to kill main and torture you... it is best to kill as many of them as possible.
The story would be the same to me if it were attacking Germans in WWII or japs...
Still... I think a lot of people have a PC kneejerk reaction when anything that doesn't portray the indians as noble, good and brave and non polluting is mentioned. The indians slaughrtered each other and tortured people... they polluted the land and then left when they used it up... if it weren't for the fact that they weren't advanced enough to keep thier birth rate up they woulda polluted the whole country given time.
I didn't realize their were so many indians on this BB tho... you all out to get together and build a casino... or hire an Itallian guy to do it for you.
Most of the land "taken" from the indians was bought... yep.. maybe the person selling it didn't have the right to do so but it was bought. The indians regularly took each others land by force... we just did a better job. the indians slaughtered families in their "villages" we just did a better job. The indians trapped out and hunted out areas... we just did it more quickly because of greater numbers and better tools.
but... I guess the History Channel was full of it... Wouldn't be the first time. Wonder how many of the ATTACKERS he did kill tho?
lazs
-
The history channel is owned by the pale faced dogs.
-
UGH, My brother Sniper Cobra has spoken wise words.
LOL
-
Hey what ya got in that peace pipe anyways LOL:aok
-
well.... I was an indian on the last home equity loan form I filled out...
does that mean I can hire some itallians to build me a casino? Maybe I will settle for selling cheap cigs or off season salmon?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
well.... I was an indian on the last home equity loan form I filled out...
does that mean I can hire some itallians to build me a casino? Maybe I will settle for selling cheap cigs or off season salmon?
lazs
No mayby you could enjoy the fine living offorded to the american indian on the reservations.
You ever been to a reservation ? I mean a real one not the ones all prettyed up for the public.
Oh yeah you can get hooked on fire water and kill your liver too.
Yep those Injuns are livin the high life.
-
I would not live on a reservation.... but maybe that's just me.
lazs