When/how exactly did cavalry die out?

Halagaz

DrakonFin said:
That is in fact the insignia of the Häme Cavalry Regiment.

Like in this wartime memorial cross for the unit's soldiers:

P1150645.jpg
Click to expand...

For a neutral and temperate power, Finland sure has some weird and ominous insignia. A horseshoe, a Swastika and totally-not-Voldemort's-symbol on top...is this the SS Paranormal Division? Nah, just the Finnish cavalry.

Does the symbol with the deer skull(?) have some specific meaning or story behind it?
 

cpip

jimmygreen2002 said:
The captain in command of the green beret A team knew horsemanship in civilian life, but, IIRC, the test of his team - a dozen men? - picked it up as they went with major help from the locals.
Click to expand...

At least one book about an extended WW3 in the 1980s-90s proposed that after a couple of years of fighting, the NATO and WARPAC militaries would be reintroducing cavalry units out of desperate necessity in Europe as global supply chains broke down and vehicles couldn't be replaced or refueled easily.
 
DrakonFin

DrakonFin

Halagaz said:
Does the symbol with the deer skull(?) have some specific meaning or story behind it?
Click to expand...

The deer head/skull is apparently a symbol taken from the vision of St Hubertus, the patron saint of hunters. It is basically the same thing you can see on a Jägermeister bottle, even if the HRR version is somewhat more ominous. Some Finnish military units have this weird fascination with patron saints, even if their soldiers have traditionally been Lutheran.
 

Gannt the chartist

Stenz said:
The Nazis formed Cossack Cavalry units in 1943.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/XV_SS_Cossack_Cavalry_Corps

After the ACW most Cavalry units were in fact mounted infantry as opposed to true Cavalry fighting on horseback in the napoleonic sense. There were noted exceptions, obviously, but most rode to battlefield then dismounted to fight.

But the last mounted charge of WWII was in 1945, so saying that it was dead by the end of WWI is incorrect. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Schoenfeld
Click to expand...


False, the main distinction between British and every other cavalry in the world in 1914 was the British were mounted infantry and the others not. The German even provided jaeger bns to give infantry support to the charging cavalry.

The soviets into 45 used cavalry/mechanised groups in corps strength with horse mounted troopers and on occasion were perfectly content to charge home with the sabre - AGC map depot got that in 41.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Gannt the chartist said:
False, the main distinction between British and every other cavalry in the world in 1914 was the British were mounted infantry and the others not. The German even provided jaeger bns to give infantry support to the charging cavalry.
Click to expand...
Er, I'm pretty sure the British charged with the cavalry sword. That's why they introduced it.
 

Somedevil

US mounted Cavalry did a good job in the Philippians during WWII also the US used tons of Donkey's and other pack animals in Burma and other pacific locals and I feel they also used them in Italy??
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Gannt the chartist said:
Exception not the rule. The general training was as mounted infantry and equipment geared around that not mounted combat. Boer war experience.
Click to expand...
But the 1912 pattern cavalry sword is specifically designed for mounted charge action. British cavalry was flexible, yes, but that's an 1850s thing and all that changes is the balance.
 

RodentRevolution

Banned
Gannt the chartist said:
Exception not the rule. The general training was as mounted infantry and equipment geared around that not mounted combat. Boer war experience.
Click to expand...

Actually there was something of an enormous bunfight in the cavalry over that and while you are right the mounted infantry approach was dominant up to 1907 or thereabouts it swung back and forth with mounted action being somewhat in the ascendancy as of 1914. There were however in any given year plenty of advocates of both schools in positions of authority within the British Cavalry.
 
Alamo

Alamo

Saphroneth said:
False. WW1.
Click to expand...

And there have been successful bayonet charges in the past decade, but I think it's safe to say that the bayonet as a major factor in warfare has been dead for a long while. A few incidents in isolation don't change a general trend.
 
plenka

plenka

Banned
In my personal opinion, cavalry was kept on into WW1 because of technological limitations. Motor technology was not as developed, the cost of motorization was too high, road network was not what it would become in latter years. And, truthfully cavalry could and did play a important role, as a mobile reserve, mounted infantry and reconaissance units.
 

yulzari

Gannt the chartist said:
Exception not the rule. The general training was as mounted infantry and equipment geared around that not mounted combat. Boer war experience.
Click to expand...
Yeomanry cavalry regiments were trained as mounted infantry although possessed of lances and sabres. When they went to war in 1914 they were instead put into the Cavalry Division and had to have rapid retraining in the the use of armes blanches in the charge. In 1918 in France and Belgium they mostly acted as mobile infantry but charged when circumstances required it.

As an aside large irregular cavalry forces were active in charges in the violence of the break up of India in 1947.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Alamo said:
And there have been successful bayonet charges in the past decade, but I think it's safe to say that the bayonet as a major factor in warfare has been dead for a long while. A few incidents in isolation don't change a general trend.
Click to expand...
Given that the British launched six bayonet charges in the Falklands (and succeeded at all of them - Goose Green, Mt Harriet, Mt Longdon, Wireless Ridge, Mt Tumbledown, Two Sisters) I think that argument doesn't wash. They're clearly still a viable means of attack in infantry warfare.

In any case. Cavalry was useful in WW1 because it fulfilled a tactical niche that had not yet vanished. I can find some specific engagements if you want.
 

Minchandre

Though cavalry remains in use in a lot of places for police work and some irregular work like that stuff with the US special forces in Afghanistan, the PLA used regular cavalry against Vietnam in the 70s (though found it was mostly ineffective and ended up disbanding the units). The PLA also uses cavalry to this day along their northern and northeastern borders for regular patrols, since the terrain isn't super suited to vehicles and most potential smugglers/infiltrators would be using horses. I'm pretty sure that this is the only "real", "regular" military cavalry today.
 

Mike D

Saphroneth said:
Given that the British launched six bayonet charges in the Falklands (and succeeded at all of them - Goose Green, Mt Harriet, Mt Longdon, Wireless Ridge, Mt Tumbledown, Two Sisters) I think that argument doesn't wash. They're clearly still a viable means of attack in infantry warfare.
Click to expand...

Several in Iraq and Afghanistan too.
 

Nick P

Donor
Let's not forget the Indian cavalry.
The Central India Horse launched a charge in May 1942 at Toungoo where they clashed with Japanese forces. This may be the last charge under command of the British Crown.
The 61st Cavalry Regiment are the main horse regiment in India, possibly the largest in the world, and carried out mounted patrols during the 1971 Pakistan war.
The Indian Border Security Force use horses on patrol, as do the US Border Patrol http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-horses-idUSKBN14V1J4

Burma Frontier Constabulary carried out mounted attacks in 1945 http://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armyunits/burma/bfc.htm

The last US Cavalry charge was in 1942 by the Philippine Scouts at Bataan.
 

urielventis

Infantry switch from phalanx to line infantry then to modern troop fighting boots on the ground in small team, still holding the lines... Nobody ask "when infantry disappear"?

Same for cavalry, cavalrymen never disappear, they adapt. Horse transform into trucks, tanks .... But they role stay on: recon, flank coverage and breaking enemy lines by frontal attack.
In several conflict they were less efficient, wwi for example, but they are still here.

In a lot of armies, the armored force became a separate part, but in France, we still have cavalry:
- Cuirassier: heavy armored soldier are now in Leclerc MBT, but same role, heavy hitting, shinny and expensive
- Hussards: light horsemen for recon, are still reconnoitring ennemy lines (see the 2nd and 3rd hussard, on VBL and AMX-10RC), some are even paratroopers, the 1st RHP on ERC-90
- Spahis on AMX-10RC
- Chasseurs and chasseurs à cheval: AMX-10RC
- Infantrie de marine and Infanterie Char de marine: maritime infantry cavalry, yes we have this! on AMX-10RC and ERC-90
- the Dragons : on regiment for the special force (13th RDP) for very deep recon, one regiment (4th RD) on Leclerc MBT, one ( 2nd RD) specialised in NRBC combat and recon
- the 501 regiment de char (tank regiment): formed in 1918 as a specialist regiment to use the new tanks, the cavalry keep it. Now on leclerc MBT

As you see, cavalry keep almost the same missions, but evolve in his material and tactics. They obtain some specialised missions (deep recon, NRBC...) cause they are more intelligent than infantrymen :cool:

ps: the best cavalrymen evolve in an even superior species: the pioneer and the artillerymen :angel:
 

joho6411

I seem to recall reading somewhere during the Korean War that the CPLA (Chinese People's Liberation Army) used cavalry in a limited fashion. Don't recall the details if they acted as dragoons or as conventional cavalry. But the Korean War may have been the last time that horse cavalry were used by one side against the other.

Cheers, Joho :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top