Could 200 Civil War Cavalry Soldiers Win the Battle of Camden?
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 02. 2024
- Other Alternate History Battles: • Alternate History Battles
In this thought-provoking video, we explore an intriguing alternate history scenario: What if 200 Civil War cavalry troops, led by Major General Philip Sheridan, were transported back to the Revolutionary War's Battle of Camden in 1780? This captivating exploration of military tactics, technology, and leadership delves into the potential impact of these soldiers armed with Spencer carbines, Colt revolvers, and cavalry sabers on an 18th-century battlefield.
Join us as we reimagine the Battle of Camden, a pivotal moment in American history, and consider how this anachronistic intervention could reshape the course of the Revolutionary War. From the dramatic narrative of the battle to the far-reaching consequences of an American victory, this video offers a unique perspective on the intricacies of military evolution and historical 'what if' scenarios. Subscribe, like, and share to join the discussion on this fascinating alternate history topic. #AlternateHistory #BattleOfCamden #CivilWarCavalry #MilitaryEvolution #PhilipSheridan #RevolutionaryWar
Remember...the worst thing to hear and absolute last thing you ever want to hear is your Commander screaming "Fix bayonets"
Comissar Sebastian Yaric: "Fix Bayonettes!" -probably
Straight Silver!!! Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt Definitely
Okay now I've learnt, avoid the historical analysis videos ie what this person did. Just watch the what if battle videos. Simples.
What if 50 us Rangers went to Wake Island December 7 after the bombs dropped on Peal Harbor?
It'd probably still fall... but if you don't include naval support, they hold out for a while longer.
You would have 50 more POW's
Honestly would t change much. The marines whooped the japs when they landed. They wouldn’t be able to do anything against ships.
50 without ship vehicles or plane won't change anything
What lead to the fall was the lack of logistics mainly ammunition, food, etc… the allies actually outnumbered the Japanese in numbers, maybe a modern small carrier group?
Please try the modern French Foreign Legion holding the Ardennes against the Wehrmacht in the battle of France in WW2
How about the Final Countdown Scenario. A 1980's era Aircraft Carrier at Peral Harbor. Could they have prevented the attack?
Easily, the japs wouldn't have a chance....but should they have? Would preventing the attack have changed WW2?
But as far as stopping the Japanese attacks go, you have a carrier with several squadrons of tomcats, harriers and hornets. These are armed with a mixture of anti ship and anti air weapons, plus the battle group of the carrier with their own anti ship weapons. They also know at least approximately where the Japanese ships are.
Id be surprised if the Japanese got off one wave before being sunk.
I’ve actually seen this scenario. Wish I could reference it for you. It plays out interestingly … basically the Nimitz or Ford class carrier’s aircraft blow Nagumo’s task force out of the water. But… the scenario identifies that there would be no way to resupply the F14s, A7s and A6s of 1981… or the F35s of today. Also once the ASRAAMs (or AIM9s / Sidewinders of the 1981 scenario) are exhausted, how long would it take for the 1940s American factories to re-tool to produce them. Even with advice from the 1980s or 2020s engineers, how long would it take even the brilliant designers and engineers at places like the Skunk Works to replicate both the munitions or the spares for the planes? In the end, it is not a case of the Pacific War ending on December 8, 1941. The war still drags on for years but eventually the US rolls out fourth/fifth generation carrier aircraft and beats Imperial Japan (but potentially with Hiroshima and Nagasaki relatively unscathed).
Or we could imagine the leap forward they'd have in both turbo prop and jets and the very much bigger CVN with catbar tech would change everything within a year or year and a half. And the metallurgy would be phenomenal and of course those reactors idk if the ship would ever sail again when considering them
@@covertcounsellor6797
The Nimitz and Ford have nukes. The war would end as soon as Tokyo was evaporated.
This is probaly the least mismatched battle I've seen on this channel.
Nvm, you gave them spencers.
The idea is goofy but fun.
Basically changing anything in a historical battle such as adding more troops even of the same era will change everything
Given the numbers committed were barely 5000, the addition of 200 cavalry of that calibre would have had at the very least provided a force multiplier effect that would have influenced the outcome.
Brits lose almost their entire army
Repeating rifles in French Revolution
Best match up so far tbh. Really love this series and im glad you're still doing it
Glad you enjoy it!
I’m surprised you don’t have more subscribers. Amazing video as usual.
Right? Love watching these. Are they sometimes goofy? Yeah, but a lot of time travel thought experiments are.
I appreciate that!
Quality video. Always appreciate these.
Glad you like them!
Thanks for doing Camden. I was worried it might end up being Quebec.
You and me both!
Well, the were US CAV(!), so wherever they show up they'll win (does not apply to certain battles named little big horn)
Love the alternate history battles. Always so fun.
I love these videos so much, I always look forward to them.
Glad you like them!
Thanks for the video…
My pleasure!
I like this channel.
Interesting, as always.
Right, the attack against British artillery was my first tought, with their mobility AND firepower the US cavalry would've been a real game changer. We could also think about the aftermath, with the technology of mid 19th century helping the young nation, with things such as anesthetics and telegraph. Naturally the Spencer repeaters would be difficult to replicate, but using chlorate potassium for the caps a breech loading rifle could be build, altering forever the art of war.
Love the video. Very entertaining.
Damn cool video dude.
The effect of Union cavalry armed with repeating carbines on opponents reliant on fixed battle lines presents tactical outcomes going back to Scythian horse archers. Mobile forces with the ability to fire rapidly and to deny their enemy any chance to engage in response possess an age-old advantage. Making it two hundred was just overkill. =^[.]^=
Thank you for making these videos. It's always interesting to see someone else's views on historical battles. What about Marines from Falluga in the Battle of Pork Chop Hill in Korea where the Chinese defeated the UN.
You see the trailer for that new game Kingmaker? Gotta stream it fella...
I wouldn't say that this battle helped to "shape the course of the Revolutionary War", as Cornwallis was soundly defeated a little over a year later at Yorktown. It may have given him a false sense of confidence, however.
What if Washington crossed the Rubicon?
My 1st reaction: lol funny joke comment that doesn't make sense
Me 2 seconds later: WAIT!
Sheridan would not have commanded a small force of 200 cavalry. As a senior General officer, he would have led brigades or a division.
You would have illustrated your point better by using the First Michigan Volunteer Cavalry under Bvt Brig Gen G.A. Custer. They were the first to defeat JEB Stuart’s heretofore undefeated cavalry East of Gettysburg, thus delaying decisive scouting reports to General Lee, thus costing Lee victory and eventually the CSA the war.
Gates would not have been in command of the Army, Sheridan would since he was of superior rank only to Washington. Therefore the Continental Army would be organized under Sheridan’s authority and would have been more of a defensive force at first. Militia would be dispersed amongst the regular army with the cavalry split into two 100 man groups, one on each side. The British army would not be walking up to an opposing force in traditional Napoleonic formations but hidden behind entrenched buttresses. Also a force of 200 would have at least brought four Napoleon cannons with them, two on each side. They would have brought the British in close and opened up a murderous fire from behind the breastworks and the sides of dismounted cavalry. Once the British forces began to retreat, mounted cavalry would begin to outflank the British forces from both sides. Cornwallis would not have been defeated, he would have been wiped out and forced into unconditional surrender. This would allow Sheridan to roam freely with his forces and assist Washington.
Absolutely
What if the full strength modern bundeswere fought in operation barberossa
What about Sheridan vs Tarleton?
or a very understrength regiment again commanded by Lt Col
By late ACW the cavalry had left their cutlery at home. Pistols were used at close range, not sabres. In a horsed cavalry on cavalry action the British, better trained in close action, once they got under the US cavalry's guns would have been more than equal to the ACW cavalry. They would have also discharged their pistols at close range against the ACW cavalry and then gone in with their sabres.
The ACW cavalry would have been better used as dragoons, getting into a flanking position, dismounting and then firing into the flanks of the advancing British.
Possibly a single Gatling gun with ample ammo plus a dozen regular soldiers with revolvers and carbines would have been enough to make a critical difference if they waited till the British ranks advanced close enough
Next you should do what if 1 turkish armour platoon went back to the battle of kadesh
200 troopers is approximately two troops thats a short strength battalion at best should be commanded by a Major or Lt Col at the most NO reason a MG should be in command of that small a force
Would have been a much better outcome.
What if... # of [Insert US/UK Force] went to the Siege of Jadotville?
What if the confederacy didn't retreat at manassas
Which Manassas? First or second?
Missed an opportunity to do confederate cavalry, since it was the southern theater of the Revolution.
Would fifty barbie dolls change the outcome of the alamo
Horatio Gates was far from the best American General in the Revolution. One can argue that Benedict Arnold played a more vital role at the Battle of Saratoga than Horatio Gates.
YEET
YOTE
Or, just replace all American troops with Chuck Norris in any famous battle!
Get on with it
Nah I don't think they could both armies have muskets so it's the same tech
The cavalry did have repeating rifles.
Wow, imagine if you had used Confederate cavalry with a good commander such as JEB Stuart, or Bedford Forrest. Union cavalry was not very good, and Phil Sheridan was only scary when fighting unarmed civilians....