I have a horse here for the wife and it charged down the driveway to the barn where i was going to feed it. I cant understand how infantry would stand against a mass cavalry charge.
thanks , the charge of the Australian Light Horse in WW1, the charge of the Polish Cavalry at Komarowo 1920, the charge of Italian Savoia Lancers against elite Soviet Syberian Division in 1942... are exaples of the heroism long time gone..
In today's battlefields the horse is almost defunct. A fighting horse is a six hundred kilo battering ram running at near sixty kilometres an hour, A man aboard who is fired up and armed with a razor sharp piece of steel that with one strike will need more than a bandaid..These were men who charged knowing they would probaly die , and then suprised themselves by not doing so. horse and guts.real guts.
To nit-pic it wasn't a 'Cavalry' charge as such at Beersheba. because the Australian's were not exactly 'Cavalry' but mounted infantry, the unit never carried as a whole lances or sabres but rifles.
Still have my grandfathers emu plumes from the lighthorse in WW1. The attack on beersheba helped the formation of Israel and why we have a special relationship with them as it led to the driving out of turkey
I have my Great Grandfather's (8th Light Horse) WW1 medals along with war trinkets he collected in a Christmas tin they all got from Princess Mary and a bayonet.
Technically the Aussies never had cavalry. They were mounted infantry. Great clip however I'm sure there are dozens of heroic charges throughout the ages
Historically, cavalry (from the French word cavalerie, itself derived from "cheval" meaning "horse") are soldiers or warriors who fight mounted on horseback. So your alternate reality has little credit here. General Custer was cavalry...but he fought his last battle unmounted...please explain. No cavalry charge in History has made such a change in History as did the lighthorse on beersheeba and the lighhorse ensuing voctories across the middkle east. So howEver...you are a tyotally wrong dik hed!
My Grandfather Francis Hope was in WW2 we have pictures of him on a big Gray Horse he died before I was born, his dress was like these guys I wounder what he did?
At the end of the war Australian quarantine laws prevented the Aussies taking their horses home. Most chose to humanely shoot them rather than have the Army sell them through the local markets.
Cavalry against any formation was suicidal... In most time periods. Cavalry is used to skirmish, flank, scout, harass, and route broken formations. Of the examples here, only the charge of the Australian Light Horse was truly successful - and the reason for this success was purely because of a ploy. The Light Horse didn't normally charge - they fought as dismounted infantry... This meant the Turks at Bathsheba held their artillery fire and waited for the dismount - a dismount that never happened. By the time the Turks opened fire it was already too late. The Light Horse were too close and "under the guns". It's not necessarily suicide, but, cavalry tactics rely on surprise and shock... It's actually the same as for most modern forms of "maneuver warfare". The idea is to have such a ferocity of attack, that you overload your opponent with problems to solve, quicker than they can solve them. This pushes forces the enemy into a state of in-action. But, relies on maintaining tempo to work. If you loose tempo, you loose initiative. If you loose initiative you loose the battle.
@@BenjaminPitkin certainly in Nap period wasnt used as you said. Cavalry in effect pins formed infantry forcing it in square which both stops an advance and makes it a nice target for artillery. In earlier wars in 18th century, some battles had more cavalry than infantry on field
The reason they used Horses in WWI was because the British were so used to fighting previous battles / Wars with Cavalry and charging the enemy. Britain's cavalry were trained to fight both on foot (with bonnets, rifles, etc) and mounted, Shock tactic of mounted charges. So they thought WWI would be the same but they didn't realise that the Germans how had machine guns and advanced technology weapons to theirs. Plus the British high-up ranks were the rich men's posts and not the men who earned it. Australia did the opposite. Promoting only the men with experience or who proved themselves.
Interesting that the "extra" clip of the Warhorse exercise shows the "correct" way to charge at the time, giving point, whereas the actual charge in the film has the cavalrymen cutting and slashing, rather than giving the point. the 1908 sword was a thrusting weapon and completely not designed for cutting.
Perhaps, but giving point like that is impractical in a running melee like that. It delivers a lot of energy into your first target, but, also puts your sword into them as well. What do you use to attack the second target, if your sword gets lodged into the first? Your bare hands? The thing you have to consider with blade combat is that having your weapon stuck in an enemy is a very bad thing to do. It leaves you vulnerable.
@@BenjaminPitkin do go on to the Schola Gladiatoria UA-cam channel, where there is a useful talk on exactly this and how British WW1 Cavalrymen were trained to give and extract the point. The sword was designed for multi use, unlike the lance, which is pretty useless in a close-quarter melee. Interestingly, continental cavalry made far greater use of the lance and the Imperial German army armed all cavalrymen with lances, not only Uhlans. I will post a link if I find it - very interesting stuff.
the last charge is a bit silly what good is cavalry charge without a lance and Sabre to strike terror into the enemy and of course a smoke screen very handy a cavalry man going at full charge only has to hold his sabre out not wave it about at full charge it will crack ribs asunder if it makes contact
Because the Australian light horse fought as mounted infantry - they were not armed with sabres, instead they pulled out their bayonets and used them instead. They used them out of necessity.
An ancient field war tactic in modern war. Was it von Moltke the Elder, who claimed in 1830 that the days of the mounted cavalry were already numbered? The cavalry has been elitist since Roman times, which is why it has survived for so long, too long..
Always fun to see cavalry with swords making a frontal assault on an entrenched line with rifles, machine guns and cannon. And of course the cavalry with swords win.
Well frank my old lad in the case of the Australian light horse at Beersheba they did. And with the capture of the wells there it enabled the capture of Gaza. The Australians managed to get "under the guns" , that is the bullets and shells were going overhead. They lost about 40 killed out of 800 or so riders. Strictly speaking though they weren't cavalry but mounted light horse. So there you go old mate.
Der polnische Angriff ist ja wohl mehr als lächerlich. Aus dem Schützengraben gezielt schießen wenn sie bis auf 100m heran sind, dann kurz ducken, die wenigen überlebenden Reiter durchlassen und sie dann in aller Ruhe von hinten abknallen. Eigene Verluste: Null. Was sonst?
It would be good to know what the battles were and what the real casualties were - just to give what are otherwise ahistorical' (as presented here) moments of glorious folly a bit of historical context.
At Beersheba the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade suffered a total of 35 killed and 39 wounded. Estimated Ottoman casualties 500 dead 200 wounded. Don't forget the Australian Light Horse were not cavalry.
Thanks for that. From the film clip, you would have thought the Ottoman machine guns and artillery had killed a lot more Australians than that, and that the Ottomans had lost nowhere near 500 men. Interesting.
@@NSWLancer Historically, cavalry (from the French word cavalerie, itself derived from "cheval" meaning "horse") are soldiers or warriors who fight mounted on horseback. As Previously stated.... Custer was 7th cavalry, but fought most of his battles on ground...including his last battle. As a NSWLancer...you need to brush up on realim...Aussies were light horse by designation only. But fundamentally a new concept in cavalry!
I wonder how many successful Calvary Charges were made during World war one. There couldn't have been that many. Basically it was another waste of good men and horses for a out of date tactic that cost the lives of good men and horses. And for what. Tradition or glory. Bolt action rifles and machine guns and breech loading artillery had made mounted charges obsolete. A pure waste for tradition.
Movie rubbish, in the first charge why would the germans have so many heavy machine guns set up in the woods behind their forward moving camp, utter bollocks.
Did anyone notice that the Poles - supposedly famous for their cavalry - could not hold formation to save themselves, which the Australians - who were actually Mounted Infantry - could! In reality, the Poles could not have been as incompetent as they were shown. Then again, the Germans would not have left their MGs unmanned and lined up aiming over their own camp, frankly, so the Poles aren't alone in being shown grossly out of character.
![Top 10 [EPIC] World War I (1914-1918) massive battles movie scenes (WW1)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AK7OO97eU3Q/mqdefault.jpg)
My Great Grandfather was in the 8th Australian Light Horse charge at Beersheba, made it through the whole war unwounded.
I have a horse here for the wife and it charged down the driveway to the barn where i was going to feed it. I cant understand how infantry would stand against a mass cavalry charge.
@@garthevans9625 it would definitely get your knees knocking as they thunder towards you.
My grandfather 18th Hussars WW1 he made it through !
My Grandfather was a Cavalryman in WW1, Imperial German Army, Western Front. Second Pomeranian Lancer Regiment Number 9.
thanks , the charge of the Australian Light Horse in WW1, the charge of the Polish Cavalry at Komarowo 1920, the charge of Italian Savoia Lancers against elite Soviet Syberian Division in 1942... are exaples of the heroism long time gone..
The Aussie win the desert town of Beersheba
I’d agree with your pick. Definitely the Australian Light Horse was epic.
La carga australiana es, simplemente, increíble, es magnífica!
Amazing re-enactment.
Aussie Anzacs kicked some serious ar.e. I salute them!
In today's battlefields the horse is almost defunct. A fighting horse is a six hundred kilo battering ram running at near sixty kilometres an hour, A man aboard who is fired up and armed with a razor sharp piece of steel that with one strike will need more than a bandaid..These were men who charged knowing they would probaly die , and then suprised themselves by not doing so. horse and guts.real guts.
SALUDOS DESDE PERU , HERMOSAS ESCENAS
I like the aussie one
Bluddy oath!
Too right mate!
"Gunna charge Beersheba mate!"
Haltung, Haltung meine Herren.......wir sind die Kavallerie 👍👍👍💣👎🏿
To nit-pic it wasn't a 'Cavalry' charge as such at Beersheba. because the Australian's were not exactly 'Cavalry' but mounted infantry, the unit never carried as a whole lances or sabres but rifles.
Still have my grandfathers emu plumes from the lighthorse in WW1. The attack on beersheba helped the formation of Israel and why we have a special relationship with them as it led to the driving out of turkey
I have my Great Grandfather's (8th Light Horse) WW1 medals along with war trinkets he collected in a Christmas tin they all got from Princess Mary and a bayonet.
Not really.
Technically the Aussies never had cavalry. They were mounted infantry. Great clip however I'm sure there are dozens of heroic charges throughout the ages
Yes. In the American West in the 19th century, too, most of the mounted soldiers were not cavalry, but mounted infantry.
Historically, cavalry (from the French word cavalerie, itself derived from "cheval" meaning "horse") are soldiers or warriors who fight mounted on horseback. So your alternate reality has little credit here. General Custer was cavalry...but he fought his last battle unmounted...please explain. No cavalry charge in History has made such a change in History as did the lighthorse on beersheeba and the lighhorse ensuing voctories across the middkle east. So howEver...you are a tyotally wrong dik hed!
@@sqnhunter Why the abuse.
The most feared unit in WW1 The Australian Light Horse 🤫🇦🇺
well they got the short bayonet out Do you know I have one says on it 1916 its mint with scabbard and frog the frog could be later the rest perfect
You know Shit's real when the horses are in the trenches.
My Grandfather Francis Hope was in WW2 we have pictures of him on a big Gray Horse he died before I was born, his dress was like these guys I wounder what he did?
Спасибо, искренне поржал. Такая лютая хня, что ух.
At the end of the war Australian quarantine laws prevented the Aussies taking their horses home. Most chose to humanely shoot them rather than have the Army sell them through the local markets.
I know nothing of military tactics but it seemed suicidal to charge with horses and swords against cannons and machine guns
What's more bewildering was the neglected sentries that would have prevented such bold a cav charges..
Cavalry against any formation was suicidal... In most time periods. Cavalry is used to skirmish, flank, scout, harass, and route broken formations. Of the examples here, only the charge of the Australian Light Horse was truly successful - and the reason for this success was purely because of a ploy. The Light Horse didn't normally charge - they fought as dismounted infantry... This meant the Turks at Bathsheba held their artillery fire and waited for the dismount - a dismount that never happened. By the time the Turks opened fire it was already too late. The Light Horse were too close and "under the guns". It's not necessarily suicide, but, cavalry tactics rely on surprise and shock...
It's actually the same as for most modern forms of "maneuver warfare". The idea is to have such a ferocity of attack, that you overload your opponent with problems to solve, quicker than they can solve them. This pushes forces the enemy into a state of in-action. But, relies on maintaining tempo to work. If you loose tempo, you loose initiative. If you loose initiative you loose the battle.
@@BenjaminPitkin certainly in Nap period wasnt used as you said. Cavalry in effect pins formed infantry forcing it in square which both stops an advance and makes it a nice target for artillery. In earlier wars in 18th century, some battles had more cavalry than infantry on field
The reason they used Horses in WWI was because the British were so used to fighting previous battles / Wars with Cavalry and charging the enemy. Britain's cavalry were trained to fight both on foot (with bonnets, rifles, etc) and mounted, Shock tactic of mounted charges. So they thought WWI would be the same but they didn't realise that the Germans how had machine guns and advanced technology weapons to theirs. Plus the British high-up ranks were the rich men's posts and not the men who earned it. Australia did the opposite. Promoting only the men with experience or who proved themselves.
Interesting that the "extra" clip of the Warhorse exercise shows the "correct" way to charge at the time, giving point, whereas the actual charge in the film has the cavalrymen cutting and slashing, rather than giving the point. the 1908 sword was a thrusting weapon and completely not designed for cutting.
Perhaps, but giving point like that is impractical in a running melee like that. It delivers a lot of energy into your first target, but, also puts your sword into them as well. What do you use to attack the second target, if your sword gets lodged into the first? Your bare hands? The thing you have to consider with blade combat is that having your weapon stuck in an enemy is a very bad thing to do. It leaves you vulnerable.
@@BenjaminPitkin do go on to the Schola Gladiatoria UA-cam channel, where there is a useful talk on exactly this and how British WW1 Cavalrymen were trained to give and extract the point. The sword was designed for multi use, unlike the lance, which is pretty useless in a close-quarter melee. Interestingly, continental cavalry made far greater use of the lance and the Imperial German army armed all cavalrymen with lances, not only Uhlans. I will post a link if I find it - very interesting stuff.
@@BenjaminPitkin have a look at this - ua-cam.com/video/9c_wwRnukYs/v-deo.html
Great, 🙂 I´m not the only one
I think those Maxims made a lot of dog food that day.😕
There are only the fools who go to be killed in the war for their lords !
the last charge is a bit silly what good is cavalry charge without a lance and Sabre to strike terror into the enemy and of course a smoke screen very handy a cavalry man going at full charge only has to hold his sabre out not wave it about at full charge it will crack ribs asunder if it makes contact
Because the Australian light horse fought as mounted infantry - they were not armed with sabres, instead they pulled out their bayonets and used them instead. They used them out of necessity.
600kg of horse meat heading for you at 60kmh is concerning enough.
Почему не показана атака донских казаков из Тихого Дона?
Там все как то реальнее.
An ancient field war tactic in modern war. Was it von Moltke the Elder, who claimed in 1830 that the days of the mounted cavalry were already numbered? The cavalry has been elitist since Roman times, which is why it has survived for so long, too long..
No3 had to be Beersheba
It sure is 👍🏻
My grandfather
the charge of the light brigade
Ww1??
Always fun to see cavalry with swords making a frontal assault on an entrenched line with rifles, machine guns and cannon. And of course the cavalry with swords win.
Well frank my old lad in the case of the Australian light horse at Beersheba they did. And with the capture of the wells there it enabled the capture of Gaza. The Australians managed to get "under the guns" , that is the bullets and shells were going overhead. They lost about 40 killed out of 800 or so riders. Strictly speaking though they weren't cavalry but mounted light horse. So there you go old mate.
Ha ha ha!😁
Атака лошадистов на пулемёты? Серьёзно?
У русских пушки холостыми стреляли.А уж про заграждения из колючей проволки они слыхом не слыхивали.
Prunaru Romania Ww1
There will be no honor in an all out nuclear war.
Der polnische Angriff ist ja wohl mehr als lächerlich. Aus dem Schützengraben gezielt schießen wenn sie bis auf 100m heran sind, dann kurz ducken, die wenigen überlebenden Reiter durchlassen und sie dann in aller Ruhe von hinten abknallen. Eigene Verluste: Null. Was sonst?
du bist mehr als lächerlich.
Bitwa pod Komarowem
Number 1!
to szarża pod Rokitną
And Napoleón Coraseros Charges what ??
It would be good to know what the battles were and what the real casualties were - just to give what are otherwise ahistorical' (as presented here) moments of glorious folly a bit of historical context.
At Beersheba the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade suffered a total of 35 killed and 39 wounded. Estimated Ottoman casualties 500 dead 200 wounded. Don't forget the Australian Light Horse were not cavalry.
Thanks for that. From the film clip, you would have thought the Ottoman machine guns and artillery had killed a lot more Australians than that, and that the Ottomans had lost nowhere near 500 men. Interesting.
@@trevsnow
Well the Australians certainly didn't stop killing with the capture of the trenches. The target was the wells and the town.
@@trevsnow They also captured 10,000 ottoman prisoners.
@@NSWLancer Historically, cavalry (from the French word cavalerie, itself derived from "cheval" meaning "horse") are soldiers or warriors who fight mounted on horseback. As Previously stated.... Custer was 7th cavalry, but fought most of his battles on ground...including his last battle. As a NSWLancer...you need to brush up on realim...Aussies were light horse by designation only. But fundamentally a new concept in cavalry!
Englisch Warlords,in Aktionen,
Второй эпизод ерунда. В окопе кавалеристы ничего пехоте не сделают.
Which is the title of the polish film?
"Legiony" in polacco. Cioe' Le legioni
@@graczgraczyk25 grazie. È visivamente molto più bello degli altri due senza bisogno di stelle e budget Hollywoodiani
I wonder how many successful Calvary Charges were made during World war one. There couldn't have been that many. Basically it was another waste of good men and horses for a out of date tactic that cost the lives of good men and horses. And for what. Tradition or glory. Bolt action rifles and machine guns and breech loading artillery had made mounted charges obsolete. A pure waste for tradition.
Movie rubbish, in the first charge why would the germans have so many heavy machine guns set up in the woods behind their forward moving camp, utter bollocks.
And don’t forget that machine guns sprayed all over and killed soldiers only but no (much bigger) horses.
And the Turks just folded, amazing
The war are written by the winners and most of it is wrong!
@@belkheir59 You a very right there. Reading and researching from the other side paints a very different picture.
Did anyone notice that the Poles - supposedly famous for their cavalry - could not hold formation to save themselves, which the Australians - who were actually Mounted Infantry - could! In reality, the Poles could not have been as incompetent as they were shown. Then again, the Germans would not have left their MGs unmanned and lined up aiming over their own camp, frankly, so the Poles aren't alone in being shown grossly out of character.
this is what I call a cavalry charge. :)
ua-cam.com/video/CLRINnp1_00/v-deo.html