What were your conclusions?
This is taken directly from my research paper
-The repeaters and muzzleloaders would have posed a threat at Henryville to Calhoun and possibly Greasy Grass Ridge to Calhoun.
-The Sharps and 50-70 rifles would have proved effective at the Henryville to Calhoun and Keogh, Greasy Grass to Calhoun, Keogh, Deep Ravine and the South Skirmish Line and the Deep Ravine to position to Calhoun, Keogh and the South Skirmish Line.
-The Cavalry Carbine would have been a suitable defensive arm in the following positions;
• Calhoun, Keogh to Henryville, Greasy Grass Ridge and Deep Ravine.
• Deep Ravine to Greasy Grass.
• The South Skirmish Line to Greasy Grass and Deep Ravine.
-The revolver can only be considered a short range side arm and would be virtually useless even at 100 yards.
The test proved that less experienced shooters had difficulty scoring consistent hits at longer distances (300 yards plus). We must take into consideration the lack of suitable shooting rest support available on the battlefield. The results of the tests indicate the best possible accuracy of which the arms are capable. The most common battlefield shooting position utilized would have been standing/offhand, and if time permitted kneeling/sitting or prone. The standing/offhand position would have resulted in a lack of effective fire even at closer ranges. Our shooters noted that, at times, in the rapid fire test they lost visual contact with the sights on the firearms and the target resulting in a miss. They had a tendency to “point and shoot” rather then carefully aiming the shot. I believe this method of firing was employed by both Soldiers and Indians. With a single shot carbine this method would be totally ineffective at virtually any range when fired against a widely dispersed or singular mobile foe. With a repeating firearm a shooter could quickly fire several shot in the general direction and hope for a hit. The “point and shoot” tactic could be attributed to;
1. The stress of combat and fatigue on an inexperienced soldier.
2. Heat waves coming from the barrel as a number of shots were fired in rapid succession. The heat waves would obscure the sights of the firearm.
3. Lack of knowledge and training in the proper use of the sights.
With the technology available at the time (1876), the Soldiers had what was considered the best suited arms for the majority of conflicts they would encounter. What the carbine lacked in firepower volume it gained in accuracy and durability. There is no doubt in my mind that the outcome of the battle would not have changed if the Soldiers had carried the Henry Winchester or Spencer. The theory that the 7th U.S. Cavalry was poorly armed does not seem valid when a side by side performance comparison is made.