"Aim too High"

[Larry Koschkee]

Mike Thorson established a thread titled - MILITIA CASUALITIES AT WISCONSIN HEIGHTS found under message board category WISCONSIN HEIGHTS.

Robert Braun responded to an inquiry about the disparity of casualties in the battle. Bob listed 6 reasons why the militia did not sustain a lot of casualties.

"e) many (but not all) Indians were aiming up-hill against the Americans on "Militia Hill;" the tendancy when aiming up hill is to aim too high;..."

This statement was ear-marked for future review. The future is now...

IMHO, the correct view is when in the act of firing a projectile up a substantial grade, let us say 60% grade or more, one has a tendancy to SHOOT (bullet point of impact) high, rather than aim high. The sight picture can be right on the target but projectile tracks high.

I have experimented with smokeless powder and blackpowder guns shooting downhill and uphill grades with varying degrees of grades. At a 60 degree grade or over and holding dead on the target, the projectile strikes higher than point of aim whether shooting downhill or uphill.

Has anybody had any experience with proving this law of physics or "Constant Acceleration" work by Galieo to give an equation as to why this occurs? Is 32 ft/sec squared have anything to do with explanation?

To further this discussion, I would need to determine the degree of grade from the "Spy Ravine" to the crest of "Militia Hill." At 60 degree or over grade the Indians may have missed a few militia if they did not compensate, therefore Robert Braun would have made a good point.

[Robert Braun]

Dr. Lawrence E. Babbits make a big deal about musketry being inordinately inaccurate when shooting downhill in his awards-winning narrative on the Battle of Cowpens (Revolutionary War, 1781) entitled A Devil of a Whipping. It is his claim that the genius of General Daniel Morgan included his positioning of troops DOWNSLOPE from the British, allowing (presumably) more accurate fire uphill, while the British fire downhill frequently ended up sailing over the American's heads.

I concede the historical accounts of eyewitness participants that indicates the British fire frequently went high. However, I'm not entirely sure I buy his hypotheses. Time and again, military theory has taught soldiers to seek the high ground as a tactical advantage. The advent of firearms did not change this instruction. If firearms were inherently inacurate when shooting downslope, what would anyone seek the high ground?

I suspect, rather, that General Morgan knew his opponants and knew the firearms of the day. I also suspect that shooters of smoothbore muskets inherently fire high because the trigger was "jerked," not "pulled" or "squeezed." Remember our Civil War history, and the numerous accounts of battled where officers admonished their men to "Aim low! Aim low!"?

Based on the lopsided casualties, Dr. Babbits' theories regarding inaccurate downslope firings were IMHO not borne out at the Battle of Wisconsin Heights.

Best,

Bob.

[Larry Koschkee]

I can not subscribe to the strategy behind Morgan's deliberate placing of the troops down hill from the British. As I have stated previously, at excessive angles, bullets or balls strike higher than point of aim whether uphill or downhill. To reinforce my experimentation with this physics action, I offer the following:

Many marksman, whether military, target shooters or sportsmen concern themselves with trying to remember whether bullets, balls or slugs strike lower or higher than usual when aiming steeply uphill or down. The general rationale among the shooting population claim common sense suggests projectiles hit lower on uphill angles because gravity is pulling them down and on the other hand, projectiles should strike higher on downhill shots because gravity is accelerating the projectiles. My advice is not to worry about up or down high or low, just bear down and focus on target.

Here is what's going on here, however. When a gun is fired the projectile immediately begins falling due to the pull of gravity, which is 32 FEET PER SECOND, PER SECOND. In other words, every second the projectile falls faster and faster at the acceleration of 32 feet each second.

Thanks to a math Professor at a local state college, I can explain projectile drop as a trigonometric function. Stay with me on this!

"The reason fired projectiles strike higher when fired at extreme angles (both up and down) is gravity pulls from the center of the earth, not perpendicular to the plane of the ground. Thus, as the angle increases, the angle of fall or pull increases, resulting in less deviation from the line of sight than would occur over the same distance on a horizontal plane. Gravity still exerts 32fps per second on the bullet, but a significant percentage of that pull is closer to line of flight."

The slower the projectile the more critical angled shooting becomes, but in my experimentation only significant in extreme angles of 60 degrees or over. This is due to the speed of the projectile when it leaves the muzzle at more than 32fps. The projectile exceeds the 32fps speed of gravity during the microsecond flight to the target.

I would submit that even though the Indians were shooting uphill at the Militia the angle was probably not acute. 40 degrees or less at the most, therefore not causing a miss.

Bob said: "Based on the lopsided casualities, Dr, Babbit's theories regarding inaccurate downslope firings were IMHO not borne out at the Battle of Wisconsin Heights". I have a question regarding this statement. Are you assuming the majority of Indian casualities occured while the milita were firing downhill?

[Robert Braun]

My readings indicate that the majority of Native casualties (dead and wounded) took place during the exchange of gunfire across Spy's Ravine and not during the bayonet charge and subsequent advance to near the Wisconsin River.

Best, Bob.

[Larry Koschkee]

Well this is just great, Bob! Once again, I find myself opposite your views on a subject. In my readings of the Wisconsin Heights battle accounts, I concluded the Indians sustained the greatest amount of casualties when not secreted. They were secreted as much as possible in the exchange of fire across the Spy Ravine.

I would submit they received the greatest casualties at the following times when they were in the open:

1) When they chased the spy battalion back to the main militia body. General Dodge and Major Ewing's companies met the charge with "a tremendous volley of musquetry upon them."

2) When the militia drove the Indians off of "Militia Ridge."

3) When the Indians tried to flank the left and right of the militia companies

a) Col. Jones' regiment was to left of Dodge and Ewing... "and opened a heavy fire upon them."

b) Col. Fry's regiment on the extreme right...
"Indians were soon repulsed."

4) Bayonet charge flushed the Indians from their cover ... "when they commenced retreating, we killed a great number."

A further comment is, I believe Black Hawk and his Sauk warriors were positioned in the middle directly opposite Dodge and Ewing's companies on Militia Ridge" and were secreted quite well. That is is the reason Black Hawk stated in his autobiography that there were only 6 warriors killed. They exchanged fire with Dodge and Ewing for a full half-hour and only sustained 6 casualties.

The flanking Indians or charging Indians sustained the brunt of casualties, such as the Kickapoo.

The best to you,

Larry

[Robert Braun]

larrykoschkee said:

Well this is just great, Bob! Once again, I find myself opposite your views on a subject. In my readings of the Wisconsin Heights battle accounts, I concluded the Indians sustained the greatest amount of casualties when not secreted. They were secreted as much as possible in the exchange of fire across the Spy Ravine.

I would submit they received the greatest casualties at the following times when they were in the open:

1) When they chased the spy battalion back to the main militia body. General Dodge and Major Ewing's companies met the charge with "a tremendous volley of musquetry upon them."

2) When the militia drove the Indians off of "Militia Ridge."

3) When the Indians tried to flank the left and right of the militia companies

a) Col. Jones' regiment was to left of Dodge and Ewing... "and opened a heavy fire upon them."

b) Col. Fry's regiment on the extreme right...
"Indians were soon repulsed."

4) Bayonet charge flushed the Indians from their cover ... "when they commenced retreating, we killed a great number."

A further comment is, I believe Black Hawk and his Sauk warriors were positioned in the middle directly opposite Dodge and Ewing's companies on Militia Ridge" and were secreted quite well. That is is the reason Black Hawk stated in his autobiography that there were only 6 warriors killed. They exchanged fire with Dodge and Ewing for a full half-hour and only sustained 6 casualties.

The flanking Indians or charging Indians sustained the brunt of casualties, such as the Kickapoo.

The best to you,

Larry

I do not have my source material in front of me. However, I will respond by clarifying that the MAJORITY of native casualties were sustained prior to the bayonet charge-- at a time when many of the native soldiers had already retreated or were in process of retreating. For example, your statements in Items 1-3 reflect those actions that included a.) the flank attacks, and b.) the exchange of gunfire across Spy's Ravine. In this aspect, we are in agreement.

I contend that there was no action that drove back Dickson's Spy Company. He retired his company on his own "hook."

More later...

Bob.

[Larry Koschkee]

Bob -

Your clarification on when the majority of the Indian casualities occured is noted. I would further submit that the Indians sustained the greatest casualities on their "shock and awe" charge against Dodge and Ewing's companies with the basis coming from a Daniel M. Parkinson quote: "We returned the fire with great rapidity, and with deadly aim, as it was ascertained that forty-eight of enemy were killed in this charge."

I do not have immediate access to the quote, but I believe it was estimated about 60 or more Indians were killed on the battle field, therefore "forty-eight" would certainly account for the highest percentage.

In addition, I would like to question your statement : "I contend that there was no action that drove back Dickson's Spy company. He retired his company on his own "hook." I have some ideas on the meaning behind this statement, but would appreciate it if you could elaborate on this point.

Larry

[Robert Braun]

I didn't have time to consult my sources last night, and will have meetings again tonight. If you can bear with my memory for a bit longer, I will respond thus regarding Dickson's company...

Dickson's men headed roughly west in the vanguard of Dodges' and Henry's militia force. Observing the large number of Indians at the Heights, Dickson ordered his small spy company to retire toward the main body of militia. This he did of his own accord believing (in my opinion) his force to be too small to move to contact and engage the much larger force.

More to follow soon...

Bob Braun

[Larry Koschkee]

Ok, Bob. Thanks for the explanation.

Larry

[Larry Koschkee]

After visiting the Wisconsin Heights battle site on several occasions and reading as many historical accounts on the battle, distance and distance measurement has become a focus. Some examples:

1) It is apparent, Dickson's Spy Company moving in a westerly direction came up to within ONE MILE of the main body of Indians, whirled the company around and rode "hell bent for election" back to the main militia column. If this distance is correct at what location on the battle field were the Indians when Dickson first observed them and tracking a mile from that point - what was the correct position of Dodge and Ewing's company when they dismounted to take the charge of the Indians?

Take into consideration the Indian ponies attaining an average speed of 25 miles per hour in their pursuit of Dickson's company, therefore they would have been on top of Dodge and Ewing in about two and one-half minutes. Some of the historical accounts bear out the fact the two companies had very little time to dismount, hold off the horses and form a skirmish line.

When I visualize a mile dimension starting somewhere on the western portion of the battle field, it extends easterly out past the north-south fence line that seperates the battle site property and private property.

2) One source indicates the charging, yelling Indians came within thirty yards of the Dodge and Ewing companies. Would this explain the large casualty number the Indians sustained in this charge? Was this an ideal distance for the use of "buck and ball" smoothbore musket discharges to be effective? Would a militia unit be trained not to have all members fire a volley at the same time?

The day of the battle was rainy and calm winds. The militia volley and Indian volley would have produced an immense smoke screen which could have allowed the Indians to close the thirty yards in a matter of seconds and ride thru the militia ranks with swinging knives and tomahawks, or provided cover for an Indian retreat.

3) Were the militia "buck and ball" discharges considered effective at the range the militia and Indians were firing across the "Spy Ravine"? I do not have any experience with long guns of this time frame. My blackpowder experience is limited to the 1873 Springfield Trapdoor Carbine and Officer's Model 45/70 caliber. Perhaps some member could discuss the caliber and type of long guns the militia and Indians would have been using against each oher.

At some point in time, and soon, I would like to obtain a range finder and encourage some Amigos to help out in checking out some distances on the battle site. I think this would give an interesting perspective to this battle history.

Larry

[Robert Braun]

My analysis puts Dodges' and Ewings' men (along with the "horse corral" squarely on park property at the time of contact. Thirty yards would indeed have been murderous range for the buck and ball ammunition used by Dodge's men-- but my reading indicated only a few (very few) Indians were struck by the militia volley.


Bob.

[Larry Koschkee]

In response to your view of "only a few (very few) Indians were struck by the militia volley," I can only refer to what I have already stated in this thread. That is a quote from Daniel M. Parkinson. "We returned the fire with great rapidity, and with deadly aim, as it was ascertained that forty-eight of enemy were killed in this charge."

I feel there is an opportunity to understand more precisely what transpired in this battle if one would take the historical accounts and try to translate with distance measurements.

This is my train of thought:

Col. Henry Dodge said: ...our spies met with three [Indians] & pursued them within a mile of their camp, our men were pursued in turn by the enemy on horseback." My questions here are: were the Indians camped at the battle site or were they camped near the Wisconsin River? My guess is they were at the latter, where they were making preparations to descend the Wisconsin River.

Three quotes indicate the Indians and militia moving towards each other met at the top of a hill.

Charles Bracken said: "The line was immediately formed, and advanced in front of the horses, to the brow of an eminence which concealed them from the enemy, who, in the mean while, was approaching FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HEIGHTS, in pursuit of Dickson, not being aware of the near presence of the army."

"...the horse guard was told off, and the men dismounted. This had scarcely been effected, when Capt. Dickson and his spies came galloping over a ridge a little in advance of us, pursued by a number of the enemy."

Daniel M. Parkinson said: "While they were pursuing the scouts up a long slope, the advance portion of our men were rapidly ascending from the opposite side, and, as a consequence we met near the top."

Is the "eminence", "ridge" or "top" of the "long slope" part of what we now call "Militia Ridge?" If so is this the high ground the Indians held for a short time before being forced to retreat to another position?

If the answer is yes to all questions I would submit the main body of Indians were on the bank of the Wisconsin River, no warriors were positioned on Sharpshooters Lookout, Spy Ravine or Militia Ridge area prior to the Dickson's Spy Company pursuit of the three Indian scouts to within one mile of the main body of Indians. Dickson probably had pursued the Indians down off the heights, and into the Wisconsin River bottoms at which time a large number of warriors began their pursuit of Dickson.

This may be far out there, but contrary to some modern historians belief the Indians set a trap at the battle site, is there sufficient evidence to indicate the militia may have set a trap. Strategy may have been... instead of attacking the main body, lure some of the warriors away from the main body, figuring a percentage of warriors would remain with women, children and infirm, thereby dividing the enemy force. I have not been able to find a specific historical account that would support this.

Larry

[richw]

Larry,

I have two brief comments on your latest post:

1. Dodge mentions a camp, but the camp was probably more of a (disorganized) assembly point. Black Hawk knew the militia was hard on his heels. He was trying to mave as fast as possible.
Also, he may have had many more scouts out than just those that encountered the militia. If some of them opened fire, that's not an ambush.

2. Ambush (either side) sounds a little too planned for this battle.

[Larry Koschkee]

Rich,

Perhaps Dodge's choice of the word "camp" to describe what was probably the main body of Indians was not quite correct.

In addition, I agree that there were most likely, more Indians scouts than what the militia encountered. I would submit there were some downstream and upstream from the main body, across the river and some flanking the militia columns.

I put my militia ambush theory out there to elicit discussion. You never know if someone can support it with some obscure revelation.

Larry

[Robert Braun]

I agree with much of Larry's hypotheses. Dickson's Spy company penetrated much deeper into "Spy's Ravine" than many had previously thought.

Bob.