Originally Posted by BritinBritain

One of the main problems was the black powder ammunition, which fouled the chamber, making it difficult to extract a fired cartridge. Troops were found tryiing the pry a case out of the chamber with a bayonet, whereas with a square the only weapon needed was the bayonet. It must also be remembered what heavy weapons that were issued were placed ineffectively, making them all but useless. Studies have found that there was plenty of ammunition was available to the firing line.

My point was more that with the firing line being closer in and the camp fortified it would have been much easier to maintain the rate of fire with both reserve troops and ammunition being easier to coordinate.

Originally Posted by MontyB

My point was more that with the firing line being closer in and the camp fortified it would have been much easier to maintain the rate of fire with both reserve troops and ammunition being easier to coordinate.

The tactics of the Zulu made it almost impossible for a firing line to hold them at bay. They used the form of the buffalo, the chest attacked from the front, while the horns went left and right of the line, game over. If the chest took out two or three troops, Zulu's would flood through the gap then attack from the rear. However, with the problem of cartridge cases jamming the chamber, bringing the firing line in close would not have helped in my opinion

If you get the chance, visit Isandlwana and Rorkes Drift. Its well worth the trip.

Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

I have been thinking about a quite fun thread in which we discuss military mistakes/failures. Not political mistakes, but military mistakes.

I am thinking about mistakes and failures quite similar to this one. When the RN was hunting down the battleship Bismarck, the Swordfish torpedo bombers accidentally attacked the Cruiser HMS Sheffield. Fortunately all the torpedoes missed

Do you know about other blunders like the one above?

What about the IJN Musashi, it's construction was an elaborate secret until it was launched and sent a tidal surge through Nagasaki.

Originally Posted by MontyB

What about the IJN Musashi, it's construction was an elaborate secret until it was launched and sent a tidal surge through Nagasaki.

Oops

The Second World War saw the development of different weaponry. I saw a doc about the uboat war. The early sound/target seeking torpedoes didn't always worked as planned. It happened the torpedoes turned against the uboat instead

Originally Posted by BritinBritain

The tactics of the Zulu made it almost impossible for a firing line to hold them at bay. They used the form of the buffalo, the chest attacked from the front, while the horns went left and right of the line, game over. If the chest took out two or three troops, Zulu's would flood through the gap then attack from the rear. However, with the problem of cartridge cases jamming the chamber, bringing the firing line in close would not have helped in my opinion

If you get the chance, visit Isandlwana and Rorkes Drift. Its well worth the trip.

I think this subject would make a good thread of its own, my main view is that a large part of the British problem stemmed from its failure to carry out standard military procedure for the time and underestimating the opposition.
I believe a properly "fortified" camp could have held off the Zulu attack as they had more than enough manpower and firepower to defend the position.

Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

Oops

The Second World War saw the development of different weaponry. I saw a doc about the uboat war. The early sound/target seeking torpedoes didn't always worked as planned. It happened the torpedoes turned against the uboat instead

There were similar issues with the wire guided SdKfz 302/3 (Goliath) bomb, as it had issues traversing objects when used at night it could bounce off objects and return to its own lines before detonating.

Originally Posted by MontyB

I think this subject would make a good thread of its own, my main view is that a large part of the British problem stemmed from its failure to carry out standard military procedure for the time and underestimating the opposition.
I believe a properly "fortified" camp could have held off the Zulu attack as they had more than enough manpower and firepower to defend the position.

Although I agree with your (my main view is that a large part of the British problem stemmed from its failure to carry out standard military procedure for the time and underestimating the opposition.) I don't believe that considering the tactic used by the Zulu and the size of the area to be defended a fortified position would be untenable. The square would have made it impossible for the Zulu to bring all their forces to bear at the same time.

Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk

Oops

The Second World War saw the development of different weaponry. I saw a doc about the uboat war. The early sound/target seeking torpedoes didn't always worked as planned. It happened the torpedoes turned against the uboat instead

US torpedoes had a habit of doing 180s. USS Tang sunk itself. The German acoustic fuses detonated prematurely.

The Luftwaffe bombed Freiburg and Dublin, the USAAF bombed ,during 3 days, Malmedy which was occupied by US forces,a US general was killed in Normandy by friendly fire .
Stonewall Jackson was hit by friendly fire, 25 % of US combat deaths in the Gulf War were caused by friendly fire .
Allied soldiers in Iraq,Afghanistan, Vietnam,...were killed by friendly fire .
But I would not call failed torpedoes mistakes, but shortcomings .

Originally Posted by lljadw

The Luftwaffe bombed Freiburg and Dublin, the USAAF bombed ,during 3 days, Malmedy which was occupied by US forces,a US general was killed in Normandy by friendly fire .
Stonewall Jackson was hit by friendly fire, 25 % of US combat deaths in the Gulf War were caused by friendly fire .
Allied soldiers in Iraq,Afghanistan, Vietnam,...were killed by friendly fire .
But I would not call failed torpedoes mistakes, but shortcomings .

I forgot about how annoyed the Swiss got when they got bombed four times instead of the Schweinfurt ball bearing plant

Originally Posted by lljadw

But I would not call failed torpedoes mistakes, but shortcomings .

The mistake was deciding they were too expensive to fire in peacetime, a costly mistake.