Does cavalry still make sense for modern militaries?

>>63886236 (OP)

Not to compliment the chinx but if my job was to swing my sword around, magdump shit while on horseback and never see any action, i would sign up in an instant

>>63886236 (OP)
yes, every armored division still has a cavalry troop
they just use motor vehicles instead of horses

>>63886236 (OP)
In an extremely limited capacity (transport in terrain that is impassable on foot) or in a paramilitary capacity (e.g. border patrol work), but otherwise no, even in a lot of the capcities they are used it's because the country in question either doesn't have the capacity for another means of transport or doesn't think it's reasonable to invest in that capacity to fill that role when horses fill it just fine.

>>63886236 (OP)
No, it's 100% for novelty and putting on a show when militaries do these things. Horses are too expensive to maintain and are giant target, always have been.

>>63886236 (OP)
Yes, but as anti-tank these days. The speed of the horse gives additional speed (thus impulse and thus penetration) to sabot rounds. The tank is also too slow to track or dodge the horse.

You basically ride in circle around the tank and then when it's exhausted you charge in at max speed at the tank and launch the AT as close as you can.

Another option is to feign a retreat making the tank chase you, then you turn around and charge at it, for even more penetration (tank speed + horse speed + AT missile speed). Or you lure it into an ambush.

>>63886236 (OP)
I think it does. I am not a tech optimist. In case of a world war. Energy will be destroyed first. Dams, oil rigs and all the powerplants are just one rocket away.
Reserves will be used strategically ond for most part, most boots will use horses.
Most German army in WW2 used horses. Technology may be sharper but energy production is still fragile as before. Even more now with rockets.

>>63890333
Reconstituting horse reserves will take wayyy too much time and qualified people in a collapsing situation like you describe. We will have car Jerry rigged to run on coal before we will have a horse division

>>63890447
This. Countries used to have state-run horse breeding programs before the internal combustion engine superseded them as the primary source of power/mobility. That infrastructure is long gone.

>>63886236 (OP)
I WANNA BE IN THE CAVALRY IF THEY SEND ME OFF TO WAR

mares

>>63886236 (OP)
Horse cavalry? Not in any meanigful sense excluding an Afghanistan situation where SOF is riding horses because that's what the natives commonly use.

Motorcycles/dirtbikes get used as a courier method in shitty countries because that's what they have.

>>63886236 (OP)
It's worth an exploration I think, some kind of modern dragoon to relocate and advance quickly.

>>63893319
Except in photo ops, cavalry was widely used on the eastern front in WW2 as dragoons or recon especially in terrain where it was difficult for vehicles to maneuver like swamps or forests.

The Soviets still had entire cavalry divisions up until the end of the war and used them as mounted infantry to provide support for armoured units, rapidly securing bridgeheads (horses can swim pretty well), infiltration & recon & deep behind the lines raids on German supply lines. The only times they charged full on was when the enemy line broke in a full frontal assault and Axis infantry started running away. The way the US SPECOPS used cavalry in the Middle East was remarkably similar to how the Russians deployed cavalry in WW2.

>>63893742
For example during the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, cavalry were deployed in regions deemed impossible by the Japanese to launch mobile assaults from such as the Gobi desert, mountain ranges or thick taiga. They were able to operate at similar speeds to motorized units in places where it was impossible for motorized vehicles to operate logistically

>>63893765
>>63893742
Interesting, I imagine the start up for such a unit would be time intensive though, not sure anyone is willing to devote the time and money for an explorative unit.

Calvary has been largely obsolete in the vast majority of it's roles ever since the repeating rifle became the standard main battle rifle amongst infantry

>>63897755
cavalry was still being used in WW1 and as mentioned above in WW2, well into the age of the machine gum

the cavalry role has not disappeared, people still need something that moves faster than two legs, and repeating rifles did not suddenly make fast movers obsolete
hell, the first users of repeating rifles in the US army were cavalry men, the spencer repeating rifle was first used by dragoons who needed to maximize firepower in a small space
what really did cavalry in was the AFV, which was even faster than the horse, could go longer distances, and was armored

>>63886236 (OP)
Only for operating in rugged terrain with no infrastructure or for riot control against civilians.

>>63897755
That's a correlation, not a causation, your average infantry man can't shoot down a drone, what makes you think they can shoot a horse at full tilt?

People both underestimate and overestimate the effort needed to keep and train an average horse. You'll often hear about how we don't have massive military horse training programmes but that isn't really necessary, it's in a way a luxury, it was the peak of horse breeding both in quantity and quality, it was the high-end. Those were the war horses that enabled the guys who were actually crazy enough to charge a machinegun to do their thing. For large parts of history keeping horse stocks was much more hands off, simply by having semi-wild horse populations - which probably isn't feasible nowadays - but, more importantly, civilian ownership. A proper war horse requires time and effort to train, but most horses used in war weren't those, they were average riding or draft horses pressed into service. You don't really need a horse that can stay calm during a charge whilist being shot at by a machinegun when you're mounted infantry, which would be the overwhelming majority of horse use these days.
It was horses being replaced by motor vehicles in the day-to-day life of civilians that killed off the military horse. Not only did the infrastructure neccesary to maintain horses disappear - think blacksmiths, experienced veterinarians, stables, even basic stuff like on-demand availability of feed - you can't even really just "buy" a horse anymore, mainly because you really need to provide all that yourself and you need to be able to provide it wherever you go, but also because there's not that many places to buy horses from. A hundred years ago there would be some horses in pretty much farm and a lot of cities would have horse stables, but even then that was on the decline. People don't travel on horses anymore, they put them in trailers behind their cars.

>>63886236 (OP)
Unironically the cav scouts could have made decent use of horses in limited numbers. Would let them range out for longer distances over rough terrain while keeping a fairly low profile. It's utility would always be niche but I think that niche is still there

>>63897941
A military that wanted to use horses would need to be able to provide all of this wherever they want to go instead of being able to rely on what's already in place AND they cannot just source horses by buying them from civilians because there simply aren't that many horses anymore. The breeding programs aren't a high-end thing you use to equip your highly trained cavalry anymore, they're the only end because everything else is gone. This is why you will still see some horse use in certain places - Afghanistan still had people who keep horses. Bumfuck Nowhere, Mongolia still has people who keep horses. It'd in those places you can really get away with using a horse for something that isn't essentially recreation.
I mean, think about your made-up societal collapse scenario a hundred years ago - it would look closer to stereotypical Wild West than anything else, with cowboys riding around on horses and occasional automobile because it requires very specific set of skills and resources to keep around that you wouldn't be able to just get anywhere. Nowadays, the roles are reversed because barely anyone has a horse, and everyone has a car and at this point it'd be easier to try and figure out where to get fuel from than where to get horses from.

>>63886236 (OP)
It looks cool with proper uniforms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaWCgdD7jlg

>>63886236 (OP)
Only when you're using a spear, and you have proper artillery and close air support, I suppose. Also, don't forget open field where the horses can move freely.

>>63888316
>it's because the country in question either doesn't have the capacity for another means of transport
Like Germany in WW2, ironically enough. Their infantry was mostly using horses for transport due to lack of motor vehicles despite their reputation for their feared tanks.

>>63886236 (OP)
In concept? Yes. it's basically what Tanks do.
In form? No. Horses don't produce nearly as much work per day as an IC engine.

>>63890650
I WANT A GOOD STEED UNDER ME LIKE MY FOREFATHERS BEFORE

>>63897794
Please stop being so retarded, thank you.

>>63897794
...are you implying shooting a drone is harder than shooting a fucking horse?

>>63897794
are you implying shooting a drone is easier than shooting a fucking horse?

>>63888005
For me, it's the Himalayan yak patrol.

>>63886236 (OP)
Yes. Because can be trusted around horses.

>>63898657
Bro that's crazy bro. Pretty sure nobody here has ever heard about that before.

>>63886236 (OP)
You're not asking the right question

>>63898880
I'm implying they're similar. How well do you think you could shoot a horse over 100 yards away and running across a field?

>>63897794
Drones are much faster, much smaller, move in 3D dimensions and can see in the dark?

>>63902097
A lot easier than trying to shoot a fucking drone, are you insane?

>>63886236 (OP)
Looking at Chink propaganda you could tell they wanted to do what the great powers in the past did so bad. It's like a rich virgin in his late 30s trying to live out the social life that his missed in his youth.
The problem is that time has changed and wars aren't glorious any more. All the big dick weapons of the past are now useless

>>63902142
Wars were never glorious

/k/ pretending not to be /an/ again

>>63902155
/k/ doesn't consider dolphins as hoofed animals the way /an/ does.

>>63897941
>>63897957
t. has never left a city in his life
Horses are commonplace, feral horse populations are problematically large, and you can easily buy horses without any problems. They're actually free if you're willing to take an untrained one.
The reason horses aren't common in militaries is that they're just worse than vehicles in almost all situations. It's only on extreme terrain where they can be better, and most of the time you can just fly over that instead.

>>63902117
Horses are pretty quick and look small when far away.

>>63902135
How many horses have you shot?

>>63890161
wow yeah, i can totally see this working

Vehicles beat horses
Drones beat vehicles
Horses beat drones because their tails are made for getting rid of flies

>>63902097
Are you actually retarded

>>63903123
>>63902135
>>63902117
Do not reply to bots.

>>63890161
t. Polish person

>>63886236 (OP)
they're good in the event of total failure of the logistics chain

>>63903123
Are you? Or have you never seen a horse run? Do they not have a race track where you live?

>>63902097
You do know people hunt elk and moose, right anon?

>>63905869
Yes, they shoot them when they're standing still, and try to make as little noise as possible so they don't move.

>>63902097
>shooting a 2.5' x 2.5' x 7.5' object moving at less than 30mph
Pretty well.

>>63906790
Have you ever done this before?

>>63906902
Shoot a horse? No. I've never shot the broadside of a barn either, but I'm pretty sure I could do that too.

>>63907204
You seem to think this would be easy. Why?

>>63886236 (OP)
I like those sabers, think they're sold on aliexpress?

>>63902228
ungulate = hooves
simple as

>>63886236 (OP)
everything makes sense where there is necessity
there are places on earth where you can't just drive down the road in an mbt, an mrap, or even a willies jeep, but a horse can manage you and your loadout just fine

I can see a shaped charge attached to a spear doing its work in terrain like iran

>>63893742
One of Italy's few claims to fame in WW2 was having some very dangerous cavalry forces on the eastern front with the other being very sneaky scuba dudes you'd want to keep an eye on
>everything else for Italy during WW2 was mostly terrible
Courses for horses are that they are cunt's of animals that you should actively avoid
>wind blew, better kick the nearest person
>what's that noise, chuck them off my back
>piece of paper, jesusfuckthisI'mout!

>>63908238
Just give them flamethrowers, the arab heathen fears the righteous cleansing fire

>>63897762
This. Cavalry were never good at charging straight into guns, even in the 1600s. It’s the advent of motor vehicles that did them in, because the logistics were so much easier (once you had an industrialized economy ofc)