Quote from: d_Guy on 14 May 2016, 07:01:57 PM
So based on this guide there appears to be no difference between French and British hussars. Is that a fair statement then?

Weren't British LC still designated light dragoons, rather than hussars? Not one of my favourite periods, so I just raise the question.

Both, all started as Lt Dragoons, which evolved from the light squadrons of Dragoon regiments.

IanS

And were they officially described as light dragoons or as hussars by the war office?

Again both. Both had same role.

IanS

Did the Carabinaries wear bright yellow uniforms, and were they recruited from ex-coalminers in the Lille region?

Cheveux Legers. Were they something special, or the name for the lancers?

Quote from: RoyWilliamson on 15 May 2016, 12:33:06 PM
Cheveux Legers. Were they something special, or the name for the lancers?

Les Chevau-légers (from French cheval meaning horse and léger meaning light) - a generic name for several units of French, Austrian and German light and medium cavalry.

Lancers were "chevau-légers lanciers." The Red or Dutch Lancers, for example, being officially the 2e régiment de chevau-légers lanciers de la Garde Impériale.

Reading all these different names, duties and types makes me wonder if it wouldn't have been far easier to have just simplified things. Think of all the expense in the costs of different uniforms and equipment. The messing about with different training, recruiting issues and having the right unit for the job.

Now I know why I favour the infantry 
And don't collect French Napoleonics!

The Americans seemed to get it right when they scrapped the dragoons and mounted rifles and just went for cavalry, who in fact were dragoons.

Quote from: Leman on 15 May 2016, 11:10:36 AM
Did the Carabinaries wear bright yellow uniforms, and were they recruited from ex-coalminers in the Lille region?

Having very limited knowledge of the period, these were sent ahead of the army to sniff out enemy positions?

Quote from: RoyWilliamson on 15 May 2016, 06:02:23 PM
Reading all these different names, duties and types makes me wonder if it wouldn't have been far easier to have just simplified things. Think of all the expense in the costs of different uniforms and equipment. The messing about with different training, recruiting issues and having the right unit for the job.

Now I know why I favour the infantry  
And don't collect French Napoleonics!

You wouldn't be wrong, except for the morale effects of everyone being special and better, and having a dozen uniforms meaning you all get to be both smart and practical! Also, bit like (say) WW2 tanks where everyone thinks there's more battle fields than there are so builds several sets of different tank types till someone says "does it drive acceptably fast with an acceptable gun and acceptable, and actually work well enough to get to the battlefield and have to be trucked back off the start line for repair?" and just shifted to the T-34/Sherman-a-like.

Also, it would cut profit from British fabric/clothing manufacturers if the French stopped buying eleven sets of different cloth for uniforms from us.

Also redux, reminds me of this - http://7.62x54r.net/MosinID/MosinHumor.htm

I would like to ask re the original post.

Why is this under humour, and not the section for historical accuracy?

I must have misposted

Quote from: Last Hussar on 24 May 2016, 11:30:41 PM
I would like to ask re the original post.

Why is this under humour, and not the section for historical accuracy?

Ever seen a French hussar trying to manoeuvre himself in those pants?