Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Alternate Civil War tactics
ChdNorm    8/28/2005 1:30:10 AM
The argument is always made that the advances in the weaponry available to both sides made the tactics that were used in the Civil War obsolete. What would have been other tactics that would have negated the advances in weapons that would have both reduced casualties and secured victory?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT
Crosshair    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/28/2005 1:55:27 AM
One item that would have greatly helped the Union would have been to issue repeating rifles and phase out all the oddball caliber muzzleloaders. Repeating rifles for close work. Muzzleloaders (since repeaters at that time did not have great range) for longer range fire.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/28/2005 8:56:49 AM
The 1860 Henry in .44-40 (thats a .44 conical bullet propelled by 40 grains of black powder), had an efective range of 50-100m's, about the same as a modern 9mm submachinegun. The 1851(?) Whitworth Hexagonal bore rifle (muzzleloader), was known to hit targets 1000m's out.
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/28/2005 10:41:19 AM
Entire units of Yankees had Henrys and Spencers and that didnt seem to change the way things were done at the front, just make it even bloodier. I dont know that using wider spread use of repeating arms such as the Henry (which fired the .44 rimfire, which was pretty anemic compared with the .44WCF AKA .44-40 that was introduced in the 1873 Winchesters) would have reduced the carnage a bit. How do you manuever huge masses of foot marching infantry without having them meet head on? The instances of using manuever seemed to yield results when attempted, but those forces were usually fixed in place. The introduction of trench warfare seemed to offer some protection to defenders, but the attackers still had to wade in right up the middle. What alternate tactics would have been more effective? What could they have done but send the infantry thru open fields and a hail of mini balls?
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/28/2005 4:03:03 PM
Well, better field intelligence and battlefield selection for a start. If you look at the early set piece battles in the Peninsular campaign, Wellington nearly always knew where the enemy was, had a suitable battlefield preselected and was able to lure the enemy into attcking him on his preferred groung. His selected battlefields usually protected his troops against enemy fire until they closed. At Busaco, he had scouted the battlefield the year before and had had a path constucted to aid the lateral movemement of his troops.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/28/2005 5:24:14 PM
Thanks for the correction ChdNorm. I still think the muzzle loading rifled muskets were a superior infantrymans arm than the repeating carbines of the period, at least where the open field is concerned. The repeating carbines would have no doubt done better in urban areas.
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/29/2005 10:20:23 AM
"What alternate tactics would have been more effective? What could they have done but send the infantry thru open fields and a hail of mini balls? " Well, for starters maybe abandoned the shoulder to shoulder set piece maneuvers that were designed for weapons that would be lucky to score a hit a 50 meters. I think this was a serious case of preparing to fight the last war again. Tactics failed to keep up with technological changes.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/29/2005 10:25:09 AM
"Tactics failed to keep up with technological changes." Nothing new there then! It is only in recent conflicts that tacticians are putting technology first.
 
Quote    Reply

jhaley    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/29/2005 4:32:35 PM
Look at the tactics of Nathan Bedford Forrest ( many consider the father of modern warfare). Flanking attacks, mobility, quick strikes, mounted divergent columns and surprise.
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/29/2005 5:06:23 PM
"Look at the tactics of Nathan Bedford Forrest ( many consider the father of modern warfare). Flanking attacks, mobility, quick strikes, mounted divergent columns and surprise. " There were a number of inovative leaders in the Civil War but they unfortunately did not establish doctrine. IE - this is the way "we" should fight the war. Commanders had a great deal of idependency due to various communication and political issues. Ego in a number of cases was no small matter. This allowed for some individual greatness but also contributed to some of the bigger blunders (on both sides) of the war. At least in my opinion.
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    RE:Alternate Civil War tactics   8/29/2005 5:22:06 PM
Also, Forrest was on the losing side.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics