# How Would You Improve US Civil War Tactics? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 16, 2012, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685 "2012-01-16T12:46:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/21 "2012-01-19T00:12:49Z")
> [@Pine\_Fresh\_Scent](#): > > _The Civil War_ documentay series diagramed Chamberlain and the 20th Maine’s “swinging door” maneuver at Little Round Top and how critical and brilliant it was. I wonder if they’ll do the same for the Upton’s manuever. Could happen. He did have a pretty good Van Dyke. I mean, nothing like Chamberlain’s most-righteous 'stache, but pretty good. ---
**Author:** ![Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@Throatwarbler\_Mangrove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Throatwarbler_Mangrove)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/22 "2012-01-19T00:50:07Z")
> [@Pine\_Fresh\_Scent](#): > > \*\*Question: \*\*Were there alternatives to massed formations and the resulting slaughters such as Pickett’s charge at Gettysburg (50% casualties- 1,123 killed and 4,019 wounded)? What would you have done differently to preserve your fighting forces in the face of long range rifles, cannon and even gatling guns? > > **Background:** I’m watching Ken Burn’s _The Civil War_ and the point is made early that the war’s casualties were so high because weapons technology had outpaced tactics by 1861. I asked myself why troops didn’t just dig in? In episode three they showed photos where troops did just that for nine months in the siege of Petersburg, 1863. This was one of the earliest examples of trench warfare. > > The Civil War was also one of maneuver through the use of railways, troop ships and even pontoon bridges, so I can understand why trench warfare wasn’t more widespread. > > Would steam-driven tanks or primitive body armor have helped? World War 1 trench warfare became that primarily due to advancements in artillery, specifically the development of the hydraulically stabilized breech loading gun in the 1890s. As others have said, Civil war artillery was essentially Napoleonic artillery. A well trained crew could get off maybe 1 round off per minute and they never hit anything because the silly gun flew off into the bushes after each shot and had to be painstakingly re-aimed. In that age infantry could still mass in dense formations for the attack. By the time WW1 came around your hydraulically stabilized gun could get off 15 rounds a minute, accurately, from far beyond visual range. The whole imagery and accoutrements of war changed. Battlefields became the cratered moonscapes that we recognize today. Soldiers began wearing steel helmets of the kind that we recognize today because shrapnel from air burst artillery became a major killer. Digging in became vital because artillery killed anything that wasn’t dug in as a matter of course. When people talk about WW1 it’s always about machine guns and repeating rifles and airplanes, but they had machine guns (of sorts) and repeating rifles in the American Civil War. Most combat casualties in WW1 and 2 were caused by artillery. Modern artillery = modern warfare. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/23 "2012-01-19T05:15:32Z")
> [@Jaguars](#): > > [http://civilwaranimated.com/](http://civilwaranimated.com/) is pretty good. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/24 "2012-01-19T10:22:20Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > I forgot you were a Jarhead. 😉 At the beginning of the war there were fewer than 2000 Marines, and some defected to the enemy. I sir, am a soldier. An old, retired soldier. The ACW featured a great coastline open to raids. The vulnerability was so great that at least one state (Alabama) held back troops from the main war effort to protect its port cities. Imagine the effect of three or so marine regiments dedicated to raiding on a regular (say monthly) basis? For a small application of force, a large amount of enemy power could have been denied him. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/25 "2012-01-19T15:41:31Z")
They did “dig in” during the civil war. Check out the wiki entries for Fredericksburg, Vicksburg, Port Hudson (LA), Chancellorsville, and so on. The times you don’t find trenches is when the armies were maneuvering/flanking (or had just maneuvered), and didn’t have much time for digging in. I think that the mindset of the leadership of the time, though, was that sheer courage could overcome these obstacles. A lot of Generals died leading the charge, too, or trying to rally the men during the confusion of battle. One of the things that I noticed about the battles I have read was the poor coordination, lack of scouting, slowness of communications hampered effective use of the forces at hand. There were battles where a sigificant portion of the army didn’t engage the enemy due to poor situational awareness, or lack of clarity in their orders. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/26 "2012-01-19T17:16:41Z")
Am I understanding that the WWI trench warefare was essentially along the French-German front, where it was a relatively short, heavily manned line with no opportunity for flanking since it was essentially 1 long line? You don’t hear about WWI trench warfare in the east or Italy except when a specific big target was under siege - same as the civil war. IIRC Farewell to Arms talks about the Italian line moving back and forth all the time… Otherwise, the warfare was much like WWII where troops were mobile enough that nobody had time to dig in unless the front was geographically supported (I.e. flank guarded by river or mountain? ) ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/27 "2012-01-19T17:51:00Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > Am I understanding that the WWI trench warefare was essentially along the French-German front, where it was a relatively short, heavily manned line with no opportunity for flanking since it was essentially 1 long line? > > You don’t hear about WWI trench warfare in the east or Italy except when a specific big target was under siege - same as the civil war. IIRC Farewell to Arms talks about the Italian line moving back and forth all the time… Otherwise, the warfare was much like WWII where troops were mobile enough that nobody had time to dig in unless the front was geographically supported (I.e. flank guarded by river or mountain? ) The Western Front style trench system was repeated along the Austro-Italian front. With steep mountain terrain thrown in for good measure. ---
**Author:** ![GiantRat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@GiantRat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GiantRat)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2012, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685/28 "2012-01-20T20:48:17Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > It’s easy to look back and say they shouldn’t have done that, but they had no way of knowing that it was going to fail beforehand, and if it would have worked, they would have broken the Union line and would have had a straight shot at the capitol. Snipped the quote for brevity, but I have to disagree on this point (and I agree with pretty much everything else you say here). If you look at the battle map, consider that the Confederate advance was in the direction of the stronger part of the Union line (entrenched on the Round Tops with more units). Had the Union line broken, there would have been plenty more fighting to be done, considering that would place both of the major portions of each army with their backs to enemy territory and separated from supply. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-us-civil-war-tactics/609685.md?page=1)