"Creeping Barrage" win Gettysburg...

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
IMHO Lee was already short of artillery ammo by Gettysburg and the Creeping Barrage would require more than he had, possibly even transport.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,619
Reaction score
4,544
I agree.
There were a lot of problems with it even with WWI equipment.
Wait... I like to point out the Union army may have been behind stonewall but was not entrenched like in WWone so creeping barrage would have been more effective than in WWone.

that settles it once & 4 all
I think something everyone over looks about Gettysburg. Everyone one mention the smoke cover the battle field... but...

the shells come down
The secret overlooked during the battle was the smoke. Pickett's change should have start minutes after the confederate started firing on the union position. The smoke would have hidden their assault or charge from the union. The confederate artillery fire was to suppress the union artillery so the confederate troops would not have been in danger of being hit by their own artillery.

Yes--- if the confederate had a little foresight they could have used the smoke as cover... so from creeping barrage to smoke screen,...
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
Wait... I like to point out the Union army may have been behind stonewall but was not entrenched like in WWone so creeping barrage would have been more effective than in WWone.
so what! if it simply can't be done it makes no sense discussing its effect, does it? with no air defences a dozen dive-bombers would have endet the war in 1861 makes as much sense as your argument.

I think something everyone over looks about Gettysburg. Everyone one mention the smoke cover the battle field... but...
... you need to see where you're shooting at for a creeping barrage, don't you?

The secret overlooked during the battle was the smoke. Pickett's change should have start minutes after the confederate started firing on the union position. The smoke would have hidden their assault or charge from the union. The confederate artillery fire was to suppress the union artillery so the confederate troops would not have been in danger of being hit by their own artillery.
how so when the line of sight firing guns they had fired those canonballs right through the space their advancing men were in?

Yes--- if the confederate had a little foresight they could have used the smoke as cover... so from creeping barrage to smoke screen,...
infantry needs to know where the enemy they are supossed to attack is. being able to see is considered quite helpfull in that respect.

if they had radar, though ...

---

for a believable what if you need to twist history just a bit not a lot - how about the prussians selling dreyses and krupp guns to the confederates. you need to find a reason why they would do that and still speed up the c/61's (german link) development at least 5 years.

good alternate timestream ideas change very little from actual history and go with that - fast forwarding 50 years of artillery development is a rather big change.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Wait... I like to point out the Union army may have been behind stonewall but was not entrenched like in WWone so creeping barrage would have been more effective than in WWone.
The intent of the WWI rolling barrage was to catch defenders leaving well-defended bunkers, shelters and really deep trenches. Not for the enemy to drop back 100 yards and dig in again. The other thing was that the rolling barrage was a feature of a static battle line, not a meeting engagement like Gettysburg. Perhaps you can find an example of a rolling barrage during a meeting engagement.

Another thing was the purpose of the Confederate barrage was to eliminate Union artillery, not infantry.

2. The largest concentrated artillery attack in history up to that point was the Confederate barrage on Union positions in preparation for Pickett’s Charge. The two-hour bombardment featured approximately 170 Confederate guns pouring fire onto Northern troops defending Cemetery Ridge.​
3. During the Confederate bombardment, Army of the Potomac artillery chief Henry Hunt slowed his guns’ response in order to conserve ammunition for the Rebel infantry assault he was sure would follow. This sudden slackening of fire, combined with limited visibility on the battlefield, convinced Southern commanders that their withering barrage had knocked out most of the Yankee batteries. As Confederate troops moved forward to smash through the Northern defenses, Hunt’s artillery opened up, shredding the Southern advance​

IMHO 170 guns are not sufficient for a rolling barrage.

There was no need for a rolling barrage at Gettysburg because there was an alternative. It was not effective for the CSA at Gettysburg.

6. Union and Confederate armies both used one particularly dangerous artillery technique known as “overhead supporting fire” during the war. Union gunners became adept at this practice, which entailed firing over the heads of their own advancing forces in order to weaken static enemy defenses prior to an assault. The Confederate army also used overhead supporting fire, but with disastrous results. At Little Round Top, the 5th Texas Infantry suffered casualties from their own cannon fire due to incorrectly sighted guns.​
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,619
Reaction score
4,544
how so when the line of sight firing guns they had fired those canonballs right through the space their advancing men were in?
The smoke was heavy and they waited for it to clear before Pickett's charge started. If they would have started the charge earlier during the bombardment the union side would ahve been caught off guard...

good alternate timestream ideas change very little from actual history and go with that - fast forwarding 50 years of artillery development is a rather big change.
Wait here... I have shown indirect fire had been around before 1860s and I showed that rapid fire weapons where within the tech window...

Hydraulic fluid machines... you know 1795 first year... did not take off until WW one... They point is the tech was there only had to be harnessed...

Hydraulic machines use liquid fluid power to perform work. Heavy construction vehicles are a common example. In this type of machine, hydraulic fluid is pumped to various hydraulic motors and hydraulic cylinders throughout the machine and becomes pressurized according to the resistance present. The fluid is controlled directly or automatically by control valves and distributed through hoses, tubes, and/or pipes.

Hydraulic systems, like pneumatic systems, are based on Pascal’s Law which states that any pressure applied to a fluid inside a closed system will transmit that pressure equally everywhere and in all directions. A hydraulic system uses an incompressible liquid as its fluid, rather than a compressible gas.

Joseph Bramah patented the hydraulic press in 1795.[1] While working at Bramah's shop, Henry Maudslay suggested a cup leather packing.[2][clarification needed] Because it produced superior results, the hydraulic press eventually displaced the steam hammer for metal forging.[3]

To supply large scale power that was impractical for individual steam engines, central station hydraulic systems were developed. Hydraulic power was used to operate cranes and other machinery in British ports and elsewhere in Europe. The largest hydraulic system was in London. Hydraulic power was used extensively in Bessemer steel production. Hydraulic power was also used for elevators, to operate canal locks and rotating sections of bridges.[1][4] Some of these systems remained in use well into the twentieth century.

Harry Franklin Vickers was called the "Father of Industrial Hydraulics" by ASME.[why?]

The popularity of hydraulic machinery is due to the very large amount of power that can be transferred through small tubes and flexible hoses, and the high power density and wide array of actuators that can make use of this power



for a believable what if you need to twist history just a bit not a lot -
Maybe a little steam punk thrown into the "what if" time line...
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
The smoke was heavy and they waited for it to clear before Pickett's charge started. If they would have started the charge earlier during the bombardment the union side would ahve been caught off guard...



Wait here... I have shown indirect fire had been around before 1860s and I showed that rapid fire weapons where within the tech window...

Hydraulic fluid machines... you know 1795 first year... did not take off until WW one... They point is the tech was there only had to be harnessed...

Hydraulic machines use liquid fluid power to perform work. Heavy construction vehicles are a common example. In this type of machine, hydraulic fluid is pumped to various hydraulic motors and hydraulic cylinders throughout the machine and becomes pressurized according to the resistance present. The fluid is controlled directly or automatically by control valves and distributed through hoses, tubes, and/or pipes.

Hydraulic systems, like pneumatic systems, are based on Pascal’s Law which states that any pressure applied to a fluid inside a closed system will transmit that pressure equally everywhere and in all directions. A hydraulic system uses an incompressible liquid as its fluid, rather than a compressible gas.

Joseph Bramah patented the hydraulic press in 1795.[1] While working at Bramah's shop, Henry Maudslay suggested a cup leather packing.[2][clarification needed] Because it produced superior results, the hydraulic press eventually displaced the steam hammer for metal forging.[3]

To supply large scale power that was impractical for individual steam engines, central station hydraulic systems were developed. Hydraulic power was used to operate cranes and other machinery in British ports and elsewhere in Europe. The largest hydraulic system was in London. Hydraulic power was used extensively in Bessemer steel production. Hydraulic power was also used for elevators, to operate canal locks and rotating sections of bridges.[1][4] Some of these systems remained in use well into the twentieth century.

Harry Franklin Vickers was called the "Father of Industrial Hydraulics" by ASME.[why?]

The popularity of hydraulic machinery is due to the very large amount of power that can be transferred through small tubes and flexible hoses, and the high power density and wide array of actuators that can make use of this power





Maybe a little steam punk thrown into the "what if" time line...
Putting it all into the 'shock absorber cylinder of a WWI artillery piece is the problem. The theory of all its parts existed, but the technology of putting it all together did not.
Description[edit]
Diagram of recoil mechanism, British 60-pounder gun Mk.I, 1916​
The usual recoil system in modern quick-firing guns is the hydro-pneumatic recoil system. In this system, the barrel is mounted on rails on which it can recoil to the rear, and the recoil is taken up by a cylinder which is similar in operation to an automotive gas-charged shock absorber, and is commonly visible as a cylinder mounted parallel to the barrel of the gun, but shorter and smaller than it. The cylinder contains a charge of compressed air, as well as hydraulic oil; in operation, the barrel's energy is taken up in compressing the air as the barrel recoils backward, then is dissipated via hydraulic damping as the barrel returns forward to the firing position. The recoil impulse is thus spread out over the time in which the barrel is compressing the air, rather than over the much narrower interval of time when the projectile is being fired. This greatly reduces the peak force conveyed to the mount (or to the ground on which the gun has been emplaced).​

the Hydraulic Recoil Mechanism did not show up until the 1870s. The CSA was not known for its industrial or technical ability. The Hydraulic Recoil Mechanism is IMHO too complicated for the CSA of 1860s to produce.
The usual recoil system in modern quick-firing guns is the hydro-pneumatic recoil system, first developed by Wladimir Baranovsky in 1872–5 and adopted by the Russian army, then later in France, in the 75mm field gun of 1897. In this system, the barrel is mounted on rails on which it can recoil to the rear, and the recoil is taken up by a cylinder which is similar in operation to an automotive gas-charged shock absorber, and is commonly visible as a cylinder mounted parallel to the barrel of the gun, but shorter and smaller than it. The cylinder contains a charge of compressed air, as well as hydraulic oil; in operation, the barrel's energy is taken up in compressing the air as the barrel recoils backward, then is dissipated via hydraulic damping as the barrel returns forward to the firing position. The recoil impulse is thus spread out over the time in which the barrel is compressing the air, rather than over the much narrower interval of time when the projectile is being fired. This greatly reduces the peak force conveyed to the mount (or to the ground on which the gun has been placed).
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
The smoke was heavy and they waited for it to clear before Pickett's charge started. If they would have started the charge earlier during the bombardment the union side would ahve been caught off guard...
... and probably
  1. got lost
  2. bajonetted their own gunners
Wait here... I have shown indirect fire had been around before 1860s and I showed that rapid fire weapons where within the tech window...
to elevate napoleons for indirect fire you need to put sth under their wheels - good luck with that

Hydraulic fluid machines... you know 1795 first year... did not take off until WW one... They point is the tech was there only had to be harnessed...
for guns? how would they make the fittings to keep the fluid in place with the gun's recoil?

To supply large scale power that was impractical for individual steam engines, central station hydraulic systems were developed. Hydraulic power was used to operate cranes and other machinery in British ports and elsewhere in Europe. The largest hydraulic system was in London. Hydraulic power was used extensively in Bessemer steel production. Hydraulic power was also used for elevators, to operate canal locks and rotating sections of bridges.[1][4] Some of these systems remained in use well into the twentieth century.
[ ] see?​
[ ] told you so​
[ ] stationary tubes could be protected then - on guns they'd certainly rapture​

Maybe a little steam punk thrown into the "what if" time line...
i love steam punk, but it's total nonsense
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
The WWI artillery used hydraulic fluid a product of petroleum refining, not water in the recoil cylnders. Now you need a CSA with a petrochemical industry.
 

Wehrkraftzersetzer

Hüter des Reinheitsgebotes
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
1,992
Reaction score
1,171
Why didn't the use the British airfields that had been seized by the minutemen screenshot-theoatmealcom-20180501-05-34-40.jpg? I think those airfields should have been still operational. 00000512.gif

and btw have a look on the construction of the gun

00000683.gif
 

Wehrkraftzersetzer

Hüter des Reinheitsgebotes
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
1,992
Reaction score
1,171
good alternate timestream ideas change very little from actual history and go with that - fast forwarding 50 years of artillery development is a rather big change.
e.g. adding another machine gun at 09.11.1923
 

O' Be Joyful

ohio hillbilly
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
3,491
Reaction score
3,136
good alternate timestream ideas change very little from actual history and go with that - fast forwarding 50 years of artillery development is a rather big change.
You need time travelers. ;)



Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.


The story deals with a group of time-traveling Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging members from 2014, led by Andries Rhoodie, who wish to alter the outcome of the Civil War and, as a result, ensure the success of their own cause in the future. In order to do this, they provide General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia and General Joseph Johnston's Army of Tennessee with a large number of AK-47s. To all but a few Confederate leaders, who are told the truth, they are known as "the Rivington men" after the (fictional) North Carolina where they set up their base. They explain the AWB initials on their organizational flag as standing for "America Will Break".
The Confederacy, starting to reel towards defeat in the late winter of 1864, welcomes the guns and other supplies. The armies of the Confederacy are trained in their use, and when the opposed armies break camp to fight the Battle of the Wilderness, there is an overwhelming Confederate victory rather than the inconclusive result in OTL. Lee's army defeats the Union again at the Battle of Bealeton in Virginia, crosses the Potomac River, and in a daring night battle, captures Washington City. With parallel successes by Confederate troops on other fronts, US President Abraham Lincoln has little choice but to sign an armistice, agreeing to the withdrawal of Union troops, and negotiations to determine a final border.

https://turtledove.fandom.com/wiki/The_Guns_of_the_South
 

rittmeister

trekkie in residence
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,185
Reaction score
3,438
You need time travelers. ;)



Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.


The story deals with a group of time-traveling Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging members from 2014, led by Andries Rhoodie, who wish to alter the outcome of the Civil War and, as a result, ensure the success of their own cause in the future. In order to do this, they provide General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia and General Joseph Johnston's Army of Tennessee with a large number of AK-47s. To all but a few Confederate leaders, who are told the truth, they are known as "the Rivington men" after the (fictional) North Carolina where they set up their base. They explain the AWB initials on their organizational flag as standing for "America Will Break".
The Confederacy, starting to reel towards defeat in the late winter of 1864, welcomes the guns and other supplies. The armies of the Confederacy are trained in their use, and when the opposed armies break camp to fight the Battle of the Wilderness, there is an overwhelming Confederate victory rather than the inconclusive result in OTL. Lee's army defeats the Union again at the Battle of Bealeton in Virginia, crosses the Potomac River, and in a daring night battle, captures Washington City. With parallel successes by Confederate troops on other fronts, US President Abraham Lincoln has little choice but to sign an armistice, agreeing to the withdrawal of Union troops, and negotiations to determine a final border.

https://turtledove.fandom.com/wiki/The_Guns_of_the_South
while turtledove is fun to read his changes to history are kinda fishy laugh
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,619
Reaction score
4,544
while turtledove is fun to read his changes to history are kinda fishy laugh
I like to point out with a little foresight many technologies were in the grasp of the 19th century man... You seem be a realist...

in this thread we have a ranking from nofish to 5fish
You lack creativity... To see the 10fish within this thread....
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,619
Reaction score
4,544
6. Union and Confederate armies both used one particularly dangerous artillery technique known as “overhead supporting fire” during the war. Union gunners became adept at this practice, which entailed firing over the heads of their own advancing forces in order to weaken static enemy defenses prior to an assault. The Confederate army also used overhead supporting fire, but with disastrous results. At Little Round Top, the 5th Texas Infantry suffered casualties from their own cannon fire due to incorrectly sighted guns.

I disagree because it would have work at Pickett's charge.... They were firing at a hill...
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
I disagree because it would have work at Pickett's charge.... They were firing at a hill...
A creeping barrage would not have worked either.
 
Top