The important bit was that it was a fleet that captured Nawlins.I'm not sure New Orleans could be held in the face of a North attack and a bombardment, but maybe I'm overestimating the size of the attack. It was about 15K attackers right?
It didn't really have "pitiful" coastal guns, and a year's work by Beauregard would have a good chance of improving the situation substantially. If nothing else New Orleans is the largest city in the Confederacy and has some genuine organic construction capacity. That said, the ironclads would help out a lot - but the forts themselves actually held out fairly well.Ok, so basically ironclades give them a chance and if he doesn't get the ironclads, New Orleans and its pitiful coastal guns are doomed.
As for the ironclads, Louisiana was very well built and (again) hot-shot guns would have made her much more effective, as would better engines. She definitely had some non-combat flaws though.
Mississippi would have been (as far as we can tell) somewhat better again, with some very thick armour that appears to have been hammered. She had better engines (the size was increased during building to fit the required boilers) and was more heavily armed.
You seem to like to simplify things hugely, as far as I can tell.
The problem was literally that those building the ironclads were required to do militia drill. Beauregard could easily have been on-the-ball enough to stop that.If he gets turned down or the appropriate building crew comes down with (insert communicable disease here) it's an uphill fight.
Given that the attack OTL came in May and that the ACW kicked off in April? Thirteen months is long enough to do a fair amount of work, and bomb-proofs are not trivial but they're also quite doable.Can we get some good bomb-proofs in time?
The problem was literally that those building the ironclads were required to do militia drill. Beauregard could easily have been on-the-ball enough to stop that.
Given that the attack OTL came in May and that the ACW kicked off in April? Thirteen months is long enough to do a fair amount of work, and bomb-proofs are not trivial but they're also quite doable.
Many, the single POD of Beauregard in charge is a huge headache for the North. It's not a war winner but it changes a lot.
Not a war winner in itself (even the loss of the entire fleet would not lose the war for the North), but its knock-on effects would be enormous. For one thing, the fall of New Orleans was a major factor in keeping the European nations from recognizing the Confederacy.
Whoops, my mistake - misread Wiki on Capture of New Orleans, which has that event end on May 1.The attack was in April, not May.
Um... firstly, the Emancipation Proclamation didn't do a great deal about the probability of European recognition. It was seen as kind of hypocritical.Then Lee will lose at Antidem and convince the Europeans otherwise, and the EP makes it even worse.
Then Lee will lose at Antidem and convince the Europeans otherwise, and the EP makes it even worse.
It wasn't. Full stop. Do more critical research, there's plenty of a print footprint about it.I though the continental Europeans were too dense to see the EP as hypocritical until after the fact?
What does this do to the Vicksburg campaign? Where is Butler?Assuming Antietam isn't butterflied away.