WI smokeless powder was invented earlier?

I could not find a thread on this so I made one of my own. According to Wikipedia, Smokeless powder was invented in 1884 by gelatinizing guncotton (which was invented in 1846) and adding ether and alcohol. So, can an earlier introduction of smokeless powder change things in time for the ACW? This makes most trapdoor and lever action rifles more usefull and could possibly lead to earlier develpment of rapid fire weapons. So, what do you think?
 
Why does no one ever respond in my threads? I have a good topic and no one answers! Well, I finally have more to add. Earlier smokeless powder will possibly spur the development of machinery to take advatage of the rapid fire it enables.
 
Depending on who developed it, it would depend on how it affects the ACW. Say for example it comes not long after 1846. It is then very possible that either the North or the South will have it in time for the ACW.

Obviously the very fact that rate of fire slightly increases, their is no fogbank after volleys that hang around your regiments and the general accuracy also improves, these would all have effects on future wars.

Most notably however is the very likely fact that the discovery would be made in Europe if so early (American arms manafacturers only really took off because of the ACW, and before then were lacking compared to European competitors), therefore it is a near certainty that the technology would not be prevalant in America by the ACW.

Then of course there are butterflies involved too.
 
I've always wanted to write a TL where the American Civil War turns into a WWI-style trench war; with the line crossing into both CSA and USA territory. Of course, I just assumed it's been done, since everything about the Civil War has been done, and I'm really not all that knowledgeable about the ACW.
 
I've always wanted to write a TL where the American Civil War turns into a WWI-style trench war; with the line crossing into both CSA and USA territory. Of course, I just assumed it's been done, since everything about the Civil War has been done, and I'm really not all that knowledgeable about the ACW.

Actually, I think that some trench warfare may have taken place during the American Civil War.
 
I could not find a thread on this so I made one of my own. According to Wikipedia, Smokeless powder was invented in 1884 by gelatinizing guncotton (which was invented in 1846) and adding ether and alcohol. So, can an earlier introduction of smokeless powder change things in time for the ACW? This makes most trapdoor and lever action rifles more usefull and could possibly lead to earlier develpment of rapid fire weapons. So, what do you think?

This would probably have greater impact on naval warfare than land warfare, I think.
 
I could not find a thread on this so I made one of my own. According to Wikipedia, Smokeless powder was invented in 1884 by gelatinizing guncotton (which was invented in 1846) and adding ether and alcohol. So, can an earlier introduction of smokeless powder change things in time for the ACW? This makes most trapdoor and lever action rifles more usefull and could possibly lead to earlier develpment of rapid fire weapons. So, what do you think?

The first land conflict where smokeless powder played a significant role was the Boer War. It shook up British tactics significantly (at first) because the Boers could fire multiple volleys before their trench lines could be located. In the ACW, commanders assumed that by firing a volley, their position was then fixed. What it might lead to is less reliance on grand maneuver and more on small unit (regiment and below) tactics, though I don't think it'll make a significant difference in the way most ACW battles are fought. It certainly will have an impact on European armies in the decades immediately following, but I'm not as familiar with those conflicts.
 
Actually, I think that some trench warfare may have taken place during the American Civil War.

I've heard that, but I'm talking about an immobile-for-years line, sort of a Western Front, except it'd be a Southern/Northern front depending which side you're on.

I don't think it'd work, though, unless you really shook things up. The CSA isn't industrialized enough to keep up with the demands of constant trench warfare along huge lines.
 
Trench warfare did occur late in the Civil war. The Siege of Petersburg is one of the most famous examples. Both armies had fairly static trench lines that reached for miles around Petersburg and toward Richmond. Although both Armies lacked anything resembling machine guns, or at least one fielded in large numbers, field pieces armed with canister shot and trenches filled with rifleman shredded the opposing army. The Union army did attempt to penetrate the enemy lines using both sapping,

Petersburg_crater_sketch_LOC.jpg

and massive human wave type attacks.
Battle_of_the_Crater.png


Many of these images are very reminiscent of the First World war.

Warfare-Trench.jpg


Petersburg_crater_explosion_waud.jpg


Petersburg_crater_aftermath_1865.jpg


Petersburg_seige.jpg


311.jpg


Cheval_de_frise_petersburg_civil_war_02598.jpg


In the end both sides made a "race for Richmond" but the Confederacy lacked the manpower to do this and the city fell. The trench warfare around Petersburg lasted 10 months.

A timeline that has the South and North facing off across no mans land isn't that far fetched. As you can see above, a barbed wire analogue did exist and was widely used. Early land mines were used, mostly just impact shells that were buried. Many hand grenades types were used widely in sieges,

1_lb_box_ketchum.jpg


hanesexcelsior1.jpg


and even early attempts to use chlorine gas as weapon Many different types of "machine guns" were used or invented during the Civil war even if they were not widely used.

agarmachinegunwheels.jpg


williamsgun.jpg


billinghurstbattery.jpg


gatlingun.jpg


So as you can see, there are large amounts of possibilities. With only a little tweaking, I'm sure you can make very depressing timeline.
 
The main reason why the ACW didn't devlove top static trench warfare for many years (like World War One) is that there is am lack of machine guns, industrialisation on the scale that allows such warfare, and overall troop numbers compared to territory itself.
 
The main reason why the ACW didn't devlove top static trench warfare for many years (like World War One) is that there is am lack of machine guns, industrialisation on the scale that allows such warfare, and overall troop numbers compared to territory itself.

More to the point, static trench warfare only evolved because flanking maneuvers were completely impossible with one end of the trench line on the Swiss border and one at the Channel.
 
To get reliable guncotton you need very pure acids, otherwise your explosives go off when you don't want them to.

I'd doubt that the state of chemistry was up to (especially industrial scale) production of smokeless.
 
As mentioned, pure grade acids would have been required to make smokeless powders, and so too would have the advanced metallurgy to fire the higher pressure smokeless power weapons, weapons that could have hardly been mass-produced. However, if the technology had been available to produce a few dozen smokeless powder rifles then snipers making further, more accurate kills against top level commanders may have impacted the length of the war. Which then brings up... who may have been killed who wasn't and how would that have affected the war? Quagmire of the unknown.
 
More to the point, static trench warfare only evolved because flanking maneuvers were completely impossible with one end of the trench line on the Swiss border and one at the Channel.

Wot he said.

Smokeless powder would've increased casualties and had some impact on tactics - and maybe uniforms if they were able to overcome tradition, since colourful uniforms and colours needed on the blackpowder battlefield - but they'd still be using 3-5 rpm single-feed weapons (albeit rifled), not magazine-fed weapons (15-25 rpm) and machine guns.
 
Precisely - many more casualties would have been produced if smokeless powder rifles could have been produced in great quantities. Camo? Sure. Already in use. Berdan's snipers from somewhere up North I don't recall exactly, used solid green uniforms as camo, and although not intentional, as the screws tightened on the South and butternut replaced gray uniforms, they also became effective camo.
 
Top