WW1: WI US Civil War experience was taken more notice of

[merlin]

I think the British Army went through a number of changes/reforms as a result of the Boer War e.g. Khaki uniforms. But what if more notice was taken of the first industrial war the US Civil War?
I recall that the European view of it was a bit patronising - it has nothing to teach a 'professional' European Army.
Yet, the costly assaults on fixed defences, the use of night assaults, the effects of artillery, the use of geographical features for defence, and technological advances - the Union Army later had access to better rifles than the Confederates.

 

[TRH]

We didn't exactly ditch the blue in that war. And calling it the first industrial war is beyond questionable.

 

[lionhead]

Might as well take notice of the napoleon wars. Oh wait, they did.

Its just the fact they actually did take notice of those wars when going into the great war. The whole point was to have one massive war to end all wars, so glorious people will be singing songs about till judgement day.

Turned out, it was a different war.

A war with an ugly face that put down its thumb on glory and said "no".

 

[RamscoopRaider]

The issue was there were other major wars that were more relevant, 1866 Six Weeks War, 1870-71 Franco-Prussian War, Russo-Turkish War 1877-78, Russo-Japanese War 1904-05

They did take notice of those wars, and changes were made after all of them in terms of equipment and tactics

 

[High Plains Drifter]

The issue was there were other major wars that were more relevant, 1866 Six Weeks War, 1870-71 Franco-Prussian War, Russo-Turkish War 1877-78, Russo-Japanese War 1904-05

They did take notice of those wars, and changes were made after all of them in terms of equipment and tactics

Like John French leading a successful cavalry charge against the Boers. Oops, wrong lesson there Sir John.

 

[Sazzer]

If perhaps full metal jacket rounds had been more in use then I think the European powers would have paid much more attention, it took the Boer war and the quick firing rifles for Britain to adapt kit, tactics and equipment, makes you wonder if France had had to fight a modern colonial war prior to the first world war what it's army would have looked like in 1914.

 

[Thoresby]

I think the British Army went through a number of changes/reforms as a result of the Boer War e.g. Khaki uniforms. But what if more notice was taken of the first industrial war the US Civil War?
I recall that the European view of it was a bit patronising - it has nothing to teach a 'professional' European Army.
Yet, the costly assaults on fixed defences, the use of night assaults, the effects of artillery, the use of geographical features for defence, and technological advances - the Union Army later had access to better rifles than the Confederates.

Well first of all they did take notice, the Union use of railway logistics was well studied and copied but otherwise there wasn't much to learn, to take artillery for example both sides were using antiquated equipment in a very basic way. At the end of the day the ACW was a conflict between two amateur forces and it showed. For the professional forces of Europe there was much more to learn from conflicts were at least one of the participants was on the cutting edge of military science. Like the Opium War, the Schleswig War, the NZ Land Wars, the January Uprising, the Austro-Prussian War etc.

 

[Thomas1195]

If perhaps full metal jacket rounds had been more in use then I think the European powers would have paid much more attention, it took the Boer war and the quick firing rifles for Britain to adapt kit, tactics and equipment, makes you wonder if France had had to fight a modern colonial war prior to the first world war what it's army would have looked like in 1914.

It would be better if someone in British Army asked himself what if the enemy sitting on trench like the Boer but using machine guns. Only this kind of question would persuade them to adopt trench warfare from day 1.

 

[Obergruppenführer Smith]

Given just how massive the scale of the American Civil War was, it's not really a good example for the type of war that would likely have happened in Europe. More importantly, ACW was really just a brute slugging match, quite different from the grinder of the trenches.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Well first of all they did take notice, the Union use of railway logistics was well studied and copied but otherwise there wasn't much to learn, to take artillery for example both sides were using antiquated equipment in a very basic way. At the end of the day the ACW was a conflict between two amateur forces and it showed. ...

"Two armed mobs chasing each other around a wilderness."

The railway, electronic communications were both duly noted and incorporated into the European armies. Its easy to say those items were being adopted, but the reality is seeing such things used broke down obstacles faster, speeding up adoption.

 

[Thoresby]

It would be better if someone in British Army asked himself what if the enemy sitting on trench like the Boer but using machine guns. Only this kind of question would persuade them to adopt trench warfare from day 1.

They did adopt trenches from Day 1. The British Army used trenches at Mons and standard doctrine was to start entrenching as soon as you stopped moving. However the a single line trench wasn't an impassable object; with sufficient numerical advantage and artillery it could be captured and the sort of dense, deep, heavily wired systems complete with bunkers and pre-registered artillery that you saw later on in the war and that basically couldn't be taken took time to build, like months. Which was why the first few months of the war were mobile. As soon as the front stopped moving due to mutual exhaustion post Marne/the Race for the Sea that the armies on both sides could really dig in and then you got stalemate.

 

[Thomas1195]

They did adopt trenches from Day 1. The British Army used trenches at Mons and standard doctrine was to start entrenching as soon as you stopped moving. However the a single line trench wasn't an impassable object; with sufficient numerical advantage and artillery it could be captured and the sort of dense, deep, heavily wired systems complete with bunkers and pre-registered artillery that you saw later on in the war and that basically couldn't be taken took time to build, like months. Which was why the first few months of the war were mobile. As soon as the front stopped moving due to mutual exhaustion post Marne/the Race for the Sea that the armies on both sides could really dig in and then you got stalemate.

The biggest problem was that the French under Joffre never understood this until much of Northern France was lost.

 

[Thoresby]

The biggest problem was that the French under Joffre never understood this until much of Northern France was lost.

Well if the troops were too comfortable in their trenches they might not want to attack

 

[TRH]

Well if the troops were too comfortable in their trenches they might not want to attack

Considering what the Maginot Line did to their mentality in round two, that might not have been complete nonsense. Just overcompensation.

 

[Thomas1195]

Well if the troops were too comfortable in their trenches they might not want to attack

The British when dealing with the French had the position of the IMF when dealing with borrowers. Britain should have enforced more conditions.

 

[Thomas1195]

But agree on the fact that the US civil war was closer to a true industrial war. They should have known that in a long war, the ability to grind their enemies to death, which is determined by industrial power, would decide who win. Sadly, only Kitchener knew this at the beginning

 

[Somedevil]

Some of those Civil war battles look to be prototype WWI battles like Petersburg and fredericksburg

 

[marathag]

More importantly, ACW was really just a brute slugging match, quite different from the grinder of the trenches

Oh really?

 

[Somedevil]

I honestly feel people only think of Gettysburg or the Bull Runs when they think of the civil war and not the less known battles.

The Atlanta campaign for one could of lead to changes.

 

[Obergruppenführer Smith]

Oh really?

The mere existence of trenches would not have prepared the Europeans. After all, the Russo-Japanese War, with far more industrialization, also featured trench warfare that was far more static than anything the ACW ever saw.