Primarily a land war?

[Nathan Stuart]

During the original formation of the seceded states there had been a strong back-channel conversation among Governors and they made it clear the attempt to turn Baltimore and take control there of Maryland was foremost in their hearts. From there the belief was by gaining control of Maryland and the Washington Capital the war would be won. This had fallen through soon after Virginia seceded, due to Ellsworth and the Potomac Fleet that invested Fort Monroe. It was a part of the Baltimore riots taking place on the first movement of Union troops and Butler's revenge that quelled the rebellion in Maryland.
Lubliner.

Given these common designs by the Southern Governors (and the continuing hopes held by the Confederate leadership throughout the war), thought it interesting that none of the 13 white stars displayed on the widely used Confederate battle flag (the 'Stars and the Bars') allowed for any possible future inclusion of Maryland into the Confederacy. (The thirteen stars shown were intended to represent the eleven seceded states as well as the border states of Missouri and Kentucky).

 

[wausaubob]

For the US, the critical sea routes to and from Panama remained open during the war even while the Blockade was in force. The Confederate commander Semmes did intercept a ship on this route. But it was out bound to Panama, loaded with Marines, not a gold laden ship bound for New York.
As the passenger and freight traffic between New York and Liverpool that moved by international shippers. The US lost some merchant services revenue in the process, but that was not significant.
The world wide US fleet handled coffee, tea, silk and other items from India and China. The fleet could always hold up in a port if the shipping news was that the Alabama was in the vicinity.
I only add that as demonstration that even while the US was conducting the blockade and combined arms operations, a significant part of normal shipping continued, as Symonds noted.

 

[wausaubob]

During the original formation of the seceded states there had been a strong back-channel conversation among Governors and they made it clear the attempt to turn Baltimore and take control there of Maryland was foremost in their hearts. From there the belief was by gaining control of Maryland and the Washington Capital the war would be won. This had fallen through soon after Virginia seceded, due to Ellsworth and the Potomac Fleet that invested Fort Monroe. It was a part of the Baltimore riots taking place on the first movement of Union troops and Butler's revenge that quelled the rebellion in Maryland.
Lubliner.

But the Confederates did capture the naval yard at Norfolk as the naval officer there hesitated about evacuating the ships being repaired there. There probably were Confederate insurgents in Baltimore. Their early efforts were nearly successful. But there was very little additional trouble in Baltimore by June 1861. I doubt many businessmen or family men wanted to see fighting in streets of Baltimore.

 

[Lubliner]

There probably were Confederate insurgents in Baltimore.

The conspiracy had been zipping around the telegraph lines and a spy was sent to Richmond as soon as Davis was elected President. I would need to look up my notes taken years ago about this event. I am uncertain where they are at the moment.
Lubliner.

 

[CavRTO]

All wars are land war. Name a major fleet battle that occurred in the middle of the ocean… don't bother, there aren't any. The reason being that there is nothing to fight for a thousand miles away from any port.

Naval warfare is not a video game where vessels fight just for the joy of it. Naval power exists to do two things:

One: is to keep supply lines open.

Two: is to interdict & blockade opponent's supply lines.

The littoral & brown water US fleet created to fight the Civil War was ideally suited to accomplish these two tasks. The inability of the CSA to mount even a token challenge was an existential failure. A 19th Century country that couldn't defend its supply line or blockade enemy ports could not win.

Indeed, the Civil War was a world wide logistics war. It was a manufacturing revolution war. It was a rail road war. It was a riverine war. It was a littoral war… on & on. The land war was, in fact, a crazy quilt of elements without which the history would have been different.

Unless I'm reading you wrong, I humbly disagree with your point that there were no major fleet battles that occurred in the middle of the ocean. I can think of two, Jutland during WWI and Midway during WWII. The battle for Midway not only destroyed Japan's carrier fleet, but opened the way for successful island hopping without having to worry about Japanese air interdiction and the liberation of the Philippines land battles.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Unless I'm reading you wrong, I humbly disagree with your point that there were no major fleet battles that occurred in the middle of the ocean. I can think of two, Jutland during WWI and Midway during WWII. The battle for Midway not only destroyed Japan's carrier fleet, but opened the way for successful island hopping without having to worry about Japanese air interdiction and the liberation of the Philippines land battles.

You might want to reexamine your maps. While surrounded by ocean waters, the Battle of Midway was for control of that island.

The Battle of Jutland was hardly in the midst of blue water. "Der Tag!" as the Kaiser's officers called it in prewar toasts, was fought to break the RN blockade & interdiction of U.K. trade.


There is no debate on this subject.

 

[Lubliner]

You might want to reexamine your maps. While surrounded by ocean waters, the Battle of Midway was for control of that island.

The Battle of Jutland was hardly in the midst of blue water. "Der Tag!" as the Kaiser's officers called it in prewar toasts, was fought to break the RN blockade & interdiction of U.K. trade.


There is no debate on this subject.

The real ocean predatory acts by Germany in submarine warfare in both World Wars, and the convoy controls to lessen the loss, how would these be classified? Thanks, Rhea,
Lubliner.

 

[Old Soldier]

Morse code, invented 30 years before the Civil War, is a binary system of X & O was the basis of telegraphic communication… & how this iPhone I am using works as well.

Nope. It is NOT binary. Binary is signal or no signal , 1 and 0.
ALL coding on telegraph/carrier wave radio is long (-) and short (.) Hence SOS --- ... --- (dah,dah,dah - dit,dit,dit - dah,dah,dah) No signal is SILENCE - a pause, nothing more.

 

[wausaubob]

Nope. It is NOT binary. Binary is signal or no signal , 1 and 0.
ALL coding on telegraph/carrier wave radio is long (-) and short (.) Hence SOS --- ... --- (dah,dah,dah - dit,dit,dit - dah,dah,dah) No signal is SILENCE - a pause, nothing more.

Its important to realize how fast long distance telegraph communication was improving in the years leading up to the Civil War. Its not a coincidence that the connection to Utah and California was completed about 7 months after the outbreak of open war. The speed and accuracy of telegraphy was improving. The companies were already consolidating and splitting up the markets. There were competing transcribing systems. But many operators could transcribe messages off the audible signal. As a tool for reporting what had happened, like success at Vicksburg and disappointment at Chickamauga, it was a huge time saver. As a tool for issuing orders or outlining future plans, I think the telegraph system was too vulnerable to leaks.
Grant did not try to manage the Chattanooga operation with the telegraph connection to Nashville. He went in person and communicated with Thomas, Hooker and Sherman in person and in writing, with minimal reliance on telegraphs. And he never put his exact plans in his telegraph messages to Washington.

 

[CavRTO]

Y

You might want to reexamine your maps. While surrounded by ocean waters, the Battle of Midway was for control of that island.

The Battle of Jutland was hardly in the midst of blue water. "Der Tag!" as the Kaiser's officers called it in prewar toasts, was fought to break the RN blockade & interdiction of U.K. trade.


There is no debate on this subject.

Your question was,"name a major fleet battle that occurred in the middle of the ocean", and I did just that. I'm not splitting hairs.

 

[Rhea Cole]

The real ocean predatory acts by Germany in submarine warfare in both World Wars, and the convoy controls to lessen the loss, how would these be classified? Thanks, Rhea,
Lubliner.

It is not a fleet action as defined by the 19th Century criteria of the period in question. The Battle of the Coral Sea between carriers also was anomalous.

The big gun surface battles of the Spanish American War, WWI & WWII were all in coastal waters. Trafalgar, Manila Bay, attempt to force the Bosporus & Iron Bottom Bay were within sight of land, e.g. This not something I made up.

Note: I grew up listening to my friend's father tell of swimming ashore from the USS Quincy. My uncles had very different experiences.

My uncle Johnny was a plank holder USS Wasp. He was at sea for two years, only going ashore one time. Uncle Mayford was an armed merchant Marine gunner. Quayside he witnessed V-1 attacks.

Of course, that experience of drone warfare is reflected in the present day naval actions.

A condition [something you can do nothing about] of the Civil War was that there were only three deep water ports south of Cape Fear.

The shallow waters of the Gulf meant that shallow draft vessels laden with salt from Havana could run up creeks & rivers. Fleet actions were littoral & riverine vs forts.

Y

Your question was,"name a major fleet battle that occurred in the middle of the ocean", and I did just that. I'm not splitting hairs.

Must be nice to be right.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Its important to realize how fast long distance telegraph communication was improving in the years leading up to the Civil War. Its not a coincidence that the connection to Utah and California was completed about 7 months after the outbreak of open war. The speed and accuracy of telegraphy was improving. The companies were already consolidating and splitting up the markets. There were competing transcribing systems. But many operators could transcribe messages off the audible signal. As a tool for reporting what had happened, like success at Vicksburg and disappointment at Chickamauga, it was a huge time saver. As a tool for issuing orders or outlining future plans, I think the telegraph system was too vulnerable to leaks.
Grant did not try to manage the Chattanooga operation with the telegraph connection to Nashville. He went in person and communicated with Thomas, Hooker and Sherman in person and in writing, with minimal reliance on telegraphs. And he never put his exact plans in his telegraph messages to Washington.

You got that right. Grant rode the 60 mile long supply line from h•^^ personally. From Chattanooga he controlled all of the operations west of the mountains.

Lincoln was deeply concerned for the Unionists in East Tennessee. There was also great concern for Cumberland Gap.

Grant sent Dana to Knoxville to report on conditions there. The Eckert Collection at the Huntington Library has Dana's personal eyes only logbook. Grant used Dana to talk directly to Lincoln avoiding the chain of command.

An example of how effective the telegraph network was is the fall back from Chickamauga. Rosecrans' field HQ had a telegraphic link to Chattanooga. Via that link News of the defeat was sent immediately to Washington & via Dana.

By chance Lincoln & Stanton were together when they received the bad news. Within 22 hours two corps of the A of the Potomac were on platforms & loading for Chattanooga.

Of course the logistical & ongoing transportation systems were managed via telegraph.

 

[wausaubob]

You got that right. Grant rode the 60 mile long supply line from h•^^ personally. From Chattanooga he controlled all of the operations west of the mountains.

Lincoln was deeply concerned for the Unionists in East Tennessee. There was also great concern for Cumberland Gap.

Grant sent Dana to Knoxville to report on conditions there. The Eckert Collection at the Huntington Library has Dana's personal eyes only logbook. Grant used Dana to talk directly to Lincoln avoiding the chain of command.

An example of how effective the telegraph network was is the fall back from Chickamauga. Rosecrans' field HQ had a telegraphic link to Chattanooga. Via that link News of the defeat was sent immediately to Washington & via Dana.

By chance Lincoln & Stanton were together when they received the bad news. Within 25 hours two corps of the A of the Potomac were on platforms & loading for Chattanooga.

Of course the logistical & ongoing transportation systems were managed via telegraph.

Dana and Rosecrans reported the bad news. That's an example of how much time was saved by telegraphy. A few days later Grant was summoned to Indiana were he met Stanton. The telegraph was used to set up an early meeting between the general and the Sec'y of War.
In addition, as you mentioned, the modernizing of the railroad system descending from Covington and Louisville was organized and managed by telegraph. The two revolutions, one being the civil engineering and systems management required to build and run a large railroad system, and the beginnings of reliable electrical communication went hand in hand.
The fast evolution of naval warfare receives much attention, but these two other revolutions were sweeping away the past even before the US Civil War began.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Dana and Rosecrans reported the bad news. That's an example of how much time was saved by telegraphy. A few days later Grant was summoned to Indiana were he met Stanton. The telegraph was used to set up an early meeting between the general and the Sec'y of War.
In addition, as you mentioned, the modernizing of the railroad system descending from Covington and Louisville was organized and managed by telegraph. The two revolutions, one being the civil engineering and systems management required to build and run a large railroad system, and the beginnings of reliable electrical communication went hand in hand.
The fast evolution of naval warfare receives much attention, but these two other revolutions were sweeping away the past even before the US Civil War began.

Definately the hand & glove of RR & telegraph is where the whole is much greater than the parts.

The prep for the June 1863 Tullahoma Campaign included (+/-) 100 miles of telegraph wire loaded on wagons.

The genius of the USMRR engineering included prefab standard bridge trusses & flatcars with what amounted to model RR-like track sections. These humble ingredients inoculated the N&CRR from anything the A of TN cavalry & nature could throw at it.

Note: I confess that I don't understand why we keep having Military Telegraph System 101 threads. The Civil War Signals website is comprehensive. How many times can this Alibaba's cave be ignored? There has even been a glaringly bogus Wiki post with a 30 year error posted.

We don't post references just to show off. Please read up so everyone can discuss at a higher level.

 

[Old Soldier]

Telegraph and railroad went hand-in-hand. On many lines outside the cities, it was the telegraph that told the station a train was coming. (the cities had coded indicators which used telegraph signals). Since the railroad required clearance either side, it was an ideal route for the telegraph line too. As for tapping, it was not as simple as wireless interception. It required three things - access to the two lines, apparatus for listening to transmissions and finally - someone who could interpret what was being sent - even in clear (uncoded) on the spot. Once intercepted and you had the information, you then had to get it back to your HQ and since all official telegraph lines were behind enemy lines - and the opposition tended to cut the unofficial ones that went to the other side. You can see it was not so easy-peasy.

 

[wausaubob]

Definately the hand & glove of RR & telegraph is where the whole is much greater than the parts.

The prep for the June 1863 Tullahoma Campaign included (+/-) 100 miles of telegraph wire loaded on wagons.

The genius of the USMRR engineering included prefab standard bridge trusses & flatcars with what amounted to model RR-like track sections. These humble ingredients inoculated the N&CRR from anything the A of TN cavalry & nature could throw at it.

Note: I confess that I don't understand why we keep having Military Telegraph System 101 threads. The Civil War Signals website is comprehensive. How many times can this Alibaba's cave be ignored? There has even been a glaringly bogus Wiki post with a 30 year error posted.

We don't post references just to show off. Please read up so everyone can discuss at a higher level.

Signaling was cheaper and more easily transportable than telegraph equipment and the heavy collection of dry cells known as batteries in those days. The telegraph was an indispensable strategic tool, because of its ability to quickly cover long distances.

 

[wausaubob]

It became much easier to form and run a big company with multiple locations between 1861 and 1880. Daniel McCallum wrote about the methods of organizing tasks and keeping accountability in the system. His work applied well to railroads and armies.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Signaling was cheaper and more easily transportable than telegraph equipment and the heavy collection of dry cells known as batteries in those days. The telegraph was an indispensable strategic tool, because of its ability to quickly cover long distances.

FYI: The Telegraph was powered by wet cell batteries.

This is a ten volt wet cell battery. It amounts to the one we put in smoke detectors. The sulfuric acid was in large glass jars. Special built sprung wagons carried the scary liquid. For long distance, the batteries were wired together.

The Beardslee Repeating Telegraph / Field Telegraph never needed a battery. It was powered by a magneto. Range, depending on a host of variables, was 5 to 8 miles.

Beardslee's were deployed with miles of wire & poles. A series of Beardslee stations were critical in the A of the Cumberland's switch from the left to center on June 23, 1863.

 

[leftyhunter]

If one looks at the US Civil War in the context of what had already been seen in the US/Mexican war, and the Crimean War, its difficult see how the non industrialized Confederacy can defeat the industrialized US.
As I have stated elsewhere, the Confederacy won enough land battles to win the war. While they were winning those tactical contests, the Confederacy's strategic situation continued to get worse. That's how the US won and the Confederacy lost. The war ended in complete victory for the side that achieved naval dominance because that belligerent's armies were better supplied at lower cost than were those of the Confederates.

The Confederacy never came close to winning enough land battles to win the war. An armies job in a conventional war is to sieze and occupy enemy territory not give up territory which is what the Confederate Army did each and every year.
Yes the Union Navy played a crucial role in defeating the Confederacy.
Leftyhunter

 

[Bentonville]

I belive a handful of CSN & CSMC from the Spray ffought at Natual Bridge in Florida. The Spray also kept the foundry at Newport safe.

Gotta love that brown water navy.