Civil War Joint Operations Papers

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#1
I've been slowly collecting papers on Joint Operations - thought I would post them here for reference and discussion...

To start with...


Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Joint operations in the James River Basin, 1862-1865.
Author:
Zatt, David K.

Abstract: This
study is an analysis of Union joint operations in the James River Basin from 1862-1865. Specifically the contributions made by the Union Navy during the battles of this period. It begins with an analysis of the Peninsula Campaign conducted by Major General George B. McClellan and Rear Admiral Louis M. Goldsborough in 1862 and concludes with the Union forces entry into Richmond in April 1865. The Union Navy played a significant role in shaping the outcome of the battles for control of the James River Basin and the eventual capture of Richmond. The navy’s control of the river allowed Lieutenant General Grant to maintain his main supply base well forward in the theater. This enabled Grant to rapidly maneuver and resupply his forces. The study provides lessons on the difficulties of joint operations and the requirements to ensure success in the joint arena. Furthermore, it provides today’s United States military with a view of riverine and mine warfare operations and the implication of allowing these warfare areas to decay.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1993-06-03
Date: Digital
2007
Call number: ADA 274011
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-11-05

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments


(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#2
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Evolution of joint operations during the Civil War.
Author:
Reed, Michael A.
Branch/Country:
United States Army

Abstract:
History has demonstrated that amphibious assaults are among the most complex and challenging of all joint operations. The myriad of factors that evolved independently throughout the war did not become fully integrated until the winter of 1864-65. This thesis explores the maturation of joint amphibious operations during the U.S. Civil War, specifically through the assaults on Fort Fisher. This analysis will use modern joint doctrine as the framework to compare and contrast the two assaults. It will elaborate on how seaborne assaults differ from riverine assaults. Utilizing Fort Fisher as the focus develops an understanding of the interrelationship of these various factors and the challenges posed in their synchronization to achieve success. This study concludes that the operations reflected jointness, but also marked the emergence of modern amphibious assault concepts.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Focus Program:
Military History
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
2008-06-12
Date: Digital 2008-06-12
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2009-08-15
29

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#4
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Joint operations in the North Carolina sounds during the Civil War.
Author:
May, James J.

Abstract: This
study is a historical analysis of Union joint operations that occurred during the American Civil War in northeastern North Carolina. The study begins with a historical overview of joint operations then transitions into the events that occurred in northeastern North Carolina between February 1862 and June 1865. Joint operations in the sounds began with the assault of Roanoke Island in February 1862. This study documents the Roanoke Island operation and the missions that supported the capture of New Bern, Plymouth and Washington, North Carolina during 1862. Specific emphasis is placed on the difficulties encountered conducting joint riverine warfare in the restricted waters of North Carolina without the benefit of a unified commander. Although the concept of a unified commander was not utilized in the sounds of North Carolina, this study documents the maturation of the joint relationship that did exist. It further displays how the joint forces overcame the challenges of communications and both natural and man made obstacles. Overall, this study shows how success in the waters northeastern North Carolina was dependent on a joint effort but could have been more successful had a unified commander been appointed. Conclusions include present day application and considerations.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher :
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1995-06-02
Date: Digital
2007
Call number :
ADA 299566
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-06-27
64

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Last edited:

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#5
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Opportunities seized and squandered: an analysis of joint Union and Confederate operations at New Madrid and Island number ten.
Author:
Murawski, Jeffery J.
Branch/Country:
United States Navy

Abstract: The
first year of the Civil War saw the struggle intensify as both Federal and Confederate militaries had to mobilize forces, install a command structure, and identify strategies for their geographic commanders. In the Western Theater of the war, both Northern and Southern strategies focused upon the Mississippi River as the center of gravity to their respective successes. Island Number Ten was the tenth island south of the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, and along with the small town of New Madrid, Missouri, was one of the string of fortifications that the Confederates constructed to keep the Union forces from taking control of the river and splitting the Confederacy. In the spring of 1862, Union forces under Major General John Pope brought 20,000 Union Soldiers in conjunction with a Navy flotilla of ironclad gunboats against the Confederate's fortifications and 7,000 soldiers. What ensued was six weeks of unique fighting with joint Confederate and Union forces taking part. The root cause of the decisive Union victory is broken down in to the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of war. These root causes, along with the leadership lessons throughout the levels show the enduring value of the analysis of the operations at New Madrid and Island Number Ten.

Series: Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Focus Program:
Military History
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
2016-06-10
Date: Digital
2016-06-10
Release statement: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2016-08-30
96

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#6
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Joint Operations and the Vicksburg Campaign.
Author:
Tindall, John W

Abstract: This
historical study investigates why Union joint operations between army and navy forces on the Mississippi and other western rivers were effective. It examines the development of a joint doctrine at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels of war. Joint riverine warfare on the western rivers was a new experience for the U.S. military. There was no clear delineation between services of specific missions or responsibilities. Joint operations incorporated numerous battlefield operating systems that the leadership had to integrate and synchronize. At the strategic level, Washington attempted to provide adequate vessels and other resources for the war on the rivers. However, the national leadership never did institute an adequate joint command and control structure for the Western Theater. The army operational commanders came to depend on the advice of the naval officers for acquiring vessels and advice on water-borne operations. On the other hand, the naval officers relied on the infrastructure of an established army to facilitate their operations. The personalities of the joint leadership were important factors in the success of joint warfare. Grant, Sherman, and Porter developed a special relationship, which allowed them to overcome tactical disagreements, and maintain a clear focus on the strategic objective of capturing Vicksburg.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1993-06-03
Date: Digital
2007
Call number:
ADA 273156
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-11-05
125

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,623
Location
Denver, CO
#7
I think that by March of 1863 Grant was aware that a huge strategic opportunity had been missed to shorten the war and save lives when Halleck omitted to co-operate with Farragut and capture Vicksburg. Halleck's force was larger enough to hold the Confederates at Corinth, and simultaneously send an expedition into central Mississippi.
When Farragut got above Port Hudson with the Hartford in 1863 there was a determination to discard Halleck's operational limitations and take high risks not to let the chance pass again.
Supporting Farragut and sharing in the potential laurels for capturing the Confederate stronghold at Vicksburg should have been persuasive arguments to gain Porter's co-operation.
Thanks for the citations. :D
 

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#8
Collection: School of Advanced Military Studies Monographs
Title:
Naval support to Grant's campaign of 1864-65: by design or by coincidence?
Author:
Murdock, Harry M.

Abstract: By
1863, the Civil War was basically a stalemate between the two belligerents. Though the Union forces had achieved some success in conducting joint expeditions that resulted in securing the Mississippi River and the majority of the Southern ports, the major land armies of the Union were generally ineffective. In March 1864, General Ulysses S. Grant was named General-in-Chief of the Union army; he designed a campaign for future operations that called for synchronized operations by the Union armies supported by the Union navy. This monograph examines the naval support to Grant's campaign to determine whether or not the provided support was by design or just coincidence. The monograph initially establishes the theater of war setting that Grant inherited when he assumed the billet of General-in-Chief. This is followed by a summary of the campaign from a naval perspective. The monograph concludes with an analysis of the naval support provided to the campaign using the four components of a successful campaign espoused in Lieutenant Colonel James Dubik's “A Guide to the Study of Operational Art and Campaign Design.” Based on the analysis, it is evident that the naval support was provided by design. Grant demonstrated an extraordinary ability to visualize operations in the entire theater of war. He fully understood and appreciated the usefulness of the sea dimension and exploited its use. The Union navy's command of the seas and resourcefulness allowed Grant to maintain his freedom of action, to operate from secure bases of operation, and to destroy the South's capacity to wage war.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC), School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) Monograph
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1992-03-10
Date: Digital
2007
Call number:
ADA 259129
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library:
Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-10-25
189

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#9
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Factors affecting joint cooperation during the Civil War.
Author:
Hanley, Timothy R.

Abstract: This
study is a historical analysis of selected joint Army/Navy operations conducted along the East Coast during the American Civil War. It begins with a description of the ante-bellum conditions of the Army and Navy and the organizational structure of the War and Navy Departments. Three joint operations are analyzed; the Fort Sumter Relief Expedition of 1861, the Port Royal Expedition of 1862, and the Charleston Campaign of 1863. In none of the joint operations covered by this study was there a unified command structure between the Army and Navy. Mutual support between the services was dependent upon voluntary cooperation between the respective service commanders. This study determines what factors influenced the degree of cooperation between the service commanders of joint operations during the Civil War. Many of the factors which either facilitated or hindered joint cooperation during that time could affect contemporary joint operations, particularly in the early stages before a unified command structure is established. An appreciation of those factors is both helpful in understanding the outcome of Civil War joint operations as well as providing some insight into the problems faced by contemporary commanders in a joint environment.

Series: Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1991-06-07
Date: Digital
2007
Call number:
ADA 241172
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2008-01-11
228

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#11
Do they have one on Charleston? That was the most futile effort on the Union's part to capture a city.

Collection:
Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Jointness in 1780 Charleston and 1861-1865 Charleston.
Author:
Campbell, John C.

Abstract:
Jointness between army and naval forces has been the focus of many historical studies. Yet, it is often difficult to determine how effective jointness was in accomplishing the required mission. Would the outcome have been the same if the forces operated more jointly? To help resolve this problem, this research focuses on a comparison and analysis between the jointness in the successful siege of Charleston by the British in 1780, and the unsuccessful siege of Charleston by the Union in 1861-1865. This research examines what role jointness played in the successful and failed sieges of Charleston during the two time periods. Charleston’s geography and fortifications played a key role in necessitating the need for forces to operate jointly. The effect of battle command and centers of gravity in relation to how forces operate jointly is also discussed. This research serves as a historical case study to help better understand the importance of jointness.

Series: Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : U.S. Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
2004-06-17
Date: Digital
2004-06-17
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2005-03-09

@gary

Cheers!
USS ALASKA

 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#12
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Confederate defense of Charleston, South Carolina.
Author:
Stone, Howard L., III

Abstract: This
study investigates the defense of Charleston, South Carolina, during the American Civil War. Charleston, during this period, is unique because of the diversified nature the military operations that took place there. Combat took place both on land and on water involving fortifications, ironclads and other warships, obstructions, torpedoes, and a submarine. Amphibious, psychological, and mine warfare was practiced. This study examines why the city's defenses and military operations developed as they did. It analyses a series of operations from the Union defense of Fort Sumter through the occupation of Morris Island. The blockade is also examined. This study provides reasons for the success of the Confederate defense and failure of Union offensive actions. The story of Charleston is a good example of an effective defensive operation. Charleston was not captured but evacuated when threatened by Sherman’s army. The example of Charleston also makes a strong case for joint military planning and operations. A detailed physical description of Charleston, an explanation of marine navigation during the period, and historical precedents are also presented to enhance an understanding of the operations examined.

Series: Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1992-06-05
Date: Digital
2007
Award winner:
Arter-Darby Military History Writing Award
Call number:
ADA 258517
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-11-30

@gary - and for extra special credit (and homework) :wink:
240

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#13
Collection: Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title:
Operations of the Western Gulf Blockading Squadron and the Department of the Gulf in the Gulf of Mexico, 1862-1864.
Author:
Despain, Jeffrey W.

Abstract:
During the Civil War, there were no joint commands with all service components unified under the same commander, with few exceptions. Instead, the command and control structure was based on close cooperation between the services, which was termed 'combined' operations. This study analyzes the combined operations of the U. S. Navy's Western Gulf Blockading Squadron and the U. S. Army's Department of the Gulf to determine the significant factors that affected the success, or failure, of these operations in the Gulf of Mexico between 1862-1864. The study analyzes the battle of New Orleans, operations along the Texas coast including Galveston, Sabine Pass, and the Rio Grande, and the battle of Mobile Bay. In these operations, the personalities and tactical abilities of the Union military leaders, sea power, and technology clearly had the most significant affect on the success of combined operations. The limitations of the command structure and the necessity to develop new tactics placed an added emphasis on the abilities of the commanders. Although Union combined operations were successful overall, it is evident that joint operations have a clear advantage over the divided command structure of combined operations. Joint operations would have enhanced the operations and achieved greater success.

Series:
Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1996-06-07
Date: Digital
2007
Award winner:
Arter-Darby Military History Writing Award
Call number:
ADA 313113
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library: Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-05-22
297

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Last edited:

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#15
Collection; Master of Military Art and Science Theses
Title; Union’s Naval War in Louisiana, 1861-1863.
Author;
Sledge, Christopher L.

Abstract;
Union naval operations in Louisiana featured some of the most important operations of the Civil War, led by two of the US Navy’s most distinguished officers. During the period from 1861 to 1863, Admirals David G. Farragut and David D. Porter led Union naval forces in Louisiana in conducting: a blockade of the New Orleans, the Confederacy’s largest city and busiest commercial port; a naval attack to capture New Orleans in April 1862; and joint operations to secure the Mississippi River, culminating in the surrender of Vicksburg and Port Hudson in July 1863. These operations have been the focus of many historical studies, but their relationship to Union naval strategy has often been overlooked. The primary elements of that strategy, as it applied in Louisiana, were a blockade of the Confederate coast and joint operations on the Mississippi River. This thesis studies the influences that shaped Union naval strategy in order to provide a strategic context for analyzing the development of naval operations in Louisiana from the implementation of the blockade to the opening of the Mississippi River. The result is a historical case study of the relationship between naval strategy and operations in a joint environment.

Series; Command and General Staff College (CGSC) MMAS thesis
Publisher; Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date; Original
2006-12-15
Date; Digital 2006-12-15
Award winner; Arter-Darby Military History Writing Award
Call number; ADA460776
Release statement; Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository; Combined Arms Research Library
Library; Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created;
2007-01-22
411

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Last edited:

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#16
Naval War College Review
Volume 59
Number 4 Autumn Article 7
2006
Fort Fisher—Amphibious Victory in the American Civil War
By Gary J. Ohls

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Naval War College Review by an authorized editor of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact repository.inquiries@usnwc.edu.

Historians and military professionals tend to agree on the importance of large armies to the outcome of the American CivilWar. Somuch attention has focused on the major battles and leaders of land warfare that other elements of military significance often receive less attention than deserved. Yet the ultimate victory of Union forces resulted froma total war effort, involving political, diplomatic, economic, military, and naval power. In no arena of conflict did the Union hold greater advantage than in its ability to assert naval force and conduct amphibious operations, and no operation in the entire Civil War better illustrates the Union’s ability to leverage amphibious power projection than the assault on Fort Fisher at the mouth of the Cape Fear River. The actions taken to capture Fort Fisher and thereby close down the last effective Confederate port—Wilmington, North Carolina—represent a particularly rich opportunity to study the amphibious elements of that war.

Gary Ohls, a retired colonel in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, teaches history and is completing a PhD dissertation in military/naval history at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth. A holder of three master’s degrees, he attended the Naval War College during the 1993–94 academic year, graduating with honors.
499

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
7,623
Location
Denver, CO
#17
Collection: School of Advanced Military Studies Monographs
Title:
Naval support to Grant's campaign of 1864-65: by design or by coincidence?
Author:
Murdock, Harry M.

Abstract: By
1863, the Civil War was basically a stalemate between the two belligerents. Though the Union forces had achieved some success in conducting joint expeditions that resulted in securing the Mississippi River and the majority of the Southern ports, the major land armies of the Union were generally ineffective. In March 1864, General Ulysses S. Grant was named General-in-Chief of the Union army; he designed a campaign for future operations that called for synchronized operations by the Union armies supported by the Union navy. This monograph examines the naval support to Grant's campaign to determine whether or not the provided support was by design or just coincidence. The monograph initially establishes the theater of war setting that Grant inherited when he assumed the billet of General-in-Chief. This is followed by a summary of the campaign from a naval perspective. The monograph concludes with an analysis of the naval support provided to the campaign using the four components of a successful campaign espoused in Lieutenant Colonel James Dubik's “A Guide to the Study of Operational Art and Campaign Design.” Based on the analysis, it is evident that the naval support was provided by design. Grant demonstrated an extraordinary ability to visualize operations in the entire theater of war. He fully understood and appreciated the usefulness of the sea dimension and exploited its use. The Union navy's command of the seas and resourcefulness allowed Grant to maintain his freedom of action, to operate from secure bases of operation, and to destroy the South's capacity to wage war.

Series: Command and General Staff College (CGSC), School of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) Monograph
Publisher:
Fort Leavenworth, KS : US Army Command and General Staff College,
Date: Original
1992-03-10
Date: Digital
2007
Call number:
ADA 259129
Release statement: Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)
Repository: Combined Arms Research Library
Library:
Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library
Date created:
2007-10-25
189

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
Good paper. In 1864, almost every United States operation had a combined arms component. Whether it was controlling steamboat traffic on the Cumberland River, or monitoring the Georgia coast in anticipation of Sherman's army arriving there, there was a plan involved.
There was one naval operation that looms large in the background, and that is Lt. Cushing dropping a torpedo on the Albermarle.
That must have a huge relief to Grant and the army.
The war was over once Terry and Porter captured Fort Fisher. The Confederacy disintegrated.
Thanks for posting this paper!
 

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#18
Naval War College Review
Volume 22
Number 4 April Article 7
1969
Abe Lincoln's Brown Water Navy
by Walter S. Pullar
U.S. Marine Corps

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Naval War College Review by an authorized editor of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact repository.inquiries@usnwc.edu.

https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6600&context=nwc-review
648

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Story

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
1,424
Location
SE PA
#19
@USS ALASKA AWESOME JOB, DOING THE HEAVY LIFTING!

I'll thank you in advance for the USN/USMC/USA undergraduate, or service-related school student, who winds up on this thread via google searching for raw material to write his term paper/thesis.

[Hey, kiddo - now it's your turn to thank the man. Sign up, do so].

nb: Not to insult anyone's intelligence by stating the obvious, but I'd recommend that anyone interested in this topic grab a copy of William B Cushing's account of his wartime service. That guy had pure brass balls.
https://rowman.com/ISBN/97807425705...il-War-Memoir-of-LCdr-William-B-Cushing-U-S-N

See also https://www.google.com/search?q=cus...rome..69i57.5939j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
 

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
3,711
#20
Accession Number : ADA297851
Title : The Union's Atlantic Blockade Campaign of 1861.
Descriptive Note : Final rept.,
Corporate Author : NAVAL WAR COLL NEWPORT RI JOINT MILITARY OPERATIONS DEPT
Personal Author(s) : Ritter, Wayne L., Jr
Report Date : 16 JUN 1995

Abstract : The Union's Atlantic blockade campaign of the South during the first year of the American Civil War is analyzed in the general context of operational art and with a view to lessons learned. The joint operations of Union forces are described at the operational level. Tactical descriptions of the first two engagements are detailed only as necessary to understand operational movement. Flag Officer Silas Stringham and Major General Benjamin Butler led a joint expedition to gain Federal access to the North Carolina interior waterways. Flag Officer Samuel du Pont and Brigadier General Thomas Sherman led a second expedition to establish an ideal base of operations at Port Royal, South Carolina. The combination of overwhelming force and sound tactics at key decisive points led to important Union victories that opened the door to effective follow-on operations. The campaign as a whole significantly tightened the Union blockade of the South, and helped to establish the economic, political, and military context for ultimate Union victory in the Civil War. (KAR) P. 1

Subject Categories : MILITARY OPERATIONS, STRATEGY AND TACTICS
Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
698

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

Similar threads




(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top