"Heaviest Artillery Barrage"?

In the course of the war, artillery plays an important part in repulsing attacks, but what about its role in barrage, as Lee envisioned on July 3rd. My thinking is it rarely played a decisive role and "softening up" the defensive line. Am I right, or are my fuzes burning too slowly?
 
In the course of the war, artillery plays an important part in repulsing attacks, but what about its role in barrage, as Lee envisioned on July 3rd. My thinking is it rarely played a decisive role and "softening up" the defensive line. Am I right, or are my fuzes burning too slowly?

The Civil War is right in the period where technology was changing how artillery was used.

At the battle of Friedland in 1807, Marshall Victor's artillery officer Senarmont massed his guns and rolled them aggressively forward to blow the Russians apart at close range with case shot. While competent generals had massed guns for years, Senarmont had combined that with aggressive offensive movement to very close ranges.

From that point on, Senarmont's tactic was a prime battle winner. Aggressive gunners copied it, pushing the guns as close as they could. From 1807 to the Mexican war in 1846-47, this was how guns were used. Braxton Bragg's work at Buena Vista was the most perfect example in the Americas, and the aggressive use of guns like this was the basis for US combat superiority in that war.

But technology changed things. Rifled guns appeared, both artillery and infantry, and were in mass deployment by the Civil War. Batteries trying to roll forward against infantry could now be engaged at 300 yards instead of 100 or less. Rifled artillery could attack the batteries from long range as they tried to move .

Largely as a result, the tactic of 1807-47 didn't work in the Civil War. Artillery was still just as powerful or even more so on the defensive, but it was difficult to dominate with it offensively. You can find some examples of Union rifled batteries dominating in the Atlanta Campaign at long range, and at Nashville -- usually when they can take an entrenched position in a crossfire.

Tim
 
Believe Trice has hit on an end to the discussion: the word, "barrage." Without looking up Webster's definition, which may or not explain in in terms that were understood during the ACE, "barrage" means to me overwhelming firepower for relatively short period to gain a specific advantage. Hence, Sumter and Vicksburg and Petersburge were not in themselves "barrages." There might have been barrages during the course of the sieges, but none of them would equal the ferocity of that on Day 3.

Just a thought.

ole
 
Dear Ole and List Members;

Barrage, bombardment, salvos, cannonade, hail; seemingly are interchangable in the Thesaurus.

Sometimes when searching the Official Records of the Rebellion they preferred using cannonades most of the time.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf
 
I read in....could be Sears? Or another book(very scholarly of me), that while the bombardment didn't damage or drive off II Corps, but by falling behind the front line, it had the effect of isolating the defenders. Pickett's Charge would have to be stopped by the guns and riflemen in place when the bombardment started.

Am I totally offbase with this assertion?

What the book your thinking off is i dont know, but its likly the author was using a "Box Barrage" to explain the effect of the fire, in that initiual fire on target is lifted to isolate the chosen point of attack, and catch in motion any reserves being moved forward and or hit any formation placed in reserve posistion that would normaly be in safe ground. Box barrage was not a WBTS Arty tactic, but in some repsects it had that effect and has been commented on by authors in those terms.
 
At Gettysburg, prior to "Pickett's Charge", the Confederates opened a (one or two hour?) artillery barrage on Cemetery Ridge in order to soften the enemy for the impending infantry assault. Many accounts say that there were 170 Confederate artillery pieces in action in this bombardment, and that it was "the heaviest artillery barrage" on the North American continent, etc.

I have some questions about this. As I suggested above, there is some disagreement as to just how long that barrage lasted, was it one or two hours, or somewhere in between? Also, most sources say 170 guns, others more or less, what's the best estimate and/or consensus of the number of guns?

Now, the real reason I ask the above is that I am wondering how the Union shelling of the Confederate lines about Richmond/Petersburg on April 1, 1865 compare with that.

I'm informed that the Union barrage lasted 3 hours, approx. from 9pm to midnight, or 9:30 to around midnight. I cannot find a source on how many guns were employed in this action. How long was it, and just how many artillery pieces?

So my bottom line question is, aside from the tactical conditions and the terrain, etc.; how do these two artillery barrages compare? Was that of April 1, 1865 even heavier than that of July 3, 1865?

--

Not sure if you after number of assets used or weight of munitions.

Assuming 170 assets at 60 min duration, =3400 per hour, http://www.nps.gov/frsp/fredhist.htm short answer, but the link is a nice read, 8000 over 2 hours from 150 guns at f-burg would be my first guess as to the heaviest weight of munitions used in the field, siege would be higher overal, but at a lower rate of fire.

Edit, a quick search found this.http://history.rays-place.com/1st-ct-ha.htm which has some data of intrest.

The first siege operations culminated in the battle of Petersburg mine, July 30th, 1864. On the 31st the great mine explosion occurped, when six tons of powder were exploded directly under the confederate forts near Petersburg. In this siege eightyone guns and mortars were served by the 1st Connecticut Artillery and the 4th New York Artillery, and about seventy-five tons of ammunition, or 3,833 rounds, were fired during the battle; and 225 tons, or 12,229 rounds in the preliminary work. This battle was probably the first in which spherical case shot was used from mortars. The novel expedient of putting thirty 12 lb. cannister shot under the bursting charge of a 10-inch shell, proved very effective.

Immediately after the battle a projected movement of the army of the Potomac necessitated the moving of 52 heavy guns and mortars, with all their ammunitions, etc., with urgent haste from the front of the 5th, 9th and 18th corps, to headquarters, a distance of eight miles. This was accomplished in twenty-seven hours, twenty-two light artillery and mule teams, and one hundred and seventy wagons being employed. The aggregate weight moved was 225 tons, and the work was done by the companies that had served the guns in the action. The enemy, did not discover the movement, which began at midnight of July 30th. The siege now took the form of bombardment, the average weight of metal thrown daily was, August 15th 2 tons; September 7th, 8 tons; October 4th, tons; November 2d, 7 tons; December 2d, 1 ton; January 1st, 6 tons; and February 1st 1 ton; aggregating 793 tons, or 37,264 rounds.

Around Petersburg, sudden artillery battles occurred at all hours of the day and night, often involving the entire line to check an annoying enfilade fire from the left bank of the Appomattox. A 13-inch sea coast mortar was mounted on a reinforced platform car and served on a curve of the railroad track. This novelty was widely known as the Petersburg express. During these operations the siege train was organized as a separate brigade under Colonel Abbott; such additional troops as were needed being temporarily attached. The aggregate number at times exceeded 3,500 men; the train contained 127 guns, 73 mortars, and the line of batteries was miles long. Over 1,200 tons of ammunition, or 63,940 rounds, hauled an average distance of seven miles by wagon, were fired during the siege.
 
Dear Ole and List Members;

Barrage, bombardment, salvos, cannonade, hail; seemingly are interchangable in the Thesaurus.

Sometimes when searching the Official Records of the Rebellion they preferred using cannonades most of the time.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf

Technically, the "barrage" was invented about 1915 and refers to indirect artillery fire used in certain ways. A young Confederate gunner in Virginia may have been the first to actually use modern artillery for indirect fire, and is often cited as the originator.

A barrage is basically a wall of fire laid down to interdict or suppress an enemy. A "box barrage" is composed of multiple barrages, each making a side of the box. A "creeping barrage" is one that moves forward, often according to a time sequence, such as X minutes of fire on target A, then advance 200 yards for Y minutes, then advance 200 yards for Z minutes, etc. There are other variations.

Before 1915, artillery mostly fired over open sights directly at a visible target.

Tim
 
Not sure if you after number of assets used or weight of munitions.

Assuming 170 assets at 60 min duration, =3400 per hour, http://www.nps.gov/frsp/fredhist.htm short answer, but the link is a nice read, 8000 over 2 hours from 150 guns at f-burg would be my first guess as to the heaviest weight of munitions used in the field, siege would be higher overal, but at a lower rate of fire.

Edit, a quick search found this.http://history.rays-place.com/1st-ct-ha.htm which has some data of intrest.

The first siege operations culminated in the battle of Petersburg mine, July 30th, 1864. On the 31st the great mine explosion occurped, when six tons of powder were exploded directly under the confederate forts near Petersburg. In this siege eightyone guns and mortars were served by the 1st Connecticut Artillery and the 4th New York Artillery, and about seventy-five tons of ammunition, or 3,833 rounds, were fired during the battle; and 225 tons, or 12,229 rounds in the preliminary work. This battle was probably the first in which spherical case shot was used from mortars. The novel expedient of putting thirty 12 lb. cannister shot under the bursting charge of a 10-inch shell, proved very effective.

Immediately after the battle a projected movement of the army of the Potomac necessitated the moving of 52 heavy guns and mortars, with all their ammunitions, etc., with urgent haste from the front of the 5th, 9th and 18th corps, to headquarters, a distance of eight miles. This was accomplished in twenty-seven hours, twenty-two light artillery and mule teams, and one hundred and seventy wagons being employed. The aggregate weight moved was 225 tons, and the work was done by the companies that had served the guns in the action. The enemy, did not discover the movement, which began at midnight of July 30th. The siege now took the form of bombardment, the average weight of metal thrown daily was, August 15th 2 tons; September 7th, 8 tons; October 4th, tons; November 2d, 7 tons; December 2d, 1 ton; January 1st, 6 tons; and February 1st 1 ton; aggregating 793 tons, or 37,264 rounds.

Around Petersburg, sudden artillery battles occurred at all hours of the day and night, often involving the entire line to check an annoying enfilade fire from the left bank of the Appomattox. A 13-inch sea coast mortar was mounted on a reinforced platform car and served on a curve of the railroad track. This novelty was widely known as the Petersburg express. During these operations the siege train was organized as a separate brigade under Colonel Abbott; such additional troops as were needed being temporarily attached. The aggregate number at times exceeded 3,500 men; the train contained 127 guns, 73 mortars, and the line of batteries was miles long. Over 1,200 tons of ammunition, or 63,940 rounds, hauled an average distance of seven miles by wagon, were fired during the siege.


All i can say is WOW, but if you prefer to put it in terms of "tons of Iron", I'll ask again, which barrage was heaviest?

=
 
All i can say is WOW, but if you prefer to put it in terms of "tons of Iron", I'll ask again, which barrage was heaviest?

=

Depends, (im not at home where i have a selection of the heaviest weight of munitions used so am using a quick search and memory)the quote thats got you intrested to start with refers to both CS and US fire as being the heaviest barrage, Hunt using 80 guns for 60-95 mins, CS 172 for the same in the main assualt and a 60 min prep by 80 odd CS guns answered by Union fire that was around 30 mins. A Porter in his MM gives abreakdon of time and rate of fire, along with munition started with, Hunts report also details further long range Union fire that would have ment a 220 total number of guns used, but many of extreme range and little return.

So its likly that this was the heavist barrage, in numbers of assets used but is refering to both sides. Your query of the single heavist barrage is a t***** issue, much depends on what your source is refering to, is the order by Grant for all guns to fire on 4 July towards the CS lines a barrage in the same sense as Bursides order for 5000 rounds to be delivered as quickly as possible into F-Burg for instance, your best bet is to look at ordinace reports for munitions expended at battles where large numbers of Arty were used, and then to determine the rate it was dilvered at, not a 5 min job.

In theory Mac siege train of 62, exclusive of all other guns, could delver 400 tons a day at a max 2 miles range,its the largest theortical delivery of munitions i know of and would not be out of place in the world wars.
 
there is a book on WWI that might have bearing here.... John Mosier's the Great Myths of World War One... in it he goes into extensive detail on the artillery used and what came before it... For instance the French 75 had only 15 degrees of traverse....
 
[
there is a book on WWI that might have bearing here.... John Mosier's the Great Myths of World War One... in it he goes into extensive detail on the artillery used and what came before it... For instance the French 75 had only 15 degrees of traverse....

That cant be right, is the book claiming that the single tail had only a 15 degree traverse or that its a myth that is did?.

French 75 when in AT role had a traverse of 58 degree.http://wiki.healthhaven.com/Canon_de_75_modèle_1897

As field piece http://www.btinternet.com/~wars/58thtwomey.htm without a split tail. shows how it was used to increase range etc.

In US Service Caliber: 75-mm 2.95 in
Weight(in action): 1544 kg 3400 lbs
Shell Weight: 6.628 kg 13.6 mils
Range: 12,960 m 13,8970 (14 miles)
Elevation: -164 mils to 809mils -9 degrees to 45 degrees 30’
Traverse: 1066 mils 60 degrees
Traction: 6 Horses or a 2 1/2 ton truck

http://www.cannonartillery.com/guns_and_ammo/artillery_history/cannon_walk/page_one.cfm
 
The gun could be traversed laterally 3 degrees to the right or 3 degrees to the left by sliding the trail on the wheel's axle.
I missed the part that said 58 degrees.

ole
 
S Footes gives the heaviest naval bombaradment, Fort Fisher and gives number and weight of munitions expended.
 
similar shield and wheels as the standard version,
So the standard version had six degrees of traverse and the split-trail had 52? Which qualifies as the official French 75? Nevermind. Off-topic.

ole
 
Back
Top