Night attacks.

[Trooper "D"]

In another thread they are discussing the Battle of Shiloh. I am uncertain if the Confederate forces there were even capable of conducting a night attack. All in all, night attacks were not very common during the Civil War. Attacks or battles during the hours of darkness were not very successful. To better understand why, I was tying to look at night battles and why they were successful or not successful.

1. Is it possible that at night, the advantage went from the attacker to the defender? If so, generals would be hesitant to attack at night when the advantages were with the defenders. Based on Civil War tactics and command and control issues, I could see where coordinating an attack during the night would be difficult. Would the defending general have less of a command and control issue?

2. I do not believe that officers or soldiers were well trained in night time fighting. Although extensive and realistic night time fighting techniques training could help overcome command and control issues, I have not seen where officers or soldiers were well schooled in night time battles, but perhaps other forum members are more knowledgeable than I.

3. Next question would be, if all the day time marching and fighting had made soldiers and officers just too exhausted to engage in a night battle. Hungry and exhausted soldiers would need a simple to understand attack plan that was easy to conduct with limited command and control. Unknown terrain experienced during the dark, would make a simple attack more difficult.

Research Spotsylvania and Cold Harbor. Early morning attacks in the dark worked out well for the Yanks at Spotsylvania CH. Unprimed weapons so nobody fired too soon actually worked...twice. Cold Harbor was continually delayed because of difficulty getting to the jump off point and ended up not being an early morning darkness assault.

 

[Kentucky Derby Cavalier.]

Research Spotsylvania and Cold Harbor. Early morning attacks in the dark worked out well for the Yanks at Spotsylvania CH. Unprimed weapons so nobody fired too soon actually worked...twice. Cold Harbor was continually delayed because of difficulty getting to the jump off point and ended up not being an early morning darkness assault.

Wow, I didn't know this.

 

[Trooper "D"]

Wow, I didn't know this.

The assaults on the Mule Shoe at Spotsylvania CH is very riveting research material. It is hard to imagine that things happened as they really did.

 

[Scott1967]

The assaults on the Mule Shoe at Spotsylvania CH is very riveting research material. It is hard to imagine that things happened as they really did.

Its easier to attack at night a fixed location , That still does not make it easy but if the enemy isn't moving around then a least you can point your troops in the right direction without confusing scouting reports of where the enemy is imho.

 

[Stone in the wall]

The artillery had been removed from the mule shoe, as Lee was expecting another flanking move, making it close to impossible to defend. Then many of the Confederate's guns just went "pop" and failed to discharge due to wet powder from the damp rainy weather.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Rappahannock Station saw the Union attack launched at the end of the day and carried into night. The Confederates were in clear entrenched positions so their location was a known quantity. The darkness helped an undersized Uniom force achieve success but also allowes some of the Confederates to escape.

Farther back, the War of 1812 had two night battles. Lundy's Lane carried on for hours after dark. (Winfield Scott commanded a brigade there.) Andrew Jackson launched a night raid on the British camp before the Battle of New Orleans. The result was basically a chaotic, confused melee.

 

[Jim Heen]

I am currently reading a book on the Battle of Borodino by Alexander Mikaberidze. The first day's fighting revolved around the Shevardino redoubt. After the the French captured it, the Russians retook it at dusk. The French then began moving their forces between the redoubt and the nearby town in the dark for a night attack. The Russians perceived the movement and had their cavalry charge the French infantry which was cut to pieces. However, 2 following French units formed square which was not perceived by the Russian cavalry who were surprised and repulsed with loss when they were suddenly fired upon by the almost invisible French squares.

The Russians also saw French cavalry moving and the commander sent forward his lancers. But in the dark, they did not realize they were charging cuirassiers where their lances were basically worthless and the Russians were routed. As the French cavalry prepared to charge the last of the Russian infantry outside the redoubt, the Russian commander ordered his men to loudly play their drums and cheer as though they were reinforcements but not to fire and give away their position. This confused the French cavalry long enough for Russian reinforcements to arrive to repel the attack.

From this sequence can be seen numerous problems both sides encountered in a night attack. After all of the above, Kutusov pulled his forces out from the redoubt that night to establish a refused left flank.

 

[Western Reserve Volunteer]

As an artillerist, I do wonder if anyone took advantage of darkness/dusk to move the artillery up closer to the enemy to harass him during the night, then withdraw before daybreak. I figure closing range might negate some of the fire control issues, and if you were strictly going for harassment fire would be less important. Having done night firing before, the biggest problem I can see is being able to see everyone else on the gun crew so you can service the piece, though I suppose at a certain point your eyes would adapt to the darkness (or would the flash from firing temporarily blind you?). I don't think you could achieve this kind of thing with a unit larger than a battery, due to the coordination issues.

I seem to recall a thread where the use of dark lanterns (oil lanterns with only one lens) were used for night attack/movement. Did anyone ever use those phosphorus stage lights, the really powerful ones used in Victorian theaters, to try and light up what they were attacking? It seems to me the darkness ceases to be a advantage the very moment the unit goes from the march to the attack.

 

[Yankeedave]

There was the night crossing and fight at Brown's Ferry on Oct. 27th.

 

[Old Soldier]

Night attacks from the position of a staff officer. In this period of history, they were still often considered to be rather 'below the belt' by some. Night was when you rested your army, lit fires and 'retired for the night'. The opposition often could not be seen and identified which meant that standard battlefield tactics could not be used to the advantage of the attacker. It WAS useful for observation as you could spot -and smell - your enemy's campfires. The most successful night attacks seem to have been made in close country on known formations or on fortifications, usually by 'irregular' forces - light cavalry, riflemen, light infantry - backed up with a general advance to secure the position. In campaigns of maneuver, night was often used to mask troop movements so that troops would be in the best position at First Light. Again, there was still the idea that, as an officer and a gentleman, you should let your opponent try to assemble their forces before you made your attack, harassed by your field artillery fire, of course. Why? Let them assemble all in one place instead of spread out, then your volley fire and artillery would have the greatest effect.

 

[tomlamarcooughlin]

Hard call really too many variables like if the defenders were expecting to be attacked, obstacles, ext. Although I can only think of one night attack that worked due to the enemy not expecting it but it was a century earlier on Christmas day when Washington crossed the Delaware River. That turned out pretty well, Better a Union Billy than a Union Jack!

The Rev War had one other that didn't fare as well. At Paoli the Brits used bayonets so whenever they saw a gun-flash they knew it was American and attacked that position. 53 Americans KIA (and buried at the battlefield) with few Brit. losses. We called it the Paoli Massacre for years, but it gave us our first battle cry-REMEMBER PAOLI!

 

[major bill]

I have done Army marksmanship training at night. I have many times did night offensive training. The number of soldiers that can hit anything at night is low and getting all my people qualified at night was difficult. Night operations are also difficult to control and with out radios and filed phones I can see control issues. Extensive night training can help, but just how much night offensive or defensive training did Civil War soldiers get?

 

[Sgt. Tyree]

Successful night attacks pre-20th Century seem to have been mostly raids involving a handful of elite. Operations like Robert Rogers' raid on St Francis, for instance. There were many others but I can't think of any on the scale of ACW battles.

 

[Sgt. Tyree]

Extensive night training can help, but just how much night offensive or defensive training did Civil War soldiers get?

I suspect none. I can't think of any ACW unit equivalent to Rogers' Rangers. The sharpshooter units, while effective light infantry, were there to skirmish and screen line units, not to conduct night raids.

 

[major bill]

I suspect none.

Night combat training was and is not as well done as WELL it might be. I once read the Soviet troops received three times as much night training as the U.S. Army. The assumption was that at night the advantage would be to the Soviet Army.

 

[History hoarder63]

In another thread they are discussing the Battle of Shiloh. I am uncertain if the Confederate forces there were even capable of conducting a night attack. All in all, night attacks were not very common during the Civil War. Attacks or battles during the hours of darkness were not very successful. To better understand why, I was tying to look at night battles and why they were successful or not successful.

1. Is it possible that at night, the advantage went from the attacker to the defender? If so, generals would be hesitant to attack at night when the advantages were with the defenders. Based on Civil War tactics and command and control issues, I could see where coordinating an attack during the night would be difficult. Would the defending general have less of a command and control issue?

2. I do not believe that officers or soldiers were well trained in night time fighting. Although extensive and realistic night time fighting techniques training could help overcome command and control issues, I have not seen where officers or soldiers were well schooled in night time battles, but perhaps other forum members are more knowledgeable than I.

3. Next question would be, if all the day time marching and fighting had made soldiers and officers just too exhausted to engage in a night battle. Hungry and exhausted soldiers would need a simple to understand attack plan that was easy to conduct with limited command and control. Unknown terrain experienced during the dark, would make a simple attack more difficult.

Night attacks are generally most successful when performed by smaller trained units attacking a specific limited target. Coordination at night is very difficult once troops get too spread out. During the American Revolution there were several night attacks that were very successful but again they were generally performed by smaller units (<2000 men) with specific objectives and good discipline. The ones that immediately come to mind are Stony Point NY, Redoubts #9/10 at Yorktown and Paoli Pa.

 

[Sgt. Tyree]

Night combat training was and is not as well done as WELL it might be. I once read the Soviet troops received three times as much night training as the U.S. Army. The assumption was that at night the advantage would be to the Soviet Army.

We did a lot of night training and I remember it going well for the most part. But I remember most of our night attacks being platoon attacks, so they were not usually big enough to turn into a cluster.

Typical would be staging in an assembly area. A night movement of about three klicks. Final preparation at an objective rally point. Then a platoon night attack and consolidating on the objective.

It's easier to pull off night operations smoothly when fewer troops are involved for sure.

 

[Old Soldier]

I suspect, not having researched it yet, that many 'night attacks' will have been either on isolated targets on the flank - disrupting transport, railroads, or tactical targets within a night's march in front of an advance, bridges (intact!), small fortifications. That is how armies at that time worked. Distances involved will have been, at most, those reached on horseback at night. Really important ones on the flank may even have been a day's ride or more away for targets like telegraph lines, railroad depots and marshalling yards.

 

[Trooper "D"]

I suspect none. I can't think of any ACW unit equivalent to Rogers' Rangers. The sharpshooter units, while effective light infantry, were there to skirmish and screen line units, not to conduct night raids.

And the Sharpshooters were there to pick off ocifers and gunners from long range. The original "reach out and touch someone".

 

[Trooper "D"]

I suspect, not having researched it yet, that many 'night attacks' will have been either on isolated targets on the flank - disrupting transport, railroads, or tactical targets within a night's march in front of an advance, bridges (intact!), small fortifications. That is how armies at that time worked. Distances involved will have been, at most, those reached on horseback at night. Really important ones on the flank may even have been a day's ride or more away for targets like telegraph lines, railroad depots and marshalling yards.

I think Col. Mosby did some night work. Seemed to work out for him. Once again, small numbers in the operations which is definitely easier. Success also was due too having giant brass b--ls in order to casually ride into a US camp as if they belonged there and act naturally.
"Act Naturally". That reminds me of a Ren and Stimpy where they sneak into a prison through the toilet. They are sitting in bowl when footsteps sound and Ren says something like, "Stimpy, someone is coming. Quick! Act natural". So they both start floating around like, well....like floaters in the bowl.
I'm twisted, I know. I still laugh when I think about that. Sorry for going off topic.
Cheers!