Night attacks.

[major bill]

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.

 

[Sheltowee]

Regarding CW era fighting-
With massed formations, nighttime attacks over rough terrain are risky business. Units breaking up, and incidental injuries, from falls, etc. would likely hamper strike effectiveness. Command and control non-existent.
Yes, the defenders would have the distinct advantage.
I agree that night fighting requires extensive training- and neither side appears to have developed such.
By comparison, today's infantry is well-schooled. But again, today would more commonly be platoon/ company sized movements…..not advancing a division, in line, across a battlefield.

 

[Nathan Stuart]

An interesting subject.

Suspect that coordinating attacking units in the nighttime would be much more difficult. There is more potential for assaulting units to misinterpret or misunderstand the attack objectives.

Imagine that fighting in the nighttime would be more conducive to close range hand-to-hand combat, as distance firing would be largely ineffectual. Also, the effectiveness of artillery firepower would be greatly reduced in the dark.

The topic of night fighting reminds me of Franklin, where the Confederate attack was launched late in the afternoon and continued well into the night, with Federal forces withdrawing around midnight.

 

[Kentucky Derby Cavalier.]

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.

Interesting topic.

 

[jackt62]

One battle that was fought at night was Wauhatchie in October 1863. In an attempt to disrupt Union occupation in Lookout Valley as part of the opening of the "Cracker Line," Longstreet mounted a failed assault against Geary's Division of Hooker's XII Corps.

 

[Kentucky Derby Cavalier.]

One battle that was fought at night was Wauhatchie in October 1863. In an attempt to disrupt Union occupation in Lookout Valley as part of the opening of the "Cracker Line," Longstreet mounted a failed assault against Geary's Division of Hooker's XII Corps.

How did it go?

 

[Scott1967]

Depending on the weather a soldier would look to the colours or flag for directions or as a base for manoeuvres that was pretty much impossible during the night unless of course a full moon gave some form of light even then smoke at night would be like fog at night you can understand in the few battles that carried on into the night how confusion was rampant.

It was virtually impossible to attack at night but it was the best time to carry out concealed movements in preparation for the daytime.

 

[Kentucky Derby Cavalier.]

Not sure if this counts, or is what you're looking for, but During the Kilpatrick-Dalhgren raid there was an ambush at night.

 

[Gary Morgan]

The only night attack that I know anything about is the ill-fated Second Battle of Fort Sumter, in which the Navy tried to retake the fort at night. The battle lasted about 20 minutes, only about 1/4 of the launchboats landed on the island, and the Union Navy sustained about 120 casualties.

The biggest problems were they thought there was just a "yeoman's guard" in the Fort, when actually the Confederates were expecting the attack and had supplemented the number of men inside, the Union believed that the fort's walls had been breached by its shelling, but the damage did not actually go all the way through and the sailors had no way to climb the walls, and some of the launch boats didn't actually have anyone in them who knew what the plan of attack was. The boats were supposed to be towed in by a tugboat, cut loose, and would then row in silently, but the rope got fouled once it was cut, and most of the boats full of attacking sailors never made it to land.

 

[19thOhio]

For what its worth: at Pickett's Mill Confederates launched at counterattack on Knefler's brigade at about 11 PM. The brigade was about out of ammunition and thus retreated back about a half-mile where they reformed their lines. I would thing counterattacks would follow different considerations than initiating an engagement.

 

[Claude Bauer]

It was virtually impossible to attack at night but it was the best time to carry out concealed movements in preparation for the daytime.

I've always wondered why they launched that assault on Fort (Battery) Wagner, Morris Island, SC by the 54th MA and other units, at night. I've read about the battle and of course saw the movie, "Glory," but have never received a satisfactory answer as to why that assault was launched at sunset and went on until 10:30pm. Doesn't appear that the cover of darkness gave them an advantage, only added to the chaos.

 

[jackt62]

How did it go?

Not well for the Confederates. Longstreet was already at odds with Bragg, who blamed Longstreet for not occupying the strategic Lookout Valley before Hooker got there. Consequently, the attack at Wauhatchie Station in the Valley was intended to set upon a part of Hooker's detached force commanded by General Geary. Michah Jenkins' brigade spearheaded the Confederate assault, but darkness and the arrival of Union reinforcements thwarted the success of the attack. Successfully opening and securing the Cracker Line was the first step in pushing Bragg's AoT out of Chattanooga and its defenses.

 

[Scott1967]

I've always wondered why they launched that assault on Fort (Battery) Wagner, Morris Island, SC by the 54th MA and other units, at night. I've read about the battle and of course saw the movie, "Glory," but have never received a satisfactory answer as to why that assault was launched at sunset and went on until 10:30pm. Doesn't appear that the cover of darkness gave them an advantage, only added to the chaos.

Good point Claude.

It was still light when they attacked the Rebs saw them coming , In July the sunlight lasts for a long-time so you would be looking at around 20.45 before they lose light so yeah what night attack?.

The attack was actually called off at 2100 I doubt it was fully dark before the fighting stopped but ill stand corrected.

 

[Claude Bauer]

Good point Claude.

It was still light when they attacked the Rebs saw them coming , In July the sunlight lasts for a long-time so you would be looking at around 20.45 before they lose light so yeah what night attack?.

The attack was actually called off at 2100 I doubt it was fully dark before the fighting stopped but ill stand corrected.

You're right, there are a lot of variables, esp. looking back more than 150 years.

According to a modern timetable, the sun sets in Gettysburg, PA on July 18 at 8:35 pm and twilight ends at 9:05 pm (i.e., that's when it gets dark). I'm assuming the same would hold true for SC, or at least be very close.

If they attacked Fort Wagner at 8:35 pm they would have had about 30 minutes of twilight fighting and then about an hour and a half of fighting in the dark before the assault was called off at 10:30 pm, the time cited by American Battlefield Trust.

So, although it doesn't get dark till late in the summer like you said, it looks like most of the fighting would have been in twilight or nighttime conditions, which I think would still qualify it as a nighttime battle.

 

[Scott1967]

You're right, there are a lot of variables, esp. looking back more than 150 years.

According to a modern timetable, the sun sets in Gettysburg, PA on July 18 at 8:35 pm and twilight ends at 9:05 pm (i.e., that's when it gets dark). I'm assuming the same would hold true for SC, or at least be very close.

If they attacked Fort Wagner at 8:35 pm they would have had about 30 minutes of twilight fighting and then about an hour and a half of fighting in the dark before the assault was called off at 10:30 pm, the time cited by American Battlefield Trust.

So, although it doesn't get dark till late in the summer like you said, it looks like most of the fighting would have been in twilight or nighttime conditions, which I think would still qualify it as a nighttime battle.

I'm not sure on that according to most historians the attack started at 19.45 and ended at 22.00 in truth the fighting in the dark was really only around 45 mins most of the attacks went in while it was still light or dim light.

We have an account I think of the 32nd Georgia who were brought in a reinforcements conducting a charge on the remaining trapped Union soldiers at around 21.45.

I wouldnt call it a night attack it just carried over into the night.

 

[6yanks+2rebs=1me]

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.

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!

 

[Stone in the wall]

Fort Stedman 1865;
John Gordon launches his attack at 4:15 AM, with in minutes they captured batteries X, XI, XII and Fort Stedman. Gordons attack was going well, then trouble began his men began to wander and many hungry soldiers stopped to eat captured Yankee rations. Another group got confused in the maze of trenches. Pickett's division didn't arrive until much too late to join in the attack. Yankee counter attack recaptures ever thing.

 

[Tom Elmore]

Judging from the July 2/3 night attacks on Culp's Hill at Gettysburg, the odds of friendly fire incidents went way up:

In one example, the 1st North Carolina, while moving up, fired upon a line of infantry weapon discharges in its immediate front, while it was receiving incoming fire. However, it turned out the discharges were from the line of the 3rd North Carolina, which was between the enemy and the 1st North Carolina. The 1st North Carolina was thus firing into the backs of their comrades.

In the second example, McDougall's Federal brigade halted upon approaching the hill around 10 p.m. and sent forward the 123rd New York, which in turn deployed its Company I to probe the woods in front. Meanwhile, many of the exhausted men in the other regiments fell asleep. A few minutes later the Confederate pickets fired upon Company I, which sent the rest of the 123rd New York running back to the brigade. Meanwhile the shots had awakened the sleeping members, who imagined the approaching 123rd New York was a full-scale enemy attack. They fired into their comrades, and then many stampeded to the rear. However, because of the erratic firing in the darkness, only a handful of "friendly fire" casualties resulted. But it took considerable time and effort to reassemble the brigade.

In several other instances that same night, the maneuvering units on both sides at times questioned whether their supposed opponent was foe or friend, resulting in confusion and hesitancy. However, the Federals (for the most part) remained in relatively static positions behind breastworks and were confident that they were facing the enemy as they blazed away in the darkness. On one occasion, the Confederates held a wall and turned the tables:

Night Ambush on Culp’s Hill | Gettysburg

In the forenoon of July 2, Brig. Gen. Thomas L. Kane’s brigade of three regiments, the 29th, 109th and 111th Pennsylvania, arrived on Culp’s Hill and were immediately put to work constructing breastworks using trees cut down for that purpose. Kane was struggling with an old wound and was...

civilwartalk.com

 

[Stone in the wall]

Tom, good point about friendly fire at night. Jackson was wounded by friendly fire while scouting for a night attack.

 

[Norman Dasinger Jr]

Cleburne led a night attack Sept 19, 1863 at Chickamauga