Petersburg question

[MikeyB]

I haven't studied this battle, but here's a simple question which I'm sure has an even simpler answer.

Why was it so difficult to dislodge the Confederates from their trenches? Couldn't you just bring up 100 of those big siege guns and open up on a segment of trench? Either get a bunch of direct hits and wipe out the defenders or you bury them alive or cave the trenches in so there is no defensive line. Either way, why was it so difficult for the Union to mass siege artillery, compromise a part of the line and then send the troops in?

Mike

 

[jackt62]

I haven't studied this battle, but here's a simple question which I'm sure has an even simpler answer.

Why was it so difficult to dislodge the Confederates from their trenches? Couldn't you just bring up 100 of those big siege guns and open up on a segment of trench? Either get a bunch of direct hits and wipe out the defenders or you bury them alive or cave the trenches in so there is no defensive line. Either way, why was it so difficult for the Union to mass siege artillery, compromise a part of the line and then send the troops in?

Mike

No surprise there consider that the even more effective artillery of the First World War could not dislodge the enemy from its trenches.

 

[redbob]

If you consider that when the mine blew at Petersburg, the Confederates were able to quickly bring up troops to seal the breach; this would have probably been the outcome if heavy, massed artillery had been used.

 

[drezac]

The use of siege guns was logistically difficult. unless you were in a situation where you were going to have them there for an extended period of time, most likely the battle would be done before you could get them in place. Moving siege guns was a major logistical challenge due to the amount of equipment needed. plus, once they arrived, you would need to construct gun placements, since siege artillery was a semi-permanent emplacement, you would need to construct the platform and assemble the carriages, then mount the guns. Not something that is done quickly. Moving siege guns was done in a "siege train" that consisted of the guns on sling carriages, wagons of ammunition, supplies to construct the emplacements, and gun carriages.

That is a situation where mortars would most likely be the best choice if they were available.

 

[Rhea Cole]

The dominance of the defensive in the Civil War came down to the ability of defenders to recover the initiative vs the inability of the attacker to maintain the initiative. No matter how many men the attacker piled into a breakthrough, the defender could seal it off. The attacker simply could not move fast or maintain the command & control necessary to exploit a breakthrough. A solution was discovered, eventually. The use of radio to coordinate infantry using light automatic rifles, flame throwers & supported by dive bombers coupled with armored forces that drove into the enemy's rear with speed & shock did the trick.

 

[Irishtom29]

Well for one thing the Federals didn't conduct a very active assault on Petersburg and I don't think that after the failure of the mine Grant even cared about cracking the Confederate line. He set about hitting and stretching the flanks and working by other means. Keep in mind that Petersburg wasn't a true siege: Lee was not surrounded, not "invested", and always had a line of retreat. It may have suited Grant fine to just have Lee fixed in place.

Contrast this with the very active Federal activities under Grant at Vicksburg, a true siege. The Federals pushed several approaches up to the ditches of the rebel works, had several mines ready to go and kept up a furious bombardment and fusillade.

 

[Bryce]

I haven't studied this battle, but here's a simple question which I'm sure has an even simpler answer.

Why was it so difficult to dislodge the Confederates from their trenches? Couldn't you just bring up 100 of those big siege guns and open up on a segment of trench? Either get a bunch of direct hits and wipe out the defenders or you bury them alive or cave the trenches in so there is no defensive line. Either way, why was it so difficult for the Union to mass siege artillery, compromise a part of the line and then send the troops in?

Mike

After the Petersburg assaults of June 15-18, 1864, Grant realized that the combination of assaulting columns of infantry and the employment of union artillery could not seize and hold the confederate trenches. For the rest of the siege Grant Launched five offenses in which he sent troops to the west of The Petersburg Defenses to seize the southside railroad. He knew that if he cut off Lee's supply lines, the Confederates would be forced to evacuate Petersburg and Richmond. These five offensives resulted in fights in the open field, not attacks on strong trenches The exception was the battle of the Petersburg crater. Without authorization from Grant, Burnside Dug the mine and planned the attack. Grant went along with the plan, but he did not initiate it. Bryce Suderow