Transportation Revolution

Not to be argumentative sir but the King would not have happened without the cotton gin. That is what made cotton a mass product consumable. After that, ways would have been found to service world markets.

As @DaveBrt has posted, some river transpo took up to two years due to winter and low water levels. What RRs brought was consistency even if the initial cost was higher.

Cheers,
USS ALASKA

I wasn't intending to discount the importance of the cotton gin.

Steam power made the gin more practical, just as it made cotton mills in England feasible, and river/ocean transport quicker and more reliable.

Maybe the Civil War was Jame Watt's fault!
 
I think the railroads probably made the War longer and bloodier than it should have been. It made transportation for both sides cheaper and more reliable. Without the RRs, the War probably would have ended sooner.
IMHO RR make a Union victory possible. No way to supply armies of conquest any other way. Without RR the Union might have given up early on.
 
I think all manner of modern transportation greatly added to the Union victory. Steamboats would goods to transfer points, and railroads would then move the supplies along to the Armies, where wagons were needed for the final move. Steamboats also moved wounded around, greatly speeding up their care. The quicker the care, equals to a much greater chance of survival. This has been proven fact in every American war. The transportation revolution effected every part of the war, changing key points for the men and the war.
 
IMHO RR make a Union victory possible. No way to supply armies of conquest any other way. Without RR the Union might have given up early on.

The Union armies could have been supplied by water, theoretically. But a functional rail system certainly gave the North an advantage.

Food transportation may have been the most important element of the system. Charles Dew's book on the Tredegar Iron Works details all of the problems faced by the gun maker, but one of the most severe was the problem of shipping in food for the workers. Rail was the only option, but the system wasn't functioning very well.
 
IMHO RR make a Union victory possible. No way to supply armies of conquest any other way. Without RR the Union might have given up early on.
Its very possible that without the RRs to support the armies of conquest, the Anaconda plan might have been the plan actually executed -- cut the Mississippi, blockade the ports and starve the Confederate economy.

Large armies were not possible to be formed or supported without the RRs, EXCEPT where rivers could be used. This would have given the more mobile Union forces a distinct advantage. Examples: Peninsula campaign, NC sounds, Shiloh, Nashville, New Orleans, the Mississippi River. In every case, the South would have had the problem gathering their forces to meet the attacking Union forces.
 
The northern advantage over the south in rail networks was a critical component of northern victory. Both north and south used their networks to concentrate far flung armies to strategic points, as in Longstreet's movement from Virginia to strengthen the Army of Tennessee before the battle of Chickamauga, and the Army of the Potomac's XI and XII Corps movement to bolster the Chattanooga forces in October 1863. But because of incompatible guages as pointed out by jgoodguy, the southern move took comparatively way longer.

A forum member of long time passed posted an article that was written by a modern U.S. Army logistician that was resurrected by @USS ALASKA for everyone's perusal.

It includes a discussion of the railroad gauge issue (not a big deal at the end of the day) and the fallacy of measuring superiority in terms of track miles. I've attached Christopher Gable's article and if the attachment won't work, it can be found on the internet, here. Well worth the time.
 

Attachments

A forum member of long time passed posted an article that was written by a modern U.S. Army logistician that was resurrected by @USS ALASKA for everyone's perusal.

It includes a discussion of the railroad gauge issue (not a big deal at the end of the day) and the fallacy of measuring superiority in terms of track miles. I've attached Christopher Gable's article and if the attachment won't work, it can be found on the internet, here. Well worth the time.
Thanks for an interesting reference!
From
Rails to Oblivian .pdf 2 Paragraphs I agree with from personal experience. Emphasis mine.

A feature commonly found in general history books on the American Civil War is a set of statistics comparing the resources of North and South at the time ofsecession. Although such statistics may vary from source to source, they invariably show that the North enjoyed major advantages in terms of population, industrial capacity, wealth, and railroads. A careless read~r might infer from these statistics that the Confederate States of America was doomed and the outcome of the Civil War decided before the first shot was fired. Even the more prudent reader might assume that these resource disparities were causal factors in the Confederacy's defeat. However, such assumptions overlook the fact that the war lasted four bloody years, and ultimately approximated the modern notion of "total" war. If the Confederacy's resource disadvantages were truly as debilitating as the statistics suggest, the war should have ended much earlier than it did.

Railroads are usually included in such comparisons of relative resources. Statistics show that the Confederacy possessed only one-third ofthe miles oftrack found in the United States at the time of secession, one-third of the freight cars, one-fifth of the locomotives, one-fifth of the railroad workers, one-eighth of rail production, one-tenth of the telegraph stations, and one-twenty-fourth of total American locomotive production. Did this disparity constitute a crippling disadvantage for the South? On the contrary-Southern railroads were in fact sufficient for the Confederacy to win the war, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the Southern rail system was good enough to win a war. This distinction will become clearer as we proceed.​
 
According to the Ken Burns Civil War show, most of the railroad engineers headed north when war was declared because supposedly it was mostly Northeners who ran the Southern railroads. Is this correct? Or an oversimplification?
 
According to the Ken Burns Civil War show, most of the railroad engineers headed north when war was declared because supposedly it was mostly Northeners who ran the Southern railroads. Is this correct? Or an oversimplification?
Yes, an oversimplification. Some railroad civil engineers, some railroad locomotive engineers, and many machinists did head north, but I have not seen any contemporary documents bemoaning the exodus. The main loss for the Confederate railroads was men being laid off in late 1860 and joining militia or newly raised units and thus becoming unavailable for the railroads. These were the men that the RRs were trying to get detailed to them during the war.
 
Yes, an oversimplification. Some railroad civil engineers, some railroad locomotive engineers, and many machinists did head north, but I have not seen any contemporary documents bemoaning the exodus. The main loss for the Confederate railroads was men being laid off in late 1860 and joining militia or newly raised units and thus becoming unavailable for the railroads. These were the men that the RRs were trying to get detailed to them during the war.
The machinists loss would be significant, because locomotives of the day were hand build and parts were not interchangeable. Southern elites looked down on mechanics and IMHO no one at the beginning of the war would note their migration North other than comment good riddance to these Yankee mechanics.

Rails to Oblivian .pdf

By 1863, the locomotive maintenance problem had become acute. In that year, the annual report for the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad listed forty locomotives on the roster. Of that number, nine were classified as "useless," and another nine as "awaiting repair." It appears that all of this attrition was due to normal wear and tear, not to enemy action. Since locomotives were non~standardized hand-built items, it would have been difficult or impossible for the Virginia and Tennessee to salvage parts from one locomotive to keep others running.

However, the most critical personnel shortage was not among operating crews; rather, it was the inadequate supply of "mechanics," or machinists, for locomotive maintenance. Locomotives in the Civil War era were not mass-produced items. Replacing a part often meant fabricating a new one. Mechanics capable of such work were skilled craftsmen who underwent extensive apprenticeships before mastering their trade. The Confederacy had only a small pool of such skilled workers when the war began, and had no time to develop apprentices into master machinists or metalworkers. Moreover, the railroads had to compete with the armaments industry for these critical personnel. The shortage ofmechanics on the Confederate railroads set up yet another vicious cycle-maintenance deferred because of the lack of skilled labor invariably resulted in even more serious problems later.
Both the CSA military and armament factories took skilled railroad men.

Railroad personnel constituted another asset that declined as the war progressed. Railroading in the 1860's was a manpower-intensive business. A typical train, carrying 100 tons of cargo, required a crew of five to seven men. (In contrast, a freight train today needs a crew of two to move 10,000 tons of cargo.) The crew included an engineer to operate the locomotive, a fireman whose full-time job consisted of fueling the firebox and monitoring water levels and steam pressures, and a conductor who supervised the overall operation of the train. The remainder of the crew consisted of brakemen, who clambered from car to car to set manual brakes when the train was required to slow or stop. In addition to train crews, railroads employed track crews to maintain the right-of-way. Heavily-traveled lines employed as many as four to five men per mile of track just for maintenance. Additional personnel included station agents, telegraph operators, switch-men to operate the manual switches that diverted rolling stock from one track to another, craftsmen and laborers to maintain rolling stock, and accountants to keep the books.

The Confederacy started the war with about 16,000 railroad employees. This figure began immediately to decline. Some railroad workers from Northern states went home at the time of secession. An unknown number of others volunteered for military service. Still others were drafted. The Confederate conscription law of 1862 initially exempted railroad workers, but not all draft officials honored the exemption. Moreover, the law was amended in October 1862, narrowing the railroad exemption to management and skilled workers. Another amendment in 1864 further narrowed the exemption. Competing demands for labor, such as the armaments industry, depleted the ranks of skilled railroad workers even more.
 
Absolutely....Already plotted and cleared, and it was easy to service. And the RR lines went from populous place to populous place...where the money would be for mass communication....USS ALASKA

To modify that the telegraph was not incidental to the tracks being laid; the corridors were not merely convenient for stringing telegraph lines. Rather, daily railroad operation was predicated on telegraph communication between depots; departures and arrivals. Telegraph was a pre-planned and critical component of building and running a railroad at the time.

Time was money, investments (corridor and town) and delivery contracts (esp. U.S. contracts) alike. So the money was in investments and contracts more than it was for mass communications (telegraph was client-to-client communication, not a broadcast). The on-the-ground reality of business in those days was (as Yoda would later declare on-screen a century later) "there is no try, there is only do."

Any train guys here that will verify this?
 
Last edited:
Not true - there was only one gauge change on that trip -- Charlotte NC or Wilmington NC, depending on the route being used by a particular shipment of troops. The slowness of the Confederate trip was caused by lack of rollingstock on every road being used.

While I can't attest to its accuracy, my information on the gauge of railroads during the Chickamagua campaign comes from A Railroad War by George A. McLean, Jr.

"The troops traveled two routes over ten different rail lines and made eight transfers of troops due to unconnected or different gauges of tracks."
 
While I can't attest to its accuracy, my information on the gauge of railroads during the Chickamagua campaign comes from A Railroad War by George A. McLean, Jr.

"The troops traveled two routes over ten different rail lines and made eight transfers of troops due to unconnected or different gauges of tracks."
One different gauges can = 2 changes if it is an immediate line. IMHO 6 changes due to unconnected and 2 due to gauge; an Alabama line having a different gauge.

The route would be nice to have.
 
One different gauges can = 2 changes if it is an immediate line. IMHO 6 changes due to unconnected and 2 due to gauge; an Alabama line having a different gauge.

The route would be nice to have.
Pleeeeeease -- Longstreet from Richmond to Chicamagua has nothing to do with Alabama railroads.

The only changes because the roads did not connect were at Charlotte and in Wilmington. Other changes were because of leaving one RR and starting on another RR.
 
Pleeeeeease -- Longstreet from Richmond to Chicamagua has nothing to do with Alabama railroads.

The only changes because the roads did not connect were at Charlotte and in Wilmington. Other changes were because of leaving one RR and starting on another RR.
It appears to me that none of the railroads connected to the destination based on that.
 
Map of Longstreet rail movement Longstreet from Richmond to Chicamagua.
Rails to Oblivian .pdf
Expired Image Removed

In September 1863, Lieutenant General James Longstreet's corps of 12,000 men traveled 800 miles from Virginia to northern Georgia and the Battle of Chickamauga (see Map 6). This movement required Sims to coordinate traffic on fourteen different railroads.​
 
Map of Longstreet rail movement Longstreet from Richmond to Chicamagua.
Rails to Oblivian .pdf
Expired Image Removed

In September 1863, Lieutenant General James Longstreet's corps of 12,000 men traveled 800 miles from Virginia to northern Georgia and the Battle of Chickamauga (see Map 6). This movement required Sims to coordinate traffic on fourteen different railroads.​
Actually, Sims did very little coordination. He controlled the Richmond to Weldon end of the movement. He ordered Major John D. Whitford to coordinate the North Carolina portion and Major Thomas Peters to coordinate the Atlanta section. Captain Thomas R. Sharp took care of the gauge change at Charlotte and the leg from there to Columbia, SC.

We really know few details of the trip. There are about 20 telegrams to/from Sims and about 100 to/from Whitford and Sharp. I have found no records of Peters' activities. Sims got the movements started by working with the QM of the ANV and the Superintendent of the Richmond & Petersburg RR; Whitford divided the movement between the Raleigh/Charlotte route and the Wilmington route. The rest was accomplished by the skill of the superintendents of the various railroads.

No one has attempted a definitive account of the movement -- an item on my personal bucket list
 
I'm reading "Battle Cry of Freedom" by McPherson and he has a couple of pages devoted the transportation revolution - railroads and canals. I'm sure some of you hard-core rail men knew this but I didn't AND I wonder if the Civil War could even have happened (certainly not on the scale it did) if there weren't railroads.

"The 9,000 miles of rail in the United States by 1850 led the world, but paled in comparison with the 21,000 additional miles laid during the next decade, which gave the United States in 1860 a larger rail network than the rest of the world combined."
Would not a better question had been on the effects of the railroad during the war.The war would have occurred regardless.The only thing that the rail did was to transport the troops to the battlefield faster there by they would not be as exhausted if they went by walking.In one battle Hill made it to one battle ,I think it was the first Bull Run,just in time to turn the tide of the battle in favor of the Confederate army.The North had a much better rail system than the south which of course played into their favor.The South .esp,the deep states neglected their rails ,upholding to the states belief that either private system with aid from the states and not the federal government should determine where they would go and who would pay,the states prehabs were "Scotch" on the financial part.,financial conservatives.
 
Would not a better question had been on the effects of the railroad during the war.The war would have occurred regardless.The only thing that the rail did was to transport the troops to the battlefield faster there by they would not be as exhausted if they went by walking.In one battle Hill made it to one battle ,I think it was the first Bull Run,just in time to turn the tide of the battle in favor of the Confederate army.The North had a much better rail system than the south which of course played into their favor.The South .esp,the deep states neglected their rails ,upholding to the states belief that either private system with aid from the states and not the federal government should determine where they would go and who would pay,the states prehabs were "Scotch" on the financial part.,financial conservatives.
It appears that the South had a good enough railroad system to fight a short war, but after a couple of years things just wore out without any way to replace men, material or machines.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top