Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: olorin@wam.umd.edu (David John Schuetz)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Civil War technology
Keywords: Ironclads, Civil War
Message-ID: <1990Oct8.030412.11732@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 8 Oct 90 03:04:12 GMT
References: <1990Sep24.001114.22188@cbnews.att.com> <1990Sep27.031313.6610@cbnews.att.com> <1990Sep29.155016.7108@cbnews.att.com> <1990Oct2.234743.22650@cbnews.att.com> <1990Oct5.034121.479@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military-request@att.att.com
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Lines: 23
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: olorin@wam.umd.edu (David John Schuetz)

Mark Kromer's comments on the Monitor reminded me of one of the revelations
of Ken Burns' documentary.  I had never before thought of the Civil War as a
techno-war, but that's what it was;  not just the ironclads, but more accurate
guns, better bullets, more deadly artillery shells, and repeating rifles.

Were there other major innovations?  And how vital were they in the war?
It seems that the north and south normally got technology at about the
same time, so the net effect was null.  I assume the South must have
suffered more from the soaring casualty rate, but their generals seem
to have adapted quicker to the new tactics.

Laura Burchard

I can see it now:  retro-techno thrillers about the Civil War.

[mod.note:  I think (vague recollection) that observation balloons
were first used in the American Civil War, as well.  One wargamer put
it this way; the ACW is a great period for gaming, because any tactic
you care to think of was tried at least once.  - Bill ]