My feed has been flooded lately with a lot of civil war clips and in early July, they were dominated with Gettysburg talk.

Was there a moment in the war where a frontal assault worked in a big battle like Lee hoped it would on day 3? It didn't work at Fredericksburg. At Chickamauga the confederate army took advantage of a gap and were able to do some damage but they didn't overrun a fortified position.

Was that tactical approach DOA by the time the civil war happened with the advancements in weaponry?

Gaines .Mill

Third Winchester and the breakthrough at Petersburg

Missionary Ridge

Probably the most successful frontal charge of the war but it wasn't ordered. In fact, as the Army of the Cumberland started forward, Grant turned toward his staff and the army commander George Thomas and asked who ordered the charge. Thomas was wishing he was invisible at the moment and everyone denied ordering the charge. Grant just commented there would be hell to pay for this error and then turned to watch the AotC capture the ridge.

Like Longstreet's attack at Chickamauga, this one had a lot of extenuating circumstances. On the Union side you had an army with a chip on its shoulder after Chickamauga, fighting alongside the most successful army of the war fresh off their greatest victory. After they captured the rifle pits at the base of the ridge, they were caught in fire from the ridge and it was either retreat or go forward. That chip on the shoulder made many of the men go forward on their own. Some division commanders like Phil Sheridan, saw what was happening and pushed the men on but they had already committed themselves.

On the Confederate side, building some of their trenches on the crest versus the military crest limited lline of sight and there was a hesitancy to fire through their skirmishes falling back with the AotC hot on their heels.

All of these factors led to an unlikely but overwhelming victory.

Lee was a horribly ineffective commander at Gettysburg. He'd gone left, then right in attacks the previous 2 days and the union forces knew an attack up the middle was next.

I would say it had more to do with Union interior lines, like Lee had at Antietam, rather than any predictability of Lee.

That article is a decent analysis but I think it is too hard on Lee. First, his strategic vision was sound. If he had won the battle, there is a good chance Lincoln kills the Chattanooga or the Vicksburg Campaigns, perhaps both to stop Lee.

Second, his tactical vision on the third day at Gettysburg, while risky (but that was always the case with Lee), it was based on sound logic. GT Anderson's brigade penetrated the Union center at the end of the second day but only had to retreat because it was unsupported on its right and left. Lee logically thought if a brigade can pierce their line, three divisions ought to do the trick. Lee also wasn't counting on his pre-attack bombardment to be so nearly useless, he expected it to silence the Federal artillery and soften up its infantry.

It's always easy to second guess plans that fail.

That's all fair. Lee didn't get lucky at Gettysburg at all but he also had vague orders and ineffective subordinates which made the whole thing a fiasco.

For those interested, the Jocko podcast Gettysburg Battle walk series with JD Baker from a few years ago is outstanding, imho. It's a fascinating battle to study from many perspectives.

The left, right, center certainly had an historical precedent Lee would have known from Churchill's victory at Blenheim.

Stive said:

---

My feed has been flooded lately with a lot of civil war clips and in early July, they were dominated with Gettysburg talk.

Was there a moment in the war where a frontal assault worked in a big battle like Lee hoped it would on day 3? It didn't work at Fredericksburg. At Chickamauga the confederate army took advantage of a gap and were able to do some damage but they didn't overrun a fortified position.

Was that tactical approach DOA by the time the civil war happened with the advancements in weaponry?

---

unbelievably at Lookout Mountain Sheridan mounted a frontal assault UP THE MOUNTAIN which caused the Rebels to retreat in disorder

Five Forks near Petersburg was a Union victory as Sailors Creek in April 1865

not sure where you are getting that frontal assaults never worked- because Lee crushed the Union at Second Manassas and Chancellorsville

Antietam saw bloody frontal assaults at the Cornfield and Bloody Lane but they were ultimately successful in pushing back Lee's forces around Sharpsburg

Frontal and flanking assaults at Third Winchester were successful in the afternoon leading to the near destruction of Jubal Early's defending Rebel forces.

Stive said:

---

Quote:

---

not sure where you are getting that frontal assaults never worked- because Lee crushed the Union at Second Manassas and Chancellorsville

---

Where did I ever say that?!?

And you're calling Chancellorsville a frontal assault?

---

And second Manassas, which I think is odd. Jackson baited Pope into going at him, with Lee and Longstreet arriving to hit Pope's flank. As I understand it, anyways.

Chancellorsville was a successful frontal assault.....from the side