pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com (LAY ON GROUND. LIGHT FUZE. 10-Oct-1990 1249) (10/11/90)
From: "LAY ON GROUND. LIGHT FUZE. 10-Oct-1990 1249" <pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com> David John Schuetz wrote (in part): >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... To the list others have proposed: repeating/"machine" guns (gatling, etc) RR mounted artillery Telegraph Mine (called "torpedo" at the time) warfare was revived for naval/ riverine use. >It seems that the north and south normally got technology at about the >same time, so the net effect was null. The usual analysis was that the South lacked the industrial infrastructure effectively bring the technologies on line. They had incentive, especially later, as they weakened, to try new things (the David's,to break the the blockade, etc...). They could import technology (revolving sidearms, from the UK) but did not have the manufacturing capability to turn out quantities of weapons. They lacked even iron, in anything like quantity/ re: The Mosquito... Halliday(?), in Mosquito!, refers to a structure of "plywood laminated to a balsa core". Carefully chosen wood was/is as good a aluminum on a strength to weight basis. The limiting factor was the need to select each piece, train the craftsmen, and the uncertainties of maintenance of wood. re: WWII submarines... Found a reference to Germany having gyrocompasses in WWII U Boats. thanks dave pierson |the facts, as accurately as i can manage, Digital Equipment Corporation |the opinions, my own. 600 Nickerson Rd Marlboro, Mass 01752 pierson@cimnet.enet.dec.com "He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing." A J Raffles