Regarding a American Civil War question. . .
- Thread starter Art
- Start date
I think Ripley made the right choice. Before Ripley became Army Chief of Ordnance in 1861, he oversaw the reconstruction and retooling of the Springfield Armory for interchangeable manufacturing during the 1840s. He became aware of the fact that it took more than 4 years for the Springfield Armory and Britain's Royal Small Arms Factory at Enfield to retool for the production of new rifle-muskets in the late 1850s. In a letter of Secretary of War Simon Cameron, Ripley noted that even Colt's private armory required six months to deliver the first batch of Springfield rifle-muskets. The process of retooling for the more complex and advanced breech-loading and repeating arms might have taken years to accomplish. Even with the existing machinery at Springfield Armory, it took a while to meet the demand of rifle muskets.
In 1863, not all the Union regiments had the chance to be armed with relatively modern rifle-muskets. About 25% of Grant's Army of the Tennessee were still armed with rifled muskets and one regiment was even armed with a smoothbore musket. By the end of the Siege of Vicksburg, Grant explicitly authorized these regiments to drop their outdated equipment for captured Enfield rifle-muskets. At Gettysburg, 10.7% and and 15.8% of regiments were wholly or partially armed with smoothbores and second-rate rifles respectively.
For the most part, it took the breechloader producers 2 years to tool up to satisfy the relatively small orders made in 1861. If the Springfield armory is anything to go off on, it would have taken 1864/65 to completely tool up and really begin large-scale production of breechloaders. To put it into perspective, it would be as imprudent as the WW2 British Government deciding that they should cut down production on the Hawker Hurricanes and Supermarine Spitfires to tool up for the production of the Gloster Meteors since jets were so superior to the other two.
| Year | No. of Springfield Rifle-Muskets Produced At Springfield Armory |
| 1861 | 13,803 |
| 1862 | 102,410 |
| 1863 | 217,784 |
| 1864 | 276,200 |
| 1865 | 300,000 (estimate if the war had continued) |
In 1863, not all the Union regiments had the chance to be armed with relatively modern rifle-muskets. About 25% of Grant's Army of the Tennessee were still armed with rifled muskets and one regiment was even armed with a smoothbore musket. By the end of the Siege of Vicksburg, Grant explicitly authorized these regiments to drop their outdated equipment for captured Enfield rifle-muskets. At Gettysburg, 10.7% and and 15.8% of regiments were wholly or partially armed with smoothbores and second-rate rifles respectively.
For the most part, it took the breechloader producers 2 years to tool up to satisfy the relatively small orders made in 1861. If the Springfield armory is anything to go off on, it would have taken 1864/65 to completely tool up and really begin large-scale production of breechloaders. To put it into perspective, it would be as imprudent as the WW2 British Government deciding that they should cut down production on the Hawker Hurricanes and Supermarine Spitfires to tool up for the production of the Gloster Meteors since jets were so superior to the other two.