Could 50 WW2 American Infantrymen Change Pickett's Charge? 

I like your thinking .

The Union had units with repeating and breech loading rifles at Gettysburg ... the WW2 soldiers wouldn't have been that overwhelming or gotten very far. A Rifle Company load out was 120 rounds per soldier and the BAR men only carried 11 mags (220 rounds) each and the grenadiers only carried a few dozen grenades. Their fire would have been drowned out by the 300 cannons and 20,000 muskets trading fire.

I can't quite tell from your response. Are you claiming there were 300 Union cannons and 20,000 Union muskets on Little Round Top?

Very good observation. That would have changed the outcome of the entire battle possibly.

I was thinking the same thing myself...

The South didn't use Spencer rifles because they couldn't manufacture the brass bullets. The US Navy blockade prevented the South from getting anything from Europe. The technology would have been useless to them.

I'm just speaking from theory but I believe the industrial technology of the south in the 1860s might actually be capable or reverse engineering some of the weapons of WW2 with some time. But that too comes with a risk. If the south can, the north absolutely will if they get their hands on it. And they have a much better industrial capacity than the south.

The title was referring to if they could change the outcome of Pickett's charge which was a military operation in the Battle of Gettysburg, which was a battle in the Civil War. It was not the War. If you removed them from the Pickett's charge operation, they would have had no effect in that operation. You didn't read or understand the title. Moreover, at this point in the war, your suggestion would not impact the outcome of the war either. I spent 10 years in the military and 9 of them were as an infantry soldier. I also study military history and the civil war and have been to Gettysburg at least 12 times. There is a lot more needed than just 50 soldiers and their issued weapons and their standard load.

Thats what I thought. Maybe southern state national guardsman?

They would all also know the result of the battle once they realized where they were and whom they were with. In 90 years, most Southern military men turned very pro-US military.

Or those fed up with WW2 enough to consider changing ACW as acceptable in order to avoid it entirely - and eg. lack of American involvement in WW1 due to say, less cohesive confederacy (rather than union - or heck, two rival states) exerting less influence on the world, can pretty much guarantee original timeline being derailed.

@@jjhantsch8647 Consider the 1898 Spanish-American War. Two confederate generals were made Generals in the US Army and the grandsons of “Johnny Reb” volunteered in big number to fight in the War.

I think in this scenario, it's more fun to just not think about the ideologies of the individuals and focus more on their capabilities. Just imagine that they're brainwashed, idk. They went back in time, so obviously something like brainwashing might be more possible.

Lot of words dude

How about at least 2 M1903A4 scoped Springfield (or the rarer M1D scoped Garand) to replace the carbines? The Whitworth rifle, despite being produced and used in very small numbers, gained a terrifying reputation. If that muzzleloader can do much damage (even if mostly psychological), one can only imagine what WW2 scoped rifles can do.

@@el52 I don't think it would matter much. The _effective_ range of the 1903 was about 600 yards. Maybe 800 with a real good shooter. But the distance from the Confederate lines to the Union position was a little over 1300 yards, and the Union artillery was some distance behind the front. So a sniper would have to come at least 500 yards into the open field with zero cover to get a shot. And then, if they can manage to steady the rifle while the ground is shaking from artillery pounding the Confederates, they can pick off a few officers, maybe cause a little confusion. But Meade's command post is close enough he can send someone to take over. Actually, if I were to change the loadout from the "average" WWII squad setup discussed above, I would lean towards mobility and close-combat power. No BARs or Thompsons (too heavy), just enough Garands for the rifle grenadiers. The other eight guys per squad, 40 men total, get either M3 grease guns or M1 Carbines (which lets them reload faster and carry more ammo). The GIs aren't taking part in the advance, really. Pickett's troops are being used to tank fire and deliver them into the Union position around "The Angle" where the IRL charge stopped. At which point, you have an admittedly small number of men, but who have a massive advantage in the close in, trench clearing kind of fight. Rapid firing, magazine fed weapons and hand grenades against single shot muzzleloaders. They still don't have the ammo to take out the entire Union force (not even close), but with proper fire discipline, they can hold out long enough for more Confederate troops to exploit the breakthrough.

Except they aren’t going to get close enough to use grenades. Remember that the charge began to break up 400 meters away from the Union lines, far beyond the range of a rifle grenade. Yes, one unit made it to the Union lines. The rest of them failed to. The battle line was a mile wide and only one unit made it. Unless those WW2 soldiers remember their history class they won’t be behind the unit that makes it to the Union lines. Even then, the Union soldiers are used to receiving cannon fire. They would probably just think the rifle grenades were just more cannon fire and go about their business.

@@patrickbrooks2743 Yeah, but I dumped all over Parry's last battle scenario and I'm leaning into this one, giving it the best possible chance. As a couple other people in the comments suggested, what 50 GIs ought to be doing at Gettysburg is attacking Little Round Top. Many fewer defenders, and I seriously doubt Joshua Chamberlain and Strong Vincent could handle 1940s weapons and fire and maneuver tactics in that kind of terrain...

There was a twilight zone episode where a tank crew from the 40s or 50s went to little big horn

@@aaronayers5151link please this sounds badass

That episode ended with the modern Commanding Officer saying the tank " might have helped ".

@@MW-bi1pi I’m going to try to find that one.

How about a company of Cavalry from the modern day 7th Cavalry. That same unit from 1876 still exists

No I'm sorry that's not true. Virtually none of the Army of the Potamic was equipped with lever action rifles at Gettysburg. The first mass equipping of Union Soldiers with those guns happened in the Army of the Cumberland in late 1863 when the Lightening Brigade of mounted infantry was first equipped with the Henry Rifle. The first battle they had a major impact in was the Battle of Chickamauga. There's even a monument to them there. You may have heard about it since idiot MTG mistook it for a Confederate Monument.

True, Many do consider the Civil War to be the first modern war because of the technology used, Since I'm a railfan it was also the first war where railroads and locomotives were used in combat which at the time was an advantage over horses for both North and South although the Confederates had a different track guage from Union railroads

I remember that one! Great episode!

I like the original series episode: "Still Valley" . They Rebs. turn down a chance to win, with the help of Satan.

@@DennisMSulliva I saw that one too, and I remember what the Confederate lieutenant said when he put the book of Satanic spells on the fire: "If the Confederacy has to die, let it be buried in hallowed ground." Now here's the lesson. The originator of "Twilight Zone" Rod Serling was a political liberal but he harbored no feelings of superiority or hate or contempt for anyone. Being a WW2 veteran he learned that even though all men are different all men are the same and like all vets he'd met and gotten to know men from all over the country. The fact he showed those Confederate soldiers as honorable men even though the cause they fought for was questionable (Any Johnny Reb would give you a different reason why he was fighting anyway) spoke volumes about Mr. Serling. A lesson many today should take to heart.

How does that work, the tank becoming unserviceable

@@ZudinGodofWar Something mechanically broke on the tank during normal operations. Broke a track or through a track. Ran out of gas. Plenty of things to go wrong on a mechanized vehicle and they are a pain in the butt to repair as well. Stuff happens all the time.

I agree. Plus, there are a bunch of very different battles in this war to examine.

The overwhelming majority of US GIs during WWII agreed with the confederates, my guy… No one voted to extend civil rights for blacks until the 1960s… about 23 years after the end of WWII. GIs instituted the height of segregation.

This is _exactly_ what I was going to say. Little Round Top, less than 400 Union troops, about 5,000 Confederates, but more importantly, it's heavily forested terrain, with great concealment and decent cover. The GIs wouldn't _need_ any tanks, they'd tear the Union troops to pieces with tactics from the hedgerows and towns of Normandy.

Sure. Maybe an arclight strike too while we are at it?

Many, if not most, if not nearly all of US paratroopers had sidearms, be they regulatory Colt 1911 A1 or civilian-bought other handguns, mostly of the same caliber.

The Battle of Gettysburg was fought in 100 degree heat and almost no breeze. The smoke from black powder of thousands of rifle muskets and dozens of cannons was absolutely blinding within the first hour. Smoke grenades would have not even been noticed.

It might not even be noticed by the other side unless it's colored smoke. Otherwise they'd probably think it was just the normal clouds of thick black powder smoke that obscured almost every battlefield during that era.

I doubt smoke grenades would do much considering the massive amount of smoke produced by firearms at the time, be it artillery or volley fires.

@@Lollygagger-k4pconsider the US troops could crawl forward and infiltrate, deploy smoke, then grenades, and then suppress the unholy position as the CSA advances.

They were given just rifles. That is not enough to make enough difference to change the outcome Union Artillery would still have devastating effects on confederate troops.

yeah I was surprised there was no mention of Thompsons, carbines or mortars or .30 caliber machine guns. I think that the M1 carbine would have really done well in this battle if they assigned them to confederate regiments.

At Gettysburg, the rear was nearly a mile away. Snipers during Pickett's Charge would be best used ahead of the advancing Confederates , leapfrogging and maintaining a rolling advance. Heart rate would be an issue. Also, they would be within range of accurate Union artillery rifles the whole way across the open farmland. Once anyone was within 200 yards, the Garand, BAR, .30 cal, would not have much advantage in accuracy. Gatling guns were known by 1863, so I don't think a full auto weapon wouild have been much of a shock, except in range. And, how much ammo can two reinforced platoons carry. The volume of musket fire that would have been concentrated on them would far out number the rounds they could have returned. Union artillery rifles at under 1000 yards could hit a 30 gallon garbage can. Under 300 yeards the artillery switched to grape shot - and became huge shotguns. It was the most devasting weapon of the warfare in those days. We have to assume that the WW2 soldiers would have been as shot up as the rest of the regiments, half of who lay dead or wounded when it was over. The Union troops in the Army of the Potomac were arguably by 1863, the best army in the world, and any anomalous soldiers seen firing with precision weapons would be targeted by hundreds of accurate muskets. Caveat: Most union soldiers were not marksmen, and had no idea they could with drill, hit a man at 500 yards. Thus, except for some experinced companies of veterans, most volley fire was done under 200 yards - often much less. A those close ranges, the Civil War rifled musket was as effective as any moder rifle, penetrating up to three men with one shot. In my scenario - since we're all playing along - the 50 modern troops would have had little impact. Now, a battalion? Sure. The battle field was massive, and there wasn't a flank that could be taken by enfilade - only by massive numbers in frontal assault. That's what failed against Chamberlians's 20th Maine. Lee mistakenly thought that Meade - who was a very competent commander - would place his strength on the flanks, possibly because of the repulse of the Texans by the 20th Maine. He decided that the Union center would be the weak spot but did not realize that it had been reinforced just hours prior to Pickett's Charge. The men who held the center were the best troops in the Union army, and had fought at Chancelorville and Fredricksburg. They were not going to run.

@@Lollygagger-k4p Battlefield commands to include brigadier generals, and sometime higher up would be close to the frontlines just to see with their own eyes what is happening, sometimes right on the frointline sto encourage their men. Look at the nimber of generals killed during the Civil War. And because the the Union forces occupied a ridge, any division general would need to be right at the front lines to look down at the Confederate forces. I do not believe the artillery would be able to spot the snipers, even assuming they knew what to look for. They will not be able to see a single shots and you have to remember that the modern rifles used smokeless powder. Furthermore, vetran WW II troops would be well versed in using concealment. I think we would have to disagree on the relative accuracy of the WW II weapons vs Civil war rifled muskets. Granted, the advantage would be much less. However, there is also the issue of rate of fire. I am not sure if you have done much shooting, but if you can maintain your position and "cheek weld" to a rifle, you will have improved accuracy for follow on shots. The Union soldiers would need muzzle load teh next round, not only losing their firing posture, but also losing track of what is going on in the field. The WW II troops can fire three or for aimed shots rapidly and then move. I would also keep the WW II troops near the rear of the Confederate troops charging (actually marching briskly till they got really close). Their uniform may help a bit. I suspect any Union soldier would focus on the lead confederate troops. To be fair, the fog of war is often very dense. lol

@@ycplum7062 Good points, but I disagree on the visibilty and concealment issue. Yes, I've been shooting for 50 years - a lot of it black powder. Lots of reading on the Civil War, it's weapons and tactics. No expert, but a keen student thereof. There was almost zero concealment during the entire crossing by Pettigrew's men. WW2 soldiers would not have had any better visibilty of the Union line than confedrate troops had - which was almost none given the thickness of black powder smoke on the field, which was windless and over 95 degrees all during the battle. All visibliti was had by the Union line because they occupied the high ground and the smoke filled the entire western Gettysburg front below. Most of the smoke was from Union fire that drifted straight down the slope into the faces of the rebels and away from the Union line. A high pressure system and high humdity held it there for the entire battle. It was a turkey shoot. The best representation of a Civil War battle IMO, was shot in the movie "Glory" , when the Regimnet fought its first engagement. The rebels came up quickly and silentley, crouched low, through the smoke of previous fire and were only visible at what appeared to be well under 100 yards. In the movie "Gettysburg" there was no lingering smoke at all, even in the scenes showing the charge of the 20th Maine. It wouldn't have been very interesting if the audience saw nothing, right? WW2 soldiers would have been instantly recognised by their round helmets - which did not exist in the world at the time. And, they would have been seen clearly as they got to within their own visibilty distance, which would certainly oput them at grave risk of grapeshot and aimed musketry. We have to getaway from the Hollywood Gettysburg scenes of clear visibility and selective casualty shots. The reality was that men went down in heaps and rows, all along the mile wide front of the charge, and got worse as they attempted to close-in to the center at the kopse of trees near the Angle. Companies and regiments simply could not see the rally point within the first few minutes of the step off. That's why Armitage (?) stuck his hat on his saber and raised above , so the men would know his position. Many commanders did the same thing at many battles. Strange, round-helmeted soldiers, coming out of the smoke at musket range would have been seen and targeted instantly since there was nothing to hide behind. Just my opinin....✌

@@Lollygagger-k4p "Concealment" would the the wrong word here. I should have used "low or lower visibility". A scattering of khaki green in the back would likely not draw as much attention as the soldiers up front, more or less in formation. As a general rule, one reacts to the nearest threat or the one that is visibly a greater threat. With smokeless powder, and firing from the rear, I think the Union soldiers will focus on the Confederate front ranks. Under stress, accuity heightens, but field of vision narrows. With eteh exception of the BAR gunners, I don't think the Union soldiers would recognize the threat. Now, it would be different if a veteran from WW II travelled back in time to advise the Union side. I think he would immediately spot the threat of the US soldiers and direct fire at them.

also, using fireteam size elemnts, leading each a company of conf soldiers, using the comms and and TTPs.. they could over whelm the enemy, evenb uphill in the defensive

Depending on the situation the 50 troops were pulled from, Company HQ would have issued one, maybe two M1919 Machine Guns down to Platoon level as well... While having limited ammunition, at a key point those would've played HAVOC with the tightly packed Union Lines...

Glad you liked it!

The emancipation proclamation was signed into law January 1, 1863; before either the Vicksburg or Gettysburg battles were fought

The Union had units with repeating and breech loading rifles at Gettysburg ... the WW2 soldiers wouldn't have been that overwhelming or gotten very far. A Rifle Company load out was 120 rounds per soldier and the BAR men only carried 11 mags (220 rounds) each and the grenadiers only carried a few dozen grenades. Their fire would have been drowned out by the 300 cannons and 20,000 muskets trading fire

Considering that Godzilla was birthed out of WWII due to the nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki

It would be treason!