LOGISTICS

[williamlayton]

What part did logistics play in winning and loseing the war----well, really, all wars/wars in general?
Blessings

[BUGEYE]

the north had tractor,trailer rigs and the south had mules and wagons.

[williamlayton]

Well, that is a good parrallel.
I believe logistics win all wars.
Blessings

[yellowtail3]

What part did logistics play in winning and loseing the war----well, really, all wars/wars in general?
Blessings

Pretty big part, I'd say. The north wasn't even fully spun up to war footing - had lots of slack - the south was tapped out.All wars? WW2 in the Pacific is interesting. If anything, Japan was further behind than the south. Compared to the Japan, in 1940 the US had nearly twice the population of Japan, seventeen time's Japan's national income, five times more steel production, seven times more coal production, and  eighty (80!) times the automobile production.

In 1944 alone, the USN commissioned 128 destroyers, about twice Japan's output for the WHOLE WAR.

...and they were on war footing in 1941, whereas we were not. They didn't have prayer of winning, no matter how effective the IJN was. Plus, they never had NEARLY enough shipping (merchant hulls) to carry out their designs - and they had a free 20 months, while our sub force had pitifully ineffective torpedoes.

On just how far out-gunned Japan was, economically: if we'd lost all three carriers at Midway, and they'd lost none... even then, by mid-1943 the USN would still have vastly out-gunned the IJN in that department. And there's the really grim part: Japanese leadership knew this. They knew their only chance was to intimidate us into not fighting, banking on US political situation, and a German victory in Europe (over USSR). It so happened that the IJN got bled at Guadalcanal, right about the same time the Sixth Army got surrounded, frozen, starved, and killed at the gates of Stalingrad.

Logistics/economic capacity had everything to do with it.

[eastbank]

it all came down to bullets,rifles,food,able bodied men and being able to get them where they were needed to be. sorry to say,but you can only fight so long with only a rebel yell.eastbank.

[subdjoe]

it all came down to bullets,rifles,food,able bodied men and being able to get them where they were needed to be. sorry to say,but you can only fight so long with only a rebel yell.eastbank.

Neither side expected a prolonged war.  While hoping that their constitutional right to secede would be recognized, the seven states of the deep south did what they could to prepare for a short war.  The thought was that, much like working the action on a pump shotgun to try to scare off a thug, the show of willingness to fight, and maybe landing a punch or two, would be enough to make the Federal government to back off.

Setting aside the issues of manpower and supply lines, just looking at manufacturing it's clear that the Confederacy could not win a sustained war.  Although they never lacked for munitions.  The failure to follow up after First Manassas with a drive on Washington City - basically turn a defensive front into a war of conquest, pretty much doomed the Confederacy.

[Shu]

Logistics is so important in warfare Tsun Tzu's book The Art of War could easily be considered a logistics study.
 
WW2 had the Red Ball Express a continual movement of trucks loaded with food, ammunition, fuel, medicines and parts. The Red Ball Express ran 24/7 from the rear lines to the front. Those trucks never stopped.
When Sherman invaded the south he looked at tax records and decided the best route to follow. He hit all the wealthy plantations to reduce what his column would need. When he reached the coast he needed a vital resupply and would not have lasted more than a couple of days without restock of food.
 
You simply cannot fight a war without logistics.