simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 24, 2018 14:04:52 GMT
The South Africans use the Centurion for the armoured regiments of their infantry divisions and are in the process of introducing the Chieftain for their armoured divisions. They have an extremely effective force.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 24, 2018 22:08:59 GMT
French Tank Development Part II: The Interwar Period
France operated the largest tank force in the world for much of the interwar period. For the victorious French infantry generals, the tank was regarded as a subordinate arm of the infantry and dedicated towards the support of the offensive. Light tanks were designed to move at the speed of the foot soldier and the heavy tanks were concentrated to destroy enemy strongpoints and break defensive lines. Doctrinally, French infantry armour was not to be used in an independent role, but was concentrated in pure tank units that did not train extensively with other arms. Cavalry tanks emerged in the late 1920s and early 1930s as a distinct type to equip the rapidly mechanizing units of the French cavalry divisions and were seen as a means of remaining relevant on the modern battlefield. The division between the types would prove to be a pivotal factor in the relative performance of French armoured units in the conflicts to come. The history of the French tank between the wars can therefore be viewed as a tale of two branches.
The Char 2C heavy tank continued production until 1921, with a further 177 tanks being built over the course of the first three years of peace, giving a total inventory of 269 vehicles. This was thought necessary as a contingency measure in case of the need to support France’s Eastern European allies who formed part of the cordon sanitaire around the Soviet Union. Along with over 2500 FT-17s, they served as the main French tank force throughout the 1920s and were the source of great pride for the Grande Armée. The remaining Schneiders were sold for scrapping by 1920. The vast quantities of war production tanks proved sufficient for the first half of the 1920s, with French expeditionary forces in Turkey and Russia equipped with the ubiquitous FT-17s. A number of these vehicles were captured by Bolshevik troops in the Crimea and were used as the basis for a number of Soviet copies, known as the Russki Renoe, which were produced from 1920-1923. French and Spanish light tanks were used in Morocco in the Rif War of the early 1920s with great success in suppressing the desert revolt. Perhaps the most notable use of French tanks in the immediate postwar period was in China, where they formed the heavy component of the international garrison in Shanghai and proved instrumental in presence patrols to reinforce the position of the powers.
In 1926, the first steps in the replacement of the versatile Renault light tank were taken, with an operational requirement issued for a char d'accompagnement, or a cheap light tank suitable for infantry support operations and capable of mass production. Hotchkiss and Renault both submitted successful designs by 1929 and the decision was made to proceed with development of both vehicles, albeit somewhat slowed by the global financial downturn of the Great Depression. The Renault R35, or the Char léger Modèle 1935 R to use its official name, was selected for production as the Infantry’s light tank and the first vehicles entered service in 1936. Weighing in at 12 tons, it was a well armoured but somewhat slow vehicle, capable of a top speed of 21 km/hr. It was armed with a pair of machine guns and a short-barreled 37mm gun, which was optimized for close infantry support but was rather deficient in the anti-tank role. The initial order for 600 tanks soon increased as the international situation deteriorated and a total of 2140 R35s were built by 1940.
The Hotchkiss tank was rejected by the Infantry due to difficulties in cross-country handling and a problematic gear box. It proved to be next to impossible to steer on uneven surfacaes, but was adopted by the Cavalry, as their operational requirements focused more upon road travel, making the steering issue less significant. The 11t Hotchkiss H35 had a top speed of 29 km/hr and carried a similar armament to the R35. It was well protected by 36mm of armour, but this was of varying quality due to the employment of subcontractors. A total of 1564 vehicles had been completed by early 1940, equipping the five Divisions Légères Mécaniques, or cavalry armoured divisions. The Hotchkiss design was also exported to Poland in the late 1930s and a total of 92 vehicles were fielded by the 1st Polish Armoured Division in 1939. Several variants were equipped with flamethrowers and Tesla lightning guns to augment the conventionally armed vehicles in their breakthrough exploitation roles.
General Etienne initiated a long term design process for the development of a heavy breakthrough tank, the Char de Bataille, in 1920 and four prototypes from rival concerns were delivered in 1925. The Anglo-Soviet Crisis of 1926-27 gave additional impetus to the fielding of the Char B1 and the first true medium tanks of the French Army entered service in 1929. It emphasized the role of infantry support, being equipped with a hull mounted 75mm gun and a 47mm Hotchkiss gun in the turret. At 36 tons, it was well protected by almost 55mm of armour and was capable of a top speed of 27km/hour. 155 were built between 1929 and 1931, followed by 592 of the improved Char B2 from 1936, which had improved armour and a more powerful engine. They made up a large part of the equipment of the five Divisions Cuirassées de Réserve, or the armoured divisions of the infantry. The Char B2 was among the most powerful tanks in the world against infantry and armour alike, but was constrained by high fuel consumption and a slow off-road speed.
Accompanying the development of Char B1 was the lighter Char D, which was designed as a specialist infantry support tank for particular use in colonial conflicts. Many of the lessons of the Rif War were incorporated into the design of its engine and tracks so that it could operate in the harsh environment of the Sahara Desert with a reasonable degree of reliability. It evolved out of the Char de Bataille programme as the former vehicle grew in size and weight, with a requirement for a 15t light infantry support tank armed with a 47mm gun being formally issued in 1926. The first production orders were placed in 1930 and 205 tanks were built between 1931 and 1934. Renault designed a more heavily armoured and upgraded version, which was designated the Char D2 and entered production in 1937. A total of 289 tanks were built by 1940, outfitting several of the new DCRs that had been raised in response to the Austrian Crisis. The newly renamed Char D1s were transferred to colonial units in North Africa and French Indochina.
The D2s were an improvement on their predecessors, but still lagged behind foreign medium tank developments. In March 1936, initial specifications for a 25t medium tank capable of a road speed of 50km/hour, a range of 400km and a good climbing capacity were issued. It was to be armed with a high velocity gun capable of destroying all enemy medium tanks currently in service or expected. A number of different companies submitted designs, with AMX be awarded the production contract for the Char G1 in February 1938. A prototype vehicle equipped with a 75mm gun was produced in March 1939, but only 87 tanks had been accepted by the French Army by May 1940. This highly advanced tank would prove to be the basis for considerable future development.
The French cavalry began the process of mechanization in the late 1920s in response to the alarming buildup of the Red Army and a requirement for a new medium tank for cavalry operations was issued in 1933. The 20t Somua S35 was the result – an agile, well-armoured, fast tank with excellent firepower. It was armed with two 7.5mm machine guns and a main 57mm gun capable of penetrating the armour of the German Panzer III, the Soviet BT-7 and the Italian M15/36. It was capable of reaching road speeds of over 45 km/hour, was equipped with a Christie suspension and was protected by 50mm of armour. It did come with a considerable unit cost of over 1 million francs and was rather difficult to repair in the field, a problem encountered by many French tanks. 593 had been accepted by the French Army by May 1940, of which 127 were in depot, 43 had been returned to the factory for overhaul and maintenance and 423 were serving with frontline units.
The last French tank of the interwar period was certainly the most powerful, albeit at the cost of being extremely expensive and slow. The Char F1 emerged from a 1932 requirement for a superheavy tank capable of blocking enemy offensives and breaking through the most solid of defensive fortifications. Three manufacturers AMX, ARL and FCM, presented design proposals, with the 124t ARL vehicle being selected for development in 1934. The first prototype was fielded in late 1936 and production began the next year. Armed with a 135mm hull-mounted howitzer and a 75mm gun in its turret, it was capable of a top speed of 15km/hour cross country and was protected by over 100mm of armour. Only 62 had been completed by 1940, with all being kept in central reserve as army-level assets along with French Army dragons and long range railway guns.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 25, 2018 10:41:57 GMT
French Tank Development Part III: World War 2 and Beyond
By May 1940, France had one of the largest tank forces in the world, fielding a total of 5389 vehicles in Metropolitan France, including reserves. The majority of these vehicles were light tanks dedicated to the support of the 122 infantry divisions of the Grande Armee and were thus spread far too thinly to be of optimal tactical utility. The 10 armoured active divisions were deployed across all four French Army Groups along the Western Front and only two partially equipped divisions were allotted to the General Reserve of the Masse de Manouevre at Paris. The British Expeditionary Force could add a further 8 armoured and 17 heavy motorized infantry divisions to this force, but the Belgian and Dutch armies did not field any substantial separate tank force. The 156 German and 23 Austro-Hungarian divisions could muster 18 Panzer divisions between them, giving a nominal advantage in numbers to the Allies. However, the Axis armoured forces were concentrated in the Low Countries and the Ardennes where they enjoyed a distinct localized superiority in numbers.
The first eight months of the war did not see any major offensives by either side on the Western Front, giving rise to what was known as the ‘Phoney War’. The Allies focused their production and planning on a great 1941 offensive into Germany, whilst preparing contingency operations to counter a German attack through the Low Countries. Orders were placed for the production 980 G1s in 1940 along with updated versions of the Renault and Hotchkiss light tanks that would be armed with high velocity 37mm anti-tank guns. 125 Renault R40s and 180 H40s were produced in the first half of 1940 and production was planned to reach levels of 120 tanks per month for the duration. A new variant of the Somua S35 cavalry tank with an improved suspension and welded turret armour, the S40, was planned to replace her older predecessor on production lines from July 1940. A project for the development of a self-propelled infantry support gun armed with a 75mm gun had been initiated in early 1939, but only 10 prototype vehicles had been produced for testing purposes by May 1940.
The Western Front of the Second World War was set alight on May 10th 1940 as Fall Gelb sprung into action. German Army Group B invaded the Netherlands and Belgium with 54 divisions, supported by the Austrian 2nd and 4th Armies. The French 1st Army Group and the BEF moved forward towards the Dyle River in response, following carefully coordinated plans for the establishment of a strong defensive line. The initial fighting in Belgium included the great tank clash of the Battle of Gembloux Gap begins, where the German 6th Army’s 3rd, 4th and 5th Panzer and four motorized divisions clashing with three armoured, three motorized and four infantry divisions of the 1st French Army. Initially, German lighter Panzer II and III tanks suffered heavy damage from the French B2s, Somuas and French heavy artillery, before a daring thrust outflanked the French positions and knocked out over a hundred tanks of the 2nd DCR. These attacks were barely stopped by use of converted 75mm field guns, often fired from extremely close range. The battle was a bloody draw, but would prove extremely important in buying time for the next stages of the wider campaign.
The Allied position was imperiled by the drive of Army Group B through the Ardennes and the capture of the key bridges over the Meuse at Sedan. For a few climactic days, it seemed as if the entire of the Allied position in Northern France would be smashed open and nothing would lie between the Panzers and the Channel. It would be the gallant but doomed stand of the 11th Army at Laon that won time for the French 4th Army Group, poised to attack into the Saar just days before, to swing back and race for the Aisne and the 2nd Army Group to strike south towards the Oise and threaten to pocket the German advance. The 11th Army, as the General Reserve had been hastily renamed, held the full fury of the German Army for two days from May 13th to May 15th before falling back to the Aisne, having lost virtually all of its tanks and heavy equipment and over half its manpower. At the final hour, France’s greatest archmage, Sieur Guillaume Flambard, flew down upon the field and threw back the pursuing German panzers with spell after spell, finally breaking his staff and disappearing in a storm of white flame. Their sacrifice had won precious time for the rest of the Allied armies and particularly for the arrival of the 4th Army Group, which had been shifted to the southern flank of the German salient along the Aisne.
The British and French forces in Belgium began a phased general withdrawal from the Dyle Line to defensible positions further south, with the British 1st and 2nd Armies withdrawing back on the Channel Ports, the French 3rd and 4th Armies falling back to the fortresses of Lille and Cambrai and the French 1st and 2nd Armies pulling back from Maubeuge towards St. Quentin. This presented Von Rundstedt with a vexing dilemma, as the original aim of encircling the bulk of the Allied armies in Belgium had been made increasingly difficult by the flanking move of the French 2nd Army Group and the retreat of the French 1st Army Group to positions that would block his drive to the Channel north of the Somme. He shifted the axis of his advance to the south of Laon, with the aim of breaking into open country with his mobile armoured forces and reaching the Channel around Dieppe. The French 2nd Army Group forced a small bridgehead across the Oise and recaptured Hirson on May 16th, before it was taken once again by a ferocious assault by German motorized infantry. The new 6e Division Cuirassée commanded by General Charles de Gaulle struck the German positions in their flank in a daring night attack and threatened to drive back their entire vanguard. Fighting continued between the Aisne and the Oise until May 19th, when Rundstedt called a temporary tactical halt to the offensive to allow reserves and heavy artillery to be bought up. OKH convinced Hitler of the necessity of a momentary pause in operations by playing to his strategic fears and prejudices and depicting the proposal as an opportunity for Army Groups to link up, the infantry to catch up with the Panzers and pin down both flanks of the Allied line.
The French R35 and H35 light tanks had suffered grievously in their engagements with the heavier armed Panzer IIs, but in turn had the measure of the 20mm armed Panzer Is, which were withdrawn to support roles in response. The Somua S35s and Char D2s were a fine match for the German Panzer III mediums and could even engage the formidable Panzer IVs with a reasonable level of confidence. The Char B1 and B2 heavy tanks had played a key role in blunting the rampaging offence of the Panzers along the Champagne front, although many had been knocked out by German field artillery and 88mm anti-aircraft guns hastily employed in a field role. The two regiments of Char G1s had performed magnificently at the Battle of the Gembloux Gap, belying their small numbers with lethal firepower at distances beyond the range of most enemy tanks. German anti-tank guns and field artillery encountered better success against the older Char 2Cs, whose lack of mobility made them stand out as clear targets on the battlefield.
Positional fighting continued over the following days as the Germans bombarded and probed the Maginot Line and the defences of the British Expeditionary Force and defeated the remnants of the Belgian and Dutch armies in detail. Both the Allied and Axis forces had taken grave losses in the first stage of the Battle of France, including over a thousand French tanks. The Western Front again erupted into action on May 23rd 1940 in three separate offensives in Flanders, Alsace and Champagne, with the latter being the most terrible blow. The French front between Hirson and Marle was engulfed in fire and storm as foul weather magic, superheavy artillery fire and the full force of Nazi Germany’s Drachenkraft fell upon the French 10th Army, preceding an attack by 44 infantry and 8 Panzer divisions of Army Groups A and B that was supported by no less than 2400 Luftwaffe aircraft. The lines of defence was rent asunder and German armour and cavalry was able to break out through to the outskirts of St. Quentin, where a scratch force of artillery, second line tanks and reserve troops was able to temporarily halt them. Meanwhile, 37 infantry and 3 Panzer divisions assaulted the Maginot Line from the Saar, supported by 1200 aircraft and a large array of superheavy artillery pieces, including 60cm howitzers and four enormous 80cm siege guns which had a truly devastating effect. By nightfall, the defences of the Maginot Line had been penetrated in half a dozen places and the French 6th and 8th Armies were hard pressed to hold back the Germans.
By the end of the day, the Allied position on the Western Front was in danger of being split into two, with minimal strategic reserves behind the Somme and the Aisne and most of the Anglo-French armies concentrated to the north. Field Marshal Ironside advised Prime Minister Churchill and the Imperial General Staff that the BEF could hold their current positions quite comfortably, but would be severely threatened should the Germans press on the Channel ports from the south. Contingency preparations are ordered for an evacuation of the BEF from the Channel Ports. French Prime Minister Reynaud telephoned Mr. Churchill in the late evening of May 24th to express his concerns that a full German penetration would not only lead to the French 3rd and 4th Armies being cut off, but would leave Paris wide open in the light of the German attacks on the Maginot Line. Withdrawing the 34 French divisions of the 1st Army Group back to the Somme-Aisne Line would give the Allies a strong defensive barrier held by almost 100 divisions, but at the cost of leaving the BEF in a pocket around the Channel ports. Churchill agrees, with the BEF to defend Flanders and the Pas de Calais for as long as possible, supported by the Grand Fleet and the RAF.
The French campaign then divided into a two quite separate battles between the French and Germans around the Aisne and the Somme and between the Germans and Anglo-French forces in Flanders. The BEF and elements of the French 3rd Army were driven back into a shrinking pocket around the Channel Ports by May 25th . German Army Group B, numbering 56 divisions, turned towards the BEF and began to advance on Yser-Boulogne Line with the intent of breaking the British defences and driving them into the sea. Intense British artillery firepower halted most German offensives, with well dug in Valiant tanks picking off advancing panzers with relative ease. The RAF committed an all-out effort in support of the BEF and smashes a concentration of German armour near Lille as well as driving the Luftwaffe from the battlefield. RN monitors, cruisers and destroyers conduct heavy bombardments of German positions in Belgium and south of Boulogne overnight. Over the next 3 days, the Battle of the Yser raged on as four German Panzer divisions clashed with three British armoured and three infantry divisions. The German forces pressed forward to the point of breaking the second British defensive line, but were torn apart in a counterattack supported by 24” superheavy howitzers firing from Dunkirk and Calais and an advance by 29 Dreadnoughts; 10 were destroyed by 150mm heavy field guns firing over open sights as they threatened to tear open the whole centre of the German line. Despite this temporary respite, the long term survival of the pocket was considered untenable by the Imperial General Staff and a decision was made to evacuate the BEF from the Channel Ports, covered by the aircraft of Fighter command and the guns of the Grand Fleet. From May 28th to June 6th, over 820,000 British, French, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and Indian troops were miraculously delivered from Dunkirk, Calais and Boulogne to British shores, along with substantial quantities of arms and equipment.
Along the Aisne and the Somme, the French Army now faced the impossible task of defending against the bulk of the enemy. The battles of Noyon and Soissons on June 16th-18th represented the last gasp of French resistance before the Panzers broke out into their rear and the 1st and 2nd Army Groups began a desperate withdrawal to the Seine. Paris was declared an open city on June 20th and the French Army began a fighting retreat to the south to cover the evacuation to Algeria of the King, the treasures of the nation, Premier Reynaud and his cabinet and as much of the airforce and fleet as possible. Lyons fell on June 26th and large pockets of French forces began to be compelled to surrender to the oncoming German forces. As the Great Evacuation began from Toulon, Marseilles and Montpellier, remaining parts of the government and Parliament at Vichy began negotiations for an armistice with Germany to save France from utter destruction. Headed by former Premier Pierre Laval and backed by the King’s brother Francois, the Duc d'Orléans, it sued for peace on July 2nd 1940, defying the government in exile of Prime Minister Reynaud in Algiers and accusing it of having abandoned France after leading it to ruin. After a flurry of telegrams with both parties accusing the other of treason, Francois assumed the throne with the backing of remaining elements of the Royal Court and dismissed Reynaud. Young King Louis XXI and Reynaud responded by decrying the action as treason and moving decisively against their perceived opponents in Algeria. The Algiers night rang with gunfire and the flash of spells and, by dawn, the pro-Vichy elements of the government and army in exile had been defeated. On July 6th, the Vichy government signed an armistice agreement with Germany at Compiegne, with Northern France to be occupied by the German Army at French expense, various heavy weapons, tanks and vehicles to be surrendered, the French Army to be reduced to 12 divisions and the 2 million French prisoners of war currently held in German captivity to remain until a final peace treaty was signed. Hundreds of thousands of other loyal French troops melted into the population in the cities and the countryside to wait for the hour of their redemption when the sound of Roland’s olifant would ring across her fields and Oriflamme would fly once again.
The French government and armed forces in exile in North Africa, already being called the Free French, announced they would not be bound by the armistice and would continue to fight on alongside the British Empire. French West Africa, French Equatorial Africa, the French West Indies and French Indochina fell into the Vichy camp, while French troops in Norway elected to continue fighting alongside their British, Norwegian and Polish allies. The French Army in North Africa comprised 8 light infantry and colonial divisions, with further manpower available in the form of 200,000 evacuated French and Belgian troops. However, they lacked any modern tanks, artillery, fuel or heavy armament and the defences of French North Africa for the moment depended on 174 Char D1s and 129 R35s along the Mareth Line in Tunisia. Initial plans for the construction of Char G1 tanks in North Africa ran into the roadblock of reality as the true paucity of resources, machine tools and industrial plant hit home. The Free French Army would rely upon the occasional delivery of surplus British Valiant tanks for the remainder of 1940. In 1941, the decision was made to reequip the Mediterranean based armoured forces with American medium tanks; French troops in Norway and Britain would continue to operate the ubiquitous Crusader. This would result in the French 1st Army being equipped with the M4 Sherman and the French 2nd Army being equipped with the Crusader when they joined up along the Loire in July 1944.
Ultimately, it had not been the particular tanks that equipped the French Army in 1940 that contributed to their defeat in the three bloody stages of the Battle of France, but rather how they were organized, commanded and deployed. The division between cavalry and infantry armoured divisions had proved decidedly inefficient and the overall dispersal of tanks and tank units had prevented a concentration of force that could have dealt a lethal blow to the early stages of the German offensive when it was slowed down around the Oise. The thousands of French light tanks proved effective in support of troops when operations mirrored those of 1918, but technology and operational art had moved beyond this point in the intervening 20 years and they could not effectively counter the medium Panzer IIs and IIIs. In the aftermath of the armistice, both the Vichy and Free French armies looked to alter their previous armoured doctrine to models based on German and British practice respectively, despite being handicapped by the conditions of the peace and material shortages. Marshal de Gaulle in particular formulated plans for the employment of an independent Corps de Cuirassée of three armoured divisions in the eventual liberation of France.
Secret design work continued in France on an improved variant of the Char G1, designated the G2, and a number of prototypes were carefully assembled and tested in carefully concealed operations. The 34t tanks were equipped with the same 75mm main armament as the G1, although it was intended to employ 90mm Schneider guns when production could begin. Production of the G1 for German and Austro-Hungarian use continued through 1943, finally coming to a stop when the AMX plant was put out of action by an audacious daylight raid by RAF Mosquitoes. It would equip several Panzer and Panzergrenadier divisions and performed creditably against the T-34s of the Red Army on the Eastern Front. The majority of the captured French Army tanks were used by the German Army for second line garrison work and anti-partisan operations across Occupied Europe. Once France had been liberated in late 1944, one of the first acts of the reestablished government was to order production of the Char G2. 1529 tanks were built between 1946 and 1952 in what can only be described as an act of supreme will intended to show that France had returned as an independent power. They gradually replaced the Crusaders and Pershings in use in French Indochina in 1954 and 1955.
The nation faced a parlous situation in the grim light of the postwar world, having to balance their extensive occupation commitments in Germany, Austria and Italy with the necessity of a Far Eastern Expeditionary Corps to reassert French control of Indochina. The initial postwar French Army was equipped with a combination of Shermans, Crusaders and G2s. They were joined in 1949 by the first real postwar French tank, the 14t AMX-13. It was designed as a lightly-armoured airmobile vehicle capable of supporting paratroopers and rapid deployment forces with its high velocity 75mm main gun. Capable of a road speed of up to 65km/hour, it would see considerable service in the Indochina War and in tough counterinsurgency operations in North Africa. A total of 3569 vehicles were built between 1949 and 1960, serving in the French, Spanish, Belgian and Italian armies.
One of the major challenges to the Western Allied armies in the late 1940s and early 1950s was perceived to be the Red Army’s fleet of heavy tanks, such as the KV-4, IS-3 and IS-10. Although the British 25pdrs and 36pdrs and the American 90mm and 105mm were capable of successfully engaging them at battle ranges, their thick armour protected them against the larger caliber low velocity weapons carried by the older Allied heavy tanks. These also needed replacement after heavy use in the last two years of the war. A general Western requirement for a heavy tank saw the development of the British Conqueror, the US M102, the Swedish Stridsvagn 100, the German Löwe and Tiger tanks and the French AMX-50. Weighing in at 67.8 tons, it was armed with a 120mm gun and a number of 12.7mm and 7.5mm machine guns. Its sloped armour was equivalent to over 230mm of conventional protection and its top speed was a creditable 49km/hour. 783 were built between 1952 and 1957, serving exclusively with the armoured divisions of the French Army.
1954 saw the introduction of the first French main battle tank, the AMX-25, after a protracted 7 year development period. It was a 45t design developed from the G2 and significantly influenced by the Centurion. Armed with a Royal Ordnance 105mm high velocity gun and protected by upwards of 140mm of frontal glacis armour, the AMX-25 was a fast and quite well protected tank. The 750hp diesel engine was extremely reliable in a variety of conditions and could propel the tank at speeds of up to 65km/hour. 2436 would be built over the next six years, equipping the Grande Armée as it rebuilt itself from the nadir of defeat and replacing the wartime American and British medium tanks in active home service.
The year was also marked by the epic Battle of Dien Bien Phu in Indochina. 24,000 troops of the French Empire, elite paratroopers and Foreign Legionnaires of the 11th Division Parachutiste supported by heavy artillery and a regiment of AMX-13s held out against almost 100,000 Viet Minh for 179 days before the siege was broken by a series of massive air raids by USAF and RAF heavy bombers that cleared the way for an aerial evacuation. The French light tanks proved useful when dug in as artillery on the bitterly contested high ground surrounding the valley, but found mobile operations difficult in the rugged terrain. Thirty eight out of fifty tanks were destroyed in the course of the fighting. The battle resulted not so much in a French victory, but in avoidance of a catastrophic defeat. The bloody war in Indochina would continue for the next two years before the Geneva Conference of 1956 lead to an unsteady armistice.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 25, 2018 15:38:20 GMT
Well that was a dramatic summary of parts of WWII. Sounds like the battle of France was bloodier for the Germans and also I notice that France is still a Bourbon monarchy. Suspect this means it was restored ~1871 and has been in charge since rather than France being republican? Also the French got the support from British and US air power to win at Dien Bien Phu, which could have big implications. Think we end up with a [pro-French?] empire in S Vietnam and the communists in the north.
Steve
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 25, 2018 19:07:23 GMT
Well that was a dramatic summary of parts of WWII. Sounds like the battle of France was bloodier for the Germans and also I notice that France is still a Bourbon monarchy. Suspect this means it was restored ~1871 and has been in charge since rather than France being republican? Also the French got the support from British and US air power to win at Dien Bien Phu, which could have big implications. Think we end up with a [pro-French?] empire in S Vietnam and the communists in the north. Steve
Well if the French needed British and US air power to win at Dien Bien Phu means that at that time they did not have their own bombers in service ore am i wrong.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 25, 2018 20:57:34 GMT
Well that was a dramatic summary of parts of WWII. Sounds like the battle of France was bloodier for the Germans and also I notice that France is still a Bourbon monarchy. Suspect this means it was restored ~1871 and has been in charge since rather than France being republican? Also the French got the support from British and US air power to win at Dien Bien Phu, which could have big implications. Think we end up with a [pro-French?] empire in S Vietnam and the communists in the north. Steve
Well if the French needed British and US air power to win at Dien Bien Phu means that at that time they did not have their own bombers in service ore am i wrong.
Well as I understand it OTL the French asked for US air support and it was denied. They didn't have sufficient air power to overcome the unexpected level of air defences and artillery the communists had deployed. By the sound of it TTL both the US and a markedly more powerful RAF force are applied and help the French win the battle.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 25, 2018 21:57:44 GMT
Your summation of Dien Bien Phu is correct - the USAF and RAF heavies were around in the Far East and were decisive in their air strikes. The French bomber force was concentrated in Europe, consisting in the post WW2 period of Lancasters, followed by Canberras while their own jet bomber project struggled onwards.
The Battle of France was more costly for the Germans, but they did have a larger force and an Austrian-Hungarian army to balance it out.
France is a constitutional monarchy, with the post 1871 restoration of the fused Orleanist/Legitimist cause under Henri V.
South Vietnam is a pro French 'empire', with strong interest and influence from the Americans.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 26, 2018 9:59:45 GMT
German Tank Development Part I: 1870-1918
German interest in the use of armoured vehicles had its origins in the use of armoured steamwagons to support the sieges of Metz and Paris during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871. These protracted engagements saw the largest employment of heavy siege artillery in Europe since the Crimean War and necessitated similar solutions to the problems of supply and movement under fire. The aftermath of victory in the war saw the formation of the German Empire and a unified Imperial German Army that emphasized speed, firepower and artful maneuver. The final decades of the 19th century were marked by a concentration on the development of heavy artillery to break French and Russian fortifications in the event of war, but the Imperial German General Staff did not completely eschew the utility of steam ironclads as an adjunct to the traditional arms of service. In 1901, the noted eccentric inventor Professor Wolfgang von Schwarzheim presented a design for an armoured steam-powered motor carriage able to carry a Krupp 77mm gun over a modern battlefield. It was rejected due to the lack of immediate utility and incompatibility with current doctrine, but the undeterred von Schwarzheim continued his tinkerings in his mountaintop laboratory and refined his design over the coming years.
The South African and Russo-Japanese Wars provided German military attaches with substantial food for thought regarding the tactical shape of the modern battlefield and confirmed the viability of tracked vehicles for logistical support of armies in the field. The Imperial German Army began testing of motor artillery tractors in 1908, but their reliability and speed was seen as inferior to that of horses in the forseeable future. In 1910, the Austrian inventor and army officer Gunther Burstyn presented his design for an overland armoured Motorgeschutz, or motorised gun, to the Austro-Hungarian War Ministry and subsequently to the Imperial German Army with mixed success. The Austrians could see a role for it in engagements with the Imperial Russian Army in open expanses of the prospective Galicia and Polish fronts, but lacked the funds to pursue development of the vehicle, whereas the Germans believed it would be too slow to keep up with the field army on the offensive and preferred to prioritize the procurement of more promising armoured car projects. It would later see use from early 1916 onwards in the service of the Austro-Hungarian Army, but was never seriously considered by Germany, given its rather different needs by that stage of the war.
Professor von Schwarzheim died tragically at the hands of his prized steam automaton Stahlherz in May 1913 and its subsequent berserk rampage destroyed much of the surrounding village before it was subdued by the use of a hastily sigil of power by a passing Imperial Wizard. In the smouldering wreckage of his laboratory, along with various fiendish designs for flying steel homunculi and electrical crossbows, investigators found a full set of plans and a working scale model of his Riesenlaster, or juggernaut. It was seemingly inspired by a combination of his earlier works and lurid reports of the British Army’s employment of captured Martian ironclads that had filtered through the yellow press in the aftermath of the events of 1898. The Riesenlaster was a 96t landship armed with four 77mm guns, half a dozen machine guns and two forward mounted saw blades and could reach the heady top speed of 2 kilometres an hour over even terrain. The blueprints and prototype of Schwarzheim’s bizarre machine were hastily taken to Berlin and locked away for testing, along with the wreckage of his beloved automaton.
The outbreak of conflict and the early course of the war in the latter half of 1914 lead to a gradual reappraisal of the role of the armoured vehicle as a weapon of war, but it took the full onset of stalemate along the Western Front to begin a formal programme of development by the Imperial German Army. Ten modified Riesenlasters were ordered on January 5th to serve as nominally mobile artillery to augment the defensive position adopted in the West in 1915 and a series of design studies on a lighter variant of greater tactical mobility were initiated. The deadlock along the Western Front also provided the impetus for the development of battle automata or war machines as they are more widely known, but that matter is beyond the scope of this particular study. The Riesenlasters went into action in mid-November around Ypres and proved to be exceptionally unwieldy and mechanically temperamental, but also exceptionally resilient as tactical strongpoints in secondary and tertiary lines of defence. Their forward mounted saw blades were of mixed utility in cutting through barbed wire entanglements and contributed more as a cause of terror among the infantry of both sides after a few rather bloody accidents. Whilst the German juggernauts at Ypres did not encounter any greater success than the British landships at Loos, they were more suited to the requirements of defensive fighting and a further thirty vehicles were ordered for production in 1916.
The British use of tanks at Loos in September 1915 lead to the creation of the 7th Transportation Branch of the General War Department with the expedited requirement to develop a counterpart to the British vehicle. The project was placed under the talented leadership of Captain Joseph Vollmer and initial plans for a 47 ton vehicle with a top speed of 12 kilometres per hour capable of crossing trenches one and a half metres wide and armed with a fixed 77mm gun and four machine guns were completed in late December. The vehicle was designated the A7V after its design department and the first prototype was completed at the Daimler Motor Corporation plant in Berlin in March 1916, resulting in an order for 230 tanks. The initial production model A7Vs entered frontline service with the Imperial German Army in September and helped stabilize the frontline in the final stages of the Battle of the Somme. The Riesenlasters were deployed at Verdun, where their defensive capacity was rendered ineffective by the sheer volume of artillery employed across the battlefield. Seventeen were destroyed and the remaining vehicles used as the basis for permanent bunkers along the northern sector of the Verdun front along the Meuse.
The A7V was soon given the appellation of the Sturmpanzerwagen, or armoured assault vehicle and by early 1917, the German Army deployed 126 of the type organized in eight Abteilung, or detachments. They proved exceptionally successful in the defensive phase of the Second Battle of the Aisne, destroying over two dozen French Schneider CA1s in a series of confused engagements. 294 were built over the course of 1917 and were deployed across the front, particularly around the Champagne and Lorraine sectors where they faced off against French and American forces. However, despite its creditable battlefield performance, the A7V was not considered the ideal German armoured vehicle. It was extremely expensive and time consuming to produce, rendering it unsuitable to mass production and required a crew of no less than twenty four to operate its complicated machinery and armament. Additionally, German armaments production was already pressed by the requirements of industrial war on several fronts, the support of several allies and the large naval repair and emergency construction programme that followed the great Battle of Jutland in 1916. Production continued on a reduced scale in the first half of 1918 before ceasing in July, with a total of 93 tanks built as German requirements shifted.
The necessity for a new, simpler tank design lead to the development of the most successful German tank of the Great War, the Sturmpanzerwagen Oberschleissen. A prototype was completed by June 1917 by the Oberschliessen Eisenwerk of Gleiwitz and it was rushed into production in September. The 26 ton tank was protected by 20mm of armour and was much faster than previous German vehicles, being capable of a maximum speed of 18 km/hour and was armed with a 57mm gun in a fully rotating turret. 524 would be built in the final year of the war out of an initial order of 2500, reflecting the increasing impact of the Allied blockade. It proved to be extremely successful in the smashing German offensive successes of early 1918, breaking through British, French and American lines and tearing large holes in the Allied front in concert with new war gasses, heavy artillery such as the notorious 24” Paris Gun, hulking war machines, concentrated battle magic and stormtrooper tactics. The Battle of Villers-Bretonneux from April 6th to April 10th 1918 saw 52 A7Vs and 94 Oberschliessens defeated at dreadful cost by 162 British and Australian Mark Vs and Mark VIIIs in the largest tank battle of the Great War that served as a sign of things to come.
A large proportion of the operational tanks used by Germany in the Great War were captured British heavy tanks, designated Beutepanzer, or ‘trophy tanks’. Over 240 tanks of various types saw service in 1916, 1917 and 1918, proving difficult to support but useful across the battlefield. Many of the earlier Mark Is and Mark IIs saw service on the Eastern Front where their firepower and protection outmatched the limited Russian tank force. One noteworthy engagement saw a detachment of six Beutepanzer Mk IVs destroyed by a pair of RFC dragons in August 1917 while they moved up to support a counterattack against the Canadians at Passchendaele; the gold wyrm Aethicandus sardonically remarked how charitable and thoroughly decent it was of the Germans to supply canned food so near to the frontline.
The German Army fielded two further tanks in the final bloody and terrible year of the Great War, although they were of substantially different roles and dimensions. The British and French introduction of fast light tanks in 1917 resulted in the development of a 9.75t German counterpart, the Leichte Kampfwagen, or light combat car. It was quite similar to the Renault FT-17 in its role and armament, sporting a Krupp 37mm cannon and being capable of a top speed of 19 km/hour across even terrain, but by the time it entered service in early June 1918, the operational needs of the German Army on the Western Front had shifted from offensive exploitation to dogged defence. Only 81 vehicles out of a total order for 650 were completed by the Armistice and they did not see action in an organized fashion before the cessation of hostilities.
The second vehicle was the superheavy Grosskampfwagen, a 160 ton behemoth that dwarfed even the British Dreadnoughts of the Royal Tank Corps. It was a direct descendant of the Riesenlasters, carrying a main armament of a hefty 135mm cannon and was capable of reaching a top speed of 6.5 km per hour. Seven K-Wagens were completed by the Armistice, but their sheer size and bulk made them impossible to be transported in a single piece. Additionally, communications, fire control and steering was conducted remotely from the control room via a series of electrical lights, which proved somewhat troublesome in testing. Two vehicles were transported to the front, assembled and deployed in early November in a herculean effort, but to little avail, with the first being lost in a canal after collapsing the nearby road and the second digging itself into a muddy pit after the steering jammed.
The German tanks of the Great War were something of a mixed bag of useful and less effective types, but were ultimately constrained by the limitations of the German war economy, which was decisively out-produced by those of Britain, France and the United States. The general German defensive posture on the Western Front between 1915 and 1918, with the exception of the bloody killing match at Verdun, was not optimally suited for the employment of tanks, making their deficiency in this regard less significant, but once the war returned to conditions of open maneuver, the Allies held a clear advantage. The A7V was the right tank for the conditions of 1916 and 1917, but was too difficult and expensive to produce in numbers; the Oberschleissen was the ideal tank for 1918 and a fearsome adversary for all Allied tanks it faced in the final year of the war, but once again, was subject to the constraints of logistics and reality.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 26, 2018 13:44:54 GMT
German Tank Development Part I: 1870-1918German interest in the use of armoured vehicles had its origins in the use of armoured steamwagons to support the sieges of Metz and Paris during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871. These protracted engagements saw the largest employment of heavy siege artillery in Europe since the Crimean War and necessitated similar solutions to the problems of supply and movement under fire. The aftermath of victory in the war saw the formation of the German Empire and a unified Imperial German Army that emphasized speed, firepower and artful maneuver. The final decades of the 19th century were marked by a concentration on the development of heavy artillery to break French and Russian fortifications in the event of war, but the Imperial German General Staff did not completely eschew the utility of steam ironclads as an adjunct to the traditional arms of service. In 1901, the noted eccentric inventor Professor Wolfgang von Schwarzheim presented a design for an armoured steam-powered motor carriage able to carry a Krupp 77mm gun over a modern battlefield. It was rejected due to the lack of immediate utility and incompatibility with current doctrine, but the undeterred von Schwarzheim continued his tinkerings in his mountaintop laboratory and refined his design over the coming years. The South African and Russo-Japanese Wars provided German military attaches with substantial food for thought regarding the tactical shape of the modern battlefield and confirmed the viability of tracked vehicles for logistical support of armies in the field. The Imperial German Army began testing of motor artillery tractors in 1908, but their reliability and speed was seen as inferior to that of horses in the forseeable future. In 1910, the Austrian inventor and army officer Gunther Burstyn presented his design for an overland armoured Motorgeschutz, or motorised gun, to the Austro-Hungarian War Ministry and subsequently to the Imperial German Army with mixed success. The Austrians could see a role for it in engagements with the Imperial Russian Army in open expanses of the prospective Galicia and Polish fronts, but lacked the funds to pursue development of the vehicle, whereas the Germans believed it would be too slow to keep up with the field army on the offensive and preferred to prioritize the procurement of more promising armoured car projects. It would later see use from early 1916 onwards in the service of the Austro-Hungarian Army, but was never seriously considered by Germany, given its rather different needs by that stage of the war. Professor von Schwarzheim died tragically at the hands of his prized steam automaton Stahlherz in May 1913 and its subsequent berserk rampage destroyed much of the surrounding village before it was subdued by the use of a hastily sigil of power by a passing Imperial Wizard. In the smouldering wreckage of his laboratory, along with various fiendish designs for flying steel homunculi and electrical crossbows, investigators found a full set of plans and a working scale model of his Riesenlaster, or juggernaut. It was seemingly inspired by a combination of his earlier works and lurid reports of the British Army’s employment of captured Martian ironclads that had filtered through the yellow press in the aftermath of the events of 1898. The Riesenlaster was a 96t landship armed with four 77mm guns, half a dozen machine guns and two forward mounted saw blades and could reach the heady top speed of 2 kilometres an hour over even terrain. The blueprints and prototype of Schwarzheim’s bizarre machine were hastily taken to Berlin and locked away for testing, along with the wreckage of his beloved automaton. The outbreak of conflict and the early course of the war in the latter half of 1914 lead to a gradual reappraisal of the role of the armoured vehicle as a weapon of war, but it took the full onset of stalemate along the Western Front to begin a formal programme of development by the Imperial German Army. Ten modified Riesenlasters were ordered on January 5th to serve as nominally mobile artillery to augment the defensive position adopted in the West in 1915 and a series of design studies on a lighter variant of greater tactical mobility were initiated. The deadlock along the Western Front also provided the impetus for the development of battle automata or war machines as they are more widely known, but that matter is beyond the scope of this particular study. The Riesenlasters went into action in mid-November around Ypres and proved to be exceptionally unwieldy and mechanically temperamental, but also exceptionally resilient as tactical strongpoints in secondary and tertiary lines of defence. Their forward mounted saw blades were of mixed utility in cutting through barbed wire entanglements and contributed more as a cause of terror among the infantry of both sides after a few rather bloody accidents. Whilst the German juggernauts at Ypres did not encounter any greater success than the British landships at Loos, they were more suited to the requirements of defensive fighting and a further thirty vehicles were ordered for production in 1916. The British use of tanks at Loos in September 1915 lead to the creation of the 7th Transportation Branch of the General War Department with the expedited requirement to develop a counterpart to the British vehicle. The project was placed under the talented leadership of Captain Joseph Vollmer and initial plans for a 47 ton vehicle with a top speed of 12 kilometres per hour capable of crossing trenches one and a half metres wide and armed with a fixed 77mm gun and four machine guns were completed in late December. The vehicle was designated the A7V after its design department and the first prototype was completed at the Daimler Motor Corporation plant in Berlin in March 1916, resulting in an order for 230 tanks. The initial production model A7Vs entered frontline service with the Imperial German Army in September and helped stabilize the frontline in the final stages of the Battle of the Somme. The Riesenlasters were deployed at Verdun, where their defensive capacity was rendered ineffective by the sheer volume of artillery employed across the battlefield. Seventeen were destroyed and the remaining vehicles used as the basis for permanent bunkers along the northern sector of the Verdun front along the Meuse. The A7V was soon given the appellation of the Sturmpanzerwagen, or armoured assault vehicle and by early 1917, the German Army deployed 126 of the type organized in eight Abteilung, or detachments. They proved exceptionally successful in the defensive phase of the Second Battle of the Aisne, destroying over two dozen French Schneider CA1s in a series of confused engagements. 294 were built over the course of 1917 and were deployed across the front, particularly around the Champagne and Lorraine sectors where they faced off against French and American forces. However, despite its creditable battlefield performance, the A7V was not considered the ideal German armoured vehicle. It was extremely expensive and time consuming to produce, rendering it unsuitable to mass production and required a crew of no less than twenty four to operate its complicated machinery and armament. Additionally, German armaments production was already pressed by the requirements of industrial war on several fronts, the support of several allies and the large naval repair and emergency construction programme that followed the great Battle of Jutland in 1916. Production continued on a reduced scale in the first half of 1918 before ceasing in July, with a total of 93 tanks built as German requirements shifted. The necessity for a new, simpler tank design lead to the development of the most successful German tank of the Great War, the Sturmpanzerwagen Oberschleissen. A prototype was completed by June 1917 by the Oberschliessen Eisenwerk of Gleiwitz and it was rushed into production in September. The 26 ton tank was protected by 20mm of armour and was much faster than previous German vehicles, being capable of a maximum speed of 18 km/hour and was armed with a 57mm gun in a fully rotating turret. 524 would be built in the final year of the war out of an initial order of 2500, reflecting the increasing impact of the Allied blockade. It proved to be extremely successful in the smashing German offensive successes of early 1918, breaking through British, French and American lines and tearing large holes in the Allied front in concert with new war gasses, heavy artillery such as the notorious 24” Paris Gun, hulking war machines, concentrated battle magic and stormtrooper tactics. The Battle of Villers-Bretonneux from April 6th to April 10th 1918 saw 52 A7Vs and 94 Oberschliessens defeated at dreadful cost by 162 British and Australian Mark Vs and Mark VIIIs in the largest tank battle of the Great War that served as a sign of things to come. A large proportion of the operational tanks used by Germany in the Great War were captured British heavy tanks, designated Beutepanzer, or ‘trophy tanks’. Over 240 tanks of various types saw service in 1916, 1917 and 1918, proving difficult to support but useful across the battlefield. Many of the earlier Mark Is and Mark IIs saw service on the Eastern Front where their firepower and protection outmatched the limited Russian tank force. One noteworthy engagement saw a detachment of six Beutepanzer Mk IVs destroyed by a pair of RFC dragons in August 1917 while they moved up to support a counterattack against the Canadians at Passchendaele; the gold wyrm Aethicandus sardonically remarked how charitable and thoroughly decent it was of the Germans to supply canned food so near to the frontline. The German Army fielded two further tanks in the final bloody and terrible year of the Great War, although they were of substantially different roles and dimensions. The British and French introduction of fast light tanks in 1917 resulted in the development of a 9.75t German counterpart, the Leichte Kampfwagen, or light combat car. It was quite similar to the Renault FT-17 in its role and armament, sporting a Krupp 37mm cannon and being capable of a top speed of 19 km/hour across even terrain, but by the time it entered service in early June 1918, the operational needs of the German Army on the Western Front had shifted from offensive exploitation to dogged defence. Only 81 vehicles out of a total order for 650 were completed by the Armistice and they did not see action in an organized fashion before the cessation of hostilities. The second vehicle was the superheavy Grosskampfwagen, a 160 ton behemoth that dwarfed even the British Dreadnoughts of the Royal Tank Corps. It was a direct descendant of the Riesenlasters, carrying a main armament of a hefty 135mm cannon and was capable of reaching a top speed of 6.5 km per hour. Seven K-Wagens were completed by the Armistice, but their sheer size and bulk made them impossible to be transported in a single piece. Additionally, communications, fire control and steering was conducted remotely from the control room via a series of electrical lights, which proved somewhat troublesome in testing. Two vehicles were transported to the front, assembled and deployed in early November in a herculean effort, but to little avail, with the first being lost in a canal after collapsing the nearby road and the second digging itself into a muddy pit after the steering jammed. The German tanks of the Great War were something of a mixed bag of useful and less effective types, but were ultimately constrained by the limitations of the German war economy, which was decisively out-produced by those of Britain, France and the United States. The general German defensive posture on the Western Front between 1915 and 1918, with the exception of the bloody killing match at Verdun, was not optimally suited for the employment of tanks, making their deficiency in this regard less significant, but once the war returned to conditions of open maneuver, the Allies held a clear advantage. The A7V was the right tank for the conditions of 1916 and 1917, but was too difficult and expensive to produce in numbers; the Oberschleissen was the ideal tank for 1918 and a fearsome adversary for all Allied tanks it faced in the final year of the war, but once again, was subject to the constraints of logistics and reality. Nice to see how the Germans developed and use tanks in the Great War, question, is the A7V the same as OTL and did the Germans like OTL also captured and use a lot of British Mark tanks.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jul 26, 2018 14:55:37 GMT
German Tank Development Part I: 1870-1918German interest in the use of armoured vehicles had its origins in the use of armoured steamwagons to support the sieges of Metz and Paris during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871. These protracted engagements saw the largest employment of heavy siege artillery in Europe since the Crimean War and necessitated similar solutions to the problems of supply and movement under fire. The aftermath of victory in the war saw the formation of the German Empire and a unified Imperial German Army that emphasized speed, firepower and artful maneuver. The final decades of the 19th century were marked by a concentration on the development of heavy artillery to break French and Russian fortifications in the event of war, but the Imperial German General Staff did not completely eschew the utility of steam ironclads as an adjunct to the traditional arms of service. In 1901, the noted eccentric inventor Professor Wolfgang von Schwarzheim presented a design for an armoured steam-powered motor carriage able to carry a Krupp 77mm gun over a modern battlefield. It was rejected due to the lack of immediate utility and incompatibility with current doctrine, but the undeterred von Schwarzheim continued his tinkerings in his mountaintop laboratory and refined his design over the coming years. The South African and Russo-Japanese Wars provided German military attaches with substantial food for thought regarding the tactical shape of the modern battlefield and confirmed the viability of tracked vehicles for logistical support of armies in the field. The Imperial German Army began testing of motor artillery tractors in 1908, but their reliability and speed was seen as inferior to that of horses in the forseeable future. In 1910, the Austrian inventor and army officer Gunther Burstyn presented his design for an overland armoured Motorgeschutz, or motorised gun, to the Austro-Hungarian War Ministry and subsequently to the Imperial German Army with mixed success. The Austrians could see a role for it in engagements with the Imperial Russian Army in open expanses of the prospective Galicia and Polish fronts, but lacked the funds to pursue development of the vehicle, whereas the Germans believed it would be too slow to keep up with the field army on the offensive and preferred to prioritize the procurement of more promising armoured car projects. It would later see use from early 1916 onwards in the service of the Austro-Hungarian Army, but was never seriously considered by Germany, given its rather different needs by that stage of the war. Professor von Schwarzheim died tragically at the hands of his prized steam automaton Stahlherz in May 1913 and its subsequent berserk rampage destroyed much of the surrounding village before it was subdued by the use of a hastily sigil of power by a passing Imperial Wizard. In the smouldering wreckage of his laboratory, along with various fiendish designs for flying steel homunculi and electrical crossbows, investigators found a full set of plans and a working scale model of his Riesenlaster, or juggernaut. It was seemingly inspired by a combination of his earlier works and lurid reports of the British Army’s employment of captured Martian ironclads that had filtered through the yellow press in the aftermath of the events of 1898. The Riesenlaster was a 96t landship armed with four 77mm guns, half a dozen machine guns and two forward mounted saw blades and could reach the heady top speed of 2 kilometres an hour over even terrain. The blueprints and prototype of Schwarzheim’s bizarre machine were hastily taken to Berlin and locked away for testing, along with the wreckage of his beloved automaton. The outbreak of conflict and the early course of the war in the latter half of 1914 lead to a gradual reappraisal of the role of the armoured vehicle as a weapon of war, but it took the full onset of stalemate along the Western Front to begin a formal programme of development by the Imperial German Army. Ten modified Riesenlasters were ordered on January 5th to serve as nominally mobile artillery to augment the defensive position adopted in the West in 1915 and a series of design studies on a lighter variant of greater tactical mobility were initiated. The deadlock along the Western Front also provided the impetus for the development of battle automata or war machines as they are more widely known, but that matter is beyond the scope of this particular study. The Riesenlasters went into action in mid-November around Ypres and proved to be exceptionally unwieldy and mechanically temperamental, but also exceptionally resilient as tactical strongpoints in secondary and tertiary lines of defence. Their forward mounted saw blades were of mixed utility in cutting through barbed wire entanglements and contributed more as a cause of terror among the infantry of both sides after a few rather bloody accidents. Whilst the German juggernauts at Ypres did not encounter any greater success than the British landships at Loos, they were more suited to the requirements of defensive fighting and a further thirty vehicles were ordered for production in 1916. The British use of tanks at Loos in September 1915 lead to the creation of the 7th Transportation Branch of the General War Department with the expedited requirement to develop a counterpart to the British vehicle. The project was placed under the talented leadership of Captain Joseph Vollmer and initial plans for a 47 ton vehicle with a top speed of 12 kilometres per hour capable of crossing trenches one and a half metres wide and armed with a fixed 77mm gun and four machine guns were completed in late December. The vehicle was designated the A7V after its design department and the first prototype was completed at the Daimler Motor Corporation plant in Berlin in March 1916, resulting in an order for 230 tanks. The initial production model A7Vs entered frontline service with the Imperial German Army in September and helped stabilize the frontline in the final stages of the Battle of the Somme. The Riesenlasters were deployed at Verdun, where their defensive capacity was rendered ineffective by the sheer volume of artillery employed across the battlefield. Seventeen were destroyed and the remaining vehicles used as the basis for permanent bunkers along the northern sector of the Verdun front along the Meuse. The A7V was soon given the appellation of the Sturmpanzerwagen, or armoured assault vehicle and by early 1917, the German Army deployed 126 of the type organized in eight Abteilung, or detachments. They proved exceptionally successful in the defensive phase of the Second Battle of the Aisne, destroying over two dozen French Schneider CA1s in a series of confused engagements. 294 were built over the course of 1917 and were deployed across the front, particularly around the Champagne and Lorraine sectors where they faced off against French and American forces. However, despite its creditable battlefield performance, the A7V was not considered the ideal German armoured vehicle. It was extremely expensive and time consuming to produce, rendering it unsuitable to mass production and required a crew of no less than twenty four to operate its complicated machinery and armament. Additionally, German armaments production was already pressed by the requirements of industrial war on several fronts, the support of several allies and the large naval repair and emergency construction programme that followed the great Battle of Jutland in 1916. Production continued on a reduced scale in the first half of 1918 before ceasing in July, with a total of 93 tanks built as German requirements shifted. The necessity for a new, simpler tank design lead to the development of the most successful German tank of the Great War, the Sturmpanzerwagen Oberschleissen. A prototype was completed by June 1917 by the Oberschliessen Eisenwerk of Gleiwitz and it was rushed into production in September. The 26 ton tank was protected by 20mm of armour and was much faster than previous German vehicles, being capable of a maximum speed of 18 km/hour and was armed with a 57mm gun in a fully rotating turret. 524 would be built in the final year of the war out of an initial order of 2500, reflecting the increasing impact of the Allied blockade. It proved to be extremely successful in the smashing German offensive successes of early 1918, breaking through British, French and American lines and tearing large holes in the Allied front in concert with new war gasses, heavy artillery such as the notorious 24” Paris Gun, hulking war machines, concentrated battle magic and stormtrooper tactics. The Battle of Villers-Bretonneux from April 6th to April 10th 1918 saw 52 A7Vs and 94 Oberschliessens defeated at dreadful cost by 162 British and Australian Mark Vs and Mark VIIIs in the largest tank battle of the Great War that served as a sign of things to come. A large proportion of the operational tanks used by Germany in the Great War were captured British heavy tanks, designated Beutepanzer, or ‘trophy tanks’. Over 240 tanks of various types saw service in 1916, 1917 and 1918, proving difficult to support but useful across the battlefield. Many of the earlier Mark Is and Mark IIs saw service on the Eastern Front where their firepower and protection outmatched the limited Russian tank force. One noteworthy engagement saw a detachment of six Beutepanzer Mk IVs destroyed by a pair of RFC dragons in August 1917 while they moved up to support a counterattack against the Canadians at Passchendaele; the gold wyrm Aethicandus sardonically remarked how charitable and thoroughly decent it was of the Germans to supply canned food so near to the frontline. The German Army fielded two further tanks in the final bloody and terrible year of the Great War, although they were of substantially different roles and dimensions. The British and French introduction of fast light tanks in 1917 resulted in the development of a 9.75t German counterpart, the Leichte Kampfwagen, or light combat car. It was quite similar to the Renault FT-17 in its role and armament, sporting a Krupp 37mm cannon and being capable of a top speed of 19 km/hour across even terrain, but by the time it entered service in early June 1918, the operational needs of the German Army on the Western Front had shifted from offensive exploitation to dogged defence. Only 81 vehicles out of a total order for 650 were completed by the Armistice and they did not see action in an organized fashion before the cessation of hostilities. The second vehicle was the superheavy Grosskampfwagen, a 160 ton behemoth that dwarfed even the British Dreadnoughts of the Royal Tank Corps. It was a direct descendant of the Riesenlasters, carrying a main armament of a hefty 135mm cannon and was capable of reaching a top speed of 6.5 km per hour. Seven K-Wagens were completed by the Armistice, but their sheer size and bulk made them impossible to be transported in a single piece. Additionally, communications, fire control and steering was conducted remotely from the control room via a series of electrical lights, which proved somewhat troublesome in testing. Two vehicles were transported to the front, assembled and deployed in early November in a herculean effort, but to little avail, with the first being lost in a canal after collapsing the nearby road and the second digging itself into a muddy pit after the steering jammed. The German tanks of the Great War were something of a mixed bag of useful and less effective types, but were ultimately constrained by the limitations of the German war economy, which was decisively out-produced by those of Britain, France and the United States. The general German defensive posture on the Western Front between 1915 and 1918, with the exception of the bloody killing match at Verdun, was not optimally suited for the employment of tanks, making their deficiency in this regard less significant, but once the war returned to conditions of open maneuver, the Allies held a clear advantage. The A7V was the right tank for the conditions of 1916 and 1917, but was too difficult and expensive to produce in numbers; the Oberschleissen was the ideal tank for 1918 and a fearsome adversary for all Allied tanks it faced in the final year of the war, but once again, was subject to the constraints of logistics and reality. Nice to see how the Germans developed and use tanks in the Great War, question, is the A7V the same as OTL and did the Germans like OTL also captured and use a lot of British Mark tanks.
On the latter see the 4th paragraph from the end, which I've highlighted. Germany did use a fair number of captured and repaired tanks. One case leading to Aethicandus remarks about the Germans kindness in supplying the British dragons with canned foodstuff.
For the A7V the Wiki article, A7V mentioned them as being 33 tons compared to 47 tons in the darkverse class so obviously different. Also 126 were produced, the 1st seeing action towards the tail end of the Somme campaign as opposed to OTL where ~20 were produced - along with ~80 armoured transport versions - and they only saw service from spring 1918, being the only German tank to see combat. As such Germany, like all the main powers, seem to have had larger forces developed earlier, with a wider range of types including some very large ones of over 100 tons.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 26, 2018 15:00:24 GMT
Nice to see how the Germans developed and use tanks in the Great War, question, is the A7V the same as OTL and did the Germans like OTL also captured and use a lot of British Mark tanks. On the latter see the 4th paragraph from the end, which I've highlighted. Germany did use a fair number of captured and repaired tanks. One case leading to Aethicandus remarks about the Germans kindness in supplying the British dragons with canned foodstuff. For the A7V the Wiki article, A7V mentioned them as being 33 tons compared to 47 tons in the darkverse class so obviously different. Also 126 were produced, the 1st seeing action towards the tail end of the Somme campaign as opposed to OTL where ~20 were produced - along with ~80 armoured transport versions - and they only saw service from spring 1918, being the only German tank to see combat. As such Germany, like all the main powers, seem to have had larger forces developed earlier, with a wider range of types including some very large ones of over 100 tons. Thanks for the highlighting stevep, missed that, also seems that a wyrm Aethicandus dragon is powerful enough to destroy a Mark tanks which are not small tanks, i wonder does it do it with fire breathing ore a different method.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 26, 2018 21:40:01 GMT
Yes, Steve has hit the (tank shaped) nail on the head. The standard draconic offensive tactic against tanks was to circle strafe them until roasted to their taste.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 27, 2018 7:57:46 GMT
Yes, Steve has hit the (tank shaped) nail on the head. The standard draconic offensive tactic against tanks was to circle strafe them until roasted to their taste. Not something anybody inside a German tank would go true, did the Germans also have dragons who did the same thing to British and French tanks ore was this only a British anti tank tactic.
|
|
simon darkshade
Inspector-General
Member is Online
Posts: 4,976
Likes: 5,840
|
Post by simon darkshade on Jul 27, 2018 8:33:28 GMT
The Germans did have dragons, but had lost air superiority over the battlefield by 1917 and 1918, meaning that they were rarely capable of a truly effective response.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on Jul 27, 2018 8:48:09 GMT
The Germans did have dragons, but had lost air superiority over the battlefield by 1917 and 1918, meaning that they were rarely capable of a truly effective response. And it seems production capacity concerning tanks.
|
|