What if the Austro-Hungarians put the Eastern Front first?

[wiking]

I found this old post on a different forum and wanted to share it hear to get some opinions while I still worked on my other TL. I just wanted to hear some opinions; I'm NOT starting another TL just yet.;)

Just a bit of background, Norman Stone, author of the only decent book on the overview of the Eastern Front in WW1 also wrote an article in German about the messed up AH mobilization of August 1914. He talks about the event a bit in his book and cites his paper in the foot notes. Having received that article in PDF through inter-library loan (the magazine it was published in no longer exists), I muddled my way through, thanks to the maps included. Several variants of the AH mobilization were included and this What If is based on the information therein.

Historically Conrad von Hötzendorf proved ridiculously indecisive when it mattered most: at the start of World War One.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/maps/easternfront.htm (though some maps are a bit off)

As the Chief of Staff of the Austro-Hungarian general Staff, Armee Ober Kommando (AOK), he was in charge of prewar planning. He had his staff create some flexibility in mobilization by creating three groups: A-Staffel, three armies, the 1st, 3rd, and 4th; B-Staffel, 2nd army of 6 corps and one cavalry division; and Minimal Gruppe Balkan (MG-B), the 5th and 6th armies (really only the strength of 1 army), to hold the Balkan front against Serbia. A-Staffel was supposed to be deployed against Russia, MG-B against Serbia, and B-Staffel could go either way.

As war was declared he vacillated and only mobilized MG-B and B-Staffel for war against Serbia, despite knowing that Russia would support her Balkan ally, which meant that Russia was able to mobilize before AH, the latter only doing so in response to the Russia declaration. This meant that only half the army was headed to Eastern Front and the crucial reinforcements, B-Staffel, would have to first go to the Balkans only to turn around and head to the Eastern Front. Historically they arrived only to be caught up in the retreat after the AHs lost the battle of Lemberg, losing important equipment and manpower.

So, what if Conrad had ordered total preparation for mobilization of the whole army on July 25th, as he did historially with MG-B and B-Staffel, but instead of sending B-Staffel to the Balkans, it headed to the Eastern Front immediately?

Now just to make something clear, Franz Josef's approval was necessary to declare full mobilization. What I am proposing then, in light of Franz Josef's reluctance to immediately authorize full mobilization, is that Conrad waits for the 'Russian Clarification of Intentions' before deploying B-Staffel. He also would already issue a general warning order to the whole army on the 25th, canceled leave, called up officers, and readied rail and telegraph staff and offices that will be needed for deployment, all things NOT historically done on July 25th. So the first day of mobilization is July 30th for A- and B-Staffel. Waiting an extra few days wouldn't have hurt the Serbian Front, but instead would save AH the muddle it suffered historically. So THAT is what I am proposing: Conrad having the sense to wait and prepare instead of going off half-cocked and messing up mobilization.

First and foremost the AHs would not attack in the Balkans, they would solely defend, avoiding the defeats and losses that historically occurred, and probably would draw out the Serbs, who would start the war being defeated as they attacked AH, which they only did in September. Their morale from the defeat and losses would change from our historical level, potentially leaving the Serbs worse off when the AHs are ready to attack. Historically the AHs had better and more artillery than the Serbs, cutting them to ribbons when attacked from prepared positions.

This would also mean that within 21-25 days of the order the AH army would be totally mobilized in Galicia. That would be between August 20th and August 24th. Historically the 'attack group' in Galicia, the 1st and 4th armies, were mobilized the quickest, 16 days for the 1st army, 18 for the 4th, though the latter received reinforcements even later than this from B-Staffel. Here these would all arrive with the rest of the army. These armies would still be on track to attack, just maybe a few days earlier than OTL.

There are a few variables though: historically Conrad deployed his armies behind the San-Dniester river lines in defensive positions, as his necessary attack forces were not available, what with the 2nd army (B-Staffel) in the Balkans. He was forced to attack after Kaiser Wilhelm, supporting Moltke's plan, 'requested' Franz Josef have his armies attack to draw off the Russians. Conrad responded with his offensive.

Here though, with all his armies available up front, he would deploy forward near the border. Historically the AH armies were forced to march across their own country and wore themselves out before even reaching the border. Then they had to march to battle, leaving the Russians able to advance farther forward in East Galicia than the AHs.
With a more forward deployment, the AHs would be less tired, but would take longer to assemble. This probably adds about 1-2 days to the mobilization of the 1st and 4th armies respectively, but historically they had to spend several days marching forward to the border, so this would probably be a wash. However, it would telegraph AH intentions...

This would also add at least 3-4 to the 3rd and 2nd armies in East Galicia, but would cut down on their time marching forward, which took several extra days, meaning train travel would actually see them arriving at their historical positions sooner. Furthermore, this means that they will be mobilized along river lines in East Galicia, the 3rd along the Bug and the 2nd along the Sereth. There will be no historical battle of Gnila Lipa with the AHs running into prepared Russian positions being cut to pieces, rather it will be the Russians fighting roughly equal numbers of AHs in terrain of their own choosing.

The other issue is that historically the Russians thought the AHs were preparing to defend, because of their initial deployments, meaning that they attacked based on the assumption the AHs were not attacking (though not everyone made this assumption-Brusilov, Ruszki). Here with further forward AH deployments the Russians will know that AHs will attack, meaning they may defend instead. This could leave the AHs attacking Russians who are defending on their own territory, but it could also mean the Russians don't care and want to fight the AHs in a maneuver battle anyway (which some generals did). I don't know what would happen for sure, but with an educated guess I would say that the Russians will still attack with their 3rd and 8th armies, as these commanders still expected an AH attack historically, based on prewar intelligence and charged forward regardless. The Russian 4th and 5th armies though might opt to defend near Lublin and Cholm instead, as historically they were unaware of the attacking AH forces until too late. Perhaps we would see a reverse situation, where the battles in East Galicia see the Russians defeated, but the AH attacks in Poland bog down and route. However, the Russians would still be mobilizing by the time TTL AH reached them, giving them no time to create trenches and field fortifications. Both Lublin and Cholm were not fortified cities.

Honestly I see the Russians attacking anyway, just so the AHs don't disrupt their mobilization at Lublin and Cholm. With the AHs mobilizing sooner and in a more rested state, they would probably be able to march forward quick enough to disrupt Russian mobilization in Poland. OTL the battles of Krasnik and Komarow saw Russian forces moving out before they were totally mobilized. I assume Conrad would still only attack into Poland while defending East Galicia, because he would still believe the Germans are going to try and support him attacking toward Seydlitz.

Instead of the battles of Krasnik and Komarow, we would see the battles of Lublin and Cholm (maybe their suburbs/flanks), but without the Russians losing the maneuver battle, only being pushed back from their assembly points. They would lose their supply dumps, along with some equipment and probably take longer to put together a solid front, but they wouldn't be at risk of being encircled and have lots of space to fall back on. Meanwhile the Austrians have no rail lines to supply their advance, so taking Lublin and Cholm is the farthest forward they could go. No decisive battle yet, but it would hurt Russian attempts to counter attack. At this point we would probably see them getting bogged down in a see-saw struggle, especially as the Russian 9th army arrives to support them. Basically the historical defensive struggle in Poland in September 1914, but north of Lublin and Cholm.

Meanwhile in East Galicia the AHs would be fighting in rough, hilly, wooded lands where they have recent maps and home field advantage, plus the added bonus of fighting on ground of their choosing with equal numbers of troops and artillery as the enemy. The Russians would have had to march into enemy territory without rail supply and attack the AHs in the hills. They do have the benefit of the Ruthenians supporting them and providing guides for their patrols. But the fighting is going to bog down, with the Russians only able to advance at great cost and no decisive victory. Instead the Austrians will be able to hold them and keep the front in Galicia instead of being forced back to the Carpathians. Furthermore, they will not lose over 100,000 men as prisoners, nor lose the vast quantities of stores and equipment as historically happened.

The opening battles would then be inconclusive, with neither side defeated. There is no Austro-Hungarian emergency, instead Russian troops occupying East Galicia and AHs occupying the South of Russian Poland. Supply is difficult for both sides, but as the Russians get more reinforcements in September the situation gets more desperate for the AHs. In late September the Germans can now support the AHs with their 9th army, probably by attacking Ivangorod and breaking the stalemate in Poland, releasing AH troops to fight in East Galicia. This probably also breaches the Vistula river barrier, forcing the Russians to evacuate Poland like in August 1915.

The AHs avoid the major losses of 1914 and early 1915 because they aren't forced back into the Carpathians, forced to fight after losing massive numbers of men, artillery pieces, and crucial territory. However, the Russians also don't lose large numbers of men trying to break into the Hungarian plain. So in late 1914 and 1915 the Russians are defending their homeland with short supply lines, while the Central Powers are now having to ship everything far forward into enemy territory in the vast plains of the Ukrainian and Polish Steppe.

What do you all think? Am I way off or does this sound plausible. What happens next: a Brussilov-type Russian victory, or an earlier Russian revolution?

Attached is my crappy GIMPed map of army positions.

Edit: AOK would be further forward thanks to Conrad planning on an offensive from day 1. The DN group in the Bukowina is a Dniester group, which Conrad had planned on creating from Landsturm (3rd line troops), cavalry, and a single infantry division for flank defense in this mobilization scenario.

[Timmy811]

It seems hard to imagine that they would just sit pat against the Serbs, punishing them was the whole point of the war.

[wiking]

It seems hard to imagine that they would just sit pat against the Serbs, punishing them was the whole point of the war.

Without the historical reinforcements there is no way they could invade Serbia; the Serbs would outnumber them. Here I am assuming that Conrad realistically looks at the primary threat to AH and realizes he cannot fight two wars offensively. He is looking to beat the Russians and turn and fight the Serbs. OTL he realized it too late by a couple of days, here he doesn't, putting priorities first.

OTL deployments

[DanF]

Well it is funny as that is something I had been thinking about this weekend (I actually mapped out the entire A-H Army at the start of 1914 for that reason). As PODs go, the easiest way would be for Franz Ferdinand and Potiorek to both die and Sophie to live. This way Conrad would have full control over the deployment of the army. OTL Potiorek had control of the SW, and since the two never got along plus Potiorek became obsessed with revenge, well things did not turn out well for A-H... In addition Archduke Eugene would be the most logical replacement (it happened OTL), Eugene did recommend Conrad for the Chief of Staff job back when Eugene was still Inspector General, and with Franz Ferdinand dead there is no longer a jealous Crown Prince to deal with (Conrad said that is why Eugene left the Army early). Also, you could even use Eugene to nudge Conrad to the option of fighting Russia first then attacking Serbia, or maybe they cut some sort of deal like: You can take the A-H 2nd Army, but Eugene's two armies get first cut to reforcements, supplies, and new Artillery (they need this see below). Basically, Eugene holds the Serbian border and slowly builds up two armies into an attack force, while the other 4 standing armies go on the offensive vs Russia.

I think the 4th & 5th Russian armies would be in more trouble as, if my memory serves me (I might be wrong on this), both re-oriented themselves to better support each other right before the A-H armies hit them OTL. So, if they get attacked earlier would be even worse. Also, I believe (I am not 100% sure on this either) the 4th Russian Army was not full mobilized OTL with only 6.5 Divisions present when the A-H 1st Army hit it. Brusilov might not be as a renown commander in this TTL since his 8th Army will be facing an 16+ Division A-H 2nd Army. However, Brudermann (A-H 3rd Army) still will lose any fights he is in. His army is only 9 Divisions, three of his Infantry Divisions are Landwehr or Honved (Landwehr & Honved divisions have only about 24 field guns instead of the normal 42 a Common Army Division has), and Brudermann idea of cavalry usage is from the Napoleonic era (fancy uniform and charge the enemy straight on). Brudermann's only saving grace is he had the Elite (for the A-H) Tyrolean Corps, which he managed to get slaughtered OTL. Which is why there were a bunch of Czechs in the 3 ID & 8 ID to defect to the Russians in 1915. As I said earlier I had just mapped out the A-H army so here are the strength lists (I can go in more detail if need be):

Krummer Army Group (Krummer) 3 Divisions & 1 Independent Infantry Brigade
NOTE: The two Infantry Divisions in this Army Group do not have attached Artillery Brigades.
1st Army (Dankl) 11 Divisions & 4 Independent Infantry Brigades
4th Army (Auffenburg) 12 Divisions
3rd Army (Brudermann) 9 Divisions & 3 Independent Infantry Brigades
2nd Army (Bohm-Ermolli) 16 Divisions & 5 Independent Infantry Brigades

Dniester Group - There were 5 Second-line Landstrumm March Brigades (I assuming you mean them) they like all the traditional 14 March Brigades were rolled into the Army OTL to replace the ridiculously high losses the A-H took during 1914. So using them for the Dniester Group it completely legit at the start of a conflict. There were also 17 2nd-line Territorial Brigades (the 12th is one of the Brigades that was given to the Polish Legion in 1914) so a few of them could also be tapped for the Dniester force. OTL Pfanzler Army Group in Transylvania was made up of about 10 Infantry Brigades through Jan 1915, so this Dniester Group sounds exactly like that.

If anyone is interested in the SW you will be left with this:

5th Army (Frank) 5 Division & 2 Independent Infantry Brigades (1 is Mountain)
6th Army (Eugene) 5 Divisions & 5 Independent Infantry Brigades (4 are Mountain)
NOTE: the 18 ID of the 6th Army is a Double strength Division made up of 4 Mountain Brigades instead of the normal two. However, only 1 Division in the 6th army has its attached Artillery Brigade, which is made worse by the fact it is a Honved Division. I am not sure what Potiorek was thinking OTL his Army had a huge Artillery deficit, and he essentially had to use Human wave tactics plus rely heavily on the Artillery of the A-H 2nd Army. No wonder he failed to beat the Serbs three times in a row.

[wiking]

Because I'm not sleepy yet I will add the OOBs to make this even more clear.
Edit: Ha! :D DanF you beat me to it! I like your POD, especially as it could have happened if the bombed thrown at FF's car went off. But the decision to send 2nd army south had nothing to do with Potiorek AFAIK, rather, Conrad overreacted and couldn't pry 2 corps of the 5 in B-Staffel loose once Potiorek leveraged his contacts at the imperial court.

Austria-Hungary:
Not included is the 5 2nd line territorial Landsturm brigades and 17 2nd line territorial brigades.

Serbian Front-
(5 Divs, 13 Mt Brgds (including 8 grouped into 3 Inf Divs OTL), 6.5 Brgds)

5th army:
XIII Corps- 3 divisions
1 Mountain Brigade
1 Landsturm Brigade
1 Marsch Brigade
(3 Divs, 1 Mt Brgd, 2 Brgds)

6th army:
XV Corps- 4 Mountain Brigades (2 Inf Divs)
XVI Corps- 8 Mountain Brigades (1 Inf Div of 4 Brgds + 4 Indp. Brgds)
2 Inf divisions
1 Landsturm brigade
1 Landsturm regiment
1 Marsch Brgd
(2 Divs, 12 Mt Brgds, 2.5 Brgds)

Rayon Banat:
Equivalent of 2 Brigades (Landsturm, Feldjägers) and attached artillery and pioneers..

There were also several Lst brgds in Bosnia to guard against insurrections which never occurred and will be reinforcements for this Front.

Eastern Front-
(42 Inf Divs, 11 Cav, 28 Brgds, 2 German Inf Divs)

Kummer Group:
1 Cav Divisions
2 Landsturm Inf Divisions
1 Landsturm Inf Brigade
1 Mountain Artillery Brigade

Woyrsch Group (German Landwehr Corps)-2 Inf divisions

Dniester Group:
1 Inf Div
1 Cav Div
5 Landsturm Brigades
1 Mountain Artillery Brigade

1st army:
I Corps-2 Inf Divs
V Corps-3 Inf Divs
X Corps-3 Inf Divs
2 Cav Divs
1 Inf Div
4 Landsturm Inf Brigades
3 Marsch Brigades
Polish Legion
(9 divs, 2 cav, 7 brgds, legion)

2nd army:
XII Corps-3 Inf Divs
III Corps-3 Inf Divs
VIII Corps-2 Inf Divs
IV Corps-2 Inf Divs, 1 mrsch brgd
2 Cav Divs
3 Marsch Brigades
(10 Divs, 2 cav, 4 Brgds)

3rd army:
XI Corps-1 Inf Div, 1 Lst Brgd, 1 Mrsch Brgd
XIV Corps-3 Inf Divs, 1 Inf Brgd
VII Corps-2 Inf Divs
4 Inf Divs
2 Cav Divs
2 Lst Brgds
5 Mrsch Brgds
(10 Divs, 2 Cav, 10 Brgds)

4th army:
II Corps-3 Inf Divs
VI Corps-3 Inf Divs
IX Corps-2 Inf Divs
XVII Corps-2 Inf Divs
3Cav Divs
3 Mrsch Brgd
1 Mt Art Brgd
(10 Divs, 3 Cav, 3 Brgds)

AOK-
Lemberg
(OTL Lemberg garrison+OTL Przemysl garrison and field fortifications)


Dniester Group - There were 5 Second-line Landstrumm March Brigades (I assuming you mean them) they like all the traditional 14 March Brigades were rolled into the Army OTL to replace the ridiculously high losses the A-H took during 1914. So using them for the Dniester Group it completely legit at the start of a conflict. There were also 17 2nd-line Territorial Brigades (the 12th is one of the Brigades that was given to the Polish Legion in 1914) so a few of them could also be tapped for the Dniester force.
What's your source on this? I'm using the AH official history, sans Beilage :(, as mine.
Edit:
http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/aug14.htm
Found them. Any idea about the quality of the territorials? I suspect they only had rifles like the Landsturm and probably used outdated rifles too. Any idea if these were part of AG Rohr in Italy???

Edit: Revised likely deployment plan for East Galicia.

[Don Lardo]

A very interesting premise and one I hope you explore further.

I've been slowly reading up on the pre-war and early war WW1 Eastern Front after my disastrously silly Franz Joseph Screams and Leaps idea, so this thread will be of great interest.

[DanF]

Well I am at work, so this will only be from memory. If I remember correctly Rohr had a Fortress Brigade and 1 Territorial Brigade (I starting to think each military region had one) at first. Also, one of the 19 Independent Infrantry Brigades is in Pola, so it could be pulled rather than just letting it merge with the local garrision like it did OTL. I am not sure about the effectiveness of the Territorial Brigades, but every commander who could did seem to grab them. So, I am guessing they were at least average.

Landstrum Bridages - Are these what I am calling Independant Infantry Brigades?

I am wondering if the 5 second line Landsturm Brigades might be the forces that were stuck in Bosnia to keep the people beat down. Potiorek was a tyrannt in Bosnia. I say that because I cannot find any other floating troops other than the 1 Indepedant Brigade in Pola and one other Indepedent Brigade that I cannot locate.

Krummer group - Was that Mountain Artillery Brigade OTL? There was another unit there, but I was not sure what it was so I did not mention it.

I am assuming you re-orged some of the forces for this discussion, based on the most likely deployment? Otherwise our troops lists appear very different.

The Polish Legion was a Battalion sized unit at the start of the war. It was more PR then effective. The 6 Companies of GrenzJager sent to Albania are probably more combat effective.

I noticed you mentioned the Marsch Brigades, I was under the impression they were designed as Training & Manpower reserve pools. In OTL with the high losses the Marsch Brigades were put on the front lines and they got slaughtered. Which was sad because that was effectively 7 Divisions (14 Marsch Brigades) worth of men that was waisted OTL.

Anyway, I definitely like this idea and thanks for starting it.

[wiking]

Well I am at work, so this will only be from memory. If I remember correctly Rohr had a Fortress Brigade and 1 Territorial Brigade (I starting to think each military region had one) at first. Also, one of the 19 Independent Infrantry Brigades is in Pola, so it could be pulled rather than just letting it merge with the local garrision like it did OTL. I am not sure about the effectiveness of the Territorial Brigades, but every commander who could did seem to grab them. So, I am guessing they were at least average.

Landstrum Bridages - Are these what I am calling Independant Infantry Brigades?

I am wondering if the 5 second line Landsturm Brigades might be the forces that were stuck in Bosnia to keep the people beat down. Potiorek was a tyrannt in Bosnia. I say that because I cannot find any other floating troops other than the 1 Indepedant Brigade in Pola and one other Indepedent Brigade that I cannot locate.

Krummer group - Was that Mountain Artillery Brigade OTL? There was another unit there, but I was not sure what it was so I did not mention it.

I am assuming you re-orged some of the forces for this discussion, based on the most likely deployment? Otherwise our troops lists appear very different.

The Polish Legion was a Battalion sized unit at the start of the war. It was more PR then effective. The 6 Companies of GrenzJager sent to Albania are probably more combat effective.

I noticed you mentioned the Marsch Brigades, I was under the impression they were designed as Training & Manpower reserve pools. In OTL with the high losses the Marsch Brigades were put on the front lines and they got slaughtered. Which was sad because that was effectively 7 Divisions (14 Marsch Brigades) worth of men that was waisted OTL.

Anyway, I definitely like this idea and thanks for starting it.

It looks like the garrison of Bosnia were various Landsturm brigades/equivalent units. These were garrisons of various fortresses in the province. There is no indication of the territorial brgds and 2nd line Marsch units in the official history OOB AFAIK.

I did definitely reorg the forces, because it made no sense to have a 14-16 division 2nd army and a 4-6 division 3rd army.

The Indp Inf Brgds=Lst Inf Brgds. They have no artillery besides the obsolete field guns and no machine guns.

The Kummer group, according to the Official History, did have the mountain artillery in August 1914.

Marsch brigades were used in combat all the time in 1914 and early 1915 despite explicit orders not to do so. However, even in August 1914 there was a new corps organized with 1 infantry division and two marsch brigades, seemingly indicating they were to act as the equivalent of an infantry division themselves (XVII corps).

Thanks for your interest, I'm surprised this hasn't come up before, besides the tangentially related "Austro-Hungarian Tannenberg" by Tom_B.

Maybe I will explore this topic, I've had a desire to do a AH TL. I've already worked out an outline.

[wiking]

Bomb is thrown at the car of FF in Sarajevo, killing everyone inside, including Potiorek, Sophia, and FF

Conrad presses for war and appoints the Archduke Eugene to the 6th army and the Serbian theater. Consulting with his old mentor, Conrad makes several changes to the OTL plan of events.

War declared on Serbia July 25th, general mobilization preparations taken, but only the 5th and 6th AH armies are mobilized. All other forces give warning orders and prepare everything short of full mobilization.

After delivering his note to FJ on July 29th, Conrad is given the green light to order full mobilization on July 30th.

6 groups are formed in Galicia: (from left to right Kummer, 1st army, 4th army, 3rd army, 2nd army, and Georgenegg detachment (Dniester group formed around the 11th Schützen division stationed at Czernowitz).

There is no wide cavalry reconnaissance ITTL, leaving AH cavalry forces rested.

Kummer is ready on the 12th of August, 1st army on 16th, 4th on the 18th, 3rd on the 24th, 2nd on 23rd, and Georgenegg on the 16th (he attacks earlier than this to secure Chotin).

Dankl (1st army) attacks north on the 17th, meeting the Russians around Borzechow between Krasnik and Lublin on the 21st, catching them in the flank, destroying half the 4th army while the rest retreat to Lublin and the swampy land around it.

The Russian 5th is forced to move out before it is assembled to aid them, crossing the Wieprz river too late to help, but quick enough to draw off some of the AH 1st army. This pulls the Russians to the West and makes them easy prey for the advancing AH 4th army.

Reinforced by the XIV corps from the AH 3rd army, Auffenburg (4th army) presses north on the 19th and clashes with the Russians starting August 23rd at Grabowiec, north of Komarow. Fighting grinds on until the 31st when Russian resistance collapses and most of the army is encircled, surrendering on the 2nd of September. The equivalent of 1 depleted corps escapes with half its artillery, plus enough cavalry for 1 division.

In East Galicia the Russians clash with the AH 2nd and 3rd armies starting August 26th, with many bloody engagements in the heavily forested hills and steep valleys of the Bug and Dniester tributaries.

Tarnopol falls on the 28th and AH 2nd army falls back behind the Sereth.
AH 3rd army is outnumbered and gunned along the Bug, fighting desperately to hold the line. Brudermann (AH 3rd) is outclassed by Ruszki (Russian 3rd) and is forced to steadily retreat, though the rugged hills and marshy ground delay the Russians, preventing a rout. Brudermann is sacked after losing 20k men at Busk on the 30th, ordering a suicidal bayonet assault with Landsturm and Marsch Brigade troops, allowing the Russians to break the Bug line. He is sacked and replaced by the more competent Boroevic.

Boroevic orders a major pull back to save his battered forces, but draws a line in the sand. Böhm-Ermolli is forced to retreat to the Zlota Lipa, despite his victories, to cover his flanks. Dniester group pulls back too to aid 2nd army.

As the war continues into September, Russian reserve divisions become available and they begin organizing an invasion of Bukowina by their 7th army, which has been guarding the Romanian border.

By September 6th AH 4th army forces had taken Cholm and doubled back to assist the embattled 3rd. After receiving the significant reinforcements, the Russian 3rd army paused its headlong rush into the AH 3rd and turned to fight the AH 4th.

Battle of Lemberg begins on September 8th, as AH 3rd army is pushed back near the city and the AH 4th army joins the battle. Heavy fighting as both sides pour on in their reserves. Ruszki's Russian 3rd army is defeated after being fixed and flanked, but is able to escape thanks to the AH 3rd army being too battered and exhausted to pursue very far, as is the AH 4th.

Russian forces in East Galicia fall back on the Sereth river and Brody, setting up a defensive line, using newly arrived corps and independent divisions to establish a continuous line. The Russian 7th army still attacks between the Pruth and Dniester rivers, falling short of taking Czernowitz.

Further Northwest near Ivangorod the AH, German, and Russian forces are locked in a bitter struggle without moving the line much. Supply difficulties are preventing the Austro-Germans from moving forward, even with the help of a brigade of Skoda mortars, while Russian reinforcements only allow them to hold the line, not pierce AH field works.

By late September the lines have bogged down with both sides having traded territory and large cities, though the AHs have gotten the best of the fighting, with nearly 200,000 PoWs captured. Large stores of Russian stores were captured at Lublin and Cholm, along with hundreds of artillery pieces. In east Galicia though the situation was somewhat dire. The Russians had taken a beating, losing up over half their August strength, but they had been reinforced. The AHs had not been, other than receiving 2nd line replacements. They had lost about half of their forces, with the 3rd army reduced to 40% of its prewar strength. 4th army was the best off, even with its losses in two separate struggles. The elite XIV corps was ironically one of the strongest remaining forces, having operated on the flanks during both attacks instead of suffering through frontal assaults like many other units.

AH ammunition stores were dangerously low, with captured Russian stocks only helping if crews could be trained to use their guns. The Russians on the other hand still had significant reserves in their fortresses and in storage, but were having difficulties bringing them to the front. October saw the AHs trying to push into Poland, while focusing most of their resources keeping the resurgent Russians at bay in East Galicia.


Any thoughts about this so far?

[DanF]

It looks like the garrison of Bosnia were various Landsturm brigades/equivalent units. These were garrisons of various fortresses in the province. There is no indication of the territorial brgds and 2nd line Marsch units in the official history OOB AFAIK.

I did definitely reorg the forces, because it made no sense to have a 14-16 division 2nd army and a 4-6 division 3rd army.

The Indp Inf Brgds=Lst Inf Brgds. They have no artillery besides the obsolete field guns and no machine guns.

The Kummer group, according to the Official History, did have the mountain artillery in August 1914.

Marsch brigades were used in combat all the time in 1914 and early 1915 despite explicit orders not to do so. However, even in August 1914 there was a new corps organized with 1 infantry division and two marsch brigades, seemingly indicating they were to act as the equivalent of an infantry division themselves (XVII corps).

Thanks for your interest, I'm surprised this hasn't come up before, besides the tangentially related "Austro-Hungarian Tannenberg" by Tom_B.

Maybe I will explore this topic, I've had a desire to do a AH TL. I've already worked out an outline.

I was following your Moltke v2, so I would prefer you do not stop that even if it requires the major re-write you referred to in that thread. I also was following Tom_B's Tannenberg, but I think that one has died a tragic death.

First off, I well admit that my knowledge of A-H and my sources appear to be of far less quality than yours. So, please take my statements/suggestions with a grain of salt. My primary source of OOB data is the site you mentioned above:
http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/ (http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/)

The books I have already read (I am cutting the titles down to type quicker):
The Economics of WW1 by Broadberry & Harrison
The Last Years of Austrian-Hungary by Cornwell
Decline and Fall of the Habsburg Empire by Sked
Origins of the First World War by Martel (Skimmed this as it appeared to re-hash what I already know)
I also have read &/or bookmarked a few Encyclopedias from 1916-1918 through Google Books to get stats on the countries involved & data as the people at the time saw things.
Besides the Encyclopedias I have also found a few web pages written by people who were interested in A-H or WW1. They can be as semi-professional as Naval-history.net to completely unprofessional as someone just writing their own opinions.

I also own or just bought, but have not read:
Austria-Hungary Naval Policy by Vego
Naval History of WW1 by Halpern
Balkans Battles by Root
The White War: Italian Front by Thompson
Eastern Front by Stone
WW1 Data Book by Cox
Dissolution of the Austrian-Hungary Empire by Mason
Fall of the House of Habsburg by Crankshaw
First World War by Strachan

I will be honest my primary focus on WW1 is A-H, as I have a soft spot for the Habsburgs in general. Kind of weird for an American with French, Italian, & Portuguese ancestry, but I like history and that family is very woven into the history of Europe.

Lastly, I found another reference to the Territorial Brigades on the A-H Military Mail site (I just recently started looking at this site):
http://www.austrianphilately.com/dixnut/dn6e6.htm (http://www.austrianphilately.com/dixnut/dn6e6.htm) scroll down to near the very bottom under Other Lst formations. The 5th joined Rohr and the 12th was under Pflanzer-Baltin.

[wiking]

The following link provides probably the best overview of events in English on the Eastern Front:
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Eastern_European_Front_Campaigns

There are more detailed descriptions of each campaign on the website, but for some reason the search function there doesn't work. So you'll need to google search the name and include 1911. AH military mail is a gem too.

I've read most of those books you mention, they are all worthwhile (though I'm not a big naval fan).
Blood on the Snow by Graydon Tunstall is a must have too, but it is poorly written. Despite that, the information is tremendous.

I do have a major AH interest after studying abroad in Vienna. Something about the doomed, yet noble enterprise, especially in light of what came after, makes me want to imagine it surviving somehow.

I am a bit frustrated with the Marne w/o Moltke right now, so I may take a break to collect my thoughts while exploring this topic briefly. I get a bit ADD with long TLs.

[Valdemar II]

If AH doesn't invade Serbia would Serbia try to invade AH? Another aspect what will it mean for AHs prestige and morale that they doesn't invade Serbia right away (of course I doubt it can be worse than OTL defeats)?

Another element, it has been mentioned that the loss to Russian, ment that much of the Austrian standing army was lost or captured. Here without the loss of their most experienced soldiers, could we see a greater quantity in the later conscriped army?

[wiking]

If AH doesn't invade Serbia would Serbia try to invade AH? Another aspect what will it mean for AHs prestige and morale that they doesn't invade Serbia right away (of course I doubt it can be worse than OTL defeats)?

Absolutely. The Serbs invaded Southern Hungary and Bosnia in September OTL and would do so here, because they thought Serb minorities there would revolt. Didn't happen and they got cut up, even after beating the AHs in August.

I'd think any sort of 'prestige' lost would be compensated for by victories over the tougher foe Russia.


Another element, it has been mentioned that the loss to Russian, ment that much of the Austrian standing army was lost or captured. Here without the loss of their most experienced soldiers, could we see a greater quantity in the later conscriped army?

It depends. They could still lose a major portion of veterans during the opening battles even if victorious. Much depends too on how stable the front is; does it make sense to withdraw experienced soldiers to train new ones? Furthermore replacements would get more time to train if the front is quiet for longer periods.

Additionally the issue of NCO and officer replacement becomes key; are the necessary language skills available to replacement and reserve officers posted to various units? The morale issue matters here too, because if the different ethnic groups feel that AH is winning they will be more loyal, just as they will be they feel their lives aren't being thrown away frivolously.

The final major issue in determining effectiveness in combat would be production. OTL the AHs didn't have enough of anything, because the loss of Galicia, which produced 1/3 of food and 1/2 of the horses in the empire; artillery shell production was a joke with 188,000 shells produced in the first 5 months of war; 240,000 were needed WEEKLY; and artillery was out of date, meaning it was out-ranged and out-fired by its opponent. These deficiencies were made up by 1916, but that is 1.5 years down the road.

Speaking for the AHs ITTL is that they will capture large stocks of Russian artillery and supplies, while keeping Galicia safe (mostly) ensuring its oil, horses, and food keep flowing. Also, they won't lose the large quantities of stores and equipment in either Galicia or Serbia during the retreats there. Most crucially they won't be losing the 1,500 locomotives in Galicia in 1914 (OTL they were only able to produce 350 for the entire war to replace them!), not to mention the 15,000 cars attached to them.

Overall things are looking up for AH compared to OTL, though its likely they still lose 250,000+ men in August/September. But the Russians will lose many more, probably 4-500,000, double what happened historically. The loss of artillery and stores will be damaging to them as well. Morale won't take a hit either and people won't question Habsburg competence in the Empire, which should prevent the OTL Czech sabotage from 1915 onward.

In short AH will avoid losses (men, material, productive land), inflict more (crucial too, as they will have lower morale, question their leaders, and lose hard to replace material, as well as have their land invaded), and perhaps attract neutrals to their side when possible (Bulgaria held back OTL because of their losses against Serbia, Italy attacked them based on their losses, Romania likewise, but they could actually break for the Central Powers if properly motivated).

OTL the AHs lost 1.25 million men in 1914 and probably another million in January-May 1915. They were wiped out early on, whereas here that won't happen and there won't be a massive refugee problem either. The Habsburg army will still be less than competent, as will their government, but they will have a better chance and Russia will lack the early victories which held their armies and nation together until 1916-1917.

[DanF]

Wow you post fast. I posted before I saw your "Rough Outline." Here is my feedback:
I like to how that all played out, A-H does better but their weak army (A-H 3rd Army) & numerical inferiority allow the Russians to still hold a decent advantage. I have one question, who is Georgenegg? I did a few Google searches and other than seeing he was a General of Infantry I cannot find a bio about him. Was he special? I believe Kovess was the senior Corps Commander in the A-H at the time, which is sort of a slap in his face that a lot of his juniors got to command armies when he was still stuck as a Corps Commander. I mention it, as I figured he or the retiring Pflanzer-Baltin would be the likely candidates to lead the Dniester Group.

With a large chunk of Galicia not getting overrun, and getting a large part of Western Poland not destroyed in the fighting means little to no food riots in Germany and the Austrian portion of A-H. Plus the added advantage of a better diet among the citizenry and troops. How much equipment was lost OTL by the A-H during the Battle of Galicia as they still have over 100K (mostly the Przemysl garrison plus other forces taking refugee there) men surrendering to the Russians?

According to the book Oil Empire visions of Prosperity in Austrian Galicia, the A-H was the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world during this time period (the wells would mostly dry up by the 1920s though). Only the U.S. & Russia produced more oil. So, the German War economy would love the Galician oil (the Russians ignored it OTL), and it would help give the A-H something beyond food to sell to the Germans to buy both Industrial goods & Armaments. Also, better trade between Germany and A-H might lessen the impact of the war giving both governments more tax revenue, better economies, and happier citizens.

I personally feel the Czechs were going to be disloyal no matter what. I did some research into the Czechs trying to come up with a Pre-1900 POD event that would turn the Czechs into a pro-Habsburg group. I found nothing the Bohemia question is equal to the Modern day East Jerusalem question one side has to lose period. Also, after the 1880s the Czechs stopped submitting reform ideas, and each successive generation was getting more anti-Habsburg. Yes Taaffe tried to submit a reform in the 1890s to please the Czechs, but not only did it fail to be accepted by the Germans even the Czechs rejected it. Frequently I think the Hungarians get a worse rap than they deserve, when the Empire needed them most the Hungarians joined the Army in record numbers in WW1. The Czechs get no bad rap even though it was essentially the Czechs that actually killed the Empire by lobbying for an independent nation in 1914/1915.

However, the Ruthenians would probably be a lot more loyal. Yes, there was a decent size Pro-Russian minority, but a lot of Ruthenians were Fence-Sitters. So, a few Habsburg victories coupled with the fact the Habsburgs treat them better than the Russians treat their Ruthenians could sway public opinion. In Poles case if the Central Powers can take and hold Warsaw Early to Mid 1915, and with A-H doing better than the Germans would probably be more willing to play ball with Charles Stephen being King of Poland. Obviously, Germany would get to be very “influential” in the formation of the Polish Army. I am saying early 1915 to mid 1915 since Franz Joseph needs to be alive & well, as Crown Prince/Emperor Charles did not seem to want to give Charles Stephen the o.k. to be King of Poland. I am not suggesting the A-H give up Galicia, I just do not see them giving up that much land. However, they could easily give Krakow and all other lands north of the Vistula. This gives Poland both its ancient and new capitol. Plus it potentially causes the Russian Polish troops to switch sides &/or revolt. The Archbishop of Krakow at the time was an Austrian born Polish Noble too, so we would definitely crown Charles Stephen.

Personally, I think the Italians were going to back stab the Central Powers either way, the only differences is they could get the Entente to promise them even more. However, the Romanians could be Neutral or most likely they jump in right before Russia looks like they are going down to grab Bessarabia. Also, something like ½ of Romania’s trade was with the A-H so financially speaking supporting the Central Powers would make sense.

I am not the biggest Navy person either (did 6 years in the U.S. Army), but I feel like in the Central Powers case they completely under used their surface ships. Germany is the obvious example, but you would have to change the Kaiser and his advisors mindset. In the A-H case they never really tried to break the Otranto Barrage until 1917. The A-H navy had 3 sea worthy Dreadnaughts at the start of the war, 3 semi-dreadnaughts, and 6 pre-Dreadnaughts. Yes, a combined Italian-French Fleet will kill you, but the French and British never really supported the Italian navy with thier own ships. Also the Italian navy is not that much bigger than the Austrian-Hungary navy. Plus the Italians have colonies and trade routes to protect so their whole navy cannot be thrown at you. Instead the A-H navy shelled a few Italian cities, made a few half-hearted attempts on the Barrage, and basically hung out in port the rest of the time during the war. Not counting the A-H subs that actually did something useful like commerce raiding.

Lastly, thanks for the book title and Eastern Front link. I just bought the book on Amazon with a few books on WW1 Air Combat and Airplanes. I am trying to read up on multiple aspects of WW1, so I can offer decent suggestions in the future. Thanks again.

[Tom_B]

Don't have a huge amount of time now

Not sure why the AH would not wear out their cav divisions doing recon. I get the impression that was in accord with doctrine

They can hold off on an invasion of Serbia BUT not indefinitely If the Eastern Front stabilizes in Nov there could be well be a Dec invasion. BTW I only recently found out that Serbia had considerable copper ore esp. at Bor. Do you know if the CP made good use of that?

Are you suggesting either a 1915 Brusilov offensive or a 1915 Russian Revolution? My vote is for none of the above. The Tsar was very reluctant to acknowledge of the incompetence of Ivanov. Also the amount of artillery needed to make a Brusilov offensive work will not be available in 1915.

An early Russian Revolution along the lines of the February Revolution OTL is highly unlikely (and an early Bolshevik Revolution almost impossible). What is somewhat possible in 1915 (but still not probable) is a revolution which deposes the Tsar and replaces him with Grand Duke Nikolai (Stone does briefly mention this possibility). It will be noted that the Grand Duke was a hopeless Francophile so this is not in itself a separate peace. He would shoot/hang and/or strangle Rasputin and send the Tsarina to a nunnery which would make the Russian war economy a notch or two more efficient.

[wiking]

First of all thanks for your service. It is appreciated.
Wow you post fast. I posted before I saw your "Rough Outline." Here is my feedback:
I like to how that all played out, A-H does better but their weak army (A-H 3rd Army) & numerical inferiority allow the Russians to still hold a decent advantage. I have one question, who is Georgenegg? I did a few Google searches and other than seeing he was a General of Infantry I cannot find a bio about him. Was he special? I believe Kovess was the senior Corps Commander in the A-H at the time, which is sort of a slap in his face that a lot of his juniors got to command armies when he was still stuck as a Corps Commander. I mention it, as I figured he or the retiring Pflanzer-Baltin would be the likely candidates to lead the Dniester Group.

I chose Georgenegg because he would be the ranking officer in the Dniester Group, which was often how command over these things was decided, and the 43rd Schützen Division, his unit, was stationed pre-war in Czernowitz and knew the region better than anyone, probably also having a defense scheme worked out as a staff exercise. Pf-Baltin isn't activated yet for health reasons, only being able to organize the Transylvanian defenses. Koevess is needed to command his corps, which won't be part of the Dniester group.


With a large chunk of Galicia not getting overrun, and getting a large part of Western Poland not destroyed in the fighting means little to no food riots in Germany and the Austrian portion of A-H. Plus the added advantage of a better diet among the citizenry and troops. How much equipment was lost OTL by the A-H during the Battle of Galicia as they still have over 100K (mostly the Przemysl garrison plus other forces taking refugee there) men surrendering to the Russians?

The food problem was much more complex than just not losing Galicia, as the empire, pre-war with free trade for unlimited nitrates, still only produced 90% of the nation's need. Now fertilizers are needed to make explosives. There will still be problems, especially as Hungary OTL sold their excess grain to Germany, not Austria, and refused to provide even the army with the necessary amounts of food, as the Germans paid better. Austria and Hungary were run as two separate war economies and the Hungarians milked it for every advantage, hurting the nation for profit; ie the workers at Skoda had their rations cut so Hungary could raise more capital from Germany, which went into private hands instead of the war effort. They would also withhold food to extract political concessions, such as how much money they needed to contribute to the war effort.

As far as equipment losses, by September 28th AH lost just under 1000 guns out of 2300 in Galicia IIRC, NOT including Przemysl. That fort wasn't lost until March 1915, which was another 1000 guns (all obsolete).


According to the book Oil Empire visions of Prosperity in Austrian Galicia, the A-H was the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world during this time period (the wells would mostly dry up by the 1920s though). Only the U.S. & Russia produced more oil. So, the German War economy would love the Galician oil (the Russians ignored it OTL), and it would help give the A-H something beyond food to sell to the Germans to buy both Industrial goods & Armaments. Also, better trade between Germany and A-H might lessen the impact of the war giving both governments more tax revenue, better economies, and happier citizens.

A distant 3rd IIRC. Trade wasn't an option, though resources flowed freely between the governments. The war economy took everything and trade was only reserved for goods not produced at home/were needed to prevent AH from collapsing. OTL Germany got nearly all of Galician oil anyway, but here the flow wouldn't be interrupted.


I personally feel the Czechs were going to be disloyal no matter what. I did some research into the Czechs trying to come up with a Pre-1900 POD event that would turn the Czechs into a pro-Habsburg group. I found nothing the Bohemia question is equal to the Modern day East Jerusalem question one side has to lose period. Also, after the 1880s the Czechs stopped submitting reform ideas, and each successive generation was getting more anti-Habsburg. Yes Taaffe tried to submit a reform in the 1890s to please the Czechs, but not only did it fail to be accepted by the Germans even the Czechs rejected it. Frequently I think the Hungarians get a worse rap than they deserve, when the Empire needed them most the Hungarians joined the Army in record numbers in WW1. The Czechs get no bad rap even though it was essentially the Czechs that actually killed the Empire by lobbying for an independent nation in 1914/1915.

I have no love for the Czechs, as they were true fence sitters, the political classes having come to the decision to support both sides (AH publicly and the Entente privately by passing information to them) to get benefits no matter who won; however, the majority proved patriotic until late 1914-early 1915 as they realized the Habsburgs were incompetent, did not stand up to Hungary, and sacrificed their young men indifferently, THEN called them traitors. Already having problems with Austria before the war, things started getting ugly when blood started to flow. Remember too that the most successful army in August 1914, the AH 4th, was 75% Czech-Slovak. The Czechs had an exaggerated sense of importance and refused to compromise after getting dumped on for generations, but I can find little fault for demanding rights like the Hungarians had, especially as the majority of industry in the Empire was located in Bohemia, the richest province in the Empire.

The Hungarians were good people, their leaders, the hereditary nobility that owned 80% of the land in the country (making up only 5% of the population), were not. They were greedy, autocratic, and chauvanistic (in the national sense). They were far worse than any group in Europe outside the Russian nobility. The Hungarian nobility was the only group allowed to vote for parliament (one had to own so much land/have so much money), meaning that only 5-10% of the population could vote. In 1890-1900 2 million ethnic Magyars left the country for the US to even find a job that sustained life. This was out of a population of about 12 million ethnic Magyars. Nearly 20% of the population fled the country to survive. Remittance payments to family left behind, either to get them out or sustain them were a major part of the economy. The only other job was substance farming on plantations owned by the nobles. I am not kidding, Hungary existed in modern feudalism in 1914. The 'middle class' jobs were 75% held by Jews from Galicia or Austrians migrating to fill the education void. This was still only about 10% or less of the population.

Preceding the war the nobility (remember they were VERY different than the Hungarian people) refused to allow the mandated draftees to report for duty without political and economic concessions (ie tariffs against foreign grains, which would cut into their profits, despite being cheaper), held back funding for the army and left the nation vulnerable. When the war started they held back food, even though the population at large volunteered and fought VERY well for the Empire, letting the Austrian half of the Empire starve, a DIRECT cause of Czech bitterness and disloyalty (why should they starve while making weapons for the army or dying in it while the Hungarian nobility lined their pockets?) A VERY telling event occurred in the last months of the war/early peace was angry Hungarian veterans murdering many of the political leaders of the Hungarian Kingdom (nobles all) including Count Tisza.

Why didn't the Hungarian people revolt if things were so bad you ask? Many were uneducated, as public education stopped after 5 grade IIRC, and were told by their bosses that gains made for the 'Hungarian Kingdom' were good for them. The Austrians were blamed for things being so bad for the peasant (fitting, if loaded, term) in Hungary and the average farm laborer didn't have time to read or educate himself on the issues. So popular anger that the Hungarian nobility stirred up was directed at the Austrians, despite being the cause of it themselves. Vote-rigging, violence, and intimidation were all common in the Hungarian parliament as the middle class tried to get universal male suffrage passed or minority rights pushed through. Honestly, the VAST majority of the ethnic problems in the Empire were the fault of the Hungarians.


However, the Ruthenians would probably be a lot more loyal. Yes, there was a decent size Pro-Russian minority, but a lot of Ruthenians were Fence-Sitters. So, a few Habsburg victories coupled with the fact the Habsburgs treat them better than the Russians treat their Ruthenians could sway public opinion. In Poles case if the Central Powers can take and hold Warsaw Early to Mid 1915, and with A-H doing better than the Germans would probably be more willing to play ball with Charles Stephen being King of Poland. Obviously, Germany would get to be very “influential” in the formation of the Polish Army. I am saying early 1915 to mid 1915 since Franz Joseph needs to be alive & well, as Crown Prince/Emperor Charles did not seem to want to give Charles Stephen the o.k. to be King of Poland. I am not suggesting the A-H give up Galicia, I just do not see them giving up that much land. However, they could easily give Krakow and all other lands north of the Vistula. This gives Poland both its ancient and new capitol. Plus it potentially causes the Russian Polish troops to switch sides &/or revolt. The Archbishop of Krakow at the time was an Austrian born Polish Noble too, so we would definitely crown Charles Stephen.

Yes, better AH actions would probably mean a Habsburg Poland. But creating it would create problems in Galicia, something Kaiser Karl was acutely aware of, hence his feet dragging. Franz Josef is not a lock for an independent Poland either. Remember Krakow sits on top of the only major rail line into Galicia that doesn't run through Hungary/the Carpathians. It is a year round line, versus the Carpathian passes, which close in the Winter.

The Ruthenians hated the empire. They were not loyal in the majority, nor fence sitters. They wanted to be Russian because the Poles treated them badly, just as bad as the Hungarian nobility treated everyone in their half of the empire. It wasn't the Austrians doing it, but they let the Polish nobility do what it wanted, which included suppressing the Ruthenians and forcing them to learn Polish, as they intended to make the whole province a part of Poland in the future. The Poles played ball because the Austrians cut them a sweet day: they could be the rulers over their province if they voted against the Czechs. This alienated the Ruthenians, which is why the locals helped the Russians in 1914-1915. It didn't matter how the Russians treated Ruthenians, they just knew that it was better being under Russian rather than Polish rule.


Personally, I think the Italians were going to back stab the Central Powers either way, the only differences is they could get the Entente to promise them even more. However, the Romanians could be Neutral or most likely they jump in right before Russia looks like they are going down to grab Bessarabia. Also, something like ½ of Romania’s trade was with the A-H so financially speaking supporting the Central Powers would make sense.
I'm not so sure about that. The Italians were opportunists (no offense to your heritage, just the Italian politicians at that time) who saw AH lose to the Serbs twice, and the Russians repeatedly, with the AH army devastated and subordinate to the Germans by 1915. It was supposed to be easy pickings. If the AHs are winning here and are able to crush Serbia eventually I don't see them risking war, especially if they can trade and make money while levering concessions out of the AHs. OTL it was a close run thing and took threats and intimidation, as well as a huge amount of money to influence the Italians to war.

Agreed on Romania.


I am not the biggest Navy person either (did 6 years in the U.S. Army), but I feel like in the Central Powers case they completely under used their surface ships. Germany is the obvious example, but you would have to change the Kaiser and his advisors mindset. In the A-H case they never really tried to break the Otranto Barrage until 1917. The A-H navy had 3 sea worthy Dreadnaughts at the start of the war, 3 semi-dreadnaughts, and 6 pre-Dreadnaughts. Yes, a combined Italian-French Fleet will kill you, but the French and British never really supported the Italian navy with thier own ships. Also the Italian navy is not that much bigger than the Austrian-Hungary navy. Plus the Italians have colonies and trade routes to protect so their whole navy cannot be thrown at you. Instead the A-H navy shelled a few Italian cities, made a few half-hearted attempts on the Barrage, and basically hung out in port the rest of the time during the war. Not counting the A-H subs that actually did something useful like commerce raiding.


Fuel was the problem. AH oil was lost in September, so its hard to power your ships when the Romanians have an embargo on selling oil too (only lifted after Gorlice-Tarnow). Also the AH's don't really need to unblock the Adriatic. Their most important port was Hamburg, as the Elbe connected them to German ports and the major shipping routes of the world. The Adriatic and Medditerranean was secondary at best. Also, to fight the British and French in the Med was not an option, least of all because the big ships did not have the range to operate outside the Adriatic for long without friendly ports to take on fuel. I agree that more could have been done, but AH was focused more on preserving their fleet for defensive actions and didn't want to lose anything which would hurt morale further. Plus the Italian torpedo boats were freakin' deadly. They were VERY good with those things, so its dangerous to use a dreadnought when you might get swarmed.

Don't have a huge amount of time now

Not sure why the AH would not wear out their cav divisions doing recon. I get the impression that was in accord with doctrine
Trying to give AH every advantage, but I know this is a very long shot. Probably should take that out.


They can hold off on an invasion of Serbia BUT not indefinitely If the Eastern Front stabilizes in Nov there could be well be a Dec invasion. BTW I only recently found out that Serbia had considerable copper ore esp. at Bor. Do you know if the CP made good use of that? True. Yes, they did, as they turned the nation into a resource farm in 1916, exporting food and other resources to Germany and AH proper.


Are you suggesting either a 1915 Brusilov offensive or a 1915 Russian Revolution? My vote is for none of the above. The Tsar was very reluctant to acknowledge of the incompetence of Ivanov. Also the amount of artillery needed to make a Brusilov offensive work will not be available in 1915.
I was referring to a more muted version of either. Russian morale collapses at home, or the AHs are weaker being further forward on Russian territory, so a less battered Russian army in 1915 (having avoided the Carpathian campaign and the 1 million+ losses suffered there, while being closer to supply sources) are able to break the AH lines, or at least push them back into Galicia like the 1915 Black-Yellow debacle.


An early Russian Revolution along the lines of the February Revolution OTL is highly unlikely (and an early Bolshevik Revolution almost impossible). What is somewhat possible in 1915 (but still not probable) is a revolution which deposes the Tsar and replaces him with Grand Duke Nikolai (Stone does briefly mention this possibility). It will be noted that the Grand Duke was a hopeless Francophile so this is not in itself a separate peace. He would shoot/hang and/or strangle Rasputin and send the Tsarina to a nunnery which would make the Russian war economy a notch or two more efficient.
I am merely suggesting that morale starts to drop without the victories of OTL, increasing unrest at home, perhaps resulting in the Tzar taking over the army earlier.

[wiking]

Here is a map of the area north of Poland and around Ivangorod in mid-September 1914 based on my outline. Kummer Group is disbanded and the forces grouped under Dankl's 1st army, while the Woyrsch corps has the West bank of the Vistula. It had 8 Skoda mortars for about 10 days, but after September 15th they were removed, having demolished all forts in range of Woyrsch's positions around Ivangorod.

Both sides are locked in from the Vistula to the Wieprz, with minor formations scattered out into the Steppe to protect their flanks.

[wiking]

Here is East Galicia in late September after the Russian 3rd army starts to retreat and they reform their 5th army.

The AH 4th army is badly over extended, having tried to flank the Russian 3rd army, but has been utilizing captured rail stock from the Russians to supply themselves. They are also using captured Russian artillery and stores, with the AH 3rd army doing so to a lesser degree. Rail gauge conversion and link connections are being frantically worked on by conscripted labor, both Ruthenian and Russian (including PoWs).

The Russians are holding on the rivers Styr and Sereth.

In October the Dniester group will be upgraded to the Pflanzer-Baltin Group and reinforced by three newly formed (and very weak 3rd line) infantry divisions created from Transylvanian border guards, gendarme, and territorials. Pf-B will then reorganized his Landsturm brigades into full divisions, as will the other armies, which will receive modern artillery when it can be produced. In the meantime captured materials are being pressed into use, as are fortress guns (machine guns and artillery) and stores. Krakow, Przemysl, and Lemberg (to name a few) are stripped of everything, including most of the garrisons, for use at the front. It will take the rest of the year to covert everything into full useful states.

[DanF]

I like the maps.

Wiking I sent you a PM with a naval idea I was thinking of today; feel free to ignore it if you dislike it or do not think it will fit. I figure in this Timeline where they still have oil and the conflicts all happen in 1914 it is still quasi-possible.

I was under the impression the Ruthenians had more love for the Habsburgs. I thought Empress Zita basically designed their flag. Overall, it is not that important as they are of minor political power in the A-H Empire.

Do not worry about the Hertiage, my Grandmother was an immigrant not me. Also, your comment is essentially true the government was looking for the best deal, and I think all the Great Powers knew it too. Now I doubt A-H is going to give up land Trieste (definite no it is their main port); maybe Trento (Tirol has a lot of histoical meaning though). However, promising the Italians Savoy, Nice, and even Tunisia for them to be Nuetral I could definitely see. Considering the resources the Italian front tied down, not having to deal with Italy would be a huge benefit. Also, the irony of Italy getting Nice and Savoy by failing to live up to their treaty obligations just like how France got the two originally would be funny.

In regards to Galicia I was thinking along the lines similar to Turkey and Greece OTL. The polish population of Galicia will move (by choice & minor encouragement) to the indepedant Poland (some parts of which need more Poles to make a majority anyway) after the war, any non-loyal Ruthenians will be expelled to Russia (I am assuming any early peace means no Ukraine), and Russia is most likely going to expel any of their own Germans (1914 it was 2.4+ million). The Baltic Germans will move to Courland (assuming this will be annexed), or stay where they are if the entire United Baltic Duchy comes about. The southern Germans Volga and Black Sea could be enticed to move to Galicia (similar climate and available land if the Poles & Ruthenians left). Also, I am sure the A-H might try to lure colonists from Germany to Galicia. All of this would help increase the numbers of Germans in the Austrian half of the Monarchy, which may help make ruling it easier.

In regards to Imperial Russia my thoughts if they get knocked out early 1915/1916 I see them as the Facist power of a WW2 (i.e. the Germany of the alternate timeline). I doubt the Bolsheviks would win a civil war, or even if there would be a true civil war. However, I could easily see a purge to remove all the "Traitors" that caused Russia to lose. They can play Slavism compared to Aryanism. They have the manpower & industrial potential. Since the peaced early they obviously only lost because they were betrayed by those traiter Russian Germans (who they expel), and the Slavic speaking Germans (Poles). Many Poles would most likely become bi-lingual do to the economic, military, and political assocations between Germany, Austria-Hunagry, and a new Kingdom of Poland in this timeline.

Oh, The World War 1 Databook arrived today. It has got a ton OOB informaion (It shows the 17 Territory Brigades & 5 Landstrum Brigades I mentioned above, it seems they were not called up until September 1914.), maps, timelines, etc...

Anyway, keep the updates coming!

[wiking]

With both fronts grinding to a halt except for some see-saw battles that just wrack up a body count, the only hope for further advance comes from the north. German forces, having been reinforced by troops from the West, savaged two Russian armies by mid-September, ending up near their borders in the north. With the Austrians asking for help and Germany now having breathing space, one option presented itself: attack south. Conrad seemingly would finally get his German attack toward Seydlitz. With the AHs lingering near Lublin, such an attack could lop off the Polish salient and trap several Russian corps. The Russian 2nd army still had not finished reforming after being crushed near Tannenberg three and half weeks prior, so stood ripe for assualt.

A 9th army was formed and promptly attacked on September 22nd. Supported by a brigade of Skoda mortars, with another on the way, the very last of the weapons in AH reserve (16 total), the Russian forts of the Narew were soon to be breached. Advancing between Soldau and Lyck, the 9th army scattered the Russian 2nd army, which retreated hastily behind the Narew. The Russian 10th army attacked furiously on the flank, but found itself bested. The Lyck river provided cover from the 10th army, but the Narew was blocked by numerous fortifications, leaving the German 9th hemmed in. Pultusk, Ostrelenka, and Lomsha were attacked in turn and fell after several weeks and limited help from the Russian field army.

The German established bridgeheads over the Narew, but now found themselves under heavy counter attack. Lasting well into October, the Germans were stymied by heavy resistance and increasing reinforcements arriving from the Russian 1st and 10th armies. These armies also attacked the German 8th, driving her back to her pre-Masurian lakes positions, but were halted thereafter. What was supposed to be a quick campaign to secure Poland now turned into an attrition struggle along the Narew. Ultimately the Germans would not be able to advance without reinforcement from the West. This would arrive in the form of the Western siege train, free from duties crushing Antwerp. This would not occur until early November with heavy losses in the meantime. The Russians suffered still greater losses thanks to the German munition advantage and professionalism of their artillery corps. Troop reinforcements also trickled in, allowing Worysch to be reinforced in the South. Finally the Russian lines could be broken, which happened by mid-November. Poland was quickly evacuated though, meaning few Russian field forces were lost.

Pulling back to the Bug-Nurez-Narew-Bobr river lines, the Russians, despite their terrible losses, were able to hold, though mainly through the attenuated German supply lines. Finally releasing the AH 1st army, locked in a bitter struggle with the Russian 4th and 9th for several weeks, the front pushed forward to natural barriers allowing some AH forces to be freed up.

By December 1st the AH front lines ran along the Bug from Brest-Litovsk to Kowel further south to the Styr and Sereth rivers. The rest of the year saw both sides lick their wounds and rebuild while improving supply lines. Army schools were formed in the rear zones of the armies to train new arrivals and retrain veterans with the accumulated knowledge of war. Both the Russians and AH lacked the necessary munitions to really shift the front lines, but both expended men to try and seize the other's trenches. Enough space remained for some maneuver, but often small arms killed just as much as artillery, limiting the scope of any advance.

Casualties were devastating for the Russians, who lost most of their prewar army in 1914, and little better for the AHs, who suffered nearly as heavily despite their significantly smaller losses thanks to their limited trained manpower. Vast sums of money and effort needed to be spent to make up for decades of neglect.

[von Adler]

Russia by 1915 survived on the prestige of the army, mostly. That prestige existed despite the losses against the Germans because the Russian army was doing well against the Ottomans and had gutted the Austro-Hungarians.

If the Austro-Hungarians are not gutted, the Russians will need to get more troops against them (especially if they had more losses themselves) which will mean only holding in the Caucasus and far less prestige for the army. I could see an upheaval coming early 1916, probably a Kerenskij-like government taking over, committed to continuing the war (pressured by the Entente), but with the army more or less disintegrating by late 1916, like OTL mid-1917.

I think the Romanians could join after a Gorlice-Tarnow equilent summer 1915, thinking the Russians are done for (they joined the Entente after the Brusilov Offensive, thinking Austria-Hungary was done for).

I do not think Italy will join when it did ITTL, if Austria-Hungary still looks strong. They might still do it, but by 1916, they are facing all of Austro-Hungary's might - and they are very close to the best infrastructure and most loyal and industrialised Austrian lands, which means the Austro-Hungarians will easily be able to throw lots at the Italians.

[DanF]

Sounds like the Germans and A-H are roughly at the August 1915 Gorlice-Tarnow line in November 1914, cool.

It is sort of funny that the only A-H artillery strength is their the Skoda 305s, and it seems 18 of the 26 pieces are in German hands in the timeline. They can at least take comfort that they are in good hands.

[wiking]

Russia by 1915 survived on the prestige of the army, mostly. That prestige existed despite the losses against the Germans because the Russian army was doing well against the Ottomans and had gutted the Austro-Hungarians.

If the Austro-Hungarians are not gutted, the Russians will need to get more troops against them (especially if they had more losses themselves) which will mean only holding in the Caucasus and far less prestige for the army. I could see an upheaval coming early 1916, probably a Kerenskij-like government taking over, committed to continuing the war (pressured by the Entente), but with the army more or less disintegrating by late 1916, like OTL mid-1917.

I think the Romanians could join after a Gorlice-Tarnow equilent summer 1915, thinking the Russians are done for (they joined the Entente after the Brusilov Offensive, thinking Austria-Hungary was done for).

I do not think Italy will join when it did ITTL, if Austria-Hungary still looks strong. They might still do it, but by 1916, they are facing all of Austro-Hungary's might - and they are very close to the best infrastructure and most loyal and industrialised Austrian lands, which means the Austro-Hungarians will easily be able to throw lots at the Italians.

I agree about the Italians, though the situation with the Romanians probably won't be that easy. It'd take more sustained victories, probably including the fall of Kiev to pull the Romanians in; they coveted Transylvania much more than Bessarbia (Moldovia).

Now the Russian home front was also more complex; it dissolved defeats in the field, administrative incompetence, and food shortages. The food shortages and breakdown in rail lines took time to build, as did the hostility with the peasantry over food prices. We might even see a resurgence in national will after these early defeats, but much of that depends on food. 1916 would probably be the year though, especially if Ukraine turns into a battlefront, reducing food output.

[wiking]

Very rough outline:
For the map I couldn't find a clean copy, so I over wrote an existing map.
Serbia attacks north by August 20th across the Save river with their 1st and 2nd armies, really just reinforced corps (4 divisions each + 1 cavalry division). The Serbian army was very low on munitions before the war and limited on artillery, which they further reduced by giving Montenegro 1/4 of their guns.

Neither Serbia nor Montenegro had much of a supply network, which hamstrung both of their offensives. Landsturm defeat the Montenegrian after a few minor battles, thanks to a lack of supply or real command or control.

Serbia expends most of her ammo quickly and bogs down, having expected the Serbs in Southern Hungary and Bosnia to revolt. They don't. Partly because of the patriotic mood of the country, Croat and Muslim crackdowns on Serbs, and Habsburg deportation of trouble makers. Liberal field executions by paranoid Habsburg soldiers, who had been few constant stories of guerrilla attacks by their superiors, keep Serb AH civilians away from the front.

AH 6th army attacks the flank of the Serb advance with much greater artillery power, buckling it. Losing 20,000 men while only inflicting 5,000, the Serbs are now without much of their munitions and dig trenches. Archduke Eugene does not pursue far, lacking the manpower for occupation and attacks. He also recognizes that there is no way to supply his forces very far across the border.

Skirmishing occurs in the down time, that is until Serbia gets resupplied via Salonkia by France and Russia, which requires them to attack again in support of their allies. Attempts to breach the Drina fail after initial success, mainly again to limited artillery stocks and supply problems, but also due to AH field works and mountain guns. Eugene also brings up two Landsturm brigades from occupation duties in Bosnia after there is no revolt, being formed into a division for service with the 6th army, while also receiving four more Landsturm territorial brigades, activated in September, but the quality of these troops and their equipment is very low, making them 4th line. Nevertheless, after retraining and some reequipment with machine guns and artillery from Bosnian fortresses, they are formed into a new corps for use with the 5th army.

Minor battles continue to grind down the Serbs, who lack munitions to respond to AH shelling. Another resupply effort in October once against comes with the strings that the Serbs must attack, but this is focused on the parts of Serbia seized by the AHs. Some progress is made, but the cost is too high, once again also using up the extra shells.

Poor sanitation and the lack of proper supply starts to cause widespread disease on the Serbian side, which spreads to the civilians population by the Winter. By December 1st Typhus is wreaking havoc in Serbia, though inoculations and proper medical/sanitation services in the AH ranks mostly protect them. Eugene requests additional forces for a wider attack, but is denied for the moment, as the Eastern Front requires every available unit, mainly due the vast distances needing coverage. Eventually some lower quality units filter in, those these need retraining, reequipping, and reorganization before they can be fully utilized. General Karl Tersztyánszky von Nádas is transferred to the Rayon Banat forces, bringing with him some more territorials and Landsturm, plus some newly formed units, which he attempts to organize with into an army group. AG Tersztyánszky is born, as its commander, discontent with his passive role, works with Eugene to develop an invasion plan. The Morova valley is deemed the best avenue for attack, meaning his force in Banat will take the lead role.

[Tom_B]

The Montenegrins would probably make a token effort to take Cattaro quite possibly with some small French assistance (there was a French artillery detachment on Mt. Lovcen OTL) However the AH had an entire division guarding Cattaro so that gets shut down right quick

I really think the latest you can postpone a full scale KuK invasion of Serbia in TTL is mid Feb. There is a possibility that the Dual Monarchy does it solo but if and when Serbian resistance appears to crack that the Bulgarians would jump in and launch an improvised invasion of Macedonia

I agree with your comments about Italy I see Giolitti becoming PM before the end of 1915. I think your Kiev comment re Rumania joining the CP is a tad overstated but I agree with the sentiment that there is a long way to go before they join in this TL (actually Bulgaria joining first is a strong prerequisite)

Short of joining the CP there are 3 things Rumania can do to help the CP:

1] Sell as much oil as they can pump to the CP
2] Allow munitions to be shipped through their territory to the Ottomans
3] Allow CP forces to pass through their territory to attack Russia (this option is under explored in alt hist)

[wiking]

I really think the latest you can postpone a full scale KuK invasion of Serbia in TTL is mid Feb. There is a possibility that the Dual Monarchy does it solo but if and when Serbian resistance appears to crack that the Bulgarians would jump in and launch an improvised invasion of Macedonia

I'm on board with the rest, however this part does raise some questions.
What about winter? Wouldn't it make operations too difficult to really advance anywhere but the Morova? The Bulgarians would definitely do so, though I wonder if they'd be on board from the beginning based on great AH prestige garnered from their victories in the East. OTL the Bulgarians did not trust the AHs because of their defeats on all front; here they would have beaten off several Serb attacks and defeated the Russians. With the advances in France and in the East, would not the Bulgarians be more willing to fight for the winning side?

[Tom_B]

I'm on board with the rest, however this part does raise some questions.
What about winter? Wouldn't it make operations too difficult to really advance anywhere but the Morova? The Bulgarians would definitely do so, though I wonder if they'd be on board from the beginning based on great AH prestige garnered from their victories in the East. OTL the Bulgarians did not trust the AHs because of their defeats on all front; here they would have beaten off several Serb attacks and defeated the Russians. With the advances in France and in the East, would not the Bulgarians be more willing to fight for the winning side?

Unfortunately Conrad demonstrated all too well that he underestimates climate. Serbia would be little less harsh than the Carpathians IMO.

Conrad made some nasty comments about the Bulgarian army prewar which greatly annoyed Sofia. They would not submit to a command structure headed by the AH. So you would need a German headed army group involving at least 6 German divisions---which is a road I've taken in two TL's but in both of those projects Conrad still experienced bitter defeat in Serbia in 1914. Here you have given Conrad all the reasons possible to be overconfident about doing it solo in the depths of winter.

[Snake Featherston]

The more sensible action would have been to send all of Austria-Hungary's troops against the smaller, weaker Serbian state and take that one out first before trying to fight Imperial Russia. A nearly universal WWI mistake was trying to do too much with too little. If Austria-Hungary had moved to squish Serbia first it would thus have had a war solely against Russia, which would be at least a help to the Central Powers in the short-term as opposed to having three failed invasions and then a joint Central Powers invasion dedicated solely to defeating Serbia.

If anything that kind of rapid victory might actually strengthen the Habsburg Monarchy itself in the short-term.

[wiking]

The more sensible action would have been to send all of Austria-Hungary's troops against the smaller, weaker Serbian state and take that one out first before trying to fight Imperial Russia. A nearly universal WWI mistake was trying to do too much with too little. If Austria-Hungary had moved to squish Serbia first it would thus have had a war solely against Russia, which would be at least a help to the Central Powers in the short-term as opposed to having three failed invasions and then a joint Central Powers invasion dedicated solely to defeating Serbia.

If anything that kind of rapid victory might actually strengthen the Habsburg Monarchy itself in the short-term.


I'm not so sure. The loss of Galicia is damaging to the monarchy and Conrad will have to find a way to resist his monarch's order to attack. The time it would have taken for Serbia to be defeated would probably have been too long, as Russia would be hitting the San-Dniester line in early September. Even if the they hold, there is the issue of the Russian 9th army being a wild card, either flanking the AH defenses or attacking and probably overrunning East Prussia. There are a lot of butterflies here from AH not attacking, some potentially deadly. I'd actually be up for writing two concurrent TL's about the different strategies in August 1914.

[Snake Featherston]

I'm not so sure. The loss of Galicia is damaging to the monarchy and Conrad will have to find a way to resist his monarch's order to attack. The time it would have taken for Serbia to be defeated would probably have been too long, as Russia would be hitting the San-Dniester line in early September. Even if the they hold, there is the issue of the Russian 9th army being a wild card, either flanking the AH defenses or attacking and probably overrunning East Prussia. There are a lot of butterflies here from AH not attacking, some potentially deadly. I'd actually be up for writing two concurrent TL's about the different strategies in August 1914.

The loss of Galicia wouldn't negate that Russia got whupped in most battles against the Germans in 1914. They'll still get stomped in East Prussia and a full Austro-Hungarian attack against Serbia that takes it out before the fall of 1914 means an Austro-Hungarian army with more of an air of being able to win battles confronts the Russians by fall.

The morale factor would be different, at least initially.

[DanF]

In regards to Galicia if my reading the Economics of World War 1 book is correct about 1/5 of the Austria-Hungary agriculture value is in that province, so that it a huge hit that they took OTL.

If Austria-Hungary can wait at least until April-May then the Typhus Epidemic will have done most of the work for them. OTL it actually hit the Medical staff first (contracted trying to help the first victims), which is what made it so damaging. Also, with more men under arms, and even more people to feed the 150,000+ people killed by Typhus OTL might be far less than what this timeline Serbia suffers. Once the invasion gets going the lack of doctors and nurses (killed by Typhus) is going to make the abiltiy for the Serbian army to recover from attacks a lot worse.

In regard to Conrad and timing. Did not Conrad nominate Archduke Eugene to command this front? As a Habsburg and the Grandson of the Great Habsburg General Archduke Charles, Eugene's word would carry a lot of weight on when to invade. Also, for internal PR purposes having a Habsburg General and the Grandson of Archduke Charles showing his military heritage, would be a huge win. Heck maybe they can give it a fancy name like the Black Yellow Offensive. :) You know to wrap it into the Habsburg mystic.

Good update!

[wiking]

In regards to Galicia if my reading the Economics of World War 1 book is correct about 1/5 of the Austria-Hungary agriculture value is in that province, so that it a huge hit that they took OTL.

If Austria-Hungary can wait at least until April-May then the Typhus will have done most of the work for them. OTL it actually hit the Medical staff first, so that is what made it so damaging. Also, with more men under arms, and more people to feed the 150,000+ losses OTL might be far less than what this Serbia suffers here. Once the invasion gets going the lack of doctors and nurses is going to make the abiltiy for the Serbian army to recover from attacks a lot worse.

In regard to Conrad and timing. Did not Conrad nominate Archduke Eugene to command this front? As a Habsburg and the Grandson of the Great Habsburg General Archduke Charles, Eugene's word would carry a lot of weight on when to invade. Also, for internal PR purposes having a Habsburg General and the Grandson of Archduke Charles showing his military heritage, would be a huge win. Heck maybe they can give it a fancy name like the Black Yellow Offensive. :) You know to wrap it more into the Habsburg mystic.

Good update!

That raises a good point. I like the offensive name :D
Both Eugene and Tersztyánszky were very well respected, the former even outside of AH. The later had Archduke Fredrich's favor as well (Conrad's direct superior), so those two combined, coupled with Conrad's respect for his former mentor/superior, probably would be enough to hold off the offensive pressures until proper weather came about, you know, like March.

http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=175301
If Sebia got priority

[DanF]

That raises a good point. I like the offensive name :D
Both Eugene and Tersztyánszky were very well respected, the former even outside of AH. The later had Archduke Fredrich's favor as well (Conrad's direct superior), so those two combined, coupled with Conrad's respect for his former mentor/superior, probably would be enough to hold off the offensive pressures until proper weather came about, you know, like March.

http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=175301
If Sebia got priority


Didn't Tisza and Tersztyanszky hate each other? Sounds like all the more reason to like Tersztyanszky. I mean Tisza was better then than the Hungarian nobles that wanted Indepedence, but then again loss of a limb is better than death.

[wiking]

Didn't Tisza and Tersztyanszky hate each other? Sounds like all the more reason to like Tersztyanszky. I mean Tisza was better then than the Hungarian nobles that wanted Indepedence, but then again loss of a limb is better than death.

Tisza was the smartest guy in the Hungarian political scene; he understood that Hungary needed Austria, but he didn't let the Austrians know that. He played the Habsburgs every which way while trying to keep the extreme nationalism he himself had built under control. Ultimately he lost control of the debate, but he played the game well. Evil genius that one.

Tersztyanszky was Hungarian, but was a Habsburg loyalist. In fact, he ended up having a hard time with his native language because he spoke German so much! All the best Hungarian soldiers/officers went into the K.u.K. army because it had the best opportunities and did not discriminate at all (except when FF intervened to prevent Jews from being promoted...guess he never met Eduard Fischer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Fischer He and the other Jewish inhabitants (and targets of the Cossacks) of Bukowina maintained a guerrilla war against the Russians until Pflanzer-Baltin showed up. Its a damn shame that more of this attitude was not harnessed in the Jewish population).

Tersztyanszky was actually FF's second choice for CoS if Conrad did not go for it. But he was a hot head who told off people for being stupid; he did not get along with Franz Josef ;)

The man was actually very, very able and would have made an excellent CoS if he had had the opportunity. The OTL invasion plan of Serbia was his idea; he actually was stationed in Banat and out of frustration and boredom developed the plan and logistics for taking on Serbia.
http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/biog/tersztyanszky.htm

[The Sandman]

Might Conrad be too focused on some grand scheme to smash the battered Russians to concern himself over-much with Serbia in winter 1914-15?

Especially if the typhus epidemic hits before the invasion; aside from the degree to which it would weaken the Serbians, it might seem prudent to wait to send large A-H formations into Serbia until the epidemic has more-or-less burned itself out.

[Tom_B]

I only recall Stone mentioning Tersztyánszky twice. Once in connection with the Carpathian offensives and then later as the possible commander of Third Army against Serbia. In neither case did Stone seem impressed by Tersztyánszky and IIRC thought the ultimate choice of Kovess was a step up.

[DanF]

Tisza was the smartest guy in the Hungarian political scene; he understood that Hungary needed Austria, but he didn't let the Austrians know that. He played the Habsburgs every which way while trying to keep the extreme nationalism he himself had built under control. Ultimately he lost control of the debate, but he played the game well. Evil genius that one.

Tersztyanszky was Hungarian, but was a Habsburg loyalist. In fact, he ended up having a hard time with his native language because he spoke German so much! All the best Hungarian soldiers/officers went into the K.u.K. army because it had the best opportunities and did not discriminate at all (except when FF intervened to prevent Jews from being promoted...guess he never met Eduard Fischer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduard_Fischer He and the other Jewish inhabitants (and targets of the Cossacks) of Bukowina maintained a guerrilla war against the Russians until Pflanzer-Baltin showed up. Its a damn shame that more of this attitude was not harnessed in the Jewish population).

Tersztyanszky was actually FF's second choice for CoS if Conrad did not go for it. But he was a hot head who told off people for being stupid; he did not get along with Franz Josef ;)

The man was actually very, very able and would have made an excellent CoS if he had had the opportunity. The OTL invasion plan of Serbia was his idea; he actually was stationed in Banat and out of frustration and boredom developed the plan and logistics for taking on Serbia.
http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/biog/tersztyanszky.htm

Read the bio on Karl Tersztyanszky, and the best part: Conrad said, "I need a General that would not be intimidated by the Germans, and rude enough to enforce our own interest." Considering the Bio talkes a lot about Karl's temper it is like the job was tailor made for him. I wonder in another time or with another country if Karl would of gone down as one of those "eccentric genius" Generals? He seemed very smart just had a huge temper.

[wiking]

I only recall Stone mentioning Tersztyánszky twice. Once in connection with the Carpathian offensives and then later as the possible commander of Third Army against Serbia. In neither case did Stone seem impressed by Tersztyánszky and IIRC thought the ultimate choice of Kovess was a step up.

Tersztyánszky, at least from the limited resourced I could find about him, didn't seem too bad. In fact in the case of Serbia, Koevess took the credit he deserved for creating the battle plan that was used to crush the enemy.
Koevess was a sound general himself and I'd rank both men in the top 10 of AH generals in the war.

[Josephus]

Interestingly, both men declined Hungarian posts by stating their 'great lack of command of the Hungarian tongue'. Since both men were born Hungarians, and loyal to the monarchy as a whole and to the common army, this seems a tad formulaic to me.

[DanF]

Interestingly, both men declined Hungarian posts by stating their 'great lack of command of the Hungarian tongue'. Since both men were born Hungarians, and loyal to the monarchy as a whole and to the common army, this seems a tad formulaic to me.

Kovess at least had the fact he was a Transylvanian Saxon to fall back on as a quasi-excuse for his lack of Magyar knowledge. However, Tersztyanszky according to the BIO is from an old Hungarian Noble family, so his refusal is obviously more for political reasons then anything else.

Since you pointed it out, I too wonder if refusing for "lack of Magyar knowledge" is the politically correct way of saying I am Pro-Empire and not Pro-Kingdom of Hungary?

[DanF]

I am not sure if you are interested, but this might help with determining number of extra divisions. Feel free to ignore.

Using the book: World War I Databook. Here is a list of Divisions formed by Austria-Hungary OTL. Considering A-H lost 950,000+ men in 1914 OTL the number of Divisions (15,000 per) formed by A-H can obviously be a lot higher in any timeline they take less losses in.

List of all Austria-Hungary Divisions formed & disbanded Oct/1914 to end 1915 - OTL
Unit Date Location
49 renamed Pustertal 5/15 Italy – Carnic Alps
50 10/14 Serbia than Italy 5/15
Kornhaber renamed 51 Honved 11/14 Russia
52 10/14 Russia disbanded 1/15
53 8/15 Serbia
54 10/14 Pflanzer-Baltin Group
55 10/14 Russia than Hoffman Corps in 1/15
56 10/14 Pflanzer group reduced to brig. 12/14
Goiginger renamed 57 10/14 10/14 Serbia than Italy 5/15
58 3/15 Italy
59 3/15 Bosnia than Italy 7/15
60 11/14 Serbia disbanded 12/14
61 5/15 Serbia than Italy 7/15
62 7/15 Russian than Serbia 9/15
70 Honved renamed Gendarmerie 6/15 Rumania
90 5/15 Italy – Tirol
91 5/15 Rohr Group disbanded 11/15
92 5/15 Rohr Group than Carnic Alps 10/15
93 5/15 Italy
94 5/15 Italy – Carnic Alps

If the number of Divisions are increased compared to OTL then getting enough artillery would most likely be an issue. However, there are a varity of ways to address that. OTL according to the book Economic of World War 1 A-H did not put in any order for Artillery in 1914, so that could be changed. They could also buy artillery from Germany who at the beginning of the war would probably love it if A-H had a bigger army. Since each A-H divison against Russia means less German soldiers are needed against Russia. Lastly, a more successful A-H army would also gain more seized Russian and Serbia guns (I think they had the french 75s), and they would not lose as many A-H artillery as they did OTL due to mass surrenders in Serbia and Galicia.

[wiking]

I am not sure if you are interested, but this might help with determining number of extra divisions. Feel free to ignore.

Using the book: World War I Databook. Here is a list of Divisions formed by Austria-Hungary OTL. Considering A-H lost 950,000+ men in 1914 OTL the number of Divisions (15,000 per) formed by A-H can obviously be a lot higher in any timeline they take less losses in.

List of all Austria-Hungary Divisions formed & disbanded Oct/1914 to end 1915 - OTL
Unit Date Location
49 renamed Pustertal 5/15 Italy – Carnic Alps
50 10/14 Serbia than Italy 5/15
Kornhaber renamed 51 Honved 11/14 Russia
52 10/14 Russia disbanded 1/15
53 8/15 Serbia
54 10/14 Pflanzer-Baltin Group
55 10/14 Russia than Hoffman Corps in 1/15
56 10/14 Pflanzer group reduced to brig. 12/14
Goiginger renamed 57 10/14 10/14 Serbia than Italy 5/15
58 3/15 Italy
59 3/15 Bosnia than Italy 7/15
60 11/14 Serbia disbanded 12/14
61 5/15 Serbia than Italy 7/15
62 7/15 Russian than Serbia 9/15
70 Honved renamed Gendarmerie 6/15 Rumania
90 5/15 Italy – Tirol
91 5/15 Rohr Group disbanded 11/15
92 5/15 Rohr Group than Carnic Alps 10/15
93 5/15 Italy
94 5/15 Italy – Carnic Alps

If the number of Divisions are increased compared to OTL then getting enough artillery would most likely be an issue. However, there are a varity of ways to address that. OTL according to the book Economic of World War 1 A-H did not put in any order for Artillery in 1914, so that could be changed. They could also buy artillery from Germany who at the beginning of the war would probably love it if A-H had a bigger army. Since each A-H divison against Russia means less German soldiers are needed against Russia. Lastly, a more successful A-H army would also gain more seized Russian and Serbia guns (I think they had the french 75s), and they would not lose as many A-H artillery as they did OTL due to mass surrenders in Serbia and Galicia.


Thank you for all the information you've provided. I'd be curious to see how many of those divisions were formed from scratch as opposed to created from Landsturm brigades combined together or combined with new brigades. AH had far fewer training personnel and trained reserves than Germany, so had difficulty creating new formations. Also, IIRC building new artillery wasn't the bottleneck for AH, as they formed large numbers of new batteries in 1914 alone (~200 with modern pieces), but the lack of shells (due to lack of explosive materials) and rushed training of replacements and new formations meant that they were generally combat ineffective. You are right though about captured artillery, especially as the Russian guns were superior to her unmodernized pre-war stocks of heavy guns. The Serbs had about 100 French 75's, but they defended them to the death and in both scenarios I'm exploring, there won't be much of an opportunity to capture any. OTL the Serbs even dragged the guns over the mountains into Albania as their men were dying of cold and starvation for the symbolism that they still had their arms. Interestingly enough, they also dragged along their AH prisoners (the poor bastards), who calling 'miserable', as one author has, is a vast understatement.

Buying from Germany was a major issue that AH had in 1914-1915; she expected to be able to do so, as had been the method pre-war, but Germany had a limit of production too and needed everything for her own army. It wasn't until December 1914 that AH got any explosive materials from her ally, at which point her shell production quadrupled. AH really depended on her ally for just about anything above and beyond their meager domestic production, which was abysmal until late 1915, but Germany could not give it because of her own shortages. Here it would still be a major problem, so, though I see existing formations getting all the replacements they need in contrast to OTL, they won't be able to expand much because of their limited trained manpower base, lack of artillery shells, and general dependency on Germany for much of her...everything.

[DanF]

Thank you for all the information you've provided. I'd be curious to see how many of those divisions were formed from scratch as opposed to created from Landsturm brigades combined together or combined with new brigades. AH had far fewer training personnel and trained reserves than Germany, so had difficulty creating new formations. Also, IIRC building new artillery wasn't the bottleneck for AH, as they formed large numbers of new batteries in 1914 alone (~200 with modern pieces), but the lack of shells (due to lack of explosive materials) and rushed training of replacements and new formations meant that they were generally combat ineffective. You are right though about captured artillery, especially as the Russian guns were superior to her unmodernized pre-war stocks of heavy guns. The Serbs had about 100 French 75's, but they defended them to the death and in both scenarios I'm exploring, there won't be much of an opportunity to capture any. OTL the Serbs even dragged the guns over the mountains into Albania as their men were dying of cold and starvation for the symbolism that they still had their arms. Interestingly enough, they also dragged along their AH prisoners (the poor bastards), who calling 'miserable', as one author has, is a vast understatement.

Buying from Germany was a major issue that AH had in 1914-1915; she expected to be able to do so, as had been the method pre-war, but Germany had a limit of production too and needed everything for her own army. It wasn't until December 1914 that AH got any explosive materials from her ally, at which point her shell production quadrupled. AH really depended on her ally for just about anything above and beyond their meager domestic production, which was abysmal until late 1915, but Germany could not give it because of her own shortages. Here it would still be a major problem, so, though I see existing formations getting all the replacements they need in contrast to OTL, they won't be able to expand much because of their limited trained manpower base, lack of artillery shells, and general dependency on Germany for much of her...everything.

How much more manpower would need to go to replace losses? I ask because the 61 starting Divisions are only 915,000 men and OTL 3.35 Million men were mobilized in 1914. If you consider over 1 Million men died or were captured OTL. Even if they form all 20 Divsions above that is only 300,000 additional men. Actually, now I am curious where all the all the manpower went OTL? I know losses were high, but A-H also was mobilizing throughout the war (almost 2 Million more by the end of 1915 alone). I wonder how many non-Division troops the A-H had? The only benefit A-H might get with fewer losses is less troops are called up after 1914, which would at least significantly help economically. If A-H were to mobilize only 6.5 million instead of 8 million from 1914-1918 then their male workforce (male workforce is alot more important in A-H at this time) would end the war larger then it was 1915 OTL. This is significant, because 1915 was the best year for the A-H economically with Hungary's GDP actually growing, and Austria only shrinking due to losing Galicia.

That stinks on the A-H's shell problems. It is funny I made the same assumption that A-H made, in that Germany would be able to provide their ally with the necessary armaments.

[wiking]

So, are we going to see a situation where A-H has actual training units in the rear for the increased manpower who then deploy fully trained up Divisions as they are ready for the field? I ask because the 61 starting Divisions are only 915,000 men and OTL 3.35 Million men were mobilized in 1914. If you consider over 1 Million men died or were captured OTL. Even if they form all 20 Divsions above that is only 300,000 additional men. Actually, now I am curious where all the all the manpower went OTL? I know losses were high, but A-H also was mobilizing throughout the war (almost 2 Million more by the end of 1915 alone). I wonder how many non-Division troops the A-H had?

That stinks on the A-H's shell problems. It is funny I made the same assumption that A-H made, in that Germany would be able to provide their ally with the necessary armaments.

A fair bit. Assuming you mean just the formed infantry and cavalry divisions, there were of course a number of independent brigades (30+), corps and army troops, supply troops-etappen zone, fortress and security troops, pioneers/sappers/engineers, and of course the marsch units and the later mobilized territorials. But in 9-10 months there were 2.25 million casualties minimum, which gutted the trained officers, ncos, and combat troops. By April 1915 there were only ~15% of the prewar infantry left and the Landsturm were considered the best troops in the army.

[wiking]

AH (all fronts):
Total- 791,000

died-286,000
wounded-432,000
captured-63,000


Russian (all fronts):
Total-1,670,000

died-681,000
wounded-592,000
captured-397,000
Significant number of wounded captured, poor medical services and sanitation resulted in high deaths from illness/infection

Serbia:
total-183,000

died (including civilians from typhus)-115,000
wounded-59,000
captured-9,000

Germany (east front):
total-310,000

died-68,000
wounded-217,000
captured-25,000

Eastern Front January 1st

[DanF]

A fair bit. Assuming you mean just the formed infantry and cavalry divisions, there were of course a number of independent brigades (30+), corps and army troops, supply troops-etappen zone, fortress and security troops, pioneers/sappers/engineers, and of course the marsch units and the later mobilized territorials. But in 9-10 months there were 2.25 million casualties minimum, which gutted the trained officers, ncos, and combat troops. By April 1915 there were only ~15% of the prewar infantry left and the Landsturm were considered the best troops in the army.

Thanks, I knew the losses were bad (though I really misunderstood how bad), but your 9-10 Month losses of 2.25 Million explains everything to me. They lost almost half of what the just over 5 million mobilized from 1914 to the end of 1915 in less than a year. In some ways is amazing they still were able to keep both a workable morale in the military, and field an effective fighting force with so many losses. That independent brigade count strikes me as high, was there a huge advantage in the A-H military to having so many brigades?

In your TTL looks like A-H is roughly 200K better than OTL. How does the German number stack up compared to OTL?

[von Adler]

Germany also had major problems with ammunition production until they could synthesize nitrates as they were cut off from the South American sources. Russia's situation was even worse. IIRC, the Russian guns were restricted to two shells per day unless a major offensive was planned or an enemy breakthrough was imminent and of the ~6 million men in uniform, only ~4 million had rifles.

This TL leaves the Habsburgs far, far better off and collaterally, the Germans as well. I am wondering how the increased casualties for the Russians and the increased need for troops facing the Austrians (as they are stronger) makes a difference against the Ottomans. IIRC, the Ottoman weakness in the Caucasus allowed the Russians to cripple the Anatolian coal production and coastal shipment infrastructure, which hurt the Ottoman war effort seriously. Are they capable to do so under these circumstances?

Edit: As for artillery, the Austrians have all the artillery they OTL lost in Galizia, especially Przemysl. Most of it is obselete, but can be passed down to second line formations while the regular troops receive new artillery. The Austrians did well during the Gorlice-Tarnow offensive, so they were able to rebuild their losses pretty well OTL (it was not until Brusilov that their army was completely broken), ITTL they should have more time (since the Russians are weaker, there's no need to push to save Przemysl, which gutted the army again OTL) and more NCOs and officers still alive to rebuild their army. They have also been victorious, which should improve morale and corps de esprit quite a bit.

[DanF]

Germany also had major problems with ammunition production until they could synthesize nitrates as they were cut off from the South American sources. Russia's situation was even worse. IIRC, the Russian guns were restricted to two shells per day unless a major offensive was planned or an enemy breakthrough was imminent and of the ~6 million men in uniform, only ~4 million had rifles.

This TL leaves the Habsburgs far, far better off and collaterally, the Germans as well. I am wondering how the increased casualties for the Russians and the increased need for troops facing the Austrians (as they are stronger) makes a difference against the Ottomans. IIRC, the Ottoman weakness in the Caucasus allowed the Russians to cripple the Anatolian coal production and coastal shipment infrastructure, which hurt the Ottoman war effort seriously. Are they capable to do so under these circumstances?



I thought the German firm BASF began Haber nitrate production in 1913?

The timeline has not addressed the Black Sea, so it should be a Russian lake effectively speaking (a few Ottoman ships with the Russians raiding the commerce). The Black Sea fleet capitol ships were 5 Pre-Dreadnoughts, and in mid-1915 they would gain two Dreadnoughts. The Goeben is a Battlecruiser and the Breslau is only a light cruiser. Those ships together could cause a problem for 1 maybe 2 Russian Pre-Dreadnoughts, but more than that would most likely mean the sinking of the German-Turkish ships. It is for that reason that the Russians tended to sail all five as one fleet knowing that the German ships could not touch them.

However, the wildcard this TTL did bring up is when Wiking said Romania expands trade. Now you could have Ottoman Ships flying under Romanian flags, or even actual Romanian ships sailing between Constanta and Constantinople. This would put Russia and the French and British subs that sneak into the Black Sea in a bind. They could sink the Romanian flagged ships, but that might push Romania to declare war on Russia. Her army might not be the best, but right now the last thing the Russians need is 500,000 more men to fight against.

[wiking]

That independent brigade count strikes me as high, was there a huge advantage in the A-H military to having so many brigades?
Flexibility?


In your TTL looks like A-H is roughly 200K better than OTL. How does the German number stack up compared to OTL?
AH numbers are actually 459,000 better than OTL. They lost 1.25 million by January 1st OTL.
Germany (after some mods) is 219,000 better off, because of a number of changes.

I thought the German firm BASF began Haber nitrate production in 1913?
It did but there were no production facilities until 1915 IIRC.

However, the wildcard this TTL did bring up is when Wiking said Romania expands trade. Now you could have Ottoman Ships flying under Romanian flags, or even actual Romanian ships sailing between Constanta and Constantinople. This would put Russia and the French and British subs that sneak into the Black Sea in a bind. They could sink the Romanian flagged ships, but that might push Romania to declare war on Russia. Her army might not be the best, but right now the last thing the Russians need is 500,000 more men to fight against.
I forgot that even OTL during the war the Hungarians blocked Romanian trade to a degree, so I might need to change this.

Germany also had major problems with ammunition production until they could synthesize nitrates as they were cut off from the South American sources. Russia's situation was even worse. IIRC, the Russian guns were restricted to two shells per day unless a major offensive was planned or an enemy breakthrough was imminent and of the ~6 million men in uniform, only ~4 million had rifles.
True, but Entente trade did ease this during late 1914. Plus there were large stocks in forts not counted in the field army totals, but since a number of forts have fallen, these have been lost.



This TL leaves the Habsburgs far, far better off and collaterally, the Germans as well. I am wondering how the increased casualties for the Russians and the increased need for troops facing the Austrians (as they are stronger) makes a difference against the Ottomans. IIRC, the Ottoman weakness in the Caucasus allowed the Russians to cripple the Anatolian coal production and coastal shipment infrastructure, which hurt the Ottoman war effort seriously. Are they capable to do so under these circumstances?
Indeed. I had not really considered the Ottoman benefits, so I will need to look into that more; do you have any links on that subject?


Edit: As for artillery, the Austrians have all the artillery they OTL lost in Galizia, especially Przemysl. Most of it is obselete, but can be passed down to second line formations while the regular troops receive new artillery. The Austrians did well during the Gorlice-Tarnow offensive, so they were able to rebuild their losses pretty well OTL (it was not until Brusilov that their army was completely broken), ITTL they should have more time (since the Russians are weaker, there's no need to push to save Przemysl, which gutted the army again OTL) and more NCOs and officers still alive to rebuild their army. They have also been victorious, which should improve morale and corps de esprit quite a bit.
Very true, and the gunners will all still be around. The quality of replacements both due to the lack of training personnel and low morale (men went into combat expecting to lose) degraded their effectiveness after 1914; distrust of their leader's competence also hurt. Here both will be less of a problem. Artillery and munitions will be at acceptable after the first half of 1915. For now the preservation of Galician grain and horses plus the safeguarding of rolling stock should mean they are light years ahead of OTL.

[DanF]

It did but there were no production facilities until 1915 IIRC.

AH numbers are actually 459,000 better than OTL. They lost 1.25 million by January 1st OTL.
Germany (after some mods) is 219,000 better off, because of a number of changes.


I forgot that even OTL during the war the Hungarians blocked Romanian trade to a degree, so I might need to change this.

However, the wildcard this TTL did bring up is when Wiking said Romania expands trade. Now you could have Ottoman Ships flying under Romanian flags, or even actual Romanian ships sailing between Constanta and Constantinople. This would put Russia and the French and British subs that sneak into the Black Sea in a bind. They could sink the Romanian flagged ships, but that might push Romania to declare war on Russia. Her army might not be the best, but right now the last thing the Russians need is 500,000 more men to fight against.



Haber Process began Industrial production 1913 in the Oppau plant. The process was created in 1909 (I think BASF bought it in 1910), but it took until 1913 for the first plant to come online. So, Germany has at least one plant, but this process is not that quick so it probably was not until 1915 like you mentioned above that Germany's needs were meet. http://www.basf.com/group/corporate/en/about-basf/history/1902-1924/index

400K for Austria that could be big in ensuring all units are full strength as mentioned earlier, and potentially provide some extra forces for the future Serbia invasion. With A-H doing better in this thread will Bulgaria be more likely to want to work with them, or will they still demand the Germans run the invasion?

How useful would an extra 200K be to the Germans? I know they are many times regarded as quasi-supermen. However, the German high command favored the Western Front, so if they do have extra man power I am assuming much of it would be transferred there. Considering we are in the later 1914 early/1915 time period would throwing an extra 200K make a difference, or would they just run up the causalities in some fruitless battle for inches? I ask since my knowledge of Germany during the war is very limited.

In regards to the Romania trade, "I Failed" on this one. I got this and the counterpoint Thread mixed up. In the counterpoint thread that is a legit statement, but here in this thread you had not said Romania increased trade with the Central Powers. I hang my head in shame, and will go add the comment to the other thread. :(

[wiking]

400K for Austria that could be big in ensuring all units are full strength as mentioned earlier, and potentially provide some extra forces for the future Serbia invasion. With A-H doing better in this thread will Bulgaria be more likely to want to work with them, or will they still demand the Germans run the invasion?
Though the Bulgarian king had personal problems with both the Germans and AHs, here without the losses of OTL, I don't see a problem with AH command. especially Eugene. The Germans will have a role though.


How useful would an extra 200K be to the Germans? I know they are many times regarded as quasi-supermen. However, the German high command favored the Western Front, so if they do have extra man power I am assuming much of it would be transferred there. Considering we are in the later 1914 early/1915 time period would throwing an extra 200K make a difference, or would they just run up the causalities in some fruitless battle for inches? I ask since my knowledge of Germany during the war is very limited.

They will be necessary in the East, so no transfers, but here, with the East secure, Falkenhayn will head West. That means limited reinforcements at best. Whether that battle will be fruitless is a matter of debate.

Here is a hint of the next topic:

[von Adler]

Another interesting question is Gallipoli ITTL. I think the Entente will see the need to open up the straits and possibly remove one of Russia's enemies (the Ottomans) even higher ITTL, however, the Ottomans have probably not lost ~250 000 men and most of their pre-war officers in the Caucasus campaign and will thus be better off to face the Entente. They had their best troops, best commanders and were very close to their best infrastructure and supply sources OTL - if/when Bulgaria joins, they might actually take the Ottomans up on their OTL offered divisions (the Ottomans had huge problems transporting and supplying troops in Caucasus and Palestine, so they offered to lend the Bulgarians some divisions against Serbia and the Salonika Army OTL).

I look forward to hearing more on this TL. :)

[wiking]

Another interesting question is Gallipoli ITTL. I think the Entente will see the need to open up the straits and possibly remove one of Russia's enemies (the Ottomans) even higher ITTL, however, the Ottomans have probably not lost ~250 000 men and most of their pre-war officers in the Caucasus campaign and will thus be better off to face the Entente. They had their best troops, best commanders and were very close to their best infrastructure and supply sources OTL - if/when Bulgaria joins, they might actually take the Ottomans up on their OTL offered divisions (the Ottomans had huge problems transporting and supplying troops in Caucasus and Palestine, so they offered to lend the Bulgarians some divisions against Serbia and the Salonika Army OTL).

I look forward to hearing more on this TL. :)

Something similar happened to the Ottomans, so that won't help, but those men were not their best or really even anything but new replacements for units destroyed in the Balkan wars. The real veterans were saved for European Turkey. Wait and see what happens at Galipoli, but it might be a few posts before that comes up. For tomorrow we will see what happens in the East and might even get a sneak peak with plans for Serbia and the West.

[DanF]

Well this update was filled with a lot of foreshadowing. A new Gallipoli and a German offensive 8 months ahead of OTL. Looks good!

Will the Ottoman's 57th Regiment make the same heroic stand, or will they at least do something as equally Noble?

I would like to again lobby for Charles Stephen as King of Poland. For no other reason then I would love to see how the Poles in France and the Poles in Russia react to the Central Powers creating a Kingdom of Poland. Though, I doubt this would happen I would love to see stories of Polish troops in mass crossing the trench line in the Western Front to the German side. Saying we are Poles and we are here to fight with you and for the Kingdom of Poland. Not to mention how quickly would the U.S. recognize Poland, especially considering both Senators from Illinois would lobby hard for it (Chicago has the largest Polish population outside of Warsaw).

Wiking, not to add any burden on you, but if you have any extra time would you consider giving updates on the other major fronts Western and Ottoman campaigns? I ask because of your earlier comments with the East secure the Germans would turn West. I am curious to see how the additional manpower helps them there. As I said earlier my knowledge of Germany during the war is limited, and my opinions of the Western front are alas biased to the common misconception of it being a war for inches. This is part of the reason I enjoyed your Moltke v2 timeline as it gives me a better understanding of the Western front beyond the popular myth.

Thanks for the update.

[wiking]

So far the Caucasus and West are pretty much convergent, so no real changes for now there. Galipoli will still occur as OTL, at least until a certain point. As to the Polish issue, that is touchy and that was probably the reason that no real resolution was reached on the issue OTL until 1916. I don't know enough about the issues and history of the debate to really get into that, but perhaps we can work something out ITTL, as the Poles are likely to be much more AH friendly with their victories and the clearing of most of Poland of Russian forces early on, not to mention the relative minor destruction to Polish cities and towns. Of course the Russians will engage in a bit of scorched earth, so the Poles aren't going to be very happy about that. However, they won't be happy to be a vassal of Germany or AH...

As you all can see based on my map from yesterday Falkenhayn decided to approve Hindenburgs' 2nd Masurian lakes with the 10th army. Already stronger than OTL (thanks to less casualties to the prewar army) with less frontage, the 10th army added significant strength to the German positions in the East. With the Russians already bashed up from the previous offensive several weeks earlier, the addition of more German forces, plus their siege artillery train, causes them to flinch and pull back quicker than they could have resisted. This is probably a good thing, because it preserves their strength more than otherwise, especially as they avoid encirclements. However morale is falling, as the men 'bug out' and flee from the heavy German guns and crushing assaults. As they rally though, they fight well and stiffly, especially as the German artillery lags behind in the winter weather. Especially around the Augustow woods Russian resistance fiercely checks German advances. However Northwest Front command pulls the men back because of their perception of German abilities, rather than the facts on the ground. The Nieman river becomes the barrier to hold on. The German are frustrated, having failed to really crush the Russians as anticipated. Prisoner counts are low, as are captured materials, but the body count is still respectable. German losses are considerably lower, but still not light.

For the moment the front line has been shortened and now rests on a good natural frontier, allowing the Germans to lengthen the line. As part of an agreement with the AHs (Falkenhayn's initiative- ITTL his relationship with Conrad is better as is AH-German relations) the Germans will take over more of the line for the period it takes to crush Serbia and transfer AH forces back East. Then the AHs will take over more and free up German units for the West Front offensive Falkenhayn has planned. ITTL AH (read Conrad) is more aware the danger of the Russian steppe being an endless frontier to occupy and bog down in, thanks to having to deal with the longer supply lines early on, so he is more amenable to Falkenhayn's West Front initiative. He also understands the need to crush Serbia and needs it himself to placate the politicians and restless home front, which demands Serbia, the cause of the war, be dealt with.

Additionally the Entente invasion of the Galipoli peninsula, the pressure is on to open up supply lines to them. Furthermore Bulgaria, which has witnessed Russia's repeated defeats and Serbia's refusal to negotiate regarding Macedonia now is willing to fight for the Central Powers. Italy is starting to get restless and the victory over Serbia should be a good way to calm them down, as both Germany and AH agree. Turkey offers troops to the AH-Bulgarian invasion of Serbia too, which is all coordinated by Archduke Eugene, though it takes some negotiating over the winter to get the Bulgarians to agree. The plan is for simultaneous assaults all over Serbia's borders, which offers the possibility to trap their armies in a pocket in the center of the nation, something Putnik, the Serb commander fears, but with Belgrade in the north, he cannot, for political reasons, properly guard the Bulgarian frontier.

[DanF]

Thanks for at least considering the Polish question... Here is a quick rundown of the major players and dates:

Josef Pilsudski was commander of the Austrian Polish Legion and effectively worshiped by his men. He was the driving force in the creation of Poland OTL. His original plan was to have the Central Powers beat Russia, and then have the rest of the Entente beat the Central Powers. For him everything went according to plan. He was the Chief of State of Poland upon its Indenpendence. NOTE: Thought he was originally fighting for Austria he withdrew his support in 1917.

Archduke Charles Stephen was a Polish speaking Habsburg, who had two daughters married to the important Polish families of Radziill & Czartoryski. He also had a Ukrainian speaking son (Archduke Wilhelm) that at one time was pushed as a potential King of Ukriane. Also, his two son-in laws were Russian officers fighting for Russia during the war. As a Habsburg he could not take a crown unless the head of the family agreed something Kaiser Charles I did not agree to. Charles harbored his own ideas on Poland.

Act of November 5, 1916 was a joint document stating that Kaiser William II and Kaiser Franz Josef supported the creation of a Kingdom of Poland. It also essentially, made this Poland a puppet of the Central Powers.

Polish Wehrmache founded 10 April 1917 it was essentially a quasi-Polish army under German command. The whole thing fell apart in July during the Oath Crisis, when the Polish army was supposed to swear an Oath of Loyalty to Kaiser Wihelm II and not Poland or a Polish King.

Polish National Committee fromed in Paris in August 1917 to advocate for the Polish cause. They would gain recognition of Poland from the Entente and even form the Blue Army in June 1917. Interesting enought the commander of the Blue Army Jozef Haller was actually the former commander of the 2nd Brigade in the Austrian Polish Legions. After the Peace of Brest-Litovsk Polish forces (Polish Legion & Former Polish-Russian troops) were fighting in the Ukriane trying to expand the borders of the future state of Poland. This did not go over well with the Central Powers, so Jozef and many of his troops switched sides.

I hope this useful &/or helpful, and thanks for the consideration and update.

[wiking]

Thanks for at least considering the Polish question... Here is a quick rundown of the major players and dates:

Josef Pilsudski was commander of the Austrian Polish Legion and effectively worshiped by his men. He was the driving force in the creation of Poland OTL. His original plan was to have the Central Powers beat Russia, and then have the rest of the Entente beat the Central Powers. For him everything went according to plan. He was the Chief of State of Poland upon its Indenpendence. NOTE: Thought he was originally fighting for Austria he withdrew his support in 1917.

I was mostly aware of all this, but Pilsudski was actually just one of several leaders within the Polish legion; he just was more ambitious and successful, so history has taken more notice of him. The Russians also promised a united (ie with German and AH Polish lands) independent state within the Russian empire, so the Polish legion was actually shunned in Congress Poland OTL, which embittered and focused the men all the more. What I am lacking is intimate knowledge of the German-AH debate about creating Poland and what held them back for so long, as well as what their worries were/intentions toward such a state. We have a broad outline thanks to wikipedia, but there is much left to really write convincingly and deeply about the issue. I had the same problem with Franz Ferdinand for some time when trying figure out his intentions toward Empire upon his ascension to the throne. I'd like to know more about Charles Stephen too, though it seems the Poles were gearing up to marginalize him like the Finns did with their German monarch OTL.

At this point it seems that there was a number of problems foreseen by the creation of Poland, as once the cat was out of the bag Galicia would be seen as Polish by the inhabitants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Poland_%281916%E2%80%931918%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Legions_in_World_War_I

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Charles_Stephen_of_Austria

[DanF]

I was mostly aware of all this, but Pilsudski was actually just one of several leaders within the Polish legion; he just was more ambitious and successful, so history has taken more notice of him. The Russians also promised a united (ie with German and AH Polish lands) independent state within the Russian empire, so the Polish legion was actually shunned in Congress Poland OTL, which embittered and focused the men all the more. What I am lacking is intimate knowledge of the German-AH debate about creating Poland and what held them back for so long, as well as what their worries were/intentions toward such a state. We have a broad outline thanks to wikipedia, but there is much left to really write convincingly and deeply about the issue. I had the same problem with Franz Ferdinand for some time when trying figure out his intentions toward Empire upon his ascension to the throne. I'd like to know more about Charles Stephen too, though it seems the Poles were gearing up to marginalize him like the Finns did with their German monarch OTL.

At this point it seems that there was a number of problems foreseen by the creation of Poland, as once the cat was out of the bag Galicia would be seen as Polish by the inhabitants.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Poland_%281916%E2%80%931918%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Legions_in_World_War_I

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Charles_Stephen_of_Austria

Sorry, I did not provide any new knowledge. In regards to Galicia there were two schools of thought. One camp was in not giving up any land, as that is what the war was effectively about. This camp is effectively the Franz Joseph loyalist camp. However, there was a collection of Austrian Germans that hoped with a formation of a separate Polish state (ruled by a Habsburg) that they would take Galicia. This would effectively make Germans the dominate group in the Austrian half of the dual-monarchy, effectively mirroring the Hungarians are in the other half. This is from the book Last Years of Austria-Hungary.

In regards to why it took so long I remember reading that Wilhelm II felt maybe a German prince should rule instead of a Habsburg since Germany did all the work. The discussions about the army were drawn out, and the above mentioned how powerful would the monarch be (constitutional vs autocratic). Also, I believe Kaiser Charles I wanted to be crowned King of Poland and suck up a bunch of Polish land to use as a power base to offset the Hungarians. Sort of like a northern Trialism, but I doubt the believability of the last piece. Alas I do not have any good references for this paragraph as it is only from memory.

Again, I am sorry I could not be more helpful.

[wiking]

Sorry, I did not provide any new knowledge.

Again, I am sorry I could not be more helpful.
No need to be sorry, you've been plenty helpful.

[wiking]

Starting March 21st the forces had been arrayed against Serbia and the offensive was launched all over the front. After massive artillery preparation with the heaviest weapons in the AH arsenal, barges filled with infantry hit the target beaches across the Danube and overwhelmed Serbian forces, weakened by disease and suppressed by artillery and gun boats fire. Belgrade was subjected to special attention, which wrecked its defenses. AH forces swept over the Serbs guarding the north of their nation.

Further south a similar situation played out as the combined Bulgarian and Turkish armies shattered the weak detachments arrayed against them. Driving hard and fast into the rear of the Serb forces, their resistance crumbled, closing the escape routes of the forces to the north. Their flight south found them encountering Bulgarian divisions prepared for a fight, which pocketed a major part of these forces. Though dedicated elements managed to slip out of the trap, most of the Serb armies were surrounded and captured. The survivors were marched north instead of entrained. The many of the wounded fell out, dying on the side of roads, while the rest found themselves destined for concentration camps with the political classes of their nation. Bringing with them typhus and other diseases, the prison camps became death camps for many. Heaps of corpses would have to be burned to prevent the further spread of the disease, but the attrition rates of these prisoners remained high. In the face of such horrors the nationalistic Serb resistance died with these men.

The limited numbers of soldiers that reached the Albanian border still had much struggle ahead. Now in the month of May, these men didn't have to deal with the winter any longer, but the marauding tribesmen of the local population were not friendly to these small groups and hunted them during their flight. Perhaps 15,000 made it to the coast alive where they had to wait for evacuation by the British. They would eventually form a symbolic division after being supplemented by Serb emigrants for places like the US, serving in at Salonika. The Entente managed to land forces at Salonika, provoking a crisis in Greek leadership, which, after a coup involving the French, resulted in the Prime Minister deposing the king and allowing British and French troops to land. This small detachment was later joined by forces evacuated from Gallipoli, as the attempt to force the straights were wound down in the face of Bulgarian reinforcements and German munitions pouring in through the recently opened rail line to Istanbul.

The Russians also launched an offensive to help the Serbs by attacking near Kowel, finally succeeding in capturing the city and holding it in the face of AH counter attacks. Earlier attempts to take it in January and February had failed bloodily, but Ivanov's forces had learned from their mistakes and managed to take advantage of AH weakness to pull off a much needed victory. In March attacks were launched in Bessarbia to retake Chotin, but these failed in the face of superior leadership at all levels among the Pflanzer-Baltin group.

After the collapse of Serbia, Conrad decided rather than making peace with Montenegro as Falkenhayn had 'suggested' he would assert his nation's interests by conquering it. This further delayed the release of troops to the Eastern Front, pushing Falkenhayn's planned Western offensive back into June. This turned out to be fortuitous, as the French launched their another offensive in May in Artois.

With the release of forces from the Serbian front several changes were made in the East, including upgrading Pflanzer-Baltin's group to the 7th army and reinforcing it with mountain troops, reforming the 5th army under Tersztyanszky north of the AH 1st to free up German troops for the West, and upgrading army group Rohr along the Italian frontier to the 6th army. Archduke Eugene stayed in Serbia as the General Governor with Landsturm units to enforce AH rule. In Poland the Polish legion was withdrawn from the front to form an expanded Polish Defense Force for service at the front, but in the meantime all Pilsudski's military organizations united to begin forming a military organization near Warsaw and recruit from Congress Poland. This of course was done under the auspices of the Germans and AH, as neither trusted the man to work independently.

[Laryng]

I would like to again lobby for Charles Stephen as King of Poland. For no other reason then I would love to see how the Poles in France and the Poles in Russia react to the Central Powers creating a Kingdom of Poland. Though, I doubt this would happen I would love to see stories of Polish troops in mass crossing the trench line in the Western Front to the German side. Saying we are Poles and we are here to fight with you and for the Kingdom of Poland.
Not going to happen:
A-the soldiers in the West were from Blue Army formed by Endecja-which had strong following in Prussian Partition Poland, and Germans wouldn't give it to Poles back
B-KoP was to be a German puppet, and the experience of Polish population was very bad in regards to treatment by German soldiers(widescale plunder, executions, forced labour, destruction of Kalisz)
C-the Polish formations in the West and in Russia dwarfed the Austrian Polish Legions, throughout the war Poles supported overwhelmingly French and British side in the war, while accepting Russian role in their region(but not liking it), the Germans didn't fool the population with their empty promises
D-Russian government actually stated well before 1916 that it will unite all Polish partitions and promised autonomy(and before 1914, Poles in Russia had more rights and higher status than in Germany)
E-Germans demanded annexations from KoP-this would completely turn the population against them(not only Poles don't get Poznan, but also have to lose parts of Congress Poland)
F-once Galicia comes up the whole region will be up in flames-Germans will have to choose between Ukrainians and Poles(OTL they supported Ukrainians)-which will turn one of the sides against them.

[DanF]

Not going to happen

I am aware of the problems with the formation of Poland by the Central Powers OTL. However, in this TTL there are some changes that make it more likely, though I am under no illusions and know that it very unlikely to occur. I am going to address the problems you laid out as they apply to this timeline. Please do not be offended as that is not my intent to question what you are saying (which are all very valid & true arguements against), I am only trying defend my idea in a logical manner.

A. The blue Army was formed 1917 compared to the Polish Legions formed in 1914. In addition, over half of the Blue Armies manpower came from Austria-Hungary prisoners of war. The war in this timeline may not last until 1917, and even if it does there are a lot less Austria-Hungary prisoners of war to recruit from.

B. In this timeline most of Poland fell very fast, so the fighting that took place there OTL did not occur. Which is not to say the Germans are not going to do some looting, but it would be a lot less then OTL. In addition, OTL Austria-Hungary made a lot of mistakes early on which meant in many ways they were 2nd fiddle to Germany. In this timeline though they obviously are not as powerful as Germany they have considerable prestige and quite a few battlefield successes. As such, they will have a real say in the future make up of Europe in a Central Power victory and not just the scraps the Germans would of given them OTL.

C. Yes the formations did, but not until 1917. U.S. Polish support was more Entente, but so was U.S. public opinion. Russian Poles were pro-Entente. OTL Austria-Hungarian Poles were pro-Austria at the beginning when they thought they would win. German Polish support is debatable, since the Entente won it is very easy to look back and say they were Pro-Entente. However, many Poles did fight for Germany, and there were no mass uprising of Poles during the war. In this Timeline German and Austrian Polish support would be higher simply because they are winning. U.S. Polish support would be a more tricky subject in this timeline.

D. Yes, Grand Duke Nicolas proclamation did state that, but it’s believably was questioned by many Russian Polish leaders. This is why Roman Dmowski left for Paris in 1915, to lobby directly for an independent Poland as he did not feel Russia would follow through with the Proclamation. Russian Poles did have more rights than Germany, but a lot less then Austrian Poles. The Austrian half of Austria-Hungary had universal male suffrage, and the Polish Conservative block was part of almost every ruling coalition since 1867. Jozef Pilsudski was shocked when he invaded that the Poles did not revolt immediately. This is because as you stated the Poles knew they had it better than the German Poles, and since 1905 things had gotten a lot better for them.

E. 100% agree this is what will cause the most problems. The land claims of Germany and Austria-Hungary vs the land claims of a Central Powers backed Poland.

F. A Ruthene revolt is probably not very likely, as the main concern will be does Galicia go to Poland or stay with Austria-Hungary. A Polish revolt if it stays with Austria-Hungary is very likely. The Ukrainian support OTL was because of food, a lot of the food pressure would be mitigated in this timeline as Galicia never fell, and most of Poland was conquered before their fields were destroyed. However, if the war still run into 1918 as it did OTL then the food issue may come to the front, and the Ruthene support vs Polish support situation could arise.

With all of the above said, I would say the odds of a Kingdom of Poland in this timeline is easily less than 50% and most likely less than 25%.

[Tom_B]

Poland is thorny problem in all CP victory TL's.

[wiking]

Poland is thorny problem in all CP victory TL's.

One option proposed for Serbia that I think would work best (though still not well) would be to have Poland with Galicia be an associate kingdom like Bavaria was in the German empire. Conrad, who liked to dabble in politics, suggested that Serbia take this form in the Empire so that trialism wouldn't have to be dealt with. Adding another crown was wisely seen to be more trouble than its worth, as the ethnic group so favored would just leverage their power like the Hungarians and make governance impossible. Also the Hungarians opposed such as solution because it diluted their power; unless a civil war is desired, its not the way to go.

ITTL Conrad has greater gravitas in AH and coalition politics, so may well propose this here and receive greater attention as a result. Obviously the Germans will still have their designs on Poland, but with Falkenhayn somewhat indebted to Conrad after the early go at Serbia plus the greater role on the Eastern Front that makes his West Front offensive possible, he may well have to use his influence with Kaiser Wilhelm to give Conrad's initiative a fair shake. AH here will have operated according to their ally's wishes for most of the war, as from the very beginning they drew off the Russians and gave Germany a chance to knock out France. It would be time for some pay back. Granted of course that Germany is helping supply AH and provide training personnel, but the wishes of AH will count for much more, especially as German troops aren't needed at the front to prop her up.

As a bit of an aside, the destruction of Kalisz doesn't happen ITTL due to most all of the fighting for Poland occurring East of the Vistula. Warsaw only sees destruction from the retreating Russians demolishing important structures to deny the Central Powers access to them (bridges, arsenals, etc.). So the Russian Poles have only witnessed limited fighting on their territory and seen the Russians lose early and big. Much like the Czech, accommodation probably will be seen as the best option to achieve their goals.

[DanF]

Well, I hope I have not completely bored or frustrated you all with my “Polish Idea.” If I have I apologize! The following is a summation of a few different thoughts I have had on an Eastern and Balkan Front war goals. Though, I am confident each of these are mostly believable individually, as a whole this “Grand Compromise” is probably politically unviable and might not be considered for the time period in question. The following should be considered as a “war goals” compromise and not a true end-state with that said here is my idea:

Germany: Will Gain Duchy of Samogitia, Duchy of Courland & Semigallia, and a Central/Eastern Europe trade zone with Austria-Hungary and any other allied state. Germany gains war repartitions from Russia.
Optional: Finland Puppet with German King, Livonia Puppet with German Prince, Georgia Puppet with a German backed King, and Ukrainian Puppet with a German or Austria-Hungary backed King.
Reasoning: Germany does not appear to gain a lot of land, but they gain a huge economic zone. Also, they would gain a big prestige advantage (which they could use on the Western Front negotiations) of having the moral high ground. Since this was obviously not a war of conquest. I am working from the opinion that Brest-Litovsk was considered an anomaly when it first happened. However, Germany has enough options that they could give Russia a very harsh treaty. Puppet could refer to anything from direct control to minimal control.

Austria-Hungary: Will gain Montenegro and the Principality of Serbia (not Kosovo or Macedonia) combined into a new Military Frontier and run as a colony. German will be official language of the Military Frontier and German settlement will be encouraged with an agreement with Germany. Austria-Hungary will give up Krakow and the Kingdom of Galicia & Lodomeria to the newly formed Kingdom of Poland. Austria-Hungary gains war repartitions from Russia.
Reasoning: Losing Galicia and Lodomeria will make the Empire smaller. Annexing Serbia and Montenegro will make up for some of that loss of land. In addition, the population loss of Serbia at that time with the war and disease is huge (OTL they lost ¼ of their population), so it is effectively under populated. This should make colonization a very possible option. The preceding land loss will also be offset a little bit by the Habsburg prestige gained by being named the Kings of Poland. Last, if Hungary complains about this there are two options to use. Option one, give Bosnia to Hungary to run as a Hungarian colony, which Hungary did have a lot of Historical claim to Bosnia. Option two, ignore them and/or use force to control Hungary this may even be used to breakup the compromise and return to a more centralized government. Lastly, with the loss of Galicia and a little bit of Gerrymandering the German block could effectively control the Austrian parliament in their half of the dual-monarchy.

Bulgaria: They gain Macedonia and a few territory adjustments from the Principality of Serbia.

Ottoman Empire: From the Russians they would gain a return to the 1877 border. They could possibly gain some war repartitions from Russia as well.
Optional: Sinking of the Black Sea fleet, though this probably will cause more hassle then it is worth asking for.

Albania: They gain Kosovo and can continue their slow slide to being an Austrian-Hungary vassal/puppet. They are getting Kosovo to give the appearance of a reward, and to legitimately remove a sizable Serb population (it was in the 1960s when most of the Serb population left Kosovo) from the lands Austria-Hungary will annex.

Romania: If they jump into the war on the Central Powers side they would gain Bessarabia. If not then they just gain increased trade with the Central Powers.

Poland: This country will be formed from the Congress of Poland with an Eastern border to match Poland’s Historical border (left vague on purpose). However, the Habsburg territories of Krakow and Galicia & Lodomeria will granted to Poland upon their acceptance of a Habsburg King. There will be some treaty verbiage about the preceding mentioned territories being Habsburg possessions and reverting to Habsburg control if Poland were to have a non-Habsburg ruler. Lastly, the constitution of Poland will be modeled after the constitution of Prussia.
Reasoning: Granting land to Poland from Austria-Hungary is designed in a way to give the appearance that it is Habsburg land and is coming with the Habsburg King. The constitution being modeled after Prussia is because is gives the Habsburg King some actual powers, and it will favor the aristocratic Polish land owners, who were the Polish representatives from Galicia who would help write this treaty. Also, since the constitution is modeled after the Prussian Constitution who better than to provide military, political, and economic “assistance” than the Germans. Poland does not gain any German lands like Warmia, Posen, Courland, or Samogitia, but since they did get a viable country which is better then a promise of autonomy they are ahead. Lastly, leaving the Eastern border undefined is designed to convince Poland to focus their attention on getting more land from there. Plus it gives the Central Powers negotiating room with Russia.

Update: Sorry, I did not see Tom_B and Wiking had posted. Wiking, the above is just a summary of my ideas so feel free to ignore at your leisure, and thanks for your consideration and a great timeline.

[Laryng]

he blue Army was formed 1917 compared to the Polish Legions formed in 1914. In addition, over half of the Blue Armies manpower came from Austria-Hungary prisoners of war.
The Polish Beyonne Legion in France and Pulawy Legion in Russia were formed in 1914 already. On 14th August 1914 you have tsar's declaration of Polish-Russian alliance against old German enemies and promise to unite all Polish Partitions under his leadership, there are also semi-official declarations of establishing Polish statehood from lesser Russian officials(among others foreign minister Sazonov who included Upper Silesia in his plans, and I believe Russian admiral in charge of Baltic Navy also declared to Polish troops that Poland will be restored).

German Polish support is debatable, since the Entente won it is very easy to look back and say they were Pro-Entente. They were pro-Entente, since before the war there was significant opression of Poles in that state-unlike somewhat more freedom in Austria and concessions in Russian Empire. So they had no real reason to support German side, and actually the most dominant political party in Prussian Partition was endecja.
However, many Poles did fight for Germany, and there were no mass uprising of Poles during the war.
There were several uprisings:in Poznan and in Upper Silesia, the one in Poznan was planned already during war. There were no uprisings anywhere for that matter in Polish territories during the war-that would be a suicide considering the military strenght of three powers involved.

The Ukrainian support OTL was because of food,
Galicia was the center of Ukrainian nationalism-partly due to Habsburgs trying to counterbalance Polish influence in AH and giving support to Ukrainians a few years before WW1 happened. In OTL Austria was glad to get rid of Galicia inhabited by both parties that wanted to abandon AH in exchange for Romania which was to become third Kingdom in AH to counterbalance Slavic influence.
Also Hungarians opposed to include KoP as third kingdom in AH, so that will not happen.

As a bit of an aside, the destruction of Kalisz doesn't happen ITTL due to most all of the fighting for Poland occurring East of the Vistula
The looting, plunder and forced labour will still happen turning the population against the occupiers. Also unless AH gains whole Congress Poland as its occupation zone, Germans will be in charge in much of the territory and the memoirs of their occupation speak of very strong arrogance and brutal treatment of local Polish population-also they will likely try to turn Lithuanians, Jews, Poles and Ukrainians against each other to secure their dominance(divide and conquer and so on).

Since this is the Age of Nationalism-flash points like Galicia, Vilnius, Poznan won't be solved with diplomacy but will require force and result in flaming outraged from the side that will feel cheated.

[Tom_B]

One option proposed for Serbia that I think would work best (though still not well) would be to have Poland with Galicia be an associate kingdom like Bavaria was in the German empire. Conrad, who liked to dabble in politics, suggested that Serbia take this form in the Empire so that trialism wouldn't have to be dealt with. Adding another crown was wisely seen to be more trouble than its worth, as the ethnic group so favored would just leverage their power like the Hungarians and make governance impossible. Also the Hungarians opposed such as solution because it diluted their power; unless a civil war is desired, its not the way to go.



I am a bit confused by this as you switch between talking about Serbia and Poland. As far as I've been able to discern there were two different ideas floated for trialism---one with a Polish third kingdom and the other with a "southern Slav" third kingdom. Actually I don't see any appreciable annexation of Serbia by AH in any TL. A long occupation definitely but not annexation exception Macedonia which goes to the Bulgarians. Montenegro will lose its coastal strip to AH though.

[wiking]

I am a bit confused by this as you switch between talking about Serbia and Poland. As far as I've been able to discern there were two different ideas floated for trialism---one with a Polish third kingdom and the other with a "southern Slav" third kingdom. Actually I don't see any appreciable annexation of Serbia by AH in any TL. A long occupation definitely but not annexation exception Macedonia which goes to the Bulgarians. Montenegro will lose its coastal strip to AH though.

Pardon my ambiguity. I meant that Conrad suggested that OTL Serbia end up being an associated kingdom like Bavaria was in Germany: it paid some dues, but maintained independence in internal matters with its own king; otherwise it had no separate foreign policy, its military was subordinate to Prussia, and there was a customs union.

I am suggesting something similar for Poland: all of the above, plus Galicia, probably East and West, are the personal property of the Habsburg monarch in union with Congress Poland only through his family's reign. Obviously the Galician Poles would be given a major role in Habsburg Poland, which would be a part of the Empire only nominally, separate in the sense that it does not participate in the Dual Monarchy's politics or budget negotiations, receiving nothing from AH. It would really be a vassal to AH. This is what I also see happening to the Serbs after the war.

Is this even plausible?

[DanF]

Pardon my ambiguity. I meant that Conrad suggested that OTL Serbia end up being an associated kingdom like Bavaria was in Germany: it paid some dues, but maintained independence in internal matters with its own king; otherwise it had no separate foreign policy, its military was subordinate to Prussia, and there was a customs union.

I am suggesting something similar for Poland: all of the above, plus Galicia, probably East and West, are the personal property of the Habsburg monarch in union with Congress Poland only through his family's reign. Obviously the Galician Poles would be given a major role in Habsburg Poland, which would be a part of the Empire only nominally, separate in the sense that it does not participate in the Dual Monarchy's politics or budget negotiations, receiving nothing from AH. It would really be a vassal to AH. This is what I also see happening to the Serbs after the war.

Is this even plausible?

I think it sounds good, but what kind of numbers are we talking. How big would Polands population be? There were 9-10 Million in Galicia alone. It is tough to have a Vassal with a population 50% or greater than the mother country. Bavaria had about 5 million (If my memory is good) compared to I think 60 Million total in Germany.

Tom_B why would Austria-Hungary taking Serbia be unrealistic? If they leave them independant the problem could just come back x amount of years later. It was just in early 1900s Austria-Hungary saw Serbia go from being their best friend to their worst enemy in the region.

[DanF]

The Polish Beyonne Legion in France and Pulawy Legion in Russia were formed in 1914 already. On 14th August 1914 you have tsar's declaration of Polish-Russian alliance.

The Beyonne Legion was part of the French Foreign Legion. That is more coincidence, due to French historical support of the Poles, than actual design.

The Pulaway Legion was formed in response to the Austrian Polish Legion, which is why it was not fully organized until 1915.

Proclamation of August 15, 1914 is the Grand Duke Nicholas's proclamation I referred to above. It sounded really great, but when the Polish leaders pressed for specifics and firm commitments they got nothing. This is why Roman left in 1915 as I said above. In my opinion the only reason Poland existed OTL is because of the Russian civil war. If the Tsar or even a strong democracy had ruled Russia there never would of been a Poland.


There were several uprisings in Poznan and in Upper Silesia, the one in Poznan was planned already during war.

Do have any names? I can not find any reference in my books or with Google of any mass uprising. What kind of numbers are we talking a few thousand, tens of thousand, a hundred thousand or more?


Galicia was the center of Ukrainian nationalism-partly due to Habsburgs trying to counterbalance Polish influence in AH and giving support to Ukrainians a few years before WW1 happened. In OTL Austria was glad to get rid of Galicia inhabited by both parties that wanted to abandon AH in exchange for Romania which was to become third Kingdom in AH to counterbalance Slavic influence.
Also Hungarians opposed to include KoP as third kingdom in AH, so that will not happen..

100% agree about Galicia and Ukrainian nationalism. However, the Ukrainians had been a lot less rebellious against the Habsburg during their time within the Empire. Compared to the Poles who had the supermajority of the Political power in Galicia, and had a history of rising up. What I said above is based on the perceived strength of each faction. The Ukrainians were mostly poor rural workers with only a few rifle companies in the army. The Poles had a lot of rich aristocrats, and a sizeable number of forces in both the regular army and the Polish Legions. I however, will concede I could be wrong on the strength of a Ukrainian revolt.

I never heard of a Romanian option, do you have any links or a source(s) you can send me? That sounds interesting.

In regards to Hungary’s dislike, I think that was the intent of the political leaders in Vienna regarding a third kingdom. As Wiking discussed earlier in the thread. The Hungarian leaders were the aristocratic elite that had way more power then they should of. However, their views were not indicative of all Hungarian views. So, if push came to shove it is questionable if Hungary would of started a civil war over a third kingdom. If they did they probably would of lost as it is doubtable even a majority of the Hungarian troops would side with a bunch of aristocrats over their King (especially if Franz Joseph were alive still).


The looting, plunder and forced labor will still happen turning the population against the occupiers. Also unless AH gains whole Congress Poland as its occupation zone, Germans will be in charge in much of the territory and the memoirs of their occupation speak of very strong arrogance and brutal treatment of local Polish population-also they will likely try to turn Lithuanians, Jews, Poles and Ukrainians against each other to secure their dominance(divide and conquer and so on)..

How much of such behavior is cultural vs reacting to the situation on the ground during OTL. A large portion of time in this timeline the German forces spent quickly moving across Poland. So, instead of dealing with a warzone and frontline troops, the Poles would be dealing with reserve and garrison forces in this timeline.

A perfect example of this is when I was in the military I was in a Counterintel unit. How my unit dealt with a local populous, was very different then how my friend in an Armored Cavalry Regiment interacted with the locals.


Since this is the Age of Nationalism-flash points like Galicia, Vilnius, Poznan won't be solved with diplomacy but will require force and result in flaming outraged from the side that will feel cheated.

Agreed, there will be no easy answer to any nationalism questions. However, there will obviously be vastly different results depending upon the outcome of the war in this timeline compared to OTL. In Poland’s case OTL is probably the best situation they could of gotten. Russia fell into a civil war, and the Central Powers lost. Any change to that dynamic means Poland will have to get less, and most likely nothing at all.

[lukedalton]

Just my two cents

I think that with AH more strong and succesfull, well Italy will probably take the bribe...offert made by Germany and AH to stay neutral, i mean the province of Trent and Albania (where italy already have an occupation force in 1914) as a protectorate plus some concession to the italian speaking minority. In OTL the current prime minister was ready to accept and leave Italy out of the war, but was dismissed by the king with manouvres by the interventist, here with Vienna succesfull there are more incentive to stay neutral...or join the fray on the Central Power side

[Tom_B]

Pardon my ambiguity. I meant that Conrad suggested that OTL Serbia end up being an associated kingdom like Bavaria was in Germany: it paid some dues, but maintained independence in internal matters with its own king; otherwise it had no separate foreign policy, its military was subordinate to Prussia, and there was a customs union.

I am suggesting something similar for Poland: all of the above, plus Galicia, probably East and West, are the personal property of the Habsburg monarch in union with Congress Poland only through his family's reign. Obviously the Galician Poles would be given a major role in Habsburg Poland, which would be a part of the Empire only nominally, separate in the sense that it does not participate in the Dual Monarchy's politics or budget negotiations, receiving nothing from AH. It would really be a vassal to AH. This is what I also see happening to the Serbs after the war.

Is this even plausible?

Bavaria was represented in the Reichstag so you are going to have Serbs represented in what legislature? At a first glance I really don't see this working for Serbia except in the short term. That is not to say the Hapsburgs wouldn't try.

The odds are somewhat better in Poland short and intermediate term BUT I think a takeover by either Pilsudski or someone similar at some point is very probable.

I have a rough idea of how Operation Unicorn ends and there the almost immediate postwar political problems in AH are the basis for the follow on project Ramshackle Empire.

[Valdemar II]

I think it sounds good, but what kind of numbers are we talking. How big would Polands population be? There were 9-10 Million in Galicia alone. It is tough to have a Vassal with a population 50% or greater than the mother country. Bavaria had about 5 million (If my memory is good) compared to I think 60 Million total in Germany.


The former Congress Poland had 11 million in 1916. If the CPs keep it from becoming much bigger, it will have around the same population as Hungary.

A interesting aspect of what happens Bukovina, it had not been part of Poland (it was bought from Moldovia in the late 18th century), it's a important transport hub, important for the defence of Hungary and was 20% was Germans. I personal Austria are going to keep it as Cisleithanian exclave.


Tom_B why would Austria-Hungary taking Serbia be unrealistic? If they leave them independant the problem could just come back x amount of years later. It was just in early 1900s Austria-Hungary saw Serbia go from being their best friend to their worst enemy in the region.

I found it a interesting idea, through I doubt they will limit settlement to Germans, likely they will let anyonwe interested in settle there move there. There are several reason for that, one it was how the Austrians usual did, other groups settling there would likely stay loyal to the empire and German are likely to be lingua franca.

[Laryng]

The former Congress Poland had 11 million in 1916. If the CPs keep it from becoming much bigger, it will have around the same population as Hungary. In 1910 general population figures:
*11.5mln Congress Poland
*8.5mln Galicia
*4mln Prussian Partition

Doesn't include Upper Silesia and rest of Russian Partition where Poles also lived.

[DanF]

In 1910 general population figures:
*11.5mln Congress Poland
*8.5mln Galicia
*4mln Prussian Partition

Doesn't include Upper Silesia and rest of Russian Partition where Poles also lived.

Well 20 Million would work as a third kingdom, I am assuming the Prussian parts would stay with Germany. The Poles would be even more unified than the Hungarians as a larger percentage of the above numbers are actual Poles and not minorities, this most likely will cause even more headaches. The only advantage of a third Kingdom is the Poles could effectively run the new Triple Monarchy if they play their cards right since they would be largest single Ethnic block. So, they would most likely be loyal to the Triple Monarchy only since they would be on top. I am not sure how well the Austrian Germans, or even the Hungarians would take that.

20 Million as a Vassal would be tough to pull off for Germany with their 60 million, but within the realm of possible. A not ethnically united Austria-Hungary probably could not do it.

[Valdemar II]

Well 20 Million would work as a third kingdom, I am assuming the Prussian parts would stay with Germany. The Poles would be even more unified than the Hungarians as a larger percentage of the above numbers are actual Poles and not minorities, this most likely will cause even more headaches. The only advantage of a third Kingdom is the Poles could effectively run the new Triple Monarchy if they play their cards right since they would be largest single Ethnic block. So, they would most likely be loyal to the Triple Monarchy only since they would be on top. I am not sure how well the Austrian Germans, or even the Hungarians would take that.

20 Million as a Vassal would be tough to pull off for Germany with their 60 million, but within the realm of possible. A not ethnically united Austria-Hungary probably could not do it.

Around 5-6 millions aren't Polish, so there would only be 14-15 million Poles, this still make them the biggest ethnicity but only barely. Of course being the biggest would mean little, when they are outside Cisleithania. Hungary dominated not through as much numbers, as in the elite of the Transleithia was Magyar. and Poland would here just be another Hungary, a agrarian economy being dominated by a small noble elite.

Economical Poland are going to be interesting, it's going to much more focused on export to Germany than to the rest of the empire. Poland will likely import most of its needed proccesed products from Bohemia and to lesser degree Silesia. This are going to be intersting, we will likely see even more Poles migrate to Silesia and Bohemia.

[wiking]

I think we can all agree that the 'Polish Question' won't be addressed until after the war, as OTL is was only brought up out of desperation and to score political points. Here Germany won't be 'chained to a corpse' and won't need a game changer like the OTL Kingdom of Poland to try and secure the East a bit more. I think ITTL after the war Kaiser Karl would be foolish enough to try for a third crown in Poland, which will bring up major issues with the Hungarians and probably the Poles as well, as I don't expect Pilsudski to accept Poland being a part of the Empire, rather than an independent state. I'm sure the Galician Poles would be ecstatic at the new setup, as they would have ridiculous amounts of power in a situation they are familiar with. I'd be interested to see if the Poles would work with the Austrians to squeeze out the Hungarians and suppress the Czechs.

Please keep discussing this issue, because it will be huge in its consequences post war.

[Valdemar II]

I think we can all agree that the 'Polish Question' won't be addressed until after the war, as OTL is was only brought up out of desperation and to score political points. Here Germany won't be 'chained to a corpse' and won't need a game changer like the OTL Kingdom of Poland to try and secure the East a bit more. I think ITTL after the war Kaiser Karl would be foolish enough to try for a third crown in Poland, which will bring up major issues with the Hungarians and probably the Poles as well, as I don't expect Pilsudski to accept Poland being a part of the Empire, rather than an independent state. I'm sure the Galician Poles would be ecstatic at the new setup, as they would have ridiculous amounts of power in a situation they are familiar with. I'd be interested to see if the Poles would work with the Austrians to squeeze out the Hungarians and suppress the Czechs.

Please keep discussing this issue, because it will be huge in its consequences post war.


I'm not sure they would be needed, Germans would make up between 48-51% of the population of Cisleithia without Galicia. The Germans don't need anybody more to keep the show running. Together with the growth of Vienna (because it's the capital) and the Sudetenland (because of its industry), we would likely see the German precent grow over the next decades, at least in Sudetenland case until Austria begin to move into the tertiary sector, here we will likely see it transformed into the Empire's rust belt.

[Laryng]

For plans to annex Romania in exchange for Galicia see IN THE WORLD WAR BY COUNT OTTOKAR CZERNIN http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18160/18160-h/18160-h.htm and Poland would here just be another Hungary, a agrarian economy being dominated by a small noble elite Nobility played no role in Congress Poland, the area was dominated by Endecja and Polish Socialists, politically nobles and landlords were eradicated by Russia and those who had some influence were mostly attached to endecja. By large the population of Congress Poland would not allow or accept nobilities rule-one of numerous problems for Central Powers plans to create a puppet monarchy there. Also it wasn't agrarian-by WW1 it was one of the most industralised provinces of Russian Empire-there were many workers in industries of Warsaw, textile centre in Lodz and coal area in Zaglebie Dabrowskie. Both Lodz and Zaglebie Dabrowskie were centers of national socialist/workers movement as seen in Revolution of 1905: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_in_the_Kingdom_of_Poland_%281905%E2%80% 931907%29 So in short the character of Congress Poland was quite different than mostly impoverished Galicia where old feudal relations were kept by Habsburgs. Another problem with any construction of Polish state would be that the population was pro-Entente and anti-German(even before the war, due to massive repressions against Poles in that state). The political factions were dominated either by socialists or Endecja-both hostile to concept of German puppet monarchy, and in case of Endecja supportive of panslavism. If KoP would be Third Kingdom(extremely unlikely) they would give support to Czechs(also supportive of panslavism at that time)-something that would mean end of German dominance in AH. Of course it would be ironic if that would happen and during post-war ear AH would eventually turn to Entente side and start opposing Germany. In any case the relation of KoP population to German Empire won't be friendly-due to Prussian Partition still being held and likely opression of Poles there, as well as the fact that German supported puppet states will take areas claimed by Poles(Vilnius, Ukrainian territories).

[DanF]

I admit defeat on Poland lobbying. Looks like it would be a big issue post war, but obviously not going to get solved during the war. Thanks for the great discussion everyone. Good luck Wiking in driving this thread forward after our almost two page Polish diversion, sorry about that.

Laryng thanks for the link.

[wiking]

With the Serbian Front wrapped up, Germany was finally free to launch its offensive in the West. The French attack at Artois was winding down with great loss of life for them, while the Germans managed to hold the line with acceptable casualties. In the East though battle had been picking up around Kowel, as the Russians were grinding further beyond the city to push the rail lines out of artillery range. Its opening eased Russian supply significantly. Obviously this was unacceptable to AOK, but the AH counter attacks had been held off by the Russians. Casualties were mounting for both side, so the battle had petered out by June. The release of AH artillery and the expansion of munition production finally allowed they to launch a proper counteroffensive, but first the Italian situation needed to be cleared up before resources could allocated.

The Italians had begun making noise about concessions in the Italian majority areas of the country to remain neutral. AH intelligence services had gauged the Italian populace for war fever, but the common man did not seem to be very belligerent. The AH victories made war seem irresponsible to the people that would have to fight it, but the ruling class had other ideas. The Entente was bribing anyone they could to drum up war support, but the population needed to be mobilized to avoid a revolution if war was declared. This had failed despite all the calls of redeeming AH Italians by famous poets and intellectuals, who couldn't move a people that seemed to understand better than they that this war would not be easy nor cheap. Even the politicians were not entirely behind the movement and could mount a strong challenge to the war party. The King was not willing to dismiss the prime minister over the issue for fear of socialist revolution. Ultimately the government decided on a policy of bluffing to exact concessions, resolving to be satisfied with whatever they could get. Starting in February the diplomats pushed the Italian agenda, but couldn't get far, even with Germany 'suggesting' AH comply.

As this dance dragged out the Italian position became were with AH victories. The fall of Serbia was a death blow for hopes of territorial gains, and ultimately meant that language and cultural concessions of minorities were given, hardly significant gains. However, the AHs were desperately in need of trade, so ultimately they managed to bargain away Albania for Italian goods. Italy would finally get the compensation in the Balkans that they had by treaty been entitled. With its gain the war mongers lost their luster and faded into the background. In their place flowed the industrialists and farmers that stood to get rich off AH and German trade. The French and British were obviously not happy with the circumstances and threatened to cut off Italian coal, but with a treaty signed allowing for more Italian labor to migrate to France to work the fields and factories (some coerced, most not), the protests quieted. These Italian men would make much more abroad than at home, sending remittances back to their families and stimulating the local economy, and get to enjoy the company of French women whose men were off in the war. Italy soon realized that peace was much more profitable than war.

In Russia the AHs were free to concentrate large numbers of troops now that they could focus on one front, using much of their shiny new modern artillery pieces. With the restriction in the number of models munition production could be streamlined much more than in 1914, when the army had 49 different models. Now, even though a larger number of models were being used, thanks to the capture of large Russian stocks, production for the AH models was finally meeting demand (by 1915 standards that is). This weight was felt near Kowel when the full resources of AH were poured into an offensive to recapture the critical city. Aiding their operation was the Russian offensive in the north against the Germans, as they were attacking in the West and the Russians were supporting their French ally. Already fearing the Germans the most and trying to take advantage of their temporary weakness, the Russians had reserved most of their shell production and reserves for the Nieman offensive. This left Kowel significantly weaker than otherwise. Additionally the Russians tried to push simultaneously on the Sereth and in Bessarbia to impress Romania into joining the war while also pinning down AH reserves. These attacks were parried easily thanks to incompetent Russian planning and execution.

AH reserves, bolstered by new formations and Serbia Front reinforcements, were ready for their own attack. It was to aid the Germans and fulfill AH goals on their front. The swampy ground restricted the fields of advance, which would allow the Russians to maximize their manpower as well as defend in depth, but having only two weeks before halted their offensive, they had yet to dig in completely. Furthermore the ground water prevented much digging into the ground, instead requiring sand bags and concrete to build a line, which the Russians had taken advantage of for their own offensive. Now it was the AH turn. Possessing new Skoda mortars, finally in production again, plus super heavy fortress weapons made into railway guns, the AHs had tremendous firepower by 1915 standards. Able to focus on the recent Russian construction, not yet ready to resist a major assault, the heavy guns demolished everything standing in their way. The Germans had been assisting in training up AH soldiers in all fields and now this expertise was paying off. Furthermore the recent levies had seen large numbers of middle class and profession young men with university educations flocking to the technical branches to avoid more dangerous service, which further elevated the quality of AH artillery. Using the battering ram approach pioneered in the West by men like von Mudra and in the East like Bruchmüller and the AH general Auffenberg, an artillery man himself, whose army it was attacking Kowel. The heavy shells plowed the way forward, despite tearing up the ground, allowing the infantry to round up the stunned Russian survivors.

The prodigious amounts of shell used stunned even the Russians, who had not been lavished with the same amounts on the Southwest Front. It resulted in the recapture of Kowel after the chewing up of Russian forces, though AH infantry still suffered. However, shell stocks were dangerously low after the offensive, what with the battles in East Galicia running at the same time. Had the Russians been in a position to follow up, they might had made significant gains against the AHs, but Ivanov was restricted in all manners and could not muster enough to reply. For now the situation was settled with AH having regained its honor, striking a blow against the Russians strong enough to limit their attacks on the Germans, and innovated new tactics to be incorporated in future attacks, once of course production could be increased.

Romania was now trading eagerly with the Central Powers, having limited its trade with Russia. Though they were to remain neutral, they still had profits awaiting them. The Ottomans were able to trade with the Romanians thanks to the government allowing Ottoman ships to fly the Romanian flag and dock in their ports. For now the Balkans were locked up, even with Entente forces languishing at Salonika, having been defeated by Bulgarian defenses. The events in the West would be the focus of the world now, as ultimately the war would be decided in France.

[lukedalton]

Really nice update, just a consideration, i suggest to give italy even the province of Trent as in OTL proposal for appease the irredentist...and becouse in OTL Vienna want extract money for that, yep is not free we must pay for that and the AH empire need money in time of war, and the little line in the contract say that the new border are very defensible for the Austrian

[Keb]

Really nice update, just a consideration, i suggest to give italy even the province of Trent as in OTL proposal for appease the irredentist...and becouse in OTL Vienna want extract money for that, yep is not free we must pay for that and the AH empire need money in time of war, and the little line in the contract say that the new border are very defensible for the Austrian

Ah, no ... technically, A-H promised Italy Trento and Gorizia if it joined the war on the CP side. The caveat here being that the areas wouldn't be transferred immediately, but only after the war.

The intention being, of course, to cheat Italy out of the territory once the war ended. A-H simply refuses to honour it's promise and leaves Italy holding the bag.

It was the only way Germany could get Vienna to even consider offering it to Italy. After all, Italy was a traditional enemy of the Austrians. They never had any intention of giving the territory ... and the Italians knew it.

[lukedalton]

Ah, no ... technically, A-H promised Italy Trento and Gorizia if it joined the war on the CP side. The caveat here being that the areas wouldn't be transferred immediately, but only after the war.

The intention being, of course, to cheat Italy out of the territory once the war ended. A-H simply refuses to honour it's promise and leaves Italy holding the bag.

It was the only way Germany could get Vienna to even consider offering it to Italy. After all, Italy was a traditional enemy of the Austrians. They never had any intention of giving the territory ... and the Italians knew it.

The German ambassador with a lot of pressure and giving to Rome the assurance that Berlin will made the treaty stick, was able to made Vienna promise to give the province of Trent and maybe some adjustament on the Venezia-Giulia border, but Gorizia was out of question for economic and prestige reason.
But there was a catch, Roma for take Trent must paid some amount of money for the 'development' expense of the Empire for the region and the border was one very defensible by the Austro-Hungarian...all that plus Albania was what the Central Power wil ready to give in OTL for Italy neutrality...on favorable term of the Empire naturally, and you are right all the territory transfer will be made after the war.
The prime minister of the time was ready to accept that, because he know that the adventure will be very expensive in blood and money but was deposed and an interventist took his place and voilat an entire generation wasted and a debt paid only in the 70's.
Taking this bribe in the long term is the better thing to do.

[wiking]

Really nice update, just a consideration, i suggest to give italy even the province of Trent as in OTL proposal for appease the irredentist...and becouse in OTL Vienna want extract money for that, yep is not free we must pay for that and the AH empire need money in time of war, and the little line in the contract say that the new border are very defensible for the Austrian

It can't happen if the AHs have any other option. Giving up any part of the empire to an outside power under pressure would destabilize the delicate balance of ethnic tensions. What happens to the Romanians, Serbs, Poles, Ukranians, etc. if the Italians are let go? Even if it is just a 'promise' (;)) the news will create major problems that can't be borne for inconsequential gain. The only reason the AHs agreed to it was their repeated defeats in the field, massive German pressure, and the near certainty that Italy was entering the war.

[Tom_B]

It can't happen if the AHs have any other option. Giving up any part of the empire to an outside power under pressure would destabilize the delicate balance of ethnic tensions. What happens to the Romanians, Serbs, Poles, Ukranians, etc. if the Italians are let go? Even if it is just a 'promise' (;)) the news will create major problems that can't be borne for inconsequential gain. The only reason the AHs agreed to it was their repeated defeats in the field, massive German pressure, and the near certainty that Italy was entering the war.

I completely agree with that.

If you get Giolitti to replace Salandra then a neutral Italy willing to trade freely with AH gets pretty easy. Contrary to the usual cliche that all Italian politicians hated Austria Giolitti seemed to like them somewhat.

Haven't been able to follow everything in detail. Are the Russians holding on to their fortress at Brest-Litovsk? If yes then that is Conrad's painfully obvious next primary objective (though he may pursue secondary objectives as well).

A minor complaint. Bruchmüller is not well known in 1915.

[wiking]

Haven't been able to follow everything in detail. Are the Russians holding on to their fortress at Brest-Litovsk? If yes then that is Conrad's painfully obvious next primary objective (though he may pursue secondary objectives as well).

A minor complaint. Bruchmüller is not well known in 1915.

Yes, Brest-Litovsk is still holding out over the Bug.

As to Bruchmüller, my understanding is that while he wasn't really known outside the Eastern Front and even then in just the 8th army, von Mudra, who I also mentioned, wasn't really all that widely known either. I may be wrong on that last bit, but I was highlighting that artillery tactics and operational procedures were developing on both fronts independently.

When I had to think up famous AH artillerists, I hit a wall. Auffenberg was the only relatively big name that I knew that would be around here, and his reputation was derived for starting the AH artillery rennovation program and recognizing the crucial need for the Skoda mortars. Any AH names that anyone else can think of?

[wiking]

Discussion about this theme here, though the specifics of TL are different of course, mainly in that there will be more German troops available for the attack.
http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=163613&highlight=wiking


After the culmination of the 2nd battle of the Artois, the German line had held effectively and left the French depleted. Vast stocks of munitions had be used and over 100,000 French soldiers had become casualties. In May to distract the British the Germans had launched a limited attack near Ypres with combat gas, which hadn't yet been used. The major surprise enabled the follow attack force to breakthrough to the city proper and tear up the defending British forces. In the melee the Canadian 1st division was wipe out, either killed or captured, creating a major scandal over seas. German casualties were stiff after the initial breech was created by the flight of the French colonials, terrified by the creeping mist and drowning sensation it caused. The collapse and political fallout locked British forces in attempts to retake the city, with limited results. The Germans were able to free up a corps from the Ypres bulge, but needed to rebuild another after the battle.

Meanwhile the Germans had also attacked at the corps level along the Franco-German border, which did little except inflict losses and draw off French reserves. Confident his offensive was unanticipated (it was, but not to the level planned), Falkenhayn had it launched on June 28th between Arras and Albert, with the neighboring armies covering the flanks. The 6th attacked Arras and the 2nd Albert and toward the Somme river. The 11th army of 6 corps (several more were in reserve) attacked at this, the weakest point in the French line north of the Somme. The break in was relatively easy, as French trenches were average or below with little dominating or obstructing terrain to hold on. With the German artillery advantage the French were unable to resist effectively, even with reserves deployed from the central French pool, as French intelligence predicted another German minor attack in the area.

Grinding forward on a wide front the Germans pressed toward Doullens, their objective, quickly, but increasing resistance from the flanks (French 10th army in Artois, weakened from their recent offensive, and the French 2nd army across the Somme river) and center (French general reserves from GQG) limited the penetration to a narrow front. Reserves meant for the follow on offensive against the British had to be committed to maintain the flanks to prevent intervention by French forces in the advance against Doullens. Nevertheless, a favorable casualty ratio was maintained throughout the attack.

Given the level of surprise achieved and the readiness of French flanking forces the Germans were able to obtain their objective within 11 days, as they had chosen a point only 60 km from the front, which, when breeched, was hard to defend. The heavy and high trajectory artillery and mortars amassed were hard for the French to counter, especially as so much of the limited French reserve forces were initially focused against the limited attacks around Verdun and the Vosges. Russian pressure in the East was manageable, which meant that almost all of the German strategic reserve could fight in the West.


Quickly though the Germans found themselves fully deployed against the French, who piled on everything they could to chop off the German bulge. The British even had to give up their Ypres counter offensive to send troops to help with the larger Doullens problem. The very factors that made the Doullens area so attractive for Falkenhayn's offensive now became major liabilities, as the natural river barriers on the flanks had not been obtained completely, which now allowed for the French and British to push hard on these flanks to break the new German lines.

Losses mounted rapidly for both sides, as the Entente and Germans threw every effort into breaking the other. With the battle grinding into July the Germans were rolled back slowly, losing Doullens on the 23rd, but staying within artillery range, enabling them to interdict French rail traffic. By August it was obvious that the offensive had failed to achieve even the first prerequisite for victory, so a prepared line was fallen back to, still significantly forward of the pre-offensive lines. Now though the French had pulled in every available force to flatten out the bulge, but they still lacked enough heavy artillery and shells to truly compete with the Germans. Still, Joffre demanded that Arras and Albert be retaken and the Germans West of those lines pocketed. Even with the less extensive trenches in the newly captured ground, the Germans were able to hold easily, as they had smashed up the French quite badly in their offensive and had abundant artillery in prepared positions to resist with. The battle ground on well into September before GQG was forced to accept that the current lines were permanent for the moment.

Though Falkenhayn’s offensive was a failure, with significant political fallout, OHL could point to one success they achieved: attrition. The French had easily suffered worse than the Germans, losing 340,000 men, with the British losing another 50,000 men in secondary attacks on the bulge. The Germans, though suffering as well, lost ‘only’ 260,000 men, with a better wounded to dead ratio. Their concentrated heavy artillery had created an ‘abnormal’ death rate in the French forces, which, thanks to losing so many men recently at the 2nd Artois, lost a large part of their trained and experienced forces. Having not had the time to rebuild before the battle and add more recruits to their forces, only prepared formations could be sent into combat, which only left the more experienced units rotated in from non-engaged armies south of the Somme. The deficit of trained manpower was acutely felt later in the year, as another offensive could not be launched until December and even then only on a limited and fruitless scale. After the war Petain would describe the Doullen offensive as the death of the last remnants of the pre-war army.

Map:
British forces were subordinate to the French 8th army. It was transferred to the Doullens area after the British agreed to take over a larger part of the front when the attack started. The thick black line was the ending line and the thin black line was the maximum area of penetration.

[DanF]

http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=163613&highlight=wiking (http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=163613&highlight=wiking)


After the culmination of the 2nd battle of the Artois, the German line had held effectively and left the French depleted. Vast stocks of munitions had be used and over 100,000 French soldiers had become casualties. In May to distract the British the Germans had launched a limited attack near Ypres with combat gas, which hadn't yet been used. The major surprise enabled the follow attack force to breakthrough to the city proper and tear up the defending British forces. In the melee the Canadian 1st division was wipe out, either killed or captured, creating a major scandal over seas. German casualties were stiff after the initial breech was created by the flight of the French colonials, terrified by the creeping mist and drowning sensation it caused. The collapse and political fallout locked British forces in attempts to retake the city, with limited results. The Germans were able to free up a corps from the Ypres bulge, but needed to rebuild another after the battle.

Meanwhile the Germans had also attacked at the corps level along the Franco-German border, which did little except inflict losses and draw off French reserves. Confident his offensive was unanticipated (it was, but not to the level planned), Falkenhayn had it launched on June 28th between Arras and Albert, with the neighboring armies covering the flanks. The 6th attacked Arras and the 2nd Albert and toward the Somme river. The 11th army of 6 corps (several more were in reserve) attacked at this, the weakest point in the French line north of the Somme. The break in was relatively easy, as French trenches were average or below with little dominating or obstructing terrain to hold on. With the German artillery advantage the French were unable to resist effectively, even with reserves deployed from the central French pool, as French intelligence predicted another German minor attack in the area.

I will post the battle later on this post with the edit, I just need to rework my conception of the course of the battle.

Well it appears that this thread was or might of been on your mind when you were working on the previous discussion. I really cannot comment on the success or failure of the idea as I lack the knowledge of the Western Front and even WW1 tactics in general. I do have a few questions:

We had discussed earlier that the Germans are ahead (i.e. taken less causalities than OTL) does this give them the needed reserves to push for more, or does the fact they have more men allow them to consider this offensive that they rejected OTL?

I noticed a lot of the negative comments were about the Russians or Serbian counter-attacks and Italian Front. All of those seem moot for this timeline as the Russians just got knocked back, the Serbians are out of the war, and the Italians are not jumping in. Also, does the A-H have 6 of 7 (with the 6th Army facing the Italians just in case) armies against the Russians? I ask because I do not think they ever managed to pull that off during war OTL.

Now something I can actually comment, some amount of knowledge of, is International Relations reactions. Generally speaking in International Relations the two things that matter are the personalities involved (leaders/ diplomats/political elite only) and perceived strengths/benefits.

In 1915 alone the Central Powers militarily have knocked out Serbia, held off both a Russian and French counter-attack, and watched A-H sucker punch Russia to take Kowel. On the diplomacy side Romania is sliding toward the pro-Central Powers camp and the Ottomans are trading under Romanian flagged ships (Entente sink those ships and see what it does). Most embarrassingly the Entente probably through everything they had, the kitchen sink, and their unmarried daughters at the Italians to join up (obvious exaggeration). What they got was an Austrian-German-Italian trade deal and a bunch of Italian men having adulteress affairs with French women.

The point of the above preamble is to say even if the military offensive isn’t a runaway success, but only a strategic success. With all the above events happening in a very short time, World Opinion would inevitably start to turn against the Entente. Even if you disagree with another nations political system/beliefs; nations will always to try to back who they think is going to be on top unless there is some sort of personality (between leaders/diplomats/political elite; not the beliefs of the people which generally matter little even in democracies) issue involved. Lastly, I am guessing Belgium is the weakest Entente member right now. How likely are their leaders to consider a separate peace?

[wiking]

Well it appears that this thread was or might of been on your mind when you were working on the previous discussion. I really cannot comment on the success or failure of the idea as I lack the knowledge of the Western Front and even WW1 tactics in general. I do have a few questions:

We had discussed earlier that the Germans are ahead (i.e. taken less causalities than OTL) does this give them the needed reserves to push for more, or does the fact they have more men allow them to consider this offensive that they rejected OTL?

I noticed a lot of the negative comments were about the Russians or Serbian counter-attacks and Italian Front. All of those seem moot for this timeline as the Russians just got knocked back, the Serbians are out of the war, and the Italians are not jumping in. Also, does the A-H have 6 of 7 (with the 6th Army facing the Italians just in case) armies against the Russians? I ask because I do not think they ever managed to pull that off during war OTL.

Now something I can actually comment, some amount of knowledge of, is International Relations reactions. Generally speaking in International Relations the two things that matter are the personalities involved (leaders/ diplomats/political elite only) and perceived strengths/benefits.

In 1915 alone the Central Powers militarily have knocked out Serbia, held off both a Russian and French counter-attack, and watched A-H sucker punch Russia to take Kowel. On the diplomacy side Romania is sliding toward the pro-Central Powers camp and the Ottomans are trading under Romanian flagged ships (Entente sink those ships and see what it does). Most embarrassingly the Entente probably through everything they had, the kitchen sink, and their unmarried daughters at the Italians to join up (obvious exaggeration). What they got was an Austrian-German-Italian trade deal and a bunch of Italian men having adulteress affairs with French women.

The point of the above preamble is to say even if the military offensive isn’t a runaway success, but only a strategic success. With all the above events happening in a very short time, World Opinion would inevitably start to turn against the Entente. Even if you disagree with another nations political system/beliefs; nations will always to try to back who they think is going to be on top unless there is some sort of personality (between leaders/diplomats/political elite; not the beliefs of the people which generally matter little even in democracies) issue involved. Lastly, I am guessing Belgium is the weakest Entente member right now. How likely are their leaders to consider a separate peace?

World opinion will probably view the Entente on the strategic defensive, as opposed to OTL where the Germans defended everywhere and knocked out one enemy at a time. Here they and their allies are attacking everywhere they are sure to win in focused strength.

[wiking]

No comments??? I'm unsure about the course of the Western Front offensive. Here the Germans have 10 corps to launch their offensive, not counting the help from the 6th and 2nd armies, so I'm not sure if it is realistic to have the French roll them back like this. Their reserves were only 3 corps plus IIRC 4 cavalry divisions. This doesn't include their 10th, 8th, or 2nd armies either, and they will have more once the 8th army (army of Belgium) is relieved by the British to the north. I hope I had the timing right on that.
This is the OTL location of the 1918 attacks with a greater force imbalance (Germans are somewhat stronger here than in 1918), plus the Germans have more heavy and high trajectory artillery (the French at Artois were still using the unmodern 90mm de Bange pieces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Bange_90_mm_cannon) and about equal if not slightly higher shell production at this point. The open ground attacks against the 75mm field guns will be murder, but counter battery with heavier guns should compensate I think.
Any comments, critiques, factual corrections are eagerly sought.

[Susano]

No comments???

This is way too military history specific for me to comment anything en detail, but, uh, Im reading it. I can comment on that much :p

[wiking]

This is way too military history specific for me to comment anything en detail, but, uh, Im reading it. I can comment on that much :p
Any advice about the politics of this scenario especially between Berlin and Vienna, and in both of the Teutonic empires would be greatly appreciated. Even some information about French, Italian, or Russian reactions would be appreciated.

[Tom_B]

Can the Germans really spare that many corps for this operation? Are you assuming 2 division corps? With the formation of triangular divisions 3 divisions corps were the norm for a while.

Gen von Fabeck was initially slated to lead Eleventh Army in this operation. His reputation was competent and aggressive but hardly brilliant.

The minor corps level attacks you describe would include some in the Vosges where they did fairly well in 1915.

The BEF IMHO was its weakest in the first half of 1915. The Mills Bomb is only introduced in May with woefully small production, the Stokes mortar does not go into production until August. Heavy artillery is inadequate. Their biggest asset, the Old Contemptibles suffered heavy cumulative losses in the early battles. Oh and then there is the Munitions Crisis.

Now one wildcard is Petain who was involved in Second Artois which is one reason it achieved some limited success initially.

[wiking]

Can the Germans really spare that many corps for this operation? Are you assuming 2 division corps? With the formation of triangular divisions 3 divisions corps were the norm for a while.
OTL the Germans had 7 corps in their strategic reserve available for the west. Here I am adding two corps taken from the East and the 1 corps freed up from flattening out the Ypres bulge. I'd imagine most were the 2 division corps, but there were some 3 division ones.


Gen von Fabeck was initially slated to lead Eleventh Army in this operation. His reputation was competent and aggressive but hardly brilliant.
You are correct, but this kind of battle won't require much beyond competence as far as I am concerned. It was basically bludgeoning the enemy with vast amounts of artillery, not maneuver battle. So long as a steady stream of ammunition is maintained (there was a rail way running through the German lines straight to Doullens), more focus will be on the corps commanders. So long as they competent things should progress well. All Fabeck should really have to really be concerned with is placing his heavy artillery in the correct locations.


The minor corps level attacks you describe would include some in the Vosges where they did fairly well in 1915.
Indeed. They will succeed here to about the same degree.


The BEF IMHO was its weakest in the first half of 1915. The Mills Bomb is only introduced in May with woefully small production, the Stokes mortar does not go into production until August. Heavy artillery is inadequate. Their biggest asset, the Old Contemptibles suffered heavy cumulative losses in the early battles. Oh and then there is the Munitions Crisis.
Very true, which is why they lost so heavily at Ypres and Doullen ITTL. The second part of the Doullens plan was to attack the French and drive them to the sea. With Doullens rail line cut it would be hard for the French to supply their forces to the north, with would jam up the limited rail net in the area.


Now one wildcard is Petain who was involved in Second Artois which is one reason it achieved some limited success initially.
Yes, but was he with the 10th army after the offensive ended? Here the German attack begins 10 days after the French offensive ends, so IIRC as a roving specialist he would probably have departed the area. I could see him working on the 2nd army's counter attack plan, which on the map I have rolling the Germans back substantially.

[wiking]

While the battles in the West were being fought, in the East there was further turmoil. Germany was fighting on two fronts, as the Russians attempted to support the French by attacking along the Niemen river; however the Russians were still weak from their previous losses and with limited munition stocks were not able to push very far. One of their few successes was to take pressure off of Kovno, which had been under attack for months. Much of the fortress area had been wrecked by German siege guns, but now it had room to rebuild. The cost had been high though, as the northern armies spent many of their replacements in incompetently handled and under supported attacks on German trenches. By August the Russians had run out of steam, which allowed the Germans to conserve munitions for the fighting in the West in September.

The Austro-Hungarians had also been busy in 1915, skirmishing with the Russians in Bessarbia again and near Dubno. They had scored defensive successes as well as recaptured Kowno, but now they turned toward the 'prestige' target: Brest-Litovsk. By now most of the AH army had been re-equipped with modern artillery with enough munitions to make them effective, but large numbers of converted, obsolete fortress artillery still remained; these still had significant stockpiles of munitions, so were useful, and even with large number of captured Russian guns and modern AH weapons, these still had a role to play. At Brest-Litovsk they would come into play.

A special siege command had been established under the AH 1st army to tackle the fortress that included German specialists, both artillerists and engineers, as well as special siege guns to aid their ally. The AHs were limited to the West bank of the Bug river, but they still could hit all parts of the fortress. Gun duels regularly occurred with the Russians fortress artillery and the field guns of the 4th army. Both sides had mounted coastal artillery on rail carriages and used them to reach deep into the others' lines, hopefully to force them to retreat. Neither had been willing so far, both suffered for it.

In many ways the fighting around Brest had formed a sort of school for both sides, as newly trained gunners went to the area to attend an artillery school set up so that artillerists battling with the latest methods of counter-battery fire and scientific gun laying could learn from the most practiced soldiers in their army. Despite the front remaining relatively static, casualties were steady from the constant stream of shells landing on both sides. Brest-Litovsk and its fortress had been wrecked by repeated bombardments, but still men resisted from the rubble. Many of its guns were still in service and were used prevent the AH and German pioneers from attempting crossings for reconnaissance or more during the night.

After the fall of Kowno Conrad decided to make Brest his goal to impress the Romanians, hopefully convincing them to join the war. It was doubtful that that would push them over the edge, but the follow on attacks over the Bug might. From September on supreme efforts were made to force a crossing of the Bug and finally capture the fortress of Brest-Litovsk. Munitions and further artillery were lavished on the Dankl and his 1st army, but the marshy ground and wooded land along the Bug proved insuperable. Russian forces were dug in and well provisioned, making their defenses impregnable. After two months of trying to force the Bug line and 10's of thousands of losses, Dankl was forced to admit defeat. Having chosen their line well, the Russians could not be budged.

As Autumn turned into winter, Conrad once again focused on Ukraine as the only option for a breakthrough. For the moment shell and soldier reserves needed to be built up once more, so the offensive would have to wait until the next year, though several corps level attacks were made by the AH 4th and 3rd armies near Dubno to capture crucial terrain for the next series of assaults.

[Tom_B]

OTL the Germans had 7 corps in their strategic reserve available for the west. Here I am adding two corps taken from the East and the 1 corps freed up from flattening out the Ypres bulge. I'd imagine most were the 2 division corps, but there were some 3 division ones.


You are correct, but this kind of battle won't require much beyond competence as far as I am concerned. It was basically bludgeoning the enemy with vast amounts of artillery, not maneuver battle. So long as a steady stream of ammunition is maintained (there was a rail way running through the German lines straight to Doullens), more focus will be on the corps commanders. So long as they competent things should progress well. All Fabeck should really have to really be concerned with is placing his heavy artillery in the correct locations.


Indeed. They will succeed here to about the same degree.


Very true, which is why they lost so heavily at Ypres and Doullen ITTL. The second part of the Doullens plan was to attack the French and drive them to the sea. With Doullens rail line cut it would be hard for the French to supply their forces to the north, with would jam up the limited rail net in the area.


Yes, but was he with the 10th army after the offensive ended? Here the German attack begins 10 days after the French offensive ends, so IIRC as a roving specialist he would probably have departed the area. I could see him working on the 2nd army's counter attack plan, which on the map I have rolling the Germans back substantially.

I guess my biggest question is would Falkenayn commit his entire Western strategic reserve to this operation.

However I discovered one odd factoid in perusing The Histories of the 251 Divisions et. al. last night. Soon after the triangular 101st and 103rd ID were created on the Eastern Front they were railed to the Serbian frontier (!?) and then were returned in mid July. Obviously they are not going to the Balkans in TTL.

[wiking]

I guess my biggest question is would Falkenayn commit his entire Western strategic reserve to this operation.

However I discovered one odd factoid in perusing The Histories of the 251 Divisions et. al. last night. Soon after the triangular 101st and 103rd ID were created on the Eastern Front they were railed to the Serbian frontier (!?) and then were returned in mid July. Obviously they are not going to the Balkans in TTL.

Very true, neither would the Alpine corps, which I assume could free up troops in the Vosges. OTL IIRC there were 8 corps in the strategic reserve, but only 7 were to be used in Falkenhayn's West Front offensive. Perhaps then there are two corps that don't need to be taken from the East Front ITTL or they just pass into the strategic reserve for any eventuality.

[Tom_B]

In OTL General Grigoriev the fortress commander at Kovno was incompetent and cowardly and this caused the fortress to fall much sooner than the Russians expected. I know Pollard makes a big deal of this but IIRC Stone mentions it as well.

I've read some less than consistent accounts of the fall of Brest-Litovsk from different sources. One of them had an obvious proRussian bias (it sounded like it had been translated from Russian) Pollard makes von Beseler's role sound crucial which is not the implication I get from LovetoKnow1911.

[wiking]

In OTL General Grigoriev the fortress commander at Kovno was incompetent and cowardly and this caused the fortress to fall much sooner than the Russians expected. I know Pollard makes a big deal of this but IIRC Stone mentions it as well.

I've read some less than consistent accounts of the fall of Brest-Litovsk from different sources. One of them had an obvious proRussian bias (it sounded like it had been translated from Russian) Pollard makes von Beseler's role sound crucial which is not the implication I get from LovetoKnow1911.

Grigoriev from what I know, seems to have been left on his own, which caused him to panic. Here he won't have the 'luxury' of fleeing, as the field army is supporting the fortress. As to Brest-Litovsk, again it wasn't supported by the field army, which left it as a speed bump. That won't be the case here.

[Tom_B]

Grigoriev from what I know, seems to have been left on his own, which caused him to panic. Here he won't have the 'luxury' of fleeing, as the field army is supporting the fortress. As to Brest-Litovsk, again it wasn't supported by the field army, which left it as a speed bump. That won't be the case here.

In this case Grigoriev might suffer a nervous breakdown and be replaced by someone with stronger resolve.

[wiking]

In this case Grigoriev might suffer a nervous breakdown and be replaced by someone with stronger resolve.

Could be. I doubt I will get that specific. I will be treating the Bug river line like the OTL Divna: well supported and hard to crack with motivated defenders.

[wiking]

Not included are estimates of sickness rates, which would included those suffering from frost bite or other winter illnesses. Those who died from illnesses, even those not related to combat, are included in the dead total. The reason is I have some access to the dead from all causes for these nations in this year, but not the illness rates, so I cannot estimate what they would be.

I also have not included desertions, as I don't have these statistics either, though some of the POWs were deserters. Most often deserters fled to their homes and did not surrender, especially in Russia with its large expanses and population willing to hide deserters and shirkers. ITTL Russian desertion rates are about 15% higher than OTL for 1915, whatever that rate was.

Germans:
total-239,000
dead-63,000
WIA-152,000
POW-24,000

AH:
total-732,000
dead-231,000
WIA-457,000
POW-44,000

Russians (all fronts):
total-1,912,000
dead-685,000
WIA-1,077,000
POW-150,000
Again the Russians had poor medical services and suffered from many other issues including having to recruit men in poor health, as those not chosen in the pre-war draft for military service, who were often of better health, had no army records, while those that had been rejected for service pre-war for reasons of health had army files and could therefore be called into service. These men suffered from higher levels of sickness than pre-war healthy recruits, dying from their illnesses.

[Sol Zagato]

I've been putting it off, but now subscribed.

How do casualties compare to OTL on all fronts?

[wiking]

I've been putting it off, but now subscribed.

How do casualties compare to OTL on all fronts?

Thanks :)

AH losses are significantly lower. At the end of 1915 they are just starting to exceed OTL 1914 losses. Edit: I raised the losses to reflect extra fighting I didn't figure in before.

German losses are significantly lower here too, on the order of 400,000+ lower because we haven't had some of their bloodiest offensive/defensive actions.

The Russians are also significantly lower in 1915, but were higher in 1914. Overall they are lower, but they lost a larger share of trained manpower, territory, and equipment+stocks in 1914, which left them weaker than OTL by many metrics. The lack of major victories has increased desertions in the army, sapping their frontline strength more than combat losses would indicate and the home front has started to become restless. All of this will have an important effect in 1916.
Edit:I just changed the Russian losses, because I was considering the actual combat that I have described here versus what happened in 1915 OTL and I would assume the Russians would try to attack on a larger scale than I described against Germany and AH, there especially along the Sereth river, with higher losses as a result.


In the West, I haven't really gone over the changes there, but the Germans have attacked more, though, apart from Doullens, mostly corps level assaults. French and British losses are higher than OTL, which will be important for 1916 too.

[wiking]

Assuming AH survives after the war in this scenario, how do you think it will function/evolve/collapse afterward? I have my own ideas, but nothing feels right just yet. What say you all?

[lukedalton]

Assuming AH survives after the war in this scenario, how do you think it will function/evolve/collapse afterward? I have my own ideas, but nothing feels right just yet. What say you all?

Well IMHO AH even if achieve victory will found itself in the same position of Italy after OTL WWI, a nation wreked by the loss of a generation and and incredible debt, with a very few faith in the governament and in the traditional authority figure, aggravated by the diverse nationality and a nation (Italy) fresh and stockpiled and with some axe to grind at his border.

[Magyarország]

I just read through all this and it's really good. Keep it up.

If AH survives the war, I find it unlikely for it to collapse. The K.u.K. Army actually acted competent in this timeline and, assuming the the CP defeats Russia, AH actually has some prestige. With their fronts secured, the Entente can't really agitate the ethnic minorities in the Empire very successfully. I can see Karl trying to reform the Empire and eventually clash with the Magyar aristocracy and I can see the latter making a really big deal out of Karl's death and Otto's succession. If Otto manages to succeed in keeping the Empire in one piece, then I can see the Empire going through democratization and perhaps centralization. I can see Otto trying to reform the Empire so that it resembles something like Canada (Strong Federal power yet very significant provincial autonomy). I actually doubt any minorities are going to really defy that, not even the Hungarians since they must have noticed how flawed the system is during the war.

The only way I can really see the Empire collapse after the war is if a victorious Germany forces it to. Since AH proved itself capable during TTL's war, the Germans probably thinks that keeping the Empire alive and stable is better for them (United and strong ally, simpler to trade with one nation than numerous ones). Since the K.u.K. Army survives in one piece, it should be able to prevent any serious uprising.

[wiking]

Any other ideas?

[Tom_B]

Not included are estimates of sickness rates, which would included those suffering from frost bite or other winter illnesses. Those who died from illnesses, even those not related to combat, are included in the dead total. The reason is I have some access to the dead from all causes for these nations in this year, but not the illness rates, so I cannot estimate what they would be.

I also have not included desertions, as I don't have these statistics either, though some of the POWs were deserters. Most often deserters fled to their homes and did not surrender, especially in Russia with its large expanses and population willing to hide deserters and shirkers. ITTL Russian desertion rates are about 15% higher than OTL for 1915, whatever that rate was.

Germans:
total-239,000
dead-63,000
WIA-152,000
POW-24,000

AH:
total-732,000
dead-231,000
WIA-457,000
POW-44,000

Russians (all fronts):
total-1,912,000
dead-685,000
WIA-1,077,000
POW-150,000
Again the Russians had poor medical services and suffered from many other issues including having to recruit men in poor health, as those not chosen in the pre-war draft for military service, who were often of better health, had no army records, while those that had been rejected for service pre-war for reasons of health had army files and could therefore be called into service. These men suffered from higher levels of sickness than pre-war healthy recruits, dying from their illnesses.

Just gave this a second look. You have only 150K Russian taken prisoner all year while Keegan (who likes to round numbers in favor of the Entente) gives a figure of 750,000 just for May through Sept (the common perception that significant fighting on the Eastern Front ended in late Sept is barely a half truth)

[wiking]

Just gave this a second look. You have only 150K Russian taken prisoner all year while Keegan (who likes to round numbers in favor of the Entente) gives a figure of 750,000 just for May through Sept (the common perception that significant fighting on the Eastern Front ended in late Sept is barely a half truth)

There wasn't the great advanced of OTL on the Eastern Front in 1915. The nature of the fighting that did occur ITTL in 1915 did not lend itself to major prisoner tallies: the German offensive was like the 2nd Masurian lakes OTL, heavy casualties, but timely retreats prevented major pockets; the recapture of Kowno and the fighting around Brest-Litovsk saw a number of artillery casualties, but the nature of the terrain allowed defenders to retreat quicker than the attack could advance. The Russians did attack often too, but so much of the battle occurred over restrictive terrain that there wasn't much of the quick thrust and parry action that allows for major prisoner totals. Instead more of an 'artillery conquers, infantry occupies' mentality has developed, especially as artillery parity and trench lines (not like the west front though) have become major factors here.

[Tom_B]

There wasn't the great advanced of OTL on the Eastern Front in 1915. The nature of the fighting that did occur ITTL in 1915 did not lend itself to major prisoner tallies: the German offensive was like the 2nd Masurian lakes OTL, heavy casualties, but timely retreats prevented major pockets; the recapture of Kowno and the fighting around Brest-Litovsk saw a number of artillery casualties, but the nature of the terrain allowed defenders to retreat quicker than the attack could advance. The Russians did attack often too, but so much of the battle occurred over restrictive terrain that there wasn't much of the quick thrust and parry action that allows for major prisoner totals. Instead more of an 'artillery conquers, infantry occupies' mentality has developed, especially as artillery parity and trench lines (not like the west front though) have become major factors here.

I am not all that convinced by your argument to justify a 5:1 difference. At Second Masurian Lakes Ober Ost tried to encircle all of Tenth Army and did succeed in encircling X Army Corps which they mistakenly assumed was all of Tenth Army.

However during the Gorlice Tarnow offensive where Seeckt's tactics were pretty close to "artillery conquers, infantry holds" according to Stone only a Russian single division was encircled. The big prisoner count seems to be mostly Russian soldiers in the front line dazed by the bombardment being easily taken not any large scale envelopments though later during the big chase starting in late July they probably overtook some units that didn't flee fast enough

[wiking]

I am not all that convinced by your argument to justify a 5:1 difference. At Second Masurian Lakes Ober Ost tried to encircle all of Tenth Army and did succeed in encircling X Army Corps which they mistakenly assumed was all of Tenth Army.

However during the Gorlice Tarnow offensive where Seeckt's tactics were pretty close to "artillery conquers, infantry holds" according to Stone only a Russian single division was encircled. The big prisoner count seems to be mostly Russian soldiers in the front line dazed by the bombardment being easily taken not any large scale envelopments though later during the big chase starting in late July they probably overtook some units that didn't flee fast enough

What do you propose would be more appropriate for the prisoner count?

[Valdemar II]

Any other ideas?

I too think federalism are going to be the future of AH. But I don't think they will choose federalism after ethnic bordres, rather they will set it up after historical adminstrative units. Hungary may be the exception I could see being split up in smaller units simply because Hungary even without Transylvania and Slavonia and Croatia are simply too big. I could see it being split in Slovakia (likely following the post-WWI borders), Backa, Banat, and spliting the rest of Hungary in a east and west.

[lukedalton]

I too think federalism are going to be the future of AH. But I don't think they will choose federalism after ethnic bordres, rather they will set it up after historical adminstrative units. Hungary may be the exception I could see being split up in smaller units simply because Hungary even without Transylvania and Slavonia and Croatia are simply too big. I could see it being split in Slovakia (likely following the post-WWI borders), Backa, Banat, and spliting the rest of Hungary in a east and west.

The problem is that here we are talking of a world war, a war were even if you are on the winning side you are almost screwed (except if you are the USA).
Italy have the 'Biennio rosso' - two years of socialist and communist violence that ended with Benny in charge
France and Great Britain faced an astonishing debt and social unrest and for two decades were basically unwilling to even consider starting a war.
AH even if win is in more trouble becouse is foundation are more shakier and frankly i don't see the hungarian easily give up power and territories.
After the war the empire will be probably besieged by internal strife with some neighboor ready to jump on the corpse or foment the trouble.

[wiking]

I too think federalism are going to be the future of AH. But I don't think they will choose federalism after ethnic bordres, rather they will set it up after historical adminstrative units. Hungary may be the exception I could see being split up in smaller units simply because Hungary even without Transylvania and Slavonia and Croatia are simply too big. I could see it being split in Slovakia (likely following the post-WWI borders), Backa, Banat, and spliting the rest of Hungary in a east and west.

Why exactly do you think that? Pre-war federalism was rejected and autocracy seemed to be the holy grail of the Habsburgs. The Dual Monarchy was only acceptable as it kept the further devolution to democracy at bay. Franz Ferdinand and later Karl both ultimately rejected any expansion of the crown system (ie the triple monarchy) and desired to return as much as possible to an absolute monarchy of enlighten despotism. Karl only turned to federalism OTL as the empire was already collapsing and he attempted to shape the collapse into a system where he still had a function. By that point he had ceased to be relevant in any real way for some time.

By 1918 armed brigands with artillery (!) roamed the countryside and confiscated anything they could wrestle away from civilians, necessitating that 10 divisions be held had home to combat them. Central authority was shaky at best and this was after the victories over Russia, Serbia, and Italy at Caporetto. When massive civil unrest and national councils were being set up in various major cities Kaiser Karl only ordered federalism in Cisleithania. Here with a AH victory (we assume) with far less embarrassing defeats and waste of life, the monarchy and government institutions in general, are not discredited while the home front is probably better fed.

Why would Karl agree to federalism? I don't know much about his son Otto's beliefs on this issue, but with Karl dying in 1922 when his son was 9 (which probably won't happen here, as Karl won't be in exile and dealing with the stress of his situation OTL, so I doubt we'd see the two heart attacks and subsequent pneumonia that killed him, at least as soon as OTL). Otto, with more time with his father in Imperial Vienna, may mimic or reject his father's views. Federalism though has a nasty possibility of raising the issue of nationalism and favoritism that may destroy the empire if attempted...

And that is just in Austria. Hungary is under even more pressures which will come to a head after the war. The 1917 Ausgleich renewal is coming up after the war and Hungary wants an independent army, something that Karl and his generals refused to give, even OTL in 1918. They also have angry Hungarian and minority soldiers coming home that desire greater opportunities after their sacrifice and have been exposed to communism on leave and at the front. The communists are gaining strength much more quickly during the war than every before, as the Hungarian peasantry have come to understand their conditions and have come to refuse to except them. Violence is nearly guaranteed, especially if the Hungarian parliament gains more power of that half of the empire.

Let's remember that Italy and Romania are so far neutral and have avoided the destruction and deaths of OTL. They will be a major factor if AH undergoes political strife.

[Valdemar II]

The problem is that here we are talking of a world war, a war were even if you are on the winning side you are almost screwed (except if you are the USA).
Italy have the 'Biennio rosso' - two years of socialist and communist violence that ended with Benny in charge
France and Great Britain faced an astonishing debt and social unrest and for two decades were basically unwilling to even consider starting a war.
AH even if win is in more trouble becouse is foundation are more shakier and frankly i don't see the hungarian easily give up power and territories.
After the war the empire will be probably besieged by internal strife with some neighboor ready to jump on the corpse or foment the trouble.

I disagree, yes AH will likely see some social and national strife. But anybody jumping them (which in this case would be Italy and Romania), AH would be fully able to bitchslap them on their own. Of course they would not need to, Germany would join them. If Italy and Romania hasn't joined the Entern, they are not going to attack AH after the war.

[Valdemar II]

....

Because most multiethnic states pushed forward with federalism in the interwar periode, at least them a single minority couldn't dominate. As I see it there are two solutions a triple kingdom (as I have described earlier) or a more federal structure if they wish or are able to deal with the Hungarians. The reason for electing historical province rather than basing it on ethnic border would be for pushing regionalism rather than nationalism.

[lukedalton]

I disagree, yes AH will likely see some social and national strife. But anybody jumping them (which in this case would be Italy and Romania), AH would be fully able to bitchslap them on their own. Of course they would not need to, Germany would join them. If Italy and Romania hasn't joined the Entern, they are not going to attack AH after the war.

Don't overstimate the streng of the Hasburg state or his military prowness, expecially after a world war. Remember in OTL Italy (basicaly alone) as keep the AH army a little busied so i don't know who are going to be bitchslapped.
Germany is, as always, the decisive factor, he can easily prop up is ally and come to the rescue...or decide that enough is enough and decide that continually save the AH is a thankless, costly, herculean task that don't go anywhere...and all this in case of victory, image if AH lose.

[Tom_B]

What do you propose would be more appropriate for the prisoner count?

I agree that it won't be anywhere near the historical May-Sept 750,000 but 300,000 sounds reasonable as Keegan has 140,000 being taken very early in GT (though he is annoyingly vague about just how early. Keegan is a notch overrated IMHO)

Someone somewhere (might be Stone) noted that being captured seemed to happen considerably more on the Eastern Front then the West, even with the Germans.

[wiking]

Don't overstimate the streng of the Hasburg state or his military prowness, expecially after a world war. Remember in OTL Italy (basicaly alone) as keep the AH army a little busied so i don't know who are going to be bitchslapped.
Germany is, as always, the decisive factor, he can easily prop up is ally and come to the rescue...or decide that enough is enough and decide that continually save the AH is a thankless, costly, herculean task that don't go anywhere...and all this in case of victory, image if AH lose.

Italy's war effort was heavily subsidized by the Entente. Alone she would not pose a major threat. However with profits from the war she will certainly be stronger than prewar. Germany will be owed debts by AH, that is for sure, but if AH takes a political course independent of Mittel Europa, things will get dicey. The Pan-Germans will see an opportunity to unite Gross-Deutschland and snap up the important bits of AH like Czechia, and dominate Hungary and Poland financially. Her enemies will be too weak financially to prevent the union and AH can be too financially draining to sustain after a certain point...just sayin'

[Tom_B]

"They called it a ramshackle empire. I wish to God there were more such empires." - Joyce

Unfortunately I see the dissolution of Austria-Hungary within 3 years as probable but if the war ends not too late it is not inevitable.

One thing to factor in is vote reform within Hungary.

[wiking]

I agree that it won't be anywhere near the historical May-Sept 750,000 but 300,000 sounds reasonable as Keegan has 140,000 being taken very early in GT (though he is annoyingly vague about just how early. Keegan is a notch overrated IMHO)

Someone somewhere (might be Stone) noted that being captured seemed to happen considerably more on the Eastern Front then the West, even with the Germans.

Even in this TL do you think the AHs will be as effective in bombardments as Mackensen's 11th army was?

[Magyarország]

The Ausgleich renegociations are going to be really hard times for the union. The Hungarians might make any demands they want, but can the Magyar Aristocracy truly gain the support of the exhausted people? Would they really want to fight against the ones they fought alongside moments ago? Neither the Austrians, not the Hungarians, not the Germans will want to fight right after the war. The Germans are probably going to be exhausted from the war as well and they probably wont be able to do much for at least a few years. The only war they could fight is a defensive war. Even then, the AH Army is going to be highly experienced versus the green armies of any "threat" like Italy of Roumania. They could actually benefit from the exhausted CPs and Entente countries without any wars. Their industry and agriculture is intact from the war compared to the countries who fought.

Hungary is going to be a mess after the war. The soldiers have been exposed to radical thoughts and the Hungarian Kingdom's government is ridiculously favouring the Aristocracy. It's going to be the same for the Austrian parts of the Empire but at a smaller scale compared the Hungary. Karl wont really have a choice. He'll be forced to reform the government. On the other hand, the Magyar Aristocrats will probably refuse any reforms even with pressure from the Emperor. This could lead to one hell of a mess and the Austrians will probably be supporting the people on that one. Limiting the power of the very conservative and nationalistic nobility in Hungary would make any centralization/Federalization plan much easier.

Nonetheless, it doesn't mean the Empire is completely safe. There are so many ways for it to collapse. It's going to be on shaky grounds until it reforms to a more stable government. Then again, the reforms might lead it to collapse. If it does, it's certain that the German-speaking parts will defect to Germany, the Italians might seize the opportunity and try to take over Trent and Tyrol, Hungary will collapse to look like OTL Hungary with Roumania taking over Transylvania and the Slavic parts breaking off the Kingdom.

[wiking]

Because most multiethnic states pushed forward with federalism in the interwar periode, at least them a single minority couldn't dominate. As I see it there are two solutions a triple kingdom (as I have described earlier) or a more federal structure if they wish or are able to deal with the Hungarians. The reason for electing historical province rather than basing it on ethnic border would be for pushing regionalism rather than nationalism.

First, one cannot approach alternate history from 2010 viewpoint. One must focus on the perspectives of the players at the time and the issues and solutions as they saw them. It might make sense for us to say the AH should have gone federal, but that ignores the perspectives of the power players of the time, as well as the divergent interests of the various parties involved and irreconcilable differences among ethnic groups.

There are major problems for the empire if they take a federal approach. The Historical Province model means that Germans will be minorities in various states and be forced to learn the native languages. The hint of this resulted in major unrest and some bloodshed in Bohemia and Morovia pre-war, which will only get much worse if enacted after a successful war. The Germans in Austria won't want to see 3 million of their brothers and sisters under Slav rule. The Czechs refuse to accept anything less than total control in Bohemia and Morovia and will riot/commit violent acts until they get it. Its a powder keg because someone is going to get disappointed and there are more Germans in Cisleithania than Czechs. That is just one example of several. Let's not even get into the mess that Hungary was. Honestly, the only parts of the empire that Karl could reform was the Austria half. There are then issues of Pole vs. Ukranians, Italians and Italy, Slovenia vs. Austrians, etc...

Language and identity are key at this point and Kaiser Karl had a very hard time making tough decisions.

Ultimately Tom_B is probably right. Robin Okey, an author with intense knowledge of the AH empire, came to the conclusion that even without a war the empire was going to end, badly. Perhaps even in the 1917 Ausgleich renewal.
http://www.amazon.com/Habsburg-Monarchy-C-1765-1918-Enlightenment-Eclipse/dp/0333396545/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293126912&sr=8-1

Suffice to say that the future for the empire was not bright and issue of Poland and Galicia alone could spark a civil and regional war that sucks in Italy and Romania.

[wiking]

Any other ideas? I should have the first post of 1916 up in a few days.

[lukedalton]

Any other ideas? I should have the first post of 1916 up in a few days.

Well, a lot depends on when the war end, if it happen before the OTL American intervention we had a lot of international butterfly. No o very different 'League of Nations', Wilson may not promote the anti-sediction act and probably a more isolationist USA. Quicker end means a lot less expensive burden for the treasury of the colonial empire who may be stronger and a less involvement of the colonies (that used this experience for create the beginning of their national identity). Frankly i thing that the CP will win, why? Italy neutral, no italian front, a lot less troops on the balkans (yes we were involved a lot even there) so what will be their demand? And more important they will have the resource for not wast their gain? (i think more of the AH and Ottoman empire in this case, i'm not very sure they can digest more population or more territory).
The problem here (sorry if i reiterate the fact) will be the relations between the AH and Italy, don't understimate how much hate was present between the nations, and with the italian more rich, more in control of their empire ( in OTL lybia was in rebellion as more troops were destined to the front and not in pacification duty) and with his hated neighbour in turmoil and very hurt by a costly war i think that D'Annunzio, Mussolini and a lot of politicians and intellectuals will press to declare war, and Italy is not a pushover...or maybe they will simple buy the territory (Trento, Gorizia-Gradisca some island in the adriatic...not Trieste of Fiume because too important) using the economic needs of AH as leverage ( and frankly i see the italians sell at the AH at very inflated price during the war)

[DanF]

Well, a lot depends on when the war end, if it happen before the OTL American intervention we had a lot of international butterfly. No o very different 'League of Nations', Wilson may not promote the anti-sediction act and probably a more isolationist USA. Quicker end means a lot less expensive burden for the treasury of the colonial empire who may be stronger and a less involvement of the colonies (that used this experience for create the beginning of their national identity). Frankly i thing that the CP will win, why? Italy neutral, no italian front, a lot less troops on the balkans (yes we were involved a lot even there) so what will be their demand? And more important they will have the resource for not wast their gain? (i think more of the AH and Ottoman empire in this case, i'm not very sure they can digest more population or more territory).
The problem here (sorry if i reiterate the fact) will be the relations between the AH and Italy, don't understimate how much hate was present between the nations, and with the italian more rich, more in control of their empire ( in OTL lybia was in rebellion as more troops were destined to the front and not in pacification duty) and with his hated neighbour in turmoil and very hurt by a costly war i think that D'Annunzio, Mussolini and a lot of politicians and intellectuals will press to declare war, and Italy is not a pushover...or maybe they will simple buy the territory (Trento, Gorizia-Gradisca some island in the adriatic...not Trieste of Fiume because too important) using the economic needs of AH as leverage ( and frankly i see the italians sell at the AH at very inflated price during the war)


Other then possibly giving up Trento, which considering Austria-Hungary policy of not giving up land unless they lose it in a war. I am not sure if they would give up even this.

Would Italy be happy with a post-war concession of a Balkan sphere (Montenegro & Albania), Tunisia, Nice, Savoy, possibly Malta, and possibly Corsica &/or Algeria? Knowing they would have to give up the Dardanelles, like they had promised in 1911 to the Ottomans, and probably not get anything from Austria-Hungary. The later who would probably be seen as a strong Great Power post-war, as she was on the winning side and did decently.

NOTE: I have never seen anyone on this board offer Algeria before or even read that Italy would be interested, but if France lost they would not have that much say and it would go along with the Med. Empire idea. (Yes, I know that was WW2 Italy, but I am trying to think of additional compensation for Italy).

[DanF]

I want to jump back to the post-war discussion and Austria-Hungary real quick.

Wiking had a very meaningful statement: First, one cannot approach alternate history from 2010 viewpoint.

Whenever Austria-Hungary is discussed the consencus always seems that they would fall no matter what. For a nation that in one form or another streches back to the Middle Ages, having it fall without an external source seems sort of unbelievable to me. Maybe I am too bias, or just a moron in thinking that it would reform, consildate, and advance.

Here are the strengths I see Austria-Hungary having post war victory:

They won, just like they did after Napoleon, Austria very well could do just as good in the peace settlement. Remember it was Russia that carried most of the manpower load to beat Napoleon, but Austria won the peace in 1815. Even if they just get their fare share, in the Timeline they did everything that was asked and expected if not more. So, there fair share would be very representative.

Post WW1 German trading network in Central and Eastern Europe. A German centric trading network would by its nature increase the usage of German. Just like English is used today for business. Even today a large percentage of Slovenia and Croatia speak German, and that is not without being part of a German ruled nation.

Economic Growth. Pre-war Austria-Hungary was outgrowing almost all of industrial Europe, unfortunately for them they were way behind the rest of Industrial Europe. This trend would of probably continued, especially if point one involves advantageous economic benefits.
Hapsburg myth of surviving no matter the odds is still intact. Whether it is the 30 years war, Napoleonic wars, Franco-Austrian War, etc… The Hapsburg win or lose still continue to rule, and to a country with different religions, languages, and even cultures the importance of this unifying belief cannot be understated.

Still a Great Power. In our timeline France had a foreign army parked in there country during all of WW1, and still exited WW1 being viewed as a Great Power. In this timeline for majority of the war Austria-Hungary was on the offensive, and controlled all their land. So, no one could question if they were still a Great Power or not.

Nations back winners. In our timeline Liberal Democracies have consistently shown success in WW1 and beyond, and as such most new nations try to mimic that form of government. In this timeline, essentially autocratic monarchies would win. People would notice that Republican France and Constitutional Monarchy Britain lost to the Central Powers, and the elites (especially the noble elites) could use this result to support the view that democratic ideas make a nation militarily weak. Yes, Russia was an autocratic Monarchy, but then again their internal propaganda could very well say they were betrayed by the “Liberal Democracies.” Which would only reinforce the belief democratic ideas make a nation militarily weak.



I am sure there are other strengths that I am missing, and I know for the majority of people born in Western nations today my last point seems impossible. However, I started this whole thing off by mentioning the quote that Wiking, said about 2010 viewpoint. History is not pre-determined, and there are many examples of nations surviving when they should not of: like Rome 2nd Punic war or during Crisis of 3rd Century. The same applies to forms of government. European history is full of examples of any form of government one can think of.

[wiking]

I'm really hung up on the postwar right now, so am doing some reading. It may be a little while until the next update...

[DanF]

I'm really hung up on the postwar right now, so am doing some reading. It may be a little while until the next update...

That's alright, I missed the initial discussions do family Christmas stuff, and I saw you started another thread. So, I figured this one might go on hold soon anyway. Though I really did not add much meaningful to this thread, I really enjoyed the discussions and the Timeline as a whole. Thanks so much for your time and effort!

[wiking]

That's alright, I missed the initial discussions do family Christmas stuff, and I saw you started another thread. So, I figured this one might go on hold soon anyway. Though I really did not add much meaningful to this thread, I really enjoyed the discussions and the Timeline as a whole. Thanks so much for your time and effort!

That was just a couple questions about an argument that in another thread. I am not starting anything new. And don't worry, you've added quite a bit; for example, now I can't figure out what to do about Poland! :D

[Franz Josef II]

now I can't figure out what to do about Poland! :D[/QUOTE]

Crown Prince Rudolf had the marvelous idea that Germany and Austria should divide Congress Poland between themselves. Thus "Poland" would cease to exist.
Unfortunately, the brilliant chap had an emo moment:D

[lukedalton]

Other then possibly giving up Trento, which considering Austria-Hungary policy of not giving up land unless they lose it in a war. I am not sure if they would give up even this.

Would Italy be happy with a post-war concession of a Balkan sphere (Montenegro & Albania), Tunisia, Nice, Savoy, possibly Malta, and possibly Corsica &/or Algeria? Knowing they would have to give up the Dardanelles, like they had promised in 1911 to the Ottomans, and probably not get anything from Austria-Hungary. The later who would probably be seen as a strong Great Power post-war, as she was on the winning side and did decently.

NOTE: I have never seen anyone on this board offer Algeria before or even read that Italy would be interested, but if France lost they would not have that much say and it would go along with the Med. Empire idea. (Yes, I know that was WW2 Italy, but I am trying to think of additional compensation for Italy).

Well Italy would be happy with this sphere in the Balkan...simply becouse at the time she already occupy Albania and without the fight with AH i doubt that she leave it as in OTL, Montenegro will be fine.
Gaining anything from the France depend, Italy was neutral or she declare war at the French in case of mass revolt of the army or a communist revolution or more probably try to buy Tunisia (here Italy has a lot more money), frankly Algeria is not that important for us in the economic and strategic sense.
I concour that the victory in WWI can give some breath to the AH state, and reinforce the trust of the people and that the imperial state will be seen as the more succesfull state...but this is WWI and even the victor (except naturally the USA) is not in a good position, here in Italy we have say if Athens cry, Sparta don't laugh, the massive carnage and monetary debt will strain every nations, loser and winner alike and of all the partecipant at the conflict apart Russia, AH has the most problematic internal situation, maybe can use the victory to push for a three monarchy, but the rest of the ethnicity will always be a growing problem.
I think tha sell the italian speaking land to Italy is not a dumb solution, she will receive money (very needed money) and at the same time will get rid of a troublesome minority, so they can use more time and resource for absorb the land acquired in the war

[Josephus]

The Italo-Austrians were amongst the least troublesome minorities in AH. Especially those in Triest knew that it was in their best interest remaining within AH. Triest was the main port of the whole double monarchy, and the Italians there were well connected. An Italian Trieste would be, at best, a tertiary port, but most likely be left rotting and idle until the old owners have to sell cheaply to the established Italian/Piemontese economic elites, even if they are not outright robbed of their assets.

[DanF]

I was thinking about Poland and 1916 campaigns today for this thread. How believable for this timeline would an easy early (1916) peace with Russia be, with the understanding France (Traditional enemy of Germany and Austria) will have to give a pound of flesh post-war?

This is what I am thinking (Note these are rough thoughts and most on this forum are more knowledgeable of the specifics then I am. I am just trying to come up with something that matches the overall goal of easy peace in the east and the hammer in the west.)

Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Ottomans vs Russia Treaty of Warsaw of 1916.

Full Demobilization of Russia’s Army and Navy, exceptions if fighting a civil war or rebellion.

Russia gives Germany Duchy of Courland, Samogitia, and either minor border adjustments with Congress of Poland or Congress of Poland up to the Vistula. Maybe a small indemnity.

Russia gives Ottomans Kars region and other lands taken in 1878. Maybe a small indemnity.

Russia gives Austria-Hungary an apology, agrees that the Balkans are completely outside of her sphere of influence for all time, and pays a large indemnity to Austria-Hungary.

Lastly, the treaty will contain verbiage alluding to the Russian Monarchy and people being tricked by France & possibly the British. NOTE: This is done for Prestige purposes and setup future "War Guilt" against the remaining Entente.

Thought Process:
The main goals is to offer Russia something she would accept, while still showing gains for the Central Powers to justify their accomplishments. Considering all the Poland related issues that were already pointed out in this thread. I now feel it is in the Central Powers best interest to take as little of Poland as possible, but also make sure it does not become an independent nation. Lastly, in the case of Austria-Hungary the intent is to reward her without taking new lands as she has enough minorities already.



Balkans, Italy, Malta, and Cyprus:
In the case of Serbia there are many different ways it could go. It could be a colony similar to Bosnia, an independent state ruled by a Hapsburg (maybe Eugene since he is the conqueror of it), or even annexed into the Empire (least likely option). However, regardless of the outcome Serbia will be smaller with Macedonia going to Bulgaria and possibly a chunk of Eastern Serbia as well. In addition, Kosovo might be given to Albania or even Bulgaria.

The next thing is what to do about Italy. Though she did not come to the aid of the other Central Powers, she still trades with them, and is still a potentially important ally. I think the end decision on what she gains depends upon how likely the German and Austrian-Hungarian diplomats feel they could reform the 3 Emperors Alliance. Yes, Russia just lost a war with Germany and Austria-Hungary but the whole intent here is an easy peace. If the peace is considered acceptable by Russia and the Balkans flashpoint between Austria-Hungary and Russia removed then there is a possibility of reforming the 3 Emperors Alliance. If the Diplomats of Germany and Austria-Hungary do not think it is possible or want to try both paths just in case then Italy will get things even though she probably will not need to fight for them.

Here is my rough idea of what Italy is going to get post-WW1 in a treaty of Berlin or Vienna. I am assuming Italy never actually enters the war, so she would get more if she actually fights.

Montenegro or Albania in her sphere, but not both since she did not fight. However, that would probably be negotiable post-war especially if Austria-Hungary and Italy can come to a Balkan understanding.

Savoy region of France and Nice, but has to renounce all claims on Austria-Hungary lands. This might come with a referendum agreement for the Italians living in Austria-Hungary. If the later than Trento would probably go to Italy, but the Austria-Hungary government (who will own the land prior to the referendum, and no one says it would be a fair vote) would most likely fix the vote (if they thought they had to) to make sure they keep Trieste and Dalmatia. I am not sure how Gorizia-Gradisca would vote, but I assume they would want to go to Italy. I am unsure how the Austria-Hungary government would view that, and if they would fix the vote or not.

Italy is either given Tunisia or buy’s it from France at a heavily discounted price, remember pound of flesh.

Italy needs to return the Dardanelles to the Ottomans as promised before.

Without Italy fighting I cannot see her getting Malta. Also, the status of Cyprus would most likely come up too. Do the British keep it (most likely), does it go back to the Ottomans, to Greece, or even go to Italy (remember former Venice colony). Overall I think Britain will lose little to nothing in Territory and might even do colony swaps with Germany (i.e. Germany gets French & Belgium colonies to give Britain some of her colonies). Though, I could see Britain getting stuck with some sort of indemnity for appearances sake post-war.



Middle Eastern and Western Front:
This section mostly is concerning the Austria-Hungarian Empire as once Russia quits they are no longer bordering an enemy. Here is my thoughts on this, though I am unsure how believable they would be from the perspective of the powers that be at the time.

Austria-Hungary will Demobilize 25% of her military, but must deploy and maintain at least two full Armies to the Western Front to help Germany against France. In addition she must deploy and maintain at least an Army Group to help the Ottomans vs the British. My thought process on this is the demobilization will greatly help Austria-Hungary economically and stability wise, but it comes with the trade-off that she has to deploy set number of forces to help her allies. In order to boost the morale of the forces that get deployed maybe say only those forces getting deployed can march in the victory parades.

Well I hope the above is at least somewhat believable &/or doable?

[wiking]

Question for all: Italy in 1916, does it declare war on AH? I'm on the fence about this, especially as AH will be bogged down in the East and the Entente will be willing to offer anything to get Italy involved. AH is definitely not going to give up any land and Italy won't offer to pay for it.

[Keb]

Question for all: Italy in 1916, does it declare war on AH? I'm on the fence about this, especially as AH will be bogged down in the East and the Entente will be willing to offer anything to get Italy involved. AH is definitely not going to give up any land and Italy won't offer to pay for it.

Well, on the one hand, there's the reasoning you put forward.

On the other, joining the Entente doesn't seem like a good prospect to just about anyone at this point. The CPs are tearing Russia a new one (even if Russian troops are still in enemy territory, they're getting nowhere fast), Serbia has been all but annihilated ... things aren't looking too hot for the Entente. They can promise heaven itself for all the good it will do if the war is lost.

Personally, I don't think it would be a wise move for Italy to join the war. The border is easy to defend, the Austrians have one less front than OTL (even if they have a greater commitment in the East) and are overall in better shape.

Then again, this is the era when people believed elan could get troops through a heavily fortified border so there's no guarantee that a rational choice will be made.

If it were up to me, Italy would stick with neutrality. Offer the CPs trade in exchange for a confirmed zone of influence in the Balkans (enlarged Albania? Greece?) just in case they win. Wait and see which way the wind is blowing.

Of course, this is opening a whole 'nother can of worms that's Italian politics during the war. The pro-Entente faction would need to be marginalized before any deals are made ... and with the pro-CP faction already marginalized that doesn't leave a lot to work with.

[Tom_B]

The "Entente will promise Italy the moon, sun and the stars" argument comes up a lot but the obviously desperate promises of likely losers doesn't seem to be worth much IMHO. Italian entry OTL came at the point when they thought the Russians were well on their way to Budapest and Gallipoli was going to knock the OE out of the war.

If Salandra survives as PM there is a remote chance that Italy will be somehow dragged into a war its people don't want. Still less of a chance with Sonino and absolutely none with Giolitti and I think Giolitti is the most likely PM.

[lukedalton]

Question for all: Italy in 1916, does it declare war on AH? I'm on the fence about this, especially as AH will be bogged down in the East and the Entente will be willing to offer anything to get Italy involved. AH is definitely not going to give up any land and Italy won't offer to pay for it.

No with a AH more succesfull Italy will stick with neutrality, after taking all the CP offer for keep it and gladly trade with Germany and AH at very inflated price.
The DoW of Italy was the work of a very vocal minority and with Russia out the neutralist will have a lot of more munition.
Surely some price will be exorted, probably Albania ( already occupied so is not great leap to concede and maybe Trento as payment of war debt but this has been already discussed, there is the possibility of Montenegro as an Italian protectorate instead of Trento, probably more concenial to Vienna and will be considered as a rectification of not giving compensation to Italy for Bosnia ).
Otherwise Italy can declare war on the Entente, after all the interventionist in general wanted just to enter the war and there are a lot of irrisolved issue with France

[wiking]

No with a AH more succesfull Italy will stick with neutrality, after taking all the CP offer for keep it and gladly trade with Germany and AH at very inflated price.
The DoW of Italy was the work of a very vocal minority and with Russia out the neutralist will have a lot of more munition.
Surely some price will be exorted, probably Albania ( already occupied so is not great leap to concede and maybe Trento as payment of war debt but this has been already discussed, there is the possibility of Montenegro as an Italian protectorate instead of Trento, probably more concenial to Vienna and will be considered as a rectification of not giving compensation to Italy for Bosnia ).
Otherwise Italy can declare war on the Entente, after all the interventionist in general wanted just to enter the war and there are a lot of irrisolved issue with France

To avoid blow back Italy probably would have to wait until France was already collapsing to swoop in and get a seat at the peace deal. Whom does Italy owe its national debts to at this time?

[lukedalton]

To avoid blow back Italy probably would have to wait until France was already collapsing to swoop in and get a seat at the peace deal. Whom does Italy owe its national debts to at this time?

During this time (and to be honest as always), the debt is owed by the italian themselfs, it's a period were at the end of the fiscal year the state has no deficit instead there are more money not much but still (yes i'm myself amazed), but the war changed that...hell we finished in the 70's to pay that debt. So in only economical terms here the real winner of the war are the USA and less Italy (no damaged industrial and social infrastructure, more commerce, basically all his enemies weakened winners and losers alike)

[Franz Josef II]

Guys, let's not make too much out of Italy getting Tyrol - whatever from Austria. In our timeline, Vienna was absolutely opposed to giving away lands that had been under the Habsburg banner for centuries. Germany put a lot of pressure on the Austrians and still they wouldn't budge. In the end, Germany's foreign minister came up with the idea: "just promise that you will cede the territory after the conflict is over, then, totally reneg (sp?) on the deal."

That was actually how Germany got Austria to propose such a deal. In a scenario where Austria is in a much better position, they will not even countenance it. More likely is that Germany will attempt to entice Italian neutrality with Tunisia, which the Italians regarded as rightfully theirs, and perhaps some border adjustments w/France or even all of Nice and Savoy.

[lukedalton]

Guys, let's not make too much out of Italy getting Tyrol - whatever from Austria. In our timeline, Vienna was absolutely opposed to giving away lands that had been under the Habsburg banner for centuries. Germany put a lot of pressure on the Austrians and still they wouldn't budge. In the end, Germany's foreign minister came up with the idea: "just promise that you will cede the territory after the conflict is over, then, totally reneg (sp?) on the deal."

That was actually how Germany got Austria to propose such a deal. In a scenario where Austria is in a much better position, they will not even countenance it. More likely is that Germany will attempt to entice Italian neutrality with Tunisia, which the Italians regarded as rightfully theirs, and perhaps some border adjustments w/France or even all of Nice and Savoy.

Yes, they were opposed to cede anything, but unless you are the Draka you can't have all what you want. After this little conflict, AH as every nation who fight it will be not in a pleaseant situation, so Rome can simply say that in exchange of Trento and a little adjustment in the Venezia Giulia they can slice the Austrian debt or pay in cash, and Vienna as everyone else will be in dire need of money so she probably swallow is pride and accept the offer.

[wiking]

Yes, they were opposed to cede anything, but unless you are the Draka you can't have all what you want. After this little conflict, AH as every nation who fight it will be not in a pleaseant situation, so Rome can simply say that in exchange of Trento and a little adjustment in the Venezia Giulia they can slice the Austrian debt or pay in cash, and Vienna as everyone else will be in dire need of money so she probably swallow is pride and accept the offer.

Debt? Do you really think the Italians would extend credit to the AHs?

[lukedalton]

Debt? Do you really think the Italians would extend credit to the AHs?

The idea to have the AH in debt will be...utterly ironical, but in any case with Italy stick with neutrality it will surely commerce with the CP selling merchandise...at very inflated price, so the possibily of a line of credit will be not ASB and in some of a classic historical irony will give to the Italy some motivation for support the continuation of AH or even if Italy don't extend directely credit to Vienna, the war debt will be enough to take in consideration every option.
Finally, yes AH will have probably the intention of not keep the promise, but the 1916 or 1917 is very different by 1915, just in the 16 AH has already almost 800.000 of death and not counting the wounded by the end of the carnage even if victorious the will to fight for single province just for not keeping a treaty will be doubtoul IMHO

[DanF]

In regards to war debt. The following are taken from the book: The Economics of WW1.

Military Spending- (Pre-War Budget 740 million crowns)
Here is Austria-Hungary OTL military spending in 1913 prices:
1913 - 1,172.2 Million Crowns (Higher than Budget due to partial mobilization to intimidate Serbia)
1914/15 - 7,382.1 Million Crowns
1915/16 - 6,191.2 Million Crowns
1916/17 - 4,535.7 Million Crowns
1917/18 - 4,038.5 Million Crowns

1913 Crowns are roughly $3.6783 in 1990 dollars (this date in dollars seems to be frequently used when discussing GDP).

Military spending should be a little less as Austria-Hungary will suffer less losses do to capture and fewer fronts. However, she also would be on the offensive more, and might spend the same amount to update her army to a better state than it was OTL. So, the above figures might be the same in this timeline as they were OTL, but the Austria-Hungary military would also be more effective.

Inflation and GDP---
Austria-Hungary suffered very high inflation during the war OTL. Here is a Cost of living Chart:

1914, July - 100
1914, Dec - 129
1915, Dec - 261
1916, Dec - 615
1917, Dec - 829
1918, Dec - 1,589

However, a lot of the things that happened OTL economically speaking did not happen in this Timeline, so inflation will be less and the economy & total tax collection will be more. Therefore total war debt would be less.

Galicia was never lost, the transportation network did not suffer the loss of cars and locomotives, and there is still a decent amount of external trade to help ensure agricultural raw materials. OTL Austria-Hungary like all war powers took a GDP hit (over 10% for A-H more than most took) in 1914. In 1915 the Hungarian half of the Empire grew, but the Austria half with the loss of Galicia shrank. In this timeline since Galicia was not lossed then Austria-Hungary would grow about 5% GDP in 1915. By looking at the sector GDPs if Austria-Hungary can keep Agricultural Raw materials at 80% of pre-war levels through trade & internal production (cotton [read Ottomans] being the biggest as the Austrian half textile industry was very large), ensure the Transport Network doesn't suffer OTL collapse do to equipment loss, and mobilizes 1.5 million less men between end of 1915 and 1918 (I am assuming the same low level of POW participation in the workforce as OTL). Then here are rough new GDP numbers (OTL she shrank throughout the war):

1916 4.7% (Now at 98%+ of pre-war GDP)
1917 1.5% (Now 100% pre-war GDP)
1918 no growth unless the war ends, but no loss either. The War ending would give roughly a 5%-7% (whole year, so pro-rate by percentage of year left) GDP growth, thanks to workforce returning. After the end of the war Austria-Hungary would "probably" go back to its high (compared to other European nations) pre-war growth 1.5% to 2% GDP growth a year. However, Austria-Hungary has a lot of upside post-war as she still has a very rural population (50% in Austria/67% in Hungary), so there is a lot of potential for even more economic growth. Especially, if one considers her large number of natural resources, good farmland, and a potential Germany lead central European trading zone.

The intent of the above is in reference to war debt. Pre-war Austria-Hungary was spent 740 million crowns, and her tax collection was not that great. She collected only between 5% and 15% of GDP in taxes, OTL.

[wiking]

In regards to war debt. The following are taken from the book: The Economics of WW1.

Military Spending- (Pre-War Budget 740 million crowns)
Here is Austria-Hungary OTL military spending in 1913 prices:
1913 - 1,172.2 Million Crowns (Higher than Budget due to partial mobilization to intimidate Serbia)
1914/15 - 7,382.1 Million Crowns
1915/16 - 6,191.2 Million Crowns
1916/17 - 4,535.7 Million Crowns
1917/18 - 4,038.5 Million Crowns

1913 Crowns are roughly $3.6783 in 1990 dollars (this date in dollars seems to be frequently used when discussing GDP).

Military spending should be a little less as Austria-Hungary will suffer less losses do to capture and fewer fronts. However, she also would be on the offensive more, and might spend the same amount to update her army to a better state than it was OTL. So, the above figures might be the same in this timeline as they were OTL, but the Austria-Hungary military would also be more effective.

Inflation and GDP---
Austria-Hungary suffered very high inflation during the war OTL. Here is a Cost of living Chart:

1914, July - 100
1914, Dec - 168
1915, Dec - 234
1916, Dec - 356
1917, Dec - 602
1918, Dec - 1,167

However, a lot of the things that happened OTL economically speaking did not happen in this Timeline, so inflation will be less and the economy & total tax collection will be more. Therefore total war debt would be less.

Galicia was never lost, the transportation network did not suffer the loss of cars and locomotives, and there is still a decent amount of external trade to help ensure agricultural raw materials. OTL Austria-Hungary like all war powers took a GDP hit (over 10% for A-H more than most took) in 1914. In 1915 the Hungarian half of the Empire grew, but the Austria half with the loss of Galicia shrank. In this timeline since Galicia was not lossed then Austria-Hungary would grow about 5% GDP in 1915. By looking at the sector GDPs if Austria-Hungary can keep Agricultural Raw materials at 80% of pre-war levels through trade & internal production (cotton [read Ottomans] being the biggest as the Austrian half textile industry was very large), ensure the Transport Network doesn't suffer OTL collapse do to equipment loss, and mobilizes 1.5 million less men between end of 1915 and 1918 (I am assuming the same low level of POW participation in the workforce as OTL). Then here are rough new GDP numbers (OTL she shrank throughout the war):

1916 4.7% (Now at 97% of pre-war GDP)
1917 1.5% (Now 98%+ pre-war GDP)
1918 no growth unless the war ends, but no loss either. The War ending would give roughly a 5%-7% (whole year, so pro-rate by percentage of year left) GDP growth, thanks to workforce returning. After the end of the war Austria-Hungary would "probably" go back to its high (compared to other European nations) pre-war growth 1.5% to 2% GDP growth a year. However, Austria-Hungary has a lot of upside post-war as she still has a very rural population (50% in Austria/67% in Hungary), so there is a lot of potential for even more economic growth. Especially, if one considers her large number of natural resources, good farmland, and a potential Germany lead central European trading zone.

The intent of the above is in reference to war debt. Pre-war Austria-Hungary was spent 740 million crowns, and her tax collection was not that great. She collected only between 5% and 15% of GDP in taxes, OTL.

This is tremendous, thanks very much for all the information, it will prove very useful!

[DanF]

Thanks, Wiking.

However, I have to say I am sorry. In my rush, I added all those numbers and forgot to add in the final cost of the war (the most important part) for Austria-Hungary. Depending upon who does the estimates the actualy cost of the war OTL for Austria-Hungary was between (all in 1913 prices):

21,951 Million Crowns to 24,283 Million Crowns

As I said in this timeline with the economy doing better, the cost would most likely be less thanks to higher tax revenue. However, it would be safe to say the costs would be at least 80%-90% of the OTL costs.

Here are some conversions to give everyone an idea of what that is to other countries:

1909 conversions:

1 Mark = 1.18 Crowns
1 Crown = 1.05 Swiss Francs
1 Crown = 1.05 French Francs
1 Crown = 1.05 Italian Lire
1 Crown = 1.05 Romanian Lei
The above (not counting Germany were in the Latin Money Union*, as was Serbia and a few other nations)
* Sort of like the Euro before the Euro existed. The idea was for everyone to make coins with the same ratio of gold and silver so they are interchangeable.

1913 conversions:

$1 = 4.96 Crowns
1 Mark = 1.18 Crowns

In regards to mobilizatin OTL Austria-Hungary mobilized 8 million. I am assuming only 6.5 million will be mobilized in my GDP growth estimates. This may seem like a lot, but remember over 1.5 Million Austria-Hungarians were taken prisoner. So, the lack of POWs alone would accomplish what I am saying. Also, unlike OTL they could actually use POWs in large numbers (especially in the mines and farms), which would have had a similar effect.

[DanF]

Just wanted to mention that on the cost of living data a few posts back I grabbed the wrong chart (circulation data). I updated post to reflect the right data. Also, my math on percentages of OTL GDP were off by a year. I updated that as well in the same post. I wanted to put the with inflation numbers to give everyone an idea of what the people at the time looked at. I created GDP estimates by taking the percentage of the 1913 GDP of Austria-Hungary and multiplying by the cost of living. These are not perfect, but they should be close enough for relationship reference. (Sorry, I am unsure how to space the data so it is more readable on this forum?)

GDP with Inflation (Million Crowns) - OTL
Year Cost of Living 1913 GDP Real GDP National Debt Crown/SwFranc
1913 100 27,326.2 27,326.2 18,810 1 = 1.05
1914 129 24,538.93 31,655.22 29,020 1 = 0.86
1915 261 24,374.97 63,618.67 44,250 1 = 0.67
1916 615 21,915.61 134,781.00 66,200 1 = 0.49
1917 829 19,019.09 157,667.84 97,130 1 = 0.44
1918 1,589 16,805.61 267,041.14 118,320 1 = 0.42

GDP with Inflation (Million Crowns) – My Growth Scenario
Year Cost of Living 1913 GDP Real GDP National Debt Crown/SwFranc
1913 100 27,326.2 27,326.2 18,810 1 = 1.05
1914 129 24,538.93 31,655.22 29,020 1 = 0.86
1915 251.7 25,741.28 64,790.80 44,157 1 = high 0.5X
1916 500 26,976.42 134,882.00 55,537 1 = mid 0.5X
1917 628.4 27,326.2 171,717.85 62,578 1 = high 0.4X
1918 1,008.4 27,326.2 75,557.40 64,476 1 = mid 0.4X

I assumed Government revenue would stay at 7.5% of GDP from 1916 and beyond thanks to less inflation and better economy. OTL it shank all the way down to 3%-4% of GDP by 1918.

[wiking]

Okay, several updates about my progress:
I've realized that the end game is going to be a bit of a ways out, so I'm toning down my reading to be able to tackle more important and immediate topics for 1916. In the meantime please keep coming up with suggestions for the post war, even if it is to mention issues that any nation/ethic group will have post war.
I've worked out a general idea of what I think could/would happen for the 1916, but the twin issues of the Somme and Verdun in this ATL have stymied me. Real Life has also become a major impediment, so it will probably delay another post for a while; I will post just as soon as I can work out several details and Real Life lets me.
In the meantime any ideas about either the Somme or Verdun here, or the Eastern Front in 1916 will be much appreciated.

The broad outline is that Verdun still happens with major resources not available IOTL, which changes how the Entente responds. The Somme is moved up to June, but with heavier losses in 1915 the British are not as prepared as OTL. Also the front line around the Somme is significantly forward of OTL, which will have important implications. Falkenhayn probably won't get sacked in 1916 ITTL. In the East the Russians will focus on fighting the Germans to support the French, as there are significantly fewer Germans and Russian losses in 1915 were significantly less than OTL- that means the Russians are stronger in just about all regards.

The Southwest Front (ITTL 40% of the Russian army on the Eastern Front) is led ITTL by general Ruszki instead of Brusilov, who is still with the 8th army; Brusilov has not been as successful as OTL so far and the AHs don't seem like easy pickings like OTL 1916. There is growing unrest in AH as the Slavs want the war to end now that Serbia is conquered and though there aren't mass desertions like OTL there are growing individual desertions among the Slav groups on the Eastern Front and growing political problems; the soldiers have grown more politicized, especially the Czechs. The Hungarian soldiers are starting to get exposed to socialist writings and are expecting important changes post war to the social/economic situation at home.

Conrad is planning a major offensive in the East near Dubno-Lutsk and is forming a new army under Auffenberg, who is the premier general ITTL (firepower focused and has transitioned well to the new paradigm of warfare) while the AH army experiments with the transition to the triangular division. Greater artillery production and fewer losses have meant that the AH divisions and corps can load up on artillery; Auffenberg's plan for the AH divisions prewar while he was War Minister was to have 60 artillery pieces per division (24 field guns 36 howitzers), 24 heavy howitzers per corps (meaning 144 guns per corps!), and is pressing to get his forces up to that standard.

During the first half of 1916 was more than 1 million shells a month OTL, here too, but with only one active front to use that supply on. The Russians was 4 million during the same period, but had major problems getting it to the front. Without Kowel the Russians don't have a major two track line to the Southwest front except through Kiev via Moscow and only one single track line from the north through Korosten.
http://parovoz.com/maps/rwmap-1916.jpg
I'm not sure the total that did, but it was probably only at most 2/3rds of total, with a smaller fraction even arriving in Ukraine. The Southwest Front will be the poor relation with at very best perhaps parity in shell supply to the AHs if not significantly less.

[Tom_B]

Okay, several updates about my progress:
I've realized that the end game is going to be a bit of a ways out, so I'm toning down my reading to be able to tackle more important and immediate topics for 1916. In the meantime please keep coming up with suggestions for the post war, even if it is to mention issues that any nation/ethic group will have post war.
I've worked out a general idea of what I think could/would happen for the 1916, but the twin issues of the Somme and Verdun in this ATL have stymied me. Real Life has also become a major impediment, so it will probably delay another post for a while; I will post just as soon as I can work out several details and Real Life lets me.
In the meantime any ideas about either the Somme or Verdun here, or the Eastern Front in 1916 will be much appreciated.

The broad outline is that Verdun still happens with major resources not available IOTL, which changes how the Entente responds. The Somme is moved up to June, but with heavier losses in 1915 the British are not as prepared as OTL. Also the front line around the Somme is significantly forward of OTL, which will have important implications. Falkenhayn probably won't get sacked in 1916 ITTL. In the East the Russians will focus on fighting the Germans to support the French, as there are significantly fewer Germans and Russian losses in 1915 were significantly less than OTL- that means the Russians are stronger in just about all regards.

The Southwest Front (ITTL 40% of the Russian army on the Eastern Front) is led ITTL by general Ruszki instead of Brusilov, who is still with the 8th army; Brusilov has not been as successful as OTL so far and the AHs don't seem like easy pickings like OTL 1916. There is growing unrest in AH as the Slavs want the war to end now that Serbia is conquered and though there aren't mass desertions like OTL there are growing individual desertions among the Slav groups on the Eastern Front and growing political problems; the soldiers have grown more politicized, especially the Czechs. The Hungarian soldiers are starting to get exposed to socialist writings and are expecting important changes post war to the social/economic situation at home.

Conrad is planning a major offensive in the East near Dubno-Lutsk and is forming a new army under Auffenberg, who is the premier general ITTL (firepower focused and has transitioned well to the new paradigm of warfare) while the AH army experiments with the transition to the triangular division. Greater artillery production and fewer losses have meant that the AH divisions and corps can load up on artillery; Auffenberg's plan for the AH divisions prewar while he was War Minister was to have 60 artillery pieces per division (24 field guns 36 howitzers), 24 heavy howitzers per corps (meaning 144 guns per corps!), and is pressing to get his forces up to that standard.

During the first half of 1916 was more than 1 million shells a month OTL, here too, but with only one active front to use that supply on. The Russians was 4 million during the same period, but had major problems getting it to the front. Without Kowel the Russians don't have a major two track line to the Southwest front except through Kiev via Moscow and only one single track line from the north through Korosten.
http://parovoz.com/maps/rwmap-1916.jpg
I'm not sure the total that did, but it was probably only at most 2/3rds of total, with a smaller fraction even arriving in Ukraine. The Southwest Front will be the poor relation with at very best perhaps parity in shell supply to the AHs if not significantly less.

Gallipoli got shut down a lot earlier in your TL though it is one of those details you did en passant with a passing reference and some arbitrary convergence. It is hard to see the British deception plan for the withdrawal working as well during the short nights near the summer solstice as they did during the winter. A really bad ending could well have toppled Asquith.

And an early termination of Gallipoli means Enver will be able to turn his attention back to Caucasia much earlier. This means reinforcements plus German ammunition will be arriving there a lot earlier. The Russians will not have the superiority of numbers in early 1916 they did OTL.

[wiking]

Gallipoli got shut down a lot earlier in your TL though it is one of those details you did en passant with a passing reference and some arbitrary convergence. It is hard to see the British deception plan for the withdrawal working as well during the short nights near the summer solstice as they did during the winter. A really bad ending could well have toppled Asquith.

And an early termination of Gallipoli means Enver will be able to turn his attention back to Caucasia much earlier. This means reinforcements plus German ammunition will be arriving there a lot earlier. The Russians will not have the superiority of numbers in early 1916 they did OTL.

I don't know as much about the battle, so any advice/information would be helpful.

[Tom_B]

I don't know as much about the battle, so any advice/information would be helpful.

This is a tall order. But a couple of points. The original landing consisted of 4 British and one French division (Apr 25 ANZAC Day). At some of their beachheads they took heavy losses from the Ottoman defenders. They got ashore and were soon hemmed in by Ottoman entrenchments and failed to take key objectives starting with the high ground at Achi Baba. They were reinforced with an additional division and an independent brigade. About the latest the expedition could last with any hope of success IMHO ITL is Third Battle of Krithia which happened Jun 4. After that the deltas you have work badly against the Entente.

1] Rail connection through Serbia is open. OE is getting ammo, probably some additional MG's and artillery as well

2] Less obvious but perhaps even more important much of the Ottoman Army was concentrated in Thrace at the beginning of 1915 incl. both the First and Second Armies (3 corps each). One of the reasons is the worry that the Bulgarians would enter the war against them. Once the Bulgarians become allies this concern goes away and most of those divisions become available elsewhere.

In OTL the build up by both sides continued. After failing with an amphibious flanking op at Suvla Bay in August the British became pessimistic. However when K. visited Hamilton, Sir Ian predicted a disaster if they tried to withdraw. Munro replaced Hamilton and devised a lengthy multistage deception plan that worked rather well at least in terms of getting men and weapons off but still allowed the enemy to capture copious stores.

Now there are reasons to justify a Gallipoli that gets aborted in June will have a much harder time pulling this off. One obvious factor is the much shorter nights. The other was that by late 1915 the Ottoman Fifth Army was badly worn and waiting for the early spring to counterattack while in an early withdrawal scenario they will be still building up and relatively fresh and aggressive.

[wiking]

Now there are reasons to justify a Gallipoli that gets aborted in June will have a much harder time pulling this off. One obvious factor is the much shorter nights. The other was that by late 1915 the Ottoman Fifth Army was badly worn and waiting for the early spring to counterattack while in an early withdrawal scenario they will be still building up and relatively fresh and aggressive.

IIRC from what little I have read on the subject, it seems that early on in the fighting, when the Ottomans were at their freshest, naval bombardments at night played a crucial role in halting Ottoman bayonet assaults with heavy losses. Even if the Ottomans catch on to what is going on, as the draw down will take place over a longer period of time thanks to the shorter nights, won't the British be able to use their battleships are floating artillery to keep the Ottomans at bay while they pull of their withdrawals at night? Granted the Ottomans are likely to be able to interdict the withdrawal more than OTL, but with Brits setting up booby traps and machine guns teams along expected attack avenues to alert and delay the enemy, wouldn't they still be able to pull something like OTL's withdrawal off?

The political fall out is still going to be large, especially as the Entente cannot then land in Greece to keep the Balkan Front open (I doubt the pro-Entente Greeks are going to have enough clout to be able to 'invite' the landings at Salonika ITTL). Might this be enough topple Asquith's government anyway.

As to the previous post regarding why I haven't mentioned the Ottomans more, I initially planned on creating an outline of events in the East with other fronts being mentioned as necessary to highlight major changes. In retrospect, perhaps it makes more sense to highlight the changes to the Middle East, because the Caucasus sector will get hotter quickly, drawing off troops from the Eastern Front.

[wiking]

From the infinite :rolleyes: knowledge of Wikipedia, it seems that in the Caucasus the period from July to September (1915) saw minor action and a period of calm from October to 1916.

With Gallipoli ending in June ITTL it looks like the Ottomans could build up significant reserves to counter the Russian attacks in 1916 or perhaps attack late in the year in 1915 (it seems the Ottomans had no rail lines running to the Caucasus Mts so any build up/supply would be difficult at best), though I doubt after the debacle in 1914 if anything like that would be feasible, especially as OTL in 1916 the Caucasian army was still riddle with major supply problems despite being half of the size of the Russian army and on their own territory. The addition of extra soldiers would only make the problem worse.

Even in 1916 I'm not sure the Ottomans will be able to overcome their major supply issues on this front ITTL, though the extra manpower could be pressed into rail line construction, something I know very little about in this theater; AFAIK the Ottomans did not engage in very much of this, as even in 1917 the rail lines radiating from Istanbul were not connected with the Palestinian Front or Mesopotamian Front and had to be carried to from one rail head to the next.

Though the Ottomans are likely to be able to check just about any Russian aggression in the Caucasus and have more forces for other theaters early on, I don't see any aggressive success on any front even with a early end to the Dardanelles campaign.

Edit: In retrospect it seems that I'm being very final here regarding my position on this issue; really I'm just stating my case. I'm actually eager for someone to refute my interpretation of wikipedia sources, because, well, I just have wikipedia to go on at the moment. I have no specifics about supply or supply potential, so I am just guessing based on my very limited knowledge of the subject. If anyone can present a counter point or point me in the direction of source materials, I will happily look at them.

[DanF]

Historically, the Ottomans relied on sea transport to make up for their lack of internal transportation infrastructure. Which, is why I mentioned Black Sea trade using Romanian flagged ships for trade would be a boon to the Central Powers trade, since they could sail to the many small ports around Anatolia. The Ottoman rail network was not really sufficient for extensive trade, and pre-war the Ottomans actually used sea trade over rail trade. Another example is during the Balkan wars the whole job of Greece was have her navy stop the Ottomans from landing more reinforcements.

Therefore, as long as the Russian navy controls the Black Sea the Ottomans are stuck with the overland route to the Caucus region and as you already mentioned the supply/transportation problems that entails. The Russian Black Sea fleet capitol ships in 1915 OTL was 5 Pre-Dreadnaughts and 2 newly built Dreadnaughts. The Ottoman fleet OTL was 1 German Battlecruiser, 1 German Light Cruiser, and 2 Pre-Dreadnaughts. The Russians frequently sailed the fleet in large formations, since the German Battlecruiser and Light Cruiser were faster, but could not take on large multiple capitol ships with any hope of winning.

[Tom_B]

I am noticing something. You present what seem to be realistic (IMHO) outcomes on the Western Front but seem very eager to hear someone tell you that you are being overly conservative. Yet on nearly every other front you are being overly conservative but do not want to hear it (zB all the major river lines are holding).

In that case let me present some interesting facts from Erickson's Ordered to Die

Table 4.2 Late April 1915 dispositions

Thrace: 13 ID*, 1 Cav Bgde
Gallipoli: 6 ID, 1 Cav Bgde
Caucasia: 13 ID, 2 Cav Div plus 1 Cav Bgde (many heavily understrength)
Mesopotamia: 2 ID

*There is an inconsistency in Erickson's table with 5th ID in both First Army (Thrace) and Fifth Army. Reading the text I've concluded it was in Fifth Army

Table 4.3 Late Summer dispositions

Thrace: 9 ID, 1 Cav Bgde (4 ID newly formed)
Gallipoli: 16 ID
Caucasia: 14 ID, 2 Cav Div plus 1 Cav Bgde (many heavily understrength)
Mesopotamia: 3 ID (1 newly formed)

Table 5.2 January 1916

Thrace: 9 ID, 1 Cav Bgde
Gallipoli: 16 ID
Caucasia: 11 ID, 2 Cav Div plus 1 Cav Bgde (some heavily understrength)
Mesopotamia: 4 ID

U]Table 5.4 August 1916[/U]

Thrace: 1 ID, 1 Cav Bgde
Gallipoli: 2 ID
Caucasia: 24 ID, 2 Cav Div plus 1 Cav Bgde (some heavily understrength)
Mesopotamia: 6 ID

I will let you draw you draw your own conclusions about how this combined with your deltas impacts your TL.

However this may be the last time I post to your thread.

[wiking]

I am noticing something. You present what seem to be realistic (IMHO) outcomes on the Western Front but seem very eager to hear someone tell you that you are being overly conservative. Yet on nearly every other front you are being overly conservative but do not want to hear it (zB all the major river lines are holding).

I will let you draw you draw your own conclusions about how this combined with your deltas impacts your TL.

However this may be the last time I post to your thread.

Thanks for your input on this subject and the information, I currently do not have a copy of that book, so it all definitely helps; I'm sorry if I've offended you with something I've written, I've just tried to go the direction that felt right to me based on my interpretation of the sources I've read. I know that my 'argument' style can be abrasive and apologize to anyone that I have offended in making my point. My understanding of the war has left me with impression of the Germans potentially being much more effective in ATLs in the West, while reading has left me distinctly underwhelmed by the potential of Germany's allies in the war, even in TLs were PODs allow them to perform better. I am lacking in some specifics as to issues like the Ottoman's supply situation or the Russian's morale/supply problems, which has colored my views regarding performance in ATLs.

I realize that my knowledge of the war and its outcomes are somewhat specific, which means I have large gaps in understanding some aspects of it, such as some of the Entente political scene and the Ottoman part of the war. I do rely on your input Tom, especially as you have a much broader and deeper understanding of the war than I, though we may not always agree; I'd hate to lose your input and feel my TL would be much weaker without it.

If you have any other specific issues with me or the my writing, I'd like to work them out. Also if you could note my edit in the above post about the Caucasian Front, I think I came off as rejecting your suggestion outright, which was not my intention at all; rather I was just trying to present a position based on a very limited and imperfect source, wikipedia. Dan clarified some of the situation about how supply functioned, so please don't misunderstand my post as an outright rejection of your advice; I just wanted to clarify the supply situation as a limiting factor on that front, which might prove crucial to transferred to a reinforced offensive. I'm used to a debate style format and presented a position, expecting others to point out problems in my view, not as an end to debate; in fact it was the exact opposite of a definitive statement.

[wiking]

Historically, the Ottomans relied on sea transport to make up for their lack of internal transportation infrastructure. Which, is why I mentioned Black Sea trade using Romanian flagged ships for trade would be a boon to the Central Powers trade, since they could sail to the many small ports around Anatolia. The Ottoman rail network was not really sufficient for extensive trade, and pre-war the Ottomans actually used sea trade over rail trade. Another example is during the Balkan wars the whole job of Greece was have her navy stop the Ottomans from landing more reinforcements.

Therefore, as long as the Russian navy controls the Black Sea the Ottomans are stuck with the overland route to the Caucus region and as you already mentioned the supply/transportation problems that entails. The Russian Black Sea fleet capitol ships in 1915 OTL was 5 Pre-Dreadnaughts and 2 newly built Dreadnaughts. The Ottoman fleet OTL was 1 German Battlecruiser, 1 German Light Cruiser, and 2 Pre-Dreadnaughts. The Russians frequently sailed the fleet in large formations, since the German Battlecruiser and Light Cruiser were faster, but could not take on large multiple capitol ships with any hope of winning.

Thanks for the info Dan; is there any information you have or might know where I can look to find any specifics about the Ottoman effort to supply the Caucasian Front? It kind of seems like the Germans in North Africa in WW2: supply has to come by sea, yet the enemy has greater naval strength.

Does anyone have any idea if Romania, given the scenario here, would be willing to do what Dan suggests and be hired to ship supplies to the Ottomans in the Black Sea?

[DanF]

Thanks for the info Dan; is there any information you have or might know where I can look to find any specifics about the Ottoman effort to supply the Caucasian Front? It kind of seems like the Germans in North Africa in WW2: supply has to come by sea, yet the enemy has greater naval strength.

Does anyone have any idea if Romania, given the scenario here, would be willing to do what Dan suggests and be hired to ship supplies to the Ottomans in the Black Sea?

Oh, I am sorry. I did not mean to imply that the Romanians would run military supplies to the Ottomans. I was only referring to Ottomans overseas trade by Romanian flagged ships (to get around a blockade by the Entente), and not her ability to use Romanian ships for military supply. If they (Romania) did the latter it would mean war with Russia, which considering Romania’s lack of navy would sink the supply ships. It may however, be good way to bring Romania into the Central Powers camp, but I am not sure it is believable.

My original intent was to follow up with the increased economic benefits the Central Powers had in this timeline compared to OTL, and to point out how the Ottoman overseas trade worked. The last point also highlights the Ottoman's lack of internal infrastructure. Sorry, for the confusion.

By mid-1915 use of the Black Sea for military supply by the Central Powers would be considered impossible because the Russian Black Sea fleet is far to powerful for what the Central Powers had in the area. The Russians however, did use the Black Sea for military supply of their own forces.

Again sorry for the confusion.

[wiking]

Oh, I am sorry. I did not mean to imply that the Romanians would run military supplies to the Ottomans. I was only referring to Ottomans overseas trade by Romanian flagged ships (to get around a blockade by the Entente), and not her ability to use Romanian ships for military supply. If they (Romania) did the latter it would mean war with Russia, which considering Romania’s lack of navy would sink the supply ships. It may however, be good way to bring Romania into the Central Powers camp, but I am not sure it is believable.

My original intent was to follow up with the increased economic benefits the Central Powers had in this timeline compared to OTL, and to point out how the Ottoman overseas trade worked. The last point also highlights the Ottoman's lack of internal infrastructure. Sorry, for the confusion.

By mid-1915 use of the Black Sea for military supply by the Central Powers would be considered impossible because the Russian Black Sea fleet is far to powerful for what the Central Powers had in the area. The Russians however, did use the Black Sea for military supply of their own forces.

Again sorry for the confusion.

Even if Ottoman ships hugged the coast? Do you know of any sources I can look at the explore this subject further?

[The Sandman]

If the Italians are staying out of the war, and the Austro-Hungarians can be pretty much certain of that, is there any chance that they might sortie their navy out of the Adriatic? Just checking the list of ships they had available on Wikipedia, it seems that they would outweigh the Russian Black Sea Fleet even without the Ottoman fleet joining them, and allowing more supplies to be shipped to the Caucasus would be helpful for the CPs.

[HJ Tulp]

If the Italians are staying out of the war, and the Austro-Hungarians can be pretty much certain of that, is there any chance that they might sortie their navy out of the Adriatic? Just checking the list of ships they had available on Wikipedia, it seems that they would outweigh the Russian Black Sea Fleet even without the Ottoman fleet joining them, and allowing more supplies to be shipped to the Caucasus would be helpful for the CPs.


I doubt the Austro-Hungarians would send their entire fleet to the Black Sea and even if they do, isn't there a big chance they are intercepted by the Med Fleet?

[wiking]

DanF and I were talking about the possibility of an AH presence in the Black Sea, which now that the Italians are confirmed to be neutral, I foresee an honorable mention of some submarines in Ottoman waters. Given the important duties of the surface fleet close to home, in case the Entente tries an incursion or the Italians 'reevaluate' their position regarding AH, makes an major surface detachment unlikely, though some lighter units could probably make the trip before the Med. Fleet could get in position if they have to sortie from Malta or Cyprus. These would likely just be token units though, as IIRC even without the Italians in the war, the Mediterranean is a much more 'target rich' environment thank the Black Sea.
As far as I know the Entente was still using the Suez Canal during WW1, so a lot of traffic would be available to German and AH subs.

[DanF]

As Wiking said we had talked (when this thread started) about the sorting the Austria-Hungarian fleet early in the war as a diversion to slip a few ships to the Black Sea. However, considering the mentality of the Austria-Hungary fleet and its overall lack of forces that is not realistic. In fact, the scenario depended upon Austria-Hungary building 3 new German designed Battlecruisers (the Trieste yards were wicked fast, and could lay all three (actually had 5 berths) at once completing all three in less than a year (could build a Dreadnought in 11 months).

The Entente in the central part of the Med. are based out of Malta, and without Italy there is no Otranto Barrage. So, subs could slip bye easily as could fast ships like Light Cruisers and Battlecruisers. The Austria-Hungarian Dreadnoughts can make the trip in one go, but they are slow (Man if the Monarch class Dreadnaughts ships had actually got built this scenario would be ideal for them) plus they were very important for home defense. The short range Austria-Hungarian subs would need to re-fuel in Greece or Italy (Dardanelles) are the only ones likely to be chosen.

Now in regards to the Black Sea I just read the Black Sea chapter up to 1917 in “A Naval History of WW1” by Paul Halpern. I will summarizes all of the action of Germany-Turk and Russia in the Black Sea OTL:

In 1914 the Goeben and Breslau, 8 fast (and small) Destroyers, and Torpedo boats were about all the Turks put in the Black Sea. The Turks had two Pre-Dreadnought Battleships, but they were far too slow. Therefore, those two ships essentially hanged out near Constantinople. The Goeben was confident against up to 2 Russian Pre-Dreadnoughts, but could not handle anymore than that. The primary focus of the Turkish-German forces in order appear to be: secure Constantinople, secure the coal trade route between Zonguldak and Constantinople, raid Russian commerce, and attack target of opportunity single Russian warships.

The Russians long range forces were 5 Pre-Dreadnoughts, a few subs (did not perform well), and the Bespokoiny class Destroyers that preformed very well. The Russians also made extensive use of sea planes. Now there were a bunch of other forces like Torpedo boats, Cruisers, other types of destroyers, etc… However, the Russians had to come from Sebastopol, which means only the above named forces were usually used outside of friendly coast routes until 1916. The Russians also had 2 Dreadnoughts under construction (the first one comes in service mid-1915). In 1914 the Russians spent a lot of effort trying to disrupt the coal route between Zonguldak and Constantinople. Once Gallipoli kicked off the Russians made a few half-hearted attempts at Constantinople, but they were not going to do anything major until the British got further north.

In the rest of 1915 the Breslau gets injured and went out for repair. The Russians sank a lot of the ships doing the coal run between Zonguldak and Constantinople (only torpedo boats guarded them, which could stop subs but were no match for the Bespokoiny destroyers). The Germans sent a bunch of older UB submarines 7 & 8 to be based out of Varna, Bulgaria to do merchant raiding in Western Black Sea. In the Eastern Black Sea only larger subs like U33 & U38 could really work. Though, the merchant raiding in the Black Sea was not very effective, the Russians were terrified of German subs and devoted a lot of destroyers to sub hunting missions. However, the sea planes always seemed to spot subs near Sebastopol. Now once the British retreat from Gallipoli then the Russians get scared and prepare mass landings of forces using their naval superiority (which started after the arrive of the first Dreadnought in mid-1915). At the end of 1915 the Russians creates a bunch of landing craft. (This might be a big thing to exploit, since ITTL the British retreated from Gallipoli earlier all of the Russian landing craft would not be available.)

In 1916 the Russians used their large fleet to ferry (in large convoy; when done piecemeal the faster German ships could sink them) troops to Rize and then Trabzon, while still using a portion of their forces to provide close naval support to the ground forces. So, basically the Russians were marching up along the coast of the Ottoman Empire in 1916. The major headache of the Russians Generals was even though; they had naval superiority they could not seem to cut off Turkish naval transport of men and materials.

In 1916 for the Central Powers the smaller subs out of Varna were good at distracting destroyers, but not much more. The larger subs U33 and U38 (U33 got damaged so this was temporiary replacement) were decent at raiding, but their main advantage was they scarred the Russian commanders to respond toward them. The Goeben and Breslau could not match the large Russian squadrons in late 1915 and 1916. So, in 1916 the Turks actually started to use them to ferry supplies and men since they were so fast they could outrun anyone trying to intercept them. The Coal trade route between Zonguldak and Constantinople stayed open, but the Russians had sank enough ships that this caused a coal shortage in Constantinople (would not happen ITTL as Romanian ships could carry coal from Romania). Lastly, the Turks seemed to at least send forces by sea in trickle fashion (i.e. not one giant wave, but a few at a time), since the Russians did not have enough forces to be everywhere.

Well I tried to give a decent summary to help give a sense of the overall flow of the Black Sea. Note: Max Valentiner was the German commander of U38 and he was one of their best captains. Both the U33 and U38 were in the Med. in 1915, so they could be called into the Black Sea earlier. Also, the Austria-Hungarian subs would have a much more freer hand in this timeline with no Otranto Barrage, so they might have a few in the Black Sea as well, but older versions would be stuck on the Western Black Sea with the older German subs.

[wiking]

So, basically the Russians were marching up along the coast of the Ottoman Empire in 1916. The major headache of the Russians Generals was even though; they had naval superiority they could not seem to cut off Turkish naval transport of men and materials.

Well I tried to give a decent summary to help give a sense of the overall flow of the Black Sea. Note: Max Valentiner was the German commander of U38 and he was one of their best captains. Both the U33 and U38 were in the Med. in 1915, so they could be called into the Black Sea earlier. Also, the Austria-Hungarian subs would have a much more freer hand in this timeline with no Otranto Barrage, so they might have a few in the Black Sea as well, but older versions would be stuck on the Western Black Sea with the older German subs.

Thanks! A lot of this is critical information for what I'll be writing about next. With the earlier end to Gallipoli and prevention of losses that would have occurred later on, the Ottomans can finally get reinforcements to their worn down units in the Caucasus. I'm just not sure which Ottoman theater would become the primary one after Gallipoli; the Brits are invading Mesopotamia, but haven't advanced over the Suez yet IIRC. Protecting the East Anatolia region would make the most sense, especially as the CPs will be likely asking Enver to attack the Russians to support them.

I assume we can rule out the Ottoman territorial losses of 1916 and perhaps even see an Ottoman advance some time later in 1915 to prepare for a major offensive in 1916. The Caucasus area is going to run red here, as the Russians won't have numerical superiority, though they will likely have logistical superiority. Naval focus on the Trebizon area is going to probably be heavy and draw in both sides' forces, or at least this is my impression. The CP forces will I assume, stay on the defensive and fight only when they think they can win, probably using Subs to harass and threaten Russian warships to keep them off the backs of Ottoman shipping.

To give an impression of the problems with Ottoman supply especially with the information provided by DanF:http://www.emersonkent.com/images/ottoman_empire_1914.jpg

[DanF]

Thanks! A lot of this is critical information for what I'll be writing about next. With the earlier end to Gallipoli and prevention of losses that would have occurred later on, the Ottomans can finally get reinforcements to their worn down units in the Caucasus. I'm just not sure which Ottoman theater would become the primary one after Gallipoli; the Brits are invading Mesopotamia, but haven't advanced over the Suez yet IIRC. Protecting the East Anatolia region would make the most sense, especially as the CPs will be likely asking Enver to attack the Russians to support them.

I assume we can rule out the Ottoman territorial losses of 1916 and perhaps even see an Ottoman advance some time later in 1915 to prepare for a major offensive in 1916. The Caucasus area is going to run red here, as the Russians won't have numerical superiority, though they will likely have logistical superiority. Naval focus on the Trebizon area is going to probably be heavy and draw in both sides' forces, or at least this is my impression. The CP forces will I assume, stay on the defensive and fight only when they think they can win, probably using Subs to harass and threaten Russian warships to keep them off the backs of Ottoman shipping.

To give an impression of the problems with Ottoman supply especially with the information provided by DanF:http://www.emersonkent.com/images/ottoman_empire_1914.jpg

Thanks. Rize appears to be the furthest eastern port that can take in supplies and men in large numbers for the Ottomans. Trabzon is the largest Port in the region, so the Germans could potentially turn it into a Sub port for their larger subs U33 and U38. There was a coastal road within naval range between Trabzon and Rice.

The first Russian amphibious landing was 2100 men on March 4, 1916 OTL. By May 1916 the Russians landed two divisions east of Trabzon, so the number of troops the could land went up quickly once all the troop ships were completed.

Good luck.

[wiking]

With the rather abrupt end of the Gallipoli campaign at the end of June (thanks to the open flow of German and AH munitions, weapons, and specialists) Ottoman forces were finally released to other fronts. Since the fighting at Gallipoli had grown to consume most of the Ottoman resources the Caucasian front had seen its flow of replacements and supplies dwindle to a trickle that left its front line forces much weaker than their foe. After the semi-successful withdrawal of Entente forces, the Ottomans had inherited a number a massive amounts (by that front's standards) of war materials that they could then put to use elsewhere. A number of prisoners had been taken in the long draw down of forces, which coupled with the failure of offensive had seen the First Lord of the Admiralty, Churchill, resign his post and leave the government. It did not suffice to save Asquith's government, which then fell in a no-confidence vote in July, further boosting the morale of the victors of Gallipoli.

As British forces redeployed, many to other sectors of the Middle East, the Ottomans began shipping forces to the Caucasian front. With their allies supplying materials the Enver Pasha was eager to take to the offensive as the Russians were locked in fighting on the Eastern Front. However, as there was no rail line linking the Front with Ankara and Black Sea shipping remained dangerous with the Russian fleet outnumbering and gunning the Ottomans, the build up remained slow. In the meantime AH naval ships were somewhat free to aid their ally by making individual dashes to Istanbul. Greece had remained somewhat friendly throughout the war, despite a strong, though diminishing, undercurrent of favor for the Entente; this allowed the AH ships to slip through their waters without the Entente realizing what was going on until too late. Mostly light units made the trek with light cruisers, destroyers, torpedo boats, and new submarines, built in Germany and assembled at Pola, arriving individually after clandestine rendezvouses with supply ships in Aegean waters.

These units helped bulk up the weak Ottoman fleet, which made further actions in the Black Sea possible. AH and later German subs made special efforts to monitor and harass the Russian capital ships to prevent them from disrupting supply runs to the Caucasus. With some success they allowed for the Ottomans to build up a sizable army by October, with the most important effort being made to bring existing units up to strength. Limited attacks were made to improve the front line, as major offensive action was deemed impossible before winter. Supplies would have to be built up over the winter before a large push could be made. These attacks were successful in the Lake Van area, as the Russians had pushed as far as possible and were trying to consolidate their gains. Van was recaptured in November after a bitter battle, with the Armenians fighting fanatically to keep the Ottomans out. Eventually though they resolved to evacuate the surviving civilians for fear of their safety.

In the meantime there was also significant action in Persia, as Ottoman forces sought to support the advance on Van and counter Russian forces issuing from Tabriz. Though supply remained a problem throughout the fighting, Russian advances were checked in Persia, at least Southwest of Lake Urmia. Winter put an end to most fighting until January. Yudenich the Russian general leading the Caucasian army, started an offensive to catch the Ottomans by surprise before they were able to build up for an offensive in spring, which allowed him to retake Van after major losses. The Ottomans though managed to successfully defend Erzerum and prevented a Russian column from moving along the coast to take Trebizond. Russia naval forces shelled the Ottomans constantly throughout the battle, but threats from submarines, both German and AH, proved dangerous enough to keep this support from getting too close to shore. Accuracy proved a critical issue that allowed the Ottomans to survive the deadly shells.

Fighting raged throughout the winter, with Spring finally bringing some respite to the weary soldiers. However by May the Ottomans finally returned to the offensive and threatened to push the Russians back over their borders. Costly fighting, supply issues, and difficulties moving up replacements kept the Ottomans from achieving their goal of taking Kars, but by August they had retaken Sarikamis, the site of their brutal defeat in 1914. The tide had finally turned in the Caucasian fighting, with Ottoman forces having the initiative. Necessary withdrawals were made on the Russian side, which weakened them in relation to their foe, especially as the fighting on the Eastern front picked up, but nevertheless critical Russian forces were pinned in the mountains instead of being made available for combat elsewhere.

However, commitments to other fronts limited the Ottomans support for further offensives, which left the Caucasian armies in a lull until the following year. Minor fighting occurred throughout the Autumn, but major actions had wound down for the year. With winter of 1916-1917 proved especially brutal, so further action was out of the question until Spring.

[Sol Zagato]

Seems reasonable to me. No real strategic resources gained or lost, but the Russian military is sapped in yet another area.

[wiking]

Seems reasonable to me. No real strategic resources gained or lost, but the Russian military is sapped in yet another area.

Its more than that. The Ottomans were ground up pretty bad OTL in the the Caucasus, especially when the Russians pushed hard into East Anatolia, wreaking havoc on the civilians in the area, depopulating major areas of core Turkish settlement. It really undermined the Ottoman war effort and threatened to knock the Turks out of the war before the revolution in Russia. Here though the Turks will have more resources for later on and a more stable population to draw on for soldiers and workers. It won't change things as much in the Middle East, but in Persia the balance of power has shifted and may well see public opinion turn toward the Turks, which gives Germany and Wassmuss a base for further clandestine operations in India and Afghanistan.

[wiking]

Falkenhayn, ever focused on the Western Front, had been preparing a strategy for the following year after the failure of his Doullens offensive. Realizing that the French still had too many reserves to make an offensive of the kind he had launched successful on the first push, OHL developed a strategy of attrition that would drag the French into an unfavorable situation and force them to fight for a piece of ground they could not abandon. Eventually the best place for the offensive was decided to be Verdun, where the Germans would have a supply advantage and would allow them to shell the area from three sides, as the fortress projected a salient into German lines.

Major reorganizations in the German force structure and savings from the Eastern Front thanks to Austro-Hungarian strength allowed OHL to amass a substantial reserve of over 40 divisions, though a number were to be earmarked for situations on the Eastern Front and for the expected British offensive in the Somme area. It was partly hoped that the British would be forced to attack before they were prepared to relieve the French, thereby grinding up both Western foes in unfavorable circumstance. As it was the Germans would be attacking on the East Bank of the Meuse with very heavy artillery support, over half of which was of the 150mm caliber and above. Over 1500 guns had been amassed, with millions of shells in reserve.

Debate with the German 5th army command staff caused some delays in planning, as they demanded an attack on both banks if success were to be had. Falkenhayn worried that such a broad offensive would dissipate German power and perhaps prevent the French from resisting on the East Bank where they would be fighting under terrible conditions, but ultimately released another corps to fight on the West Bank. The delay set the offensive bank until February 15th, but an unexpected storm lasting 10 days pushed the ultimate start date back to the 21st. Fortunately for the Germans they were able to wait out the storm in proper lodgings instead of in their jump off stollen. As the storm broke German guns smashed French positions along both banks of the Meuse, which the following day fell to an infantry assault supported by flamethrowers, infantry guns, and hand grenades. Even with the desperate French survivors fighting gallantly, they were overwhelmed and lost crucial positions before the French command could react. Despite the brilliant Petain taking over command of the sector, even he could not arrest the retreat immediately.

The gravest loss to the French was on the West Bank where the fall of Morte Homme and Hill 304 gave the Germans a vista view of the French defenses and excellent artillery parks to strike deep into French lines. Severely outnumbered Petain demanded permission to fall back to the West Bank, but the inexplicable German halt after taking Hill 304 gave GQG and the French government confidence enough to deny his request. Now though the Germans were able to strike French artillery parks and forts in the Bois Bourrus, which had been enfilading the German advance on the East Bank.

On the East Bank the French were being slaughtered in the German advance, though several spirited counter attacks and valiant defensive actions around some of the forts checked them. As February ground on, it looked as though the French defenses were going to collapse, especially as the German advance took them to the gates of ft. Douaumont by the 25th. Mostly abandoned except for a small caretaking group, it fell shortly thereafter to a bluff by an enterprising officer. Vaux and Souville remained outside German hands for the moment and continued raining down shells on the massed regiments pushing the French back. By March the Germans had long outrun their artillery support and were now experiencing the weight of French reserves as they appeared. A new, tighter line of defense and excellent leadership by Petain managed to parry the German advance for a while, but still the Germans pressed ahead.

Casualties for both sides rose at an alarming rate, but thus far the Germans had gotten the better of it. Of course the appalling loss rates at the front only drove the soldiers to despair, as matters of strategy and ‘acceptable’ losses meant nothing to them. By the end of March ft. Vaux was surrounded and Fleury was soon to fall. Souville and Tavannes were the next targets, which for Falkenhayn would satisfy his requirement of proper defensive terrain and start the next part of the battle. April was now by far the bloodiest month, as Souville was fought over repeatedly. In the East the Russians had started their supporting offensive between the Nieman and Bug rivers, distracting OHL at a critical moment. Reserves had to be diverted East, which proved intensely worrisome to Falkenhayn in particular, as he expected the British to attack any day to relieve the French. Thus far no indication was picked up by intelligence that the Brits were ready to enter the fray. Eventually Falkenhayn was persuaded to release more artillery and men to the Verdun battle, but so far nothing seemed to be able to knock the dogged French from their perch at Souville.

By May the constant pressure and added artillery finally told and Souville fell decisively, allowing German spotters to overlook the city of Verdun and the ground beyond. The rest of the month was spent pressing in on Tavannes and trying to hold captured ground. The French offensive efforts were stymied by the lack of decent observation of German positions once Souville had fallen, meaning their artillery was not nearly as effective as the German guns. French losses began to mount alarmingly, in contrast to the Germans, which started to fall for the first time since the start of the battle. In late May ft. Tavannes fell after a terrible series of engagements and Falkenhayn began removing units from the 5th army to halt their offensive. Still large numbers of heavy guns and mortars remained, as the defensive attrition battle was now to begin. June and July were brutal months that saw unheard of levels of munitions expended and left the area devastated by constant explosions. The Germans dug in deep, only emerging to push the French off the remaining superstructures of fortresses they had overrun. Guns had to be replaced in large numbers due to barrels being worn out so quickly from the constant firing.

Even as the British and French armies attacked the Somme bulge with mixed results, the fighting around Verdun did not slacken. Verdun itself was a pile of burning rubble, of no military value, but both sides had invested so much of their prestige into holding the area that they refused to withdraw resources desperately needed elsewhere. At the Somme the French had to keep withdrawing men to maintain their offensives at Verdun, which only served to consume lives and shells, while the Germans had to maintain so much of their artillery that the British were allowed to dictate the proceedings and break into even the heaviest defended strongpoints in the sector.

Despite the begging of his staff Falkenhayn held strong at Verdun and saw his strategy pay off. Even though minor offensives needed to be launched to recapture the constantly burning Souville and Tavannes, the French were paying more heavily for their efforts than the Germans to hold them. Still it locked in so many resources that many in the military and government questioned the wisdom of losing ground near the Somme to continue to turn the gears of the organ grinder of Verdun. July saw the AHs return to the offensive in the Ukraine, which finally forced the Russians to call of their bloody offensive against the Germans, freeing up resources for the West. Eventually though, even with the troops from the East, Falkenhayn was forced to release resources from Verdun for the Somme as the British pressed deeper into German defenses. This finally allowed the French to recapture Souville from the Germans and start to roll up the German lines. They had to give up pressing on the Somme, but the French fought for the rest of the year, often bloodily, to reconquer the blood-soaked moonscape of the Meuse Heights, one hill at a time. Tavannes was liberated in August, Vaux in September, but the Germans held Douaumont for several months, only losing it in December to a vast coordinated offensive that left the French exhausted. Morale was fraying, but the final recapture of Douaumont left the army with a sense of accomplishment that held them together into the following year. Verdun was declared to be a victory, but it was a pyrrhic victory.

The Germans had lost very heavily, suffering 320,000 irreplaceable casualties in the nearly year long battle at Verdun, but the French had suffered even more, losing 530,000 men in their constant efforts to retake the various forts and critical hills on the East and West banks of the Meuse. Even after liberating all of the forts in the Verdun area, the Germans still held crucial terrain such as Morte Homme and Hill 304 to the West and Hill 344 in the East. Efforts continued to retake these positions, but strong German defenses would see them hold out against these secondary operations. Though Falkenhayn’s plan did not work as well as intended, the Germans were able to force the French to fight and suffer more casualties, including a greater percentage of dead and permanently injured, than they themselves received. French participation at the Somme also was repeatedly scaled back after the early pushes, which made that operation more sustainable, which demonstrated some wisdom in holding the French at Verdun simultaneously. Though Falkenhayn was seriously concerned about the state of the German home front and economy, the coming year seemed to offer an opportunity to finally push the French over the edge.

[Sol Zagato]

I'm gonna have to reread this whole thread before I can make intelligent comments on this update. Glad to see it continuing.

[wiking]

I'm gonna have to reread this whole thread before I can make intelligent comments on this update. Glad to see it continuing.

Yeah, sorry I haven't been posting to this thread lately, RL has thrown me some curve balls, so I just haven't had the focus. I'm working on more updates now, so hopefully I can post them soon.

[Franz Josef II]

Yeah, sorry I haven't been posting to this thread lately, RL has thrown me some curve balls, so I just haven't had the focus. I'm working on more updates now, so hopefully I can post them soon.


Any chance you will be continuing this one?:o

[elkarlo]

Only a few pages in, but it is very good. Well thought out and implemented

[elkarlo]

After the Serb defeat, and the lessening of nationalism for a Serb nation. I could see a Free France like movement starting outa the hardcore. Where they wish to continue the fight no matter what. While the rest are demoralized by the defeat. Much like occupied France in WWII. Most people just did what they had to to, in order to live a normal life. Wasn't till the Allies were clearly going to win, did the resistance become a real movement.

[elkarlo]

The idea to have the AH in debt will be...utterly ironical, but in any case with Italy stick with neutrality it will surely commerce with the CP selling merchandise...at very inflated price, so the possibily of a line of credit will be not ASB and in some of a classic historical irony will give to the Italy some motivation for support the continuation of AH or even if Italy don't extend directely credit to Vienna, the war debt will be enough to take in consideration every option.
Finally, yes AH will have probably the intention of not keep the promise, but the 1916 or 1917 is very different by 1915, just in the 16 AH has already almost 800.000 of death and not counting the wounded by the end of the carnage even if victorious the will to fight for single province just for not keeping a treaty will be doubtoul IMHO


Heck with Italy neutral, they could sell Dutch products to the Dutch. As the Brits didn't let anything but the smallest amount of war goods into the Netherlands. Be a super easy way to make money.

[JEDLC]

Definitely well thought out, and intelligently written.

I cannot honestly see the Allies continuing very strongly if either the French or the Russians fail.

[BlondieBC]

Starting March 21st the forces had been arrayed against Serbia and the offensive was launched all over the front. After massive artillery preparation with the heaviest weapons in the AH arsenal, barges filled with infantry hit the target beaches across the Danube and overwhelmed Serbian forces, weakened by disease and suppressed by artillery and gun boats fire. Belgrade was subjected to special attention, which wrecked its defenses. AH forces swept over the Serbs guarding the north of their nation.

Further south a similar situation played out as the combined Bulgarian and Turkish armies shattered the weak detachments arrayed against them. Driving hard and fast into the rear of the Serb forces, their resistance crumbled, closing the escape routes of the forces to the north. Their flight south found them encountering Bulgarian divisions prepared for a fight, which pocketed a major part of these forces. Though dedicated elements managed to slip out of the trap, most of the Serb armies were surrounded and captured. The survivors were marched north instead of entrained. The many of the wounded fell out, dying on the side of roads, while the rest found themselves destined for concentration camps with the political classes of their nation. Bringing with them typhus and other diseases, the prison camps became death camps for many. Heaps of corpses would have to be burned to prevent the further spread of the disease, but the attrition rates of these prisoners remained high. In the face of such horrors the nationalistic Serb resistance died with these men.

The limited numbers of soldiers that reached the Albanian border still had much struggle ahead. Now in the month of May, these men didn't have to deal with the winter any longer, but the marauding tribesmen of the local population were not friendly to these small groups and hunted them during their flight. Perhaps 15,000 made it to the coast alive where they had to wait for evacuation by the British. They would eventually form a symbolic division after being supplemented by Serb emigrants for places like the US, serving in at Salonika. The Entente managed to land forces at Salonika, provoking a crisis in Greek leadership, which, after a coup involving the French, resulted in the Prime Minister deposing the king and allowing British and French troops to land. This small detachment was later joined by forces evacuated from Gallipoli, as the attempt to force the straights were wound down in the face of Bulgarian reinforcements and German munitions pouring in through the recently opened rail line to Istanbul.

The Russians also launched an offensive to help the Serbs by attacking near Kowel, finally succeeding in capturing the city and holding it in the face of AH counter attacks. Earlier attempts to take it in January and February had failed bloodily, but Ivanov's forces had learned from their mistakes and managed to take advantage of AH weakness to pull off a much needed victory. In March attacks were launched in Bessarbia to retake Chotin, but these failed in the face of superior leadership at all levels among the Pflanzer-Baltin group.

After the collapse of Serbia, Conrad decided rather than making peace with Montenegro as Falkenhayn had 'suggested' he would assert his nation's interests by conquering it. This further delayed the release of troops to the Eastern Front, pushing Falkenhayn's planned Western offensive back into June. This turned out to be fortuitous, as the French launched their another offensive in May in Artois.

With the release of forces from the Serbian front several changes were made in the East, including upgrading Pflanzer-Baltin's group to the 7th army and reinforcing it with mountain troops, reforming the 5th army under Tersztyanszky north of the AH 1st to free up German troops for the West, and upgrading army group Rohr along the Italian frontier to the 6th army. Archduke Eugene stayed in Serbia as the General Governor with Landsturm units to enforce AH rule. In Poland the Polish legion was withdrawn from the front to form an expanded Polish Defense Force for service at the front, but in the meantime all Pilsudski's military organizations united to begin forming a military organization near Warsaw and recruit from Congress Poland. This of course was done under the auspices of the Germans and AH, as neither trusted the man to work independently.

On the March 21st date, implies that the Bulgarian army starts a full mobilization no later than February 25. They had an 18 day mobilization plan that took closer to 25 days. I had to research this for my time line, and March 21 seems a bit too soon. Plausible, but on the fast side of plausible. There were issues to negotiate with the treaty, negotiations between the Ottomans and Bulgarians. Also, on the weather, are the mountain roads in good shape by March 21?

Originally, the A-H/German forces and Bulgarian forces were supposed to attack on the same day, but slow mobilization made the Bulgarians 7 days late. In your TL, will they attack on the same day as planned?

There is also an Order of Battle Issue with the Salonika forces. Most of these troops are not ready til closer to the September window. If the French/British move troops to Salonika, they either have to cancel Gallipoli or pull troops from France. So there will be a substantial butterfly effect. A lot will depend on how you write the story, but if you want fewer butterflies, don't do Salonika with an early Bulgarian attack. The free divisions are as follows for the early period

29th - February.
NZ & Aussie division - March - in training Egypt.
42nd Division - Defending Egypt by late 1914.
52nd Division - June

Stripping these means stripping the defenses of the Suez, and would be unwise, not that that being unwise stopped leaders on both sides.

The XII Corp units existed, but they look very, very Green to me.

[Andristan]

what is Arthur Arz von Straussenburg doing throughout all this? He led A-H 1st Army against the Romanian invasion and commanded during Caporetto, also led 6th corps during gorlice tarnow in OTL

[wiking]

what is Arthur Arz von Straussenburg doing throughout all this? He led A-H 1st Army against the Romanian invasion and commanded during Caporetto, also led 6th corps during gorlice tarnow in OTL

At this point he is commanding a corps or small army 'group' meaning a corps plus some various units. During the Winter of 1915 OTL he ended up commanding an adhoc unit during the battle of Limanova and ITTL did something similar. He will be a corps commander during TTL's version of Gorlice-Tarnow.

[wiking]

On the March 21st date, implies that the Bulgarian army starts a full mobilization no later than February 25. They had an 18 day mobilization plan that took closer to 25 days. I had to research this for my time line, and March 21 seems a bit too soon. Plausible, but on the fast side of plausible. There were issues to negotiate with the treaty, negotiations between the Ottomans and Bulgarians. Also, on the weather, are the mountain roads in good shape by March 21?

Originally, the A-H/German forces and Bulgarian forces were supposed to attack on the same day, but slow mobilization made the Bulgarians 7 days late. In your TL, will they attack on the same day as planned?

There is also an Order of Battle Issue with the Salonika forces. Most of these troops are not ready til closer to the September window. If the French/British move troops to Salonika, they either have to cancel Gallipoli or pull troops from France. So there will be a substantial butterfly effect. A lot will depend on how you write the story, but if you want fewer butterflies, don't do Salonika with an early Bulgarian attack. The free divisions are as follows for the early period

29th - February.
NZ & Aussie division - March - in training Egypt.
42nd Division - Defending Egypt by late 1914.
52nd Division - June

Stripping these means stripping the defenses of the Suez, and would be unwise, not that that being unwise stopped leaders on both sides.

The XII Corp units existed, but they look very, very Green to me.

The Bulgarians do attack, but are hastily trying to influence the campaign before the Serbs can get away. Their limited mobilization doesn't allow them to really influence the campaign very well.

Because of the Gallipoli invasion there won't be a Salonika here.

[wiking]

Would anyone be interested if I were to restart this TL? I'm not happy with the current version, because its too wank-y for the Austro-Hungarians compared to how the POD would likely have turned out.
I've had one PM about my TLs and this is the one I have the most interest in writing ATM.

[Josephus]

Don't know about wank-y, we held out a long time and fought bravely, despite losing almost all the regular army and lots of rolling stock right at the start. Without that, the improved quality and especially the logistics will add up.

I, for one, would be delighted to see good old Austria do better.

[wiking]

Don't know about wank-y, we held out a long time and fought bravely, despite losing almost all the regular army and lots of rolling stock right at the start. Without that, the improved quality and especially the logistics will add up.

I, for one, would be delighted to see good old Austria do better.

No doubt, but the disadvantage of being further from supply centers ITTL by winter 1914-5 will have an impact as well.
Otherwise that sounds like a yea to me.

[lukedalton]

Would anyone be interested if I were to restart this TL? I'm not happy with the current version, because its too wank-y for the Austro-Hungarians compared to how the POD would likely have turned out.
I've had one PM about my TLs and this is the one I have the most interest in writing ATM.

Frankly i don't found it excessively wanky, but for added realism i will just get one or two stupid blunder for the CP (they can be minor or major...you are the author so it's your choice) as both side had plenty of this.
I vote yes, after all this is one of the inspiration for mine

[Simon]

I, for one, would be delighted to see good old Austria do better.
Ditto, always nice to see Austria-Hungary do better and not seemingly being automatically written off as completely doomed.

[Caoster]

I'd be happy either way, if you think rewriting results in a better enough story to be worth your time, then go for it, otherwise, just keep going with what you have.

[Anderman]

Would anyone be interested if I were to restart this TL? I'm not happy with the current version, because its too wank-y for the Austro-Hungarians compared to how the POD would likely have turned out.
I've had one PM about my TLs and this is the one I have the most interest in writing ATM.

Yep i would be interested :)

[HJ Tulp]

Would anyone be interested if I were to restart this TL? I'm not happy with the current version, because its too wank-y for the Austro-Hungarians compared to how the POD would likely have turned out.
I've had one PM about my TLs and this is the one I have the most interest in writing ATM.


Very interested :)

[wiking]

Very interested :)

http://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=265417

[elkarlo]

I thought the German firm BASF began Haber nitrate production in 1913?

The timeline has not addressed the Black Sea, so it should be a Russian lake effectively speaking (a few Ottoman ships with the Russians raiding the commerce). The Black Sea fleet capitol ships were 5 Pre-Dreadnoughts, and in mid-1915 they would gain two Dreadnoughts. The Goeben is a Battlecruiser and the Breslau is only a light cruiser. Those ships together could cause a problem for 1 maybe 2 Russian Pre-Dreadnoughts, but more than that would most likely mean the sinking of the German-Turkish ships. It is for that reason that the Russians tended to sail all five as one fleet knowing that the German ships could not touch them.

However, the wildcard this TTL did bring up is when Wiking said Romania expands trade. Now you could have Ottoman Ships flying under Romanian flags, or even actual Romanian ships sailing between Constanta and Constantinople. This would put Russia and the French and British subs that sneak into the Black Sea in a bind. They could sink the Romanian flagged ships, but that might push Romania to declare war on Russia. Her army might not be the best, but right now the last thing the Russians need is 500,000 more men to fight against.


Didn7t the Russian fleet tend to run back to port at any sign of sub activity, real or imagined? They really lacked initiative OTL

[DanF]

Elkarlo,

If you go back to page 9, post 166 (I think). I give a quick summary of the OTL Black Sea battle, in it I state the following:

"Though, the merchant raiding in the Black Sea was not very effective, the Russians were terrified of German subs and devoted a lot of destroyers to sub hunting missions. However, the sea planes always seemed to spot subs near Sebastopol."


So, yes the Russian's were very cautious of German/Central Power submarine usage. Also, I was going to mention that Wiking started a new WW1 thread, but I noticed you are already posting in it. I look forward to your future posts.

[elkarlo]

Another interesting question is Gallipoli ITTL. I think the Entente will see the need to open up the straits and possibly remove one of Russia's enemies (the Ottomans) even higher ITTL, however, the Ottomans have probably not lost ~250 000 men and most of their pre-war officers in the Caucasus campaign and will thus be better off to face the Entente. They had their best troops, best commanders and were very close to their best infrastructure and supply sources OTL - if/when Bulgaria joins, they might actually take the Ottomans up on their OTL offered divisions (the Ottomans had huge problems transporting and supplying troops in Caucasus and Palestine, so they offered to lend the Bulgarians some divisions against Serbia and the Salonika Army OTL).

I look forward to hearing more on this TL. :)


but I bet they will still attack the Suez like a bunch o' loons.

[DanF]

but I bet they will still attack the Suez like a bunch o' loons.

Actually the Ottomans did not really care about the Suez. It was the German officers attached to the Ottomans that pushed for that. The Ottomans wanted to gain lands in the Caucasus. Though, getting Egypt would be great, the Ottomans did not view it as realistic.

The German's however, felt it was imperative to get the Suez. To hurt British supply lines (unlikely), prestige, and most importantly for post war trade (Ottoman controlled Suez is more favorable for their shipping).

[elkarlo]

A neutral Italy is good for both sides.

More access to world trade for the CPs. And minus a major minor front

For the Entente, more guest workers, and no massive economic/military bailout of Italy.

[elkarlo]

Actually the Ottomans did not really care about the Suez. It was the German officers attached to the Ottomans that pushed for that. The Ottomans wanted to gain lands in the Caucasus. Though, getting Egypt would be great, the Ottomans did not view it as realistic.

The German's however, felt it was imperative to get the Suez. To hurt British supply lines (unlikely), prestige, and most importantly for post war trade (Ottoman controlled Suez is more favorable for their shipping).


That is true. They did drill the wells for the Ottomans. I just didn't know it was the Germans pushing for this so hard.

Anyhow, it was bungled about as badly as an operation can be.

And yes, the ottomans really wanted the Caucuses, they seemed obsessed with them.

[Tongera]

And yes, the ottomans really wanted the Caucuses, they seemed obsessed with them.

I presume they wanted all the Caucuses up to Baku?

[wiking]

IIRC the Ottomans were not that interested in the Caucasus, but it was Enver Pasha's obsession, so being the most powerful of the Young Turks and the driving force behind the German alliance, was able to get his way very often, especially as war minister.

[Andristan]

I always heard that the Ottomans and the Young Turks especially, were into the whole pan-turkic thing, where they wanted to unite all the turk tribes in the Caucasus, (the azeris mostly), and central asia.