German 1914 army with years to plan Eastern strategy

[allegro6]

But isn't unlikely that the German Empire would decide to enter in a war that is thought to be long-lasting? Fritz Haber devised a way to produce nitrogen at the beginning of WW1. Without proper substitutes and ersatz-materials it is risky for Germany to enter a war that is thought to take years. (especially without a proper knowledge about whether France or the UK might block the German havens)

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

1) In some ways I can't see it in 1905, as such a preventive war would be rather too likely to turn into a general war.

2) There are of course matters of the friction of war and whether or not Russia would decide prestige and politics means Warsaw and its environs have to be held regardless of the military ability of Russia to actually accomplish this. If Russia eschews an offensive strategy and adopts a defensive one, that would actually complicate matters for the CPs as things like Tannenberg worked mostly when Russia assumed the offensive. So you'd see a more unpleasant and difficult process of smashing through the Russian army, and a war where the primary battles that occur are indecisive, large-scale clashes of armies where both claim to be victors right up until Russia's internal political weaknesses cause it to start degenerating.

1) Except that is why the Schefflin plan was written. Russia was in revolution, and German GHQ was thinking about taking France. So of A-H is not having internal issues, Germany might make run to crush France for all time. Take rest of industrial area, some fake pretext.

A-H can be kept as reserve to keep Russia honest.

2) Yes, Germany will have to busted Russia out of well supplied fortresses.

[Snake Featherston]

1) Right, but if Germany's planning for 1914, then they'd have to take into account that the Russia of 1914 would not be that of 1905. Gambling that a few meetings in 1905 form an adequate basis for a joint plan is not a good idea, if such a pre-emptive war were to happen the more likely date would be 1908/9.

2) Well, I think in this case that the realization that there's only one way Germany's going to go might force the Russians to devote more of their pre-war production to providing greater quantities of field artillery. Of course greater quantity is no guarantee of quality use of that quantity, but it still helps. And if Russia's defensive structure is overall superior in terms of combat than IOTL, Germany's going to have a longer and bloodier sequence of more indecisive battles ahead of it. And indecisive in a different way to that of the Western Front. Here it'd simply be the incapacity of anyone to exploit tactical victories, as opposed to OTL when it wasn't even clear in the West for a while what a victory in a battle looked like.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Bob in Pittsburgh

• Absent an invasion through Belgium the British will stay out. Presumably they will mobilize and bring their standing army back to the British Isles.
• Would France attempt to implant its plan to attack Germany or would the situation be like 1939 with neither side attacking?
• Assuming a long war the Germans would need to think in terms of advancing and then establishing defensible positions.
• It might then become a question of which empire—Austria or Russia—collapses first.
• Absent the bloody trench stalemate Wilson may have been able to broker a peace.

1) UK neutral is often debated, complicated issue.

2) French will attack in 1914. No doubt.

3) Yes, they would do that. Probably take Congress of Poland, consolidated. Try to break out and take another section, consolidate.

4) They would have doubts, but with our information it is clear. Russia falls first.

5) Wilson likely fails IOTL too.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

3) Yes, they would do that. Probably take Congress of Poland, consolidated. Try to break out and take another section, consolidate.

And the most decisive section here would be the capital. Nicholas II is not Stalin, he'd orient himself around having to defend his capital and be far more likely to fail to use the potential counters against staking everything on a single thrust, like flank attacks. The casualties might be steep until the victory is won, but the resulting defeat of Russia would make such a drive worth it, as Russia would have no choice but to concentrate its armies to defend its capital.....

[miketr]

Originally Posted by Bob in Pittsburgh

• It might then become a question of which empire—Austria or Russia—collapses first.
  

If Germany is pushing hard East then many of the problems of that happened in 1914 with such long lasting consequences are removed.

1) Loss of Galacia
2) Useless KuK counter attacks winter of 1914-15.

These have huge changes in terms of economics and manpower for A-H.

Now don't get me wrong, A-H is still going to have lots of problems and make more than a few blunders but it will be better than historic.

Michael

[Paul MacQ]

Originally Posted by miketr

If Germany is pushing hard East then many of the problems of that happened in 1914 with such long lasting consequences are removed.

1) Loss of Galacia
2) Useless KuK counter attacks winter of 1914-15.

These have huge changes in terms of economics and manpower for A-H.

Now don't get me wrong, A-H is still going to have lots of problems and make more than a few blunders but it will be better than historic.

Michael

Yes just now it is harder for Conrad to show how much of a Douche he is. He will find some way he is Conrad the Idiot after all

Galicia is a good thing like 1/3 food Production half there Horse Breeding Lands and all that useful Oil. And all those hundreds of Trains not lost.

Is the war continues there is a massive amount of Land in the East they could get to being Productive. No starving Populations I imagine is helpful to moral.

About 700k less loses for AH. Conrad would try an Offensive somewhere. He seem to completely lack the ability to Hold over winter months.

[anotherlurker]

Originally Posted by Paul MacQ

Yes just now it is harder for Conrad to show how much of a Douche he is. He will find some way he is Conrad the Idiot after all

Galicia is a good thing like 1/3 food Production half there Horse Breeding Lands and all that useful Oil. And all those hundreds of Trains not lost.

Is the war continues there is a massive amount of Land in the East they could get to being Productive. No starving Populations I imagine is helpful to moral.

About 700k less loses for AH. Conrad would try an Offensive somewhere. He seem to completely lack the ability to Hold over winter months.

plesae, he's just incompetent, not the anti christ.

the russians throwing everything at the more dangerous germans makes his life a lot easier, also no shameful display in serbia or an italian front will help.

[Jukra]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

What you say makes sense, except the German Navy did not have a plan at the start of WW1. They had the resources for some type of amphibious operation IOTL (Marines). Even if it was just a raid that took undefended Aland Island for a week or two, it would help the Germans. Just the Russians having to place more forces to defend the coastline helps.

In a case that British entry to war is at least delayed the Navy would have to find ways to prove itself useful. As Åland isles were unfortified by treaty pre-war they would be a tempting target. This would open up Finnish coast on Bay of Bothnia for raiding.

Hmm, instead of Königlich Preussisches Jägerbataillon Nr. 27 we might see a German Naval infantry battalion instead...

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Jukra

In a case that British entry to war is at least delayed the Navy would have to find ways to prove itself useful. As Åland isles were unfortified by treaty pre-war they would be a tempting target. This would open up Finnish coast on Bay of Bothnia for raiding.

Hmm, instead of Königlich Preussisches Jägerbataillon Nr. 27 we might see a German Naval infantry battalion instead...

IMO, it still takes a second POD to have an aggressive German navy. It is understandable that they did not attack France in the first two days of the war, since sailing towards England might bring the UK into the war. But attacking the Aland Islands does not bring the UK into the war, and using the Navy actively in the Baltic might lower UK concerns to a small extent. Even landing a few Battalions on Aland or other Baltic Islands would have helped the Germans by messing with the Russian mobilization schedule. Enough of a Bluff to get Russia to pause to defend St. Petersburg could easily be a war winner in OTL.

[wiking]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

IMO, it still takes a second POD to have an aggressive German navy. It is understandable that they did not attack France in the first two days of the war, since sailing towards England might bring the UK into the war. But attacking the Aland Islands does not bring the UK into the war, and using the Navy actively in the Baltic might lower UK concerns to a small extent. Even landing a few Battalions on Aland or other Baltic Islands would have helped the Germans by messing with the Russian mobilization schedule. Enough of a Bluff to get Russia to pause to defend St. Petersburg could easily be a war winner in OTL.

The Baltic islands were too well fortified to risk attacking until the Russian Revolution destroyed the Russian army's morale.
With worries about the British navy, I doubt the German navy is going to risk losing many ships in risky Baltic operations.

[Jukra]

Originally Posted by wiking

The Baltic islands were too well fortified to risk attacking until the Russian Revolution destroyed the Russian army's morale.
With worries about the British navy, I doubt the German navy is going to risk losing many ships in risky Baltic operations.

Åland isles were unfortified by treaty. Any raid to occupy them would meet unfortified, just arrived troops at best. Finnish coast north of Turku was unfortified as well.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by wiking

The Baltic islands were too well fortified to risk attacking until the Russian Revolution destroyed the Russian army's morale.
With worries about the British navy, I doubt the German navy is going to risk losing many ships in risky Baltic operations.

They were unfortified early, but rapidly fortified once the war starts. Just like Scapa Flow. An aggressive German commander has opportunities to execute a daring, powerful first strike at either one, and the vulnerabilities were know. The striking contrast between the German Army who not only had detailed plans and developed weapons to make the work better (siege mortars) and developed infrastructure to help (railroads) compared to the German Navy which did not even have a quality plan of any kind AFAIK.

There were no naval coastal artillery. So the Germans would only really have to worry about the Russian seeking a decisive battle. And with the UK not in the war on day one, the Germans could attack with the bulk of their navy while rapidly mining the German Blight. The benefit is not that German will hold the Island for the entire war, even thought it is possible. The benefit is that taking the Island will make St. Petersburg, the Finish coast and the Baltic coast appear vulnerable to follow up attacks. This will pull multiple corps from arriving at the front, and cause Chaos on the mobilization schedule.

I can also do one for Scapa Flow or a early Jutland battle, even thought it is not clear to me who would win. In the first weeks of the war, the U-boats could have literally sailed into Scapa and started shooting. While the Grand Fleet was often not their, sinking the colliers and auxillery ships would have a huge impact on the war. And at any given time you would pick off a few capital ships. And you would force the RN to retreat to Belfast or other secured ports.

IMO, any major German Naval win in the first days of the war would have a large diplomatic payoff, and make it much harder (more UK concessions) to get countries like Italy in the war. Or make countries like Bulgaria consider entering sooner than OTL. Or maybe bring the Ottomans in a bit sooner.

[Paul MacQ]

Originally Posted by anotherlurker

plesae, he's just incompetent, not the anti christ.

the russians throwing everything at the more dangerous germans makes his life a lot easier, also no shameful display in serbia or an italian front will help.

Conrad -"anti christ" he does not have the meline intelligence for that........ Then again any witnesses stating he had adverse reactions to Holy water ?

[Tyg]

If they Germans are planning for a long war against Russia, wouldn't that suggest that they'd concentrate more diplomatic effort at getting the Ottomans onside at the earliest possible opportunity? Germany can't restrict Russian trade anywhere near as well without the Ottomans closing the straits for them, and it has important implications for the disposition of Bulgaria and Romania.

On the other hand, it might draw (more) British concern, and German diplomacy wasn't all that it could be.

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by Snake Featherston

To expand on my previous post, without hindsight, and with the existing German appreciation of Russian strength in 1914, I'd initially plan for a defensive-offensive strategy of trying to break the initial Russian offensive and capitalize on momentum. I would at least work on establishing the rudiments of a joint plan with the Austro-Hungarians, a plan that would involve ultimately a joint encirclement of the Congress Poland salient. The way that this plan would work would be to try to draw stronger Russian strength into the terrain of East Prussia, where defensive firepower and logistics would strongly favor my armies, enabling something like a Tannenberg to happen and to thus cripple Russian morale.

This sounds very reasonable to me. This "open strategy" IMHO plays along the strenghts of the German general staffers and officer corps. Also it allows for the decisive battles to be run close to the border which faciliates supply and logistics.

I also agree that Poland is the first objective, as IMO shortening the front helps the CP at least as much as the Russians. (Unfortunately, military success will not keep the CP from bickering over the spoils instead of working on a viable concept on what to do with Poland), followed by a drive through the Baltic lands. The latter have the advantages of

- being geographically manageable, as opposed to going deep into Russia or the Ukraine
- close to the coast (an asset, especially if the HSF dominates the Baltic Sea)
- the offensive would threaten Petrograd
- have in some places a well-educated German-speaking minority

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

We know Russia plan was to fall back towards Baronovich and give up Poland without a fight. Likely still true here.

It is certainly not what the French expect their ally to do.

Originally Posted by miketr

Till after 1910 the official Russian war plan was to do just that, not even attempt to fight for Congress Poland. Later agreements had been made between French and Russian GHQ to do combined offensives. I think if Germany as a matter of policy favors East the moves will be obvious. Besides railroad changes I would expect the desire to fortify A-L also wins out. Again it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out gross intentions with stuff like this in front of them. It would generate some type of reaction, what exactly is open to debate. I wouldn't expect an exact replay of opening moves though on French and Russian sides though.

German Railway construction was subordinated to needs the army. Lots of construction along Belgium to serve mobilization needs. If official policy all along is East Focus rather than West Focus then there would matching construction in Silesia, Posen and East Prussia the Russians will see it and put two and two together.

Indeed you are right if we deal with a paradigm shift rather ignoring the West. But if we just assume that the General Staff didn't stop updating Eastern plans after 1912, and then we have a sort of last minute decision (as Wilhelm II was toying with in OTL for a moment) to rather go after Russia? Then we wouldn't have such telling differences. The extreme build-up of railroads on the Belgium border resulted from a needed quick massing 4 armies in a very small area, a degree of railway-infrastructure justifiable by economic means.
Bringing two armies to East Prussia and two to Upper Silesia, also with a more lenient timetable (remember, I assume that ca. half the mobilization still has to pour into Elsaß-Lothringen and Rheinprovinz quickly) should be manageable with the existing net.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...hland_1899.jpg

Also, there was considerable fortress building in Elsaß-Lothringen, especially around the crucial point of Metz-Diedenhofen (Thionville) just not that the planners got everything they wished for. But do they ever?

However you are right, from day 1 on we would have a different war.

Originally Posted by allegro6

But isn't unlikely that the German Empire would decide to enter in a war that is thought to be long-lasting? Fritz Haber devised a way to produce nitrogen at the beginning of WW1. Without proper substitutes and ersatz-materials it is risky for Germany to enter a war that is thought to take years.

Yes, it should have been unlikely. Unfortunately, a few people thought it was their responsibility to act in a different way.

[Snake Featherston]

Originally Posted by Hörnla

This sounds very reasonable to me. This "open strategy" IMHO plays along the strenghts of the German general staffers and officer corps. Also it allows for the decisive battles to be run close to the border which faciliates supply and logistics.

I also agree that Poland is the first objective, as IMO shortening the front helps the CP at least as much as the Russians. (Unfortunately, military success will not keep the CP from bickering over the spoils instead of working on a viable concept on what to do with Poland), followed by a drive through the Baltic lands. The latter have the advantages of

- being geographically manageable, as opposed to going deep into Russia or the Ukraine
- close to the coast (an asset, especially if the HSF dominates the Baltic Sea)
- the offensive would threaten Petrograd
- have in some places a well-educated German-speaking minority

Let's not forget either that Nicholas II's regime was both weak and incompetent, so a drive to Petrograd would force it to send its strength there and to that region to be destroyed. Stalin would have ordered at least some kind of large-scale counterattacks in the center and the south against the Germans to keep this kind of thing from happening and to work to exploit the open flank, Nicholas II I don't think has either the will or the ability to do such a thing. Combine this with the prestige loss from the loss of Poland, at least in terms of CP propaganda and the inevitable major mistakes WWI Russia will make, and this is the strategy that'd promise the greatest rewards, albeit with a sharp degree of risk involved. And if the CPs defeat Russia in a relatively quick fashion by this strategy then they can concentrate their entire strength on the West, which might end very badly for the Western Powers.

[BlondieBC]

Originally Posted by Hörnla

It is certainly not what the French expect their ally to do.

You are wrong on this point. IF the Germans sent 4 armies east (50%), the French expected the Russians to go on the defensive. IOTL, the Germans sent closer to 2 of the 8 original armies east by January 1, 1915. So 50% of forces going east is an even better performance than OTL. Note: All sides started adding armies fairly soon in the war.

[Catspoke]

a 1915 or 1916 battle for Petrograd would be epic. The Russians have a very well built Moscow - Lenningrad rail line that they would need to defend, as it would be running parallel and behind the front, Russian supply should be decent (limited by their ability to produce), so the Russians can stick a lot there to defend. There is plenty of labor around for building trenches and fortifications. The Russian Baltic fleet should be able to provide gunfire support if the Germans get really close.

The casualties would be high. If the German can cut the railway and isolate the city, from the south the city will collapse, probably right away (the Soviets can have hundreds of thousands of people starve to death, but not Nicky's government).

If the Germans are really this successful (and I am not convinced they can be, but assuming they are), German diplomacy needs to be better than what was typical OTL and give the Russians the ability to get out of the war then easily and fast, i.e. Russia agrees that whatever happens in the Balkans and Turkey and Persia isn't her business, grain shipments, oil shipments, reparations etc are fine, but leave the borders at 1914, leave the harsh peace to the French and British. Dont force on the Russians the need to continue the war at some level with a Kerensky type government because there is no other good choice than some harsh OTL like dictated German peace.

[Hörnla]

Originally Posted by BlondieBC

You are wrong on this point. IF the Germans sent 4 armies east (50%), the French expected the Russians to go on the defensive.

So what happens when the French realize that they will have an extremely hard Time getting to there Rhine despite only facing 50% of the German war machine? Will that Be before or After the tsar gave up Warsaw?

I do Not contradict you that it would Be Wise to withdraw delayingly into Firm positions. But I doubt that this strategy will survive the political Stress of a war looking Bad.