Triangularization of the German Army, 1912

[Hoplophile]

In the 1914 of our time line, the formations of the German Army were "square." That is, each army corps consisted of two infantry divisions, each infantry division of two infantry brigades, and each infantry brigade of two infantry regiments. A number of military experts (such as Friedrich von Bernhardi) condemned this system, arguing that a "triangular structure" (army corps of three infantry divisions and infantry divisions of three infantry regiments) would make formations easier to handle and, in particular, would greatly facilitate the focus of efforts (Schwerpunktbildung). However, the "square" organizational scheme was retained, largely because changing it would require a great deal of reorganization in the administrative infrastructure of the various German states.

Let us assume that, in 1912 or so, the objections to triangularization were overcome. How would it effect the way that German formations fought in the opening campaigns of the Great War of 1914?

 

[BlondieBC]

If you go to triangular formations, it means you have removed the restrictions on non-Prussian nobility in the officer corp. This restriction was one of the bigger items restricting the size of the German army. i.e. number or regiments. You have likely made much bigger German army.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

If you go to triangular formations, it means you have removed the restrictions on non-Prussian nobility in the officer corp. This restriction was one of the bigger items restricting the size of the German army. i.e. number or regiments. You have likely made much bigger German army.

The problem there is the lack of horses to build up the necessary new divisions in peacetime. Besides just the infantry regiments you still need to build up a new artillery regiment and various support elements, plus the division supply train and staff. In wartime it was doable because they didn't care about the impact on the rest of the economy, but in peacetime they were very concerned with providing horses to standing military units and the impact it would have on the economy if there was a long mobilization, which limited division size; the new corps they built up in the 1910s pre-war was considered the max with their horse population and the lack of motorization at that time (oil/rubber supply in wartime was the major factor there then).

 

[marathag]

The problem there is the lack of horses to build up the necessary new divisions in peacetime. Besides just the infantry regiments you still need to build up a new artillery regiment and various support elements, plus the division supply train and staff. In wartime it was doable because they didn't care about the impact on the rest of the economy, but in peacetime they were very concerned with providing horses to standing military units and the impact it would have on the economy if there was a long mobilization, which limited division size; the new corps they built up in the 1910s pre-war was considered the max with their horse population and the lack of motorization at that time (oil/rubber supply in wartime was the major factor there then).

They needed coal fired trucks

 

[The Byronic Hero]

They needed coal fired trucks

Steampunk forces. Throw in early semi-automatic rifles, Günther Burstyn's tank, and a deadly airship bomber squadron. Make Wilhelm obsessed with tech and willing to tear down the establishment as the conservative officer corps is determined to stand in the way. Triangularization is seen as yet another needed reform as well as weakening the Junkers.

 

[Gudestein]

The problem there is the lack of horses to build up the necessary new divisions in peacetime. Besides just the infantry regiments you still need to build up a new artillery regiment and various support elements, plus the division supply train and staff. In wartime it was doable because they didn't care about the impact on the rest of the economy, but in peacetime they were very concerned with providing horses to standing military units and the impact it would have on the economy if there was a long mobilization, which limited division size; the new corps they built up in the 1910s pre-war was considered the max with their horse population and the lack of motorization at that time (oil/rubber supply in wartime was the major factor there then).

Lets apply the triangularization and lack of horses for a moment. Could such a build-up facilitate a change in strategic doctrine as one option is that parts of the army would be immobile?
Do you make triangularization, but cant enlarge the mobile army (just yet), so you decide one of two fronts should be fixed/static (with rails laid down for supply) until the other side is defeated?
A strategic driver for an east first campaign?

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Lets apply the triangularization and lack of horses for a moment. Could such a build-up facilitate a change in strategic doctrine as one option is that parts of the army would be immobile?
Do you make triangularization, but cant enlarge the mobile army (just yet), so you decide one of two fronts should be fixed/static (with rails laid down for supply) until the other side is defeated?
A strategic driver for an east first campaign?

Seems like the force in Alsace-Lorraine would be immobile then. Perhaps with extra artillery.

 

[StevoJH]

The alternative to raising additional larger divisions would be to either have the same number of divisions with the additional brigade of infantry or to have a reduction in the number of divisions by rearranging the OOB.

As for the Prussian officer system, did the Bavarian Army or Saxon Army have Prussian officers?

Basically the German Army of 1914 would have less Corps and Divisions then OTL, but the same number of Brigades.

 

[Gudestein]

Seems like the force in Alsace-Lorraine would be immobile then. Perhaps with extra artillery.

Exactly my point

 

[Deleted member 1487]

As for the Prussian officer system, did the Bavarian Army or Saxon Army have Prussian officers?

No. They fall under the Prussian command system and perhaps sent officers to train at Prussian schools, but they had their own armies with they're own officers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Saxon_Army#German_Empire

 

[StevoJH]

Then obviously the officer corps of those armies are not Prussian Nobility.

 

[Hoplophile]

If carried out without any increase in the number of fighting units, triangularization would not have had much of an effect on the requirements for officers. That is, without creating any new units other than the headquarters for new infantry divisions, the German authorities would have been able to convert 50 square divisions into 67 triangular divisions. (The additional infantry regiment needed to do this was, along with 16 other "excess" infantry regiments, was already available.)

The means to create headquarters for the 17 new infantry divisions could easily be found among the generals, adjutants, ordinance officers, clerks, grooms, horses, wagons, map chests, and sets of mess equipment made redundant by the dissolution of 100 infantry brigade headquarters.

Triangularization would also reduce the number of army corps in the peacetime order of battle of the German Army, from 25 to 24. (The easiest way to do this would have been the dissolution of the corps headquarters of the Guard Corps and the use of Guard Corps units to fill gaps in other formations.) This, in turn, would have made additional resources available for the creation of the new division headquarters.

In the years before 1914, the officer shortage within the German Army was entirely a matter of subalterns. According to the 1913 issue of the authoritative annual Loebells Jahresberichte, there were about 3,000 billets for lieutenants that were being filled by senior non-commissioned officers.

If, in the course of triangularization, the German authorities wished to form the "excess" infantry regiments into infantry divisions, they would have to find ways of providing those new formations with cavalry, field artillery, engineers, and the like. The easiest way to provide cavalry to triangular formations would have been the replacement divisional cavalry regiments with corps-level cavalry brigades. (This would have avoided both the splitting of existing cavalry regiments and the need to create new ones.) Similarly, a scheme that allocate two battalions of field guns to each triangular division (for a total of 144) and two battalions of light field howitzers to each triangular army corps (for a total of 48) would have left the reorganized peacetime army with a surplus of eight battalions of light field howitzers.

As far as engineers go, triangularization would fit in nicely with the way that they were employed. Under the square organizational scheme, the three pioneer companies of each army corps were allocated to infantry divisions in an asymmetric fashion, with one division receiving two companies and the other but one. Triangularization would provide each infantry division with a single pioneer company of its own.

 

[StevoJH]

So basically you are giving each Division 3 Infantry Regiments instead of 4.

So what does this change in terms of the supporting arms within each division?

How many battalions were there in a typical German Infantry regiment?

I’ve been thinking about this in a commonwealth context. Battalion<Brigade<Division with Regiment basically an administrative formation.

 

[TruthfulPanda]

Actually, with 182 IR. + 11 Guard + 24 BavarianIR there were enough regiments for
60 Prussian Line InfDiv (+2 surplus)
4 Guard InfDiv (11 Regiments plus Lehr and/or the Gardes Jaeger and Gardes Schutzen Battalions)
8 Bavarian InfDiv

All Regiments had 3 Battalions at this point.

 

[BlondieBC]

The problem there is the lack of horses to build up the necessary new divisions in peacetime. Besides just the infantry regiments you still need to build up a new artillery regiment and various support elements, plus the division supply train and staff. In wartime it was doable because they didn't care about the impact on the rest of the economy, but in peacetime they were very concerned with providing horses to standing military units and the impact it would have on the economy if there was a long mobilization, which limited division size; the new corps they built up in the 1910s pre-war was considered the max with their horse population and the lack of motorization at that time (oil/rubber supply in wartime was the major factor there then).

In the Army budget before the war, and maybe the one before that, there were originally funding for a lot of trucks. These were cut out. IMO, if you fix the Prussian officer issue, you will see many/most of the additional divisions as motorized infantry. As in the supply chain above the battalion level would be motorized. While I love my German wank naval POD, the easiest POD by far is to add a few regiments of trucks to the org chart and watch the German roll through Belgium. Memory can be weak on stuff I read 5+ years ago, but seem like armored cars were also in the budget. I presume they would be the fire power to protect these truck regiment.

 

[BlondieBC]

Steampunk forces. Throw in early semi-automatic rifles, Günther Burstyn's tank, and a deadly airship bomber squadron. Make Wilhelm obsessed with tech and willing to tear down the establishment as the conservative officer corps is determined to stand in the way. Triangularization is seen as yet another needed reform as well as weakening the Junkers.

I know people think this way, but the army asked for truck, armored cars, and other useful type modern gear. These request were just largely removed by the budget hawk of the Reichstag.

 

[Riain]

IIUC when the Germans did triangularise their divisions they eliminated the Brigade level HQs, which presumably frees up staff officers etc for the new divisions.

 

[Anderman]

IIUC when the Germans did triangularise their divisions they eliminated the Brigade level HQs, which presumably frees up staff officers etc for the new divisions.

Exactly perhabs somebody in the Grosser Generalstab or the Kriegsministerium looks at the Prussian Orbat at Waterloo

http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napol..._of_Battle_Waterloo.html#prussians1815ziethen

Close to what we are looking for.

 

[Hoplophile]

View attachment 397744

So what does this change in terms of the supporting arms within each division?

I've seen two schemes for 'triangularizing' the field artillery of German army corps and infantry divisions. Both start with the presumption that the number of field pieces in each type of formation will not change.

The scheme proposed by Friedrich von Bernhardi was the simpler of the two. He advocated the assignment of two battalions (Abteilungen) of 77mm field guns to each of the three divisions of a triangular army corps and two battalions of 105mm light field howitzers directly to each army corps.

The scheme proposed by the anonymous author of an article published in 1912 or so proposed the assignment of four small battalions (each of twelve field pieces) to each triangular division. This would allow each infantry regiment to be affiliated with a battalion of 77mm field guns. (Anonymous, ‘Die Kriegs- und Friedensgliederung des Armeekorps’, Jahrbücher für die deutsche Armee und Marine, 1912, pp. 274-82.)

To create the new battalions, the anonymous author proposed the withdrawal of six field pieces from each battalion, thereby reducing its size and, at the same time, providing the means for creating new battalions. This scheme would thus require the creation of headquarters for twelve new batteries and four new battalions.

 

[Catsmate]

They needed coal fired trucks

Chemistry to the rescue!!
1. Why use petroleum/hydrocarbons for fuel? Why not alcohols? As discussed here.

For example back in the 1890s ethanol/methanol fuelled engines were in use in farm machinery in Europe, something that made countries almost fuel independent. There was extensive German and French research into alcohol fuels. Again, when the first automobiles were developed those in Europe often operated on alcohol fuels. Then in 1899 the German government taxed petroleum imports and subsidized domestic ethanol to promote domestic fuel sources over imported (i.e. Oil Trust) hydrocarbons; Wilhelm II sponsored research into the use of alcohol as a fuel.
This spread to France within a couple of years; in fact Paris had an exposition dedicated entirely to the uses of alcohol as a fuel in 1902!
Under Teddy Roosevelt, in 1906, the US eliminated most alcohol taxes and exempted far stills from government oversight, specifically to undermine Standard Oil.
By 1918-25 there was much interest in alcohol blending with hydrocarbons; this would boost octane rating without TEL. Even Standard Oil dabbled in this.​

2. As for rubber, bah German chemistry is the best in the world. Today tyres use polymers produced from styrene and butadiene. Interestingly a German chemist had produced both styrene and polystyrene by 1845. Styrene can be extracted from coal tar and butadiene produced from ethanol, just to save more imported oil.

Now get the SDs to find mechanisation of teh German military in (say) 1908, perhaps as a sop to employing more Germans or mechanising agriculture.