Hello,
My first post and to start, may I thank all who have given their time lines, the level of detail, in many shows an truly inspiring level of research, knowledge and thought. I had considered a time line looking at the battle of the Somme, but the more I soon discovered that I had far too many unsupportable assumptions, a level of hand wavium that was growing like a weed and to cap it all a P.O.D so dubious as to make it questionable even as an A.S.B! My problem is that I was looking at a desired outcome and then trying to magic a P.O.D, I may as well have said on the 30th June the Germans had a huge party and so were so drunk as to do nothing to stop the advance (it would have been more plausible and honest as an A.S.B )

So instead I would like to rephrase a thread I discovered by (old ironside I think) and ask some questions regarding the Somme to see if any P.O.D could be found that would make a significant change.
1. Could more tanks and (personel carriers) be developed in time for 1st July
2. Was there any way more H.E and less shrapnel been used and would it have made a difference.
3. Were there any good reasons for an alternate bombardment strategy to have been developed before the lessons learned on the first day?
4. Could the Army have been better trained and front line officers given more freedom to act?
5. Would lightening the infantry mans load and encouraging a series of short rushes get more men across no man’s land?
6. Would seeking to grab hold bight size chunks of the front rather than seeking a breakthrough make a diference?
In short are there any changes that could give the forces a tactical advantage on the 1st to achieve better results and fewer casualties?
Given the political imperative to attack to help the situation at Verdun, location and timing are not an option as a point of difference.
I hope thus has not already been debated and debunked to the extent of the sea mammal.
Thanks in advance D.J.P