AHC: Improve the Polish performance in 1939

Did Hitler want anything from Soviets?

Yes, a free hand. Not to mention millions of tons of strategic raw materials, say food and oil, at cut-rate prices.

It would be the same as Ribentrop Molotov but with Poles.

So a very bad idea for Poland.

Poland was very important ally for Hitler but we didnt want to ally with satan. In fact we had to do it to kill a devil.

Don't use that "we" unless you were alive in 1939 and a significant decision maker in Poland.
That said, Poland was no important ally for Germany. Hitler seems to have frequently changed his mind on the topic, sometimes considering Poland as a suitable tool, other times desiring it to disappear from the map of Europe. He seems to have thought that he might have come to an understanding with Piłsudski, if the old man had still been alive and at the helm; but naturally, we don't really know, and I doubt that the general would have sold out a piece of existing Poland. Danzig, maybe.
In general, in any case, no ally was "very important" for Nazi Germany.

And riots will be made by socialists and easy to destroy.

Quite the contrary, it's the ultra-nationalists, army officers, noblemen, far-right types who would see the sellout of Danzig, and bits of Silesia and Pomerania, as nothing short but high treason. It's the kind of important guys who have the keys of the armories and devoted NCOs at their orders.
 
Summary of proposals. Part II
Okay, so I read your comments and I'm going to summarize what you said plus giving a few ideas of mine If you allow me to do so. Soooo....

-First of all, let's give some informations about Poland's ability to produce war material:
-Between 1933 and 1939, Poland produced 550 fighters (including 200 sold to foreign countries), 300 light bombers (including 50 sold to Bulgaria), 136 medium bombers, around 800 training aircraft and around 300 reco and army cooperation aircraft.
-Between 1931 and 1939, Poland produced 145 medium tanks (7TP and 9TP) and 575 TK tankettes plus 450 artillery tractors and 100 armoured cars.
-Between 1935 and 1939, at least 3500 modern AT rifles were produced and delivered.


For me, and following your advices, Poland would need:

-600 fighters (500 locally produced PZL 24+ 100 bought from another country: why not the Czech Avia B534, a decent plane for 1939 and not the most expensive). A batch of 50 fighters could produced and sold to Romania like OTL (to improve the relationship and having cash), 250 simplified light bombers (simplifying the PZL 23 thus gaining money) plus selling 50 more light bombers to Romania. Nothing change for the rest.
-400 Tanks: 200 produced locally (7TP) and 200 bought (French R40 like OTL and perhaps 100 Czech LT35). The number of tankettes would be reduced to 500, thus gaining money but 100 of these would be converted with a 20mm gun (instead of 24 OTL).
-MORE AT Rifles, at least 7000. Possibly more knee mortars (like Wiking said).
-More AA guns as long as it remains financially possible. Keeping the Armoured trains but protecting ordinary trains with AA units, thus rendering the logistics more effective.


-The Navy:
3 destroyers instead of 4 OTL. Thus 3 Grom class destroyers would be good. Still one large minelayer but 6 submarines instead of 5. Instead of 5 big submarines, 6 modern and smaller subs better suited to the North and Baltic Seas would be good (perhaps dutch or british design). Again, we're gaining money here we can spend elsewhere.

-The Diplomacy:
Poland needs to build a good relationship with Czechoslovakia (and buying war material won't hurt), notably by forgetting its claims over Czech lands. A relative friendship with the Czech could give a relative friendship with the Slovaks after 1939, thus securing the Carpathians. Poland could say to Hungary "if you're going against them, you're going against us". At the same time, Poland needs to improve its alliance with Romania as it could be useful in "neutralizing Hungary" and in getting Slovakia's tacital gratitude, which will help a lot when September 1939 will come.
-Poland NEEDS NEEDS NEEDS French financial support from 1936 onwards: French loans will finance Polish modest rearmament program.
-Poland NEEDS NEEDS NEEDS to delay Soviet intervention in September 1939. Every week the Soviets decide to wait is a week where the Germans are bleeding in Poland.
-IF POSSIBLE: Romania goes full Entente, joining Poland, France and Britain in September (I believe they considered the option during the Polish campaing. Once Poland falls, Romania becomes an another front for Germany, sucking up precious ressources and buying precious time for France. If France and Britain send air support and 6 Divisions, Romania can hold the Carpathians with its Army and Polish survivors from the Lwow Bridgehead.

POLISH BATTLEPLAN:
-FOLLOW the Weygand plan: abandon Poznan and concentrate your efforts in defending a VISTULA-WARTA line, thus shortening your frontline. The Lodz Army MUST NOT be so damn close to the border. The Pormoze Army MUST NOT be in the Polish Corridor but behind the Vistula.
-Poland must mobilize earlier and thus having 30 Infantry Divisions, 9 reserve Divisions, 3 Mountain Brigades. Thanks to more tanks, Poland COULD in theory convert 6 Cavalry Brigades into 6 Motorized Cavalry Brigades, each with one tank battalion and 2 motorized cavalry regiments (basically battalions). The 7 others brigades remain classical Cavalry Brigades. These 39 Divisions and 16 Brigades are divided between the 6 Armies of OTL.
-Prepare to blow every bridge in Western Poland. Summer was hot in 1939 and some rivers had dried but it will buy time as the German Panzers will be slightly slowed down.
-Romanian Bridgehead as OTL.
-Convince Gamelin to be a little but just a little bolder with the Saar Offensive.

POSSIBLE OUTCOME
-Poland will fall.
-Germany will have a relatively bloody nose. Polish Air Force will be defeated but will still bleed the Luftwaffe and they will bleed it more than OTL.
-Germany will have serious problems initially at breaking through the Polish lines. Of course it will happen but it will cost more men and time.
-The Bzura Counter offensive against a more exhausted ennemy could have greated results. Slightly more mechanized units will help.
-The Pormoze and Modlin Army, forming a more compact frontline, will resist for a time against the German Army Group North.
-After a month, the Polish Forces, tired and bloodied, will begin to retreat and to abandon central Poland but with luck, the German won't be able to create large pockets like OTL.
-More Polish forces reach Lwow and have Romanian and later Entente support.
-Gamelin is just a little bolder and the Saar Offensive, while not a success (I agree with Wiking here) will take more German territory (just a little) and will concern the OKH which will send divisions from the East to the West.
-Poland falls after three months at best if the USSR doesn't interve before but large numbers of Polish troops have reached Romania where the Armies of the four Entente countries organize the defence against Germany (and possibly Hungary). Germany needs to devote ressources after a relatively costly campaign in Poland for a war in winter in the Carpathians.
-The West remains a Phony War but France and Britain are rearming. With more losses in Poland and Romania possibly a second front. Will Germany be confident enough to launch FALL GELB in May? Then time begins to flow and the butterflies to flap their wings.

CONCLUSION?
 
Last edited:
I read Czechoslovak intelligence in March 1939 had information about German plans for occupation and there were some plans for Air Force to deffect to Poland. Weather was though very crapy plus some higher ranking officers were warning what would be Getman redponse against families.
It would be interesting though if majority of Czechoslovak airforce managed to deffect. Let say some 250 Avia B-534, about same Letov S-328 and about 100 Avia B-71.
B-534 and S-328 were last biplanes in Aviation history with comfirmed aerial victory. Both in Slovak National Uprising.
 
I read Czechoslovak intelligence in March 1939 had information about German plans for occupation and there were some plans for Air Force to deffect to Poland. Weather was though very crapy plus some higher ranking officers were warning what would be Getman redponse against families.
It would be interesting though if majority of Czechoslovak airforce managed to deffect. Let say some 250 Avia B-534, about same Letov S-328 and about 100 Avia B-71.
B-534 and S-328 were last biplanes in Aviation history with comfirmed aerial victory. Both in Slovak National Uprising.
I confirm that AVIA B 534 was a good plane for 1939. Indeed better relationship with Poland could also motivate Czech officers and other ranks to unofficially join Poland after March 1939. Tanks like LT35 and LT38 could be discreetly sent to Poland while the rest could be scuttled: more tanks for Poland and less for Germany. And of course Czech specialists (tankists and pilots) could use Czech planes and tanks in Poland in some kind of unofficial Army-in-Exile which would become official in September. Two tanks regiments and one or two Fighter Brigade (each brigade has between 40 and 50 Fighters) in the Carpathians could hurt the German Divisions.
But again, here we're multiplying the PODs and we must be careful to remain plausible. If these events we're depicting happen BECAUSE of a diplomatical POD and if Czech and polish leaders, men of the 1930's, without hinsight and with their own political and military culture, accept to do this, then yes we're talking about plausible solutions.
I'm only saying this because I tend to get too much enthusiastic sometimes about a subject, thus forgetting that good AH must think about historical people before our personal desires.
 
Maybe i used a wrong analogy but my point is that Poland wouldn't be attacked by Germany at least before they deal with Soviets, because they will be important ally. It will give Eastern Europe a peace for about 2 years and Poland a time to modernize its army.

Unfortunatly Hitler had no intent of giving them two years, or two weeks. The Poles were trying to do exactly this. negotiations had not ceased in their view & they hoped that with Brit & French support Germany would continue discussions. Hitler misread the Franco/Brit intentions and had no intention of delaying the complete destruction of Poland two years or even two months. He thought it best to resolve the Polish question now, before the winter arrived and the French committed.
 

Deleted member 1487

The problem (for Germany) with an allied Romania is the oil facilities, they'll want to capture those intact.
Airborne assault?
See the 1944 defection for how that went IOTL. The Germans actually tried to secure a number of places via Brandenburger surprise attack and paratrooper assault and pretty much were wiped out by the Romanians with no Russian help.
 
The problem (for Germany) with an allied Romania is the oil facilities, they'll want to capture those intact.
Airborne assault?
See the 1944 defection for how that went IOTL. The Germans actually tried to secure a number of places via Brandenburger surprise attack and paratrooper assault and pretty much were wiped out by the Romanians with no Russian help.
Wiking is right here. I will add that the OTL German Airborne raids in 1940 were against targets which were close to the frontline. The paratroopers just had to take their objectives and to hold with what they had until cavalry arrived. It worked in Belgium but failed in Holland. For Romania, oil facilities are waayyy behind the frontline if war arrives to Romania (meaning Bukovina and Transylvania): a raid to take oil facilities where the German Panzers and Infantry must first cross the Carpathian Mountains isn't a good idea: paratroopers will lack ammo and will be forced to surrender before cavalry arrives... if the said paratroopers manage to take their primary objectives in the first place.
And who says the Romanian won't burn their facilities if the Germans are getting close?
Plus a para raid in Romania would warn the Entente (and neutral countries) about this possibility.
 
I confirm that AVIA B 534 was a good plane for 1939. Indeed better relationship with Poland could also motivate Czech officers and other ranks to unofficially join Poland after March 1939. Tanks like LT35 and LT38 could be discreetly sent to Poland while the rest could be scuttled: more tanks for Poland and less for Germany. And of course Czech specialists (tankists and pilots) could use Czech planes and tanks in Poland in some kind of unofficial Army-in-Exile which would become official in September. Two tanks regiments and one or two Fighter Brigade (each brigade has between 40 and 50 Fighters) in the Carpathians could hurt the German Divisions.
But again, here we're multiplying the PODs and we must be careful to remain plausible. If these events we're depicting happen BECAUSE of a diplomatical POD and if Czech and polish leaders, men of the 1930's, without hinsight and with their own political and military culture, accept to do this, then yes we're talking about plausible solutions.
I'm only saying this because I tend to get too much enthusiastic sometimes about a subject, thus forgetting that good AH must think about historical people before our personal desires.
Actually there was Czechoslovak legion created from Czech and Slovak soldiers and pilots who escaped to Poland. But officially was supported only after September 1st. Poles didn't want to provoke Germans to much I guess. Meanwhile big transport of pilots was moved to France.
 
Actually there was Czechoslovak legion created from Czech and Slovak soldiers and pilots who escaped to Poland. But officially was supported only after September 1st. Poles didn't want to provoke Germans to much I guess. Meanwhile big transport of pilots was moved to France.
then it could happen ITTL and be expanded if there is a warmer Czech-Polish relationship.
 
-The Navy:
3 destroyers instead of 4 OTL. Thus 3 Grom class destroyers would be good. Still one large minelayer but 6 submarines instead of 5. Instead of 5 big submarines, 6 modern and smaller subs better suited to the North and Baltic Seas would be good (perhaps dutch or british design). Again, we're gaining money here we can spend
Definitely cut down more on destroyers. What's their purpose at all? If it's threatening larger German warships, that will be with torpedoes, so buy or build a dozen torpedo boats.

-The Diplomacy:
-IF POSSIBLE: Romania goes full Entente, joining Poland, France and Britain in September (I believe they considered the option during the Polish campaing.


No, I don't think it's possible.

Thanks to more tanks, Poland COULD in theory convert 6 Cavalry Brigades into 6 Motorized Cavalry Brigades, each with one tank battalion and 2 motorized cavalry regiments (basically battalions). The 7 others brigades remain classical Cavalry Brigades. These 39 Divisions and 16 Brigades are divided between the 6 Armies of OTL.

That seems to imply that you start with 13 cavalry brigades. You don't. You have 11, plus one armored brigade.
 
Definitely cut down more on destroyers. What's their purpose at all? If it's threatening larger German warships, that will be with torpedoes, so buy or build a dozen torpedo boats.


No, I don't think it's possible.



That seems to imply that you start with 13 cavalry brigades. You don't. You have 11, plus one armored brigade.
-11 cavalry brigade plus 2 motorized Cavalry brigades (one of them being the Warsaw Armored Cavalry Brigade).
-I maintain my opinion on Polish destroyers not because it's a good idea for Poland to have destroyers in the Baltic sea (indead subs or TBs would be more suited) but because Polish leaders WANTED destroyers. It was a matter of political prestige for a nascent country with a nascent navy. But a POD could at least somewhat mollify Polish government like "Kay, we need destroyers but at least we could buy good stuff like the Tribal class destroyers, not garbage like the Wicher class, and three good destroyers is better than 4 average ones".
-Why Romania would not become an official ally in 1939 with a plausible POD? I repeat that Romania considered and in fact even proposed to Poland to join them in September 1939 (and besides, the country itself was very pro-French in 1939). IMHO, all it would need would be a little push.
 
-11 cavalry brigade plus 2 motorized Cavalry brigades (one of them being the Warsaw Armored Cavalry Brigade).
-I maintain my opinion on Polish destroyers not because it's a good idea for Poland to have destroyers in the Baltic sea (indead subs or TBs would be more suited) but because Polish leaders WANTED destroyers. It was a matter of political prestige for a nascent country with a nascent navy. But a POD could at least somewhat mollify Polish government like "Kay, we need destroyers but at least we could buy good stuff like the Tribal class destroyers, not garbage like the Wicher class, and three good destroyers is better than 4 average ones".
-Why Romania would not become an official ally in 1939 with a plausible POD? I repeat that Romania considered and in fact even proposed to Poland to join them in September 1939 (and besides, the country itself was very pro-French in 1939). IMHO, all it would need would be a little push.
Azworthy's book Third Axis Fourth ally deals a bit on Romania's pre war and early war politics. I would recommend to read it to get some basics. Romanians even put their troops on alert in March 1939 when rest of Czechoslovakia was taken and Hurgarians were occupying Ruthenia.
 
-11 cavalry brigade plus 2 motorized Cavalry brigades (one of them being the Warsaw Armored Cavalry Brigade).

Yeah, I'd never count the latter one, of course.

-Why Romania would not become an official ally in 1939 with a plausible POD? I repeat that Romania considered and in fact even proposed to Poland to join them in September 1939 (and besides, the country itself was very pro-French in 1939). IMHO, all it would need would be a little push.

The proposal was nothing but a face-saving formality, done after it was sure the Polish situation was hopeless and the proposal would be meaningless. The strange thing here is that you call up political inevitabilities when you deem that it's unavoidable to have destroyers. OK; I'll grant you that your explanation is sound, I actually agree, but since other proposals also are hard to swallow on non-military aspects, I thought we were just trying to maximize the Polish armed forces regardless of political considerations.
Yeah, political considerations matter.
And yet, at the same time you believe that the Romanian ruling class might embark on such a risky venture. What I'm saying is that there isn't a "suitable POD".
The same could be said of the Polish-Czechoslovakian relations. Yes, it would be nice if they were friends, especially with a neighbor like Germany. Right, all the Poles have to do is to give up their claims on territory they really really really really wanted historically.
 
Yeah, I'd never count the latter one, of course.



The proposal was nothing but a face-saving formality, done after it was sure the Polish situation was hopeless and the proposal would be meaningless. The strange thing here is that you call up political inevitabilities when you deem that it's unavoidable to have destroyers. OK; I'll grant you that your explanation is sound, I actually agree, but since other proposals also are hard to swallow on non-military aspects, I thought we were just trying to maximize the Polish armed forces regardless of political considerations.
Yeah, political considerations matter.
And yet, at the same time you believe that the Romanian ruling class might embark on such a risky venture. What I'm saying is that there isn't a "suitable POD".
The same could be said of the Polish-Czechoslovakian relations. Yes, it would be nice if they were friends, especially with a neighbor like Germany. Right, all the Poles have to do is to give up their claims on territory they really really really really wanted historically.
Point taken. So Romania going full Entente is out of the question when we looking for ways to improve Polish performance.
However, I maintain that if we can prevent Slovakia from being Germany's ally and puppet during the Polish campaign, that could really help Poland on a tactical pov. So is there any plausible pods to come to this or is it just impossible without hinsight/SI/ASB?
 
B-534 and S-328 were last biplanes in Aviation history with comfirmed aerial victory.

Finnish Gladiators, you mean
The squadron’s pilots entered in combat for the first time with Gladiators on 2 February 1940.
At 10:40, Luutnantti Paavo Berg was engaged in combat with six I-153s above Hanko and shot down one of them. Jorma ‘Joppe’ Karhunen described Berg’s first claim during the Winter War (Karhunen was at the time a Fokker D.XXI pilot and flight commander in 1/LLv 24):


"We shared the ice base at Littoinen near Turku in the beginning of February 1940. LLv 26’s Gladiators were flown here after they had been assembled in Sweden.
On the 2nd of February I saw Berg climbing from Littoinen in GL-263. Air raid sirens were screaming in Turku. Time passed and I saw Berg land. He ran toward me and told me:
"I shot down a Chaika (Polikarpov I-153), it crashed on the ice. My own aircraft has hits, can you borrow me a Fokker so I can go and have a look at he wreck?"
As he was very exited about his first kill, I gave him my permission to use one of our Fokkers. Berg took off and returned after some time. Unfortunately he had damaged the Fokkers undercarriage making a harsh landing on the ice, so the Fokker had to be repaired at the state aircraft factory at Tampere overnight."
Berg’s own combat report was quite short: “A squadron of Chaikas bounced me from the above. I received several hits on my Gladiator, but a fast evasive turn prevented any further damage. I decided to test the maneuverability of my new mount and the nearest three-plane Chaika section wanted to fight with me. The rest of them went away.
The Chaikas made a tight turn to try finishing me off again. I made a turn too and I discovered that my GL was able to turn with the Chaikas. I was not even warmed up when I was able to get into a firing position behind one of them. I tightened my turn to the extreme and thus I was able to pull enough deflection and my short burst hit his engine.
The plane I fired on went down towards the ice. His comrades decided to turn for home, and my victim made a landing on the ice. It looked only slightly damaged. I decided to fly back to Littoinen because I feared the hits on my own aircraft might be critical.” http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/gladiator_finland.htm
 
Finnish Gladiators, you mean
The squadron’s pilots entered in combat for the first time with Gladiators on 2 February 1940.
At 10:40, Luutnantti Paavo Berg was engaged in combat with six I-153s above Hanko and shot down one of them. Jorma ‘Joppe’ Karhunen described Berg’s first claim during the Winter War (Karhunen was at the time a Fokker D.XXI pilot and flight commander in 1/LLv 24):


"We shared the ice base at Littoinen near Turku in the beginning of February 1940. LLv 26’s Gladiators were flown here after they had been assembled in Sweden.
On the 2nd of February I saw Berg climbing from Littoinen in GL-263. Air raid sirens were screaming in Turku. Time passed and I saw Berg land. He ran toward me and told me:
"I shot down a Chaika (Polikarpov I-153), it crashed on the ice. My own aircraft has hits, can you borrow me a Fokker so I can go and have a look at he wreck?"
As he was very exited about his first kill, I gave him my permission to use one of our Fokkers. Berg took off and returned after some time. Unfortunately he had damaged the Fokkers undercarriage making a harsh landing on the ice, so the Fokker had to be repaired at the state aircraft factory at Tampere overnight."
Berg’s own combat report was quite short: “A squadron of Chaikas bounced me from the above. I received several hits on my Gladiator, but a fast evasive turn prevented any further damage. I decided to test the maneuverability of my new mount and the nearest three-plane Chaika section wanted to fight with me. The rest of them went away.
The Chaikas made a tight turn to try finishing me off again. I made a turn too and I discovered that my GL was able to turn with the Chaikas. I was not even warmed up when I was able to get into a firing position behind one of them. I tightened my turn to the extreme and thus I was able to pull enough deflection and my short burst hit his engine.
The plane I fired on went down towards the ice. His comrades decided to turn for home, and my victim made a landing on the ice. It looked only slightly damaged. I decided to fly back to Littoinen because I feared the hits on my own aircraft might be critical.” http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/gladiator_finland.htm
No I mean Slovak Avia B-534 and Slovak Avia S-328. During Slovak National Uprisin August-October 1944 pilot of Avia B-534 shot down Ju-52, rear gunner of S-328 shot down Fw-189 of which pilot probably thought biplane Letov easy pray.
 
No I mean Slovak Avia B-534 and Slovak Avia S-328. During Slovak National Uprisin August-October 1944 pilot of Avia B-534 shot down Ju-52, rear gunner of S-328 shot down Fw-189 of which pilot probably thought biplane Letov easy pray.

There is this:
On 8 February 1945, 10 CR.42s of Stab and 2. Staffel of NSGr. 7 took off from their base at Agram-Gorica in Croatia for an anti-partisan mission. Their intended target was Grabovica airfield, used by partisan forces, but in the last moments the target area was changed and they were sent against the partisan forces north-west of Sisak. Several km south-east of Agram-Gorica the CR.42 formation was jumped by P-38s of 14th FG. During the ensuing battle, the NSGr. 7 suffered serious losses when four CR.42LWs failed to return (one reportedly by AA-fire). According to American records, between 12:16-12:32, 1st Lieutenant Lawrence V. Bach Jr. of 37th FS claimed two biplanes, 1 probable and one damaged. However, the historian Csaba Becze's research has shown that the battle was not one-sided, since one of the NSGr. 7’s pilots claimed a P-38 during this dogfight as well. Unfortunately, his name is not known and nothing more remains about his identity in the existing documents. What is known is that the 14th FG lost two P-38s in this mission when 1st Lieutenant Fredrick R. Branscombe (MACR 12138) and Captain Kyle J. Pinney Jr. (MACR 12139) was shot down, reportedly by AA and small arms fire.
This combat seems to be the last biplane victory ever claimed.http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/falco_germany.htm
 
There is this:
On 8 February 1945, 10 CR.42s of Stab and 2. Staffel of NSGr. 7 took off from their base at Agram-Gorica in Croatia for an anti-partisan mission. Their intended target was Grabovica airfield, used by partisan forces, but in the last moments the target area was changed and they were sent against the partisan forces north-west of Sisak. Several km south-east of Agram-Gorica the CR.42 formation was jumped by P-38s of 14th FG. During the ensuing battle, the NSGr. 7 suffered serious losses when four CR.42LWs failed to return (one reportedly by AA-fire). According to American records, between 12:16-12:32, 1st Lieutenant Lawrence V. Bach Jr. of 37th FS claimed two biplanes, 1 probable and one damaged. However, the historian Csaba Becze's research has shown that the battle was not one-sided, since one of the NSGr. 7’s pilots claimed a P-38 during this dogfight as well. Unfortunately, his name is not known and nothing more remains about his identity in the existing documents. What is known is that the 14th FG lost two P-38s in this mission when 1st Lieutenant Fredrick R. Branscombe (MACR 12138) and Captain Kyle J. Pinney Jr. (MACR 12139) was shot down, reportedly by AA and small arms fire.
This combat seems to be the last biplane victory ever claimed.http://surfcity.kund.dalnet.se/falco_germany.htm
Heard of it but still seems to be not confirmed. Nothing against Csaba's research. That's why I said in my post "confirmed" as both Slovak claims were confirmed by debris on the ground and photographic evidence.
 
Top