Keynes' Cruisers Volume 2
- Thread starter fester
- Start date
- Status
Donald Reaver
Donor
Not sure they can squeeze another beach in for them, back up for the British, Canadian beaches would be good. Backing up the Canadian advances towards Caen would be interesting. Will not be o.t.l. D-Day at this point anyways.
Just saying that the Australians have a nice little army not doing much besides wrecking bars in Singapore and Alexandria at the moment.
2 Divisions were involved in the occupation of Thailand until they were rotated back to Fremantle and Sydney.
That still leaves 2 infantry divisions of the AIF plus the 1st Australian Armoured Division deployed overseas and quickly available for action with the other 2 divisions available as a second echelon with 4 months notice. The 2nd NZ is in Greece (https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...uisers-volume-2.451883/page-210#post-19746825) but there is a potential white Commonwealth Army (Canadians have 2 corps and the Aussies could get another single big corps) to NW Europe by the time weather allows for a landing. Throw in an ever growing Free French army and a multi-corps Polish contingent, there is a nice little bit of additional veteran manpower available.
Last edited:
up until Korea IIRC Australians had a reputation. “Active patrolling” is one way of phrasing it. “Failure to accept reasonable surrender” is another. The lack of Singapore and PNG will push towards the former. Boredom and alcoholism will push towards the latter.
German diarists and autobiographers will be less evasive than otls Japanese. On the other hand German surrender is more likely to be accepted until camps are overrun. Meaning comparatively more surviving German diarists than Japanese.
Errolwi
Monthly Donor
Note that minor ally forces would prefer to be under the command of a major ally, rather than another minor ally. This minimises the relationships to be managed, and differences in approaches. So an Aussie division would rather be in an British corps than a Canadian one.
formion
Banned
@fester what about the indian divisions? Without a campaign in FIC, there must be a whole field army of experienced divisions available.
Moreover, the TTL Italian and Greek Campaigns seem to be less bloody than the OTL Italian one. Combined with lighter casualties in North Africa and not Singapore disaster, there must be another British Corps available.
What is the current status of the French and Greek armies?
Lastly, it seems the american mobilizatioh and deployment is something like 6 months ahead compared to OTL.
The Normandy beaches can support only a finite number of divisions. I wonder what new surprise you have for us...
Moreover, the TTL Italian and Greek Campaigns seem to be less bloody than the OTL Italian one. Combined with lighter casualties in North Africa and not Singapore disaster, there must be another British Corps available.
What is the current status of the French and Greek armies?
Lastly, it seems the american mobilizatioh and deployment is something like 6 months ahead compared to OTL.
The Normandy beaches can support only a finite number of divisions. I wonder what new surprise you have for us...
My 2 cents is a landing in Provence before the landing in Normandie. A lightning capture of Marseille and Toulon (like OTL) will give the Allies the logistal base to trap what ever German forces still fight in the Western Alps. So, either they push reserves South or they pull out to Lyon.
Plus, the Italian ports in Liguria are in Allied hands along with most of the Italian rolling stock.
For the fight in Northern France, I think with the German attention even slightly drawn toward the South, the Allies have good odds to capture more French ports more or less intact (it was close in Bretagne if I recall correctly). So speed and a bit of luck might win them one or more ports.
And there is always the Quiberon Bay Mulbery as a possibility.
Commonwealth Divisions available for overseas service Spring 1944
Slight spoiler below as this is the division list that I am working from for the Commonwealth armies.
There are some notable changes from OTL. For instance South Africa has 2 Armoured Divisions in the field as 2nd South African was never destroyed at Tobruk and New Zealand is not trying to maintain 2 divisions any more. The Indian Army has a few fewer units and a higher level of mechanization and firepower as it is more orientated towards deploying significant heavy combat power to Europe than Burma in this timeline. The Chindits/2nd Indian Division never form. As a side effect the demand on British manpower in both specialist units and infantry brigades is a bit lower for the Indian Army TTL than OTL. The Australians are mainly benefiting from not having to fight the New Guinea campaign.
Some of the Corps HQs are fully operational without external support; others have significant # of loaners from other nations.
Realistically the 5 Australian divisions plus 5, 17, 19, (infantry) and 31, 44 (armoured) Indian Divisions are readily available for additional TTL only combat operations in new theaters. The Canadian divisions are roughly committed as per OTL, South Africa and New Zealand are TTL already committed to Greece instead of OTL Italy, as well as 4,6,8 Indian. Might be able to shake one or two more divisions out of SE Asia (Borneo, Thailand, Malaya) if desperate BUT the Indian Army is performing a lot of deep rear area security which is quite valuable in and of itself. So we're looking at about 10 more Commonwealth divisions (with a higher proportion of veterans) available for operations west and north of Suez TTL compared to OTL plus Y number of Free XXX divisions that in OTL were not available on April 1, 1944. Also there are Z number of British Army divisions that are available for operations TTL west and north of Suez that were not available OTL (18th for instance)
There are some notable changes from OTL. For instance South Africa has 2 Armoured Divisions in the field as 2nd South African was never destroyed at Tobruk and New Zealand is not trying to maintain 2 divisions any more. The Indian Army has a few fewer units and a higher level of mechanization and firepower as it is more orientated towards deploying significant heavy combat power to Europe than Burma in this timeline. The Chindits/2nd Indian Division never form. As a side effect the demand on British manpower in both specialist units and infantry brigades is a bit lower for the Indian Army TTL than OTL. The Australians are mainly benefiting from not having to fight the New Guinea campaign.
Some of the Corps HQs are fully operational without external support; others have significant # of loaners from other nations.
Realistically the 5 Australian divisions plus 5, 17, 19, (infantry) and 31, 44 (armoured) Indian Divisions are readily available for additional TTL only combat operations in new theaters. The Canadian divisions are roughly committed as per OTL, South Africa and New Zealand are TTL already committed to Greece instead of OTL Italy, as well as 4,6,8 Indian. Might be able to shake one or two more divisions out of SE Asia (Borneo, Thailand, Malaya) if desperate BUT the Indian Army is performing a lot of deep rear area security which is quite valuable in and of itself. So we're looking at about 10 more Commonwealth divisions (with a higher proportion of veterans) available for operations west and north of Suez TTL compared to OTL plus Y number of Free XXX divisions that in OTL were not available on April 1, 1944. Also there are Z number of British Army divisions that are available for operations TTL west and north of Suez that were not available OTL (18th for instance)
Last edited:
Status of the Greek Armed Forces November 20, 1943
There are 2.5 Front line divisions
1st Greek Corps
1st Greek Infantry Division (veteran/Libya)
2nd Greek Infantry Division
1st Greek Parachute Brigade (mostly built around the Sacred Bands....)
The 3rd Greek division has been broken down to provide two streams of critical manpower; replacements for the fighting divisions and cadre/specialists for three divisions that are currently in the process of being formed up. the 4, 5, 6th Divisions could probably hold a static position/fortress/mountain pass at the moment but not conduct mobile defenses or any offensive operations above the company level. They should be available summer 1944 for those purposes. Conscription is ongoing to provide individual replacements for all 5 divisions over the course of time. Several very light infantry battalions have been formed from pre-exisiting partisan bands and they are still operating in the German rear but with more support and better weapons TTL than OTL. The tensions between the communists and Republicans and Monarchists is still very real and the Greek government is spending almost as much time thinking about that dynamic as they are working against the Germans.
formion
Banned
Thanks a lot for the very helpful OOBs @fester ! The increase of the Greek Army seems very plausible under the circumstances. So, 5 frontline divisions by summer 1944, would mean something like 9-12 divisions by spring 1945. The static divisions covering mountain passes can receive second rate equipment (eg. captured italian) and the motorized ones to get the modern anglo-american equipment. Moreover, the mountain garrisons don't need many trucks for their logistics: mules are enough. After all, I doubt the Germans would attack 1,500-2,000m high mountain ranges anytime soon.
Since you are so helpful, may I impose on you a bit more?
a) What happened to the cut off german army in the Peloponnese?
b) What happened to the Epirus region that in OTL was occupied only by Italians and was secluded from the rest of the country by the high Pindos range?
c) Does the italian army hold a beachhead in Yugoslavia or Albania?
d) How many divisions do the French have? Have they reached their 13 division goal?
The Greek goal is to have 5 first line infantry divisions and 1 armored division available by April 1, 1945 with another 3 division equivalents of Category B troops. They are not seeking to max out their manpower pool as civilian infrastructure has been shot to shit and the number of men who are physically incapable of meeting standards is fairly high at this time.
Peloponnese --- the Germans have been able to evacuate most of their manpower either over the Corinnth Canal or over the sea BUT... they had to leave a lot of heavy equipment behind. A few regiments surrounded mostly intact to partisans as the route to retreat could have been bulled through with firepower but the logistics would have been hideous.
The Italians have decent control in Albania, but the Dalmation coast is a clusterfuck of no control by anyone and the Germans are exerting their authority or at least artillery throughout the region.
Epirus --- the Italians are forted up and holding the passes against any potential German offensive. The RN, USN and RM are supplying the Italian forces and Greek civilians through the small ports along the coast. The Germans are not pressuring at this time as they have too many other problems to address first.
The French.... another update for another time.
You have liberated everything up to the Olympus so far. That's roughly 4.863 million out of a pre-war population of about 7.345 million, slightly over that 2/3 of it. That's a manpower pool of about 300-350,000 men from the 500-550,000 Greece had under arms at the time of the German invasion including thousands of officers and noncoms, who are already trained and in the case of the former frontline troops also have combat experience of 5 months of mountain operations. The cadres from 12-13 of the 20 divisions that were in action in 1941 would be in the liberated area.
Why do you need to break a division for replacements under the circumstances? You should be able to call up more than enough cadre, whether that is officers, noncoms, artillerists, radiomen etc to keep III infantry going. For that matter the three new divisions that are being stood up are not green men. They will need of course conversion training to the new weapons and train again as whole units after 2+ years out of the colours but by the same token they are not men just off the boot camps. I'd be more worried about a proper supply of oh car mechanics than infantry or artillery cadres.
Also historically both post liberation and both in the partisan units of the war, all sides were based on the prewar regimental and divisional organization which to a considerable extend was localised (ie reservists from a certain area manning each regiment.). In the area just liberated you'd have the following 6 divisions that are likely stood up:
I Infantry (Larisa)
II Infantry (Athens, )
III Infantry (Patras)
IV Infantry (Nauplion)
V Infantry (Crete)
XIII Infantry (Lesvos)
Here is my thinking:
They are not seeking to max out their manpower pool as civilian infrastructure has been shot to shit and the number of men who are physically incapable of meeting standards is fairly high at this time.
Offensive operations usually require more replacements for casualties than defensive operations.
The Greeks know that the liberation of their country is at best a tertiary priority for the Americans and a secondary priority for the British Empire. They know that they can not liberate all of Greece with Greek only resources and attempting to do so only bleeds the country dry against high-capital German formations if they use low capital intensity fighting styles that trade blood for steel. They know that their 1943 and 1944 and 1945 divisions are fundamentally different in composition than their 1940/41 infantry divisions.
Let's take a look at the TO&E of the 2nd Greek Division (really 2 distinctive formations with no real lineage/commonality) between their 1940 and 1943 versions:
The 2nd Division in 1940 at the start of the Greco-Italian war had 27 65 mm direct fire infantry guns and 16 75mm + 8 105 MM guns organic to the division with no attached armor, AA or anti-tank guns.
In 1943, the 2nd Greek Division is mostly British equipped and on a standard British TO&E. It has 72 25 pounders, 8 155mm howitzers (US lend lease), 48 6 pound anti-tank guns and 36 40mm + 18 quad 50s in an anti-aircraft regiment. The corps HQ has a British army tank brigade (to be replaced with a Greek tank brigade at some point in 1944) with 120 tanks that can directly support the infantry divisions.
The new division's artillery park is heavier than a Corps artillery park and the AA regiment is far heavier (with the exception of v. heavy field AA of 4 guns) and the anti-tank capacity is immensely different as PIATs are down to company level and the division batteries are immensely powerful. The Greek Army in 1943-45 is way more firepower heavy than it was in 1940, so being able to raise a bunch of riflemen is far less useful now in 1943/44 than it was in 1940-41.
That is why the 3rd division is being split. They have been trained on Crete from local Cretan recruits for 2+ years now to be able to support a capital intensive way of fighting instead of a manpower intensive way of fighting. And the Greek government will, as long as the US and UK are keeping a fire hose of supplies spraying, continue to fight that way. They are more than willing to use pre-war structures that are mostly intact for internal security and recruiting, but their manpower needs are fundamentally different in H1 1944 than they were in H1 1941.
I can be wrong on this, but I don't think I am being illogical
Last edited:
What about the African Divisions?
Historically, at this point there were 3.
The 11th(East African) and the 81st & 82nd(West African).
Historically, post WW1 the British decided not to use non-white colonial troop in Northern Europe. So, no Gurkha's, Indian Divisions and absolutely no African troops in the home country.
However, that still leaves the Mediterranean (Italy & Greece) and the Far East.
(OTL Indian Army Divisions fought in the Italian Campaign)
And can use the African divisions to relieve British home raised forces for NW Europe duties.
- Status