Little Things WI: the French Spade

Saphroneth

Banned
What if the French Army had adopted the spade a few years before WW1? Would the ability to dig in more easily have changed the battles of 1914?


(I find this one fascinating because it sounds like such a little thing.)
 
What if the French Army had adopted the spade a few years before WW1? Would the ability to dig in more easily have changed the battles of 1914?


(I find this one fascinating because it sounds like such a little thing.)

The ability to dig a hole in 1914 is not the key to survival. It is the ability to construct top cover to go over that hole. Now there are two basic ways of doing this, one it to make a roof or the other is dig a second hole adjoining the bottom of the first hole, into which you can scramble when the shrapnel starts raining down.

For a really serious trench you don't just need to dig but have access to some kind of propping material, most typically wood but of course concrete and better yet reinforced concrete is pretty awesome.

Armies seem to have grasped the value of entrenchment in static positions and the engineers had a reasonable though of course without practice far from perfect idea of what was required.

Maybe if the spade introduction had led to the call for more battalions it might have made a difference later but I am not inclined to see as changing much early on.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
The ability to dig a hole in 1914 is not the key to survival. It is the ability to construct top cover to go over that hole. Now there are two basic ways of doing this, one it to make a roof or the other is dig a second hole adjoining the bottom of the first hole, into which you can scramble when the shrapnel starts raining down.

That's the thing, in the trench battles it doesn't make much difference since there's so much high-trajectory artillery around firing shrapnel... but in the fluid battles of the frontiers in 1914 it can! It's the difference between being able to be targeted *directly* by artillery and not, or between being open to being shot by rifles and not.
 
That's the thing, in the trench battles it doesn't make much difference since there's so much high-trajectory artillery around firing shrapnel... but in the fluid battles of the frontiers in 1914 it can! It's the difference between being able to be targeted *directly* by artillery and not, or between being open to being shot by rifles and not.

Well I did ponder that and also allowing time for communications of the period diminishes their effectiveness but each German division did have a battalion of howitzers. I am not sure that bigger holes really makes much difference over bayonet dug scrapes in such a circumstance.

All in all though the purpose of much of an army's firepower in manoeuvre warfare is to 'fix' the other side in place so you can try and work your way around him. If he digs in that will often do the job.

I suppose had the spade led to or resulted from a more flexible doctrine than attaque a outrance it would have made a profound change to many outcomes but a doctrinal change is a rather bigger pod than provision of a spade.
 
Top