Magnum's naval PoD's. Ep. 5 - Austro-Hungarian Navy sails to Constantinople in 1914

[Magnum]

1. Why?
- From the Sea of Marmara, they threaten not just the Anglo-French in the Mediterranean, but also the Russians in the Black Sea (whom they now massively outnumber)
- With the Black Sea coast now vulnerable to potential Ottoman landings, Russia would have to pull men away from the fronts that matter
- It would be much harder for the Anglo-French to blockade the Aegean the same way they did the Adriatic

2. When?
- Shortly after the Ottoman Empire joins the war and before the Otranto Barrage is set up. (the PoD is that such a contingency is planned for before the war)

3. Drawbacks?
- Maintenance would eventually become an issue, but then everyone was expecting a short war anyway, and most pre-war estimates emphasized that a long war would be disadvantageous to the Central Powers, so it's kind of a moot point anyway
- Italy might feel emboldened to declare war...however, they did so OTL anyway soon after it became clear a fast German victory was not in the cards
- There's a certain risk that the ships might be lost whilst transferring, affecting overall morale

4. What ships?

- Head to Constantinople:
4 Dreadnoughts
9 Pre-dreadnoughts
3 Armoured cruisers
2 Torpedo cruisers
2 Protected cruisers
2 Scout cruisers
15 Destroyers
25 High Seas Torpedo craft

- Stay in Adriatic:
3 Coastal defence ships
3 Protected cruisers
2 Destroyers
29 Coastal Torpedo craft
6 Submarines

5. Effects?
...

 

[Winestu]

Why would the Austrians leave their entire coast open to attack?

 

[Magnum]

Why would the Austrians leave their entire coast open to attack?

This is how I would answer, were I to be a proponent of this maneuver ITTL:

1. There is nobody in a position to attack the coast: The Russians are bottled up, and the Anglo-French are too busy defending Paris. By the time they can scrounge up enough reserves, the war will have already been won or lost in Flanders and Galicia
2. There are no valuable targets immediately along the Adriatic coast - mostly a bunch of Croatian fishing villages. Eminently expendable.
3. Every Anglo-French division dicking about in Dalmatia is one less holding the line at the Marne
4. There is still a considerable surface force left behind for coastal defence, enough to delay any enemy build-up long enough for us to bring overwhelming numbers by rail to defeat them. Plus, if they retire to Tunis to rearm/refuel, our fleet can sail from Constantinople and defeat the remaining enemy fleet left behind to support the landing
5. The potential advantage of locking in a Russian corps to defend the Black Sea outweighs the risks

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

What is the supply situation in respect of coal & ammunition? At this point the rail link between Vienna & Constantinople is blocked by Serbia.

 

[Magnum]

What is the supply situation in respect of coal & ammunition? At this point the rail link between Vienna & Constantinople is blocked by Serbia.

A cursory research shows they had a bustling coastal mining center a short distance away from Constantinople and had just opened their first coal-fired power plant in the capital in February 1914. So I'd say coal shouldn't be a problem.

 

[CV(N)-6]

Might the presence of all these ships make Greece feel threatened and declare war, making Moudros a good base for an Anglo-French fleet to bottle up the CP fleet, at least on the Aegean side?

On the flip side, with that much more power right next to Greece, might the pro-German factions win out, with Greece joining the CP?

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

A cursory research shows they had a bustling coastal mining center a short distance away from Constantinople and had just opened their first coal-fired power plant in the capital in February 1914. So I'd say coal shouldn't be a problem.

IIRC the mines were at Zongdulak (?) and interdicting the seas transport of coal west along the Black Sea coast was a major objective of the Russian fleet.

Ammunition?

 

[Magnum]

IIRC the mines were at Zongdulak (?) and interdicting the seas transport of coal west along the Black Sea coast was a major objective of the Russian fleet.

Yes. ITTL, the Russian fleet isn't really in a position to attempt any funny business.

Ammunition?

IDK. Do you have any info?

 

[Deleted member 94680]

1. Why?
- From the Sea of Marmara, they threaten not just the Anglo-French in the Mediterranean, but also the Russians in the Black Sea (whom they now massively outnumber)
- With the Black Sea coast now vulnerable to potential Ottoman landings, Russia would have to pull men away from the fronts that matter
- It would be much harder for the Anglo-French to blockade the Aegean the same way they did the Adriatic

Why would the Austrians leave their entire coast open to attack?

This is how I would answer, were I to be a proponent of this maneuver ITTL:

1. There is nobody in a position to attack the coast
2. There are no valuable targets immediately along the Adriatic coast
3. Every Anglo-French division dicking about in Dalmatia is one less holding the line at the Marne
4. There is still a considerable surface force left behind for coastal defence, enough to delay any enemy build-up long enough for us to bring overwhelming numbers by rail to defeat them.
5. The potential advantage of locking in a Russian corps to defend the Black Sea outweighs the risks

It doesn’t work like that. It didn’t work like that OTL and it doesn’t work like that here, either.

The Austrians felt they needed their entire fleet to defend the Adriatic, owing in a large part to the Royal Navy’s Mediterranean Fleet and the French ability to bring in ships if needed.

An Entente that could launch and maintain the Gallipoli landings (anywhere between 5 and 15 divisions, almost half a million men in total) would make a pretty severe dent in the Austrian’s hinterland. That’s half a million men that they didn’t need to hold the line in Western Europe OTL. They would be better used in the Adriatic, no?

That and I’m not sure the Ottomans would be too happy about all those Austrians loitering around their capital unfettered. The relatively few Germans that the Goeben and Breslau brought were one thing, but an entire fleet under foreign (allied, but foreign nonetheless) command would be an entirely different proposition to Enver, Djamal and Talaat.

 

[Magnum]

It doesn’t work like that. It didn’t work like that OTL and it doesn’t work like that here, either.

The Austrians felt they needed their entire fleet to defend the Adriatic, owing in a large part to the Royal Navy’s Mediterranean Fleet and the French ability to bring in ships if needed.

An Entente that could launch and maintain the Gallipoli landings (anywhere between 5 and 15 divisions, almost half a million men in total) would make a pretty severe dent in the Austrian’s hinterland. That’s half a million men that they didn’t need to hold the line in Western Europe OTL. They would be better used in the Adriatic, no?

That and I’m not sure the Ottomans would be too happy about all those Austrians loitering around their capital unfettered. The relatively few Germans that the Goeben and Breslau brought were one thing, but an entire fleet under foreign (allied, but foreign nonetheless) command would be an entirely different proposition to Enver, Djamal and Talaat.

Let's turn that around, Stenz - if YOU were Churchill, would you advocate that the force that went to Gallipoli OTL be instead landed at Dubrovnik or Zadar and then marched deep inland towards Sarajevo or Zagreb? Do you really see no risk with that plan?

 

[Atterdag]

An Entente that could launch and maintain the Gallipoli landings (anywhere between 5 and 15 divisions, almost half a million men in total) would make a pretty severe dent in the Austrian’s hinterland. That’s half a million men that they didn’t need to hold the line in Western Europe OTL. They would be better used in the Adriatic, no?

The difference is of course that Constantinople is the Ottomans capital and taking it seemed like it could knock them out of the war, where as even if you take Dalmatia Vienna is a long and perilous journey ahead.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

Let's turn that around, Stenz - if YOU were Churchill, would you advocate that the force that went to Gallipoli OTL be instead landed at Dubrovnik or Zadar and then marched deep inland towards Sarajevo or Zagreb? Do you really see no risk with that plan?

If I were Churchill, yes. If I were me, no. Any of the “soft underbelly” operations were a waste of resources (with the possible exception of the one they never tried - Alexandretta), but that isn’t the point. I was merely asking if an Adriatic operation were a better use of resources than Gallipoli. I think on balance, knocking the Austrians out of the War would end the whole thing quicker than removing the Ottomans.

Of course there’s risk, but the Adriatic is easier to supply than the Dardanelles, there’s a better chance of an immediate impact (removal of the Austrian ports, Italian entry, a Slavic uprising, etc) and the landing will not be unopposed. The Austrians will have to pretty much cease fighting the Russians to deal with 5, 10 or 15 Entente divisions landing in Cisleithania and that’s a boon.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

The difference is of course that Constantinople is the Ottomans capital and taking it seemed like it could knock them out of the war, where as even if you take Dalmatia Vienna is a long and perilous journey ahead.

True, but to knock the Austrians out of the War, you don’t have to take Vienna. You just have to take enough territory or defeat enough armies to make them come to terms. Landing a sizeable force in such an area as the Adriatic littoral with it’s ports, roads and infrastructure mean that a telling impact can be made on the Austrian deployments of their entire military. They will not be able to defeat the Adriatic invasion and fight the Russians at the same time, they can hold one and fight the other at best. OTL, the Austrians didn’t do well against the Russians early in the war when they were fighting the Serbians at the same time - now you have an Entente expeditionary force thrown in at the same time?

 

[Magnum]

First of all, any landing that advances too far inland faces the very present risk of being overwhelmed and destroyed by enemy reinforcements, something that was definitely no the case with the Gallipoli operation. Secondly, the Entente deployed 32 capital ships at Gallipoli OTL - the 13 the Austro-Hungarians could muster couldn't have been that much of a deterrent.

 

[CV(N)-6]

First of all, any landing that advances too far inland faces the very present risk of being overwhelmed and destroyed by enemy reinforcements, something that was definitely no the case with the Gallipoli operation. Secondly, the Entente deployed 32 capital ships at Gallipoli OTL - the 13 the Austro-Hungarians could muster couldn't have been that much of a deterrent.

The Austrians had sixty-odd TBs, and several minelayers, they could've made the landings difficult before they even took place.

 

[TRH]

The Austrians had sixty-odd TBs, and several minelayers, they could've made the landings difficult before they even took place.

Perhaps those could be left behind? I assume the minelayers would slow down the capital ships anyways.

 

[anotherlurker]

The adriatic coast of A-H is a solid wall of mountains and hillsides going right up to the ocean, there's few places where you can get through to penetrate inlands. Compared to that the geography of Gallipoli is downright inviting. The only place where it's thinkable would be far to the North at Istria, but that gives A-H more than enough time to prepare troops to welcome the British with thunderous artillery, also easy logistics due to a direct railway line to the industrial heartland, supplies from factories around Vienna can be at the front in about 12 hours according to the A-H railway map.

They could invade neutral Albania though to link up with the Serbians.

 

[BooNZ]

It doesn’t work like that. It didn’t work like that OTL and it doesn’t work like that here, either.

The Austrians felt they needed their entire fleet to defend the Adriatic, owing in a large part to the Royal Navy’s Mediterranean Fleet and the French ability to bring in ships if needed.

It does sound gamey, but I have read in the opening days of the war, a play for the Black Sea (featuring significant A-H naval assets) was mooted in both the German and A-H naval circles OTL. I have raised something similar on the board before: https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-the-cp-controlled-black-sea.442318/#post-16921319

An Entente that could launch and maintain the Gallipoli landings (anywhere between 5 and 15 divisions, almost half a million men in total) would make a pretty severe dent in the Austrian’s hinterland. That’s half a million men that they didn’t need to hold the line in Western Europe OTL. They would be better used in the Adriatic, no?

Yes, no.

That and I’m not sure the Ottomans would be too happy about all those Austrians loitering around their capital unfettered. The relatively few Germans that the Goeben and Breslau brought were one thing, but an entire fleet under foreign (allied, but foreign nonetheless) command would be an entirely different proposition to Enver, Djamal and Talaat.

Yes, the full fleet might be a bit much.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

First of all, any landing that advances too far inland faces the very present risk of being overwhelmed and destroyed by enemy reinforcements, something that was definitely no the case with the Gallipoli operation. Secondly, the Entente deployed 32 capital ships at Gallipoli OTL - the 13 the Austro-Hungarians could muster couldn't have been that much of a deterrent.

Considering the kittens Churchill had about Goeben on her own interfering with the landings, I imagine 13 battleships would be viewed quite severely.

 

[marathag]

Secondly, the Entente deployed 32 capital ships at Gallipoli OTL - the 13 the Austro-Hungarians could muster couldn't have been that much of a deterrent.

Except the Tegetthoffs would slaughter most of those 8 French and 24 RN pre-dreadnoughts without difficulty, and the Battlecruisers would not fare much better, Only Queen Elizabeth was superior.
Don't discount the Subs and other light craft the A-H Navy had
Captain von Trapp would have a field day in U-5