Question: Could the Dardanelles Campaign have been successful?

Coordinated landings at channakale (sic) to hit the forts with the initial naval attempt, while the turks were much lighter on the ground? After they get reinforced it is fairly thin.

That would get the allied fleet into the straight. Doesn't necessarily knock Turkey out of the war though. they were pretty hard core at defending the homeland

Anecdotally, i was told by the turkish guide at the battle site that the bulk of the troops deployed in the area including his grandfather, were local, and after the historical landings the turkish government intentionally left their families in place immediately behind the lines to encourage them to fight harder. It would seem to have worked.
 
Proper planning!!! There was minimal coordination between Navy & Army, no adequate recon, because of numerous foul-ups the whole operation was telegraphed to the Turks well in advance, have proper minesweepers in place, have aggressive commanders that don't halt for a "brew up" when they have no opposition and could have kept going, etc, etc, etc.

Even with the equipment of the day, competent planning by proper staff could have resulted in Gallipoli being taken and the narrows cleared. having said that, would the British & French shelling Istanbul put the Ottomans out of the war? Would both sides of the straits be cleared enough for merchant ships to sail through and get to Russia? And would the additional supplies made a difference at that point?

Gallipoli is an example of just about every mistake that can be made in doing an amphibious operation being made.
 
Had the British and French fleets just pushed on they Turkish forts would have run out of ammunition. I have no doubt that a more determined push after that would have seen Costantinople fall to the allies.
 
Top