Sanity options 2.0 - Polish armed forces

[tomo pauk]

1st to fight the Nazis, and back-stabbed by Stalin, so let's 'give' them somewhat a better chance in their struggle.
Thread is for the army, navy and air force of Poland. Time frame spans between 1934 and 1940. Things like "kill Hitler", "kill Stalin" etc are cute, but not the topic.
Stuff in the need for change: disposition of the armies/units, improvements to the air defence and air force, finding the chances to hit back the aggressor, ways of stalling the motorized war etc; I'm aware that most of German and Soviet infantry divisions were still relying on horses.

 

[EWHM]

I'm thinking you can't really afford to do a balanced force as a minor neutral like Poland. You probably need to focus on a few things with high bang for the buck and do them well. Your navy is pretty much irrelevant. You don't really have the wherewithal to do significant bombing, even tactical bombing because you can expect to have air supremacy against you against either Germany or the USSR. So here's my take:

Order good fighters from somebody. Focus there. You need something that can blunt the edge of the hardcore dive bombing you're going to be facing. Maybe cooperate with the Finns, they did very well modifying export fighters.

Buy lots of good anti aircraft artillery. Also buy lots of good anti tank artillery. The two can sometimes be dual use.

Buy lots and loads of radios. Those are a force multiplier. Don't go heavy into tanks, you probably can't afford it. Train anti tank tactics on your infantry.

Strive to make it really expensive to take you out. That's probably the best you can do.

 

[Sasza]

Wait, it's not that easy.

First of all, you need to start changes after the Treaty of Riga at the earliest.

Firstly, changing the conditions of the Polish-French alliance, so that Poland does not have to permanently maintain over 30 Infantry Divisions and 9 Cavalry Brigades, this only drained the budget.

Limit the number of divisions to 18 and cavalry brigades to 4. Thanks to this, you will strive to build a more professional army.

Do not sign monopoly agreements with Fiat or Bristol and require more flexible agreements. When the Great Depression comes, do not introduce high taxes on motor vehicles.

For more mundane things, settle for average equipment, not any high demands.

 

[Ramontxo]

If you are Polish sanity is not an option. If you choose sanity you may adapt yourself to the circumstances and the reality. But if you choose to keep being Polish never forget. Deus Mirabilis Fortuna Variabilis

 

[tomo pauk]

Wait, it's not that easy.

It wasn't supposed to be easy :/

Firstly, changing the conditions of the Polish-French alliance, so that Poland does not have to permanently maintain over 30 Infantry Divisions and 9 Cavalry Brigades, this only drained the budget.

Limit the number of divisions to 18 and cavalry brigades to 4. Thanks to this, you will strive to build a more professional army.

Don't have these units fully manned.
I'd try to milk the French a bit better, including the long-term loans.

Do not sign monopoly agreements with Fiat or Bristol and require more flexible agreements. When the Great Depression comes, do not introduce high taxes on motor vehicles.

These agreements are beyond my pay grade
As for the aero engines, I'd go with HS 12 engines, and probably try to keep ties with Syzdlowksky who is now in France. Have the French government be a creditor for the engine factory in Poland.
Now that we're in financial matters, take loans from German, Austrian and Czech banks Also from British, American, Italian and Swiss banks. Belgian, Swedish, Danish banks - everything goes, just make sure that loans are with long repay period and with grace periods.

For more mundane things, settle for average equipment, not any high demands.

Polish equipment was already average, especially when we look at air force and air defense.

 

[Sasza]

Polish equipment was already average, especially when we look at air force and air defense.

What I meant here was that the Polish Army had very high requirements in terms of, for example, reliability or some technical solutions.

An example of this is the 7tp, where instead of building the Vickers E as much as possible, they started scheming and thus delayed the mass introduction of the tank into the army.

Don't have these units fully manned.

But you still need professional officers or other soldiers who have to guard or take care of the horses

 

[Driftless]

Rube questions: would it have made more sense to set up defensive works back from the borders (both East and West) designed to funnel attacks along preferred lines? Not a clue where those works should be set up and where attacks should be deflected to. The thinking being that the Poles are outnumbered on either front, so any means to buffer against assault would be useful. That stepped back plan could provide more preparation time and shorten up the defensive perimeter somewhat too, saving on resources and allowing for better coordination of supporting moves

 

[tomo pauk]

What I meant here was that the Polish Army had very high requirements in terms of, for example, reliability or some technical solutions.

An example of this is the 7tp, where instead of building the Vickers E as much as possible, they started scheming and thus delayed the mass introduction of the tank into the army.

Okay, roger that.

But you still need professional officers or other soldiers who have to guard or take care of the horses

Lease the horses to the Polish economy (not unlike what Japanse did with some of their ships).
Having divisions half-manned saves a lot on housing, food any pay to the soldiers, and still we can show to the French that we mean business.

 

[Sasza]

Lease the horses to the Polish economy (not unlike what Japanse did with some of their ships).
Having divisions half-manned saves a lot on housing, food any pay to the soldiers, and still we can show to the French that we mean business.

But that's how it was, do you think, why were cars taxed, but not horses taxed during the crisis?

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Firstly, ease up on the secrecy and train up troops to use their (pretty decent) AT rifles and issue them promptly. They would still have lost, but exacted a much higher price on the most important arm of the German army and maybe added another week of defiance. That's an easy win as they had the rifles in sufficient numbers but needed proper training and distribution.

Second, update a few more of the tankettes with 20mm. Again, even another dozen or two would have slowed and disrupted attacks. There were plans to do more conversions as I understand it [1] but not soon enough.

Tanks. Nice, but in 1939, more tankettes might have been a better option. They were low profile, easy to conceal and nasty against infantry znd softskin units. On the defensive, they would be useful for spoiling attacks and generally disrupting unarmoured units.

Fighters needed to be updated sooner. Though agile, they needed something more modern, faster and with more guns. This is the hardest as it needs lots of money and retraining.

Better defensive planning and mobilisation. Even a modest improvement in initial deployment may have helped. Again not a big resource sink, but asking 'we could be attacked from all sides. Is a long thin crust the best option?' one more time might have led to a modest improvement in the price paid by the Germans, and particularly by their most important mobile units.

So tgat's my good ideas for today. Apart from the fighters only modest changes needed, and while not enough to win, slowing thd Germans by a week or two has big downstream impacts [2]

[1] I can't read Polish so this may not be correct, but it's a relatively easy change.
[2] A hundred or so fewer tanks and tank crews makes France just that bit slower and more expensive, and then Barbarossa or Greece is missing a few more hundred tanks and crews and a few hundred capured tanks that ITTL were destroyed in combat. Plus fewer captured vehicles, possibly less pressure on the BEF so personal weapons, bren guns and AT rifles and a few guns are evacuated with the troops, which maye leads to 6 pounder production starting earlier. So a big deal eventually.

 

[tomo pauk]

Firstly, ease up on the secrecy and train up troops to use their (pretty decent) AT rifles and issue them promptly. They would still have lost, but exacted a much higher price on the most important arm of the German army and maybe added another week of defiance. That's an easy win as they had the rifles in sufficient numbers but needed proper training and distribution.

Second, update a few more of the tankettes with 20mm. Again, even another dozen or two would have slowed and disrupted attacks. There were plans to do more conversions as I understand it [1] but not soon enough.

Tanks. Nice, but in 1939, more tankettes might have been a better option. They were low profile, easy to conceal and nasty against infantry znd softskin units. On the defensive, they would be useful for spoiling attacks and generally disrupting unarmoured units.

Good call.
Any worth in a good HMG? A ~30 kg weapon that can kill a lot of Heer's kit, as well as harm the aircraft. Extendable pintle-mount (set down for ground attack, set up for AA job)?

Fighters needed to be updated sooner. Though agile, they needed something more modern, faster and with more guns. This is the hardest as it needs lots of money and retraining.

Polish produced a lot of aircraft in the 1930s. Circa 500-600 fighters(?) yes, a number of them was exported. 250+50 of PZL 23+43 1-engined bombers. About 120 of PZL 37s, the 2-engined bombers. A smattering of other A/C was also produced.
We can understand the reason behind the PZL 23, but that is probably not the money well spent. Me, I'd focus on making of another several hundred of fighters instead. Arm them with light bombs need-be.
Fighters themselves need to be cantilever low-wing types, with enclosed canopy, set more for speed and firepower than for horizontal maneuverability. Probably start with a fixed U/C low-wing design instead of the P.11, make a few hundred of these, and then switch to the retractable U/C version?
Going with HS 12 engines to power the Polish fighters is my intention; we should hopefully arrive at 400-500 of Polish fighters by 1939 being no worse than the IK-3, with another 200-300 being as good as the Avia B.35.

I'd keep the PZL 37, but the doctrine should be that night bombing is favored, thus the training and technology (starting from usage of flares, as well as radio-goniometer tech) needs to be in that direction. Leave a dozen of sleeper agents to lit up the German air bases?

 

[Sasza]

In terms of armor units. Put Vickers E into production immediately and don't wait for 7tp. This will give you over 1,000 tanks by 1939. At the same time, look for a partner for a new medium tank (preferably Czechoslovakia, but that is out of the question because of Masaryk).

In terms of aviation, do not build the PZL-37 and transfer the power for this bomber to a new fighter. At the same time, continue to order further PZL-24 and PZL-11 modifications with Gnome engines.

Assuming a better planned army reduction, Poland will be able to field 18 Category A Divisions, 4 Category B Divisions and 6 Category C Divisions. In addition, 2 mechanized/motorized divisions.

The Navy had one better-planned type of armed forces and I wouldn't change much here, unless we managed to obtain some ships in the initial period after the three Black Eagles.

 

[tomo pauk]

In terms of armor units. Put Vickers E into production immediately and don't wait for 7tp. This will give you over 1,000 tanks by 1939. At the same time, look for a partner for a new medium tank (preferably Czechoslovakia, but that is out of the question because of Masaryk).

Vickers E seems indeed like a very smart choice for the 1930s.

In terms of aviation, do not build the PZL-37 and transfer the power for this bomber to a new fighter. At the same time, continue to order further PZL-24 and PZL-11 modifications with Gnome engines.

Why should Poland stick 430 km/h fighters in the late 1930s?

 

[yulzari1]

Trim your forces to fit the budget and strengths. Poland had no shortage of horses but limited motorised transport. Build your army around mobility rather than heavy power.

An air force centred upon fighters to avoid enemy air superiority and with short service lives. Accept that you must re equip with the latest in technology at short intervals. IOTL they were caught between generations so had the last of the old in 1939 and had not yet received the first of the new.

Horse transport cannot move heavy army guns fast nor far. Concentrate on what can be pack transported. Mortars etc. and light anti tank guns. But in quantity. You will be weak in counter battery fire but be too mobile for rapid remote enemy artillery location and can swamp enemy front lines. Infantry become dragoons accepting using less able troops allocated to horse holding etc. A high proportion of LMGs. Possibly, in period, HMGs can double as anti tank weapons and double up with mortars as area or point fire weapons to deal with enemy MGs. Troops will, by and large, be accustomed to working with horses so little new training in transport given. A larger professional officer and NCO corps and a shorter conscription period but with more frequent refresher training thereafter to keep them up to speed. To deploy this one needs excellent radio communications. Line, telephone and messengers will not do.

For the navy. It cannot usefully fight either likely Baltic opposing navy offensively. Though doubtless it would do so bravely were it in that position. It must think defensively to deny enemy the freedom to operate littorially. The classic denial weapon is the mine. So minelaying would be a key task, supported by light attack craft to drive off mine sweeping craft or at least divert naval opposition to escorting and supporting their minesweepers. So high speed minelayers to make best use of night operations and force minesweeping to allow for mines laid further afield, even if only a token number are so used as a diversion.

The aim has to be to disrupt all arms warfare at which the industrial capacity of either prime danger nations is capable of exceeding Polish industry.

What it does is to strip air support from enemy forces, strip offensive naval support in shore bombardment and logistic supplies from the campaign and force them to meet a mobile army which can destroy front line positions by local direct and indirect fire and strip away tank support. A fighter air force, a cavalry army and a mining navy. Much of this is within the ability of Polish industry and the investment will grow the Polish industrial base to boot. The weakness is the ability to assault prepared defensive positions.It is a formula to lose a war far more slowly, not one to win by sole military force. It requires some external factor to weaken the enemy.

One should note that in any extended war motorised items will fail through lack of fuel and there will be a severe shortfall in munitions. Simply due to the isolation of Poland from its potential supporting allies and the limitations of Polish industry and raw materials. Without an active allied campaign to divert the enemy’s attention and forces, a war of attrition will doom even the bravest Polish defence. A swift response and defeat of the enemy early the ground allied to political conversation with the enemy is the best solution and a well chosen armed mobile army protected from the air and sea is the best hope.

The next question is what kit will fit this doctrine?

 

[Sasza]

Why should Poland stick 430 km/h fighters in the late 1930s?

As I wrote earlier, be satisfied with what is available and don't look for your dream weapon. Especially since it can always be used to hunt Ju-87s or other less maneuverable and slower machines.



If the resources and money go to the PZL-50 instead of the PZL-37, you will receive a fighter. The PZL-37 was a disaster for the Polish aviation, it consumed a large part of the car fleet and money, and we received the worse He-111.

For the navy. It cannot usefully fight either likely Baltic opposing navy offensively. Though doubtless it would do so bravely were it in that position. It must think defensively to deny enemy the freedom to operate littorially. The classic denial weapon is the mine. So minelaying would be a key task, supported by light attack craft to drive off mine sweeping craft or at least divert naval opposition to escorting and supporting their minesweepers. So high speed minelayers to make best use of night operations and force minesweeping to allow for mines laid further afield, even if only a token number are so used as a diversion.

The navy was built to combat the USSR's Baltic Fleet and was ideally suited for this purpose.

 

[tomo pauk]

As I wrote earlier, be satisfied with what is available and don't look for your dream weapon. Especially since it can always be used to hunt Ju-87s or other less maneuverable and slower machines.

No offense, but I'm past obeying random people on the internet.

On a constructive note, I'm not looking after a dream weapon (Spitfire for 1939), but for what can be available for the Poland. After the Bf 110, Ju 87 was a minority among LW 1st line combat A/C anyway. Staying with strutted parasol wing, fixed U/C and 9 cyl radial was passee by 1935-ish, and here is the area Polish need to focus with improvements 1st and foremost, and invest their and foreign money.

If the resources and money go to the PZL-50 instead of the PZL-37, you will receive a fighter. The PZL-37 was a disaster for the Polish aviation, it consumed a large part of the car fleet and money, and we received the worse He-111.

Fo the late 1930s, PZL 37 was a far better bomber than the P.11 and P.24 were as fighters.

 

[Popcorn]

AA and AT guns to make the actual invasions as painful as possible for the Germans and Soviets. Several million rifles with adequate ammunition for the general public to bleed them white during the occupation.

 

[sdgottsch]

For a question on tactics: Since the Polish defense always planned for a German attack, place massive landmine barrier on Eastern (Russia) border and on Czech border. That way concentrate capabilities on Western Front and leave defensive only units on East.

If the German Army was ground to a halt before 17 September, do you think Stalin would have called off his attack from the East?

 

[Driftless]

Buy some Fokker D.XXI from the Netherlands, as a stop gap?

 

[The Tai-Pan]

If the German Army was ground to a halt before 17 September, do you think Stalin would have called off his attack from the East?

Why? Probably just leaves him more land to grab.