Verdun forts remain fully equipped and manned

Historically the Verdun forts were mostly disarmed and the garrisons reduced to maintenance only, with some forts being made ready for demolition.

What if at the time of the German attack in this area, the forts had remained fully equipped and manned by regular trained troops.

Not sure if the Germans still attack in this area if this is the case but for the sake of argument, assume they do, what effect will fully equipped and manned forts have?
 
I thin they couldn't resist the most powerful German guns. If the Germans still attack, the French will have probably less difficulty to resist than OTL.
Whoever the winner, if that can avoid OTL crazy meat-grinder, then the better.
 
Given what the Germans did to the Liege forts I wouldn't hold out much hope for them.
Verdun forts were more resistant than Liege forts, due to their modernization, so their inner tunnels resisted the German and French heavy artillery. So if Doumont is not captured by Germans on the march, but serves as lynchpin of the defense in the area instead, it would take the Germans a lot more time and casualties to overcome it, perhaps Vaux would even manag to hold out.
 

Deleted member 94680

What changes to make the French believe that the Forts are worth utilising? The Belgian example 'proved' to Joffre that the Forts wouldn't be able to withstand the German howitzers - how is convinced the opposite is true?

Also, where do the troops come from to properly garrison the Forts?
 
What changes to make the French believe that the Forts are worth utilising? The Belgian example 'proved' to Joffre that the Forts wouldn't be able to withstand the German howitzers - how is convinced the opposite is true?

Also, where do the troops come from to properly garrison the Forts?
Colonial infantry?
French had plenty of colonial troops in WW1.
 

Deleted member 94680

Transport more?
German navy is under blockade, so the sea lanes are generally safe.
Colonies have plenty of men, that's for sure.

The racial attitudes of the day would probably preclude simply ramping up the numbers of freshly recruited colonial soldiers at short notice into metropole France. They never tried it OTL, for good reasons. Or at least good reasons to them at the time. Conscription was, as I understand it, limited in the colonial populations due to the delicate nature of the relationship of France with her colonial populations (as it was with all European Empires), so simply “getting more” wouldn’t be considered by the French General Staff outside of some manpower crisis later in the War.

Would the French trust that many new colonial soldiers to perform correctly? Would there be fears of insurrections and rebellions if “too many” colonial troops were gathered together in one, critical, sector of the line?
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
My understanding is that it was the lack of infantry to hold the trenches around & between the fortifications, allowing German infiltration closer to the forts, that really led to the fall of Douamont.
 
Top