WI there was a Bruislov Offensive on the Western Front in 1915?

King Thomas

Banned
Done by the Western Allies, with no prior buildup of troops for spies to report on and only a very short bombardment of a few minites before the attack starts along the whole Western Front. Would it be a success? If so, how much of a success?
 
The doctrine would not support that at all because the entente "knew"
that artillerybombarment for several hours would do the trick, always
remember that generals are almost everytime one war behind.
 
Done by the Western Allies, with no prior buildup of troops for spies to report on and only a very short bombardment of a few minites before the attack starts along the whole Western Front. Would it be a success? If so, how much of a success?

When the 1915 German Army turns into the 1916 Austro-Hungarian army, sure. Until then - not a chance, I'm afraid. Brusilov's tactics were nice, sure; but it helped - a lot - that he was facing one of the worst armies of the war.
 
Brusilov's tactics were nice, sure; but it helped - a lot - that he was facing one of the worst armies of the war.
That and much lower density of troops and fortifications on the Eastern Front due to geography (frontline was too damn long).
 

MrP

Banned
Bit groggy atm. I'll have a look at OTL's operations of '15 in a min, and see what I can come up with. Neuve-Chapelle springs to mind unbidden, but I don't doubt the French had similar success. The problem is communication (very difficult across a battlefield), German reserves (relatively easily contacted and deployed) and lack of support for the attackers past a certain point (because of communications again).

The doctrine would not support that at all because the entente "knew"
that artillerybombarment for several hours would do the trick, always
remember that generals are almost everytime one war behind.

In fairness, it was often necessary to have lengthy bombardments to weaken enemy defences so that troops could get through. And their ability to sap enemy morale should not be under-estimated.
 
Nueve Chapelle was in many ways similar to later offensives. It had a high density of heavy guns for the front it occupied, a fast bombardment and considerable intial success. But as stated, communication was a major problem; artillery couldn't be stopped when it wasn't needed, called for when it was and commanders couldn't keep touch with their units. So it bogged down and counter attacks removed much of the successes gained.

NC also had a quite sophisticated operational objective. It was supposed to endanger supply to nearby sectors and lead to a wider German withdrawal as a result.
 
In the case of the Brusilov offensive, the Austro-Hungarians had transferred all their good units to the Italian front for their own offensive against the Italians.
What was meant as a Russian reconnaissance in force turned out to be a total rout of the remaining very low quality troops of the Austro-Hungarians, very much to the surprise of General Brusilow.

Any such thing staged at the Western front would result in a mass slaughter of the attackers, nothing else. Only when you can convince the OHL to send 80% of their soldiers on harvest holiday, there might be a chance of success.
 
Top