WI: What if 1918 Spring Offensive was Cancelled?

It's near fogotten now, but the French introduced an 8mm Autoloader, the RSC Mle 1917, over 80,000 made before the end of the War, with bugs addressed with the Mle 1918, that a few thousand were made before the Armistice.
The British weren't far behind with the Farquhar-Hill, 100,000 ordered in Summer 1918 but the Armistice came before any production facilities could be assigned and the order was dropped.
 
Narrow? 100km?

Discounting the more inactive part of the fronts south of Metz, the Western Front at the time of the August counterattack was about 250 miles. I think about 90-95% of the German 200 (or so) divisions were deployed here, or maybe 1 division per every 1.3 miles. The gap between Liege and the northern edge of the German fortified belt at Thionville is 100 miles, of which about half was the Ardennes or the Liege area, so about half a mile of front per division.

And why do you assume that people would be stupid to attack those places and not go around?
http://members.kos.net/sdgagnon/mil03.jpg

Namur, Brussels, and Liege are key rail junctions and built-up areas. In the historical 100 days the German army was in full retreat so major city fighting was avoided. But if there is no Spring Offensive, each of these cities is a set-piece battle with the rail junctions being the prize. (Not sure what the logistic requirement of the BEF was, but assuming 3.5 million men and horses at 20lbs per man and horse per day, that's about 35,000 tons supply per day, meaning that an advance into Germany without the major rail lines would be impossible)

Come on, look at a map. The Vosges were in French hands (and they are not in Alsace but in Lorraine) and you just need to use the southern gap or the northen one. Look at a map.
I don't think an offensive south of Metz is ending the war even in 1919, The Allies have to break through north of Metz, or cross Bohemia into Germany after a march up the Danube. They have to advance through the line Aachen-Metz and cross the Rhine into the Ruhr. With the German army reeling after the failed Spring 1918 offensives, a reasonable timeframe from historical in capturing the Ruhr might be spring 1919. But with the stormtrooper divisions intact in the counterattack role in the fall of 1918 when the Allies might commence their offensives? I doubt the Allies even reach the Rhine by spring 1919.
 
>Discounting the more inactive part of the fronts south of Metz,

Why?

>the Western Front at the time of the August counterattack was about 250 miles.

more 350

> I think about 90-95% of the German 200 (or so) divisions were deployed here

Plainly wrong. They had 197 on all fronts (including occupation forces in the East) + Italy + Greece + Alsace

Among them many were depleted (24) or unfit (16) for combat according the the own German command (and many divisions were worse than than, check Michael Neiberg: The Military Atlas of WWI)

You have the OOB here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Army_order_of_battle,_Western_Front_(1918)

You can check division per division here: http://www.vlib.us/wwi/resources/germanarmywwi.pdf A huge number of them is seriuosly depleted or unfit for combat.

The average front line per division was MUCH larger as a consequence.

Your numbers just don't fit


Namur, Brussels, and Liege are key rail junctions and built-up areas. In the historical 100 days the German army was in full retreat so major city fighting was avoided. But if there is no Spring Offensive, each of these cities is a set-piece battle with the rail junctions being the prize. (Not sure what the logistic requirement of the BEF was, but assuming 3.5 million men and horses at 20lbs per man and horse per day, that's about 35,000 tons supply per day, meaning that an advance into Germany without the major rail lines would be impossible)

Check your maps again and you will discover something specific about Belgium: they have many rail lines that avoid those cities. Second thing: the idea is ti surround the city and to make them surrender. why attacking the city itself? and BTW your link is dead.

I don't think an offensive south of Metz is ending the war even in 1919, The Allies have to break through north of Metz

There is a place called Alsace anf the Belfort gap... and why north?

, or cross Bohemia into Germany after a march up the Danube. They have to advance through the line Aachen-Metz and cross the Rhine into the Ruhr.

I would use the flat Belgium plain (the same that germans selected to use in WW1 and WW2)
 

The major effort south of Metz? May as well roll out "Victory in 1920!" as the slogan.

Between the Netherlands and Thionville, there's about 50 miles of good offensive ground.


Plainly wrong.
Noted.


Check your maps again and you will discover something specific about Belgium: they have many rail lines that avoid those cities.
For an offensive into Germany, the BEF has to control either the cities on the Meuse and Brussels, or Antwerp and Brussels, and Liege in all cases, to establish its communications into German. Preferably, all of the above.

Second thing: the idea is ti surround the city and to make them surrender. why attacking the city itself?
A siege could work for all of them except Liege. Liege would have to be taken by assault. But sieges could take a long time, unless sped along by reducing the surrounded cities to rubble with artillery, which isn't a very "Belgiumy" option.


There is a place called Alsace anf the Belfort gap...
There's also a place called the Black Forest.
 
The major effort south of Metz? May as well roll out "Victory in 1920!" as the slogan.

What an uneducated guess. State your sources first. A major attack was planned there in november 18...

Between the Netherlands and Thionville, there's about 50 miles of good offensive ground.

That's plainly stupid. And this one is an educated guess: I just look from my window! It's flat, flat and flat.



There's also a place called the Black Forest.

so what?
 
Given that Germany would probably collapse over the winter of 1918/1919, the WAllies probably don't have to worry about any resistance once the campaign season begins.
 
I'm just surprised the allies weren't at all concerned about Brest-Litsvok? I mean the collapse of the Russian front in WW2 might hhave meant the end of war. I'm confused why it didn't in WW1

In WW1, the western front was very much regarded as the main theatre by all the major combatents (France, Germany & Britain - although opinion was divided in Germany). All other theatres were regarded as secondary in importance. Tsarist Russia was not the same beast as Soviet Russia. In essence this view was proved right as a failure to win in the west cost Germany the war, despite victory in the east.
 
What do you think the 100 Days was and where do you think it happened?

Basically, in front of my home. Here we still have to be carefull when digging. too many unexploded shells and so on.

And can you come back please to your previous comments and take into account the posted sources.
 
Basically, in front of my home. Here we still have to be carefull when digging. too many unexploded shells and so on.
Your home is in Flanders? I thought it was around Brussels? Anyways, still interested in your explanation of how the BEF attacks into Germany without first taking Liege, Antwerp and Brussels and clearing the Ardennes.

And can you come back please to your previous comments and take into account the posted sources.

I was waiting for you to cite some sources that concluded the war could be won with an offensive south of the Metz. You do suppose the French are going to make much progress following the Rhine on the tiny front with the Black Forest on their right?
 
ok, let's summarize things:

- your estimated distances are wrong
- you don't know the area nor its geography (and of you knew it you would not say such funny but irrelevant things)
- you don't enve know how many divisions they have (while it's easy to gether data on such a topic)
- you don't know how many still have fighting capabilities (same remark)
- you don't know what was the allied strategy late 1918 and the overall plan for the Lorraine-Alsace offensive
- you don't use and first or second had account nor any source
- you don't take into account answers when they should you, using sources, that you are wrong.

Your opinion in this thread is thus irrelevant.

pdf27 on the other hand has relevant comments! I may not agree but he may be right.
 
Top