Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

If germany attacked the maginot line

Discussion in 'What If - European Theater - Western Front & Atlan' started by Hawkerace, Jul 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Carl W Schwamberger

    Carl W Schwamberger Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    81
    I'll have to read Johnson to see what he exactly wrote. It sounds like he is repeating a odd myth about the Maginot system. The French records are still available & quite clear. In the original proposal for a fortification system the primary purpose was to provoided a hardend position for the French field armys defending the vulnerable industrial region along the border. A critical portion of French industry, including coal mines, steel mills and foundrys lay within easy striking distance of Germany. The flaw in thinking of the terrain behind the Maginot line is that the Germans did not need to pass through it to cause severe damage to the French. An advance of just sixty kilometers captures a critical portion of French industry. Encasing the artillery and machine guns in concrete rather sand bags, burying the ammunition supply deep underground, installing tank traps, tunnels for the infantry, and placing the communications centers in bomb resistant shelters made perfect sense in this context.

    One item that is seldom noted is that the frontage on the infantry divsions defending in the 'Maginot' fortification sector was more than double the conventional defensive front for a French divsion. This saved approximatly ten divsions for use of the armys facing Belgium.
     
  2. Carl W Schwamberger

    Carl W Schwamberger Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    81
    I've been back & forth over the French OB & unit movement. On 10 May there were sixteen (16) French divsions assigned to the "Stratigic Reserve" and not to any specific army. These were posted in northern France, none near the border, and were engaged in various training exercises. These included the three DCR armored divsions, some motorized infantry div, and the remainder infantry. They ran the scale from well trained & equipped 'R' divsions down to untrained & partially equipped 'B' divsions. All these were subject to various contingency plans. All were required to be able to move to the battle zone imeadiatly on order.

    On 16 May the date of Gamelins infamous remark I can find only six of these divsions comitted to the battle anywhere. The other ten were either still in their original postions, or enroute to one of the army sectors in the battle zone. Gamelins statement that there was no stratigic reserve remaining indicates either he had lost any grasp of the situation, or that he had given up and no longer cared.
     
  3. Carl W Schwamberger

    Carl W Schwamberger Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    81
    "Yes, the fact is the Germans could have been stopped near Sedan, had the French GHQ properly answered to early warnings.

    But after the breakthrough, a reaction would have required a massive and fast combined arms movement to pull many units where needed, well this is what you can expect from a strategic reserve.


    I will try to find back in the very good book I got on this subject, at what time Churchill was told by the French there wasn't such thing as a strategic reserve strong and mobile enough to stop the Germans pouring (the words "Masse de manoeuvre – maneuver mass ? " were used by Churchill at this time).

    Anyway, at this time (to be confirmed) the French army had still many units, but the fact is France had an abysmal intelligence and communications, moving orders could be delayed for hours when not for days, overall the French army was not mobile at all."
     
  4. Carl W Schwamberger

    Carl W Schwamberger Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    81
    As WWII progressed it turned out aircraft were not very effective vs fortifications. Paticularly with the medium & light bombs the Luftwaffe used. Fortresses like Corrigidor held against massive air bombardment for several weeks. The fortified submarine pens built in France for the uboats were resistant to all but the heaviest bombs, & those required direct hits from lower altitudes. Neither was the super heavy artillery the Wehrmacht ordered worth the effort. The 280 to 800 mm cannon were too slow & immobile for fast breakthrough operations. Only at the siege of Sevastopol were the heavy guns effective. Elsewhwere the battle was over beore they could be used, or they were nuetralized by air strikes.

    What was effective were small assualt engineer groups supported by light artillery which blinded the forts with direct fire & smoke. Using through reconissance, carefull methodical planning, smoke & direct fire with howitzers or the 88mm FLAK guns, and rapid execution the Wehrmacht took out several small forts. The assualt team from the Brandenberg Regiment that destroyed the guns of Eban Emael did so in the first twenty minutes of their attack, and without any support on any sort.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page