Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

mannerheim line vs siegfried line vs maginot line


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 tommy tater

tommy tater

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Posted 30 August 2008 - 12:57 PM

3 strong defensive lines which where eventually destroyed by the enemy. which of these three was the strongest?

#2 lwd

lwd

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,098 posts
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 30 August 2008 - 03:22 PM

I'm not sure I'd say the Maginot was destroyed by the enemy it was outflanked but surrendered pretty much intact. It probably would get my vote for the strongest.

#3 Kai-Petri

Kai-Petri

    Kenraali

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 20,292 posts

User's Awards

2   

Posted 31 August 2008 - 11:01 AM

I'd say Maginot the strongest, Siegfried next, Mannerheim had not that many bunkers or big guns.
Posted Image

#4 Jaeger

Jaeger

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,495 posts

Posted 31 August 2008 - 08:48 PM

Mannerheim line was the strongest because it was defended by Finns...
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

#5 T. A. Gardner

T. A. Gardner

    Genuine Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,855 posts

Posted 31 August 2008 - 10:04 PM

Easily the Maginot Line. While it has its negatives it was by far the best throught out and planned fortified line in the world in 1940.

The Sigfried (of the ones listed) would be second and the Mannerheim third.

#6 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 31 August 2008 - 10:08 PM

None of which were "Destroyed". In length of time to have been designed and built. Maginot took the longest IIRC.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#7 STURMTRUPPEN

STURMTRUPPEN

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 610 posts

Posted 02 September 2008 - 01:38 AM

seigfried then maginot then mannerheim

#8 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 02 September 2008 - 02:16 AM

Also take into consideration that for years the Sigfried Line was neglected between 1940 and 1944 and some areas fell into disuse . The cannon and other weapons were removed. IIRC The bunkers were locked up with some of the keys being lost and some being used by the local farmers as root cellars.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#9 tommy tater

tommy tater

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Posted 01 January 2009 - 04:58 PM

in my opinion mannerhiem, it held back the soviets for months using guerilla tactics. but that might be because I love a good guerilla war!

#10 TiredOldSoldier

TiredOldSoldier

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,725 posts

Posted 01 January 2009 - 05:34 PM

Mannerhein was the weakest but historically was the most effective closely followed by Sigfried. The latter's psychological impact on the French, probably reinforced by the usual military failing of believeing your enemy is thinking like you do, doomed Poland by allowing the Germans to concentrate on it so it gets good points despite it's non stellar effectiveness in 44. IMO Maginot is a masterfully implemented outdated military concept, with the amount of mobile firepower available in 39/45 fixed fortifications had little chance against determined well organized attacks, the role of forts in 39/45 was to hold up the enemy for a while so you could concentrate elsewhere (or bring up reserves) not to guarantee an impregnable static front. I think the mix of fort and mobility that characterized the Finnish defences is a brilliant example of this.

#11 Kai-Petri

Kai-Petri

    Kenraali

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 20,292 posts

User's Awards

2   

Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:24 AM

Some pics of the Mannerheim line´s biggest bunkers today. The Russians blew up the bunkers, I think in 1944-45 so as they could not be used at all.

Panoramio - Photo of Mannerheim-linjaa Suurniemen lohkolla

From the wikipedia site you can see the 1939 line going through the Karelian isthmus. Notice Summa, where the biggest bunkers were.

Mannerheim Line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1944 the Mannerheim line consisted of three different lines one after the other, a bit like the Germans had in Italy, and the last line just and just managed to hold the summer main offensive 1944 by the Red Army. There was also the last line deeper inside the main continent called the "Salpa-linja" but this was never used.
Posted Image

#12 lwd

lwd

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,098 posts
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:35 AM

in my opinion mannerhiem, it held back the soviets for months using guerilla tactics. but that might be because I love a good guerilla war!

Ok how is a fortified defensive line be consistant with guerrilla tactics?

#13 JCFalkenbergIII

JCFalkenbergIII

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,479 posts

Posted 02 January 2009 - 06:19 PM

Ok how is a fortified defensive line be consistant with guerrilla tactics?



LOL I would love to hear how a fortified defensive line can conduct "guerilla tactics" too.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman.

#14 TiredOldSoldier

TiredOldSoldier

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,725 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 09:28 AM

LOL I would love to hear how a fortified defensive line can conduct "guerilla tactics" too.

Obviously by acting as a force multiplier along the enemy's main line of advance and so allowing forces to be freed for operations elsewhere.
It's not the forts doing the guerrilla but guerrilla tactics basically means having your (usually stronger) opponent spread himself thin and then hitting him where he's weak, having him commit a large force against a fortified line in a good way of reducing troop density elsewhere. If you have better mobility those tactics can be very effective. Any national army's priority is to protect it's key population centers and without the fortifications to act as force multiplier most resources would have to be committed in the istmus against the main soviet trust.

BTW that's why I believe Sigrfied and Mannerheim were a success while Maginot was a failure, a fortification line is a defensive force multiplier, the German and Finnish strategy was that it would keep the enemy at bay on the most critical front and allow then to concentrate forces elsewhere (Poland and Belgium for the Germans and the North and Center for the Finns). The French theory was that the role of the forts was just to reduce casualties in a defensive battle but had no "offensive" component (Dyle-Breda was a defensive contingency plan) so left the initiative to the Germans who decided to attack elsewhere.

Edited by TiredOldSoldier, 03 January 2009 - 09:45 AM.


#15 tommy tater

tommy tater

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 01:10 PM

Ok how is a fortified defensive line be consistant with guerrilla tactics?

Look at the equipment that the Finns used, they had about 30 tanks compared to 6,541 soviet tanks, 250,000 Finnish troops held off 1,000,000 soviet's for nearly a year. I realise that the finns didnt use the Guerilla type warfare from the start of the winter war but they certainly adopted such tactics by ambushing and sniping. Soviet troops with their dark uniforms were easily visible against the white snow, & targeted by the Finns' snipers and machine guns. Corporal Simo Hayha was credited with 542 confirmed kills, making him the deadliest sniper in military history. Had he been born in France, Britain or The United States, he could have gone down in history as the most famous sniper in the world

#16 Triple C

Triple C

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,515 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 06:54 PM

LoL! There was a whole lot of standing fast and very little running away at the Mannerheim. The idea of having a fixed line of defense is inimical to guerrila tactics, the point of which is to avoid contact instead of being engaged in a week long fight to the death.

The Sigfried Line's pillboxes were outmoded. The MG apperatures were designed for MG-34s and 3.7-cm. anti-tank guns. Modern weapons could not be used at all. The Germans rushed to defend it and barely made it. Another 24 hours and the US Army would have made it through.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users