german tactics

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
User avatar
sithlord72
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 19:26
Location: erie pa

german tactics

Post by sithlord72 » 28 Apr 2003 16:22

Was the German's blitzkrieg revolutionary, or where they just they just taking the concept of combined arms to the next logical stage?

User avatar
Gen. Erwin Rommel
Member
Posts: 532
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 22:54
Location: Portugal

Post by Gen. Erwin Rommel » 28 Apr 2003 17:17

Blitzkrieg was revolutionary, and one of Blitzkrieg caracteristics was the combination of weapons, with a large cover or artillery, and air bombings, the Panzer divisions move forward as a spearhead penetrating deep in enemy territory, then the infantry comes back cleaning some spots of resistence.

In Desert Storm 1991(Golf War I) the US forces used a kind of Blitzkrieg.

User avatar
sithlord72
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 19:26
Location: erie pa

Post by sithlord72 » 28 Apr 2003 17:43

But couldnt you say that the use of infintry, calvary, and artillery durring the conflicts of the 17th and 18th centeries amounted to the same basic principle? An argument could be made that the real success of the German military was in combining airpower and automotive mobility, both of which had played roles in campaigns before 1939.

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13568
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 28 Apr 2003 19:05

Although the employment of combined forces and speed to such an extent was revolutionary, the concept can be traced back to WWI, and the idea as far back as cavalrys appearance...

Have a look here if you've got too much spare time :P
http://www.panzerworld.net/Blitzkrieg.htm

Christian

Misereor
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 19:58
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by Misereor » 28 Apr 2003 21:36

Blitzkrieg was revolutionary.
True combined arms tactics (including schwerpunkts) may have been taken in use during the napoleonic era, but the role of the exploiting armored formations was completely new.

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13568
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 28 Apr 2003 21:38

Misereor wrote:Blitzkrieg was revolutionary.
True combined arms tactics (including schwerpunkts) may have been taken in use during the napoleonic era, but the role of the exploiting armored formations was completely new.


Mainly because there were no fast armour before WWII - although J.F.C. Fuller lobbied for this...

The Germans did use their StoBdivisionen in much the same way during WWI.

Christian

User avatar
sithlord72
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 19:26
Location: erie pa

Post by sithlord72 » 29 Apr 2003 02:17

Misereor wrote:Blitzkrieg was revolutionary.
True combined arms tactics (including schwerpunkts) may have been taken in use during the napoleonic era, but the role of the exploiting armored formations was completely new.


Ild argue that some nations used their calvary much like germany did it's panzers, although on a more limited scale. All through history there have been mobile, usually horse mounted, soldiers who have exploited gaps in an enemy's lines. What Germany did on the ground was push the horse calvary into the industrial age

Gwynn Compton
Member
Posts: 2840
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 22:46
Location: United Kingdom

Post by Gwynn Compton » 29 Apr 2003 08:38

The tactics were not revolutionary, merely the methods and equipment with which they were put into use with, were.

Gwynn

User avatar
Blitzkreig
Member
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Apr 2003 15:23
Location: Syracuse. New York

Post by Blitzkreig » 29 Apr 2003 11:47

i have to agree with that...that the idea behind it really wusnt revolutionary..it was guderians principles that he used and the methods in whihc he brought it about was revolutionary

Misereor
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 19:58
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Post by Misereor » 29 Apr 2003 15:25

Actually I considered adding a comparison to Jeb Stuart in my post, and why it wasn't a good comparison :)

Anyway, the role of the WW1 Stossdivision was different in that it lacked the mobility of the panzer division.
(But ofcourse the sturm- and stosstruppen of late WW1 was where the doctrine originated. They just lacked the tools to do the job properly.)

Cavalry of earlier eras can be better compared to the panzer division, but while used for raiding, the only significant force I can think of that used cavalry as agressively in an exploitation role as in the blitzkrieg doctrine was the Golden Horde...

...And they can't be compared either because the main part of their armies were composed of highly mobile troops.

On a smaller scale, a useful comparison could be Alexander's tactical doctrine using infantry to pin down the enemy, and cavalry to exploit, disrupt, surround, and finally destroy. But use an old trick that hasn't been used in enough years, and people will call it revolutionary ;)

User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 13568
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 14:07
Location: Denmark

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 29 Apr 2003 16:04

It should also be noted, tha Guderians Achtung - Panzer! is large a walkthrough of speed employed during WWI...

Christian

User avatar
ckleisch
Member
Posts: 1546
Joined: 01 Mar 2003 08:03
Location: Elizabeth City, NC USA

Post by ckleisch » 29 Apr 2003 16:14

Interesting reading on the subject is the US printing by ballatine Books of Heinz Guderians book "Panzer Leader". U02 63 is the book reference number. ballatine is a new york publisher.

User avatar
sithlord72
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 11 Jan 2003 19:26
Location: erie pa

Post by sithlord72 » 30 Apr 2003 03:14

To stretch the subject a little, how did the Wehrmacht compare to other militaries in the use of combined arms?

User avatar
Lady From Hell
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 02:40
Location: Canada

Post by Lady From Hell » 30 Apr 2003 04:06

Hi :

:) I had faced off with them So i think they were lousy Fighters. Pheraps if hey had brought there Mothers along it may have ben a bit Better. In Fact when they looked down the Barrel of my weapon they just cried so i just helped them along by taking them out of there misery . And Getting on with my Job. As we took no prisoners at the time . ( Followed Orders )

" Lady From Hell" 8)




sithlord72 wrote:To stretch the subject a little, how did the Wehrmacht
compare to other militaries in the use of combined arms?

User avatar
Gareth Collins
Member
Posts: 1491
Joined: 17 Oct 2002 18:38

Post by Gareth Collins » 30 Apr 2003 05:16

and the point of your post was...?

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”