Es Geloybte Aretz - a Germanwank

[matzeskatze]

Some good ones, some bad ones. In Germany, mainly the wrong ones. German strategists have lost so badly focusing on the schwerpunkt that the 'winning' strategy is a war of maneuiver, from where they stand. That means, on the one hand, a strategic vision of blitzkrieg, but on the other, a focus on speed at the expense of weight. Germany will begin the next round with tanks that are too light for the modern battlefield, guns that punch too little, obsolete long-range cavalry forces, and a fleet of high-altitude bomber airships that are not survivable.

Nice storry so far.
But in the quoted part I see some problems. Yes the Germans could come to the wrong conclusions. But the utter failure you paint in arms procurement Imo could only occure if they shut out the other powers.
Because if they see others build bigger, better things they also will feel the need to experiment. Not neccecerily in the same class, but the guns surely will also grow.
Also the "Northern Front" will most likely lead to the "British" infantry and cruiser tank paradigm. With at the time could be right if the machines are mature and propperly integrated.

Also the airships. They should be aware of the shortcommings. Weather and so on will conflict with aims in this war too, so a heavier than air design could also emerge. As in this war the first should be there in the recon role.

 

[wietze]

Additionally, I think there will be significant immigration from the East. Quite a lot of people will flee Russia, including Russians that are not ok with the new regime. Poland and the other Eastern regions cannot hold them all. Ultimately, a lot of refugees will therefore end up in Germany.

who says the only go to germany, they might even end up in some of the dutch colonies

 

[carlton_bach]

Nice storry so far.
But in the quoted part I see some problems. Yes the Germans could come to the wrong conclusions. But the utter failure you paint in arms procurement Imo could only occure if they shut out the other powers.
Because if they see others build bigger, better things they also will feel the need to experiment. Not neccecerily in the same class, but the guns surely will also grow.
Also the "Northern Front" will most likely lead to the "British" infantry and cruiser tank paradigm. With at the time could be right if the machines are mature and propperly integrated.

Also the airships. They should be aware of the shortcommings. Weather and so on will conflict with aims in this war too, so a heavier than air design could also emerge. As in this war the first should be there in the recon role.

I don't envision a total loss. German heavy artillery will remain top-notch, and of course they will have aerodynamic flight (though the development will be slower than OTL, making airships seem viable for longer and entrench the zeppelin lobby). German infantry doctrine and equipment is also good, chemical weapons will remain world leaders, and the navy, while small, will be excellent. Combined arms doctrine will remain a weakness, though. It will result in 'maneuver' divisions that lack punch, equipped with 'cavalry' tanks that can't stand up to Russian models and 'anti-tank' guns that aren't. Like OTL's 3.75 PAK - "Panzeranklopfkanone". Just screwed up enough to be credible: Nobody does everything right. And just in the place to hurt most.

 

[JohnOfNottingham]

OTL is pretty much a anglo ( US & UK) wank so far, so a wank can take any shape and form. i think you have to wait till a later stage to see what it really becomes. (and remember, sometimes you have to through the fire to get to heaven)

Is it?
Also, I suppose it is indeed a more long-term wank....

I'd call a wank a scenario in which a country (or other entity) does as well as is realistically plausible. E.g. a CSA wank would involve a negotiated peace after early successes and the survival of the nation against the odds, but not the conquest of New York or the annexation of Mexico and Gran Colombia. It's also supposed to have a lasting positive effect on the standing of the country in question. I wouldn't call Timur a Mongol-Wank because things didn't go well for the Mongols in the medium term at all.

Here, things are suposed to go well, but realistically well, for Germany. That is not easy, given mindest of the people who governed the country. They'll need all the help they can get not to start a war against all comers, seek Lebensraum in the east, or neglect to develop their economy to meet the needs of a modern state. This war forces them to.

I see. So, to word it differently, you let Germany walk a hard path in order to reach the greener plains - or something like that.
Of the wanks that I have read, this is definitely the most long-term, and most realistic, I think.

 

[machine3589]

Some good ones, some bad ones. In Germany, mainly the wrong ones. German strategists have lost so badly focusing on the schwerpunkt that the 'winning' strategy is a war of maneuiver, from where they stand. That means, on the one hand, a strategic vision of blitzkrieg, but on the other, a focus on speed at the expense of weight. Germany will begin the next round with tanks that are too light for the modern battlefield, guns that punch too little, obsolete long-range cavalry forces, and a fleet of high-altitude bomber airships that are not survivable.

The bolded part happened IOTL as well to a degree, and the Heer did some incredible feats of war with less resources and less industrial might than what TTL's Germany will presumably have. Remember, a Panzer III with its "measly" 50mm gun (and sometimes even with the 3.7 cm KwK 36 L/45) managed to take out T-34's en masse because its "soft characteristics" (ergonomics, optics, radios, etc.) and crew training were superior to that of the Soviets for a long time. While certainly a disadvantage, simply having less mm of armour and less cm of guns is not a crippling disadvantage in and of itself. The bigger issue will be if infantry AT guns aren't powerfull enough, however. In that case the Heer will have to improvise around that problem, much like they did IOTL.

German casualties at this point would be around 3 million, of which under 1 million are dead. Western front figures are explained not least by the fact that the German strategy for most of the war was defensive. ITTL, they remain focused on the offensive throughout, while having just enough success to make it seem worthwhile. In other words, they are caught in the French trap, bleeding out more than they can afford, but unable to come up with a strategic solution that would end the need to attack.

Nobody knows the exact number of Russian casualties, and nobody ever will. What the Russian government knows for a fact is that two million men who once took Russian paybooks are now in POW camps, over a million are in the hospital system, and over four million not accounted for. Graves registration is spotty and administration dodgy, but many of them are probably dead by enemy action.

I will have to agree with Caoster that this seems excessive, judging by the OTL casulaties in the manouver part of 1914. and the Eastern front in general.

EDIT:

Combined arms doctrine will remain a weakness, though. It will result in 'maneuver' divisions that lack punch, equipped with 'cavalry' tanks that can't stand up to Russian models and 'anti-tank' guns that aren't. Like OTL's 3.75 PAK - "Panzeranklopfkanone".

Just a little defence for the "Door knocker" - IOTL it was good enough to take out the vast majority of tanks that the USSR had during 1941. The T-34`s and KV`s made only a small part of the Soviet`s tank fleet during Barbarossa. Still, the Nazis could have seen that it was behind the curve after the Battle of France, though even following that would have only given them a mass-useage of the Pak 38, which still would have been inadequate against the KV`s.

 

[Stendhal]

I seem to remember from discussions of the Septemberprogramm that it insisted on the annexation of French Lorraine lest otherwise Germany might run out of steel by 1980 -- take that Montanunion. So I don't think Swedish iron ore will be as helpful now as in OTL WW2 because the Kiruna mines are not online yet.

 

[DrakonFin]

So I don't think Swedish iron ore will be as helpful now as in OTL WW2 because the Kiruna mines are not online yet.

Not fully online perhaps, but the Malmbanan between Luleå-Gällivare-Kiruna-Narvik has been completed since late 1902. The first load of ore was transported by rail from the older Gällivare mine (Malmberget) in 1888, and mining began at the Kiirunavaara mine in 1898 and at the Tuolluvaara mine in 1903. So while the capacity of the Swedish mines up north would not yet be at 1930s levels, they would be a significant factor nevertheless by 1908 ITTL.

EDIT: That is to say, according to my sources the Swedish annual production of iron ore reached 4 million tons by 1907. For comparison, it is only third of what was produced in Lorraine at the time - but then again, almost as much as was produced in Germany itself.

 

[Beer]

Hi, Carlton!

First, you make a really good TL, no doubt. Still, I have to agree with matzeskatze Coaster and machine3589 that some of the future mistakes you attribute to Germany and the losses against Russia now seem a little forced.
ATL 1906/07 Russia is taking losses near WW2 levels by comparison, worse equipment than 1914 and has a far worse political situation internationally, but still stands. While Germany takes disproportionally high losses, even accounting for the 1906 army, against an overall weaker enemy.
Sorry, but the whole time on the offensive argument is bull. OTL Germany was on the offensive in the East for nearly all of WW1 as well, against a stronger, by comparison, Russia. And took fewer losses. As Caoster said rightly, OTL Germany kicked a stronger Russia with very few losses in 14/15. Even with the insane luck ATL Russia had so far, your loss ratio for Germany is rather improbable high. I know why you shove it into this direction, still it is unlikely.
On Panzertaktik, I agree with machine. If ATL Germany comes out with something akin to OTL Blitzkrieg, the Heer can mitigate quite a bit of the problems with other characteristics.

You make one of the best and wellthought TLs here, but on the points above it feels forced.

 

[Uli_Stoiber]

Hi, Carlton!

First, you make a really good TL, no doubt. Still, I have to agree with matzeskatze Coaster and machine3589 that some of the future mistakes you attribute to Germany and the losses against Russia now seem a little forced.
ATL 1906/07 Russia is taking losses near WW2 levels by comparison, worse equipment than 1914 and has a far worse political situation internationally, but still stands. While Germany takes disproportionally high losses, even accounting for the 1906 army, against an overall weaker enemy.
Sorry, but the whole time on the offensive argument is bull. OTL Germany was on the offensive in the East for nearly all of WW1 as well, against a stronger, by comparison, Russia. And took fewer losses. As Caoster said rightly, OTL Germany kicked a stronger Russia with very few losses in 14/15. Even with the insane luck ATL Russia had so far, your loss ratio for Germany is rather improbable high. I know why you shove it into this direction, still it is unlikely.
On Panzertaktik, I agree with machine. If ATL Germany comes out with something akin to OTL Blitzkrieg, the Heer can mitigate quite a bit of the problems with other characteristics.

You make one of the best and wellthought TLs here, but on the points above it feels forced.

I tend to agree to Beer.

 

[Deimos]

I would not be so hasty to decry all military "innovations" Germany as bad. The backbone of every military - especially for a land power - is still the infantry. I do not seem them learning bad "new tricks". For example, high altitude airships means high-calibre AA guns that can hopefully be pressed into an anti-tank role.
Trench warfare heightens the need for exploitation when a breakthrough occurs which in turn begets more fully mechanised units.
The worst I can see happening is prolonged classism in the military with more technical and specialised branches not coordinating with the low-tech grunts and specialising too much in doctrine and equipment to the point that other units cannot do fill a role they could be expected to perform reasonably well in otherwise.

It is also quite possible that Germany has the problem of WW2 Italy of OTL. Meaning they modernise their forces quite well but are more on an early-to-mid 1930s level when the next round begins and did not have the budget or political will to spend more on the military in a time of rapid advancements.

 

[Cecil]

Not fully online perhaps, but the Malmbanan between Luleå-Gällivare-Kiruna-Narvik has been completed since late 1902. The first load of ore was transported by rail from the older Gällivare mine (Malmberget) in 1888, and mining began at the Kiirunavaara mine in 1898 and at the Tuolluvaara mine in 1903. So while the capacity of the Swedish mines up north would not yet be at 1930s levels, they would be a significant factor nevertheless by 1908 ITTL.

EDIT: That is to say, according to my sources the Swedish annual production of iron ore reached 4 million tons by 1907. For comparison, it is only third of what was produced in Lorraine at the time - but then again, almost as much as was produced in Germany itself.

Though my metallurgy knowledge isnt exactly up to speed IIRC Iron ore from Lorraine is not equal to the one from northern Sweden. The upside of the mines in Lappland has never been the vast amount of ore you can extract but rather the high quality of the Iron.

 

[DrakonFin]

Though my metallurgy knowledge isnt exactly up to speed IIRC Iron ore from Lorraine is not equal to the one from northern Sweden. The upside of the mines in Lappland has never been the vast amount of ore you can extract but rather the high quality of the Iron.

Yes, the Swedish ore in Lapland is both a) high quality and b) comparatively easy to mine. This means both that once the transport issue is under control with the completion of the Iron Ore Line, the Swedish can up the production numbers fairly quickly (as was happening around 1903-1914 IOTL, AFAIK) and also that this ore provides better value for the buyer than would be immediately obvious from just looking at tons exported. As Sweden has been working quite closely together with the Germans ITTL, these particulars would help the Germans somewhat even if the production numbers for Swedish iron ore would not yet be nowhere near WWII era levels.

 

[avernite]

To be quite honest, I sometimes think Carlton is secretly wanking Russia but didn't dare talk about it...

At least, on the military front, they've succeeded beyond any reasonable estimate, they've suffered more losses than can reasonably be considered acceptable...

And they're supposed to come back and have even MORE success!

Honestly, if it wasn't for their insane luck STILL not being enough to actually win, I'd call this a Russia-wank.

 

[wietze]

To be quite honest, I sometimes think Carlton is secretly wanking Russia but didn't dare talk about it...

At least, on the military front, they've succeeded beyond any reasonable estimate, they've suffered more losses than can reasonably be considered acceptable...

And they're supposed to come back and have even MORE success!

Honestly, if it wasn't for their insane luck STILL not being enough to actually win, I'd call this a Russia-wank.

no, carlton although said a few things about russias future, and that includes a second war with germany, and the fact that german instant sunshine ends that war.

 

[carlton_bach]

Looking at the figures, it does look as though the casualty numbers are excessive. I was working withg a book that seems to quote inflated figures for WWI and simply reduced them, but looking at more reasonable ones, they're not plausible. Consider them lower.

Regarding the Russian figure, though, I think there is some misunderstanding. Four million unaccounted for does not mean four million dead. It reflects the almost complete breakdown at this point of Russian administration. Take the "million men" (actually closer to 700,000) army that went into the Carpathian offensive. There are officially about 100,000 who returned from there, but even though the Russians did lose a lot of men, a large number simply got detached from their units and went home, or tried to. One of the functions of the Patriotic Union's bogatyr brigades is to collect people like that. Many of the best greenjackets are ex-deserters who found it easiest to give a false name and pick up a rifle again (though you can also do that in the regular army by now - nobody's asking questions).

What the Russians are increasingly suffering is civilian casualties. They moved millions of people away from the front with no proper plan how to feed and house them. This winter is going to be awful.

 

[formion]

What are the german plans in regard to Crimea ?

Are there any thoughts to establish a demi-colony/protectorate etc, due to the strategic value of the peninsula ?

After all, most of the slavic colonists are ethnic Russians, not Ukrainians and the Crimean Tatars would welcome the german rule, especially after the intergralist policies. It would be a splendid protectorate, giving control of the Black Sea, good land for cereal production, mineral resources and a base close to Donbas and the Caucasus

 

[Kvasir]

What are the german plans in regard to Crimea ?

Are there any thoughts to establish a demi-colony/protectorate etc, due to the strategic value of the peninsula ?

After all, most of the slavic colonists are ethnic Russians, not Ukrainians and the Crimean Tatars would welcome the german rule, especially after the intergralist policies. It would be a splendid protectorate, giving control of the Black Sea, good land for cereal production, mineral resources and a base close to Donbas and the Caucasus

This is something that more than a few people have commented on in threads previous. Crimea; the first true European colony?

Remember though that while Crimea is strategic, it is very hard to surply as it has few raw materials of its own. It would require the consent of either the new Ukraine, or a very strong ally in the black sea region. Romania seems a good option.

--

On another topic. While this is a German wank, anyone else think that this is looking strongly like a British wank too?

 

[formion]

I always had in mind an Ukraine heavily dependent in Germany against their Russian cousins.

Even a national-awaken Ukraine will have problems dealing with the russian minority/plurality in Southern Ukraine. So, having Germany take care of Crimea, shielding its flank and having close german bases for support, would be beneficiary.

As far as i know Crimea can be a small breadbasket of the Empire. It has iron-ore, flux limestone, building materials, soda and bromine.

And yes, my thoughts exactly in being a brit-wank as a byproduct. More specifically, a steadier British Empire.

 

[avernite]

IMO Crimea's Tartars make more sense in the OE (after all, the Crimea had been a sort-of vassal of the OE for quite a while before the Russians showed). Especially as the Black Sea sounds like a terrible place for German expansionism; the Baltic seems more sensible, with a native German-ish populace and land & naval access to the heart of the Reich.

 

[Kvasir]

I always had in mind an Ukraine heavily dependent in Germany against their Russian cousins.

Even a national-awaken Ukraine will have problems dealing with the russian minority/plurality in Southern Ukraine. So, having Germany take care of Crimea, shielding its flank and having close german bases for support, would be beneficiary.

As far as i know Crimea can be a small breadbasket of the Empire. It has iron-ore, flux limestone, building materials, soda and bromine.

Obviously it depends on the population size but Crimea will require feeding and energy imports. Ukraine, by the way, will most likely be in Austria-Hungary's sphere of influence should AH survive.

And yes, my thoughts exactly in being a brit-wank as a byproduct. More specifically, a steadier British Empire.

Actually, I was thinking more in terms of economics than Empire. Before WWI Britain was a huge creditor nation, after WWI the centre shifted to New York and Britain became a nation in debt to America.

Here, Britain is going to make a killing in German war bonds. Furthermore, Britain will be selling goods to Germany left right and centre. British Industry was falling behind in its competitiveness at the turn of the 20th century. There is now so much liquid capital for investment sloshing around that we could see this not becoming a problem for much longer. So an industrially secure, economically sound British mainland will have huge effects.

Obviously, I am assuming a sensible and careful British government. They could squander everything on a ruinous war over Ireland and a crackdown on civil liberties over the votes for women and rights for the lower classes, but that seems unlikely.