Germany's 1914 Eastern Plan?

[BooNZ]

The French were especially quick to sack incompetent leaders during the disastrous summer of 1914. But that doesn't change the fact that building enough heavy artillery and retraining infantry for new tactics (captain Laffargue and his TTL analogues will certainly reach the same conclusions, and IMO the French are more likely to listen than in OTL) is not something one can do without time.

The difficulty is 'incompetence' is likely measured by adherence to a disastrously flawed offensive doctrine devised by Joffre - from 2 August to 6 September 1914 alone Joffre relieved 2 army commanders, ten corps commanders and 38 divisional commanders. With Joffre at the helm, the absence of the Germans in Belgium would have resulted in the OTL French offensives continuing unabated. Joffre would have certainly been removed earlier without the Battle of Marne on his CV, but even if Joffre lasts only six months, the French army will be absolutely munted.

Any scenario with France attacking more in 1914 with Joffre's doctrines and insufficient heavy artillery, makes it very difficult for France.

 

[LordKalvert]

Makus, given that the Germans went into Belgium on August 4 with the fully manned in peacetime 16th division and used 420mm big Berthas and 305mm Skoda mortars to smash the forts, none of which applies to the French I'd suggest that the French couldn't do what the Germans did against the Belgian forts.

The Belgian fortresses are no more an obstacle to the French than they are to the Germans. The myth of the German monster guns is just that- a myth. The French had plenty of artillery that could smash a fortress if they had to do so. The established practice was the use of naval guns. They are a bit of a chore to set up but the process isn't unknown. The Germans monster guns are a bit more mobile but the Germans are far more pressed for speed than the French

But why do the French need to take the Belgian fortresses anyway? The route to Germany is below the Meuse and below Namur and Leige. Only if the Belgian army moves south does it even need to be dealt with. Simply mask the Fortresses with some territorials or fortress troops and move on

The fortress fall because they lack a field army in the area not because of the monster guns

 

[LordKalvert]

Apparently folks like LK don't know that such units exist, so maybe I should include them rather than assume everybody realizes they are there and will be used. I did mention in my proposed order of battle that such units might be grouped with a regular or reserve corps to create an Armee Abteilung covering the Ardennes... maybe that was too subtle.
But otherwise I've not explicitly enumerated them in my various posts.

Unfortunately folks like you have no sense of the actual French order of Battle and how fast they will quickly add to their forces. This was one of the main reasons for their recovery at the Marne

The table:

active army.......................................................994,000
25 reserve divisions...........................................450,000
12 Territorial divisons.........................................184,600
Cavalry...............................................................52,500
Army troops......................................................187,500
Fortress garrisons..............................................821,400
GVC.................................................................210,000
Depots..............................................................680,000
Total...............................................................3,580,000

Source- Edward Spears Liason

Now, combing through this mass we have a rather large force to deal with your tiny 40 divisions and for the French to make good their losses

The Territorials and troops brought up from the Fortresses (the Germans do this OTl so I'm sure the French won't think of it or can't do it in the minds of some in this thread) to mask the German and/or Belgian fortresses that they may need

The GVC were detachments to guard communications in the rear. In OTL they are disbanded even with the German thrust into France. With the Germans chasing after the Russians, they are getting disbanded and used to fill the ranks

The depot troops are specifically for building units back up to strength. They do include men called up for training and will start becoming available by the end of September

The Germans make a huge roll of the dice- they threw everything in to their offensive so it is the Germans who are going to have more trouble making good their losses. Especially given the need to make good the much higher losses they will be facing in the East

 

[LordKalvert]

It makes some sense if one assumes that all British statesmen lust for war with Germany, in order to stop the Evil Teutonic Empire and appease the Franco-Russians, but have so far been denied a self-righteous pretext by ungrateful little Belgium. I mean, once it's apparent that there will be no good excuse, you just chuck the whole pretense of justification and revert to naked national aggrandizement, right?

The problem is that the Cabinet and Parliament war debates prove that not all British statesmen were pathologically anti-German and pro-Entente-appeasement.

But if you've made up your mind that Britain must always under all circumstances join the war against Germany, you must jump through these hoops...

Um, no you don't. You just look at more than the cabinet debates and quickly grasped what is really going on in the British government

First, the British are like everyone else and don't want war.

Second, the Liberal party is more interested in peace that the rest of the country but divided on the issue. Gray and Churchill definitely are in favor of intervention, Asquith less so. Morley strongly opposed

Third, the Liberals are trying to stick together and keep their government together. The non-interventionists do not resign when interventionist measures are taken because they know the truth which is: if they resign, the government will fall and be replaced by a coalition of Liberal Interventionists and Tories. Bonar Law and Lord Landsdowne make that point clear in their letter

The only reason for delay is to keep Party unity. If that's hopeless, Grey and Churchill join with the Tories and there is war

 

[LordKalvert]

Not necessarily, for example what if the RN had caught the Goben and Breslau before OTL DoW but after the RN mobilisation and AH, Russian, French and German mobilisation? Would it have engaged these ships if Belgium hadn't been invaded on 4 August, or just let them escape? Because if they engage them Germany and Britain are at war!

There's a brief period when they would. Churchill gives the orders but later is forced to rescind them but, yes, its another possible flashpoint between Germany and Britain.

It doesn't necessarily mean war if the parties are inclined to peace- the Cabinet could disavow Churchill after the fact and the Germans ignoring it because, well peace with Britain right now would be worth it even if the British latter come in anyway

 

[LordKalvert]

You are right - he isn't. Therefore this thread is discussing a scenario based on a carefully designed warplan that was annually upgraded until the very last years of OTL 1910s, and one that could have very well been taken as a basis of German strategic deployment in 1914. The pros and cons of such an alternative strategic plan are the topic here - AFAIK no one is claiming to have found a magic formula for winning the Great War. So please, tone it down and use actual arguments instead of hyperbole.

Are we really? Or are we taking a German war game out of context? What exactly do the Germans think happens in the West? What is the German, not the Tail, plan for dealing with the French? Or is this based on an old war game that has France neutral in a Russo-German War?

 

[Riain]

Unfortunately folks like you have no sense of the actual French order of Battle and how fast they will quickly add to their forces. This was one of the main reasons for their recovery at the Marne

The table:

active army.......................................................994,000
25 reserve divisions...........................................450,000
12 Territorial divisons.........................................184,600
Cavalry...............................................................52,500
Army troops......................................................187,500
Fortress garrisons..............................................821,400
GVC.................................................................210,000
Depots..............................................................680,000
Total...............................................................3,580,000

Source- Edward Spears Liason

Now, combing through this mass we have a rather large force to deal with your tiny 40 divisions and for the French to make good their losses

The Territorials and troops brought up from the Fortresses (the Germans do this OTl so I'm sure the French won't think of it or can't do it in the minds of some in this thread) to mask the German and/or Belgian fortresses that they may need

The GVC were detachments to guard communications in the rear. In OTL they are disbanded even with the German thrust into France. With the Germans chasing after the Russians, they are getting disbanded and used to fill the ranks

The depot troops are specifically for building units back up to strength. They do include men called up for training and will start becoming available by the end of September

The Germans make a huge roll of the dice- they threw everything in to their offensive so it is the Germans who are going to have more trouble making good their losses. Especially given the need to make good the much higher losses they will be facing in the East

The same applies to the Germans, but to a greater extent. Firstly in the OTL Eastern plans the most Germany ever planned to deploy and could deploy to the east was 42 divisions leaving 50-56 in the west not 40, secondly it doesn't count Landwehr and Landstrum units which were quickly made into divisions,

 

[LordKalvert]

The same applies to the Germans, but to a greater extent. Firstly in the OTL Eastern plans the most Germany ever planned to deploy and could deploy to the east was 42 divisions leaving 50-56 in the west not 40, secondly it doesn't count Landwehr and Landstrum units which were quickly made into divisions,

Give the German numbers- they are going to be hard pressed more so than the French as the Germans are dividing their forces between East and West

The German plan in 1914 was to concentrate everything and make a go for broke shot at taking down the French. It largely worked in crippling the French but then the Russians still had to be dealt with and then the British

Having put their reserves into the front from the onset and the French did not, the French do have more room to expand early before the Germans can bring their larger population to bear.

Does anyone have an actual German plan for dealing with this?

 

[Glenn239]

And the French government forbade any French soldier to set foot on Belgian soil until after the Germans had done so. Therefore, even if your "unofficial stuff is always official no matter what" point is correct, it is immaterial. Until and unless the French civilian authorities change their mind. This can certainly happen, but it may not be quick.

The French government's position was that the invasion of Belgium could be undertaken in case of positive menace, giving Joffre the green light for such planning. He just chose to keep a division between his formal and informal staff papers, perhaps in case of an embarrassing leak.

Umm, the Belgians asked Britain for assistance against a massive German invasion of the Belgian heartland. What is under discussion is an Entente limited invasion of Belgium south of the Meuse;

The Belgians asked for assistance historically, there is no reason to suppose otherwise in this case - any other reaction by Belgium would be a gross violation of its obligations under the 1839 Treaty and could be cited as evidence by Berlin that Belgium was a defacto Entente satellite, (this would come in handy when the Germans decided to cross the Meuse and push into France some years into the war).

Yah, I'm pretty sure it won't be a French blitzkrieg.

The French army's cavalry had no trouble conducting a deep scouting mission to the German border around August 6th, (three divisions?) yet , oddly, you suggest the French could not do what they actually did?

Oh, and one would have to be a complete purblind idiot to think that the Germans would wait for British permission before protecting themselves against an Entente sweep through Belgium. The fact of the threat, and the violation, justifies a proportional response.

You can't have it both ways - if the Germans are coordinating with the British on Belgium to the purpose of keeping Britain neutral then the Germans will coordinate with the British on Belgium, even if this costs a delay. They're not going to invade Belgium off the cuff - what if news of a French invasion was false? They could be at war with Britain.

And besides, nothing changes the fact in this TL that it is the French, not the Germans, violating Belgian neutrality. Ignore it how you will, that will have some effects.

Britain could not tolerate a Great Power war in Belgium and Britain would never be on the side of Germany. Do all the gymnastics you want, the cold logic of the situation spelled out exactly what must happen.

 

[Glenn239]

The above is fiction....

It is clear there was no coherent French plans to invade Belgium, beyond Joffre's private musings.

Joffre's staff writes up a war campaign plan on formal letterhead and stores it in a government safe vs. Joffre's staff writes up the exact same document on blank paper and Joffre stores it in his safe at home. Unless you are suggesting that Joffre is not the chief of staff, he can pull out the plan from either safe, correct? And unless you are saying he had two staffs, the plan itself will be the same people drafting it, commanding the same units, correct? So where is the functional difference?

 

[BooNZ]

Are we really? Or are we taking a German war game out of context? What exactly do the Germans think happens in the West? What is the German, not the Tail, plan for dealing with the French? Or is this based on an old war game that has France neutral in a Russo-German War?

Schlieffen himself revived the Eastern Plan (Grosser Ostaufmarsch) in 1900/01 and 1901/02. Molke (the Younger) again revived the Grosser Ostaufmarsch in 1909/10. In 1909 the Germans war gamed defending the West with only 23 Divisions. Further planning on the Grosser Ostaufmarsch may have been shelved in 1913, but I understand railroad deployment plans contemplated the Grosser Ostaufmarsch in 1914, be-it slower than a Western deployment schedules.

This can be contrasted with the French plans to invade Germany through Belgium, which simply did not exist OTL. No one here is saying the absence of such plans would preclude such an invasion, it is just noted that sending armies through the Ardennes to face the Germans with no formal plan or preparation will not end well.

 

[BooNZ]

Joffre's staff writes up a war campaign plan on formal letterhead and stores it in a government safe vs. Joffre's staff writes up the exact same document on blank paper and Joffre stores it in his safe at home. Unless you are suggesting that Joffre is not the chief of staff, he can pull out the plan from either safe, correct? And unless you are saying he had two staffs, the plan itself will be the same people drafting it, commanding the same units, correct? So where is the functional difference?

References please.

 

[LordKalvert]

Schlieffen himself revived the Eastern Plan (Grosser Ostaufmarsch) in 1900/01 and 1901/02. Molke (the Younger) again revived the Grosser Ostaufmarsch in 1909/10. In 1909 the Germans war gamed defending the West with only 23 Divisions. Further planning on the Grosser Ostaufmarsch may have been shelved in 1913, but I understand railroad deployment plans contemplated the Grosser Ostaufmarsch in 1914, be-it slower than a Western deployment schedules.

This can be contrasted with the French plans to invade Germany through Belgium, which simply did not exist OTL. No one here is saying the absence of such plans would preclude such an invasion, it is just noted that sending armies through the Ardennes to face the Germans with no formal plan or preparation will not end well.

That's very nice but can we see the actual German plan for dealing with the French in this situation? Obviously if they are devising an attack East they are doing something in the West. They wouldn't just game out the East and say the West will take care of itself. Unless, this is just from an old exercise where they have the French being neutral

In any case, why did they hate it? Why was it so bad that they stopped work on it?

 

[BooNZ]

That's very nice but can we see the actual German plan for dealing with the French in this situation? Obviously if they are devising an attack East they are doing something in the West. They wouldn't just game out the East and say the West will take care of itself. Unless, this is just from an old exercise where they have the French being neutral

In any case, why did they hate it? Why was it so bad that they stopped work on it?

Reference please - who hated it?

Edit - and what further work was required beyond deployment?

 

[LordKalvert]

Reference please - who hated it?

Edit - and what further work was required beyond deployment?

Well the Germans hated the idea. They stopped work on it. They had to have a reason. What deployment did they make for the West. They would have decided where they were putting their troops.

They aren't thinking in a vacuum here. If they are going East with this 4 Army plan, then they would have developed a plan to deal with the West at the same time What is is it?

When we are coming up with the French response, we naturally take their Plan XVII and go with it. It calls for massing the French army along the Franco-Belgian border which makes a swing through Belgium likely

 

[dandan_noodles]

Thing is, even if the French do maneuver the British into the war (by invading Belgium???) Somehow, you are not going to see the same massive outpouring of emotion in the public, which led to Kitchner's army, by far the most powerful army ever raised in British history. Sending one field army of old pros who take one hundred percent casualties in two months is going to be of limited value to the Entente.

Second, Germany has the advantage of interior lines; they can afford to take a risk deploying east, because they have plenty of railroads to throw half their Eastern command back west if the French decide to violate Belgian neutrality. They only actually need one-two of their initial armies in the east for the first months of the war; having twice as many lets them crush the Polish salient immediately, while allowing for a redeployment west, or else for the forming of new armies to defend the west. By Spring 1915, they had two new armies in their order of battle, more than enough to cover a French attack through the terrible logistical network of the Ardennes. Furthermore, the correlation of forces in the West will not tip so heavily against the Germans, since they won't be taking the staggering losses they did on a massive strategic offensive through hostile territory under great strategic density of firepower (500,000 in six weeks!), while the French will still be taking casualties at their OTL rate for the first few months.

Furthermore, let's not place unlimited stock in the Germans' pre war plans, since they were based on assumptions (free transit through Belgium, Bewegungskrieg in France, slower Russian mobilization, Britain not caring about the treaty of London, the impossibility of victory in a long war on two fronts) that we know (with hindsight) are mostly false. The Germans could certainly defeat the Russians in a long war, because they did, and France's population was considerably smaller than Germany's; once the Russians are defeated, the Germans could still easily man a defensive line including the Ardennes with plenty left over for an offensive, especially since they'll have added multiple armies to their order of battle since the beginning of the war, and will have captured frankly embarrassing numbers of fortress guns in Poland they can ship west to crank up their defensive firepower.

 

[BooNZ]

Well the Germans hated the idea. They stopped work on it. They had to have a reason. What deployment did they make for the West. They would have decided where they were putting their troops.

They aren't thinking in a vacuum here. If they are going East with this 4 Army plan, then they would have developed a plan to deal with the West at the same time What is is it?

When we are coming up with the French response, we naturally take their Plan XVII and go with it. It calls for massing the French army along the Franco-Belgian border which makes a swing through Belgium likely

References please - specifically regarding German hatred of an East plan. As usual, big hat, no cattle...

 

[BooNZ]

Thing is, even if the French do maneuver the British into the war (by invading Belgium???) Somehow, you are not going to see the same massive outpouring of emotion in the public, which led to Kitchner's army, by far the most powerful army ever raised in British history. Sending one field army of old pros who take one hundred percent casualties in two months is going to be of limited value to the Entente.

The Belgium policy was armed neutrality and this applied equally to both the Entente and Germany - Belgium had no intent to provide the English or French access to their strategic ports and fortresses, but the OTL German assault into the Belgium heartland forced Belgium's hand. A French excursion through the Ardennes as sometimes mooted in this scenario is a different beast.

Pre-war the Belgium military did not plan specifically for a French invasion, but its reaction would likely mirror its plans for the Heer. In the case of an invasion of the Ardennes, the Belgium field army would remain a force-in-being behind its line of fortresses. While Belgium would technically declare war on the invader, this status would be independent of the key belligerents and Belgium would be unlikely to initiate further hostilities. The opposing power would be free to respond to such an invasion in the Ardennes, but co-operation from Belgium would be minimal at best. Accordingly, a proportionate German response to a French invasion of the Ardennes is not going drag the Britain into the war. Nor will it cause the Belgiums to hand over its strategic ports to Britain or fortresses to Germany.

As previously stated, I believe Belgium's belligerence (or lack thereof) in this scenario is critical - more so than Britain in the short term.

 

[BooNZ]

Unfortunately folks like you have no sense of the actual French order of Battle and how fast they will quickly add to their forces. This was one of the main reasons for their recovery at the Marne

The table:

active army.......................................................994,000
25 reserve divisions...........................................450,000
12 Territorial divisons.........................................184,600
Cavalry...............................................................52,500
Army troops......................................................187,500
Fortress garrisons..............................................821,400
GVC.................................................................210,000
Depots..............................................................680,000
Total...............................................................3,580,000

Source- Edward Spears Liason

Now, combing through this mass we have a rather large force to deal with your tiny 40 divisions and for the French to make good their losses

The Territorials and troops brought up from the Fortresses (the Germans do this OTl so I'm sure the French won't think of it or can't do it in the minds of some in this thread) to mask the German and/or Belgian fortresses that they may need

The GVC were detachments to guard communications in the rear. In OTL they are disbanded even with the German thrust into France. With the Germans chasing after the Russians, they are getting disbanded and used to fill the ranks

The depot troops are specifically for building units back up to strength. They do include men called up for training and will start becoming available by the end of September

If the Germans are determined to actively defend the West, the above is not at all good for the French.

Without the German threat in Belgium and the subsequent Battle of Marne, Joffre would have persisted with ill conceived offensives and the French would have continued to incur horiffic causaulty rates. I thought perhaps this misery may have abated after the frontline French troops are slaughtered and lose cohesion, but from what you are saying, Joffre could have seamlessly moved on to the slaughter of French reserves.

Again, due to Joffre's doctrines and the lack of heavy artillery, any scenario where the French attack more in 1914 is not good for France.

 

[BooNZ]

Are we really? Or are we taking a German war game out of context? What exactly do the Germans think happens in the West? What is the German, not the Tail, plan for dealing with the French? Or is this based on an old war game that has France neutral in a Russo-German War?

The 1912 German Intelligence estimate.

An initial French offensive was considered extremely difficult - much more so than a German offensive - and therefore was very unlikely, unless the Germans committed significant forces in the East. The 3rd Department was implicitly saying that an Ostaufmarsch would assist and encourage a French offensive. If the French did attack the most likely French course of action would be to attack on both sides of the Metz (which was in fact Joffre's intent in plan XVII). The attack by the French right between Metz and Strasbourg was extremely difficult and the left wing French armies would be separated from the right by Metz. The further advance by the French left would be in eccentric directions towards Moselle and the Rhine, and would be blocked by these rivers. A French advance across the upper Rhine into South Germany would be cut off.

The Real German War Plan, Zuber, page 130

In short, the Germans welcomed a French offensive and accurately predicted the likely point of attack. The Germans also believed the French would enter the Ardennes early on, which was probably wishful thinking.

The Territorials and troops brought up from the Fortresses (the Germans do this OTl so I'm sure the French won't think of it or can't do it in the minds of some in this thread) to mask the German and/or Belgian fortresses that they may need

A 1909 German war game contemplating Ostaufmarsch defended the West with only 23 divisions. The German solution was a surprise attack through the fortress Metz, featuring an entire German army. Well done, by using third tier French troops to guard a key flank you have collapsed the French Front and ended the war early.

The Germans make a huge roll of the dice- they threw everything in to their offensive so it is the Germans who are going to have more trouble making good their losses. Especially given the need to make good the much higher losses they will be facing in the East

To put things into perspective, 268,000* Frenchmen lost their lives from October 1914 to March 1915 alone. This was after the Battle of Marne and after the French had purportedly recognised the deficiencies in their doctrines and the yet to be remedied shortfalls in equipment.

Conversely, on the Eastern Front the Germans lost 312,000 men (dead and MIA) over the entire war, which illustrates the benign threat of the OTL Russian armies in the East. In this scenario the Germans will face similar number of Russians, except with vastly superior German numbers and firepower. It is entirely possible the Germans suffer less casualties than OTL.

*Pyrrhic Victory; Doughty; pg 107