![]() |
|
|||||||
| Notices |
| Versailles to September 1, 1939 World War II's roots can be traced back to the end of World War I. Discuss the events that lead up to the re-armament of Germany and the rise of fascism in Europe. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
| Sponsored Links |
|
|||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
I agree with the aircraft being a key component of Blitzkreig in WWII. The most noticeable attribute for me with aircraft was the shock value on a retreating or forming enemy. Confusion and sheer terror from constant attacks kept the enemy on the hop so to speak and did not allow time to react in mobile operations.
Dive bombers were also useful as forward artilllery since most ground artillery was not motorised and simply had trouble keeping up with armoured units. The shock value to me is the most important as it was followed up by the further shock value of tanks, giving many units the impression that they were being assailed from every direction - the real key component of blitzkreig. Reconnaissance by aircraft gave long range eyes to ground units and allowed them to head for areas of least resistance - again very important. |
|
|||||
|
Thanks for the reply Dave, IF you have total control of the air, recon and air strikes on retreating forces and fixed positions is the wat they went it seems. I'm not the best at the air war, but did'nt they Germans "drive" civs onto the road from towns as well to further choke the road routes the Allied forces had to use to retreat, OR go forward to try to stem the German Blitz tide as well?
Cheers, something maybe to add to the air component, did the Germans "plan" on this, or was it just happeneing to further benefit the German amy for the France battle? TRDG Tom |
|
|||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
Not sure on the civilian thing TRDG. It did happen though. I would also imagine the civilians mostly went of their own accord to avoid the fighting so it may have an automatic by product.
I know the planes were communicating via ground air controllers who were usually in half tracks with good comms systems. This was a vital component for picking targets and giving immediate feedback on results. It would have made the target units very edgy when each plane or wave seemed to be able to zero in so well. It didn't always work well as Guderian found out in France. He was attacked by a couple of planes, one of which was shot down by German troops as it attacked. Guderian told the pilot off but also congratulated him on his tenacity - something like that. The impact on rear area supplies and command posts must have had a huge effect on coordination of the defending forces too. Communications and transport would have been the other obvious targets. |
|
|||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
![]() But aircraft used in a recon or ground support role is still WW1 technology. Radio is still the big one. Without it, aircraft are flying willy-nilly around the battlefield, attacking uncordinated and at will.
__________________
If you bought it, we brought it. |
|
||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
Quote:
I would greatly agree that radio played a key point in Germans advance early in the war. I does seem this effect was greatly negated later on with the code cracked on the enigma. Just a thought. It seems later on, everyone was one step ahead of the Germans, as they knew exactly what they were planning. |
|
|||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
As I posted in the WWI armour section for TRDG, Guderian spent the First World War in technical and comms work which exposed him to the possibilities of radio and fast transport (at that time trucks). When he was later exposed to the tank and other AFV's it all fell into place for him.
Kesselring also learned a lot in WWI about comms and observation since he was trained and first employed as an artillery officer. He saw the obvious advantages of first, observation balloons and then aircraft. His later work as a staff officer and then training service allowed him to help build the tactical Luftwaffe at the same time as Guderian headed the Armour Inspectorate and built the Panzerwaffe. Thus, two new arms for Germany from the ground up with the experience behind them of two highly capable men. The Panzerwaffe and Luftwaffe as originally devised had not been seen before and were very hard to counter. They did however, have other parallels through history and were only new in the tactical sense. |
|
|||||
|
Re: Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?
Quote:
__________________
If you bought it, we brought it. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Spearhead for Blitzkrieg | RSS Bot | RSS Feeds | 0 | March 7th, 2007 06:22 AM |