Poland and checoslovakia together in alliance

[KACKO]

Timing will be crucial, by the time of Munich the LW has not much to show for, in September 39 the western Allies had caught up a lot more than they realized. After that the strength of Germany relative to its neighbours will decrease fast.

Only problem is, that if war will start in September 1939 and France will sit on its hands as it did in September/ October 1939, Germany will have some advantage against Czechoslovakia/ Poland.
But if war starts in October 1938, Polish and Czechoslovak Air forces are probably strong enough to defend their air spaces or at least keep some balance. In my opinion, war in October 1938 will benefit more Czechoslovakia and Poland.

[Markus Becker]

Only problem is, that if war will start in September 1939 and France will sit on its hands as it did in September/ October 1939, Germany will have some advantage against Czechoslovakia/ Poland.

I would not jump to these conclusions. If the CSR still exists in Sept. 39 the Germans will be 247 tanks short, effectively cutting the number of their "medium" tanks by 50% and Poland does not have to worry about its southern flank. It also looks like the Germans took over every single small arm and heavy weapon in the czech arsenal. Not having all that will hurt them. Fighting two to four nations in the east and south-east would not be helpful either.

[maltesefalcon]

On the toher hand, even in September 1939 the actual state of the LW was not nearly as good as the Allies thought. The Me109 is the best example; many units still flew the inferior -D model and the -E were the -E-1. The top speed was 535 kph, the plane was armed with 4*7.9mm machine guns, had rudimentary armour and unprotected fuel tanks. Many bomber and Zerstörer units were also in a process of transition.

Misquote I think. I did not write the above.

[KACKO]

I would not jump to these conclusions. If the CSR still exists in Sept. 39 the Germans will be 247 tanks short, effectively cutting the number of their "medium" tanks by 50% and Poland does not have to worry about its southern flank. It also looks like the Germans took over every single small arm and heavy weapon in the czech arsenal. Not having all that will hurt them. Fighting two to four nations in the east and south-east would not be helpful either.

That's what I said in one of my first posts, I mean the tanks missing in Germany arsenal.
By some advantage on Germany side in September 1939 I ment against war in October 1938. Start of production of Pz IV Ds, higher amount of Pz IIIs.
Of course. In OTL, Germany had advantage of attacking from Slovakia.
Few posts before, I was speculating what Germany could really do if they wanted attack CSR/Poland.
I case of attack against Czecholsovakia as planed in 1938 would basically left whole Polish -German border almost uncovered.
In case of attack against Poland from Prussia and from west, Czechoslovakia would be able to deploy its army as it wish.

My question is. Let say, Poland and Czechoslovakia are in alliance. Your opinion is as I understand it, is that their position is not so bad.

Czechoslovakia October/ November) 1938:
Tanks 350 (LT-34, LT-35) (150 LT-38 produced till summer 1939).
Tanketts 70
Armored car 70
Armored trains 17
Aircraft 950 (610 of 1st line aircrafts)
Fighter planes: 370+54 B-534, Bk-534
Bombers: 60 Avia B-71, 259 S-328, 124 Avia MB-200)
AT guns 780
AA MG & G - 230+250
MG 40 000
Field guns 2270
Mortars 700

Poland September 1939
Planes 771 (421 of 1 st line)
Fighter planes: 175 PZL 11, 105 PZL 7
Bombers PZL 23 app 205
PZL 37 61
Guns 4300
Tanks: 800
574 TK, TKS
132 7TP
38 Vickers 6t
49-53 R35
3 H-35
102 FT-17
Armored cars app 100
Armored trains 11


Germany September 1939:
(I will not count LT-35, 38 )
Tanks: 2650
Pz I 973, Pz II 1220, Pz III 87, Pz IV 198
Artillery (wiki) 9000 (maybe we should take out around 3000 Czechoslvak pcs.)so app 6000
Aircrafts:
Fighters: Bf 109 D/E 459, Bf 110 B/C 102
Bombers Ju 87 B 346, Hs 123 39, He 111 H/P 540, Do 17 E/M/Z 377, Do 17 F/P 181
Others Hs 126 182, He 45, He 46 20, Ju 52 300

[Markus Becker]

The Pz.I and II are not of much use against any semi-decent opposition, czech-polish artillery is a numerical match for the Germans, by protecting their own borders the Czechs protect the southern border of Poland.
Now to the numbers: In 1938 the Czech Army was numbering at least 25 divisions plus many regiment and battlion size units. The Poles had 39 plus regiment and battlion size units, the Gremans had 60 divisions and 4 Bde. in 39. The Polish Campaign revealed serious leadership deficiencies that were fixed by May 1940. At that time Germany had app. 130 divisions reday for some kind of action but just 80 of were ready for offensive action.
And the assumption that France and the UK will do nothing while the Germans run into at least twice the resistance is far from certain. One user even said the Germans might have to face Romania and Yogoslavia too. In that case inaction in the west would be most unlikely as Germany is numerically way overmatchend by the Allies.

[KACKO]

The Pz.I and II are not of much use against any semi-decent opposition, czech-polish artillery is a numerical match for the Germans, by protecting their own borders the Czechs protect the southern border of Poland.
Now to the numbers: In 1938 the Czech Army was numbering at least 25 divisions plus many regiment and battlion size units.

Czechoslovak army had in peace composition app 200 000 men in 17 infantry divisions and 4 fast divisions (tank division) + some additional units.
After full mobilisation in September 1938 it was 37 infantry divisions, 4 fast divisions and 1 100 000 men.
There are articles about 10 of 1000 volunteers from Yugoslavia registrated, most of them still in Yugoslavia but willing to join the army.

The Pz.I and II are not of much use against any semi-decent opposition, czech-polish artillery is a numerical match for the Germans, by protecting their own borders the Czechs protect the southern border of Poland.

Pz I was would be indeed not much against decent defense, but on the other side, even when Pz II were only light tanks, against LT-35 were pretty much even much. Of course, against AT defense would run into problems.

One user even said the Germans might have to face Romania and Yogoslavia too. In that case inaction in the west would be most unlikely as Germany is numerically way overmatchend by the Allies.

Most important role of Romania and Yugoslavia in Czechoslovak plans was the covering of Hungary in case of war with Germany. I think I mentioned that. Romania actually mobilized it's army after some steps from Hungarian side were taken. Recently I read that Yugoslavia was already getting under some Italian influence but still posted thread to Hungary in case of it offensive actions against Czechoslovakia. Romania would be also open gate for imports of weapons and raw materials for Poles and Czechoslovaks. There was railway from Slovakia across Ruthenia to Romania.

[Tim Smith]

If Yugoslavia joins in the war, she risks being attacked by Italy. Mussolini wants an excuse for a war with Yugoslavia over Dalmatia. So Yugoslavia might be safer staying out of it. However, Serbs are not inclined to take the safe and easy path, honour is much more important to them than safety....

[Markus Becker]

Pz I was would be indeed not much against decent defense, but on the other side, even when Pz II were only light tanks, against LT-35 were pretty much even much. Of course, against AT defense would run into problems.

The LT-35 has a 37mm gun that penetrated 30 to 40mm of armour@500meters and a 25mm glacis plate/turret. The Pz.II´s 20mm gun could penetrated 15 to 20mm at the same range, 500 late production tanks had 30mm of armour, the others no more than 15mm.
The Czechs have another ace up their sleeve; their very impressive border fortifications. In 1938 German generals rated them too strong to be taken by force.

With regard to Italy, Benny stayed out of the war until after France was defeated and it appeared the war would be over within weeks. Since the Allies are considerably stronger in this scenario I can´t see him act differently.

[Tim Smith]

The Czechs have another ace up their sleeve; their very impressive border fortifications. In 1938 German generals rated them too strong to be taken by force.

That only applies to their fortifications facing Germany. Those facing Austria were as much a myth as the German Siegfried Line. Leaving Czechoslovakia vulnerable to Blitzkrieg in late 1938.

[Markus Becker]

That only applies to their fortifications facing Germany. Those facing Austria were as much a myth as the German Siegfried Line. Leaving Czechoslovakia vulnerable to Blitzkrieg in late 1938.

True, but with one part of their border well protected by fortifications, they can send their quite sizable field army to the other. And any major attack the Germans make there, is one that does not hit Poland, which also has a sizable army. Taking on both without the looted weapons from the CSR would have been anything but easy, particularly as the Polish Campaign -fought against a half mobilized enemy- revealed serious ledership problems at company and battalion level.

[Okyzm]

If Yugoslavia joins in the war, she risks being attacked by Italy. Mussolini wants an excuse for a war with Yugoslavia over Dalmatia. So Yugoslavia might be safer staying out of it. However, Serbs are not inclined to take the safe and easy path, honour is much more important to them than safety....

Well, also depends on when such alliance is made. If before Anschluss, Italy could be convinced to join an preventive attack on Nazi Germany which in it was somewhat willing to do in our history.

One also shouldn't forget that Italy and Poland had quite excellent relations-both being conservative catholic countries(Fascist turned Poland allied with both Italy and Spain is another interesting what if....), and there was both admiration from Mussolini towards Poles and from Poles towards Mussolini. This could be opportunity for Polish diplomacy.

[KACKO]

That only applies to their fortifications facing Germany. Those facing Austria were as much a myth as the German Siegfried Line. Leaving Czechoslovakia vulnerable to Blitzkrieg in late 1938.

True, but with one part of their border well protected by fortifications, they can send their quite sizable field army to the other. And any major attack the Germans make there, is one that does not hit Poland, which also has a sizable army. Taking on both without the looted weapons from the CSR would have been anything but easy, particularly as the Polish Campaign -fought against a half mobilized enemy- revealed serious ledership problems at company and battalion level.

Exactly. Plus, I ma not sure about logistic, but wouldn't it be problem supply German division in Austria (Vienna area) attacking toward Brno? I am not sure about Austrian railway connections there toward Germany. If Germany tried as planned in OTL, attack from Austria and from north, to cut Czechoslovakia half, their northern wing could be attacked by Poland.

Well, also depends on when such alliance is made. If before Anschluss, Italy could be convinced to join an preventive attack on Nazi Germany which in it was somewhat willing to do in our history.
One also shouldn't forget that Italy and Poland had quite excellent relations-both being conservative catholic countries(Fascist turned Poland allied with both Italy and Spain is another interesting what if....), and there was both admiration from Mussolini towards Poles and from Poles towards Mussolini. This could be opportunity for Polish diplomacy.

So, in order to get Poland and Czechoslovakia to alliance, we probably need to get rid of Benes. The best way probably would be if Slovak People Party didn't vote for him.

[Gooner1]

That only applies to their fortifications facing Germany. Those facing Austria were as much a myth as the German Siegfried Line. Leaving Czechoslovakia vulnerable to Blitzkrieg in late 1938.

Map of the Czecho-Slovak defences of Autumn 1938.



http://www.fortif.net/files/overview.php

I guess some of the German divisions in Austria were former Austrian army divisions and their committment to the cause may not be so great.

[Piotr Kapuscinski]

Hi all!

Interesting discussion! I agree that Czechoslovakia and Poland fighting together (and in 1938 if possible) against Hitler, would have had considerable chances to stop his invasion (especially with French help). But in my opinion you underestimate abilities of Germany and overestimate abilities of Czechoslovakia and Poland - at least a bit.

Some myths (such as supposed inferiority of German tanks in early WW2) need to be busted here :

The Polish Campaign revealed serious leadership deficiencies that were fixed by May 1940.

Any examples of these serious leadership deficiences and their terrible consequences (which must appear if there are "serious leadership deficiencies")? Or maybe you are talking about Polish leadership - then this would be correct.

Pz I was would be indeed not much against decent defense, but on the other side, even when Pz II were only light tanks, against LT-35 were pretty much even much. Of course, against AT defense would run into problems.

They would run into problems against concentrated AT defense, but not against dispersed AT defense. 27 AT guns divided between 3 companies (9 guns each) aren't able to stop a Panzer division composed of 300 - 400 tanks. And Czechoslovakian divisions had got even fewer AT guns than 27 (Polish infantry divisions had 27 AT guns each).

German tanks vs AT guns tactics in 1939 was to encircle them and attack their rear by one group of tanks, while another group was engaging them with fire from the front (covered by hills / other terrain). I know examples.

The LT-35 has a 37mm gun that penetrated 30 to 40mm of armour@500meters and a 25mm glacis plate/turret. The Pz.II´s 20mm gun could penetrated 15 to 20mm at the same range, 500 late production tanks had 30mm of armour, the others no more than 15mm.

It doesn't matter because as KACKO wrote, Pz-II could easily knock out LT-35 or 7 TP from 500 metres. LT-35s frontal armour was only 10mm thicker than Pz-IIs frontal armour. Armour of 7 TP was even easier to penetrate by KwK 30.

On the other hand - in many important aspects Pz-II was even better than LT-35 or Polish 7 TP.

LT-35 can be considered as equal to 7 TP or at least very similar (in some aspects better, in some worse).

1. Advantages of Panzerkampfwagen II in comparison to 7 TP or LT-35 (I compare mainly to 7 TP):

1) most of 7 TPs and Czechoslovakian tanks didn't have radio stations, Pz-IIs (as well as Pz-Is) had got them
2) KwK 2cm was an automatic gun (10 rounds per 1 magazine) with higher rate of fire than 37mm gun of 7 TP / LT-35
3) thanks to high rate of fire, KwK 2cm was better in eliminating infantry and in close combat against hard targets
4) Pz-IIs as well as 7 TPs had got triple crews, but in Pz-IIs loaders didn't have to reload their gun after each shot, but they only had to change magazines (10 rounds each) from time to time (KwK 2cm was automatic)
5) as the result each crewmember of 7 TP was more ladened with duties than each crewmember of Pz-II
6) there were no observation turrets for commanders in 7 TPs (Czechoslovakian tanks and Pz-IIs had got them)
7) weight of Pz-II was similar to weight of Polish 7 TP (7 TP was maybe 10% heavier, no more)
8) engine of LT-35 was less efficient than engine of Pz-II (103 kW / 140 KM)
9) Pz-II's abilities of movement in difficult terrain were circa 30% better than those of LT-35
10) 7 TP could only carry 130 litres of fuel (and consumed 80 - 100 litres per 100 km)
11) When moving on roads, 7 TP was slower than Pz-II, in fact Pz-II was ca. 20 km / h faster than 7 TP
12) In difficult terrain, Pz-II was also slightly faster than 7 TP and even more faster than LT-35
13) despite instructions (40 - 50 km / h), Panzer II could even move as fast as 60 - 70 km / h
14) 7 TP had got worse (designed in 20s) traction system than Pz-II, vulnerable for breakdowns
15) LT-35's armour was proven to be made of worse quality steel than Pz-II's or 7 TP's armour
16) 7 TP was powered by oil (not gasoline), which caused many supply problems in wartime reality

Only in few aspects (contrary to believes - not very important) 7 TPs & LT-35s were better than Pz-IIs:

2. Disadvantages of Panzerkampfwagen II in comparison to 7 TP or LT-35:

1) slightly (2mm - 10mm) thicker armour (which had - in fact - no practical meaning on the battlefield)
2) 37mm gun (of 7 TP & LT-35) could penetrate Pz-IIs armour from 1,5 - 2 km, while KwK 2cm with PzGr39 could penetrate armour of 7 TP or LT-35 from ca. 0,5 km (but most of tank combats in European theatre were fought on distances shorter than 0,8 km, so this advantage had - in fact - no any real meaning on the battlefield)
3) 7 TPs had got rotary periscopes, Pz-IIs and Czechoslovakian tanks didn't have them
4) thanks to Diesel's engine (81 kW / 110 KM) 7 TP was better in moving in difficult terrain than Pz-II and LT-35

To summ up - Panzerkampfwagen II was a very decent tank in comparison to 7 TP or LT-35. It was at least equal to 7 TP or LT-35 and in fact it was probably more practical on the battlefield (despite slightly inferior armour).

Pz I was would be indeed not much against decent defense, but on the other side, even when Pz II were only light tanks, against LT-35 were pretty much even much. Of course, against AT defense would run into problems.

Maybe Pz-I was not much against decent defense, but Pz-I was not meant to operate alone and was not meant to operate in groups composed only of Pz-I - it was meant to operate in large groups together with other Panzers.

And 100 Pz-Is (= 200 mobile & armoured HMGs) + 100 Pz-IIs + 30 Pz-IIIs and IVs = very much against any defense.

The Czechs have another ace up their sleeve; their very impressive border fortifications. In 1938 German generals rated them too strong to be taken by force.

These are myths. Czechoslovakian fortifications were not rated very well by the Germans (check the "Denkschrift uber die Landesbefestigung"). Polish testings (Poland captured some Czech fortifications in 1938) proved the same.

Moreover - German generals rather underestimated than overestimated Czechoslovakian defensive abilities (as well as the size of their army) and they were certainly not afraid of their fortifications - as the German plan of war against Czechoslovakia (Fall Grün) clearly shows. Moreover - Czechoslovakian fortifications did have many weak points:

These would be the best areas to attack:





Encircling Praha from 4 sides, cutting off Czech forces trying to withdraw to the east, pacificating fortifications in the north by attacking their rears (and engaging with artillery from the north). Road system favourable for Panzers:



Deployment of opposing divisions during the initial phase of Fall Grün and Czechoslovakian defensive plan:



Results of Polish testings which were carried out on Czechoslovakian fortifications in the Summer of 1939:

Został stwierdzony dość ciekawy i znamienny fakt, który nie powinien ujść uwagi historyków. Po zajęciu Zaolzia w czasie inspekcji kancelarii jednej z baterii pokazano mi kartę pocztową adresowaną do gospodarza lokalu. Była to fotografia dużego dzieła fortyfikacyjnego postrzelanego dosłownie na rzeszoto, jak wynikało z treści, była to kartka z obszarów niedawno zajętych przez Niemców. Już nie pamiętam w jakiej miejscowości fort ten się znajdował. Skonfiskowaną z miejsca kartkę przesłałem natychmiast w drodze służbowej do Oddziału II Sztabu Głównego. Latem 39 r. została powołana komisja do zbadania wytrzymałości na ogień artylerii bunkrów zbudowanych ( przez Czechosłowaków) na poprzedniej granicy polskiej. W skład komisji wchodził m.in. płk Luśniak- dowodca 5 pac w Krakowie i ja. Przeprowadziliśmy szereg strzelań na różnych dystansach do wybranych przez losowanie bunkrów. Wyniki były następujące: Ciężka artyleria - armata 105 mm z zakrytego stanowiska, na dystansie 3,5 km - 2 trafne pociski przebiły ślepą ściankę czołową bunkra i wybuchły wewnątrz. Artyleria lekka: 75 mm- działo francuskie- strzał na wprost z odległości 1-1,5 km: ścianka czołowa przy każdym strzale zostawała przebita na wylot, a granat pocisku wybuchał wewnątrz bunkra. W końcu przeprowadzony został ogień z armatki 37 mm na odległość 400 - 450 metrów: po oddaniu 15 -18 strzałów została wybita dziura w żelazobetonie 40 - 50 cm średnicy i ostatnie 2-3 pociski wybuchały już wewnątrz bunkra. Wniosek komisji, do której wchodził również oficer saperów (mjr Orłowski): nieodpowiednio przygotowany beton.

Here are the results of Polish artillery tests (tests were carried out on frontal walls of different Czechoslovakian concrete bunkers, fortifications designated for tests were randomly chosen):

1. 105mm gun - 2 accurate hits from the distance of 3,5 km pierced the frontal wall of the bunker and exploded inside
2. 75mm gun (French) - few direct hits from 1 - 1,5 km = each hit pierced the frontal wall of the bunker and exploded
3. 37mm AT gun - 18 hits from 400 - 450 m = 16 hits were necessary to pierce the reinforced concrete wall (50 cm diameter hole) and the last 2 hits exploded inside

Conclusion of the Polish research committee (including mjr Orłowski, officer of sappers, expert on fortifications):

- Czechoslovakian fortifcations were made of incorrectly prepared concrete.

From the book titled "21st Podhalanska Infantry Division in the Polish-German campaign of 1939".

Similar opinions about poor durability of Czechoslovakian fortifications can be found in German & Soviet sources.

Summarizing - Czechoslovakian fortifications were very numerous, massively produced - but not of best quality.

[Pavel Novak]

Hallo
Just note all czechoslovak tanks (LT-34 and LT-35) were equipped with radios. Problem was that these radios weren't anything like state-of-the-art. New set of radios was developed for LT-38 and ST-39 but these weren't in service in 1938.

My 2 cents
The worst nightmare for czechoslovak army was that german army would divide them and so the most forces were in Moravia - with resereves were actually more numerous than german units facing them from Austria. Probably most problematic place was possible german attack to Pilsen (to southwestern Bohemia) which could eventually threaten side of the 1st Army. German attack from Wien against the 4th Army have no chance to succed because of too low numbers on german side however they could engage czechoslovak units so they cannot fight elsewhere (ie. helping 1st Army).

But if Poland is in alliance with Czechoslovakia - how much units can Germany actually send against Czechoslovakia? If only half of them then Germany doesn't have enough troops to invade on more than one direction and that can be easily stopped by CS army.

The question is how Germany should wage war against Poland and Czechoslovakia. Where to attack?

Regards