JTV wrote:CanKiwi2 wrote: I don’t want to deviate from reality here in terms of manpower availability, but I plan to introduce some changes, such as significant numbers of Lotta’s and Cadets (16-17 year olds) in the military from the start.?
Finnish military did not have cadets of that age. Finland has not really had a cadet system with 16 - 17 year olds serving in it since the
Suomen Kadettikoulu (Finnish Cadet School) abolished by the Russians in year 1901 as part of the russification campaign. Since Finland became independent the cadets have been grown men, who have already gone through their compulsary military service. Simply put having already gone through reserve officer training as part of military service is a requirement for applying to
Kadettikoulu (Officer School).
I'll be getting into that in a Post or two (may have mentioned it in passing a lot earlier in this) but for this ATL, what is happening is that in the early 1930's, a "Military Cadet" organisation is put in place in schools providing basic military training for ALL school-children, and encompassing teenagers who leave school early up until they do Conscript Training. This would include "Summer Camp" style training as well. Think something similar to the British Commonwealth-style Military Cadet System (which still exists in Canada incidentally, but outside of Schools). Older teenagers (14-17) receive more training. It's taken over from the Suojeluskuntas Boy-Soldiers and Pikku-Lottas to a large extent, although these still exist, complementing each other more or less.
So there's a pool of teenagers 14-17 years old with basic military training and equipment who can perform military tasks under direction. (Perhaps using over-age Officers and NCO's in command positions).
JTV wrote:CanKiwi2 wrote:These are round numbers. Also keep in mind in this ATL scenario the increased availability of motorized transport, substantially reducing the numbers of horses used by the military - and the manpower and logistical support that horses required.
Where are fuel and tires coming for this? Even with extremely hard rationing Finland had serious issues keeping even the absolutely needed motor vehicles running due to shortage of fuel and tires.
Now fuel was waay early in this timeline. As of the late 1930's, in this ATL Finland has the Neste Oil Refinery in full production from 1934 (see
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 7#p1535991). Sisu Heavy Vehicles and the Ford Plant outside Helsinki are producing motor vehicles, oil has been stockpiled in the Naantali caves. Anticipating the outbreak of WW2, Neste had by 1939 built up large stockpiles of both crude oil and refined petroleum products in the storage cave reservoirs near Naantali, estimated to be enough to supply the entire country for six months. With strict rationing, these reserves proved to be sufficient for the duration of the Winter War of 1939-40.
Ditto rubber, althoo this is also shipped in as "Foreign Aid", meaning Finland has enough raw rubber for tires (and a much bigger vehicle fleet - plus many more trucks shipped in as the war progresses (not forgetting that in this scenario the war lasts thru to October 1940, meaning there is time for foreign shipments to reach Finland via Lyngenfjiord and be brought into service.
JTV wrote:CanKiwi2 wrote:The Army in this scenario consists of approximately 750,000 men and women (600,000 men and 150,000 women). Of these, approximately half are in frontline formations (Divisions, Regimental Combat Groups, Artillery, etc.) while the other half fill rear area support units of various types. Compared to most militaries, this is an extremely “lean” organizational structure and there’ll be a fairly lengthy post later on going into the whole philosophy and structural background to this, not the least of which is that most militaries end up with a large organizational “tail” which is not strictly necessary to combat. In this scenario, if it doesn’t fight, it better be female, a cadet or over the age limit for a combat formation. No fluff in this Army!
What I have read the historically accurate organisation was actually even more leaner than that - there was very little supplies units compared to frontline formations.
Also - experiences suggest that the about 500,000 men mobilised for military service level could be maintained only temporarily before agricultural production and industrial production would decline too much. This was the reason why oldest soldiers got demobilised in late 1941 - early 1942.
That's good to know. I was looking at the large tail that existed for US and British units compared to German. and then looking at the Continuation War - and was thinking Finnish units were pretty lean on support, so I'll stick with the 50% and maybe even go slightly higher in terms of percentage in combat formations,
Re manpower, I was working on taking the Continuation War numbers and factoring in the casualties from the Winter War to give an "optimal" number of men. Accepted that this would be temporary, but it was achieved in the Continuation War for a while so it was doable in the short term. Also, in my ramped up military-industrialisation, I have Walden insisting that 50% of all hires in defence-related industry be female to allow for continued production expertise in the event of a full-scale military call-up. The grandparents and younger Cadets get left to look after the kids.
There would be problems with manpower come Spring and Summer for sure. That's part of the scenario looking ahead. How do these get addressed is one of the intended discussion points. Hard-times for Finland is a partial-answer. This ATL won't be all Roses for Finland......
JTV wrote:CanKiwi2 wrote:The end result is around 400,000 men (and women) in combat formations. Working on an average “light” Divisional manpower strength of 15,000, this gives me 25 Divisions to work with, with 3 light combined-arms “Regimental Combat Groups” per Division. Regiments and Battalions will be rather smaller in manpower and more streamlined than Original Time Line (OTL) with a far higher proportion of automatic weapons and much greater availability of organic Artillery.
IMO it would be smarter to go with (infantry) brigades and increase the number of supporting heavy weapons - wartime experiences proved that divisions were too large to be commanded effectively.
Lotta Svärd had about 232,000 members, it seems that about 40,000 of these served elsewhere with the grand majority staying at home. IMO it would have been impossible to mobilise over triple the number to serve elsewhere without disastrous results. Most Lotta Svärd members were likely family mothers - since their men had been already called elsewhere to serve, what happens to children if the mother has to leave as well? Also - one cannot simply order them to do this, Lotta Svärd was a volunteer organisation and I am pretty sure that its members had to separately volunteer for this kind of service before they could be commanded anywhere.
What I was moving towards was essentially what you suggest, under a nomenclature where a "Regimental Battle Group" was essentially a Combined-Arms Brigade. Divisions in this instance would tie together a higher level of command for a number of such "Regimental Battle Groups" but wit rather more independence of command for the Battle group (aka brigade) commanders, giving the greater effectiveness you mention. Also, these units have their own organic artillery and a lot more automatic weapons and mortars (81mm and 120mm both) so they're far more effective fighting units.
Re Lotta Svärd, I have 242,000 Lottas as of 1939, with another 79,000 members in Lotta Svard girl-units (the Small-Lottas) and 42,000 supporting members. Not forgetting also that all girls up to 17 are also in the Cadets. In this scenario all 16-17 year old Cadets, male and female, are called up for service. Assumption is that Lotta's fill a lot of rear area positions. Approximately 100,000 Lottas and some 30,000 older girl-Lottas were assigned to take over jobs from men, who were thereby freed up for military service. (Refer back to
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 5#p1586217).
Basically, younger children are going to be pooled in emergency care by grandmothers, older Pikku-Lotta's and some mothers for the duration. Likely in the countryside rather than towns and cities. I'll be getting into this in a Post on Civil Defence further down the line, but in essence if you stay in child-care, you're going to have raft of other peoples children to look after as well as your own.
Lotta Svärd were voluntary, but this would be a rather more militarised society when the war comes. Unmarried women and ALL older teenage (16-20) Lotta's are going to get called up for service in the military or for assigned war work, with very few exceptions. That by itself gives a fairly large pool of personnel to work with. Younger mothers who volunteer and many older women (catering branch, supply and transport, air base, naval base and rear-area army personnel, medical, rear-area AA-gunners, etc). Come Spring and Summer 1940, it's going to be mainly women working the farms.