Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Germany 1944 vs modern USMC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Cyberknight View Post
    The modern battlespace is so much larger due to range and commo, that the Marines woulkd cripple the 1940s Germans in weeks.

    Whisket Cobras can take down FW-190s and Me-109 if the fast mopvers are elsewhere. LAV 25s can penetrate any German armor. USMC artillery guided by RPVs would make actual meeting unusual.

    Sufficient fuel, food, ammo and rest would be the determinants of how fast Berlin falls.

    Just replace those scenes of Iraqis surrendering to US forces during Desert Storm with Wermacht.
    While it may be great to have such air superiority, the fact remains that the 250,000 USMC (This the total contingeant) have to defeat something like 9,000,000 ground troops.

    This equates to something like 280+ field divisions, the 10's of thousands of artillery guns, the 10's of thousands of anti-aircraft guns, the 10's of thousands of anti-tank guns, the millions of rifles and small arms, the hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 10,000+ AFV including tanks, the millions of mines

    Then on top of that the USMC would have to almost by themselves virtually destroy all of Germany's war industry, Military infrastructer, lines of communications, attack on a very broad front.

    Also if we use the OP only transports can be used, so that rules out anyother support even using Britain, those transports would be vulnerable to Submarine attack.

    I am not saying that USMC defeat is a given, but it would certainly be very difficult to achieve.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
      Amphibious transport ships, better part of a years logistics, & entirety of the current Corps. The German Army of 1944 would be attrited. With the the Prowlers in there...the Germans would not have a C-2 other than runners.
      And land-line telephones. LOTS of land-line telephones.
      Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
        While it may be great to have such air superiority, the fact remains that the 250,000 USMC (This the total contingeant) have to defeat something like 9,000,000 ground troops.
        You're looking at this from an attrition perspective only. You don't have to defeat 9,000,000 ground troops. I don't think there has ever been a war were every member of a nations armed forces were defeat.

        A simple thing like FASCAM (emplacement time = 5 minutes) would defeat a larger force from bringing it's forces to bear on a smaller force.

        Counter battery capability differences between today's and WW II forces would put the German Artillery in a silence mode very quickly.
        "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Nichols View Post
          You're looking at this from an attrition perspective only. You don't have to defeat 9,000,000 ground troops. I don't think there has ever been a war were every member of a nations armed forces were defeat.

          A simple thing like FASCAM (emplacement time = 5 minutes) would defeat a larger force from bringing it's forces to bear on a smaller force.

          Counter battery capability differences between today's and WW II forces would put the German Artillery in a silence mode very quickly.
          All true. But even if you say that killing 20% of his force is sufficient to cause capitulation you're looking at 1.8 million enemy soldiers you have to kill or incapacitate.

          FASCAM is a sweet system, but fairly rare. Even a 'years supply' of these mines wouldn't be very many. Additionally, you're going to expend them at a pretty prodigious rate if you're using them as an assault tool, rather than as a defensive tool. Remember, the Marines not only have to win, they have to win while on the Offensive.

          Counterbattery radar will be fought the same way that our premodern enemies of today are doing it. The Germans will focus their energies on building and deploying SP artillery that can fire and then immediately move to avoid answering fires, and extensive use of mortars and other rapidly mobile systems. Heavy artillery will be reserved for important occasions, and dugouts made behind the guns for the crews to run to after firing a few salvoes. Technology can certainly make the German's life miserable, but doctrine can overcome technology to some extent. Considering that the Marines only have a year's worth of shells for their limited number of guns, the Germans just need to get them to waste shells on low-risk targets. 155 HE and AP shells are only somewhat more effective their their WWII counterparts.

          To answer the LAV note, Yes the 25mm cannon will be devestating to German Armor. Conversely most, if not all, existing German AT weapons can chew up the LAV-25. And again, remember that the LAVs won't be ambushing probing German armor on the defense....they'll be assaulting dug-in German armor and AT weapons on the attack.
          Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

          Comment


          • #20
            Some glaring aspects and that is Psychology.

            Germany has weathered huge losses during 1939 to 1943 so their Psychology is used to large loss of troops, where as the modern USMC isn't.

            Today's USMC as good as they are could not cope with the loss of several thousand in one battle, or 10's of thousands in a few weeks, or in a worse case scenario battle to the death, would the US government be prepared to lose 250,000 in a war of attritian.

            Also not even touched upon are the USMC casualties, many thousands will be wounded, and taking Britain out of the equation, every wouned would need to be evac'd out of the battle to hospital ships or flown back to USA for treatment, the Germans don't need to kill many only need to wound to cause massive casualties.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
              All true. But even if you say that killing 20% of his force is sufficient to cause capitulation you're looking at 1.8 million enemy soldiers you have to kill or incapacitate.
              Two MEBs tied down 6 Divisions in 91 without firing a single round.
              "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                Two MEBs tied down 6 Divisions in 91 without firing a single round.
                Pardon my ignorance but what does MEB's mean?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                  Some glaring aspects and that is Psychology.
                  This is where IMO, the Marines would hold the upper hand.

                  Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                  Germany has weathered huge losses during 1939 to 1943 so their Psychology is used to large loss of troops, where as the modern USMC isn't.
                  The huge losses also require replacement by less experienced troops

                  Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                  Today's USMC as good as they are could not cope with the loss of several thousand in one battle, or 10's of thousands in a few weeks, or in a worse case scenario battle to the death, would the US government be prepared to lose 250,000 in a war of attritian.
                  Me thinks that you are applying WW II USMC tactics to today's Marines. Doctrine requires them to avoid going head to head against an enemy. Surfaces & gaps...exploit the gaps, avoid the surfaces.

                  Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                  Also not even touched upon are the USMC casualties, many thousands will be wounded, and taking Britain out of the equation, every wouned would need to be evac'd out of the battle to hospital ships or flown back to USA for treatment, the Germans don't need to kill many only need to wound to cause massive casualties.
                  The OP didn't take Britian out of the equation.

                  There really is no comparison between casualties in WW II and today. What would have sent someone back to the rear in WW II is routinely handled by platoon Corpsman today.

                  The one area that I could see the Germans putting the Marines into a hurt locker would be if they used nerve agent. This would throw a wench into the operations very quickly. They didn't use it on us in WW II because they were sure that we had to have it also...kinda a MAD scenario except we didn't even know that it existed.
                  "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Roddoss72 View Post
                    Pardon my ignorance but what does MEB's mean?
                    Marine Expeditionary Brigade

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_...ionary_Brigade
                    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                      Two MEBs tied down 6 Divisions in 91 without firing a single round.
                      Ok, in detail

                      1) The 6 divisions being talked about are Iraqi. Some Republican Guard, others not even that good. I'm no german fanboi, but I do appreciate the tenacity despite losses, and the level of morale and proficiency that the Germans had in their craft, especially the better formations. They were far and above better quality men than the Iraqi divisions, and to say otherwise is to do them (and those that defeated them) a disservice.

                      2) Tied down is not annihilated. I put forth 20% as the number of German soldiers that the USMC would have to Annihilate in order to force capitulation. Annihilate, as in 1.8 million German Soldiers captured or dead....or Captured And Dead

                      3) The Iraqis were tied down by a potential amphibious assault. The Germans OTOH would consider a 2 brigade assault to be a Dream, a fantasy even. Oh, there'd be 6 divisions waiting....after all, if you've got 90 divisions lying around, then you can afford to put 6 or even 10 divisions on a single USMC division. The Germans are deploying anywhere from 27 to 45 times the number of troops faced by the entirety of the coalition forces in Desert Storm.

                      It's all a numbers game. Logistically there just aint enough gear for the Marines to defeat a force 36 times their total size. Then when you consider manpower, it looks even more bleak. 250,000 includes all the pilots, groundcrew, and other extraneous MOSs of the air wings, all service support troops, and all administrative troops. Even if you follow the "Every Marine a Rifleman" to the letter, you're outnumbered 36 to one. If you use only the grunts and engineers on both sides the odds still are incredibly poor for the Marines. Then let's look at tanks. The Marines will deploy 4 Battalions of M1A1 Abrams tanks and roughly the same number of LAV battalions....no more. The Germans will deploy 19,000 AFVs of all types in 1944 alone, not counting any still in service from previous years. In aircraft the Marines will deploy several squadrons of Cobras, F-18s, AV8Bs, EA6Bs, and transport aircraft. The Luftwaffe will be able to put 24000 new Fighters in the air in 1944, along with nearly 3000 bombers, attack aircraft, and recce planes.

                      Remember the logistics available is an anticipated normal supply for a year of combat operations. Not a year's unlimited supply of weapons, ammo, fuel, and spare parts.
                      Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        This is where IMO, the Marines would hold the upper hand.
                        This is what I'm not so sure about. You've got guys accustomed to heavy losses on the Eastern Front, to fighting against the odds. Now you tell them that 90 divisions of their best friends and they will have to hold off an assault by 250,000 men? They've already fought bigger battles than this...they're going to scoff at the MC....no offense.

                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        The huge losses also require replacement by less experienced troops
                        There are less experienced formations. But the whole Wermacht isn't made of them. And remember, no eastern front, so all those very hardened veterans are stiffening up the Volksgrenadier regiments.

                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        Me thinks that you are applying WW II USMC tactics to today's Marines. Doctrine requires them to avoid going head to head against an enemy. Surfaces & gaps...exploit the gaps, avoid the surfaces.
                        Where exactly are you going to find Gaps for 4 divisions to beat 90 divisions. In France. With the 4 Divisions having to do a breakout attack against the 90 redeploying to defend against them. I'm incredulous that you'd think it's possible.

                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        The OP didn't take Britian out of the equation.
                        Good thing too. Otherwise we'd not have F-18s, EA6Bs, or KC-130s.

                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        There really is no comparison between casualties in WW II and today. What would have sent someone back to the rear in WW II is routinely handled by platoon Corpsman today.
                        Will make some difference into how long the MC can continue to fight....not in whether we'd win or not.

                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        The one area that I could see the Germans putting the Marines into a hurt locker would be if they used nerve agent. This would throw a wench into the operations very quickly. They didn't use it on us in WW II because they were sure that we had to have it also...kinda a MAD scenario except we didn't even know that it existed.
                        The Germans would never even need to consider it for a moment. Just deploy infantry divisions with AT weapons to cover major industrial, rail, and political sites against air assault, disperse political and C3 assets to the countryside, utilize multiple telephone networks, deploy the better infantry and armor formations forward in a defense in depth, and simply force the MC into a grinding campaign by denying a weak flank, while simply waiting out the airstrikes until the MC ground forces are wiped out.

                        {the irony boys and girls, is that both Nichols and myself are Marines, arguing whether the Marines can take on and defeat the entirety of 1944 Nazi Germany. I think that's beyond our capability. Now, if you wanted to replace the entire Anglo-American ground forces and tactical air force involved in France/Germany with the USMC, I think you're getting Far Closer to what is possible}
                        Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                          This is what I'm not so sure about. You've got guys accustomed to heavy losses on the Eastern Front, to fighting against the odds. Now you tell them that 90 divisions of their best friends and they will have to hold off an assault by 250,000 men? They've already fought bigger battles than this...they're going to scoff at the MC....no offense.
                          It wasn't 90 divisions of their best friends, the German Army of 1944 was no where near the ethnic composition it was in 1939.

                          A few things to keep in mind:

                          C-2

                          Third, the German command structure was a disaster. Hitler's mistrust of his generals and the generals' mistrust of Hitler were worth a king's ransom to the Allies. So were Hitler's sleeping habits, as well as his Wolkenkuckucksheim ideas.

                          The only high-command officer who responded correctly to the crisis at hand was Field Marshal Rundstedt, the old man who was there for window dressing and who was so scorned by Hitler and OKW. Two hours before the seaborne landings began, he ordered the two reserve panzer divisions available for counterattack in Normandy, the 12th SS Panzer and Panzer Lehr, to move immediately toward Caen. He did so on the basis of an intuitive judgment that the airborne landings were on such a large scale that they could not be a mere deception maneuver (as some of his staff argued) and would have to be reinforced from the sea. The only place such landings could come in lower Normandy were on the Calvados and Cotentin coasts. He wanted armor there to meet the attack.

                          Rundstedt's reasoning was sound, his action decisive, his orders clear. But the panzer divisions were not under his command. They were in OKW reserve. To save precious time, Rundstedt had first ordered them to move out, then requested OKW approval. OKW did not approve. At 0730 Jodi informed Rundstedt that the two divisions could not be committed until Hitler gave the order, and Hitler was still sleeping. Rundstedt had to countermand the move-out order. Hitler slept until noon.


                          http://www.worldwar2history.info/D-Day/Hitler.html


                          Individual soldiers

                          The Wehrmacht in Normandy in June of 1944 was an international army. It had troops from every corner of the vast Soviet empire -- Mongolians, Cossacks, Georgians, Muslims, Chinese -- plus men from the Soviet Union's neighboring countries, men who had been conscripted into the Red Army, then captured by the Germans in 1941 or 1942. There were some Koreans, captured by the Red Army in the 1939 war with Japan. In Normandy in June 1944, the 29th Division captured enemy troops of so many different nationalities that one GI blurted to his company commander, "Captain, just who the hell are we fighting, anyway?"

                          http://www.worldwar2history.info/Nor...-soldiers.html

                          “For years, the German Army on the Eastern Front was not properly armed for repelling massive Red Army tank attacks. Tens of thousands of brave German soldiers died taking on communist tanks with hand weapons. Six men were assigned as an antitank team, generally for night operations in positions covering possible avenues of tank approach. The team was deployed in the form of a U at intervals of approximately 50 yards, adapting itself to the terrain for observation and field of fire. All the men were armed with machine pistols and antitank, magnetic hollow-charges. The team leader, No. 4, carried a pyrotechnic pistol. In addition, four Tellermines were carried for placing in the probable path of the tank and were controlled by a 50-yard length of wire by which they can be pulled under the approaching tank.

                          When a tank came on, the team leader fired a pyrotechnic charge directly at the turret of the tank and momentarily blinded the crew. At the same time, Nos. 3 and 5 pulled Teller mines into its path, and No. 2 rushed forward to place a magnetic charge on the side armor plate of the tank. Meanwhile, No. 4 covered the turret-hatch to prevent the escape of
                          the crew; Nos. 1 and 6 covered the ground behind the tank for possible infantry accompanying it. Each man was interchangeable with the others of the team and his duties were determined by the terrain. The desperate method of using men against Soviet tanks was caused by the sabotage of German traitors within the Wehrmacht who made certain that insufficient antitank guns were delivered to the German troops. Since massed Red Army tank attacks were a frequent occurrence, many brave German soldiers died in the dangerous efforts of individual tank killing.”


                          http://www.quikmaneuvers.com/german_...bat_facts.html

                          By June 1944, the German forces in France numbered 46 infantry divisions and 9 panzer divisions (notably the Panzer Lehr, 1st, 2nd, and 12th SS Panzer Divisions). Several infantry divisions were inexperienced and contained lower quality young troops and older men - troops that were unable to immediately fight on the Russian front. In addition, of the 850,000 men under Rundstedt's command, 60,000 were hilfswillige (prisoners from the Russian front who volunteered for Russian service - mostly Tartars, Cossacks, Ukrainians, etc.) But, most infantry divisions were of good quality and several consisted of battle-hardened veterans from the Eastern front. A typical German division was slightly smaller than an American division, but because of material and fuel shortages, it lacked significant mobile transport - relying on heavy use of horse and train.

                          http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com...y/prelude.aspx

                          Logistics

                          The study describes German logistics in the 1944 Normandy campaign and demonstrates that logisitic deficiencies were centrl to the German defeat, and that the role played a major role in the successful American breakout during Operation Cobra in late July.

                          http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/sage/feed...ndy-xCFXBGQL0N
                          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            You're still maintaining that 4 (light) air wings, 4 Infantry Divisions, 4 Tank Battalions and 4-8 LAV battalions (depending on how you divvy them up), can take on and defeat an army of 90 divisions, while advancing over 400 miles on a front over a hundred miles wide, and do so with what would be considered to be 'normal' yearly logistics for such a force?
                            Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                              Where exactly are you going to find Gaps for 4 divisions to beat 90 divisions. In France. With the 4 Divisions having to do a breakout attack against the 90 redeploying to defend against them. I'm incredulous that you'd think it's possible.
                              From the border of Spain all the way to Germany.....how many miles of shoreline can 90 or 140 divisions cover? Keep in mind the Germans had some serious logisitical and command & control issues.

                              We need to get into the current 21st Century mindset of amphibious operations, remember the OP was today's Corps. It appears that everyone is stuck on the 1944 amphibious operations where very little portions of a beach could be used.

                              They didn't have AAVs as capable as today's. They didn't have LCACs, helicopters or regular line infantry units trained in conducting raids using zodiac rubber boats from over the horizon.

                              The 'longest' amphibious assault was conducted by the 15th MEU on 26 November 2001. They traveled 689 km to hit the objective. That is one MEU...a Battalion + that conducted this operation. How much hate and discontent could an enemy Battalion plus sized force cause say 200 kms to the rear?
                              "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
                                You're still maintaining that 4 (light) air wings, 4 Infantry Divisions, 4 Tank Battalions and 4-8 LAV battalions (depending on how you divvy them up), can take on and defeat an army of 90 divisions, while advancing over 400 miles on a front over a hundred miles wide, and do so with what would be considered to be 'normal' yearly logistics for such a force?
                                I'm maintaining that today's Corps would never pick Normandy as the entrance point to Fortress Europe.
                                "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X