The Maginot Line

[NeilYoungIsBack]

Agreed that German forces had largely modern equipment but Britain and France had modern (and modernising) airforces, plenty of man power and modern weaponry - all in all, no doubt they could give a very good account of themselves.

Britain in WW2 seemed to be always at least one step behind when it came to tank design. Early on in the war there were some truly terrible British tanks (e.g. the Matilda Mk 1 and the Valiant).

Probably worst of all was the Covenanter, a tank so bad it never served in combat, even though over 1,700 were produced between 1940-43.

Covenanter tank - Wikipedia

Even the famous Matilda II was problematic: i.e. it seems a pretty basic design flaw to create an infantry support tank that wasn't capable of firing HE rounds of ammunition.

 

[oakiecokie]

The Maginot Line took 10 years to build starting in 1929, completed in 1939. This is a series of underground bunkers lining the French border with Germany which cost billions of French Francs "

It would appear to have provided little to no resistance to the German invasion due to German military pouring through the least fortified section of the line " through Belgium and the Ardennes Forest " quickly overwhelming the French military and taking Paris in mid-June of 1940.

Surely that money would have been better spent arming the French forces with tanks, artillery and aircraft.

What a totally bizarre idea and place, anyone been before or know any of the history behind this place?

Were you watching the same programme as me last night on Sky Geographical ref WWII ??

 

[NeilYoungIsBack]

The British and French tanks weren't hopeless. They were pretty much on par with the German Panzer 2,3 & 4's used in the invasion, and the Allies also had a slight numerical advantage.
The issue was how they were used. The germans attacked with them en masse, whereas the British and French spread them around all the various units, resulting in the Germans always having a local numerical advantage in tank to tank engagements(i.e 3 or 4 to 1).
Plus the Germans could also being able to call on Air and Artillery support quicker as needed.

On the rare occasion when the Brits managed to mass their tanks together they could cause absolute carnage. In one instant they grouped about 12 Matilda 1 & 2's together (Matilda 1's didn't even a gun, just a big machine gun) and sent them down 2 roads to attack, which caused nearly a full German infantry division to fall back in total dis-array. Part of the reason for this was the Matilda's were very heavily armoured and the standard German anti-tank guns ammo would just bounce off. Also the Matilda's had stowage bins (for the crew's kit etc) on the outside which would often set on fire when hit. So there's a few german reports from the time saying they'd hit these Matilda's with everything they had, set them on fire etc and they just kept going to their amazement.

The Shermans equipped with British Guns later on in the war were known as Sherman 'Fireflires'. Basically a Sherman equipped with a British 17 pounder artillery gun instead of the standard 75mm gun.

Ha, I've just condemned the Matilda 1 in my post...

 

[metalblue]

Britain in WW2 seemed to be always at least one step behind when it came to tank design. Early on in the war there were some truly terrible British tanks (e.g. the Matilda Mk 1 and the Valiant).

Probably worst of all was the Covenanter, a tank so bad it never served in combat, even though over 1,100 were produced between 1940-43.

Covenanter tank - Wikipedia

Even the famous Matilda II was problematic: i.e. it seems a pretty basic design flaw to create an infantry support tank that wasn't capable of firing HE rounds of ammunition.

On that Wiki I saw it says ordered for production before pilot models were built. No idea why it was so bad then!

Germany, most notably in trying to produce heavy tanks, had their own failures and problems.

 

[NeilYoungIsBack]

On that Wiki I saw it says ordered for production before pilot models were built. No idea why it was so bad then!

Germany, most notably in trying to produce heavy tanks, had their own failures and problems.

Yes, like those overlapping wheels on their large tanks and half-tracks. A nightmare when the mud freezes on the Russian front.

 

[Ghandi's Flip Flops]

Ha, I've just condemned the Matilda 1 in my post...

The Matilda 1 was okay of as an Infantry Support Vehicle, but obviously if judging it on a Tank vs Tank basis or the main battle tank concept that came later it wasn't.

The British designers had a tendancy to design different tanks for different applications. So you got a range of them (cruisers for speed, infantry support tanks etc) pressed into service and/or adpated to what they weren't designed for. Plus they tended to like to emphasize the ability for crossing various terrains.
If you read the reports on the battles in the hilly or mountainous regions of North Africa etc, the British Tanks could do hill climbs etc that no German or American tank could get near.

 

[Bobby the blue]

My grandad was in the Polish army during the Second World War and told my dad a few things regarding battles etc. My old man has always said that he was told that this thing to do with the Polish army having to to rely on horses against an advanced German war machine as propaganda of the highest order. This was done to make out that the Polish army was backwards and to pour scorn on them. My old man said that he used to remember his dad and his chums coming round and telling a few stories that you just couldn’t believe. Such as a regiment being told that basically the troops were fucked and they were to make their own way to Crete to meet up an regroup. My grandads best friend recounted how he walked/ etc most of the way. One night he was in a barn when some Germans busted in. He thought on his feet and pretended to be mad. Luckily they bought this and left him alone. Amazing stories really.

 

[nellyonthewing]

Reading a book on Normandy1944 by J Holland right now.
interesting his take on the Allies (particularly Montgomery's) strategy that we just couldn't take the level of manpower loss that the Germans and Russians accepted. So we would use our better resources and weaponry to good effect. Monty believed the Germans would always counter attack and that was when you used your superior Artillery and air power to destroy them.

 

[Blue Mist]

I visited the Maginot line back in the late 80's and the bit we visited, which was in the south east of france, had seen action
There were sighns saying this ditch was made by a bomb dropped from a Stuka and also the metal fortifications had huge chunks taken out of them by german artillery and heavy machine gun

My grandad visited the line and confirm it had seen action. Mind you he was in the Panzer division in to 1939 offensive.

 

[MadchesterCity]

The French made the common mistake of fighting the next war based on the last war.

They expected static lines and simply had not considered blitzkrieg - they weren’t alone as I don’t think anyone did.