And if your campaign will fail if any one of your assaults doesn't succeed quickly, it's a bad plan.
Bad ideas in war
- Thread starter HansMustermann
- Start date
And if your campaign will fail if any one of your assaults doesn't succeed quickly, it's a bad plan.
Gulliver Foyle
Philosopher
I'll start this out with the WW2 British idea that German paratroopers could just land in Central Park, and who's gonna stop them?
Well...
1. The German paratrooper units had been depleted in the invasion of Crete. They had won, but they took serious losses that were never replenished. Sure, Germany conscripted more soldiers, but they tended to go to just about any unit except paratroopers. Even when they devised a paratrooper weapon like the FG-42 (Fallschirmjägergewehr 42 = "paratrooper rifle 42") it only got issued in limited numbers in 1943 and beyond, way after the Battle Of Britain, and really, still the number of paratroopers they had was really just to tick the box that they had any at all.
2. MORE IMPORTANTLY, you have to undertstand how German paratroopers worked AT ALL. Seriously, it's counter-intuitive.
You may have seen in stuff like Band Of Brothers how the allies jumped with their weapons attached to themselves in various bags and all.
The Germans didn't.
The Germans jumped with just a pistol on themselves, while the rest of their weapons (not just heavy equipment, but even rifles or SMGs) dropped separately. After you landed, you had to scramble towards WTH place you saw a parachute fall and search for your equipment. (Sounds dumb, and IS dumb, but nobody said the Nazis were geniuses)
So, yeah, if they paradropped in Central Park, they'd have just about a Luger or Mauser C96 between every second or so of them, while even their basic rifles dropped in, say, Peckham or Camden
The Londoners among you will understand the problem, but for everyone else, imagine your rifles and ammo dropping a couple miles away in an urban jungle, AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE. Literally.
The whole German paratrooper doctrine was devised for open fields, not urban jungle.
Would "Dad's army" of old reserve guards be able to take them on? <BLEEP!> even a couple of angry cop precincts could
Feel free to add your own mis-conceptions in wars in any era.
Speaking of WW2 the two "plans" the nazis had for knocking the UK out of the war were mind-bendingly idiotic. Firstly there was the invasion "plan" where a couple of infantry division (with no artillery support, never mind anything heavier) would cross the Channel in flat bottomed river barges that would sink in anything other than flat seas and look to set up a beachhead in the teeth of Britain's strongest defences. All that was needed was for the Royal Navy to buzz the few destroyers listed as escorts into a panic and the backwash from the toing and froing would have sunk the barges.
The plan actually used, the bombing campaign consisted of Goering being off his gourd, a staff who didn't know what they were up against and ignored those who were developing a good idea, fighters that didn't have range to support bombers that were unsuitable, replacement planes that weren't being built for pilots that weren't being trained, a lack of a proper strategic plan, and a blindness to the absolute requirement that it needed a successful German landing to have any hope of succeeding.
But then you could say as much for pretty much any German plan in WW2. For example they only won the Battle of France because a million to one chance went their way in the Ardennes breakout.
Gulliver Foyle
Philosopher
Ok, time for another bad idea, in fact a whole bunch of them under one category: Albert Speer.
People often hear about how he massively increase production practically overnight. But what had actually happened was that he practically stopped producing spare parts, so of course the production of complete planes and tanks went up.
E.g., if something went wrong with a tank (say, the much maligned Panther final drive broke), you were supposed to ship the whole tank back to the factory to be fixed.
Operational readiness plummeted.
And not just for tanks. For example in late 44 (IIRC October?), out of IIRC 28 Me-163 rocket fighters, only 6 were actually usable, because of lack of spare parts. OK, so the Me-163 was itself a bad idea, but the lack of spare parts made even the ones built to be... err.... even more completely useless than they actually are.
But let's return to something I mentioned earlier: that Panther final drive. Well, the original design called for a more robust helical geared final drive. And they could build one all right. But Speer asked for a cheaper and simpler one instead, that could be made with untrained slave labour. He got his wish, and the Panther got... well, the drive we all know and love
But Speer could show his buddy Adolf, "look, line goes up!"
And the list goes on and on like Celine Dion's heart
This is what I said elsewhere when Shoigu's replacement was compared with Speer:
Edited by Agatha:
Edited quote for rule 10
Last edited by a moderator:
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
The only Tank design that was worse, is the Soviet Tank Crew Moon Launch System known as the auto Loader.
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
Not all autoloaders will launch crew to space. Just soviet ones...
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
You go to war with the logistics you have, not the logistics you wish to have or plan to have at a later date. It's not like Germany's logistical and supply situation was going to get any better if they waited.
It's a desperate plan. Last ditch efforts and forlorn hopes have their place in warfare.
Fair enough if it's not a fight of your choosing. But if you are planning and have the initiative, it's just a bad idea.
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
I can see that as an issue if you're defending. If you're starting a war, it is just plain stupid.
One thing that went waaaaay wrong for the Kwantung Army in Manchuria was their practice of gekokujo, meaning "leading from below." It amounted to self-righteous insubordination, as one author put it, and it got their teenage butts kickedppl in '37, '38, and finally 1939 at Nomonhan.
Doug MacArthur tried something similar in Korea, and got sent to the showers. So it's not just a Japanese thing.
Doug MacArthur tried something similar in Korea, and got sent to the showers. So it's not just a Japanese thing.
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
In both world wars, Germany knew that Moscow was conspiring to invade them at the earliest opportunity, and was building up for that plan. They also had good reason to believe that France was either colluding with Moscow (WW1) or would opportunistically attack Germany if they attacked eastward.
Basically, Germany was looking at a countdown timer and a difficult choice: Attack west to get France off their back, and then pivot east to deal with the real threat, or attack east first, and take their chances with France.
And especially in the run-up to WW2, they didn't have the luxury of waiting in until they were fully ready, since Moscow would also be getting stronger and stronger in the meantime.
In a lot of ways, even only knowing what we knew then, Germany's wars of aggression were a preemptive defense.
Anyway, by the time of the Battle of the Bulge, that operation was clearly defensive in nature.
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2009
- Messages
- 23,741
It kinda is when the war or operation is your choice in the first place. It's like saying I'm going fighting with the muscles I have, when it was my choice to punch that guy in the first place.
For example before Barbarossa Halder was ASKED if he can realistically take a given set of strategic targets in a given time, or the operation wouldn't have begun. Instead of telling his boss the truth, he went in a completely different direction, and even for that he ignored the logistics guys, who incidentally predicted exactly where it would stall.
Or my favourite idiot, von Hötzendorf, had been the #1 agitator for Austria to start a war, any war, when he was in a prime position to know the state of their army.
Essentially what I'm saying is people should stop having a mentality of "but we must do SOMETHING"... even if that something is counter-productive. I suppose it helps if you think in terms of Go instead of chess. In chess you HAVE to make a move, even if it digs you further down the hole. In Go you don't. It's ok to pass your turn if that leaves you in a better position.
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 66,914
Don't forget the invasion was relying on capturing a major port intact so that re-enforcement could arrive.
That lot coming in the barges had no artillery or armour with them and only supplies for a few days.
Plus even getting ashore was a chore. It relied on the towing vessels to push the barges on to the beaches so the infantry could climb out.
The barges had to be pushed one at a time waiting for their turn.
Then the tugs would pull them back off the beaches and set off back to France for the second wave.
Each crossing would take 24 hours or more each way at more or less walking speed.
Even if the Germans obtained temporary air superiority over the channel for a while their success bombing fast moving warships like Destroyers and Cruisers was
not good and wasn't possible in the dark anyway.
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 66,914
Why do you think it was ineffective?
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2009
- Messages
- 23,741
Germany had the same, not as a proper doctrine (well, they did encourage some initiative at lower levels, including forming ad-hoc groups), but as part as Hitler's ideas of "will to conquer" and pitting everyone against everyone else. In the military domain it included stuff like Sepp Dietrich being DECORATED for ignoring the direct HQ orders to stop and wait for maintenance and reinforcements, or... well... Rommel's whole career. Which may have been a direct cause of several further issues in Africa.
But more importantly, which really was the root cause of what I previously mentioned as a bad idea before D-day, namely making Hitler himself as a bottleneck for any reinforcements. Rommel was essentially so out of control and ignoring any direct orders (including in Africa directly from the chief of staff of the Army High Command (OKH), Halder) because he's Adolf's best buddy, that the only way to stop him from doing whatever he wants was to require him to override Hitler himself if he wants to disobey orders.
So, yeah, encouraging disobeying direct orders... not a good idea.
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Moscow was gearing up to invade Germany. This was inevitable. And the longer Germany waited, the worse the disparity of strength, in Moscow's favor. Obviously Hitler went into the war intending to profit from it. But he also went with the understanding that war was coming to him regardless.
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2009
- Messages
- 23,741
Well, I wouldn't say that flat out there is no law, although I can see where you're coming from. But the NSDAP in particular had an explicit idea about the Aryan superman "will to conquer", so stabbing your superior in the back and getting away with it (e.g., Milch) was actually a GOOD thing. It showed that you had that kinda will.
Kinda reminds me of the Sith, come to think of it.
Gulliver Foyle
Philosopher
It was Hitler's genius plan for making sure nobody would topple him. If everybody below him was fighting everybody else beside and below them he was safe.
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
Or Terran Empire from Mirror universe in Star trek.
