Military Review

TVD Second Patriotic. 1916 year. Part of 1

54
1916 campaign operations developed in a positional war. By this time, the 4 TVD was formed: the Baltic-Belarusian, Galician, Romanian and Caucasian.


11 Bet meeting. 02. 1916 took the principle plan of the summer campaign of the year - the main attack was assumed by the adjacent flanks (left of the North and Right of the West) of two fronts.

The agreed deadlines for a general offensive by the Allies on the Russian and French fronts were planned for the end of spring. But the large-scale offensive of the enemy near Verdun substantially corrected the planning of the Entente: the Russian army again had to bail out its ally. But after the 1915 attacks, the supreme command of the German bloc considered the Russian army incapable of making noticeable changes in the operational-strategic situation.


1 schema. Russian front by March 1916. Podorozhny N. E. Naroch operation in March 1916 M., 1938

Baltic-Belarusian TVD


This theater covered the most important strategic areas and was controlled by the Northern and Western fronts. By the beginning of the campaign, the largest grouping of German troops on the Russian front was concentrated on this campaign - up to 180000 people against the Northern and up to 358000 people against the Western fronts.

Realizing the principles of the coalition war, the Russian army, in connection with the Verdun operation, launched a premature offensive by the forces of the Western and Northern fronts. The plan of the operation suggested cutting off the Vilna group of Germans from the Neman ferries and the city of Kovno. The northern front was to advance from Jakobstadt to Ponevezh, and the Western front from Smorgon to Vilna. Coming out to Vilna, taking possession of Kovno, cutting off the German troops from Riga and Dvinsk and advancing to East Prussia, the Russian troops beat off from the Germans a significant part of the territory of the Baltic States lost in 1915. But the achievement of this goal ran into insurmountable at that moment obstacles - destroyed communication lines, defense in depth and excellent communications of the enemy. By capturing the strategic network of the Baltic railways, the Germans could transfer their reserves to any scale.


2 schema. Plan of operation Podorozhny N. Ye. Naroch operation

The shock grouping (2-A and part of the forces of 5-A) during the Naroch operation 5 – 17 of March included (with reserves and 14 AK 1-A) 12 cases. The operation was entrusted to the commander of the 2 Army, General of Infantry, V. V. Smirnov, but due to the illness of the latter, the operation was led by Infantry General Acting Commander General of Infantry.

TVD Second Patriotic. 1916 year. Part of 1
Commander 25 AK Acting Commander 2 A General of Infantry A. F. Ragosa

The operation involved up to 460000 people (including the 375000 — 2 Army). But the artillery support of the operation was insufficient - only about 1000 light and 150 heavy guns were involved. Although the artillery densities at the main strike sector were quite good for the Russian front at the beginning of 1916 G .: 12 - 18 (and in some places up to 35) trunks per kilometer of the front, this rate was significantly lower than used 100 gun barrels per kilometer [1]. The main attack was inflicted on the 3 group of corps of the Western Front: M.M. Pleshkova, L.-O. O. Cirelius and P. S. Baluev.

The enemy - the German troops of the 10 and 8 armies and the army of F. von Scholz - over 100000 soldiers and officers (including 82000 in the 10 army), were in deeply echeloned and well-established positions. The marshy-wooded and lake-like terrain of the offensive site created additional difficulties for the Russian troops.


Cavalry General M. M. Pleshkov


Infantry General P. S. Baluev

In the course of heavy fighting, significant, but at the same time, local success was achieved only by the left-flanking group (Baluev), which seized the seats. Postavy. The result of the operation, in addition to the heavy ground and weakness of the attackers, was also influenced by the tactical miscalculation - the sighting of the day 3 of the day gave the Germans the direction of the main attack. At the same time, the site for the offensive was chosen correctly - a double strike should have covered and then overthrown the 21 th German army corps and brought it to Vilno-Kovno. Auxiliary offensive took place south of Dvinsk, under Dvinsk itself and at Jacobstadt. Bold and persistent, despite heavy losses, infantry attacks were supported by fire unprecedented until now on the Russian front. [2].

The losses of the advancing Russian troops amounted to over 78000 people. The defended Germans lost up to 40000 people, including about 1500 prisoners [3]. The Germans suffered the greatest losses, trying to counterattack to regain lost ground.

Despite the lack of operational results, the battles of Naroch and Dvinsk led to the fact that during the week of the Russian offensive the German attacks near Verdun ceased. Not a single German division during this period (the most important in the fate of the Verdun operation) left the Russian front. Already during the battles of the Men of Garabagh, only the German forces, opposing the 2 Army, increased their 30000 bayonets and 230 guns. The concentration of German reserves in the zone of Russian activity contributed to the success of the first stage of the Offensive of the South-Western Front - after all, in March-June the main reserves of the German Eastern Front were concentrated north of the Pripyat marshes line. On the other hand, the troops of the Western and Northern Fronts were battered even before the summer campaign (the higher command personnel of these operational-strategic associations did not believe in a breakthrough with the available fire weapons of the enemy's deep-echelon defense) and could not perform the strike function.

So, the main blow in the summer campaign was to deliver the Western Front to Vilna, and the South-Western and Northern Fronts to “assist”, advancing in order to attract enemy reserves. But the approval of a plan for the onset of all 3 fronts made it possible to realize the freedom of maneuver in carrying the main attack, if necessary.


3 schema. Baltic-Belarusian theater of war in the summer of 1916. Strategic sketch of the 1914-1918 war. CH 6. M., 1923

Three offensive operations with Baranavichy (30 - 31 of May; 19 - 26 of June; 12 - 16 of July) were carried out in this theater of operations — they had only tactical success.

During the first operation, the Grenadier Corps of the 4 Army was able to seize part of the advanced positions of the Germans. Having completed up to seven attacks, the compound partially mastered the enemy’s main position, but could not hold on or develop success. Persistent counter-attacks and powerful fire forced the corps to retreat to its original position. He suffered heavy overall losses: up to 7000 people. The total loss of the Germans - to 3000 people. In the course of a difficult and stubborn battle, the Grenadier Corps proved its elite character, its soldiers and officers showed mass heroism.


4 schema. Area of ​​operation at Baranavichy. Vogel V. Baranovichi. PB., 1921

The operation abounded with tactical blunders: the weakness of artillery and the errors in its use, the inadequacy of reserves, the narrow front of the attack did not allow to solve the task. A tactical breakthrough bought with big blood due to the absence of a second echelon (development echelon of success) could not be converted into operational victory. With the withdrawal of troops to the starting line, the results of tactical success were lost. Moreover, the unnecessary activity of the Grenadier Corps on the eve of a large-scale offensive showed the enemy the direction of the intended main attack of the Western Front.

During the second offensive at Baranavichy, the Russian command concentrated 145 infantry and 19,5 cavalry divisions on the 2-kilometer section of the front. It was planned to break through the German positions on the front of Chvira, Tsirin, Gorodishche, Zhabintsy, Rusyns, r. Myshanka. In this battle, 4 guns and 15 prisoners became trophies of the 4000 Army (total Austro-Germans lost 25000 people, including wounded before 8000 and wounded before 13000). Russian casualties - up to 80000 (30000 killed, wounded up to 47000 and up to 2000 prisoner) soldiers and officers. Russian troops were able to take 1 - 3 defensive positions of the enemy - but the tactical success could not be transformed into operational.

The third battle under Baranavichy was demonstrative. In the course of this offensive, the 4-I army was to pin down the enemy, not allowing to transfer its troops to the Pinsk and Kovel directions. The 4 Army was advancing in two directions: the 35 Army and the 3 Caucasus Army Corps (in reserve, the Siberian Army Corps 3) on the Settlement; 9-I, 31-I infantry and 11-I Siberian Rifle Divisions (9-y army corps in reserve) - on Baranovichi. Despite the stubbornness of the Russian troops, it was not possible to advance further than the enemy’s 1 line of trenches.

All three offensive operations in Baranavichy with the loss of 120000 Russian troops (including 50000 killed) did not bring significant success. Opponent lost to 40000 people (including 20000 killed). A significant percentage of bloody casualties is a vivid illustration of the brutality of the Baranovichi battles. The operation, long prepared and repeatedly repeated by the forces of one army, resulted in isolated actions of almost unrelated corps groups. This forced Stavk to shift the center of gravity of the main attack to the South-Western Front, developing the operational success achieved there.

On July 3-9, the attack of the 12 th Army of the Northern Front was launched in the direction of Bausk. In the 1916 campaign, the Northern Front was assigned a supporting role. The offensive began after a three-hour artillery preparation, which did not give positive results. Heavy positional battles began in the tactical zone of the defense of the German troops. The attacks of the Russian units were interspersed with constantly renewed artillery preparation. Germans constantly counterattacked. July 7 shock group reached the line of the river. Kekkau The unsuccessful battles of the 12 Army in the period of 3 - 9 in July cost its units the loss of 15000 soldiers and officers.

At the same time, based on the importance of the operational direction and the balance of forces of the opponents, operations in the Baltic States were particularly sensitive for the Germans. In addition, the offensive of the 12 Army held down significant enemy forces and limited its capabilities for military redeployment to the south in order to fight the offensive of the South-Western Front. M. Hoffman noted that the battles near Riga were heavy - the Russians managed to win space, and although the attacks were repulsed, Riga was the most "sensitive place of the northern front" - in the case of a Russian breakthrough, the entire front was reversed [4]. Of particular importance were the operations of the Northern and Western Fronts during the crisis of the reserves of the Austro-German command, when all that was possible was sent to Galicia. In this situation, even local success could be the last straw that overturned the balance in favor of the Russian troops.

Already at the end of the campaign, the 12 th Army of the Northern Front 23 - 29 December was carried out a local offensive operation - to capture the enemy positions in the Lake. Babbit and the break of the Olai railway line and the Mitawa – Creutzburg railway. It was possible to achieve tactical surprise by capturing the 3 line of German positions. But a number of tactical and operational circumstances prevented the development of success. [5]. The operation is interesting with the technology of conducting - the Russians used a new method of breaking through the enemy’s defensive positions. In the course of the Mitava operation and the German counter-attack that followed it in January 1917, the Russian troops lost up to 23000 people (including 9000 missing). German troops, according to German data, lost 3500 people during the Mitava operation [6] (including 1000 prisoners), as well as 33 guns, 19 machine guns.

In the 1916 campaign, the Baltic-Belarusian theater of strategic importance was of secondary importance to the Russian front.

But he was of major strategic importance for the Entente.

B. Liddell-Harth noted that Russia's actions had allowed the German plans for 1916 to be thwarted — the March offensive at Lake Naroch led to a weakening of pressure on France. Then a major offensive was prepared in the northern sector in July. [7].

Yu. N. Danilov also noted that the Naroch operation that had begun during the period of the Verdun battles chained all the German reserves of the Eastern Front. The offensive, carried out in terrifying conditions of the spring thaw and swampland, led to the death of many Russian heroes, but the German High Command was not able to withdraw any troops from the Russian front to move to the west — even those German divisions that were deployed to reinforce the Austrian forces returned. [8].

In the Naroch operation, the Northern and Western fronts assisted the French, in the course of the summer offensive, the strike armies of the South-Western front, in the course of the Mitava operation local tasks were solved. The northern and western fronts drew off the lion's part of the German troops [9]focused on the Russian front, and this had a crucial impact on the success of the 1916 campaign for the Entente.

Notes

1. Barsukov E. Artillery in providing a breakthrough. March operation 1916 g. S. 26.
2. Hoffman M. The war of missed opportunities. C. 108.
3. Podorozhny N. Ye. Naroch operation. C. 124 - 126; Chronicle of the war 1914 – 15 – 16 No. 84 of. C. 151.
4. Hoffman M. The war of missed opportunities. C. 110.
5. Gurko V.I. War and revolution in Russia. Memoirs of the commander of the Western Front. C. 284.
6. Reichsarchiv. Der Weltkrieg 1914 – 1918. Band 11. Berlin, 1938. S. 401
7. Liddell-Garth B. The Truth About the War 1914 — 1918 C. 185.
8. Danilov Yu. N. Russia in World War. C. 396.
9. By the end of March, 200000 was a man against the Northern Front, and before 400000 was a man against the Western Front, almost exclusively German troops. See Strategic Essay on the War of 1914 — 1918. CH 5. C. 110. That is, compared with the situation at the beginning of the Naroch operation, the grouping increased by 82000 fighters.



The headquarters of the regiment on the front Dvinsk. The photo allows to make a conclusion about the difficult terrain Russian forces had to operate in the Baltic States in the summer of 1916. Chronicle of war.

To be continued
Author:
54 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Olgovich
    Olgovich 9 November 2017 07: 45 New
    16
    Author: "Despite the lack of an operational result, the fighting at Naroch and Dvinsk led to the fact that during the week of the Russian offensive, the German attacks near Verdun stopped. Not a single German division during this period (the most important in the fate of the Verdun operation) left the Russian Front"

    . .
    Two fronts, there are two fronts: this is the inevitable end. Germany.
    Support for the Allies by offensive actions, albeit not always successful, solved the main task of Russia: maintaining the main theater of the West.
    Correspondingly, the cannon fodder of the Great War became Anglo-French - and this is the greatest merit of the political and military leadership of Russia to the Russian people.
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 9 November 2017 08: 15 New
      +3
      Correspondingly, the cannon fodder of the Great War became Anglo-French - and this is the greatest merit of the political and military leadership of Russia to the Russian people.


      Why laugh then ...
      get involved in a world carnage with dire consequences for the Russian people is this a merit ???

      The fighting and the war itself took the scale of mass bloodshed on both sides ... why did the Russian people need it at all what
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon 9 November 2017 08: 39 New
        +5
        And what was the history of the war that was exactly what the people needed? When is it a people, just an ordinary people, who wanted war and would benefit from it?
        1. Same lech
          Same lech 9 November 2017 08: 43 New
          +2
          And what was the history of the war that was exactly what the people needed? When is it a people, just an ordinary people, who wanted war and would benefit from it?
          In the wake of jingoism, they fought with the Turks in Bulgaria ... there was a thing.

          Wars always begin with the hope of quickly defeating the enemy ... and when funerals begin to come to neighbors and women cry everywhere ... then you understand that war is an evil from which you can’t hide anywhere.
          1. Cartalon
            Cartalon 9 November 2017 12: 27 New
            +3
            Something I doubt that the Ryazan men, for example, experienced bouts of cheer - patriotism, this is a property of people reading newspapers.
        2. Dzmicer
          Dzmicer 9 November 2017 12: 38 New
          +2
          I would get it. Due to the control of the straits, it would be possible to expand the sales markets for Russian bread and, as a result, its price in the domestic market would increase. The same is true for Russian factories.
      2. Olgovich
        Olgovich 9 November 2017 11: 51 New
        13
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        get involved in a world carnage with dire consequences for the Russian people is this a merit ???

        The WWII happened exactly the way you wanted: we did not get involved, watched (rejoiced) how the damned imperialists crushed each other.
        Then, remember what happened? More than 50% of WWII losses are ours.
        In WWI, our losses 10%
        Catch the difference?
    2. Mikado
      Mikado 9 November 2017 13: 05 New
      13
      Correspondingly, the cannon fodder of the Great War became Anglo-French - and this is the greatest merit of the political and military leadership of Russia to the Russian people.

      yes, only by some calculations we lost more than France. And what started here (unlike France and England) then began - in general, a separate conversation. Calculations of losses in a war sometimes differ by a million! We are unlikely to know the exact numbers. We feel sorry for our people ...
      Thanks to the author for the detailed cycle. hi Narochansky Krai is now the largest resort in Belarus. If anyone wants to improve their health, there is a car, and the trip is not so far - I recommend it. Although I liked it near Polotsk. drinks
  2. XII Legion
    XII Legion 9 November 2017 07: 46 New
    19
    On the Baltic-Belarusian theater of operations, the norms of artillery densities are 3 times lower than the French ones, and the fortifications in the Baltic states and Belarus are the same, if not steeper.
    After visiting the front of the German Southern Army in Galicia in 1916, the Kaiser said that he had not seen such fortifications even in the west. The model was shown in Berlin.
    And the north - the more powerful were the fortifications.
    And in such conditions, the Russian troops acted actively.
    In the campaign of 16 years, Russian troops learned to break through the layered defense of the enemy - in the spring and summer in Galicia and in winter - in the Baltic states.
    A Baltic-Belarusian theater
    had a major influence on the successful outcome of the 1916 campaign for the Entente

    Thank you
  3. Doliva63
    Doliva63 9 November 2017 10: 01 New
    11
    It seems to me alone it is not clear why the Imperialist War was now suddenly called the Patriotic War? An overdose of pseudo-patriotism?
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 9 November 2017 10: 08 New
      +3
      Quote: Doliva63
      It seems to me alone it is not clear why the Imperialist War was now suddenly called the Patriotic War? An overdose of pseudo-patriotism?

      Well, yes, you definitely answered the question.
      Tutu in the flow of information on the essence of this article, one of the gentlemen agreed, they say they fought with the Turks, they attacked because "domestic", let them ..
      History has indicated which wars were DOMESTIC and some imperialist disassemblies of large predators. 1 world-disassembly of predators and nothing more.
      The wars of 1812 and 1941-1945 are no doubt DOMESTIC WARs.
      1. Lieutenant Teterin
        Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 11: 36 New
        15
        Mr. Baden, that is, for you, the fact of declaring war by Austria and Germany is not enough? Then here are maps showing the plans of the Austro-Germans in relation to Russia:


        And that war was perceived by society precisely as the Second World War. Whether you want it or not, but the historical reality is just that.
        1. badens1111
          badens1111 9 November 2017 11: 46 New
          +3
          Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
          that is, for you, the fact of declaring war by Austria and Germany is insufficient?

          The fact of the declaration of war does not mean anything in the essence of the war itself.
          Do not pull the owl on the globe trying to scamper predators, in the process of redivision of spheres of influence and colonies, to present it as a Patriotic war, for the interests of those same predators.
          In the fact that Russia plunged into this war, the mediocrity of Nicholas 2, acted contrary to its interests, but in the interests of England and France, a fact, but absolutely not a fact, that the war for Russia was Patriotic.
          1. Lieutenant Teterin
            Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 12: 18 New
            16
            Quote: badens1111
            The fact of the declaration of war does not mean anything in the essence of the war itself.

            Here is the news. At all times, the declaration of war meant aggression. The UN knows about this. The world powers of the WWI era knew. This is evidenced by the 3rd Hague Convention of 1907:
            Article 1 The Contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between them shall not begin without a preliminary and unequivocal warning, which will take the form of either a motivated declaration of war or an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war. Article 2 The state of war must be notified to the neutral powers without delay and will be valid for them only after receiving a warning, which can even be done by telegraph. However, neutral powers cannot invoke a lack of warning if it is established with certainty that in fact they knew about the state of war.
            Source: http://ppt.ru/newstext.phtml?id=32050

            And only for Baden’s act of declaring war "means nothing"! Are you seriously saying this, or are you just playing clowning for the sake of provocation, eh, Baden?
            Quote: badens1111
            imagine as a Patriotic war,

            I have already given you photographic materials and posters of 1914-1916, where the war is directly called the Second World War, I brought them today, with a comment below. But why do you stubbornly continue to ignore the facts and carry propaganda nonsense about the "predators".
            Quote: badens1111
            In the fact that Russia plunged into this war, the mediocrity of Nicholas 2, acted contrary to its interests, but in the interests of England and France,

            Lying. Before repeating Russophobic myths, you'd better look at the order of declaration of war by the powers in 1914:

            So the war actually began with a showdown between Russia and Austria over the sovereignty of Serbia. The British and French “fell under the hand” due to their alliance with the alliance with Russia, and not vice versa. A war in Europe was inevitable because William II had been rattling arms since the late 1900s, and claims were made in the German circles to the Baltic states and Ukraine. And exactly
            Quote: badens1111
            mediocrity of Nicholas 2
            The Russians simply met the inevitable war with the Allies, and even the main blow of the Germans fell on France, not Russia.
            1. Nehist
              Nehist 9 November 2017 21: 37 New
              +1
              Dear Lieutenant, you should read the correspondence of the Kaiser and Nikolai on the eve of WWI, namely starting from July 29. Then it will become clear to you that if it were not for the saber-rattling on our part, then the inevitability of war could be delayed by at least two years. Or did you forget that the mobilization (which actually meant war) was launched by RI ?!
              1. Gopnik
                Gopnik 10 November 2017 13: 12 New
                12
                It is better to read internal German documents. For example, the 1912 meeting, where it was decided "that war is inevitable, and the sooner the better", or the correspondence of the Kaiser with the Austro-Hungarians, where he intensified pushed the latter to a forceful decision.
                All this has been chewed a thousand times and for almost 100 years now. The Germans wanted a war and deliberately went to it.
    2. Lieutenant Teterin
      Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 11: 41 New
      16
      Maybe because the “imperialist" war was called by the Bolshevik traitors, who in their propaganda called for the defeat of their homeland - Russia, and in Russian society at that time they called the Second World War, by analogy with the war of 1812?


      1. badens1111
        badens1111 9 November 2017 11: 50 New
        +2
        Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
        in Russian society at that time the war was called the Second World War, by analogy with the war of 1812?

        The regular propagandists were supposed to do this, but for you the disappointment, the fumes caused by the flow of propaganda, had faded sharply by 1915, when it became clear what kind of war it was.
        And finally, the full-time monarchist of the site, you’re so grieving about the heroes here ... so collect a couple of million euros, go to Germany., You will find at the Dalgovo dump located between Olympishesdorf and Dalgov (not far from Berlin), exactly to the left of the dump in five hundred meters, the grave of captured Russian soldiers and do there at least something, and do not yell here everyone. nonsense.
        1. Lieutenant Teterin
          Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 12: 32 New
          17
          Quote: badens1111
          The regular propagandists were supposed to do this,

          What else would you come up with justifying your lie? I specifically cited not only state-owned publications, but also a private journal. So these are not propagandists, but a real attitude in society.
          Quote: badens1111
          by 1915, when it became clear what kind of war it was.

          In 1915, the decline in morale of troops and society was associated with a retreat. After taking command of the Emperor and stopping the Germans, the mood changed in the other direction. Here is what Sergey Volkov writes, for example, about soldiers ’letters:
          I'm not talking about the reluctance to fight, but simply complaints of any kind, such that "transferred me to another part," "the next division, and the food is much worse," "dugouts in worse condition." Any complaints at all. All of these letters of complaint, conditionally dissatisfied letters, were considered one thing, and without any such, exceptionally peppy, - another. It is very characteristic that this percentage fluctuated from time to time by month, but always more than 80% of letters were peppy, that is, the mood was very peppy on the eve of February. We give the following as an example. Suppose November-December 1916 is 84% ​​of peppy letters. At the beginning of January it is 81%, then even again 87% at the end of January. That is, there was stability, the percentage fluctuated, but it was completely independent of what we decided to associate with the escalation of some kind of revolutionary situation. Absolutely not.
          http://matveychev-oleg.livejournal.com/378036.htm
          l
          So again by. Everyone - and the soldiers, and officers, and society in the rear perfectly understood that the army was fighting for Russia.
          Quote: badens1111
          to collect a couple of million euros, go to Germany.

          Baden, do not tell me what I should do, and I will not tell you where you should go. laughing
          1. soldier
            soldier 9 November 2017 12: 49 New
            17
            Everyone - and the soldiers, and officers, and society in the rear perfectly understood that the army was fighting for Russia.

            Absolutely definitely respected Lieutenant Teterin!
            The soldiers understood, but now some do not understand laughing
            why the imperialist war was now suddenly called the Patriotic War

            Any war on HIS land is aimed at protecting the Fatherland - and, accordingly, the Patriotic War. good
            1. soldier
              soldier 9 November 2017 13: 23 New
              18
              Continuing the theme - the cover of another of the editions of the war.

              And there are a lot of such materials
            2. goblin xnumx
              goblin xnumx 9 November 2017 18: 41 New
              0
              Well, then the civil war was also domestic, by your definition ...
              1. soldier
                soldier 9 November 2017 19: 07 New
                16
                War of course with an external adversary
  4. BRONEVIK
    BRONEVIK 9 November 2017 10: 25 New
    18
    Tutu in the flow of information on the essence of this article, one gentlewoman agreed that they fought with the Turks, because they attacked the "domestic", let them.

    Who is it? Where is it? belay
    Traditionally, instead of content, some gentlemen (comrades ??) see only headings.
    Yes god be with them
    Thanks to the author for reviewing the Theaters of War on the Russian Front
    And success!
  5. Lieutenant Teterin
    Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 11: 25 New
    16
    Wonderful and objective article! The losses of the Russian troops were great, but not in vain. And the Russian Headquarters took these losses into account, increasing the saturation of the army with heavy artillery. I look forward with interest to continue, especially the coverage of the battles on Stokhod, which became the last major operation of the Russian Guard ...
    The author - my sincere gratitude for the work done!
  6. badens1111
    badens1111 9 November 2017 11: 51 New
    0
    Quote: BRONEVIK
    Traditionally, instead of content, some gentlemen

    Are you talking about yourself?
    Well, since you recognized yourself for yourself, and speak.
    1. BRONEVIK
      BRONEVIK 9 November 2017 12: 35 New
      19
      Are you talking about yourself?
      Well, since you recognized yourself for yourself, and speak.

      No, it's me about you
      Besides the words of the Second World War - there’s nothing more to talk about
      1. Lieutenant Teterin
        Lieutenant Teterin 9 November 2017 12: 46 New
        16
        Mister Bronevik, you can not waste time on such disputes with this "comrade". As far as I noticed, this person is either a provocateur or a leftist propagandist, due to the fact that he is absolutely immune to arguments. He can be given facts, documents, quotes, scans of newspapers and maps ... all is meaningless. A man just like a parrot repeats the same thing, ignoring your words. And he just loves to “translate arrows” to the opponent in the spirit of a junior school: “No, it's you; no, you’re like that”, etc.
        1. BRONEVIK
          BRONEVIK 9 November 2017 12: 55 New
          18
          Understood Mr. Poruchik
          Familiar thing
          Thank you for your recommendations. hi
        2. Karen
          Karen 9 November 2017 20: 41 New
          +6
          Lieutenant, these merchants sold our military victories and casualties 100 years ago ...
  7. Some kind of compote
    Some kind of compote 9 November 2017 15: 59 New
    16
    Interesting article
    A comprehensive review of the database in the Baltic States and Belarus in 1916
    Recommendations - develop in details
    Soon
  8. goblin xnumx
    goblin xnumx 9 November 2017 18: 58 New
    0
    "The losses of the advancing Russian troops amounted to over 78000 people. The defending Germans lost up to 40000 people,"
    “They forced the corps to move back to its original position. It suffered heavy total losses: up to 7000 people. Total losses of the Germans - up to 3000 people”
    . "In total, the Austro-Germans lost 25000 people, including up to 8000 killed and 13000 wounded). Russian losses - up to 80000 (30000 killed, up to 47000 wounded and up to 2000 prisoners) soldiers and officers"
    All three offensive operations at the Baranavichy when the Russian troops lost 120000 people (including 50000 killed) did not bring noticeable success. The enemy lost up to 40000 people (including 20000 killed).
    The unsuccessful battles of the 12th Army during the period of July 3–9 cost its formations the loss of 15000 soldiers and officers.
    During the Mitau operation and the German counterattack that followed in January 1917, Russian troops lost up to 23000 people (including 9000 missing persons). German troops according to German data during the Mitau operation lost 3500 people [6] (including 1000 prisoners) "
    and after all the above, the pinnacle of the logical practice- "the Anglo-French people became the cannon fodder of the Great War - and this is the greatest merit of the political and military leadership of Russia to the Russian people." and "In the WWII, our losses are 10%" - the curtain ... cheers and " bonnets in the air "- and the Bolsheviks-" traitors "who stopped the meat grinder and the enemies of those who wanted to put on mince those soldiers who -" were peppy, that is, the mood was very peppy on the eve of February. "
    1. soldier
      soldier 9 November 2017 19: 18 New
      16
      "The losses of the advancing Russian troops amounted to over 78000 people. The defending Germans lost up to 40000 people,"
      “They forced the corps to move back to its original position. It suffered heavy total losses: up to 7000 people. Total losses of the Germans - up to 3000 people”
      . "In total, the Austro-Germans lost 25000 people, including up to 8000 killed and 13000 wounded). Russian losses - up to 80000 (30000 killed, up to 47000 wounded and up to 2000 prisoners) soldiers and officers"
      All three offensive operations at the Baranavichy when the Russian troops lost 120000 people (including 50000 killed) did not bring noticeable success. The enemy lost up to 40000 people (including 20000 killed).

      The defender loses at least 2-3 less people. Therefore, such losses. Moreover, we are talking about a breakthrough of the layered defense of the enemy.
      They broke through in Galicia - went to the Carpathians and Bukovina. In Belarus (so far) failed.
      the aster was very peppy and on the eve of February

      And the mood was peppy on the eve of February.
      The army rested and prepared for new operations. The year 1917, if Russia had not left the war, would have become the last for the German bloc. A lot of lives would be saved - the Anglo-Franco-Americans who fell in 1918 and the Russians who fell during the Civil War in 1918-22. (in the edition in which we know it).
      About the mood
      One of the delegates of the Petrograd Conference in January 1917, visiting the front, wrote: “The positions of the Russians at the front are very strong and in some areas are equipped with a large number of wire fences. Country roads stretch for miles ... I was much more satisfied with the organization and defense system at the front than I expected. The soldiers are well-fed and well-dressed ... The army, which was able to fully recover from the disaster that befell it a year and a half ago, can do a lot to accomplish its mission. Neither the French nor the English army could recover so soon .... I can quite imagine the breakthrough of the German front to the east ... The Russians have 52 cavalry divisions .... The Russians are doing great. In most cases, they are tall, strong, funny guys. They are surprisingly brave and patient ... they are taken care of ... "
      Somehow
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon 9 November 2017 20: 39 New
        +2
        And a month later, these cheerful guys began to hold a rally, everything was not so blissful, the Germans would not have sustained a blow like the Brusilovsky front on the North and North-Western front, they simply did not have reserves, and private operations did not bear anything other than losses and a decline in morale .
        1. soldier
          soldier 9 November 2017 22: 33 New
          16
          A month later they will not start
          In what circumstances the Manifesto was read and how the acting army was shocked - you know.
          Decomposition went gradually.
          Private operations riveted German reserves. Of course, it was better to deliver the main blow to the Northern and Western Fronts (the North-Western was no longer there; in August 15 it was divided into the Northern and Western). The bet decided so on April 1, 16. You also know about the transformation in the future of this plan.
      2. goblin xnumx
        goblin xnumx 10 November 2017 00: 16 New
        0
        The defender loses at least 2-3 less people. Therefore, such losses. - and now connect this with the words “In WWII, our losses are 10%” about the fact that the “second Patriotic War of 1914” is known only in your house - I generally will not say anything ... :)
        1. soldier
          soldier 10 November 2017 07: 27 New
          17
          The defender loses at least 2-3 less people. Therefore, such losses.

          This I said only about some positional operations in Belarus in 1916. In many others, the Russian army lost less people than the enemy.
          second patriotic 1914 "known only in your house

          I do not understand the meaning of this incoherent phrase and what does the Second World War have to do with it. I don’t know about the affairs in your house and what is known there.
          Sorry
  9. Loki_2
    Loki_2 12 November 2017 20: 18 New
    0
    The First World War never became in the memory of the people the second patriotic, in spite of all the efforts of the bakers.
    The Patriotic War should be liberating, and entered the First World Russian Empire with aggressive purposes.
    1. soldier
      soldier 13 November 2017 10: 08 New
      15
      The First World War never became in the memory of the people the second patriotic, in spite of all the efforts of the bakers.
      The Patriotic War should be liberating, and entered the First World Russian Empire with aggressive purposes.

      I really mind.
      Goals goals. All sides in wars have different goals (the losers were usually "undressed" even by the liberators - after all, "woe to the vanquished"). And World War II ends with reparations and annexation of territories.
      But ...
      World War II is waged with an external aggressor and (usually) on its territory.
      What we see in the WWI.
      1) On the Austro-German front: a) The German bloc declared war on Russia (external aggression); b) most of the war the enemy trampled on Russian land (10 provinces) - and it was an elementary discussion about the liberation of Russia.
      2) The Turkish Front: a) Turkey attacked Russia without declaring war (external aggression); b) one of the goals of the Russian war in the Caucasus is the liberation of the Armenian people from the Turkish yoke (the creation of Greater Armenia) - that is, the liberation goal.
      1. Loki_2
        Loki_2 13 November 2017 20: 42 New
        0
        Do not cling to formal reasons. Germany declared war in response to general mobilization in Russia, Russia began mobilization in response to the actions of Austria-Hungary. It does not matter. The true goals that Russia planned to achieve when entering the war have values. These reasons are straits. The war in Transcaucasia serves to achieve these goals. So the goals were predatory, and the war pursuing the predatory goals cannot be domestic (this is the main difference between the WWI from 1812 and the WWII).
        The people of the Russian Empire, not understanding the purpose of this war, perceived it extremely negatively. I think it’s not necessary for you to remind what the participation of Russia in the WWII led to ...
        I can’t understand. Are you an idealist or an amateur?
        1. soldier
          soldier 13 November 2017 21: 51 New
          15
          Do not cling to formal reasons.

          These are for formal reasons - and actual SIGNS.
          Which of us is an amateur - and cannot distinguish between causes and symptoms?
          Is it:
          1) On the Austro-German front: a) The German bloc declared war on Russia (external aggression); b) most of the war the enemy trampled on Russian land (10 provinces) - and it was an elementary discussion about the liberation of Russia.
          2) The Turkish Front: a) Turkey attacked Russia without declaring war (external aggression); b) one of the goals of the Russian war in the Caucasus is the liberation of the Armenian people from the Turkish yoke (the creation of Greater Armenia) - that is, the liberation goal.

          causes of war?
          lol
          It does not matter. The true goals that Russia planned to achieve when entering the war have values. These reasons are straits. The war in Transcaucasia serves to achieve these goals. So the goals were predatory, and the war pursuing the predatory goals cannot be domestic (this is the main difference between the WWI from 1812 and the WWII).

          You are an idealist, for I repeat once again - look at the consequences of these wars. Or Russia (USSR) did not acquire anything?
          The people of the Russian Empire, not understanding the purpose of this war, perceived it extremely negatively.

          There was a huge patriotic upsurge. At least at the beginning of the war. The Russian people knew that it was helping Serbia, France, and since 1915, when the war came to the territory of Russia - the question was about the liberation of their own territories. Does the liberation of their own territories occupied by the enemy mean nothing?
          You need to know the FACTORY - to blame others for amateurism.
          Preferably - according to the CONTENTS of the article, and not according to the TITLE. Or for the amateur heading (domestic or non-domestic) - more important?)
        2. soldier
          soldier 13 November 2017 21: 55 New
          15
          The Entente, by the way (at least in the Russian-French part) is a defensive alliance and was activated only under the condition of the HARMFUL INITIATIVE of Germany.
        3. Rotmistr
          Rotmistr 14 November 2017 06: 28 New
          15
          The true goals that Russia planned to achieve when entering the war have values. These reasons are straits.

          And I, in turn, want to ask Loki_2 to name the territories that Russia wanted to tear away from Germany and Austria-Hungary (since the war was invading) and in what international agreement does it say. And besides, to inform in which international agreement it is said that straits (no matter which) are the main goal of Russia's participation in the WWII.
  10. Loki_2
    Loki_2 14 November 2017 21: 54 New
    0
    Quote: soldier

    There was a huge patriotic upsurge. At least at the beginning of the war. The Russian people knew that they were helping Serbia, France,

    There was a rise, at the very beginning of the war. Relatively short. Does it make sense to recall the mood in 1916, and especially in 1917?

    Quote: soldier

    and since 1915, when the war came to the territory of Russia - the question was about the liberation of their own territories. Does the liberation of their own territories occupied by the enemy mean nothing?

    Let’s do this: You attacked to rob. The victim rebuffed you. A fight ensued. You now, unaware of the original goals, talk about how you defended your own honor, forgetting about the original intention to rob.
    I draw yours. Finally, the closest attention to PMV was wanted by all parties to the conflict, all (without exception) had their own interests. The tangle of contradictions could not be resolved without a global war. And to reduce the geopolitical interests of Russia to international assistance to the fraternal Armenian and Serbian peoples is not even funny ...

    Quote: soldier

    And I, in turn, want to ask Loki_2 to name the territories that Russia wanted to tear away from Germany and Austria-Hungary (since the war was invading) and in what international agreement does it say. And besides, to inform in which international agreement it is said that straits (no matter which) are the main goal of Russia's participation in the WWII.

    Anglo-Franco-Russian Agreement (1915)
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B3%
    D0%BB%D0%BE-%D1%84%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE-
    %D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D1%81
    %D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%
    D0% B5_ (1915)
    1. soldier
      soldier 14 November 2017 22: 14 New
      15
      So answer the question posed by Rotmister (since the war is predatory):
      the territories that Russia wanted to tear away from Germany and Austria-Hungary (since the war was predatory) and in what international agreement it is said. And besides, to inform in which international agreement it is said that straits (no matter which) are the main goal of Russia's participation in the WWII.
      1. soldier
        soldier 14 November 2017 22: 19 New
        15
        And we are not talking about the 15th year. During wars, the Allies often share the skin of the still-killed bear - both in WWII and in WWII. Compensation is what you want.
        I am interested in the START OF WAR agreement - that is, the GOALS of Russia in the Entente.
        So there are 2 questions:
        1) What Austro-German territories did Russia want to tear off in accordance with the agreements concluded for 1914;
        2) Why the war to protect its territory and the Fatherland can not be called Patriotic?
        1. soldier
          soldier 14 November 2017 22: 21 New
          15
          Anglo-Franco-Russian Agreement (1915)

          I know him very well
          And you want to say that this is the MAIN goal of Russia's participation in the war? It’s not for nothing that I singled out
      2. Loki_2
        Loki_2 15 November 2017 20: 29 New
        0
        The answer is given above.
        There were many reasons for Russia entering the war. One of them is resolving the issue of the straits.
        And now, in response, I ask you to answer: what, from your point of view, was the reason for Russia's entry into the war? Infantilism in the style of Russia freed the nations because it is so good, I ask you to leave it to the children.
        1. soldier
          soldier 15 November 2017 21: 58 New
          15
          I gave you the answer above. He speaks about the reasons for Russia's participation in the WWII (BEFORE the STRAIN ISSUE - and not a single straits in the world will involve the state in the World War).
          The creation of the Entente was a reaction to the building up of the Triple Alliance, to the strengthening of Germany and an attempt to prevent GERMAN HEGEMONY on the European continent.
          The Entente (in the Russian-French part) is a DEFENSE alliance and was activated only under the condition of the HARMFUL INITIATIVE of Germany.
          That is - answering your question: there were no major Russian-German and insurmountable Russian-Austrian contradictions. The separation of territories from AUSTRIA and GERMANY with their inclusion in Russia before the war was not planned.
          European empires sought to HOLD what is (I do not take the narrow issues of Alsace-Lorraine and the situation in the Balkans). But the logic of being in large military-political unions tied their participants as if with mutual responsibility - and along the chain everyone began to enter the war. The logic of a coalition war has come on.
          Russia's goal on the Austro-German front is defensive. Everyone understood perfectly well that if the Russian Empire in the conditions of a coalition war evaded fulfilling its allied duty, then after the defeat of France and Serbia, it would have found itself face to face with the Austrian and German troops in FULL.
          That is, it was about SAVING the Russian Empire. Even before raising the question of the Straits. The question of which was used by the Allies only for additional stimulation of Russia (the old idea is fix). But the question of the Straits could be included only after Turkey entered the war - and in August 1914 its position was unclear. And the Straits cannot be the REASON for the entry of RI into the World War in AUGUST 1914.
    2. Rotmistr
      Rotmistr 15 November 2017 02: 38 New
      15
      Loki_2
      English-French-Russian Agreement (1915) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BD%
      D0% B3%

      The Entente was formed long before the First World War.
      The war began in August 1914
      But Turkey joined it only in November 1914 (and in the summer and autumn of 1914, its position was not clear.
      Memorial Note from the British Petrograd Embassy to which you are referring - dated March 1915
      That is, in your opinion, the predatory nature of Russia's participation in the WWII appeared only after Turkey entered the war (otherwise how to solve the issue of the Straits if it is neutral)? The question of the Straits was somehow reflected in the agreements of the Entente in 1891-1914.?
      Or the war became aggressive only during the war, or was it different for different fronts?)
      1. Loki_2
        Loki_2 15 November 2017 20: 47 New
        0
        For the Elm, the issue of the status of straits in the Entente agreements of 1891 was not reflected due to the lack of the Entente :)
        I recommend that you familiarize yourself with the growth of contradictions in the world of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Features of political life. Then maybe you change your point of view and stop looking at Russia through the pink glasses.
        1. Rotmistr
          Rotmistr 15 November 2017 21: 40 New
          15
          For the Elm, the issue of the status of straits in the Entente agreements of 1891 was not reflected due to the lack of the Entente :)
          I recommend that you familiarize yourself with the growth of contradictions in the world of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

          Thank you for your concern) I know this without you. And even in the same program I can star)
          Russia and France in 1891–1893 created your union. It became the basis for the future Entente. In 1904, England entered into an agreement with France; the Anglo-French Entente was formed, and in 1907 with Russia.
          But you have not answered my question.
          I asked:
          The war began in August 1914
          But Turkey joined it only in November 1914 (and in the summer and autumn of 1914, its position was not clear.
          Memorial Note from the British Petrograd Embassy to which you are referring - dated March 1915
          That is, in your opinion, the predatory nature of Russia's participation in the WWII appeared only after Turkey entered the war (otherwise how to solve the issue of the Straits if it is neutral)? The question of the Straits was somehow reflected in the agreements of the Entente in 1891-1914.?
          Or the war became aggressive only during the war, or was it different for different fronts?)

          How can the issue of the Straits characterize the supposedly predatory interests of Russia - which arose only after Turkey entered the war. That is, not earlier than November 1914.
          So in August-November 1914 there were not aggressive interests?
          The answer is very simple - the issue of the Straits was very important, but it was not the key in this war. No wonder it was allowed only in March 1915.
          Turkey did not belong to the German bloc either in 1891-1914, or in 1904-1914, or in 1907 - 1914. (these are the stages of the formation of the Entente).
          That is, the issue of the Straits was not the REASON for Russia's entry into the WWII - it arose already in the course of it, after Turkey joined the German side.
          1. Loki_2
            Loki_2 18 November 2017 08: 26 New
            0
            Quote: Rotmistr
            Thanks for work)

            Always please :)
            Quote: Rotmistr
            I know that without you.

            I see it in the face ...
            Quote: Rotmistr
            And even in the same program I can star)

            How to film - a link to the studio!
            Quote: Rotmistr
            But you have not answered my question.

            I think our argument has reached an impasse. You’ll choose to stress that there are no documents with the signature of Nicholas, Turkey has not officially entered the war, therefore it has not been included in the planning horizon.
            I will sprinkle links to historians, you will not parry the material will parry that you know the story at least no worse.
            I will try to return the conversation to a constructive track. Wikipedia lists the following interests of Russia that became the causes of WWI:
            - Claimed the free passage of its fleet to the Mediterranean Sea, insisted on weakening or reviewing in its favor the control regime over the Dardanelles.
            - She regarded the construction of the Berlin-Baghdad railway (1898) as an act unfriendly from Germany. She also referred to the fact that this encroached on her rights in Asia under the Anglo-Russian agreement of 1907 on the distribution of spheres of influence in this region. However, by the start of World War I, these differences with Germany were settled by the 1911 Potsdam Agreement.
            - Countered German hegemony in Europe and Austrian penetration into the Balkans.
            - Insisted on the exclusive right of the protectorate over all Slavic peoples; supported the anti-Austrian and anti-Turkish sentiments among the Serbs and Bulgarians in the Balkans.

            What exactly do you disagree with or maybe some reasons are not mentioned?
            ps I just ask you, second lieutenant, spare me the bakery. This kind of infantilism annoys me. Thank you for understanding.
            1. Rotmistr
              Rotmistr 18 November 2017 21: 06 New
              15
              This is verbiage.
              But we set:
              1) The defensive nature of the Entente. And the war of Russia on the Austro-German front was defensive in nature.
              2) Turkey entered the war in NOVEMBER 1914, and therefore the entry of Russia into the WWII in AUGUST 1914 is not connected with the issue of the Straits. By the way, in August-September 1914, the question of Turkey on the side of the Entente was discussed. I wonder how the question of the Straits would be solved then?)
              3) The key word of this article is not the Second World War, but the theater of operations. It’s interesting if the article was not called the theater of the Second World War, but the theater of the Russian Front of the First World War — would you have something to say on the SUBJECT of the article?))