The triumph of allied tanks

38
We continue to briefly review application features tanks in World War I (see Tanks in the battles of the Great War).





Soissons and Reims


At Soissons, the German offensive was replaced by the stunning French counter-strike launched by 18 on July 1918 without any artillery preparation.

The French 10 and 6 armies came under the command of Mangin and Degout — on Soissons-Chatto-Thierry-Reims. Dense masses of infantry went on the attack with the support of the hitherto unprecedented number of tanks for one section. Small and fast Renault tanks showed themselves.

The triumph of allied tanks

Renault FT moves forward


On the 20-kilometer front, Mangeon had six groups of medium tanks (210 vehicles) and three battalions of Renault light tanks (each with 45 units) in reserve. The groups were divided into divisions and attached to military units and formations.


And the remains of Renault


The degut on the 16-kilometer front had one group of medium tanks and three battalions of light tanks.

In total - over 500 machines.

At 4 in the morning the offensive began. Under the cover of light fog, the tanks quickly moved forward, overtook the infantry and entered the battle. Once again, tactical surprise was achieved by winning space 4 - 6 km deep in the first day. On that day, 102 of the tank was lost (including 62 from artillery fire), and personnel losses reached 25%.


Saint-Chamonix in battle


The next day, 50 tanks were hit by artillery, on the third day - 17, on the fourth - 32, and on the fifth - 48 vehicles. When the offensive was over, the composition of the tanks of the 10 Army was almost exhausted.

In the 6 Army, the losses were less significant, because here the Germans had to retreat more hastily. The army lost 58 vehicles and 6% of the crews, but achieved the greatest success - having gone in six days into the enemy’s defense at 20 - 30 km.

In this operation, tanks were used that served only to transport people. They crossed the German lines behind the erupted battle tanks and planted machine gunners to create machine gun nests in the tactical rear of the Germans, and then returned for reinforcements.


3 Battery Schneiders


The German infantry did not withstand such attacks everywhere - and the French managed to win territory southwest of Soissons. Further mass attacks, supported again by a significant number of tanks, were repelled.

The "black day" of the German army


In early August 1918, the Germans began a retreat along the entire front.

On August 8, the day that General E. Ludendorff called “The Black Day of the German Army”, the British and French launched an offensive early in the morning in the thick fog (reinforced by smoke curtains) between the Somme and Oise, with the support of large tank forces, and penetrated far into the depths the German front - “zeroing out” the 6 - 7 divisions that stood on this section (even the headquarters of the divisions were taken by surprise by tanks at the locations).

The British had on the 16-kilometer front about 430 tanks. The attack began at dawn after a brief artillery fire, which was intended to mask the noise of tank engines. Having managed to catch the enemy by surprise, they won the territory with a depth of 10 km, at the cost of losing about 100 tanks.

On the next day, 145 was destroyed from the 39 tanks used, and on the third day, 67 from the 30 tanks.

The French deployed two battalions (2,5 light tanks) on the 90-kilometer front, which allowed them to win space in 12 km of depth.

The Germans suffered heavy damage to prisoners and the material part.


Tank of the British 2-th tank battalion 8 August 1918


The morale was also undermined.

The wealth of the anti-German coalition in manpower and equipment (especially in tanks underestimated by the Germans) made it possible to continue the offensive non-stop.

Extremely heavy battles with the British followed in late August between the Somme and Scarp. Narrow, deep tank breakthroughs became a characteristic phenomenon - after a brief but fierce artillery fire and with the support of a smoke curtain. General Mangen, operating north of Soissons, also used tanks in large numbers - from 20 August to 17 September (of 480 tanks 215 were destroyed, including 60 - artillery).

Saint Miel and the Meuse


In the period from September 12 to October 9 (Saint-Miel and Maas-Argonne) 180 light and 60 medium, and 350 light and 60 medium tanks were used, respectively.

During the offensive of the French 4 Army under the command of Gouraud on the 25 of September 1918 in Champagne, each corps had on average 90 tanks and, in addition, there were significant reserves. The area to be overcome on the first day was in such a condition that it was inaccessible to tanks. The infantry offensive was to begin six hours after the start of artillery preparation. 2800 people worked all day - to turn roads and terrain into passable for tanks.

Significant results, however, could not be achieved. Having concentrated a tank fist in one of the buildings (150 vehicles), the French delivered a combined blow. When the tanks were pulled out of battle on October 8, the very high damage of this fist was established: in tanks - 39%, in officers - 40%, in lower ranks - 33%.


Renault American 1-th tank brigade, Argonne, 12 October 1918


The advance of King Albert’s troops in Flanders 14 - 19 on October 1918 was supported by 180 French tanks, of which half (and half of the crews) were lost. Separate tank units traveled to 74 km without leaving the case for 58 hours.

25 - On 26 on October two tank battalions took part in the attack on the Hunding position. The organization of the offensive was successful. The noise of the engines was masked by airplanes firing at German observation posts. Special artillery detachments acted against the near anti-tank defense of the Germans. Success resulted in a breakthrough 3 km deep with the loss of 33% of people and 50% of the material part.

Thus, the massive use of tanks, coupled with the use of smoke screens, has become the most dangerous enemy of the Germans. Its importance increased with the decline of spirit and the growth of fatigue and powerlessness of the German divisions - whose nerves were no longer able to withstand artillery fire and the gigantic onslaught of tanks.

The crack on August 8, the growing participation in the hostilities of major US forces, and, most importantly, the defeat of Bulgaria and the collapse of the Balkan Front of the German Bloc, broke the spirit of the Second Reich High Command - which decided to end the struggle by applying for a truce addressed to the President of the United States Wilson.

To be continued
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    31 August 2019 05: 08
    Thanks interestingly, we look forward to continuing.
  2. +10
    31 August 2019 06: 02
    The Germans learned a good lesson and twenty years later answered a resounding slap in the face to their teachers. Yes
    1. +8
      31 August 2019 06: 25
      Not just a lesson - they harbored a wild grudge. This grudge greatly contributed to the Nazis coming to power.
      1. +11
        31 August 2019 07: 55
        I don't remember exactly who said, in my opinion, Lenin: "With the robbery and unjust Peace of Versailles, Western politicians themselves laid the foundation for a new war." I can't vouch for the accuracy of the quote, but the meaning is preserved. Yes, so it turned out as a result. We got Hitler, the Third Reich and the Second World War.
        1. +8
          31 August 2019 08: 00
          So Hitler also found the same car and put it in that place when the French signed the surrender - the Germans were too rotten, too much.
          1. +5
            31 August 2019 09: 47
            It is amazing how the Germans missed a new weapon.
            Many have achieved technical suddenness (chemistry, flamethrowers, etc.), but in the tank sphere they gave a blunder.
            Rare strategic myopia
            1. +6
              31 August 2019 12: 24
              But you had to be very brave people in order to be tankers with such losses ...
              "of which half (and half of the crews) were lost" or "33% of people and 50% of the material part" or "in tanks - 39%, in officers - 40%, in lower ranks - 33%." Perhaps it is less than in the infantry, but the chance is one in three or two ...
            2. +2
              31 August 2019 17: 13
              It's amazing how the Germans missed a new weapon

              They learned their lesson and a "blitzkrieg" appeared ..
              1. +4
                31 August 2019 21: 29
                More precisely, Guderian appeared, and "Blitzkrieg" they themselves learned two goals through Poland and France, until they found a complete balance and learned how to apply it correctly. Not so simple. And we learned from an experienced enemy, and we bought our experience with a lot of blood.
                1. +1
                  1 September 2019 14: 36
                  One of the first attempts to conduct a blitzkrieg was made by German troops during the First World War on the Western Front. Schlieffen's plan
                  Barbara Tuckman. First Blitzkrieg. August 1914.
                  For those wishing to book here:
                  https://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1034047/Takman_-_Pervyy_blickrig._Avgust_1914.html
                  1. +1
                    1 September 2019 14: 47
                    You see, "Blitzkrieg" is a maneuverable war, without tanks, aircraft and stable radio communications, it is impossible.
                    And Barbara can write anything, she can stand the paper.

                    Regards M.Kot. hi
                2. 0
                  1 September 2019 18: 50
                  More precisely, Guderian appeared

                  I know who Guderian is, and also much more, perhaps unknown to you.
                  1. 0
                    1 September 2019 18: 54
                    Surely you know a lot of things unknown to me, just like any other person on this planet. Resentment is what, I did not insult you, but simply expressed my opinion. hi
                    1. +1
                      1 September 2019 18: 55
                      Resentment for something

                      No offense.
                      Your opinion is your personal opinion. As they say on the Internet - IMHO.
        2. Alf
          +3
          31 August 2019 21: 07
          Quote: Sea Cat
          I don't remember exactly who said, in my opinion, Lenin: "With the robbery and unjust Peace of Versailles, Western politicians themselves laid the foundation for a new war."

          Marshal of France Foch on the Versailles Peace said, This is not peace, but a truce for 20 years.
          1. Alf
            +2
            31 August 2019 21: 55
            Quote: Alf
            Quote: Sea Cat
            I don't remember exactly who said, in my opinion, Lenin: "With the robbery and unjust Peace of Versailles, Western politicians themselves laid the foundation for a new war."

            Marshal of France Foch on the Versailles Peace said, This is not peace, but a truce for 20 years.

            Let the disagreement refute.
    2. +1
      31 August 2019 15: 16
      I do not want to belittle the role of the German military, but the main role was played by English and French politicians, if the Entente countries acted at the same time, though not always by their own will and not everywhere, then common sense overpowered the Second desire to sit out.
    3. 0
      5 September 2019 12: 05
      Quote: prapor55
      Germans got a good lesson

      History teaches that it teaches nothing. Each generation of imperialists has an urgent need to avoid a final defeat in the competition or redirect cash flows. Both wars were organized by financial circles: after the completion of the WWII, they started talking about WWII. This is clearly visible even from the speeches of delegates and materials of the congresses of the CPSU (b) of the twenties. Germany, Nazism - this is just one of the tools. The main thing everyone has forgotten is that the Asia-Pacific region and China were much more interesting for the United States. WWII began not on September 1, 1939, not by Germany, but much earlier by Japan. The first victims of Japan in WWII were China and Korea. The Japanese and Germans were replaced by the Americans - the main resource of world financial capital. And where was our country and population when, in the USA, bull-calves were counted? - paid by Lend-Lease and bought technology from them under conditions of sanction pressure.
  3. +8
    31 August 2019 10: 02
    Thanks to the author - informative. About the 1st MV, our idea is mainly on the eastern front, where large formations of tanks were not used, and in general, the use of "gases" somehow "takes" the evolution of the use of tanks in battle into the background, although in the 2nd MV tanks this is one from the main shock combat arms. And in our history this period is almost not consecrated, because the first place was taken by the Civil War.
  4. +6
    31 August 2019 12: 30
    Surprisingly, I did not know how massively tanks were used on the western front of the WWI, and with what impressive results. It is all the more surprising that lessons were learned from this by those who suffered from these tank "wedges" ... And the anti-Hitler coalition did everything WRONG! And the tank troops were not organized like that, and the tanks turned out to be "about nothing" ...
    1. +1
      31 August 2019 16: 34
      Therefore, the practice of using allied tanks is better described as a significant success, but not a "triumph", as in the title of a good and informative article.
      1. +6
        31 August 2019 17: 50
        Therefore, the practice of using allied tanks is better called a significant success, but not a "triumph

        Perhaps it was meant that the 1918 campaign was a triumph for the use of the tank by the Allies in the WWII? Is not it?
        Allies who worked on the mistakes of using tanks in the campaigns of 1916 - 1917.
        And given the role played by the tank in 18, it was yes, his triumph
        1. +2
          31 August 2019 18: 24
          Perhaps I agree with your point of view that for tanks, as a new weapon - a triumph and moreover brilliant. However, he did not have a cardinal effect on the general course of the war, already lost by Germany (it helped, and even very much - this is beyond doubt)
    2. 0
      31 August 2019 20: 42
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      It is all the more surprising that lessons were learned from this by those who suffered from these tank "wedges" ...
      It's not about the "wedges" (which didn't exist yet). IMHO, it's about the last offensive of the Germans. Let me remind you: before the conclusion of peace, they successfully broke through the front and began to launch an offensive. But due to the lack of tanks (real), motorized infantry and mobile artillery, the defenders managed to build a new line of defense. There was no one to break into the breakthrough (by the way, I don’t understand why they didn’t use the strategic cavalry, they could have done it), smash the rear, block roads and supplies. An acceptable world was lost. It seems to me that the analysis of this particular situation led to the appearance of the blitzkrieg.
      1. 0
        2 September 2019 10: 01
        Field Marshal Hindenburg, who examined the first 1918 cars in Charleroi in March 10, spoke very skeptically: “They probably will not bring much benefit, but since they are already done, we will try to apply them. ”
        The instruction "Interaction of tanks with infantry" was published, which, incidentally, noted: “The infantry and tanks advance independently. When moving with tanks, infantry should not come closer than 200 steps to them, since artillery fire will be opened on the tanks. ”
        During the offensive in Picardy on March 21 - April 4, 1918, at a front of 765 km, the Germans brought 59 divisions with 6824 guns, 1000 aircraft and a total of 19 tanks (of which 9 were captured). They were opposed 35 divisions, about 3000 guns, 500 aircraft and 216 allied tanks.

        There was no one to break into the breakthrough (by the way, I don’t understand why they didn’t use the strategic cavalry, they could have rolled), smashed the rear, blocked roads and supplies.

        The British attempt to use cavalry to develop success in the battle of Amiens ended in failure.
        The cavalry corps was divided into two parts. The 1st Cavalry Division of the British was ordered to catch infantry north of Luce as quickly as possible, while the 3rd Cavalry Division was to do the same south of the river. The second cavalry division of the British followed them in the second line. Battalions of Whippet tanks moved ahead of the first line divisions to cover the riders and lay passages through barbed wire fences. By 2. 10 divisions of the first line reached the Ignokur-Marselkav line and turned around to fulfill their tasks. Sixteen tanks were assigned to each brigade, consisting of three cavalry regiments and one horse-drawn battery.
        The 1st Cavalry Brigade broke through farthest, stopping in front of Framerville and Voville. The rest did not reach the milestone from which their main task was to begin - a breakthrough to the railway connecting Scholne and Rua. It would not be an exaggeration to say that cavalry could not have advanced so far without a tank cover. An attempt to carry out a cavalry attack with large forces was inevitably choked in a matter of minutes, leading to heavy losses, as evidenced by the actions of the 6th cavalry brigade southeast of Keio or the Canadian cavalry brigade near Bokur. And this is subject to the absence of a solid defense front here! Only two and a half companies of German sappers was enough to stop the advance of the 3rd Cavalry Division, and they only retreated when the tanks went on the attack and pushed them back north of the Beaufort. Only a few cavalry units were able to get here, and here the battle ended. The second line of cavalry was not introduced into battle.

        Mikhail Baryatinsky
        The Great Tank War 1939 - 1945
        It follows from this - but could the German cavalry (if it had been involved in the offensive operation) have made the much-needed breakthrough?
        Very doubtful!
        1. 0
          2 September 2019 12: 18
          By the year 18, the Germans had almost no full-fledged cavalry at the front line.
          The British cavalry in 18, supporting the tanks, acted more or less effectively.
          This was repeatedly written in and. with. on VO (cycle Supporting armored monsters and not only).
          So everything was more than possible
          1. 0
            2 September 2019 14: 06
            So everything was more than possible

            Then why did the British happen at Amiens the impossible?
            Perhaps it was because the tanks were attached to the cavalry, and not vice versa. The interaction and artillery support were not debugged.
            1. 0
              2 September 2019 14: 44
              Everything turned out there, although not on such a scale as we would like. And there were horse attacks. The mistakes of course were serious.
              And under Cambrai cavalry supported tanks.
              It happened differently - either cavalry was attached to armored cars and tanks, or vice versa.
              1. 0
                2 September 2019 15: 04
                It turned out or not! We can only state that a truce was concluded with the Second Reich!
                And even worse on the Eastern Front - the country disappeared, the army scattered along the huts. No tanks, no planes, nothing ...
                The Germans simply had nowhere to take reserves from. And the allies had colonies and the USA entered the war on their side.
                They just "showered with hats"!
                Here is the German "navel and untied".
  5. +2
    31 August 2019 13: 06
    The tanks in the illustrations for this article had a long military career. everyone knows about Renault FT-17 - in Europe, the last battle in the spring of 1945, on the Asian theater of war, in August 1945. 9 Schneiders became the first tanks in Spain, in the late 20s they were used in battles in North Africa, where two cars were lost. At the time of the Civil War, they were on conservation and came to the Republicans, And the last two * Schneider * six months before the start of the 2MV became the trophies of the Franco army, And as for the English * rhombuses *, according to Shirokorad in 1940 they were in Estonia, in The Red Army was used as a training and in 1941 became the Wehrmacht trophies. and in one of the mechanized corps of the Red Army (12th?) by the beginning of the Great Patriotic War were 6 FT-17, 6 Fiat-3000 and 42 Vickers.
  6. 0
    31 August 2019 14: 43
    I have an assumption that three FT-17s were captured by us from the Finns in 1940, then they were put on the open exposition of the Leningrad Naval Museum, and with the outbreak of the war they were sent to the front, I read the book in my school years from the series * Military memoirs * of our I don’t remember the tank commander, the author, only this episode, His part captured these tanks, and in August 1941 he ended up in Leningrad and did not see these tanks in the museum. I can not vouch for the reliability of the tank brand was not indicated, but the Finns had FT-17 and * Vickers E *, and these are standard weapons for the Red Army! T-26
  7. +1
    31 August 2019 18: 48
    A good article with well-chosen illustrations. Thanks to the author! :)
  8. +1
    31 August 2019 19: 16
    Saint-Chamonix in battle



    Saint-Chamonix after the battle.
  9. 0
    31 August 2019 21: 13
    because you had to be very brave people to be tankers with such losses
    ,,, and communication sad

  10. 0
    31 August 2019 21: 44
    ,,, I would like to note that the main role in breaking through the defense near Soissons was played not only by French and British troops, but also by the American forces. In the first echelon of the offensive, the 10 army included the 1 and 2 th American divisions, the 6 th army, 4 th and 26-th American. To support the American divisions, they were given French tanks with French crews. In particular, the 11-I and 12-I groups (divisions) of "Saint-Chamonix" were given to the 1-th American division.
  11. -1
    2 September 2019 17: 49
    Quote: mat-vey
    Not just a lesson - they harbored a wild grudge. This grudge greatly contributed to the Nazis coming to power.

    the offense was not for the tanks, but for the conditions of the world and how they were later realized.
  12. -2
    2 September 2019 17: 53
    Quote: bk0010
    I don’t understand why they didn’t use strategic cavalry, it could have been a ride

    the Germans from the beginning of the war were not eager to use the cavalry as striking force
    she was few and she mainly participated in reconnaissance and rear-guard battles.
    Austria-Hungary used cavalry much more actively, but its base was mowed down in the first year of the war.
    1. 0
      2 September 2019 20: 40
      the Germans from the beginning of the war were not eager to use the cavalry as striking force
      she was few and she mainly participated in reconnaissance and rear-guard battles.
      Austria-Hungary used cavalry much more actively, but its base was mowed down in the first year of the war.

      this is a simplified and vulgarized view
      German cavalry was very actively used on the Western Front in the 1914 campaign. It was precisely as strategic cavalry. Allied also. There are articles on VO and not only VO.
      Russian and Austrian were more active and most importantly tenacious
  13. The comment was deleted.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"