Things sometimes change slowly. My dad was still dragging French 75's around with horses in the US Army Field Artillery for direct fire missions in 1934-37. He said they called it "training".
And the German Army used horses to drag their artillery around until the end of WW2. The fabulous mechanized German Army everyone feared was still using horses for most of it's logistics. It's why horse meat was available during many 'kessel' operations when the boot was on the other foot.
Death, you have no clue what you're saying. I've never experienced combat, but if you do enough research it doesn't take a genius to figure out that weakness or cowardice isn't the culprit. Some minds can take certain trauma better than others. Only after the incessant shelling is over will you know how you will react. Maybe I could take it, maybe I'd go insane, who knows? Just an example, I'm a farmer, and have been around dead animals. Seeing blood, guts, crawling maggots, and black liquid oozing out of corpses after sitting in the sun I've gotten used to, the smell makes me gag and puke. Am I weak because the smell causes that reaction? Everyone's mind is different.
Luckily artillery has changed a lot since then. As an artilleryman, I am proud to do my duty, and I am amazed every time my battery fires a round. The technology, power behind the round, and altogether unique experience of using artillery is simply indescribable. There truly is nothing like it. We often spend days or weeks out in the field moving heavy rounds and artillery pieces through rough terrain. If it's this difficult some days here in modern times, I can only imagine the hell the men went through when the guns were pulled by horses and donkies. The thick mud, pouring rain, haze of smoke from the powder blinding the men from any possible infantry hidden close by.... I truly respect and appreciate the men who came before me, and I'm thankful they were there to keep us free and show us the lessons we need to learn still yet. You are not forgotten, nor going unappreciated, my fellow brothers in artillery. To all who served and to all we lost: you are not forgotten, and your sacrifice, courage, and duty are why we're still here today.
Honestly I'd rather go back to ww1 and serve as artilleryman... war was way more practical and fun, new technology destroyed meaning of war.. drop few rockets, and send infantry clear out the possible targets, and end... stupid
Having read and watched some lectures on the subject, I must say you produced a fantastically clear and exhaustive summary leaving no blanks or unanswered questions.
Clear & analytically precise. This guy would be perfect for any history / ww1ww2 historian student. Such a great video that was informative non stop without being too overwhelming to take in (as some deep history videos can be). Loved this video mate keep up your style it is bloody perfect for historical analysis & learning.
I recall the first time I was made aware of concrete fortifications used by German troops in WW I: It was in a high-school (US) English class with the reading of "All's Quiet on the Western Front." It was a shared reading done, out-loud, among the students during the class period, probably for the English teacher to get a grasp of the students' reading comprehension skills. There was a section in the book when the protagonists were in a bunker that took a direct hit from an artillery shell, and while the German soldiers were shaken by it, they survived the hit unscathed. It was at that time that the English teacher, and not a history instructor, paused our reading to explain that in the latter stages of WW I, there were elaborate concrete fortifications in place for the German soldiers. It always impressed me of that high-school (US) English teacher giving us students a history lesson detail; which I can still recall a half-century later.
Wow this was one of the best videos so far. I really like how you go straight for the most important issues and don't get caught up in politics, rhetoric or anything else that has no substance when it comes to the real issues. All i can say is Thank you and keep up the good work; i look forward to future videos. If you want suggestions, perhaps a video on the Belgium forts and/or the Maginot line.
A fascinating video for which I would merely add ONE complaint (disagreement). The use of long range very heavy artillery to destroy heavy fortifications which essentially remained the same from 1914-1945. Whether in Belgium in 1914 or 1940 or Sevastopol in 1942! This point in NO WAY contradicts your correct detailed comments on the use of REGULAR Artillery in field operations!
An excellent and highly informative video ! My Grandfather served in the British Royal Horse Artillery from 1914, with the original BEF, until the end of the war in 1918, on the Western Front in Belgium and France, and was awarded the Military Medal for courageous action. This documentary explains why artillery was estimated to be the foremost killer during that terrible war, the sheer amount of rounds or shells used by all sides was insane, but obviously effective nonetheless. 🌟🌟🌟
French artillery was the best design of the Great War. The French didn't need as many because they developed the hydraulic carriage that allowed rapid fire on targets because they didn't need to get back on target. Mocking the French military not only shows the intellectual ignorance, it shows the mind of a mental handicap.
This channel is actually really helpful, I'm doing an essay about the evolution of artillery tactics from 1914 to present day, and many of the links and sources you've provided have been extremely helpful to my research. Thank you for the informative overviews and included sources.
it would have been better if the had used the Vickers machine gun as it was comparable with the Spandau the lewis was a light mobile gun and used in a different manner
Very interesting summary of the changes in WW1 artillery. It would be great to have a follow up on what happened during WW2, since the changes were easily as great (e.g. anti-tank, radio, more coordination, naval bombardment for landings, proximity fuses). Thanks!
one factor usually overlooked in the trench warfare of WW1 is that the German armed forces had a habit of picking higher ground to establish their trench lines. The German lines were not mud soaked pits. The Allies were happy to establish their lines in the low ground and their soldiers paid dearly for this policy. Look at the allied force notes on captured German lines one would be tempted to view them as a resort compared to the hell holes the Allied soldier's lived and died in.
we never really engaged outside of our videos, I sent him a tweet and referenced him in facebook. Until he made his response video I never "heard" (read) anything from him, besides one reply to a comment from one of my subscribers on one of my videos, so I knew he probably watched the video. I think we never were "not cool" with each other, especially after he linked to me in his video with positive remarks.
you are welcome, it is quite annoying sometimes, but I want my videos to be approachable and I know that quite some of my viewers have a different reference system in "metrics".
Prior and Wilson in "Command and Control on the Western Front" go into deep analysis as to the reason for the failure of the Somme bombardment - including too few guns spread out among too many targets (so an insufficient density of fire), a large proportion of failed shells, and a failure to correlate expected vs observed results where wire cutting was concerned. Where the barrage worked (e.g. on the right, in the centre in the area of 36th Division which had some borrowed French guns), success was achieved to some degree. Others say that Haig wanted a 30 minute hurricane bombardment but was overruled by his artillery experts. It's one of those arguments which will keep military historians busy for quite a while. However, your overall analysis and presentation of the topic is excellent and, from my reading, generally correct.
When the musical "Oh what a lovely war" got to the scoreboard for the first day I blinked, swallowed bitterly knew there was a lot more to come. Real History treated as that kind of a story makes every one think of what happened. And how. It is not something to forget.
Nice summary. There are other points you could have covered, such as the lack of indirect fire early in the war leading to the (re)introduction of mortars into warfare (though sometimes manned by infantry), and the big part played by aerial photography in map making for the artillery (certainly by the British and I presume the other countries too).
I have watched a goodly number of your videos and been both edified and entertained-even when our conclusions differ. Still, I believe this is the best one so far for placing an issue in perspective. Thanks for posting!
Railway guns existed since WW1. Unfortunetly, most of the WW1 lessons have been forgotten by WW2, especially by the Allies on all fronts. This is perhaps because artillery performance outpaced human performance. The guns became more mobile and started to be exploited in various ways (like anti-tank and anti-car ) The ideea of tanks supporting the infantry as a mobile artillery also changed how things looked like. Artillery per-se, aka large field guns (152-203mm) simply outranged the abilities of their observer, so their effective range was reduced. The only thing they could achieve was planned fire and destroying enemy fortifications Pretty much like early WW1. The ideea of using camouflage also had a great impact on artillery as observers and planners could not predict where to aim their fire for effective use. They would just bombard for a long time hoping to hit something.
I glad I found this, far too many people fail to realize that ww2 came from ww1 in almost every way. from artillery to tanks to air power to the convoy system and more. I'm going to look around your page and see if I can find more but I would like it if you did more ww1 stuff (I know, its dry stuff and the sheer pigheadedness of the generals on any form of change is infuriating to read but its such an important part of military history)
now that ive said that I also realize I really like the modern hypothetical situations and comparisons you've started to do...I don't know man I like your stuff
Don't know how much you've looked into military history since making this comment years ago, but I for one have found my opinion on "stubborn generals" shifting quite a bit. It's easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to see the rapid technological growth of the early-to-mid 20th century and laugh at those doddering old men and their fixation on what "worked", but you have to also consider the bigger picture. Germany had the benefit of basically being able to start from scratch, and having lost the war they saw no need to inherit any aspect of their previous failed attempts. They also had the power to go "all-in" on whatever new concepts they had, as their economy was functionally pointless and raw material was all that mattered. Meanwhile, all the allied nations not only had the complacency of victory hanging over their decisions, but also the health of continuing economies to worry about. Throwing away hundreds of thousands of vehicles and heavy weapons just because of a hunch that the next war would be radically different didn't make sense. Again, knowing what we know now it's a "wow, how shortsighted", but you can look back through primary sources and see how the visionaries we point to as being the only ones who "figured it out" were typically in a very small minority and ignored or at least competently dismissed via contemporaries' assurances based on evidence of the time.
@@angrytigermpc you make a good point on Germany being able to start from scratch and go all in from go. I deliberately try not to use hindsight when judging things, views or opinions but what I think I get wrong (and got wrong here) is that I am a person living in 2021 and have seen much change already in my life, where as they would have seen little major change in their lives till it all exploded. I'm thinking it's a difference in expectation. I expect change and plan for it, they didn't. Not because they were stupid but because they had lived decades with little swift change so they made the call that was logical to their lived experience.
Liked, commented, and shared to a friend who was a career artillerist in the US Army (155mm Self Propelled-15.5cm Selbstfahrlafette Paladin ;-) ). That's the highest praise I have at my disposal. Good work!
The vast quantities of artillery shells used in WW I had lingering effects in areas of the French countryside years after the hostilities ended. My French mother, as a child in France prior to immigrating to the US in the mid-1930s, told me of swaths of properties in France where signs were posted to warn people not to trek into the areas due to unexploded artillery ordnance. She recalled one incident when a picnicking young couple ventured into one of those areas and were killed when they stumbled upon and detonated an artillery round.
Greatly enjoy your videos. As regards this one, it helps dispel the Great War myths about the "lions led by donkeys." Simply put, it was clear that artillery was a key to victory, but needed refinements in quality and quantity, logistics and tactics, all at great cost. The worst thing about the Great War is that Europe has never recovered from its self-inflicted damage, and I think the world is way poorer for it.
Incredible use of data and enriching information that makes warfare history come alive! You earned a sub from the U.S.!!! Keep up the good work Fritz. ;-)
You could always make fun of Conrad Von Hotzendorf for failing repeatedly except for that one time in Italy that literally everyone saw coming but nothing was really done to stop this completly obvious surprise attack.
if you have done one for infantry tactics in ww1 i haven't seen it but would love to. if you haven't I would recommend it for a video in the future it wasn't all just hide behind the trench, and did develop some innovations as well that frequently gets forgotten when we talk about ww1. love your channel and the videos it creates very clear understanding of why things were the way they were
I would only critique one item concerning your description of the issue facing the creeping barrage development: I would think it worth mentioning the coordination failures during this type of barrage that either put infantry too far behind the barrage (thus giving the defenders time to recover) or worse, amidst the barrage, leading to horrendous friendly fire incidents.
4:46 worth noting that the Bulgarian army wasn't even properly stocked in artillery shells and the relatively young Bulgarian arms industry was severely insufficient to supply all wanted cannon and artillery guns with shells and other arms in general, so the number of supplies needed is actually higher that the number used.
Great video! However, I have some questions: What about the Austro-Hungarian artillery? Wasn't the Austro-Hungarian Army equipped with heavy artillery right from the start? How were the Skoda guns/mortars in comparison to their western equivalents? From what I know from history class, the Austro-Hungarian Artillery had to re-enforce the German Imperial Army at several occasions on the Western front. How significant was that in numbers and impact on the battlefield?
I only know very little about the Austro-Hungarian Army, only read a few pages on forts. The articles I was using for this video didn't cover the Austrian-Hungarian side at all. Hence, I don't have any answers, sorry.
The Germans had more heavy guns, but they were also fighting a war on two fronts, so I doubt they heavily outnumbered the combined French and British artillery. Great channel.
yeah, but in 1918, the Russian front wasn't anymore. Thus, I didn't the outnumber note in 1914 :) Although I don't know how much they had stationed at the other fronts in 1918.
DarkFlameDragonSlayer No way for heavily outnumbering,maybe just several thousands.Anyways after Russia’s out of the war they sent over 50 divisions to Western Front so German Army began outnumbering Allied Troops on the Western Front until Americans came.
This is so awesome. I can't believe it only has 56,000 views. This is the future of education. And German, to boot -- which means it's the best (superior numbers be damned).
Thanks very much. This is your best video. I've know much of what you covered for sometime but you have added a great deal of information and also a sense of how and why things developed. Subscribed :)
I came across this video whilst doing some research into WWI after reading a very detailed fiction story that takes place in that era. I've known for a while that WWI was hell on earth, but this video and others like it really bring that point home. I don't think I would have been a very effective soldier. If anything, I'd either be dead or charged with desertion. Here's hoping I never have to find out. Ahem, in any case, this is a very well-made video that explains the facts without going into tangents.
It seems implied in a book I read about sniping developments that lot of observed fire was directed by snipers and that sniping was merely a secondary role to intelligence collection due to the nature of the job, where firing a shot exposes a concealed position that counter-snipers can zero in on.
I would love you to do a unit breakdown of units in the American civil war. I would love to see what a union battalion, regiment, brigade, division and so on looked like. I know there was no standardization but still would like to see.
Excellent analysis and video presentation. In the British service wire cutting without chewing up the ground too much did become possible with the 106 fuse and creeping barrages were fired with shrapnel too keep the enemy's heads down as the danger zone was in front of the burst which allowed the infantry to follow the barrage more closely without taking excessive casualtied from their own guns, say more than 10%.
Hello, huge fan of your videos since 2016 as a historian and military history nerd. This video is one of those that got me to subscribe in the first place--phenomenal work. I apologize if this has been addressed elsewhere, but there are serious typos with the English captioning for this video. I am sure that I am not using the auto-generated captions. I think 16:37 is the most apparent example. As someone who has some years of German speaking and hearing English in a German accent, I am hearing you say "Thus, the destruction of the enemy troops. . ." as a summary statement. The current captions read "Does the destruction of the enemy troops. . ." as if it were an open question. I mean no disrespect to the transcriber or the captions themselves, but I have noticed several other typos like this throughout the video. I can't list them all out here, but I did want to point this out because it obfuscates the otherwise pristine presentation, especially for those hard of hearing. Thank you!
Since around 2019 I provide my own subtitles, unless it is an interview. Other subtitles are either auto-generated or from user-submitted subtitles before approving those I skimmed them mostly for abuse then being on correct. So yeah, likely there are some errors.
I think some mention of General Plumer's artillery tactics, ie. @ Messines ridge would've added to this video. I understand that you possibly left this out due to time constraints.
i like the Willie MacBride quote during the Somme description. Kleinigkeit aber: "join the great fallen" hätte es heissen sollen, not "fall in". Aber egal. hammer gut wie immer.
I've been fascinated by the capabilities of artilerie and long range units. We can see in history a steady shift form short range weapons to long range weapons. Like: Swords -> Bows -> Crossbows -> simple guns and cannons -> advanced guns - and cannons -> atiliery -> Long range rockets. Well it is no suprise that it is very effective to deliver a fatal stike to the enemy while being out of range of their weaponary and technological advances have been made towards that goal. And now we got numerous very efficient and effective long range weaponary. The most profound one is unboubtedly the ICBM nuclear missel which can end a war even before it staret through to its insane devistating capabilities creating such intense fear of total annihilation, that a outbreak of a war becomes unlikely in the first place.
![[Barbarossa] The Major Errors and Blunders - Or why Barbarossa Failed](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A_3R-Rkn_98/mqdefault.jpg)
![Ice On My Teeth - ATEEZ エイティーズ 에이티즈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 241115](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c-n92OgbbwA/mqdefault.jpg)
Things sometimes change slowly. My dad was still dragging French 75's around with horses in the US Army Field Artillery for direct fire missions in 1934-37. He said they called it "training".
And the German Army used horses to drag their artillery around until the end of WW2. The fabulous mechanized German Army everyone feared was still using horses for most of it's logistics. It's why horse meat was available during many 'kessel' operations when the boot was on the other foot.
@@tomservo5347 Yep, they used it for supply on the Eastern front too, guess they were surprised when the horses died of the cold.
@@cushpnk if only there was some precedent they could have learned from! /s
Because It was Literally Training
@@tomservo5347Doesn’t Make It Good
Infact It Specifically Make’s It’s Bad
But It does show Its Possible
Also: Neo Nazi Propaganda:
67 people use direct fire
:D
Lol
Direct fire artilery works if you are on the defence and explode the shels in air or agaisnt vidacles.
That's why the term fire for effect is used. It means shot right now for results 50 years later
I don't understand
the moments pause after mentioning the numbers of dead at the Somme was very respectful. Thank you.
@Mitsi Grabblerberg peanut brain
@Mitsi Grabblerberg shut up and show some respect
Imagine a bombardment that lasted for days??? Imagine it? Can you ... High Explosive for 3-4 days of explosions . no wonder men went mad.
Look at the shell shocked videos they are very disturbing.
see kubriks "paths of glory"
Great movie. Unusually authentic for a war movie.
Death, you have no clue what you're saying. I've never experienced combat, but if you do enough research it doesn't take a genius to figure out that weakness or cowardice isn't the culprit. Some minds can take certain trauma better than others. Only after the incessant shelling is over will you know how you will react. Maybe I could take it, maybe I'd go insane, who knows? Just an example, I'm a farmer, and have been around dead animals. Seeing blood, guts, crawling maggots, and black liquid oozing out of corpses after sitting in the sun I've gotten used to, the smell makes me gag and puke. Am I weak because the smell causes that reaction? Everyone's mind is different.
All quit on the western front has a quite detailed Account on what happens to you
D O A R T I L L E R Y O N L Y
5:03 What most of my production lines look like in HOI IV.
Luckily artillery has changed a lot since then. As an artilleryman, I am proud to do my duty, and I am amazed every time my battery fires a round. The technology, power behind the round, and altogether unique experience of using artillery is simply indescribable. There truly is nothing like it. We often spend days or weeks out in the field moving heavy rounds and artillery pieces through rough terrain. If it's this difficult some days here in modern times, I can only imagine the hell the men went through when the guns were pulled by horses and donkies. The thick mud, pouring rain, haze of smoke from the powder blinding the men from any possible infantry hidden close by.... I truly respect and appreciate the men who came before me, and I'm thankful they were there to keep us free and show us the lessons we need to learn still yet. You are not forgotten, nor going unappreciated, my fellow brothers in artillery. To all who served and to all we lost: you are not forgotten, and your sacrifice, courage, and duty are why we're still here today.
Honestly I'd rather go back to ww1 and serve as artilleryman... war was way more practical and fun, new technology destroyed meaning of war.. drop few rockets, and send infantry clear out the possible targets, and end... stupid
Having read and watched some lectures on the subject, I must say you produced a fantastically clear and exhaustive summary leaving no blanks or unanswered questions.
thank you!
Clear & analytically precise. This guy would be perfect for any history / ww1ww2 historian student. Such a great video that was informative non stop without being too overwhelming to take in (as some deep history videos can be). Loved this video mate keep up your style it is bloody perfect for historical analysis & learning.
Glad you liked it!
I love the little digs at World of tanks Stock ammo at 5:30
thx, actually it was a War Thunder reference, but it works for both.
I recall the first time I was made aware of concrete fortifications used by German troops in WW I: It was in a high-school (US) English class with the reading of "All's Quiet on the Western Front." It was a shared reading done, out-loud, among the students during the class period, probably for the English teacher to get a grasp of the students' reading comprehension skills. There was a section in the book when the protagonists were in a bunker that took a direct hit from an artillery shell, and while the German soldiers were shaken by it, they survived the hit unscathed. It was at that time that the English teacher, and not a history instructor, paused our reading to explain that in the latter stages of WW I, there were elaborate concrete fortifications in place for the German soldiers.
It always impressed me of that high-school (US) English teacher giving us students a history lesson detail; which I can still recall a half-century later.
GOD BLESS YOU FOR CITING YOUR SOURCES. YOU ARE THE ONLY RUclipsR THAT DOES THIS!!!!
Wow this was one of the best videos so far. I really like how you go straight for the most important issues and don't get caught up in politics, rhetoric or anything else that has no substance when it comes to the real issues. All i can say is Thank you and keep up the good work; i look forward to future videos.
If you want suggestions, perhaps a video on the Belgium forts and/or the Maginot line.
thank you! I like my videos the same way I like my music, straight to the point, just like Heavy Metal :)
Maybe at some point, not on my current list.
DUNKIRK
A fascinating video for which I would merely add ONE complaint (disagreement). The use of long range very heavy artillery to destroy heavy fortifications which essentially remained the same from 1914-1945. Whether in Belgium in 1914 or 1940 or Sevastopol in 1942! This point in NO WAY contradicts your correct detailed comments on the use of REGULAR Artillery in field operations!
Daniel Hall AGREE COMPLETELY!! ONLY FACTUAL INFORMATION... AND ZERO POLITICAL RAMBLINGS. LOVED IT AND ALSO LEARNED FROM IT!!
An excellent and highly informative video ! My Grandfather served in the British Royal Horse Artillery from 1914, with the original BEF, until the end of the war in 1918, on the Western Front in Belgium and France, and was awarded the Military Medal for courageous action. This documentary explains why artillery was estimated to be the foremost killer during that terrible war, the sheer amount of rounds or shells used by all sides was insane, but obviously effective nonetheless. 🌟🌟🌟
French artillery didn’t need as many rounds early in the war because their rounds had more elán. 😝
MarcosElMalo2 and by 1917 French shells barely cleared friendly lines, so depondent were they.
French artillery was the best design of the Great War. The French didn't need as many because they developed the hydraulic carriage that allowed rapid fire on targets because they didn't need to get back on target. Mocking the French military not only shows the intellectual ignorance, it shows the mind of a mental handicap.
@@mattharrell6880 calm down mr. salty ass
This channel is actually really helpful, I'm doing an essay about the evolution of artillery tactics from 1914 to present day, and many of the links and sources you've provided have been extremely helpful to my research. Thank you for the informative overviews and included sources.
Leroy Tan not just this subject this is an extremely good channel as the author sites all sides and accurate information from detailed records
I’m literally just watching it for enjoyment
T
I just woke you so I don’t think so so I just just got back
I just woke you you feel like
Sick burn with the Spandau note
How progressive and tolerant of you.
SteveOwnsMC ...
You have to be kidding me... you have the name SANDERS on your freaking account and you are an intolerant little bitch.
So Char was actually Bernie Sanders before he became space Hitler?
As someone who served as an artillery spotter, it´s nice to see the historical background to the tactics that we use today.
Any stories you'd like to share? id love to hear some
"look a lewis and a spandau together in one icon... one might wonder which was better"
amazing XD
it would have been better if the had used the Vickers machine gun as it was comparable with the Spandau the lewis was a light mobile gun and used in a different manner
DANIEL YOU ARE A FUNNY MAN
Telling an opinion*
THE WHOLE THING IS A JOKE ABOUT LINDYBEIGES VIDEO
The Woodio Bros Who?
I've been wanting to know about WW1 artillery tactics for a while now. Nice job!
Very interesting summary of the changes in WW1 artillery. It would be great to have a follow up on what happened during WW2, since the changes were easily as great (e.g. anti-tank, radio, more coordination, naval bombardment for landings, proximity fuses). Thanks!
WOW ARE MY EYES AND EARS DECEIVE ME?! Point blank actual military recognized facts?! Put in an actual blunt as is presentation?! God Bless you
one factor usually overlooked in the trench warfare of WW1 is that the German armed forces had a habit of picking higher ground to establish their trench lines. The German lines were not mud soaked pits. The Allies were happy to establish their lines in the low ground and their soldiers paid dearly for this policy. Look at the allied force notes on captured German lines one would be tempted to view them as a resort compared to the hell holes the Allied soldier's lived and died in.
love the little spandau in joke, i suppose you and lindybeige are cool now. great video btw, all the way from nz
we never really engaged outside of our videos, I sent him a tweet and referenced him in facebook. Until he made his response video I never "heard" (read) anything from him, besides one reply to a comment from one of my subscribers on one of my videos, so I knew he probably watched the video. I think we never were "not cool" with each other, especially after he linked to me in his video with positive remarks.
+Military History Visualized I am subscribed to you and lindybeige. I see no conflict. A source of new knowledge is not to be scorned or wasted.
Thank you for showing Imperial conversions.
you are welcome, it is quite annoying sometimes, but I want my videos to be approachable and I know that quite some of my viewers have a different reference system in "metrics".
This is one of my favourite history channels as the videos are short and quick flashes of info keep it up 👍
Prior and Wilson in "Command and Control on the Western Front" go into deep analysis as to the reason for the failure of the Somme bombardment - including too few guns spread out among too many targets (so an insufficient density of fire), a large proportion of failed shells, and a failure to correlate expected vs observed results where wire cutting was concerned. Where the barrage worked (e.g. on the right, in the centre in the area of 36th Division which had some borrowed French guns), success was achieved to some degree. Others say that Haig wanted a 30 minute hurricane bombardment but was overruled by his artillery experts. It's one of those arguments which will keep military historians busy for quite a while.
However, your overall analysis and presentation of the topic is excellent and, from my reading, generally correct.
When the musical "Oh what a lovely war" got to the scoreboard for the first day I blinked, swallowed bitterly knew there was a lot more to come.
Real History treated as that kind of a story makes every one think of what happened. And how.
It is not something to forget.
Nice summary.
There are other points you could have covered, such as the lack of indirect fire early in the war leading to the (re)introduction of mortars into warfare (though sometimes manned by infantry), and the big part played by aerial photography in map making for the artillery (certainly by the British and I presume the other countries too).
I have watched a goodly number of your videos and been both edified and entertained-even when our conclusions differ.
Still, I believe this is the best one so far for placing an issue in perspective. Thanks for posting!
thank you!!!
this is a very comprehensive report and well documented
just subbed the little potshots you take at gaijin and in this case, lindybeige, are hilarious
this is an absolutely spectacular video! I am blown away by what I just took in. and the writing is funny, too!
Best use of icons I have ever seen.
I really enjoy these videos! Very informative and I learn something from every one of them! Keep up the good work!
thank you!
Now we need artillery combat during WW2.
This time, it's even more creepier (katyushas,nebelwerfers,
railway guns and SPAGs)
Nice video BTW
Railway guns existed since WW1. Unfortunetly, most of the WW1 lessons have been forgotten by WW2, especially by the Allies on all fronts. This is perhaps because artillery performance outpaced human performance. The guns became more mobile and started to be exploited in various ways (like anti-tank and anti-car ) The ideea of tanks supporting the infantry as a mobile artillery also changed how things looked like. Artillery per-se, aka large field guns (152-203mm) simply outranged the abilities of their observer, so their effective range was reduced. The only thing they could achieve was planned fire and destroying enemy fortifications Pretty much like early WW1. The ideea of using camouflage also had a great impact on artillery as observers and planners could not predict where to aim their fire for effective use. They would just bombard for a long time hoping to hit something.
Earned a new subscriber. Glad I found your channel, very informative and simple to understand videos perfect for my research
Excellent work
This guy works hard and is accurate and professional. I thank you sir.
In context - Can you do a video on Bruchmuller's tactics at this time? It's quite a contrast to the "pound away" notions of WW1.
Excellent. I've read a lot about WW1, and still got a lot from this video. Thanks!
I glad I found this, far too many people fail to realize that ww2 came from ww1 in almost every way. from artillery to tanks to air power to the convoy system and more. I'm going to look around your page and see if I can find more but I would like it if you did more ww1 stuff (I know, its dry stuff and the sheer pigheadedness of the generals on any form of change is infuriating to read but its such an important part of military history)
now that ive said that I also realize I really like the modern hypothetical situations and comparisons you've started to do...I don't know man I like your stuff
Alot of historians regard WW 2 as a continuatio. of Ww1
Don't know how much you've looked into military history since making this comment years ago, but I for one have found my opinion on "stubborn generals" shifting quite a bit. It's easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to see the rapid technological growth of the early-to-mid 20th century and laugh at those doddering old men and their fixation on what "worked", but you have to also consider the bigger picture. Germany had the benefit of basically being able to start from scratch, and having lost the war they saw no need to inherit any aspect of their previous failed attempts. They also had the power to go "all-in" on whatever new concepts they had, as their economy was functionally pointless and raw material was all that mattered.
Meanwhile, all the allied nations not only had the complacency of victory hanging over their decisions, but also the health of continuing economies to worry about. Throwing away hundreds of thousands of vehicles and heavy weapons just because of a hunch that the next war would be radically different didn't make sense. Again, knowing what we know now it's a "wow, how shortsighted", but you can look back through primary sources and see how the visionaries we point to as being the only ones who "figured it out" were typically in a very small minority and ignored or at least competently dismissed via contemporaries' assurances based on evidence of the time.
@@angrytigermpc you make a good point on Germany being able to start from scratch and go all in from go. I deliberately try not to use hindsight when judging things, views or opinions but what I think I get wrong (and got wrong here) is that I am a person living in 2021 and have seen much change already in my life, where as they would have seen little major change in their lives till it all exploded. I'm thinking it's a difference in expectation. I expect change and plan for it, they didn't. Not because they were stupid but because they had lived decades with little swift change so they made the call that was logical to their lived experience.
Liked, commented, and shared to a friend who was a career artillerist in the US Army (155mm Self Propelled-15.5cm Selbstfahrlafette Paladin ;-) ). That's the highest praise I have at my disposal. Good work!
Excellent video and I all but LOLed at 14:38. :D
thank you, well, I guess it could be a start of a new line of jokes that are not Pommel-related :)
i love the pommel one though :(
The Lewis Gun was obviously better. The British won the war after 1917, after all.
:D
No begets in this video?
Days of shelling empty enemy trenches seems like a great idea to me. What a brilliant commanders they had in WWI...
The vast quantities of artillery shells used in WW I had lingering effects in areas of the French countryside years after the hostilities ended. My French mother, as a child in France prior to immigrating to the US in the mid-1930s, told me of swaths of properties in France where signs were posted to warn people not to trek into the areas due to unexploded artillery ordnance. She recalled one incident when a picnicking young couple ventured into one of those areas and were killed when they stumbled upon and detonated an artillery round.
Awesome work. Very, very informative. Honestly this is so good. Thank you!
Greatly enjoy your videos.
As regards this one, it helps dispel the Great War myths about the "lions led by donkeys." Simply put, it was clear that artillery was a key to victory, but needed refinements in quality and quantity, logistics and tactics, all at great cost.
The worst thing about the Great War is that Europe has never recovered from its self-inflicted damage, and I think the world is way poorer for it.
Even today we are seeing its aftereffects…
Another superb tutorial; informed and accessible simultaneously. I really enjoy your work.
12:40 "I'm about to drop the hammer, and dispense some indiscriminate justice!" - Siege Tank Operator, Starcraft
This channel is amazing. Been following you from the very beginning mate.
thank you, yeah, you look familiar :)
amazing channel, so informative and yet so approachable.
Incredible use of data and enriching information that makes warfare history come alive! You earned a sub from the U.S.!!! Keep up the good work Fritz. ;-)
thank you! Yeah, this is one of the videos I am really proud of. Welcome to the Channel!
I liked how you added "The green fields of france" into your video. I used to sing my boys to sleep with that one.
This was interesting stuff indeed. I'm looking forward to seeing more such high quality uploads in the future!
You won me with the metal at the end. Subscribed:)
Very important post on the dominance of WW1 Artillery!
Very interesting visualisation. Superbly well explained introduction and a pretty objective review of the role of artillery.
You could always make fun of Conrad Von Hotzendorf for failing repeatedly except for that one time in Italy that literally everyone saw coming but nothing was really done to stop this completly obvious surprise attack.
Weeelll, it's easy to armchair general, as they say.
Italians at Isonzo: "12th time's the charm, let's go boys!"
Excellent presentation as always. Thank you for your hard work.
Admirably correct use of the semi colon.
if you have done one for infantry tactics in ww1 i haven't seen it but would love to. if you haven't I would recommend it for a video in the future it wasn't all just hide behind the trench, and did develop some innovations as well that frequently gets forgotten when we talk about ww1. love your channel and the videos it creates very clear understanding of why things were the way they were
I would only critique one item concerning your description of the issue facing the creeping barrage development: I would think it worth mentioning the coordination failures during this type of barrage that either put infantry too far behind the barrage (thus giving the defenders time to recover) or worse, amidst the barrage, leading to horrendous friendly fire incidents.
4:46 worth noting that the Bulgarian army wasn't even properly stocked in artillery shells and the relatively young Bulgarian arms industry was severely insufficient to supply all wanted cannon and artillery guns with shells and other arms in general, so the number of supplies needed is actually higher that the number used.
0: 59 direct-fire weapon? 1:15 machine guns and rifles now able to engage direct fire artillerly 2:07 breakdown of usage 2:35. 3:52 ammo usage rates
I really enjoy your videos. You explain things nicely and I do learn stuff that I didn't know before or knew little about.
New subscriber, I enjoy these types of vids!
Keep going. This site is pure historical gold.
Excellent work as always!
Don't mind me, I'm just a humble man helping the algorithm to bring this awesome video up. :)
Very good. The need of artillery on tracks is so obvious.
Great video! However, I have some questions: What about the Austro-Hungarian artillery? Wasn't the Austro-Hungarian Army equipped with heavy artillery right from the start? How were the Skoda guns/mortars in comparison to their western equivalents? From what I know from history class, the Austro-Hungarian Artillery had to re-enforce the German Imperial Army at several occasions on the Western front. How significant was that in numbers and impact on the battlefield?
I only know very little about the Austro-Hungarian Army, only read a few pages on forts. The articles I was using for this video didn't cover the Austrian-Hungarian side at all. Hence, I don't have any answers, sorry.
Ok, thanks anyway, and good work. You are historian by training?
not familiar with the term "by training". I have a MA in History and MSc in Computer Science.
The Germans had more heavy guns, but they were also fighting a war on two fronts, so I doubt they heavily outnumbered the combined French and British artillery.
Great channel.
yeah, but in 1918, the Russian front wasn't anymore. Thus, I didn't the outnumber note in 1914 :) Although I don't know how much they had stationed at the other fronts in 1918.
I am surprised you didn't add the Russian artillery. I would have like to see the contrast between German and Russian guns.
DarkFlameDragonSlayer No way for heavily outnumbering,maybe just several thousands.Anyways after Russia’s out of the war they sent over 50 divisions to Western Front so German Army began outnumbering Allied Troops on the Western Front until Americans came.
Really like this video! Hope this channel will grow fast! And he'll make even more content :)
Most people do not know the difference between cover and concealment. And the difference is a lifesaver.
This is so awesome. I can't believe it only has 56,000 views. This is the future of education. And German, to boot -- which means it's the best (superior numbers be damned).
First-class work! I found the references quite valuable.==Bob Bailey in Maine
Fun fact, the barbed wire had deliberate gaps set up for the machine guns to lie in wait for the troops to try to get through
Thank you.We don't get good documentaries anymore. History Channel Discovery Channel Nat Geo they just don't put out the material that they used to
Thanks very much. This is your best video. I've know much of what you covered for sometime but you have added a great deal of information and also a sense of how and why things developed.
Subscribed :)
I came across this video whilst doing some research into WWI after reading a very detailed fiction story that takes place in that era. I've known for a while that WWI was hell on earth, but this video and others like it really bring that point home. I don't think I would have been a very effective soldier. If anything, I'd either be dead or charged with desertion. Here's hoping I never have to find out. Ahem, in any case, this is a very well-made video that explains the facts without going into tangents.
It seems implied in a book I read about sniping developments that lot of observed fire was directed by snipers and that sniping was merely a secondary role to intelligence collection due to the nature of the job, where firing a shot exposes a concealed position that counter-snipers can zero in on.
Amazing video man
thank you!
great video ! such significant aspect of the war
I love the Lewis Spandau snark.
As usual very good video.
Great video, as usual, sir. It's nice to see your channel growth pick up some momentum :)
I found your channel today and it's just simple amazing! Thank you!
I would love you to do a unit breakdown of units in the American civil war. I would love to see what a union battalion, regiment, brigade, division and so on looked like. I know there was no standardization but still would like to see.
Factual with references. Great stuff.
It's amazing how most of the military commanders in 1914 seemed to still think in Napoleonic terms, tactically at least.
David Moore it was only 100 years ago. We still view symmetric warfare on the same terms as ww2, and that was 73 years ago.
@@NYG5 Eh, not really. Reconniasence, stealthand mobility have a much greater focus. BVR engagementsa re the norm, and airpower is much more potent.
Fun Fact:Almost %40 of all French Army on Western Front(some 850.000 men)were operating artillery in the end of WW1.
It is in fact 1,100,000 servants
Your channel is simply awesome man, I was looking for something like that. +1 sub
thank you!
very well done video.
Excellent analysis and video presentation. In the British service wire cutting without chewing up the ground too much did become possible with the 106 fuse and creeping barrages were fired with shrapnel too keep the enemy's heads down as the danger zone was in front of the burst which allowed the infantry to follow the barrage more closely without taking excessive casualtied from their own guns, say more than 10%.
Hello, huge fan of your videos since 2016 as a historian and military history nerd. This video is one of those that got me to subscribe in the first place--phenomenal work.
I apologize if this has been addressed elsewhere, but there are serious typos with the English captioning for this video. I am sure that I am not using the auto-generated captions.
I think 16:37 is the most apparent example. As someone who has some years of German speaking and hearing English in a German accent, I am hearing you say "Thus, the destruction of the enemy troops. . ." as a summary statement. The current captions read "Does the destruction of the enemy troops. . ." as if it were an open question.
I mean no disrespect to the transcriber or the captions themselves, but I have noticed several other typos like this throughout the video. I can't list them all out here, but I did want to point this out because it obfuscates the otherwise pristine presentation, especially for those hard of hearing. Thank you!
Since around 2019 I provide my own subtitles, unless it is an interview. Other subtitles are either auto-generated or from user-submitted subtitles before approving those I skimmed them mostly for abuse then being on correct. So yeah, likely there are some errors.
5:26 "stock ammo sucks" Nice! :D
I think some mention of General Plumer's artillery tactics, ie. @ Messines ridge would've added to this video. I understand that you possibly left this out due to time constraints.
Your channel is fantastic
i like the Willie MacBride quote during the Somme description. Kleinigkeit aber: "join the great fallen" hätte es heissen sollen, not "fall in". Aber egal. hammer gut wie immer.
I've been fascinated by the capabilities of artilerie and long range units. We can see in history a steady shift form short range weapons to long range weapons. Like: Swords -> Bows -> Crossbows -> simple guns and cannons -> advanced guns - and cannons -> atiliery -> Long range rockets. Well it is no suprise that it is very effective to deliver a fatal stike to the enemy while being out of range of their weaponary and technological advances have been made towards that goal. And now we got numerous very efficient and effective long range weaponary. The most profound one is unboubtedly the ICBM nuclear missel which can end a war even before it staret through to its insane devistating capabilities creating such intense fear of total annihilation, that a outbreak of a war becomes unlikely in the first place.
Absolutely fantastic video....extremely well done to say the least! 11 Stars out of 10! 👍👌👏
Could you make a video comparing the artillery doctrine and tactics of the combatants in WWII?