• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

The role of the trench systems in contributing to the stalemate (1 Viewer)

lookatusnow

New Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
12
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
[FONT=&quot]Hey this might be a stupid question but,
Explain the role of the trench system in contributing to the stalemate on the Western Front

Can someone help? Thanks[/FONT]
 

Korrupt Soul

New Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
21
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
well, hmmm.

the trenchs systems on both sides had a front line, a support trench and a reserve trench, if there was to be a major break through, then the front line would usually fall back to the support trenches using the communications trenchs since they weren't far apart. oww yeah and the barbed wire which are highly featured in the trenchs are also a problem.

well thats what i can only think of for that question. just add machinegun nest somewhere in there and your set lol.
 
T

Testpilot

Guest
They contributed because, the defenders had cover, and could fire at attackers comfortably.

Trenches were caused by the Race to the Sea.

Defence in Depth etc.

Just read your textbook!
 

Robbeh

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2006
Messages
94
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
No Mans Land.
Advantage of defense due to covering ARTILLERY fire (~60%) and MACHINE GUNS (~40%).
Initial poor tactics. Archaic 19th Century linear marches eventually developing into a more modern three-dimensional field of battle.
 

el gwapo

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
288
Location
northern Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Basically the trench was a defensive structure, designed to consolidate gains. Look at the German trenches they were well set-in with windows in their foxholes and concrete pillboxes and such.

Add to what Robbeh said the 19th century tactics took time to move into the 20th century, and as did technology and mankind's knowledge of how to use such technology like artillery. By 1918 when trenches became irrelevant as the form of stalemate with the Spring Offensive and the Hundred Days artillery was more precise not a useless barrage before the human wave tactic.

You could say the stalemate created the trench, but the trench continued the stalemate
 

hitachi88

New Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
17
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
[FONT=&quot]Something I wrote awhile back about Trench Warfare; it should give you an idea why a stalemate occured.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]>[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I’m going to try to dispel many of the common “Myths of WWI”, because the views I’ve just read are typical of how most people view WWI (even after studying it).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is definitely incorrect to assume it’s “easy” to penetrate a trench, let me explain the “usual” phrases of battle.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If the British were to attack a German position (prior to late 1917,1918) it would begin with a long (at least 6 hours, but often stretching to days on end) bombardment of German trenches with artillery and mortars. The effect of artillery was abysmal, because trenches are remarkably tough (especially the Germans), and although the defenders may suffer casualties, it will not be in any significant manner*. The British would assume that their artillery fire had cleared away enemy barbed wires, blown away machine guns and light guns and also broken the morale of the German defenders. In fact, artillery has tangled barbed wires even tightly than before**, and the machine guns and light guns left intact, and the German soldiers had retreated deep into their bunkers to escape the blasts***. Then the British infantry would get out from their own trenches, and advance in ranks **** across the open field towards the enemy. Most of the time, the landscape will be completely clear, except for the shell holes and tree stumps; but there were some stretches of the line that were based around blown-out towns. It is during this advance across “No-Man’s Land” that the German machine-guns (situated in sandbag areas called Redoubts), rifle fire, heavy artillery and light artillery and mortar fire would inflict enormous casualties on the exposed infantry. Most of the time, the advance would be halted and the men would scramble back to their lines. But sometimes, the men continue forwards despite casualties. When the attackers eventually near the German trenches, they are completely blocked by the barbed wires. They have no way of getting through, except by wire-cutters which take way too long under such intensive fire. In desperation, many men throw themselves onto the wire, hoping to “swim” across. They die. Their comrades step on their dead bodies and swarm across. Some manage to get into the German trenches, where fierce close-combat ensue. The men use grenades, bayonets, rifles (ineffective due to bolt-action guns), rifle butts, shovels and their edged helmets to slice into the enemy. Most of the time, the German defenders overwhelm the British and many are slaughtered. In this instance, they manage to push the Germans backs, and are able to advance through the trenches. But progress is slow due to trenches being full of bends: the British must take one “sector” at a time. If the British are still able to cling to their positions, they prepare to advance further. But they have run out of supplies and are in desperate need for reinforcement. The message back to the HQ is lost or is delayed, and no message is sent. British artillery can no longer sustain the infantry, and they are left to fend for themselves *****. Morning comes, and the German reinforcements return to dislodge the English and push them back to their own trenches. ******[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That was just a simple but rather routine example of how WWI warfare was conducted. It is important to note that penetration has indeed occurred. So it’s not that “hard”; but there is no exploitation. And therefore, any land that is gained is quickly lost. And any land that is gained and held, will only be in small amounts due to the limited range of an infantry advance without resupply. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]*Even though artillery is said to account for 70% of casualties during WWI, it is through the accumulation of the entire War, and casualties during an preliminary bombardment was not definite enough to cause the enemy to retreat in scale* [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]**Barbed wires remain to this day to be extremely tough to clear out, even with modern explosives. The best way of clearing barbed wires is through wirecutters by Engineers, but this would obviously result in high casualties if this is carried out during an assault.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]***Artillery’s effect on men’s nerves, especially sustained on ends could lead to breakdowns. But this did not happen in sufficient quantities to have any significant impact on the defensive capabilities. The men would emerge from the trenches, slightly shaken, but completely capable of machine gunning down slow-advancing soft infantry. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]**** Most of the BEF (British Expeditionary Force) were wiped out after 1915, and so the volunteers and conscripts filled up the ranks of the professional army. British generals did not believe the men were capable of discipline during advance under fire, and thus were ordered to advance in lines: very much harkening back to the days of Napoleonic Warfare.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This type of “advance” would be continued for the entire war, until the Germans developed “stormtrooper” tactics. This meant that small platoons of men would advance from cover to cover to breakthrough at weak points, and then continue on towards other weak-points. Follow up infantry would then use the gap they have created, and push out (expand) from the salient. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]***** This is a very important factor. During the advance, the artillery would have been able to fire on pre-determined targets. But once the barrage is over, artillery fire would have to be paused to avoid friendly fire. Later, even if they had wished to run the risk, the artillery might be out of range and must be brought forward (light artillery have shorter ranges; heavy artillery to use as infantry support is more likely to bomb out your own trenches). This is an incredibly arduous task, and coupled with the long delay in relaying the new fire co-ordinates, little or no artillery support is able to be offered to the friendly infantry. Meanwhile, the enemy artillery is able to continue blasting as their communication lines are intact (it is their own territory). [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]****** From late 1916, the Germans adopted “an elastic defence”, or defence in depth. This was to account for their reduced numbers (being sent off to fight in Russia), acceptance in defensive war (they just had to hang in there until the Russia was knocked out) and increased effectiveness of Allied artillery (shell shortages problems finally somewhat reduced). Previously, the majority of defenders were massed and distributed along a front. With elastic defence, only a sparse skeleton force was left on the front-line. They acted as forward defence, which would slow down the enemy advance. Meanwhile, the bulk of the defenders would be several hundred meters back in support trenches, ready to be moved to areas of vulnerability, and also to exploit and flank the enemy: thus retaining full flexibility in their action. Furthermore, the German trenches were improved so that each “compartment” of the trench was able to defend for itself, thus increasing independence as well as freeing men up for a mobile arm which would flank and crush the enemy which were being held up by “compartments” of defence. [/FONT]
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top