'Bluff'

[nicburch]

Was there any incident or action on the battlefield that was considered a master 'bluff'

Nick

[spike10764]

You could say the attack at Gommecourt on the day of the Somme Battle and the series of attacks further north intended to draw the German reserves to the away from the main attack.

I'm not sure any of these could be called master bluffs(as they didn't achieve their aim of drawing away enough reserves). On a static front like the Western Front bluff attacks were not easy to set up(hiding the main build up was no easy matter), but appear to have been tried nonetheless.

[truthergw]

Was there any incident or action on the battlefield that was considered a master 'bluff'

Nick

I'm not sure what you mean by bluff. Any side which convinced the other that it was about to launch a serious attack would be inviting real retaliation. The nearest that we got to pretending to attack was what were known as diversionary attacks. Guinchy and north of the canal at the battle of Loos, Gommecourt at the Somme, spring to mind. These were real attacks which had no breakthrough or prolonged occupation in mind. They were intended to keep troops and reserves where they were and not be released for support in the real/main attack.

[nfh249]

How about the Q ships? Disquised merchantmen armed with hidden guns to help counter the U-boat. Didn't they also sometimes stage a dummy abandonment when confronted? Don't know whether you'd consider that a master bluff though.

Neil.

[spike10764]

How about the Q ships?

Good one

[Dolphin]

Nick

One operation involving 'bluff' that springs to mind is the massive deception put in place by the British Empire forces under Allenby in Palestine before the offensive of September 1917. Several measures were implemented to indicate to the Turks that the attack would be in the Jordan Valley area rather than nearer the coast. These included leaving the tents of the Desert Mounted Corps standing after it had left the Valley, constructing 15000 dummy horses to fool aerial reconnaissance, sending out false radio messages, creating large dust clouds to give the impression of cavalry on the move, etc.

There's more information in Anthony Bruce's The Last Crusade; ISBN 0 7195 5432 2 and from page 685 onwards in Volume VIII of the Australian Official History: http://awm.gov.au/histories/chapter.asp?volume=8

Gareth

[truthergw]

How about the Q ships? Disquised merchantmen armed with hidden guns to help counter the U-boat. Didn't they also sometimes stage a dummy abandonment when confronted? Don't know whether you'd consider that a master bluff though.

Neil.

I still don't see it as a bluff. Deception yes. To me, a bluff requires the enemy to think that I am about to attack when I am not. The Q ship was the opposite. It pretended it could not attack when it could. There was a lot of jiggery-pokery went on in mining. Whether some of that could be construed as bluff, I am not sure.

[spike10764]

To me, a bluff requires the enemy to think that I am about to attack when I am not.

Or not attack when I actually am, surely the principal of tying down the reserves in one area of battle, whilst planning to attack in another ?

[jdajd]

From Shoulder to Shoulder (about the 9th HLI) regarding the battle of Loos:

The attack on the Tortoise, which was to be undertaken by the Highlanders on a one-company frontage, was a very tough proposition. It would have no chance of success unless the gas turned out to be completely effective, for in addition to the cross-fire from the machine guns on the embankment the advance of about 350 yards could be enfiladed from the left where the enemy’s front line, which was not being attacked, formed an arc about 700 yards across. It is true that smoke bombs were to be thrown from the trenches on this flank, but the effectiveness of such a screen was doubtful. Even if the Tortoise were taken it seemed rather an ambitious, not to say foolhardy, project to send two isolated companies out into the blue with an objective a mile away.

The bombardment continued during the 22nd and 23rd. The Highlanders were ordered to make a demonstration. Dummies had been prepared of stuffed sandbags on sticks. In. the afternoon the bombardment suddenly grew more intense, Nos.3 and 1 Companies, which were in the front line, opened rapid fire, then the buglers blew the ‘charge’, the pipes played, dummies and bayonets were displayed over the parapet and everyone cheered and shouted. This stage-management had the result of immediately bringing a storm of rapid fire from the Boche opposite, and in a minute or two his guns joined in with a rigorous barrage in our lines. This of course, was not unexpected, but we could only crouch down in the bottom of the trenches and pray that there should be no direct hits — and fortunately there were none. On

[truthergw]

That last post illustrated what I worried about with a bluff. A real response. As artillery became more sophisticated, a ploy which was a kind of bluff was used more than once. During a preliminary bombardment, all firing would stop. The enemy, convinced that the attack was imminent, would man his fire trench only for the bombardment to continue. This caused many casualties and was hard to counter since eventually, the firing would stop and the deadly race between attacker and defender would begin. This was known as a chinese barrage.