strategies used by the british army at gallipoli

[Guest]

hello

im not sure if this thread has been discussed before,buti was wondering which offensive strategies did the british army use on the gallipoli peninsula?

and what is the similiarities between the strategy "blitzkieg"used by the germans in ww2 and the strategy used by the british army on the gallipoli peninsula?,they both look cut from the same cloth to me,one more thing,does any of you have any information as to the T-Tactic which hamilton mentiones in his diary?,

thanks alot already for your responses

william

[Jeff Pickerd]

William,

Much of the information you seek will be found in the various war diaries of the MEF. Unfortunately it takes a great deal of time and reading to build up the picture, but that's the draw back of the question you ask.

http://www.awm.gov.au/diaries/ww1/diary.asp?diary=58

Have fun, you will come across some real gems along the way.

The one thing I would add, keep in mind that the Dardanelles landings were the first modern amphibious assaults to be launched in 20th Century warfare. The strategies, tactics and plans were all untried and tested, if not completely new and radical.

Jeff

[Guest]

thanks alot for the link, jeff

william

[bob lembke]

William;

I feel that a lot of the Blitzkrieg tactics flow out of the developments in the German storm troop movement developed during WW I. I, however, cannot see any particular link between the Blitzkrieg concepts of WW II and the British tactics at Gallipoli. Can you make your case for this link? Also, should we be talking about tactics, or strategy?

Bob Lembke

[Guest]

" Can you make your case for this link? Also, should we be talking about tactics, or strategy,should we be talking about tactics, or strategy"

both tactics and strategies, this may seem abit silly but my opinion is that in ww2 the germans copied the british tactics used at gallipoli!!,if my memory serves me correctly, either in the second or third battle of kritha,the british used armoured cars so as to support the attack, and this attack looks very smiliar to the blitzkrieg concepts of ww2,

william

[bob lembke]

We probably should not beat WW II to death on this forum, but I could point out that, on the WW II Western Front, as far as I know, the French had both more tanks and heavier tanks than the Germans, but they employed them much as they were employed in WW I, as an infantry support weapon. The better tanks of 1940 had, generalizing here, 6-10 times the speed, 20 times the range, and 20 times the reliability of, say, the Mark IV or V. These improvements, and radio communications, enabled WW II armor to become a strategic weapon, when handled properly. O)f course WW I armored cars had a better chance of being a strategic weapon, but I don't know if they ever succeeded. In Russia?

I know little about British use of armored cars at Gallipoli, but did they ever have a chance to break thru and be a stratigic weapon?

Bob Lembke