World War 1 Technology Uses.

KickstartHeart

Just finishing up a last bit of work for college.

Can anyone give me some good examples of battles when commanders in the first world war used the new military technologies of the time to their advantage, and examples of battles when commanders completely failed to use technology to their advantage, and in the process were defeated? Just looking for a start point for a bit of study.

Thanks.

xflyer

The classic example was very early on in the war. When an RFC recconaissance pilot noted that Von Kluck's army had changed direction and was attempting to outflank the British by marching on Mons. This allowed the British to prepare a defence and hold up the Germans for a time. There are several other examples along those lines particularly at the Marne. Without the RFC the Germans may have got to Paris. Sir John French the BEF Commander certainly appreciated their usefulness. There were plenty of others who didnt though.

savagecabbages

The use of tanks for the first time by the British could have had a major influence on the course of the war, but they weren't initially fielded in large enough numbers to make a huge difference. Maybe someone else on here can elaborate a little.

Also the U-boat campaign proved very effective at hindering the British supply lines, with a relatively small number of U-boats being able to tie up large Royal Navy forces.

The series 'First World War' should make some interesting watching, its regularly repeated on Discovery, and may be available somewhere online too..

tricky D

In 1915, (George) Maurice Wright was the Marconi Company's director of research, and later was one of the founders of signals intelligence during World War II. He developed 'aperiodic' direction finding capability which basically gave advance warning any time the German Fleet moved out of its base on the Kiel Canal so that the British Fleet at Scapa Flow could intercept them. He himself set up and operated the listening station in Oslo for 6 months until he saw a wanted poster for himself being pasted opposite his post. He then high-tailed it in a prepared extract operation.

bwatson

Things like

Use of railways and industrial base

British and French breech loading artillery, Indirect fire, rolling barrages

Use of tanks

Allied Refinement of tactics that came with these developments - it wasn't the war of attrition its made out to be etc, smaller infantry squads, company sized operations, concentrated attacks etc

Look at the preogression of tactics and technology from the start of the war and the BEF and then the battles of 1918, Amiens etc for the differences

all things that I researched a fair bit for a university essay last year on a similar topic

Manach

Advances in cryptography. AFAIR from a book on the Zimmerman Telegram which was instrumental in bring the US into WWI, the UK's naval code breakers managed to crack the Germany ambassadors communications and selectively leak the Telegram, hence enraging the US Press.

KickstartHeart

Great responses. These should be helpful.

Thanks very much lads.

Stovepipe

Better use of artillery, ie, better timing, better targeting by aircraft, better shells, flexiibilty in changing the fire plan, better deployment, faster deployment and so on.
Better optics,ie, field binoculars and stereoscopes gave better accuracy for guns and saved ammunition. Also applied to ship gun directors.
At sea, changing from coal to oil saved money, improved the lot of the sailors and reduced the dense giveaway smoke trail. Use of airships and aircraft at sea drastically cut losses to U-Boats.
On land, better infantry tactics and better medical treatment reduced casualties. There were also side-effects such as improved techniques for the mass production and storage of food and medicine. Tanks and armoured cars got better and more reliable and the eventual use of combined arms won the day.

regards
Stovepipe

Delancey

Surprised that 2 inventions haven't been mentioned - Poison Gas and Flamethrowers ( Flammenwerfers ). Gas used by both sides with overall mixed results , not sure if the Allies had their own flamethrowers.

Lemming

Not so much an invention as a developed concept; the use of snipers, which after the end of WW1 was neglected, resulting in the loss of all those hours of invaluable experience regarding fieldcraft which had to be re-learned during WW2.

meathstevie

Let's not forget motorised transport in general.

Also, the first bombing of the UK from the air by foreign forces.

goldie fish

The use of a wristwatch to co-ordinate timing of attack was first used in WW1.

Jawgap

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Just finishing up a last bit of work for college.

Can anyone give me some good examples of battles when commanders in the first world war used the new military technologies of the time to their advantage, and examples of battles when commanders completely failed to use technology to their advantage, and in the process were defeated? Just looking for a start point for a bit of study.

Thanks.

The Battle of Jutland - depending on your view it was:-

1. A German victory - the sunk the greater number and tonnage of ships, despite having a smaller force
2. A British victory- they stopped the Germans from breaking out and thus frustrated their strategic objective
3. A draw

In terms of new technology, the Germans made better use of rangefinders and, by and large, had better equipment on more ships and thus had better fire control. They also used wireless to co-ordinate ship movements where the British relied on flags and lamps.

The British relied on the Nelsonian attributes of aggressive manoeuvering and volume of fire, prioritising speed over accuracy. The desire for fast firing also led to practices that undermined the design of some of the battleships and made them easier for the more accurate firing Germans to sink!

the_syco

The use of dirigibles (often known as zeppelins) for bombers, the allies used them as cheap recon tools. When bombing London, they flew too high for the planes of the time to shoot them down when they first started attacking. One was brought down by a plane, but only when said plane dropped bombs on top of it when said dirigible started to go low when it was over German airspace. Though only one in ten bombs with their target, it had a psychological impact.

Explosive and incendiary ammo helped stop bring down the planes, though, as time went on.

Lemming

Whilst not a military "technology" either, the demonstration of 'clay-kicking' as a viable method of tunnelling during WW1 led to the formation of specialist tunnelling companies within the Royal Engineers - ostensibly formed from coal miners initially. The technique allowed the British to tunnel faster, more efficiently, and quieter than their German counterparts.

More on it here

Stovepipe

Dramatic advance in aviation from flimsy single-seaters with weak engines to huge bombers. The great leaps in aviation in the 20s and 30s wouldn't happened without the stimulus of WW1.
regards
Stovepipe

EWQuinn

Here is one avenue worthy of some consideration perhaps. My wife had an uncle gassed in the Argonne forest. He was a literary and musical talent, related to Evelyn Waugh. To add insult to injury, while he was convalescing he got a "dear john" letter from his sweetheart who opted for a rich doctor instead. He was never the same after that, but he wrote some rather poignant anti war poetry in his life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meuse-Argonne_Offensive

http://www.worldwar1-history.com/Poison-Gas-of-World-War-1.aspx

"Chlorine became the first killing agent to be employed in poison gas. German chemical conglomerate IG Farben had been producing chlorine as a by-product of their dye manufacturing. In cooperation with Fritz Haber of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin, they began developing methods of discharging chlorine gas against enemy trenches. By 22 April 1915, the German Army had 160 tons of chlorine deployed in 5,730 cylinders opposite Langemarck, north of Ypres. At 17:00, in a slight easterly breeze, the gas was released, forming a grey-green cloud that drifted across positions held by French Colonial troops who broke, abandoning their trenches and creating an 8,000 yard gap in the Allied line. However, the German infantry were also wary of the gas and failed to exploit the break before Canadian and British reinforcements arrived."