Czech Army in 1938

[Darkhorse]

Well, Czech armoured vehicles were good, however some, such as the PA-II Zelva, OA vz. 27, and LT vz. 34 armoured cars and light tanks were hopelessly outdated by 1938, other examples such as the OA vz-30 armour car and the Panzer 35(T) and Panzer 38(T) were superb tanks for the period and after the occupation were used in many German units. Much of the forces which attacked Poland and France used Czech armour. Although by the end of the war they were hopelessly out of date, as seen by the Hungarian Turan variants of the Czech tanks in 1944, where they were ripped to pieces. (Although the Zrinyi assault gun variant was successful) The Bren gun carrier like vz-33 Tankette was also popular although it was a mediocre vehicle at best. Many Czech vehicles were in service until the 1950's post war.

Anti tank guns and artillery pieces, especially those built by Skoda, were some of the worlds best, the 47mm kanon Skoda A.6 for example, rivialed the German 37m PAK AT gun, and the British 2pdr AT gun, which at the time were the best AT guns in service. Czech Artillery in 37, 80, and 100/105mm calibres were pretty effective. Skoda K 149mm howitzer is a prime example of an excellent weapon. Many Czech guns were used in German service, many SS divisions prefering Czech AT guns, vehicles, and machine guns over German designs in the early war period. MAchine guns such as the ZB vz. 26 LMG and the ZB.53 Besa machine gun were used by all sides right up to the end of the war. The Besa being the preferred machine gun armament on many British tanks. The ZB 26 was infact an excellent LMG, spawning designs such as the Bren gun. And was used by both Allies and Axis. Another Czech machine gun, which I cant remember what it was called, it was a heavy barrelled water cooled thing, was the preferred HMG armament of some SS units until 1943.

So the Czechs certainly had the gear, and as I have said previously if they fought in Sudetenland, where the majority of their fortifications were position, I'd imagine they would have fought effectively. I doubt they would have ultimately won, but I think they would have inflicted serious damage on the German army at the time, which was reliant on Panzer I and Panzer II tanks (inferior to the Czech designs I'd say) at the time and its excellent (probably world best) range of armoured car's and halftracks. The ace up Germany's sleeve would have been their superb mortar teams, superior air power and early examples of the 88mm gun.

[jo the greek]

The early Wehrmacht is so damn overrated. Germans didn't really had technological advantage in the early days of the war. In fact they could have been defeated in Poland. But they were well commanded and had pretty strong will.(I watched it in a documentary, this is the sum of it)
Either way, Germans owe a lot to the stuff they captured...not just from the Czech but also Poles and French.

agree

[Domen123]

Much of the forces which attacked Poland and France used Czech armour.

In Poland Czech armour was used in I. and II./Pz.Rgt.11; Pz.Abt.65 and Pz.Abt.66 - so in 4 out of 34 German tank battalions which participated in the campaign.

[Darkhorse]

4 is alot. That would have mainly solely captured equipment, as it wasn't until 1939 Czech production for the German Army really began. Numbers were higher in France. Germany was very reliaant on captured weaponary and vehicles. They had large units on the Eastern Front armed solely with vehicles and equipment (except probably rifles) captured from Dunkirk in 1940/1. Not to mention, in 1939 the Czech tanks were the best Germany had. 1400 Panzer 38(T)'s alone were used. And later in the war many were converted into Marders.

[Domen123]

The early Wehrmacht is so damn overrated. Germans didn't really had technological advantage in the early days of the war. In fact they could have been defeated in Poland.

In 1939 population of Germany together with Austria and Sudety was 78,5 million. After capturing Czech and subordinating Slovakia, this number reached 90 million. At the same time Poland numbered 35 million. Roughly 40% of that number were minorities (Germans among them), some of which were not very friendly towards Poland.

Extraction of coal in Germany was 12-times bigger than in Poland. Extraction of iron ore in Germany (together with Austria and Czechoslovakia) was 17-times greater than in Poland. In producing pig iron, steel and iron products the III Reich was on the 2nd place in the world and was superior to Poland 14-times in production of steel and iron products and 25-times in production of pig iron. Only extraction of crude oil in Germany was on similarly low level as in Poland - both countries were extracting about 0,5 million tonnes of crude oil per year. But German industry already managed to master production of synthetic gasoline from hard coal, and this production was close to 7 million tonnes per year.

If it comes to financing armed forces of both countries - the III Reich spent around 90,000,000,000 RMs on developing her military machine before September of 1939, while Poland spent only around 6,700,000,000 PLN (or 3,350,000,000 RMs) on developing her military machine before 01.09.1939 - which is 27-times less than the III Reich spent.

Modernization of the Polish army started in 1935, after the death of Pilsudski and included only some branches

By the end of August 1939 Polish AA artillery numbered 462 guns - including 350 modern 40mm and 75mm Bofors. On 15.06.1939 Polish field artillery numbered 3,429 guns, including only 665 heavy (also 105mm were counted as heavy - while in the German army 105mm howitzers were "leichte Feld Haubitze"). Ammunition stocks numbered 3,678,100 rounds - just a bit more than 1,000 rounds per gun, but in practice this situation was even worse, because of disproportion in ammo stocks for different calibres (especially modern guns - like 100mm howitzers - suffered from insufficient ammunition supplies). Monthly production of artillery equipment numbered 50 field guns, 80 anti-tank guns and 25 anti-aircraft guns. Ammunition stocks were covering mobilizational demand in just 37%.

Against 3,000 German combat aircrafts, including 2,000 bombers and fighters, the Polish Air Force could throw just 390 suitable for fighting combat aircrafts, much slower and with much worse armament. The Polish bomber air force numbered 9 squadrons (86 aircrafts), fighter air force numbered 15 squadrons (150 aircrafts) and reconnaissance plus observation air force consisted of 19 squadrons (154 aircrafts). Part of bombers and part of fighters belonged to the Bomber Brigade and Chasing Brigade, which were parts of the Commander in Chef's reserve. The rest of Polish Air Force was subordinated to individual armies and thus dispersed, which caused further reduction of its strength.

[Darkhorse]

Polish Cavalry offered a viable, and successful anti tank option. Contray to popular beleif Polish Cavalry never charged tanks, the myth spawned from when a unit of cavalry was ambushed by a German armoured car squadron. Polish Cavalry in fact acted like dragoons, carrying anti tank rifles and towing Bofors 37mm AT guns. Against Panzer I's and II's they held up rather well. People forget Germany did lose 40,000 dead and wounded, and lost more aircraft and vehicles. It was by no means a whitewash. Of course Poland fared worse, but being invaded by 3 countries like that, you're bound to lose.

[alhoon]

If the Czech had 35 fortified divisions and Germany 40 divisions, and the Czech had a fought back with their tanks that history buffs here prise, then yes, perhaps they would have won. But since Germany had good generals and dedicated soldiers, my bet would remain with Germany.

[Domen123]

People forget Germany did lose 40,000 dead and wounded

Even more - at least 55,000 and maybe even much more - but this is a topic for another discussion.

[K1ller]

Polish PZL P.11c was comparable to Czechoslovakian Avia B 534 (maybe slightly worse), but PZL P.24 was better than Avia B 534 (in total 189 PZL P.24 were produced in Poland, but only for export). -> Fighter airforce = comparable

If you think that Avia B 534 was so excellent, read how badly it performed in combats against FIAT CR.32 during the Slovakian - Hungarian border conflict in 1939 (23.03.1939 - 04.04.1939). What is interesting - FIAT CR.32 is theoretically (technically) worse than Avia B 534 (so its poor performance was probably the matter of pilots). If Avia B 534s were not even able to successfully deal with FIAT CR.32s how do you imagine them having been able to deal with modern, well armed and piloted by good pilots Messerschmitts Bf-109 / Bf-110?

Have you ever thought about pilots? Hmm. How would you fight after you were told that your country you swear to defend at all cost surrendered without a single shot? And again, how many Bf 109 and 110 were there in 1938? Bf 109 were versions C and D, the E was just entering service. So I can imagine quite a good fight between highly motivaded B.534 pilots defending their homes vs. German 109s and older fighters.

Czechoslovakian medium bombers (MB.200) were much worse than Polish PZL.37 "Los". Their light bombers (Letvov S. 328, Avia A.100/A.101) couldn't even compete with Polish PZL.23 "Karas". -> light and medium bombers = Poland > Czechoslovakia

It seems you just write what supports your arguments. How many P.23, not to mention P.37 were in service in 1938? Production of PZL.37B, the main variant, started in autumn 1938. And how about Czechoslovak Avia B-71 (licensed Tupolev SB-2)? There were about 105 of these in the Czechoslovak airforce in 1938. And protypes of new bombers (and fighters) were undergoing tests (e.g Aero A-300 and Avia B-35).

Czechoslovakian LT.35 tanks had got poor quality armours (despite medium thickness) and in general were worse than Polish 7TP tanks. Polish 7TP was also slightly faster than LT.35. Another advantage of 7TP was its internal combustion engine (Diesel engine), thanks to which 7TP was much less susceptible to inflammation after being hit (it certainly saved the lives of many crews). -> armour = comparable (considering that Czechoslovakia had more LT.35s than Poland 7TPs)

I just checked wikipedia. 7TP 5-17mm armor Lt. vz. 35 12-35mm. Speed 35km/h vs. 34km/h. So again you posted wrong data based more on feelings than on facts. One has to wonder why Germans continued producing Lt.35 but not 7TP. And again, how many 7TPs were there in 1938? Accordint to wiki, total 108 of cannon 7TP were made. There were 297 Lt.35s on the Czechoslovak soil! So Poland just bought already finished tank and all they had to do was to change armament and they managed to produce only 108. Czechoslovaka had to start from the scratch, make the design and produce it and they managed to make 298. Moreover the replacement, Lt. vz. 38, the best light tank of that time, was just being tested in September 1938.

Polish army introduced "Urugwaj" Anti-Tank rifles cal. 7,92mm which were able to penetrate armour of every German tank - Czechoslovakian army didn't have anything comparable to Polish AT rifles. -> infantry AT weapons (AT small arms) = Poland > Czechoslovakia

AT guns - Polish ("Bofors" type 36) and Czechoslovakian ("Skoda" type 36) AT guns were similar. -> AT guns = comparable

Again, you lie. Czechoslovakia had PT (AT) puska (rifle) ZK 382 W 7.92 ( 7.92 x 145 mm ).

Poland had got modern "Bofors" 40mm AA guns - Czechoslovakia didn't have anything similar. -> AA guns = not possible to compare

Czechoslovakia had 20 mm vz. 36 AA gun. You have really thought that one of the most modern armies in the world would not have AA guns?? Maybe not 40mm BOFORS, but it was own design. And you somehow forgot to mention havy AA guns comparison...

How do you imagine Czechoslovakian army fighting efficiently if 1 / 3 of its soldiers were hostile towards their motherland ???

You forget that not all Germans wanted to join the Reich. Those untrustworthy were relocated to Slovakia or other places. So yes, the defence may have been hard, especially with nations like Poland and Hungary lurking around like vultures. Fortunately Hungary was kept in check by Romania who confirmed it is ready to fullfill its allies duty. I am also pretty sure that we would have lost. But I still think we should at least try. But what I will never understand is why two nations, so close to each others as Czechoslovakia and Poland were unable to overcome differencies and make an alliance. If fighting together I bet even Germany would reconsider an attack.

[Knize.Vladivoj]

There was one big point - part of the 35 divisions were built by ethnic Germans, and even when the most fanatical Ordner escaped the draft, there was a serious considering if the rest of Germans can be trusted in event of German attack.
Second, there was some serious lack of modern aircraft.

[Domen123]

Again, you lie. Czechoslovakia had PT (AT) puska (rifle) ZK 382 W 7.92 ( 7.92 x 145 mm ).

I do not lie and stop accusing me of lies without reason.

Czechoslovakia had this AT rifle but Czechoslovakian Army DID NOT have this rifle.

It was produced by Czechoslovakian war industry ONLY FOR EXPORT.

armor Lt. vz. 35 12-35mm.

Wrong. Correct is 8 - 25mm:

http://klub.chip.pl/krzemek/pzkpfw35(t)/pz35(t)_tt.htm

7TP 5-17mm armor

Yeah but it was of better quality than that of LT vz.35.

Besides, a few mm here or there doesn't make any real difference on the battlefield.

Both tanks had thin armour even for 1938 / 1939 conditions.

Speed 35km/h vs. 34km/h.

Speed of 7 TP tank was 37 km/h not 35 km/h.

But of course it doesn't make a big difference - just like those few mm difference of armour thickness.

So Poland just bought already finished tank and all they had to do was to change armament

Nice revelations.

But 7 TP was a Polish design - started from scratch -, not an "already finished tank".

And it was not "bought" anywhere but built in Polish factories.

Poland had got modern "Bofors" 40mm AA guns - Czechoslovakia didn't have anything similar.

Czechoslovakia had 20 mm vz. 36 AA gun.

Which is not anything similar to 40mm Bofors AA gun.

Calibres like 13,5mm or 20mm are usually called Heaviest Machine Guns.

So it was not really anti-aircraft artillery.

By the way - how many of these 20mm vz. 36 were produced and available in 1938?

How many AA guns did each Czechoslovakian infantry division have in 1938?

So yes, the defence may have been hard, especially with nations like Poland and Hungary lurking around like vultures.

Poland declared that in case of a German invasion it will support Czechoslovakia, provided that Czechoslavkians will fight instead of surrendering:

Read this extensive article ("Occupation of Zaolzie" written by Zbigniew Pruski):

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtop...olzie#p1466377

The Translation is rather poor because I used Google Translate, if you cannot understand anything just tell me:

Quotation:

Czechoslovak-Polish relations throughout the interwar period did not create themselves best from Warsaw, it was combined with the reluctance of the total disbelief in the possibility of a continuation of the Republic and seek with her agreement. Did not constitute the essence of things and lots Zaolzie dispute with the year 1918-20. A factor was the pro-Russian policy of Czechoslovakia when it came to Russia's territorial claims to Polish territory. Evidence of this material is the Polish Foreign Ministry in March 1938 "... As long as the head of state stands Czechoslovak Benes, or until any other will play a decisive role in the country, and will be left to govern as long as Czech, Polish co-operation with Czechoslovakia seems to me to be excluded. ... Today is also the important point is that Czechoslovakia is influenced by Soviet Russia and all Międzynarodówkom (III, II, IV, forming, masonry, etc.). Hence stemmed, in relation to the Polish are not guided by self-interest but the interests Międzynarodówek . Taking in general, all the proposals at the Czech Polish are cyclical, and especially disingenuous. I never will be loyally carried out ...". Czech affix a reluctance to enter the country, in its view threatened from all sides, which was Poland and the reluctance to take a position in the Polish-German dispute, since, according to Benes of Czechoslovakia and Germany had no reason to quarrel. On the other hand, policies Beck tolerated the possibility of annexation by Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia by Hungary. Moreover, in the interests of the German saw the Czechs a chance to extend the facilities on its own border with Germany.

Czechoslovakia matter of his security without reservations tied with France, with whom relations were based on considerations far more closely than the Polish-French relations. Czechoslovakia has not entered into the path of self-ever policy on the model of Polish politics. More importantly, the military alliance with the Soviet Union had enforceable obligations as allies of France. Once outlined the threat of Czech-German conflict, a "... request made by President Moscicki to President Benes that Czechoslovakia would defend himself with that if that were the case, Poland will engage on her side, Benes said, after a few On that Czechoslovakia has no chance of defense and that whip up arms only if the implementation of a military alliance by France, stressing however that Czechoslovakia alone has not taken the military initiative. In Warsaw, this response was assessed as agreed with the Soviet Union ... ' The decision of the war in defense of Czechoslovakia, which shall be taken automatically mean a Paris performance of the Polish-French alliance against Germany. The Polish government on this possibility was prepared, although it does not believe it accurately assessed the desire of France to maintain "peace at any price." However, if przerodzenia crisis in the European war, according to the minister Mr Beck had 24 hours to change the policy of Poland because Poland could not be on the side of Germany, even indirectly.

While the Czechoslovak crisis began in the fall sharper phase, from 5 to 19 September took place in Volhynia large maneuvers, where he attended Marshall E. Smigly-Rydz. Their practical aim was to study the organization and the ability to act Learner cavalry divisions, the possibility of trying out the great armored motor units and the use of command and more a grouping of aviation, as well as an attempt to unit air-desantowego. Maneuvers have been completed which is a parade in Luck at the same time a great manifestation of the national-patriotic. These maneuvers off the training tasks may be the intentions of the Polish authorities, a demonstration of power and readiness of active opposition to Soviet troops attempt to march through the Polish territory. Please note that the Soviet authorities in May of Czechoslovakia declared its readiness to provide assistance. Another obstacle was the lack of consent of the Polish and Romania, the march of Soviet troops through their territories. March 15 Commissioner Litvinov journalists to question how the Soviet Union will be able to fulfill his obligation in the event of aggression against Czechoslovakia, since there is no common border said, "a corridor for sure will be found."

And the same in Polish (if you are from Czech Republic maybe you will understand this):

Stosunki polsko-czechosłowackie w całym dwudziestoleciu nie układały się najlepiej, ze strony Warszawy była to całkowita niechęć połączona z niewiarą w możliwość utrzymania się Republiki i szukania z nią porozumienia. Istoty rzeczy nie stanowiły losy Zaolzia i sporu z lat 1918-20. Pewnym czynnikiem była prorosyjska polityka Czechosłowacji gdy chodziło o pretensje terytorialne Rosji do ziem polskich. Dowodem tego są materiały polskiego MSZ z marca 1938 r. "...Dopóki na czele państwa czeskosłowackiego stoi Benesz, lub dopóki odgrywać będzie jakąkolwiek inną rolę decydującą w państwie, oraz dopóki rządzić będzie lewica czeska, współpraca Polski z Czechosłowacją wydaje się mi wykluczona.... Dzisiaj ważnym momentem jest również to, że Czechosłowacja ulega wpływom Rosji Sowieckiej i wszelkim Międzynarodówkom (III, II, tworzącej się IV, masonerii itd.). Stąd wypływało, że w stosunku do Polski kieruje się nie interesem własnym, lecz interesami Międzynarodówek. Biorąc ogólnie, wszystkie propozycje czeskie pod adresem Polski są koniunkturalne, a przede wszystkim nieszczere. Nigdy nie będą lojalnie wykonywane...". Dołączała się czeska niechęć do wiązania się z państwem w jego mniemaniu zagrożonym ze wszystkich stron, jakim była Polska oraz niechęć do zajmowania stanowiska w sporach polsko-niemieckich, gdyż zdaniem Benesza Czechosłowacja i Niemcy nie miały powodów do zatargu. Z drugiej strony polityka Becka godziła się z możliwością zaboru Czech przez Niemcy i Słowacji przez Węgry. Co więcej widziała w zainteresowaniach niemieckich Czechami szansę przedłużenia pokoju na własnej granicy z Niemcami.

Czechosłowacja sprawę swego bezpieczeństwa bez zastrzeżeń związała z Francją, z którą stosunki opierały się na przesłankach znacznie bliższej współpracy niż stosunki polsko-francuskie. Czechosłowacja nie weszła nigdy na drogę samodzielnej polityki na wzór polityki polskiej. Co ważniejsze także sojusz wojskowy ze Związkiem Sowieckim miał klauzulę wykonalności w postaci wypełnienia zobowiązań sojuszniczych przez Francję. W momencie gdy zarysowała się groźba konfliktu czesko-niemieckiego, na "...zapytanie wystosowane przez prezydenta Mościckiego do prezydenta Benesza, czy Czechosłowacja będzie się bronić, z dodatkiem, że gdyby tak było, Polska zaangażuje się po jej stronie, Benesz odpowiedział po kilku dniach, że Czechosłowacja szans obrony nie ma i że chwyci za broń tylko w razie wykonania sojuszu wojskowego przez Francję, podkreślając jednak, że Czechosłowacja sama inicjatywy wojskowej nie podejmie. W Warszawie oceniono tę odpowiedź jako uzgodnioną ze Związkiem Sowieckim..." Decyzja wojny w obronie Czechosłowacji powzięta w Paryżu oznaczałaby automatycznie wykonanie sojuszu polsko-francuskiego przeciwko Niemcom. Rząd polski na tę możliwość był przygotowany, choć w nią nie wierzył, gdyż oceniano trafnie pragnienie Francji utrzymania "pokoju za wszelką cenę". Jednak w razie przerodzenia się kryzysu w wojnę europejską, zdaniem ministra J. Becka należało w ciągu 24 godzin zmienić polska politykę gdyż Polska nie mogła być po stronie Niemiec, nawet pośrednio.

W czasie gdy kryzys czechosłowacki zaczynał wchodzić w ostrzejszą fazę, od 5 do 19 września trwały na Wołyniu wielkie manewry, w których uczestniczył sam Marszałek E. Śmigły-Rydz. Praktycznym ich celem miało być przestudiowanie organizacji oraz zdolności do działania ćwiczebnej dywizji kawalerii, wypróbowanie możliwości wielkiej jednostki pancerno-motorowej oraz użycia i dowodzenia większym zgrupowaniem lotnictwa, a także próba oddziału powietrzno-desantowego. Manewry zakończone zostały defiladą w Łucku będącą zarazem wielką manifestację narodowo-patriotyczną. Manewry te poza zadaniami szkoleniowymi mogły być w zamierzeniach polskich władz demonstrację siły i gotowości czynnego przeciwstawienia się próbom przemarszu wojsk sowieckich przez terytorium Polski. Należy pamiętać że władze sowieckie od maja deklarowały gotowość udzielenia Czechosłowacji pomocy. Przeszkodą był brak zgody Polski i Rumunii na przemarsz wojsk sowieckich przez ich terytoria. 15 marca komisarz Litwinow na pytanie dziennikarzy jak Związek Sowiecki będzie mógł spełnić swój obowiązek w wypadku agresji przeciw Czechosłowacji skoro nie ma wspólnej granicy odpowiedział: "jakiś korytarz na pewno się znajdzie".

When it comes to this:

But what I will never understand is why two nations, so close to each others as Czechoslovakia and Poland were unable to overcome differencies and make an alliance.

It was shameful for both nations indeed.

But both Poland and Czechoslovakia must be blamed for such a course of events - not just Poland.

And also Britain and France and Hungary, of course.

[RomanSoldier9001]

The early Wehrmacht is so damn overrated. Germans didn't really had technological advantage in the early days of the war. In fact they could have been defeated in Poland. But they were well commanded and had pretty strong will.(I watched it in a documentary, this is the sum of it)
Either way, Germans owe a lot to the stuff they captured...not just from the Czech but also Poles and French.

And have soviets coming from the other side.

[Kenobi]

Yes, I am fully aware this is going to be massive necro, but since the post is going to be constructive, I do not see the problem. I stumbled upon this thread by accident and I still have the word document I was writing for a friend some 1.5 year ago about this topic. And I do think you may find it interesting.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wehrmacht’s land forces consisted of 38 infantry divisions (Infanterie division 1-36, 44 and 15. Divisions 2., 13, 20. and 29. were fully motorized), 3 mountain divisions (Gebirg division 1-3) and 3 armored divisions (Panzer division 1-3). In case of war, another 9 division were going to get formed together with 22 Landwehr divisions (in fact militia). With mobilization (which obviously wasn’t needed), Heer numbers could possibly reach 1.700.000 men, in the end of september it was 1.100.000 men.

Czechoslovak land forces consisted of 33 division, 4 of them (named „Quick divisons“) were combination of armored and motorized divisions, together with horsedrawn artillery. This number do not count with units used to provide logistical support and inland security. Plus there were about 30.000 men in SOS (Guards of defense of the state). These units were consisted of policemen, financial guard members and regular soldiers and their task to was to keep order in front of fortification line, where army wasn’t allowed to go, cause of political pressures. They were armed like regular infantry, but they have no heavier equipment. Mobilized numbers of czechoslovak army were 1.250.000 men.

As for divisions (numbers are not absolute, especially CZE divs were often under these):
Czechoslovak infantry division: 14.000men, 36 guns, 36 AT guns, 18 mortars and 350MGs. Borderline infantry divisions (Hraniční oblasti) had also additional armored units, armored cars, more artillery, reaching sometimes around 20.000 men.
German infantry division: 17.000men, 1000 vehicles, 70 guns, 75 AT guns, 54 mortars and 500 MGs.
Czechoslovak Quick division: 12.000men, 98 tanks (no quick division had this – 1st had 30, 2nd had 40, 3rd had 16 and 4th had 78), 15 armored cars, 1000 vehicles, 2500 horses, 60 guns, 15 AT guns and 320MGs
German armored division: 350-500 tanks and armored vehicles, 2100 vehicles, 30 guns, 70 AT guns, 50 AAs.

Luftwaffe in september 1938 is pretty hard nut to crack, because Germans were bluffing hardly, renaming units to confuse everyone, but these numbers should be +- correct: 1500 airplanes of newer types (Bf109, He111, Do17, Ju87...) and 1300airplanes of older types (Ju52,He51,Do23...).

Czechoslovak ariforce however was clearly inferior. There were around 900 airplanes total, most of them still old fashioned biplanes (although fighter Avia B.534 IV.series (around 350 made) was on par in many aspects with Messerschmitt Bf-109 (around 250 made, only B,C,D)), with exceptance of Avia B.71 (only really modern aircraft in CZE arsenal, basicly licensed soviet SB-2).

This would do for the numbers. However, there are certain factores, that simply cannot be thrown away.

Fortification: Borderlands of Czechoslovakia were protected by foritification lines, which were planned to be finished in 1945. They were to be made of light and heavy fortification. In 1938 there were just lines of light objects finished, heavy objects were unfinished or not started yet. Not a single one of artillery or mortar forts recieved its weapons. But even the light objects were virtually indestructible (if you don’t count monsters like SC1000, but these werent available in ´38. Their obvious weakness was low ammo supply (there were around 5.000 rounds per object) and unfinished air recycling equipment, making them vulnerable against gas attacks and sometimes force the bunkers to fight with opened doors. Wehrmacht generals were counting with 100% casualities for the first attack waves. The light fortification was everywhere (contrary to the popular belief, light fortification was finished and fully armed along border with former Austria. Whoever do not believe this, just go to southern Moravia, these forts are still there), except places, where it wouldnt be useful (high mountains, where regular field fortification was used instead). Lines where heavy foritifications objects were finished, were practically unbreachable (German generality didn’t even consider trying to attack here). These objects were however finished only in Silesia. Finally, CZE fortification system cannot be compared to that of Belgium or France, because it worked differently.

Infantry: There were in fact nearly no differences between soldier´s equipment on both sides. No side had submachine guns, numbers of machine guns per man were +- identical. So was their quality (mainly MG34 vs ZB vz.26, both sides used also old Great war machine guns). I see no difference there. However, Czechoslovak infantry had very little AT weaponry. No AT grenades were issued, standard grenades were not made to be bundled and would need to be improvised. No AT rifles were issued either. Number of AT guns in CZE infantry divisions was very small. Also there was no special training in fighting tanks.

Air force: Luftwaffe had numerous types of aircraft with very different qualities. Its main workhorses, that made their names in WWII (Bf109, He-111, Ju-87) were definitely one of the best aircrafts in the world (for their era).However, it also had aircrafts, which were of little or no use in actual combat (because of low speed, armament, whatever...). On the other hand czechoslovakia was planning major rearmament that wasnt yet started and thus had mainly biplanes (CSR was going to start production of brand new metal monoplane Avia B.35/135, and adopt them as main fighter plane). B.534 (III and IV series) was the main fighter of Czechoslovak army, and while conceptualy inferior to Bf109, it was still worthy opponent with better armament, better maneuverability and better rate of climb. While situation in fighter planes quality is rather balanced, bombers are different story. Luftwaffe possesed the most advanced bomber planes (some of them are even faster than czechoslovak fighters), while czech bomber aircrafts were either very obsolete or in very limited numbers. Main bomber was obsolete Aero MB-200 (licensed french Marcel Bloch MB-200), which was slow, with inadequate defensive armament and its only advantage is (by French records) good ability to sustain damage. Only good bomber was Avia B-71 (soviet SB-2) which is solid fast monoplane. Rest are big biplanes with solid bombload, but their speed is ridiculous, only about 250km/h. Luftwaffe’s Heinkel He-111 (mainly B version) was super-fast bomber (for the era of course) with solid bombload and rather weak defensive armament. However cause of its speed, it would be almost impossible to shot them down by B.534. For Stukas I pressume everyone know what they were like. Also, czechoslovak AA defense was disastrous.

Motorisation: There is really big advantage of Wehrmacht. Its level of motorisation was the best in whole Europe, while Czechoslovakia had one of the lowest, because of the strange tax laws passed in early 30s. This was affecting performance of artillery, because hippotraction is much slower than towing guns by car. Next fact is that Czechoslovakia had not enough drivers even for their low number of trucks (around 35% of drivers were missing). This was caused by fact, that these positions often belonged to Sudetengermans (because of their technical skill) and big amount af these refused to obey the mobilisation order.

Training: Czechoslovak soldiers (infantry) were slightly better trained than those of Wehrmacht. It’s reason is the fact, that Germany was not allowed by Versailles to have draft, while CSR had 1,5 year draft for the whole time of its existence (in 1937 it was raised to 2 year draft). In 1938 Germany still had not filled the gap caused by this restriction. Czechoslovak pilots generally had much bigger experience (aka flight hours) than their Luftwaffe counterparts. Legion Condor was not to be used in war against Czechoslovakia. Also, germans had more planes than trained crews for them.

Generals: I would say that CSR scored in this more than Germany. Nearly no German general had war experience (with the modern war), and because of Versailles, there were not enough military maneuvers. On the other hand nearly all Czechoslovak high-ranking generals had experience from war during Siberian anabasis in 1917-1919, where the combat was pretty similar to the new style of warfare (ie. no trench warfare, just maneuvering, outflanking and such...). CZE generals were generally younger, but had longer experience in commanding of big units (divisions and above). Also Anschluss and (historical) annexation of Sudetenland showed that german generality was still fighting with the new doctrines (annexation of sudetenland took three times longer than was planned, Anschluss was disaster and in these cases there was no opposing forces).

Doctrines: Well...I really can’t judge that. GBlitzkrieg was proven to be excellent in WW2, but totally failed in 1938 during Anschluss due to logistical problems (IIRC one german general is quoted that bombing of Linz would stop entire advance). Doctrine of Czechoslovakia is a question. From 1920 they were using french WWI doctrines, but through time they found it obsolete and too static for new kind of warfare. So they added greater emphasis on movement, so at the end it was some kind of elastic defense. When it comes to utilisation of air power, Germans were clearly superior compared to Czechs. Germans were using modern tactics (moreover, unlike Blitzkrieg itself, these things were tried and perfected in Spain), while Czechs were fighting according to doctrines from early 30s (Kette formation, bomber formation = unstopable air power and mainly equation air combat = lot of individual dogfights). Anyway, Germans gave up their plans of synchronised attack through southern Moravia and Silesia (mainly because Silesia was heavily fortified and Moravia had the biggest concentration of CZE units). Their plan was simultaneous attack along the whole border and concentrate forces wherever the opportunity arouses. Czechoslovak plan was to keep army operational at all costs, even giving up fortification line without a fight if the units were to be cutted off from the main force. After break through fortification, army was to slowly retreat east, taking positions on Vltava (Moldau) river, Moravia and in the worst case, Slovakian mountains. Due to mobilisation at the end of september, all units were in their positions. German units were not at theit positions by the end of september - some of the units assigned against Czechoslovakia were in Hannover etc.

Terrain: Terrain is considered as main reason, why typical Blitzkrieg (used in Poland, France and during Barbarrosa) was likely to fail. Czech borderlands (aka Sudetenland, however this is not accurate term) were in fact only forested hills and mountains. Every pass with road (i mean for vehicles, infantry don’t need roads...) was guarded by fortification objects, which were very hard to knock out. Hill terrain also mean that vehicles and armor have little to no space for maneuvering, so one stopped tank or truck (be it for mechanical breakdowns, damage, destruction, whatever) stopped entire column. In forest you can’t lead a succesful armor offensive and infantry alone is easy target (before anyone plays the Ardennes card, I would like to say I have seen the Ardennes and I have seen Šumava. Also Ardennes didnt have solid fortification line). Mountain roads were ready to be blown up by explosives, thus making whole border even more unfriendly to anything but infantry.

Foreign relations: Czechoslovakia could not expect any help at all. France and Britain were obviously out of game. Little Entente (Romania and Yugoslavia) was not likely to help either. Firstly, their help was tied to Hungary joining the war, secondly Yugoslavia was drifting out of Entente after assasination of Alexander I in France. The only ally that was bound to help Czechoslovakia was Soviet Union, but this help was meaningless as both Romania and Poland refused to allow soviet armies through their countries. On unofficial level, lot of volunteers from other countries (mainly Yugoslavia, Romania, France and…surprisingly South Africa) offered themselves, but their adaptation into military and use in war was very unlikely.

Armor: Offensive concept of Wehrmacht was responsible for having much more tanks and armored cars, than defensively oriented army of Czechoslovakia. Germany had over 2200 tanks (around 1450 Panzers I, 800 Panzers II, small number of Panzer IIIs and Panzer IVs was constructed, but not assigned to divisions in September). Czechoslovakia offered only about 300 tanks LT vz.35. Czech doctrines for using tanks were bad.

[TWWolfe]

Don't forget that several of the German divisions were Austrian, recently added to the Army with the Anchluss, and had had no time in 1938 to actually integrte into the German army.

[Kenobi]

I actually wouldn't say so. I do not have vast knowledge of austrian military, but some operational german divisions were made of former austrian units. 2nd (in Innsbruck) and 3rd (in Graz) Gebirgsjäger divisions were originaly Austrian. Also 1st light division (in Vienna) was originally austrian and was operating lot of former austrian equipment (Fiat CV-33 and 35, ADGZ armored cars and Lancia armored cars). As was possibly quite a few other infantry divisions - after a quick check: 44th infanry division (in Vienna) and 45th infantry division (in Linz). Dont know about other units though. All these were battle ready by the end of Munich crisis.

[TWWolfe]

I actually wouldn't say so. I do not have vast knowledge of austrian military, but some operational german divisions were made of former austrian units. 2nd (in Innsbruck) and 3rd (in Graz) Gebirgsjäger divisions were originaly Austrian. Also 1st light division (in Vienna) was originally austrian and was operating lot of former austrian equipment (Fiat CV-33 and 35, ADGZ armored cars and Lancia armored cars). As was possibly quite a few other infantry divisions - after a quick check: 44th infanry division (in Vienna) and 45th infantry division (in Linz). Dont know about other units though. All these were battle ready by the end of Munich crisis.

True, but the problem was they were still markedly Austrian divisions at the time. It was more an issue of communication and standardization rather than being ready for fighting. By the time the germans Invaded Czechoslovakia, these problems had been smoothed out, but had Munich not gone the way it did and led to fighting earlier than it actually happened, these could have hampered their operational efficiency.

[TheNasoRomaLost]

Well im reading a book at the minute called 'Hitlers Empire' and it says that in 1938, the German army, which was made up of 40 divisions faced a strong, well equipped Czech army with 35 divisions and in well fortified positions. It was backed up with a French and British force of 100 divisions but then the Governments of Britain and France felt as though they need more time to arm theselves so they pulled out of Czech and simply left them to defend themselves. I have just started the chapter called 'Sudetland: 1938' so I might have more info for you later.

That is apologism for Britain and France, what it did to Czechoslovakia can not be described without the word stab in the back; both were as well and in some ways better off then Germany. They chose Munich because they were both wedded to the idea of appeasing Hitler.

They were so wedded to the concept of appeasement that during the Poland Campaign when they could have walked into Germany (think when the Swedes invaded Poland in the 1650s) they instead hoped to persuade the Germans to stop by dropping pamphlets into Germany.

[Stario]

Great post Kenobi,

Regarding divisions, it's important to note that despite the Czechoslovak army having in fact 34 armed and ready divisions, and the Germans increasing their mobilisation from 31 to 36 divisions by September, 1938. However, the German force was slightly smaller that the Czechoslovak force. Also, 19 German divisions were still at two-thirds strength. Also to note France, despite of having not mobilised completely had over 20 infantry divisions + 10 motorised divisions. Russia had nearly 100 divisions, and insisted on a policy of resisting the Germans.

Regarding armour (or more precisely Tanks). The Czechoslovak army had 350 tanks and 70 tankettes (small tanks). Also, the German tanks were (junk), all below Mark II (10 tons), and armed with machine guns. The Czechoslovak tanks wee mostly 38 tons armed with 75mm cannon. In fact the German captured nearly 500 of them at the capitulation of Czechoslovakia in March, 1939. It wasn't until 1939 that Germany brought into production a Mark IV Tank armed with a 75 mm cannon (still by as late as September 1939 Germany only had 300 Mark III and Mark IV tanks combined).

Edit:\

From the political theater. The Czechoslovaks did not resist due to ultimatums from France and Britain- basically that they would be fighting alone if they did not cede. There was also the real threat of an attack from the flank by the Hungarians (and ironically even from the Poles who were more interested in the destruction of Czechoslovakia). Large parts of Czechoslovakia (mainly the Slovak regions), were part of the Hungarian Empire for thousands of years and Czechoslovakia comprised nearly 1 million Magyars. Hungary in the past had made several claims to those regions. Benes also feared that if he resisted he would be supported by the Soviets, and therefore be denounced as promoting Bolshevism in Europe (as he was anyways despite ceding). There was also fear that France and Britain would aid Germany in order to draw them into a war with the Soviets. Britain did try attacking the Soviets in early 1940; only to be denied by Sweden, when they were technically at war with Germany, so such fear on Benes's part has some validity. Difficult political sphere, but ultimately in my opinion the Benes Government failed in its principal duty to protect its people and country .

[Kenobi]

The Czechoslovak tanks wee mostly 38 tons armed with 75mm cannon. In fact the German captured nearly 500 of them at the capitulation of Czechoslovakia in March, 1939. It wasn't until 1939 that Germany brought into production a Mark IV Tank armed with a 75 mm cannon (still by as late as September 1939 Germany only had 300 Mark III and Mark IV tanks combined).

No, Czechoslovak army had 298 LT vz.35 (10t, 37mm gun) and 50 LT vz.34 (7,5t, 37mm gun). Also no other tanks that could CZE army theoreticaly use, since it was in garages (FT-17, LTP, LTH) had 75mm gun. The only bigger tank that CZE ever produced was ST vz.39 (16t, 47mm) that was even planned to be built with 75mm cannon, but the cannon was never developped. And while the contract for 300 of these tanks was given to factories in 20th of April 38, by the time of Munich crisis not a single ST vz.39 was ready.

[conon394]

The problem with Tank number whatever there type is still France had more and better tanks and a mostly fortified frontier etc they still lost. France and the UK were even less ready for war in 1938 than later so no invasion. Hitler was still a risk taker so he likely would have made the same gamble. Considering how quickly Germany detached Slovakia and the Sudetenland I just don't see Czechoslovakia doing better than France.

I suppose the best thing is just there would be less equipment and intact Factories maybe to capture...