Yes, but the British also used it in WW1:
"Arguably, the first Mechanized infantry were 36 two-man infantry squads carried forward by Mark V* tanks at the Battle of Amiens in 1918. In a battle of such scale, their contribution went unnoticed.
Towards the end of World War I, all the armed forces involved were faced with the problem of maintaining the momentum of an attack. Tanks, artillery or infiltration tactics could all be used to break through an enemy defense, but almost all the offensives launched in 1918 ground to a halt after a few days. Pursuing infantry quickly became exhausted, and artillery, supplies and fresh formations could not be brought forward over the battlefields quickly enough to maintain the pressure on the regrouping enemy.
It was widely acknowledged that cavalry were too vulnerable to be used on most European battlefields. Motorised Infantry could maintain rapid movement, but their trucks required either a good road network, or firm open terrain (such as desert). They were unable to traverse a battlefield obstructed by craters, barbed wire and trenches. Tracked or all-wheel drive vehicles were to be the solution.
Practical soldiers such as Heinz Guderian in Germany and Mikhail Tukhachevsky in the Soviet Union recognised that tank units required close support from infantry and other arms. As the Germans rearmed in the 1930's, they equipped some infantry units in their new Panzer (armoured) divisions with the Half-track SdKfz 251, which could keep up with tanks on almost any terrain. The French Army also created Light Mechanised divisions in which some infantry units possessed small tracked carriers. Together with the motorisation of the other infantry and support units, this resulted in highly mobile formations in both armies that could keep pace with armored formations. The Germans used these to exploit breakthroughs in Blitzkrieg offensives, the French envisaged them being used to shift reserves rapidly in a defensive battle.
The Soviet Red Army did not immediately follow this trend because of the confusion of the Great Purge, although they did practice tank desant. The British Army had established an Experimental Mechanised Force in 1927 but failed to pursue this line due to budget constraints and the prior need to garrison the frontiers of the Empire."
"World War II
From the outset of World War II, German mechanised infantry had a disproportionately large number of successful operations. Because their half track APC was more expensive and time-consuming to manufacture than a truck, it should be noted that barely a quarter or a third of the infantry in a Panzer division was mechanized, except in a few favoured formations.
As World War II progressed, the Germans integrated tanks or assault guns with mechanized infantry as combined arms Panzergrenadier Divisions, providing mobile anti-tank defense and close-up direct fire support for the infantry.
Most other armies of the period also fielded mechanized infantry in units up to brigade in size. Their armored divisions and some armored brigades also included a mechanized infantry element for combined arms support. For example, British armoured brigades had a "motor infantry" battalion mounted in Bren carriers or Lend-Lease halftracks. Later in the war, the United States Army used large numbers of M3 Half-track vehicles to give their infantry mobility. All US Armored Divisions had three battalions of 'Armored Infantry' fully mounted in M2 and M3 halftracks. The British and Canadians also used expedients such as the Kangaroo APC.
Like the Germans, the Soviet army fielded division-sized mechanized infantry units which they called Mechanized Corps, usually consisting of one tank brigade and three mechanized infantry brigades, plus artillery and other support units. New Zealand fielded a division that was sent to Italy, with an organization intermediate between an armored division and a mechanized infantry division."
2007-01-02 01:00:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by johnslat 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
A Colonel in the British army developed the idea when he noticed that the only vehicles that could navigate the rough terrain were caterpillar tractors with moving treads. He realized that if such a vehicle were covered with armor, it might be just the very thing to get into and over the other side's trenches.
It was the British.The tanks weren't used in battle until the end of 1916, but then the first batch was tried. Unfortunately most of them broke down before they got very far, but a few did get past the enemy trenches. The army saw the potential and got production underway. A year later, in November of 1917, they were for the first time used effectively to break through the enemy lines.
2007-01-02 00:54:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by felixtricks 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
France was the first to deploy tanks in combat. Followed quickly by Germany and England , still in the first world war. By world war II most powers had armored divisions that basically replaced cavalry.
The role of an armored division is similar to cavalry. Armored divisions are used for ATTACK rather than defense. The idea is that they can go faster than infantry and surround an enemy forcing its surrender.
The Germans found that they could also make frontal attacks with armored divisions, provided they were aided simultaneously by air force ,infantry and artillery in a quick blast. This they called ( and consequently coined the famous term) of Blitzkrieg.
2007-01-02 01:24:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by Robertphysics 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
minimum. The French military (even by the BEF) collapsed interior 6 weeks of the German invasion in 1940, folded and surrendered. unfastened French forces never comprised extra advantageous than 5 divisions at anybody time interior the Allied armies. German scientific records for cover stress workers in the process the occupation of France in WW2 coach conclusively that there have been continuously a tactics, lots extra Germans out of action as a results of STDs caught from drowsing with French women folk than there ever have been as a results of activities of the French Resistance. I trust the concept this became as a results of a loss of energetic management at ideal stages, the two protection stress and political. Britain's war attempt wasn't going lots extra helpful till Churchill took over as best Minister and inspired his us of a and human beings to proceed what, on the time, appeared a hopeless conflict. France, on the different hand, went for the defeatist management of Petain while issues appeared hopeless, (the previous head of state, Reynaud, had desperate to bypass homestead),and for this reason basically basically refused to combat on as a rustic. Petain's government then effectively collaborated interior the German occupation for the subsequent 4 years, almost each and all of the inhabitants following his lead. i don't think of the French would desire to be mocked or ridiculed for this. For an in intensity prognosis of the underlying better half and young little ones components that led to the French defeat in 1940 (a huge ask your self to each physique,not least the Germans), see the impressive 'To Lose a conflict: France 1940' via Alistair Horne.
2016-10-19 08:44:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
the Brits figured out using tanks ( the code word for an armored fighting vehicle that stuck as the name ) in WW1 to break the trench lines and barbed wire fields....and from 1917 to 1940 almost all armies had tanks.........in general they were assigned to an infantry division, so each would have 25-40 tanks in support. The German innovation was to take all the tanks, mass them together in what is now known as an armored division, and send them off in a mass of armored cavalry....
2007-01-02 00:58:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by yankee_sailor 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
That depends on what start-date you use for the war. Most consider the German invasion of Poland as the beginning of the war, in which case the Germans were first. Doctrinally the Panzergrenadier was the first as well. But the Japanese had been using armored cars in China, if you want to be argumentative.
2007-01-02 03:47:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Apparently they were disguised as water tanks during their development, and the name stuck.
2007-01-02 01:05:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Alex 5
·
0⤊
0⤋