What was the effect of new technologies introduced during World War 1?

Answer 1

Tanks, airplanes, machine guns, grenades, and chemical warfare were employed for the first time in World War 1.Because of technological advancements at this time in history warfare was changed because the much more efficient weapons made it much easier to kill the enemy and eliminated chivalry. Because of these new advancements such as tanks, machine guns and lethal gasses such as mustard gas casualties were much higher and trench warfare was introduced to keep soldiers safe while not in combat due to the ability to kill enemies from long distances.

The aforementioned tanks, airplanes, and chemicals were generally the ONLY significant technologies invented DURING the First World War. And, overall, none proved to be a significant factor.

Chemical warfare, while horrible, proved to be unwieldy and unpredictable, and relatively easy to counter. After some limited successes against unprepared opponents, the use of chemical gas had very little tactical benefit; the recognition of this limited utility is that after widespread use in 1915 - except for the short-lived effects of the introduction of mustard gas in 1917 - gas was abandoned by both sides as an effective tactic.

Tanks likewise had very limited impact, though for different reasons. They were not available in sufficient numbers to make a difference when first deployed, and the technology was too new - WW1 tanks were too slow, too expensive, had too little armor, and broke down much too fast. Tanks in WW1 were "proof-of-concept", in that they showed a potential to change warfare, but the actual tank available was not up to the task of being useful. Tanks played no real role in the collapse of the German Army in 1918, and had extremely limited successes on the battlefield.

Airplanes were in a similar position as tanks - the technology was really too new and immature for effective combat use. At best, the airplane provided better observation and reconnaissance ability than previously available, but, in a static trench-warfare setting (with the commonly poor European weather), the amount of benefit this provided is easy to overstate. Tactical and strategic bombing was non-existent; the airplane would have to wait for the wars of the 30s and 40s before becoming a useful (and game-changing) weapon.

On the other hand, several technologies which had been developed over the prior several decades first saw widespread use in European-style combat during WW1, and it was these technologies which proved to define the fighting. A short list would include: the practical submarine, machine guns, mass quantities of long-range artillery, effective hand grenades and mortars, and barbed wire. Lesser-known technologies which weren't as immediately apparent in impact, but still had a noticeable one, were: the diesel engine, motorized vehicles (primarily the tractor, not the automobile/truck), steam turbines, advances in field medicine, and improvements in many chemical processes (most noticeably, the introduction of smokeless powder for firearms, and radically more effective high explosives).

The impact of the aforementioned "pre-existing" technologies varied according to how they were used. Technologies like the submarine, diesel engines, and steam turbines were accompanied by radically new (and innovative) ideas on how to use them - WW1 proved the place where these new ideas were first employed, and they often resulted in a revolutionary new fighting style. Other technologies, such as the machine gun, barbed wire, heavy artillery, and smokeless powder, were simply incorporated into the existing military mindset, without the accompanying re-examination of their potential impact. This set of technologies had been previously employed in a variety of smaller wars (primarily in colonial and non-European settings) in one-sided manners, and their impacts against similarly-equipped opponents were never really considered. It is these technologies which are primarily responsible for the wholesale slaughter of WW1 - the prevailing military theory had failed to consider the characteristics of this recent technology advances, and thus, missed the radical change required by their employment by BOTH sides of a conflict.

Overall, brand-new technology in WW1 had no real impact; rather, it was the first use of many existing technologies in a European-style mass combat situation which defined the radical form of WW1..

Answer 2

Barbed wire, machine guns, poison gas, tanks, airplanes, and submarines changed warfare as the world knew it. War used to be based solely on number and how fast you could march. Now all that mattered was who got there first. By liberally placing barbed wire, they could just sit there with machine guns, and literally mow the enemy down as the marched towards them. Poison gas was introduced at the Second Battle of the Ypres and was highly effective to the point were it was banned after World War I was finished. At first, airplanes were only used to take photographs of the war on both sides, but soon they were dropping bombs and gas, and fighting each other in the air. Submarines could take out cargo ships transporting food and supplies to enemy lines, while the contribution of the tank is a little more obvious.

Answer 3

They allowed Germany to take France easily