How hard would it be for a modern soldier to fight in World War II with period tactics, weapons, etc

My latest writing project is based around the premise of people being unwillingly sucked back into time into an alternate version of World War II. By 'alternate', I mean one of the time travelers has taken upon himself to shake up the war by changing one of the participating countries to suit his vision. I'm just making that clear because I know writers love using World War II as a pastiche for their own conflicts.

Anyway, one of the characters is a retired British soldier who finds himself being forced to dress up in a Brodie helmet and carry a bolt action rifle instead of the semi-automatic rifle he is used to.

I know military tactics and technology have evolved since 1945, but I was curious as to how difficult it'd be for a soldier trained in modern tactics (focused around fighting terrorists rather than the official military of a enemy nation) and weapons (semi automatic rifles instead of bolt action rifles) to adjust to fighting in the style of period soldiers.

I know the British Army has recently begun training it's soldiers in trench warfare, but with how mobile World War II was, I'm not sure if that's applicable in my story.

It'd be helpful if I got the perspectives of people from other countries like the United States, Germany, etc. How hard would it be for your country's soldiers to adjust fighting in WWII-era conditions?

 

As a general rule I think spending decades doing nothing but counterinsurgency considerably degrades a military's ability to fight a conventional war. From an individual soldier's perspective though the particular circumstances would probably make the most difference. I vaguely recall that the British army, and the quality of its officers, was pretty uneven in WWII.

 

Modern training and adapting or finding an SMG or machine gun would also be a factor. Though night fighting would be difficult since there would not really be access to night vision gear. So combat effective would probably be better than a WWII soldier, but not an overall game changer since its one modern soldier. Might have a bit of an edge in hand to hand combat as well. Also they would have prior knowledge going in, considering they are from the future. However they would forgo things like body armor and other modern gear that they would be used to. Also prior combat experience would be a factor as to how well they would perform on the battler.

 

I have no personal experience in the military but have done 'some' research.

I don't think they would have that hard a time adjusting. While counter-terrorism is the most likely place a modern soldier will see real combat, they still train for more traditional warfare (at least int he US), that's a big part of what "basic training" is.

I think World 1 or World War 2 are pretty much the baseline model of "modern warfare" you have to go pre-1900s if you want to dramatically throw off a modern soldier. Like I think they'd do okay in World War 2, but I think they'd be in trouble fighting in the (American) Civil War.

 

This is not accurate. The Tommy gun was in common service as well as the Browning Automatic Rifle.

Experience with IEDs would also be a factor.

 

True. The American Civil War is basically the birthplace of modern warfare; this where the world gave birth to long-range snipers, trenches, bunkers, metal ships in general (as opposed to wooden ones), the concentration camp ... hm.

This is also where the style of warfare that evolved during the 18th century, and reached its apex during the Napoleonic Wars -- think marching in columns over open country, forming squares, and the bayonet charge -- met "modern-world" military technology, with devastating results.

The Franco-Prussian War of 1871 showed that it was still possible to win a war "before the leaves fell", but that window was closing. The Boer Wars showed (or should've showed) everyone that.

As for the original question: I think it's been answered by people with more experience than I have. Nathan, unless your protag is a kind of Rambo-style super-hero, I don't think he'll achieve much by himself. Millions of soldiers marching across millions of miles, and he's just one man. The chances of him dying or being seriously injured are just too great. Let's look at how this could happen ... but first, let's define "a retired soldier".

By "a retired soldier", I have to make three assumptions:

1. Your protagonist is "permanently retired", i.e. no longer on active duty; a civilian.
2. Your protagonist is male. No sexism intended; that's just the way things were. No-one in WW2 would allow women on the front lines (although there were such things as the WAAF, the WRENs, the Soviet women flyers who performed such heroic deeds etc...) but most of them were men. This is especially evident in the German armies.
3. Your protagonist is in reasonably good shape, physically and mentally.

So: how could your protagonist be killed, or seriously injured, or be otherwise forced out of the conflict? Take your pick:

1. Enemy fire (or friendly fire), obviously.

2. Unfamiliar (or bad) food, and its effects on his stomach. What people ate then is not what we eat now. I don't care how tough you are, you're not a good soldier if you've constantly got the runs.

3. Bad water. How does he know what's safe to drink? Is the water safe? How can he tell?

4. Unfamiliar geography, e.g. straying into an area he shouldn't because he doesn't know what's there. Or even deciding, on a hot day, to strip off and cool off in a river ... and drowning.

5. Unfamiliar diseases that we don't have now (thanks to vaccines). How long has it been since an adult has died, or been incapacitated by ... Polio, Hep A, Hep B, Chickenpox, Diphtheria, or the Flu? (I'm not counting the ones that affect kids, like HIB, Tetanus, Rubella, Measles, Whooping Cough ... Pneumococcal Disease).

Nowadays, we have vaccines for them. Back in the 1940s, we didn't (at least, not for them all). FDR, to name just one famous name, was struck down by polio in 1921, when he was 39, and suffered from it until he died in 1945, aged 63 (but he looked older).

Before your hero goes back, he should see his doctor, get his vaccines, and strengthen his immune system. And finally:

6. Shell shock (as they said in WW1) or "battle fatigue" (in WW2). Your hero's been out of combat for a while. How's he going to react to people dying horribly all around him? Is he used to that? Probably not anymore. Maybe he is; I don't know. But it will make an impression, I'm sure.

So many good men (and teens - and boys!) suffered from this in WW2. Privates Charles E. Kuhl and Paul G. Bennett (who Patton slapped, and more) are just the most famous. Nowadays, we understand more about this condition. Back then, we didn't, and it was seen as cowardice. (Patton probably suffered from it himself). But how will your hero's ideas about this fit in with his unit, or his commander?

All right, I've lectured enough. I'm sorry; I'm sure many people here know more than I do about this. I'm just throwing out some ideas, that's all.

 

To make that work, your protagonist would have to wind up in the body of some higher level flag officer. Otherwise, he would be ignored or institutionalized or perhaps imprisoned.

 

That would depend on the MCs point of entry into the alternate world. If the MC lands in England, the there are a ton of complications to overcome to have an impact beyond his own unit, if even there. On the other hand, if the MC finds himself in France, then he could have a greater impact with in the resistance. Depending on when in the war the MC arrives. For example, what impact on D-Day could the MC have by raiding the supply depots of the German coastal defenses. Or organizing aid to the paratroopers as they land inland of the invasion. Could the MC impact Operation Valkyrie and the plot to assassinate Hitler? Just a few thoughts.

 

At first glance I'd think he might have a bigger/better impact as a sniper or leader of a small, surgical strike unit where he might be able to better apply modern movement/positioning/strategy, or even perhaps better use of older weapons technology (if he carries such knowledge.) Otherwise, if he's "only" one soldier in a large force, he'd probably just blend in. Though again, his modern sensibilities and knowledge would probably serve him better than the typical WWII-era soldier.

 

Well ... would they, though? I'm sorry for asking, I'm just not sure. *shrug* I mean ... obviously, our viewpoints of the world and those of the 1940s are very different, especially regarding the-then enemy (Japanese, Italians, Germans), minorities (e.g. African-Americans, Jews, gays, Native Americans etc.), and women. (I don't include women in the "minority" category, since they're not a minority and never have been).

So ... maybe one of the worst things this MC can do is land in the 1940s, hear how people talk about -- say -- African-Americans, and try to "correct" them. There were no SJWs back then, obviously. He'd be laughed out of the service, or worse.

Then again, what if the MC is a member of a minority group? Suppose he's African-American, or Jewish, or gay, or even all three. How would he deal with that kind of attitude?

Knowledge-wise? I agree that he'd be more knowledgeable than the average "dogface". But what would he be knowledgeable about? Military technology has changed a lot over the past 80 or so years, obviously ... so. *shrug* I don't know the specifics, but if a modern infantryman were to suddenly go back to the 40s, he'd have to handle an M1 Garand instead of an M4A1. (I'm not a military man, I simply googled this). I can't say how they differ, but I'd imagine there would be many, many differences. (Also, our modern man wouldn't have access to modern technology, like -- say -- phosphorous grenades, night-vision goggles, laser scopes, etc.)

Then again, let's say that our man is an expert in modern electronics, and is suddenly dropped into a world that doesn't have them ... not even transistor chips or micro-chips (those were developed in the 60s!!!) ... he would obviously have to adapt his thinking, or even start from scratch. No computers, of course -- or rather, the most advanced ones are restricted to the boffins at Bletchley Park, etc.!!

So, yeah ... it's not realistic to drop him in a war-zone, and expect him to become Superman.

OK, never mind military technology. What about something relatively every-day, like ... plumbing? In 1940 nearly half of houses lacked hot piped water, a bathtub or shower, or a flush toilet. Over a third of houses didn't have a flush toilet.

Or what about heating? In 1940, half of all households heated with coal, and another quarter heated with wood. By 1960, fuel oil and natural gas were the primary heating fuels. By 2000, less than 5% of houses were still heated with wood or coal. (Source: https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2004/data/papers/SS04_Panel1_Paper17.pdf)

In short: our modern man would face a HUGE culture shock. The USA of the 1940s was completely different to that of the 2020s ... that much should be obvious.

 

Yeah, I can see all that but I was thinking pure combat tactics and movements that would give him an advantage over your average grunt in the '40s. Think along the lines of Kyle Reese in the opening of the original Terminator. Talk about a shock (culture or otherwise) entrance into the past.

First the dude gets slammed side-first, naked, into a dirty alley from whatever equivalent height. Lucky he didnt break ribs, a hip, or an arm. Or maybe he did, but he'd been through worse in his life and shrugged it off.

But within 10 minutes, he found clothes, disarmed a cop, found out the date, evaded another ten cops, stole another weapon, found records of Sarah Connor and then escaped into the night. Without his advanced post apocalyptic/proto-military training for sneaking around and fearlessly and yet tactically evading his enemies, would he have been able to do all that when he arrived rather painfully in 1984? It's doubtful.

To your point, it depends on how the character would be utilized. He could either be in a major culture shock as you suggest, in which case he'd probably be labeled a nutjob or worse and not taken seriously by his comrades. Or someone might figure out that this guy can offer some different things or skills that none of us have the perspective on, so let's give him some special assignments befitting his talents and knowledge and let him be a badass for us. Or, both

There was an episode of the TV show Angel where something related happened. The military knew Angel was a vampire and put him to task to help secure a captured German submarine, because he was the only one who they could literally drop in the ocean so he could enter the sub from the outside. Why? He's a vampire. Doesn't need oxygen. EZPZ. Now, he didnt get sent back in time to do this job, but it's an example of a military outfit utilizing a character's unique abilities or knowledge to carry out a mission.

 

So he goes back in time. He knows the future; even if he's not sure of the exact dates, he knows about Pearl Harbor, the invasion of the USSR, etc. As an officer, he probably studied a number of historic conflicts, including WW2. He may even remember a few things about how the allies broke the Enigma machine.

I'm thinking that giving him a gun and sending him out to fight the enemy would be the worst use of him possible.

 

Apples and oranges. In the world of terminator, the resistance training would be highly specialized in stealth and evasion.

The modern military training has been shifting towards insurgency, not the fixed battles between armies that WWII was. Additionally, the modern military makes greater use of close air support, and technology.

On a tactical level, infantry tactics haven't changed that much, other than the greater use of mechanized forces, ie Bradley's or air mobile tactics.

I would suggest using army field manuals on infantry as part of your research you can find WWII era manuals here https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/FM/index.html

 

There's a great movie that already did this idea..

The Final Countdown. I highly recommend it if you haven't already seen it.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080736/

 

Exactly. Most of the things that work in a Hollywood film would never work in real life.

Let's take the Terminator from Damage 718's post.

I'm sure there are worse things in life than broken bones, but ... um. OK.

I have broken a bone or two, and it's not fun. The last bone I broke was a fracture in my big toe, which made almost everything an agony for a while, until my podiatrist finally ordered me one of those moon boot things to wear over my foot.

(Sorry: a 'moon boot' is also known as a Controlled Ankle Motion (CAM) boot. It's an orthopedic device prescribed for the treatment and stabilization of severe sprains, fractures, tendon or ligament tears in the ankle or foot. It's called a 'moon boot' because it looks like something an astronaut might wear).

Anyway, you can't wear a shoe with it, and it was only for one leg, so I was hobbling about everywhere for a few weeks ... but at least it was bearable, and I was also lucky that it was summer. From the time of the accident to the end of the recuperation, it took nearly a year.

So, let's go back to Ah-Nold as the Terminator. If that had happened to an average person -- or even US Marine -- he would be in all kinds of strife. Naked, dirty, possible broken bones, in pain, in public, and maybe also hungry and thirsty. No disrespect to the Marines, they're tough, but I doubt any Marine would accept being air-dropped into the unknown in the nude. That doesn't sound like Hollywood, it sounds more like porn.

But hey, it's Hollywood, which is a wonderful, MAGICAL place!! It's a place where nothing bad happens to good guys, but only to the bad guys! Why? 'Cos Hollywood.

More than doubtful -- impossible.

I don't think the training has much to do with it. The T-800s are all identical in appearance: a muscular, male human exterior made up of living tissue, covering a metal endoskeleton actuated by a powerful network of hydraulic servomechanisms ... which basically provide superhuman strength and resilience. Great.

(And yes, I understand what those individual words mean. But it still sounds like pseudo-scientific techno-babble. But hey, it sounds cool, and the film is exciting, so ... fine?)

 

I know it's Hollywood. I was just citing one example of a soldier sent back in time and how he MIGHT react and applying fictional logic to where, in Reese's scene, there's no way he does all that in his first 10 mins without the training and experience he had in the future.

Could something like that apply to the OP's situation? Maybe, maybe not. There are no rules that I know of for that kind of thing.

 

Well, um ... fair enough. Nathan (the OP) only tells us that he's writing "an alternate version of World War II". We don't know what genre that is.

If he's writing a fantasy, fair enough -- then Nathan can write his own rules about how things work in the "alternate universe". Fantasy, in this context, could mean something like the first Back to the Future film, only our time-traveler goes back to 1940 (or whatever) instead of 1955. And by the way, we still don't know how this time-travel actually works ... but a nuclear-powered DeLorean is definitely out.

However it works, this fantasy world needs internal rules that everyone in this world follows. If there are no rules at all, then it's chaos, and anything could happen, which is not a good thing when you're trying to plan a story.

But if the genre is "alternate history" or "historical fiction" -- i.e. similar to history, but with only one or two changes -- then the story has to follow history (meaning historical rules, physics etc.), because the setting is still World War II on planet Earth! No-one would believe it if, say, this visitor from the future arrives in 1940 with a gift of nukes, or if he arrives in 1940 and starts playing an electric guitar -- those haven't been invented yet. It'd certainly be unbelievable if he starts playing a Chuck Berry song, and everyone started dancing.

 

No laser ranger finder, or thermal imaging. No sabot rounds. And gasoline engines, which are more likely to be explosively unhappy at being hit. There is also the issue of allied tanks generally being out classed by the axis armor.