Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

The myths of WWII (Eastern Europe)

Discussion in 'Eastern Europe' started by LJAd, Mar 14, 2011.

  1. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    They attacked in june with 2.7 million (some 120 divisions),which were reinforced between june and september by 28 divisions of the OKH reserve (600000 men).The 2 PD of this reserve (2 + 5 PD) were committed only in september.
    There also were 6 (later 9 )security divisions ,small police units,which were not engaged at the front .
     
  2. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    I guess the info among multiple sources always tends to be a bit different but to me 2.7 mil just seems a bit low. No matter ;)
     
  3. Jager

    Jager Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    3
    The heights of nazi extent, (territory wise was in 1942). Also to clear up the other comment from slonisk regarding which army is being spoken. It refers to the entire german army in 1942, that is the ones fighting in africa ostfront, everywhere. This army was almost as large as the one in 1941. and although most of the experienced officers were lost in barbarossa only to be replaced by new recruits, the germans in 1942 were far better equipped. New weapons like MG42, pak40, Panzer IV ausf. F2/G models and the Tiger were now available in 1942. In 1941 the German army did not have access to weapons of this quality. The best German panzers were no match for the russian KV's and T-34's in 1941 and they struggled highly against the Zis 2 gunand other russian weapons. The German army was not due for completion untill 1943. that is why alot of people argue that the Germans would have had a better chance had they waited (not referring to that as my view but very logical in this aspect)
     
  4. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    I too would agree that Germany's war machine as whole in 42' was better than she was in 41'. IMO, the best army that Germany had in 42' was the same one which marched into Paris a few years earlier. This was the most modern and mechanized army Germany had (some would say) and in late August 1942 this army consisting of 330,000 men crossed the Don and entered a city called Stalingrad...
     
  5. Jager

    Jager Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    3
    im assuming thats a typo and you meant august of 42 but yes and the defeat of this army at stalingrad and the near simultaneous defeat of DAK in africa are considered the turning points of the war for germany or the point where germany had lost initiative and was now on the defensive.
     
  6. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    Yes, thank you that was definately a typo.

    I would not consider Germany on the defensive after Stalingrad, IMO that would come after Kursk.
     
  7. ptimms

    ptimms Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2011
    Messages:
    294
    Likes Received:
    98
    I agree the Pak 40 and MG42 are available in 1942 but the numbers of PzIV with the long guns are small, even the PZIII's are still often the short 50mm L42 and Tigers even less. The first Tiger battalions start arriving in Nov 42 and even then the battalions had more PZIII's than Tigers. More Panzer IV's are available but if you look at the Stalingrad campaign they are way fewer in number than PZIII. In June/July 42 for example 14th Panzer has 42 L42 Pz III's, 19 L60 Pz III's but only 4 PzIV's with the long gun(even less than the 14 Pz II's it had). 24th is similar 12 long gun Pz IV's and 18 L60 Panzer III's but 39 PzIII L42 and 19 L24 Pz IV's again there are more PZII's than long IV's with 13 present. Of the entire Panzer force at the start of the 42 campaigning season the most Pz IV's with the long gun is 12 in a few units but 4th, 5th, 8th, 13th, 17th, 18th 19th and 20th have none at all and nearly the entire strength of 8th Pz is 65 Pz 38T's. By 18th November 42 no Panzer Division in the South have more than a dozen PzIV. 24th Pz has 12 Long gun Pz IV, but it has 31 Pz III's and 5 short gun Pz IV. At this time Army Group south lists 6 Tigers.

    It isn't until 1943 that the Panzer IV and Tiger become a significant force and still as late as Kursk which is July 43 there are still large numbers of PZ III's (although mostly L60's) in use. For example both Das Reich and Totenkopf have more PzIII's than IV's at the start of Zitadelle (mind they have a Tiger Company too).
     
  8. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    IMHO,the argument that the 1942 Ostheer was better than the 1941 Ostheer,because it possessed so called better tanks,PAK.....,is very simplistic .
    First,we don't know how many Soviet tanks were eliminated in 1941/1942 by German tanks /PAK
    Second:we only know that the Germans lost in 1941 2300 tanks ,the Soviets 20000,in 1942 the Germans 3200,the Soviets 15000,that would be a loss ratio of 8/1 in 1941,and 5/1 in 1942.But,this is of course irrelevant ,because we don't know the reason .
    One could argue that the Ostheer was better in 1941 than in 1942(not that the ostheer of 1941 was better than the ostheer of 1942),because the Germans had "better" results in 1941 than in 1942,but,OTOH,one could object,that the ostheer of 1941(=A) was fighting against a Soviet Army (=B) that was different than the Soviet Army of 1942 (=D).
    Thus,we have in 1941:A against B,and in 1942,C against D.Drawing any conclusions,is ,IMHO,senseless,it would be comparing 2 sorts of apples with 2 sorts of oranges.
    It is the same with the weapons:would the Germans have had better results if they had Tigers in 1940,and Panthers in 1941?
    Would the US have had better results in 1941 with Pattons,instead of Shermans ?
     
  9. Jager

    Jager Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    3
    well that is an argument by many. that if the germans had waited untill 1944 when its armed force were due for completion then they would have won (not my opinion but just saying, and not saying its right or wrong) And there is logic to it if you look at it from the weaponry view. Simple things like say if the germans had started barbarossa with the pak 40 instead of door knockers. If they had entered russia with the stg-44 instead of K98's? if they had the MG42 instead of 34? Panthers instead of mark IV's. Tigers. These weapons could have had huge effects if the germans had them when they first entered russia. It most likely would of at least saved german lives and took more soviet. helping to offset the numbers a shad bit dont you think?
     
  10. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Except they probably wouldn't have entered the war with those at least not in great numbers. Indeed Germany was on the road to bankrupcy in the early 40's and only managed to stave it off as long as they did with the gold reserves of Austria and Checkoslavakia followed by the war. In the mean time the allies are also building up their forces. The Soviets are likely to have a lot more T-34's and there's at least some chance they will have had time to recover from the purges (provided there aren't more purges). Likewise the Western navies have been built up to the point that the war at sea is a non starter for Germany. Japan will have either capitulated, run out of oil, or be very near defeat as it is overwhelmed by the Western allies. Relativly speaking the French, British, and US armies will also be stronger compared to the German one.
     
  11. Jager

    Jager Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    3
    I dont think the balance would of been too far off. German production was not as bad as it seems. yes it minor compared to USSR and the Us but german production was more than able to compete against UK and IMO better than the french. The French were wasting their budget on a defense system anyways and by 44 they prolly stil wouldnt have been done. The British wee concentrated on the navy. The soviets would still be outproducing the Germans but they were from the beginning anyways so it does not seem a factor to me. If German industry is not bombed and the needs of the replacement for german weapons is not needed then I think German production stays good. The germans did manage to produce 493 of the 1500 KT's ordered using one plant that at one point had nearly 90 percent of its floor wiped out in bombing raids. And if the E-series tiger and panthers came out then production of those tanks would of been sped up even more.
     
  12. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    Both the Tiger and Panther (especially) were a response to Soviet tanks which the Germans didn't know existed (T-34, KV-1). Not to mention that by 1944 the Germans would be facing over 30,000 T-34's and a nuclear bomb a yr later....

    This debate is a none starter. Germany was only successful in Russia because Hitler attacked at the best possible time, Russia was not ready for war. When she got her act together, Germany was finished.
     
    DocCasualty likes this.
  13. Jager

    Jager Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    242
    Likes Received:
    3
    To my knowledge the Germans were developing a HT as early as 1937. The Tiger was a last minute tweak as a response to russian tanks in 41mbut still it would have been developed. The panther yes but to assume that the germans would not develop this anyways would be a little to much to calculate because then there is no telling what they would of developed otherwise. I dont think the russians would of had 30k T-34's by 44. 40 only saw 115 produced and 41 only saw 2800. The soviets obviously accelerated production when they saw what they had so you cant be sure that the soviets would of produced 30k of them. and i dont buy the USSR was not ready for war. It was ready for war. it still had a larger combat force than the germans. I only buy that the frontier armies had been suprised. after that the soviets were ready.
     
  14. DocCasualty

    DocCasualty Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    54
    Location:
    Northern Michigan
    "When German troops invaded Poland, the Soviet Union was ill prepared to fight a major war. Although military expenditures had increased dramatically during the 1930s and the standing army was expanded in 1939, Soviet weaponry was inferior to that of the German army. More important, eight of the nation's top military leaders, including Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevskiy, had been executed in 1937 in the course of Stalin's purges; thus the armed forces' morale and effectiveness were diminished. The time gained through the pact with the Nazis was therefore critical to the recovery of Soviet defenses, particularly because Hitler's forces had overrun much of Western Europe by the summer of 1940. To strengthen its western frontier, the Soviet Union quickly secured the territory located in its sphere of interest. Soviet forces seized eastern Poland in September 1939; entered Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in October 1939; and seized the Romanian territories of Bessarabia (later incorporated into the Moldavian Republic) and northern Bukovina (later added to the Ukrainian Republic) in June 1940. Only Finland resisted Stalin's program of expansion, first by refusing to cede territory and then by putting up a determined defense along the Mannerheim Line when the Red Army invaded in November 1939. The Soviet-Finnish War (also known as the Winter War) of 1939-40 exposed grave deficiencies in Soviet military capabilities, which Hitler undoubtedly noted." Russia - The War Years

    The USSR was ill-prepared to fight a war with Germany at the time. That's why Stalin jumped at the chance to sign a non-aggression pact with Germany, to buy time to build up to the war he knew was inevitable with Hitler. The above quote is the first hit I obtained with Google. Almost any other source would agree with this verbatim.
     
  15. Tamino

    Tamino Doc - The Deplorable

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2011
    Messages:
    2,645
    Likes Received:
    305
    Location:
    Untersteiermark
    Indeed, economy was one of the most decisive factors that contributed to the outcome of the war.

    Hitler’s Four Year Plan memorandum of mid 1936 was response to the worsening economic situation. To overcome economical constraints he has set a timetable for the war: Germany had to be ready for the war within four years. In 1938 the future allies combined had about 25% advantage in gross domestic product (GDP) over Germany. After the annexation of Austria, Czechoslovakia and occupation of Poland and France, Germany has successfully extracted resources from the occupied countries and gained significant advantage over Allies: combined GDP of allied nations was just about 60% of German.

    With Barbarossa, the economic situation just worsened: USSR has lost not just territories and human lives but their GDP has halved due to loss of significant industrial and agricultural resources. In that respect 1942 was the worst year for Allies but with the entrance of America in the war and its significant economic growth starting with 1942 has shifted equilibrium in favor of Allies. At the beginning of 1942 it was apparent that Germany cannot win while in 1943 the defeat has become imminent due to huge economic advantage of allies.
     
  16. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    In june 1941,the offensive capacities of the Soviet Union were inexistant:they were depending on the strength of the Soviet monile forces(the mechanized corps),and these were nihil.
    The first 8 mechanized corps were formed in june 1940,the 9th in november:all they possessed were tanks,but,for the remainder,there was a big shortage .
    In february 1941,not less than 20 (!!!) new mechanized corps were formed,IMHO,a total waste,whatever,in june 1941,not a single was ready (the US needed 2 years to make ready a division) .
    hehe 17th MC only had 36 (training) tanks,the average MC in the western military districts only had 38 % of the very low authorized number of motor vehicles,very low:the authorized number of tanks in a Soviet tank division was 375,the authorized number of motor vehicles was 1568 (a ratio of 4.2 to 1),for a German PzD,it was 2304 to 182 (a ratio of 12.7 to 1),and the Germans had 2.5 ton trucks,the Soviets 1.5 ton trucks.
    The result was that the PzD had almost 5 times as much "transport lift capacity" as a Soviet tank division ,with the following result :the 6th MC (in the Western special military district) had 1021 tanks (of which 352 T 34 and KV1),but only 29 % of its motor vehicles:after 2 weeks it was destroyed without inflicting any serious damage on any German units .Most Soviet tanks in the initial fase of Barbarossa were abandoned,because of shortage of ammunition,fuel,spare parts:a total of 6800 between 22 june and 10 july .
    Source:The Actual Strength of all Soviet Land Combat Units in a deployed State on 22 june 1941.(by Nigel Askey)
     
  17. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    Again, had the Germans never seen a T-34 there IMO, there would have been no Panther (no need for it) as for 30k T-34s.... Over 60k were produced during the war so 30,000 would not be a problem (Russia had always had huge
    number in tanks and even today has over 25k). But let's say that the Germans encountered half of that (15,000) instead of a few hundred which they historically had, me thinks, they would have found themselves in a world of Sh*t. ;)

    Now for the "I dont buy that Russia wasnt ready for war.." no surprise really. Prepare yourself friend the following might scare you!

    Ordered by Stalin and prepared in early 1941 by G.K. Zhukov, the new Chief of the Genral Staff, State Defense Plan 1941 (DP41) reflected the assumption that the Red Army would begin military operations in response to an aggressive attack. Therefore, while defensive in a strategic sense, the plan and the military thought that it echoed was inherently offensive in nature.

    Dp41 and its associated mobilization plan required the Red Army to deploy 237 of its 303 divisions in the Baltic Special, Western Special and Kiev Special Military Districts and the 9th seperate Army which, when war began, would form the Northwestern, Western, Southwestern and ultimately, Southern Fronts. As a whole, Red Army forces in the western Soviet union were to deploy in two strategic echelons. The first was to consist of 186 divisions alligned to four operating fronts, and the sencond was to include 51 divisions orgnised into five armies under High Command (Stavka) control. In turn, the four operating fronts were to deploy their forces in three successive belts, or operational echelons, arrayed along and behind the new frontier. The first operational echelon formed a light covering force along the border, and the second and third echelons, each of roughly equal size were to add depth to the defense and conduct counterattacks and counterstrokes.

    Mobilization difficulties in early 1941, however; precluded full implementation of DP41. Consequently , on 22 June 1941 the first strategic echelon's three operational belts consisted of 57, 52 and 62 divisions. By the 22 June 1941 neither the forward military districts nor the five armies had completed deploying in accordance with the official mobilization and deployment plans. Worse still, Soviet war planners had fundamentally misjudged the situation, not only by concentrating their forces so far forward, but also by expecting the main enemy thrust to occur south of the Pripiat Marshes. Thus the Red Army was off-balance and concentrated in the southwest when the main German mechanized force advanced further north. Finally, the Red Army had already largely abandoned and cannibalized their pre-1939 defenses along the former Polish-Soviet frontier and were erecting new fortified regions in the western portions of the so called Special Military Districts. Despite prodigious efforts, however; the new defenses were INCOMPLETE when the Germans attacked.


    By May 1941 the Red Army division was woefully understrength, with most divisions around 8,000 -10,0000 men or less even before the German onslaught.

    The MIG -3 fighter and the excellent Il-2 Sturmovik ground attack airplane were in some ways superior to their counterparts, were just entering service. Pilots were also in transition to their new planes, many only had a "hand full" of hours in the air when the Germans invaded. Some even fired at their own bombers not realizing they were new Russian birds...

    Lets not also forget that when the war broke out, the Russians just began fielding their newest weapons such as the Katusha (multiple rocket launcher) and new tanks (T-34 medium and the KV heavies) that were markedly superior to all current and projected German vehicles.

    -----Glantz-----

    What the Germans did was attack every echelon independently thus always outnumbering and outgunning the Red Army on every local front (a task far more fromidable had the echelons been complete)

    When Hitler invaded, Russia was at her most vulnerable state while Germany was far from it. RUSSIA WAS NOT READY.
     
  18. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    Just stumbled onto this peice of work... Where on earth do you get your information from Jager?! The Russians counter attacked only 4 times and 1 on a major scale during Barbarossa, is that so?

    Well lets take a look shall we?

    -The first Soviet counter attack occured on June 23-25 (yup just one day after the invasion) by a General I.V. Boldin (someone you probably never heard of... he was a Spanish civil war veteran and one of the few who escaped Stalin's initial purges) at Grodno.

    -On July 12th Stavka ordered Tymoshenko to launch another counter attack at Babrusk... Tymoshenko took the apportunity and ambushed the advancing Germans with the first ever massive Soviet artillery barage. While ultimately a failure, it did inflict heavy casualties on the Germans and slowed them down by a whole week. This encounter is also quite significant because it helped Hitler make up his mind in sending Guderian south to help secure Ukraine...

    - July 23 - August 7, Timoshenko launches counteroffensive - Group Kachalov

    - July 24 - July 27, Timoshenko counteroffensive- Groups Kalinin & Khomenko, plus Gorodovikovs cavalry raid

    -July 29- July 31 Timoshenko counteroffensive- Group Maslinikov

    - August 11th, the Soviets begin a general offensive around Yelnia

    -Sept 6, the Soviets re-occupy Yelnia. Hitler issues his directive 35.

    -November 14-16 Zhukov launches attacks against Army Group Center

    And lets not forget the persistent counter attacks against Guderians left flank which ultimately doomed Germany's southern pincer against Moscow and cause Guderians first defeat in Tula, by none other than then General I.V. Boldin.

    Care to recant your silly post?
     
  19. urqh

    urqh Tea drinking surrender monkey

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    955
    They were being rounded up or withdrawing while Zhuukov built up an organized force to conduct a counteroffensive. that was zhukovs strategy. The russian forces were never trying to fight back or beat the Germans they were being sacrificed to save time for zhukov to organize and build up a force. Hence they stood their ground and got rounded up while the rest withdrew to the next defensive position. The counterattacks they conducted were minor and a failure.

    Even if the above statement was correct...Sounds like the strategy for the BAOR in Germany in the cold war...We would have done nothing different but took the hammer blows while others arranged our sacrifice payback. Sounds a reasonable strategy unless your in the line at the time..I'll side with Sion though on the actualls...
     
    Jager likes this.
  20. hyde

    hyde Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    2
    Actually the Soviet artillery had reworked their fire control tables and tactics towards massed barages already during the Winter War. The effects of this tuning of tactics can be seen in the battles fought in February and March 1940. So the 'first ever' part is a bit stretch.
     

Share This Page