"Son of Barbarossa" or "S.o.B." - a What-If where Barbarossa is made to work.

I still suspect it was not up to the first rank German divisions but as you state city fighting tends to be a leveler. How they were equiped and what their supply priority was could have some impact though.

Right, taking a major city with an armored force. Sounds like a good reciepe for looseing the armored force for little gain. Without adequate infantry armor is at a significant disadvantage in a city. You also need to make up your mind. Does the armored force do it or do the Hungarians?

If you include good conditions for making a rapid advance as part of the definition of good weather, no it doesn't.

Or not. Even if it means more Soviets encircled initially if they fight longer and inflict more losses on the Germans the point will come sooner where the Germans are no longer able to incircle the Soviets.

 

As I said if the opportunity to take the city on the march comes along (as it did in real history) then the Panzers should take it.
If not the Hungarians and other can storm it later.

Firm ground and clear skys are good conditions.

Yeah that point will come in 1943 not June 1941.

 

But the ground wasn't "firm" in a good part of the region in May and even into June. There went your month.

I never said it would come in June of 41 but given your scenario we might start seeing cases of it in August or September.

 

Well poor ground conditions did not hamper AGN or the German invasion of the Balkans.

Yes im sure after the 6 Gladiator fighters on Malta had broke the back of the Italian airforce in June 1940 the Italians would sued for peace.

 

They didn't? Care to support this?

Were the ground conditions bad in the Balkans? Somewhat different topography and climate as well, no? On the otherhand it appears that ground conditions did indeed hamper them to some extent. From:
THE GERMAN CAMPAIGN IN THE BALKANS (SPRING 1941): PART II

I guess that's enough to make my point.

???? where did that come from.

 

Except and earlier Barbarossa would have run into the unusual heavy rain and had been caught with there pant's down due to it. So they attack 3-5 weeks earlier, Maybe move a couple hundred miles (that's a long shot) but in that time the Russians have reorganized and started to hit back better then they did historically, Comparing the Balkans with Barbarossa is like comparing Beer with Soft drink, They are both entirely different on a whole range of accounts.

 

The Soviets did not manage to hold the line until December 1941.
They are not going to be able to in June 1941 even with less than perfect ground conditions.

 

Or not. Obviously the greater distances of Barbarossa allows such effects to multiply. It did however refute your claim of

You are waxing incoherent. No where did I state that 6 Gladiators were going to defeat the Italian airforce or the Italian invasion of Malta. I'm pretty sure in reasonable person would not even have suggested that was my position.

By the way if you learn to use the quote tags properly it makes it a lot clearer who said what. There is a button just above the reply window that will automatically insert and open and close quote tag or you can use {quote} to open one and {/quote} to close one if you replace the "{}" with "[]" brackets.

 

Possibly, Not a fact. But none the less it could give them more time allowing them to actually hold the line sooner then December.

 

It refuted no such thing.
The campaign was a great success in true Blitzkrieg style.
Ground conditions where worse in the Balkans than they would be in Late May 1941 so I think we can conclude it would do little to slow the attack down.

So what is your position?
Do you think Malta could be held against a combined Axis attack and the defeat would knock Italy out of the war much ealier?

 

More likely more time for the Germans to advance in good weather.

 

It most certianly did. Unless you have a very warped definition of "refuted". You claimed they had no problems with ground trafficability I showed that they quite clearly did.

That may be but it is irrelevant to the point I was making.

Would they? How do you kown? I think your conclusions are significantly premature.



So what is your position?
Do you think Malta could be held against a combined Axis attack and the defeat would knock Italy out of the war much ealier?[/QUOTE]

 

You have provided us with nothing to suggest that your evaluation is correct.

 

Apart from actual history.

 

It most certianly did. Unless you have a very warped definition of "refuted". You claimed they had no problems with ground trafficability I showed that they quite clearly did.

No I claimed and I quote "Well poor ground conditions did not hamper AGN or the German invasion of the Balkans."
As stated the Balkan campaign was a great success.

Its very relevant as you suggested the ground conditions would prevent the German invasion being a success.

How do we know? Er because its historic record.

 

It's not at all clear that "actual history" supports your claims.

 

No its just a statement of fact that we now know the weather and ground conditions in 1941 in the USSR and Balkans.

 

And within a few weeks of its begining the ground conditions are firm and the weather very sunny.