Thoughts on North Africa?

I do think also that ULTRA was the main Allied advantage over us. Knowing exactly what is the enemy going to do is the best for warfare. And I would say that the Allies had much better intelligence teams than we did. The Soviet Maskirovka was just the act of diversion taken to perfection!!! They cheated us over and over again in a genious way. And we must not forget about Pas de Calais, Norway, the Balcans, etc... When he transferred vital troops there...

 

That, and production/manpower. You're right- it can't be underestimated that the allies commonly knew what the germans were up to. And like you say, that knowledge can be used, in the example of narmandy, not just to know what the enemy is up to but to also actively decieve them.
That's one of the things that impresses me about studying the german army of ww2- despite the often desperate circumstances they faced, the germans were able to put up an impressive fight.

Havne't heard of that, Friedrich. Do tell...

 

[ 22 July 2002, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

Crazy, finally here it is (after writing it three times).

Maskirovka?! It is the most awesome tactic of the Red Army. We had our Blitzkrieg. They had their Maskirovka. It is the most important and genius diversion tactic ever performed. Much more important than the diversion of Pas de Calais and Overlord... compared to the Maskirovka is just a kid's game...
The Maskirovka consist in making the enemy believe you are going to strike in an exact point, but you attack elsewhere. But it is not that simple. You have to make the enemy absolutely sure that you are going to attack in a point and make not let the enemy see a single soldier or gun in the real place of the attack. In this way, the enemy will become weaker in the point of your attack, because he is going to be reinforcing the place of the fake attack. So, you must move a small numbers of troops to the fake attack place, hide them badly and making them seem much larger and stronger than they really are. You must hide them but not very, very well. You cannot put the whole fake army on open field for the enemy to see it. Then he is going to suspect: "Why the enemy is showing me his troops? He wants to cheat on me!" You have to avoid that.
And well, at the real place of the attack you have the huge task of hiding perfectly a large amount of troops. You must coordinate a large amount of workers who will prepare the roads, bridges, communication lines, supply lines and that will prepare the hiding places too. Then you must move your troops and equipment at night and hide them perfectly during the day. You do not use the radio at all nor written orders. Everything is planned orally. You also must not allow enemy reconnaissance aeroplanes to infiltrate and if they achieve to do it: they must see nothing. So, when the attack starts, the surprise factor is 100% complete and it is very important for the success. The rest will be done for the improved mechanised and lightning warfare. The Maskirovka is the compilation of all this hiding and diversion tactics.

There are some examples of this which were real master pieces of cheating.

One happened in autumn-winter 1942. There were plans for enormous counter offensive which had the task of destroying the Wehrmacht with three tactic operations which will make an strategic operation and therefore victory. First, colonel general Vasilievski should surround and destroy the VI German army at Stalingrad with operation “Little Saturn”. After doing this, “Saturn” should focus an attack on Rostov to trap and destroy Army Sub-group A in the Caucasus. At the same time of “Little Saturn”, marshal Zhúkov should launch operation “Mars” in Moscow area, surround and destroy the German IX army. After “Mars” and “Saturn”, “Jupiter” will come, to encircle and destroy Army Group Centre. The key of this was the Maskirovka. Let the Germans know that they were not going to attack and if they did that they did not know where, how and how strong the attack would be. We know what happened with “Little Saturn”. The Germans did know about the bad and vulnerable position of the VI army but the flanks were not reinforced because our intelligence had made clear (thanks to the Maskirovka) that the real attack was going to happen in Moscow, so IX army was reinforced instead of the VI. Once “Little Saturn” was launched we did not realise about the real danger because the Maskirovka had made us believe that it was a weak attack… That operation was supposed to destroy an army of 90.000 men, not 350.000. It went far better than planned. But, thanks to Von Manstein’s skills and strong positions, “Saturn” could not be launched and Army sub-group A was retired from the Caucasus relatively untouched. And, in Moscow, even if the Maskirovka disguised the strength of the attack, “Mars” was a total failure because the attack happened in the very place where was expected.

And then, in 1944 came the greatest Maskirovka of all with operation “Bagration”. The Soviets reinforced before our noses the Baltic Front and made us sure that a huge offensive was going to be launched against Army groups South and North Ukraine. Then we reinforced the South with a lot of aeroplanes and a powerful armoured corps, all at expenses of Army Group Centre. Thanks to the Maskirovka we could not see 166 Soviet divisions in front of Army Group Centre. So, when the attack came on June 22nd 1944, astonished and weak troops of this group had to fight without any advantages. The result: III Armoured army, II army and part of IX army were destroyed (27 divisions annihilated, 18 severely damaged), totalising 400.000 casualties, including 100.000 KIA. That was the greatest defeat of the Wehrmacht and the greatest victory of the Red Army. Bloody D-day has all the attention, but it was just a kid’s game compared to this.

 

Thanks, Friedrich! Obviously you went to some effort there!

I'll have to read up a bit on those campaigns... With Bagration though, I've gotten the impression that the Russians simply overwhelmed the Germans with numbers. Do you think the deception made a significant difference? Would the germans have been able to stop Bagration? I'd be interested in your opinion there...

I'd agree that when considering the scale of the battles, battles on the russian front generally made battles in the western theater seem small! Just compare Normandy to Kursk... almost no comparison...
(of course we must always pay respect to soldiers who fought in any of the battles... don't want to belittle the service of any soldiers for any side)

One question though- wasn't the deception for the Normandy invasion actually a version of Maskirovka? The allies convinced Hitler the attack would come at Pas De Calias, not Normandy. And the allies put on the whole deception with Patton's phantom army to convince the germans they were coming... that seems like the same idea...
(this kind of goes right back to the codebreaking thing, at least in the western theater- a war of information)

 

Bagration stopped? Perhaps. You must remember that a big part of the Luftwaffe was transferred South and a powerful Panzerkorps (I cannot remember the number) which was the only armoured strong force of Army Group Centre at that time was diverted to the South also. Maybe with those tanks and aeroplanes the flanks of the Soviet offensive could have been attacked and possibly stopped. But we must consider here that the samshing force of the Soviets was just overwhealming... Even with that armoured corps the proportion would have been 4 to 1 in tanks, kind of.

 

Bagration stopped? Perhaps. You must remember that a big part of the Luftwaffe was transferred South and a powerful Panzerkorps (I cannot remember the number) which was the only armoured strong force of Army Group Centre at that time was diverted to the South also. Maybe with those tanks and aeroplanes the flanks of the Soviet offensive could have been attacked and possibly stopped. But we must consider here that the samshing force of the Soviets was just overwhealming... Even with that armoured corps the proportion would have been 4 to 1 in tanks, kind of.

And Pas de Calais is a kind of amateur Maskirovka, indeed. But Normandy was not 100% surprise, by example. And later, the battle of Normandy took 40.000 casualties only. That is why I call it a kid's game.

 

Friedrich :

What were the dates of the Bagration offensive ?
I'll give you my thoughts on the Luftwaffe sources once I have dates.....

E dang my eyes are burning from the smoke.....

 

Operation "Bagration". Offensive destinated to smash Army Group Centre and realease Bielorrusia from the Germans. Launched on June 22nd 1944, three years after "Barbarossa". It engaged three Soviet Army Groups. In order, North to South: 3rd Bielorrusian Front of Chernyakhovsky, 2nd Bielorrusian Front of Zhakarov and 1st Bielorrusian Front of Rokossovsky. 3rd and 1st were the pincers and 2nd was going to be the sweeper... It engaged 2.400.000 men of the Red Army, 36.000 guns, 5.200 tanks and 5.300 aeroplanes. Army Group Centre of Generalfeldmarschall Ernst Busch faced it. North to South: 3rd Armoured Army, Generaloberst Georg Hans Reinhardt, 4th Army, General der Infanterie Kurt von Tippelkirch, 2nd Army, Generaloberst Walter Weiß and 9th Army, Generaloberst Josef Harpe. LVI Panzerkorps of General der Infanterie Friedrich Schultz (80% of the armoured forces of the Army Group)had been transferred to Army Group "South Ukraine" of Generalfeldmarschall Walter Model.

When the offensive came took everybody unaware. The pincers closed Southwest of Minsk on July 3rd 1944 and encircled 3rd Armoured Army, 4th Army and part of 9th Army. After losing all these formations, Chernyakhovsky headed to Lithuania and Rokossovsky to Brest-Litovsk. The offensive stopped on August 29th 1944 in river Vistula.

[ 24 July 2002, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

Friedrich:

Since this was in the middle of the Normandy ofensive. The Luftwaffe fighter force put up 26 fighter gruppen in defence of France. I see what little units on the Russian front, JG 51, 52, parts of JG 54 and 77.
Most probably most ground attack and bomber units were serving on the Ost front.

E

 

Good stuff, Friedrich! Interesting take on Bagration. I did some of my required reading up last night ( )- good analysis! I wasn't aware of the extent of Soviet deception. I tend to agree with you on the possible outcome. Had the germans known the true intent of the Russians, they certainly would have had a better chance at slowing or stopping the russians. I would tend to think though that at this point the best the germans could have done was slow the russians. We know about the russian manufacturing capacity by this point, and we also know of the russian general's lack of concern for casualties. Considering this, I think they probably would have eventually overwhelmed the germans. Would have been interesting though- the german army of ww2 was one of the most accomplished defensive force of all time...

Normandy may not have been a suprise for all the german troops, but we must remember two things- first off, it WAS a complete suprise to Hitler; even as the invasion forces were landing, Hitler believed it was a diversion. And more important- since Hitler had given the order that no large groups in Normandy move without his direct permission, it didn't really matter what anyone else thought! Kampfgruppe von Luck was within easy reach of the Normandy beaches with a powerful panzer force; yet since Hitler was convinced the invasion was only a diversion, he didn't release von Luck until it was far too late. In this case, Hiler himself ensured the allied deception would succeed.

40,000 is certainly less casualties than many of the eastern battles, but "a kid's game" may be downplaying it a bit too much, I'd say...

Erich, I'm starting to worry... how bad are those fires? Not too close to homes, I hope...

 

Erich, were there just four bloody Jagdgeschwadern to protect a 2.200 kilometres front?!!!! And I suposse they were in the South. I cannot imagine what happened in the air with those 5.300 Soviet aeroplanes!!! And that was only in Bielorrusia!!! Perhaps the Red Air Force had at least 9.000 aeroplanes when Bagration... My God!!!

Normandy indeed was a nice divertment. You cheated at us quite well. And yes, Hitler and Von Runstedt believed with all reason that the invasion would come in Pas de Calais. Their best spies (actually counter-spies) and little reconaissence forces had told them all that Pas de Calais was the place to go. Put yourselves in Hitler's shoes for a while. You will consider then, that if you have been warned by your men that it is more probable that the invasion would be at Pas de Calais than elsewhere, then, even if the Normandy invasion happens. I can assure you would hesitate a while before moving the Panzers... That is why Von Runstedt's plan was a better one: no matter where the invasion would be, because the allied armies are going to be surrounded and anhilated. But it could not be done with the circumstances at the time. And yes, A "kid's game" sounds a little rough, but it just pisses me off when TV and stupid magazines talk about the "Glorious D-day, the day when Hitler lost WWII..." My a...!!! The 80% of the Wehrmacht was destroyed by the Red Army. It is not fair at all that due to stupid telly programmes and magazines the Western allies take the 80% of the credit when they had only the 20%... Sorry if I am ofending some one, but that it the truth.