PDA

View Full Version : Communist German/Soviet Pact against Allies in 1939



zraver
27 Mar 12,, 17:50
The change in history occurred in the Fall of 1918 during one of many gas attacks. A runner, a corporal estranged from his family and a loaner in his regiment is one of many who died that day, if perhaps even more un-mourned than most.

As a result the right wing nationalist movements at odds with the Wiemar Republic were never able to coalesce into a unified voice. Not that this did the Social Democrats any good. Without a strong right wing to counter them the numerous, organized and externally directed communists first gained dominance over the other leftists and then turn on the left of center SDP. By 1933 they gained control of the Reichstag with a slim minority followed by the SDP and then numerous smaller interest and regional parties among them a Bavarian right wing party called the National Socialist. Just days after the communist victory the Reichstag burned to the ground. The accused Arsonist Ernst Rhom was quickly convicted and executed.

However the shock of the fire and his right wing connections provided the cover for the communists to force Hindenburg to pass a series of emergency laws which quickly turned on him and forced out the aging but militantly right wing president out in favor of Ernst Togler the recently appointed chancellor. With the powers of both offices and with civil liberties suspended the communist moved rapidly to ban, suppress and persecute the leadership of all other parties.

The army threatened to intervene supported by the members of the various freikorps and civil war loomed. However in an impassioned address to the army Tolger managed a remarkable feat and convinced the army and much of the population that it was not Stalin who was a threat, but France. After all it was France who had troops on German soil, who has pressed for the ruinous reparations, who took the Saarlands coal even if taking it mean women and children freezing to death.

With the army at bay at least for now, the communist moved on the junkers and industrial concerns like I.G. Farben. This move was widely supported by populace who wanted employment and stable prices. With the army bowing out the junkers who were the last visible right wing hold outs were quickly dispossessed. But the army was not forgotten. In mid 1934 a young officer of French Huguenot decent was arrested and accused of being a spy for France. In his confession he named a member of the general staff. While the colonel accused should have had an impeccable record of loyalty the communist investigation turned up a Belgian mistress and a strange relationship with a Bavarian Catholic named Himmler, plus strange cash deposits in his accounts. This was enough to start a witch hunt and before the army could re-act its core of older Prussian generals was relieved to make way for a new generation of "modern" Germans. Eager to avoid their mentors fate and equally eager to get one of the new command billets several officers quickly sided with the communists in a very timely career move. Arming them were Mainstein, Rommel, Hausser.

The communists next move stunned the world and almost brought war... almost. In November 1934 the communist nationalized the banks of Germany and turned them into simple sites of deposit. All excess funds above a surprisingly low limit were seized, as were all foreign assets held in German banks including balance of payment transfers to France and UK. The communist announced that the seized assets totaled triple what most had thought was held.

Britain and France both threatened to invade and Italy and Poland actually began mobilization until Tolger asked for Soviet help. Stalin quickly announced that 40 divisions were en-route. Since the most direct route was through Poland, Poland's plans to wage war on Germany quickly fell apart. This left Mussolini as the only European leader willing to fight Germany. However Britain and France were too scared of the ghosts of the last war and quickly settled the issue by declaring the reparations over and the seized assets as just remuneration. This added to international financial woes, but it avoided war.

But the threat of war gave the KDP the cover it needed to re-arm. The massive windfall which many suspected was made up of whole cloth was abl;e to finance a massive expansion of the Duetschvolkheer. Soon Soviet designs like the BT-3 and T-26 were rolling off German assembly lines alongside some native weapons like the MG34 and the venerable Mauser K98.

The VolksLuftwaffe was also soon created equipped initially with Soviet supplied Polikarov I-5 bi-plane fighters but all German designs were on the drawing board. Not to be outdone, the German shipyards were soon working extra shifts building submarines. No fixation of capitol ships, likely because Stalin would not permit Germany to have a larger surface fleet than the Soviet union.

The weakness of western leaders to act gave the communists in Austria freedom to act and they soon toppled the Austrian government and petitioned for inclusion in a new Union of German Socialist Republics (GUSR). This was quickly achieved and then Tolger suddenly died. Many believe it was a Soviet coup because several other senior German communists: Nuemann, Remmele, Schulte and Sherbert all quickly retired and faded from view at least for awhile. The new head of the German state was Wilhemn Pieck was was named as president of the German Politburo. However most observers believe that the real power not controlled from the Kremlin was in the hands of Walter Ulbricht.

The fall of Austria which went by without so much as a murmur from England or France, Italy having since gotten tied up in Ethiopia seemed to herald the fall the traditional Republican ideals or so said a Spanish colonel taking umbrage over his nations attempts to deal with the Germans. Franco and his Republicans quickly gained control of Spanish North Africa and with covert British and French help was able to land an army on Spain's southern coast.

Over time the Spanish civil war would see volunteers from many countries. the USSR and GUSR supported the government while Britain, France, and Italy supported Franco. The war revealed several things which likely caused the conflagration that would follow.

First the communist tanks were markedly superior to most Spanish tanks which were based on either the French Renault FT-17 or the British Vickers 6 ton. Neither of which could compete with the T-26 in terms of firepower. The T-26 was itself a development of the Vickers 6 ton, but a radical one. The French response was to provide large numbers of R35 tanks to Franco. This tank was virtually immune to the communist tanks. The T-26 didn't have a powerful enough gun, enough armor or the mobility to survive and the BT series designed to be a cavalry tank and not deployed until after the R35's introduction were ill suited to the war in Spain and as a result Franco was able to gain the initiative and he never gave it back. By early 1938 the communists abandoned the Spanish government in Madrid.

The war finally convinced the UK to begin its own re-armament, principally in the air. One area where the communists had not lost was the air. The Soviet I-15 and then I-16 were superior to Western fighters. However in late 1937 the first all German fighter entered the war. The Mep-10-9 (Mechanical Equipment Plant 10- design number 9 was a sleek low wing all metal monoplane fighter using a stolen copy of a British inline engine. Nothing in the air could even come close.

The French began a desultory development program to match, but believed that their combination of the Maginot line and superior tanks made them invulnerable to communist attack. While this was an undeniably defensive posture, the words coming out of Paris were very much aggressive in nature. This boldness combined with the twin British bulldogs of Chamberlain and Churchill convinced Czechoslovakia to try and make an alliance before the growing communist movement among the German minority toppled the government or lead to war. Bold behind their own fortress line, armed with their own world class tanks and armed with British and French assurances the Czechs began a brutal purge of communists and suppression of the minority German population.

The GUSR threatened war and was supported by the USSR and Stalin.This time however things when differently. Surprised by the arrival of 40 divisions a few years earlier Romania and Hungary had both acceded to Soviet territorial demands and Bulgaria had quickly entered into a Friendship Pact with both the GUSR and USSR. This gave the communists the ability to outflank the Czechs if they were willing to march through other obviously pacifistic countries.

The only barrier was Poland, who despite her earlier betrayal had been enticed back into an alliance with France. The large Polish army was the brake on communist aspirations. Polish Hussars were portrayed in the English papers as heroic guardians of liberalism. The vulnerability of horseflesh to machine gun bullets seemingly forgotten. A rough stalemate a phony war of words developed.

In part the standoff in Europe had to do with Developments in Asia. Japan and USSR clashed in 1938 and Japan clashed again and again with Mao's Chinese Communist Party. The clashes resulted in a shocking Soviet defeat at Khalkhiln Ghol. During the Spanish civil war the British had decided to renew the Anglo-Japanese alliance. The promise of oil and technology, as well as a freehand in China was the price. The Japanese now feeling they had a secure border deployed overwhelming air power in response to a Soviet attack by Zhukov. What was verging on a Soviet victory fell apart under the onslaught of a 1000 plane armada.

Unwilling to import the Mep 10-9 from the GUSR lest it be seen as a sign of weakness. Stalin decided to go on the defensive in Asia and concentrate once again on Europe. Due to the purges it took some time to get the Soviet military which had been shifting Eastward to shift again to the West. The target now was not some worthless chunks of Mongolia, but the linchpins of Western Imperialist Resistance- Poland and Czechoslovakia.

On September 1, 1939 the GUSR invaded both countries. Against Poland were committed most of the GUSR's mobile and air forces while against the Czechs infantry remained the order of the day. The Czech fortresses held up well, but the Poles got smashed by what the Germans were calling Blitzkrieg. Poland quickly asked for help but France with its loud bark but timid deployments replied that they had already dispatched troops to Czechoslovakia via Italy and would have to wait on the arrival of the BEF.

Britain duly declared war and Churchill at the behest of Chamberlain sought answers from the Soviets as to their involvement. Stalin replied that it was a German-Polish argument, not a Russian one. Churchill took this to mean the USSR was going to let the GUSR gut itself in order to preserve Soviet dominance. This information was relayed to Warsaw who saw it as an opportunity to shift forces from the East to try and contain the German penetrations.

On 17 September, Stalin made his move and the Red Army crossed the Polish frontier. By 6 October Poland was gone and the two communist superpowers were territorially united. The fall of Poland quickly caused the collapse of the Czech effort as well and a communist puppet government was soon installed. The invasion of Poland was the cassus beli for the UK vs Germany and on the 17th against the USSR as well. France followed suit joined quickly by Italy and then Japan.

However the war ended up causing the collapse of one of the British bulldogs. Churchill, once again in charge of the admiralty was held to blame for the shortage of escorts as a fleet of over 100 German u-boats ravaged British shipping. There was a very real danger that the UK would be starved out this time. Even the diversion of French, Japanese and Italian destroyers could only slow the onslaught. Unless the US could be brought into the war Blightly might well lose, and lose Europe in so doing.

This is the situation on jan 1, 1940..... HAVE FUN

astralis
27 Mar 12,, 18:50
man, if USSR attacks then she is toast.

the issue with the germans was that they could never get at all of the soviet formations-- always more hanging in reserve, and german intelligence was horrible. also as the germans went deeper into russia, geography expanded so that the germans had to cover more and more space with fewer and fewer troops. that won't be the case if the soviets decide to wade into germany. it'll allow all the german operational/tactical strengths to come to the fore, and ameriolize a lot of the strategic missteps the germans took in OTL.

also, with a USSR attack you can wave good-bye to lend-lease, which is hell on the mobility aspects of deep battle. BTW, france and UK had a secret plan to attack the USSR in such a scenario. it was sort of lame but it was there.

Mihais
27 Mar 12,, 19:58
Then all of us would have been toast.Doesn't matter what Stalin doesn't get from Lend-Lease.He doesn't lose what he lost in 1941.By late 1940 there will be many new Soviet Republics,many tens of millions dead or dying.By 1943 at the very latest,Eurasia and Africa would be Soviet.The Cold war would have lasted another half a century,until the inherent weakness of Communism would have led to a collapse.Most of the world would have looked like North Korea.The good part is that there would have been no demographic boom in the present 3d world.They would have starved to death and all those capable of feeding them would have also starved long ago.Another one is that I would have never been born,in case you dislike me.:biggrin::biggrin:

The scenario is faulty however,but I'm not going to jump Z on this.However charismatic Adolf was,he wasn't alone.Anti communism in Europe wasn't his doing,there were significant forces opposing the red plague.

1979
27 Mar 12,, 20:12
Then all of us would have been toast.Doesn't matter what Stalin doesn't get from Lend-Lease.He doesn't lose what he lost in 1941.By late 1940 there will be many new Soviet Republics,many tens of millions dead or dying.By 1943 at the very latest,Eurasia and Africa would be Soviet.The Cold war would have lasted another half a century,until the inherent weakness of Communism would have led to a collapse.Most of the world would have looked like North Korea.The good part is that there would have been no demographic boom in the present 3d world.They would have starved to death and all those capable of feeding them would have also starved long ago.Another one is that I would have never been born,in case you dislike me.:biggrin::biggrin:


what cold war ? :confu:

In a few words: there is no such thing as Soviet technology. Almost all — perhaps 90-95 percent — came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union. Its industrial and its military capabilities. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. Since the Revolution in 1917. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance

Antony C. Sutton

Mihais
27 Mar 12,, 20:20
NKVD,MGB,NKGB,KGB,GRU.What is this series of letters?

All that's needed for a cold war is couple of fellows helping put a nuclear warhead on an ICMB.The designers of said rockets,German,Russian or other nationality were happy to work extra-time for an extra half a bread and the feeling of not feeling a cold metal barrel in the back of the head.

1979
27 Mar 12,, 20:39
no actually the point was to provide a counterbalance to German dominance on European continent either it was lead by the kaiser or fuhrer,
with Germany ceased to be a threat the next enemy , that needed a counterbalance , became the SU.

Mihais
27 Mar 12,, 21:14
Yes.So?

1979
27 Mar 12,, 21:29
I do not assume that SU would win in 1939.

kato
27 Mar 12,, 22:00
If the Soviets attack France wins the war by default. In order to have a chance at beating the Soviets in 1940, the already thin defenses on the Western border would be thinned out further, with French intelligence at some point being able to convince Petain to move further than just 10 km onto German soil. Use the mobile forces already arrayed in Belgium to strike east towards Cologne and roll up the Rhine valley from there while infantry supporting the Maginot at Bitche and west of it move north to occupy the Saar area and Southern Palatinate.

At minimum, France and the UK would be able to push the Germans back across the Rhine within weeks, putting the German military-industral complex out of operation long-term as the Ruhr area comes into easy air strike range, the BASF plant at Ludwigshafen is seized and the second large chemical complex in Germany at Höchst falls within artillery range.

zraver
27 Mar 12,, 22:05
Communist advantages

Massive production, abundant oil, iron, coal, combined population of around 250 million people, about 600 standing divisions, only 2 main languages, no exposed sea lanes, gobs of strategic depth huge air force and a modern air force, 23,000 tanks.

Communist problems- Soviet wariness of the German successes, German wariness of massive numbers of Soviet troops in Germany. Red Army bumbling due to the purge, most of the communist tanks are markedly inferior, not enough trucks, low war stocks of ammunition, at war on multiple fronts

Western advantages, powerful surface fleet, better tanks overall, better pilots overall than the Russians. Larger potential manpower pool. Economic advantage from an area even more secure than factories located behind the Urals.

Western problems, French faith in the fortress. Lack of real Japanese armor, the US is still officially neutral so direct armaments and war loans are out. Active communist 5th column. While current tanks like the Souma S-35 and Matilda II are light years better than the PZbT-5's and PzT-26's used by the Germans, they are an evolutionary dead end. unbeknownst to all the Soviets have begun production of the T-34 and the Kv-1m39 is already in service. Finally the allies do not have a unified war plan. France hates Germany but is scared to bleed, Mussolini hates communists and is itching for a fight, too bad he is the only man in Italy who is, Britain wants to preserve her empire but do it on the cheap and Japan wants an empire regardless of the cost. The potential ace up the allies sleeve just wants to be left alone.

zraver
27 Mar 12,, 22:08
please read the scenario, it is not stalin attacking hitler, it is a communist germany and ussr attacking the west

1979
27 Mar 12,, 22:11
the soviet armed forces in 1939 had 110 infantry divisions and 44 cavalry div + 25 tank brigades compared to 303 div in 1941.

as for the west the 30 div on the border can buy enough time for germany to mobilize.

Mihais
27 Mar 12,, 22:26
C'mon man,read Z.He said USSR and Germany vs the world.

Btw,you do realise that Red Army outnumbered the Wehrmacht by 2 to 1 in real history.Both had no experience in 1939,but this is also the Red Army before the expansion.Meaning a greater proportion of trained officers.Trained in the Deep Battle and Deep Operations I mean.

1979
27 Mar 12,, 22:28
please read the scenario, it is not stalin attacking hitler, it is a communist germany and ussr attacking the west[/size]

in that case the french are toast...

1979
27 Mar 12,, 22:35
Btw,you do realise that Red Army outnumbered the Wehrmacht by 2 to 1 in real history.

1940 figures are 1.5 to 1.

Mihais
27 Mar 12,, 22:47
I'm sure they were.:biggrin:

It puts R-M into new light,doesn't it?

Z's scenario is nice,but here's what I'd like to in an alternate universe.Germany,Romania and Poland join in 1939 against USSR.That would have been a game to play.Doesn't matters who attacks whom.

1979
27 Mar 12,, 23:28
Western advantages, powerful surface fleet, better tanks overall, better pilots overall than the Russians. Larger potential manpower pool. Economic advantage from an area even more secure than factories located behind the Urals.


1. the french fleet would run to England after the army overruns the ports.
2. slow tanks with weak guns .
3. quantity has a quality of his own
4. to bad they did not have enough rifles to go around for the whites .
5. see above ^^^

Tarek Morgen
27 Mar 12,, 23:34
Z, shall I edit the title to avoid further confusion about the scenario?

zraver
28 Mar 12,, 00:18
Z, shall I edit the title to avoid further confusion about the scenario?


Please!

zraver
28 Mar 12,, 00:21
1. the french fleet would run to England after the army overruns the ports.
2. slow tanks with weak guns .

If the communist army overran the ports. Soviet mass gives the Germans a numbers edge but adds a whole hell of a lot of friction and the German panzers are much less suited for blitzkrieg in this scenario.


3. quantity has a quality of his own

Yup, but often that quality is markedly inferior despite the maxim.


4. to bad they did not have enough rifles to go around for the whites .
5. see above ^^^

See references to getting the US in to the war.

Tarek Morgen
28 Mar 12,, 00:23
Please!

Changed to "Communist German/Soviet Pact against Allies in 1939", but I am open for suggestions.

snapper
28 Mar 12,, 08:34
Didn't the Battle of Warsawa in 1920 prevent such a situation?

Mihais
28 Mar 12,, 08:43
Yes it did.

That could have been even nastier,given the general exhaustion in Europe.

In Z's scenario at least there are armies somewhat prepared to fight.

Gun Boat
28 Mar 12,, 11:47
I would see the Germans teaming up with the Soviets as a lot like the German/Italian alliance in terms of how the Germans viewed the ally (inferior figthing ability)

The Soviets would provide a lot more rescourses and manpower of course.

But I cant see the German's adopting to much Soviet equipment for to long. The Germans would still have an appetite for their native designs. A german perfected T-34 with 3 man turret and radio would be good ah la Panther/VK3002DB.

The western allies would stand no chance against this alliance but only if they could be unified. From the early stages I think plans for Germany leaving the alliance would be in the making within Germany itself. I just cant see them playing nice for to long. I think Stalin would be treating Germany like a puppet rather than an ally and the Germans wouldn't like that.

If this did occur I could see a massive secret operation that would have the Russian armies in Europe inturned by the Germans and a Barbarossa occuring some time after France and England were beaten.

astralis
28 Mar 12,, 14:20
oops, my bad.

OK, for this scenario...

how autonomous is the "GUSR"? in the period of the 1920s-30s, communist movements outside the USSR took orders from the USSR pretty seriously. i am only half-joking when i say that if stalin had ordered the french communists to give away their wives/sisters as sex slaves to the capitalists, the french commies would have done it.

1979
28 Mar 12,, 18:42
If the communist army overran the ports. Soviet mass gives the Germans a numbers edge but adds a whole hell of a lot of friction and the German panzers are much less suited for blitzkrieg in this scenario.

OK so it is winter and Czech tanks had not bean included yet , but i still argue for Germany to attack for the following reasons:

-There are the weaknesses in the french AA and ATG equipment that would be corrected (in part) until MAY.
-for each INF division Germany gets until MAY, the french would add one as well.
-the french have only five battalions of tanks with high velocity 47 mm guns (s-35, char B-1)
-the Belgian and Dutch armed forces are expanding, (30 new divisions would be combat ready until may ) any delay leads to more diversion of combat strength on the northern flank and less force at the center of gravity.
-KW-line is not completed yet nor is it manned.
-3 days with bad weather would conceal/cover Germany columns as they move trough Luxemburg .
- until march the latest , the french problem would be dealt with, even without soviet assistance ,besides nobody wants to be the junior partner in a relationship *:)


See references to getting the US in to the war.

Is up to the members of the discussion to come up with ways to draw US assistance ?

zraver
29 Mar 12,, 19:05
oops, my bad.

OK, for this scenario...

how autonomous is the "GUSR"? in the period of the 1920s-30s, communist movements outside the USSR took orders from the USSR pretty seriously. i am only half-joking when i say that if stalin had ordered the french communists to give away their wives/sisters as sex slaves to the capitalists, the french commies would have done it.

Lets just say the headquarters of the GUSR's version of the Gestapo has a Moscow mailing address... It is the 1930's after all.


1979

No, its not up to the members to come up with ways, to, but to debate the ability of the periods leaders to do so.

Gunboat, the East Germans used Soviet kit for almost 50 years, the Me109 used a british designed engine and the Germans invaded Russia with French and American trucks... Add in Stalin's desire to keep the Germans behind the USSR technologically in most areas and using Soviet kit is very doable.

Red Team
29 Mar 12,, 23:28
With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

zraver
30 Mar 12,, 00:11
With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

Japan is an ally of the west against the communists.

zraver
30 Mar 12,, 00:11
With respect to provoking a US intervention, would the Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy, Japan (and for this scenario the Soviets) still be in place? I understand that the Soviet/Japanese diplomatic relationship was rocky at best during 1939. If that's the case, a corresponding Pearl Harbor event would still draw the Americans in with the Allied Powers.

As to who would win this war? Well let's just hope that the US can adjust quickly from whiskey to vodka...

Japan is an ally of the west against the communists.

Jim Ray
30 Mar 12,, 00:22
I have to honestly say that I think that the USSR and German counterpart could easily topple the European powers. The Russian tactics were targeted at charging enough troops that you could easily find weak points and massively expose them, and lets not forget that even with the low supplies and lesser advanced armor, the Russians had the comand of the most advanced and refined special forces units of the era and their main job was to wipe out targets such as AIRFIELDS, HARBORS, and MISSLE sites. Most likely theyd send in these units early to disrupt and cripple defences to pave ways for Soviet and German advancements on all fronts.
Lets also not forget that the Germans had n extremely large U-Boat fleet working constantly and the UK is on an ISLAND, so as long as the Germans could hold them off by sea, they were a fairly pointless ally to rely on
France ha advanced tanks but as previously said, they were at an evolutionary wall, and the soviets could easily run through a tank line, I mean seriously, they beat back the Nazis in , so
Stalingrad, mostly on freaking horseback. Also the soviets had dogs that they would train to crawl under tanks with bombs strapped to their chests to destroy tanks.
Japan had a decent military but they only really wanted China and wouldnt really care for the other factions unless they impeded that progress, so their nvy wouldnt hlp much until it was already too late. The USA might very well try to intervein somehow but lets be honest, the only reason they got into WW2 was because they were attacked. As long as the soviets, germans, and japs didnt touch them, they wouldnt get involved. Any dissagreements because id love to hear em

dave lukins
30 Mar 12,, 00:47
Fasten your seat belt Jim..put on your big jacket and await the flak....incoming :biggrin:

Jim Ray
30 Mar 12,, 00:52
Fasten your seat belt Jim..put on your big jacket and await the flak....incoming :biggrin:

haha. what do you think?

Red Team
30 Mar 12,, 05:50
Japan is an ally of the west against the communists.

Alright then the outcome of said conflict could actually tip over to the Allied forces' side. Japanese forces presumably in China and Korea would be able to tie down the ever vital Soviet Siberian divisions from the European Front, Her Majesty's Colonial forces would be free from fighting a foe in the Pacific, adding additional manpower to the ranks of Britain's defense forces. The US could be pressured over to the Allied side because of the natural mistrust of the Communists (Red Scare of the 1920s). Naval superiority in favor of the Allied powers (carriers and effective anti-sub warfare), ground superiority in favor of the German/Soviet pact (numerical superiority), air superiority would IMO be a crapshoot.

But a few other factors still leave me on the fence, the prevailing one being which side would get the bomb first...that would almost guarantee a victory for one side.

Officer of Engineers
30 Mar 12,, 06:24
I have to honestly say that I think that the USSR and German counterpart could easily topple the European powers.And if France and Great Britain went on the attack?


The Russian tactics were targeted at charging enough troops that you could easily find weak points and massively expose them,You have absolutely no clue to the writings of Mikhail Tukhachevsky and the practices of Georgy Zhukov.


lets not forget that even with the low supplies16 armies with 45 days of supplies per campaign is low?


and lesser advanced armor,T-34 and IS-2 is less advanced?


the Russians had the comand of the most advanced and refined special forces units of the era and their main job was to wipe out targets such as AIRFIELDS, HARBORS, and MISSLE sites.Would you care to list some of them? Especially missile sites.


Most likely theyd send in these units early to disrupt and cripple defences to pave ways for Soviet and German advancements on all fronts.Mind citing me a single campaign where this worked?


Lets also not forget that the Germans had n extremely large U-Boat fleet working constantly and the UK is on an ISLAND, so as long as the Germans could hold them off by sea, they were a fairly pointless ally to rely onBut you seemed to forget that the Germans lost the Battle of the Atlantic - to the Canadians.


France ha advanced tanks but as previously said, they were at an evolutionary wall, and the soviets could easily run through a tank line,Mind wargaming me a Soviet army breaching the Maginot Line?


I mean seriously, they beat back the Nazis in , so Stalingrad, mostly on freaking horseback.T-34s can't ride horses.


Also the soviets had dogs that they would train to crawl under tanks with bombs strapped to their chests to destroy tanks.Yeah, you do know that dogs can't tell the difference between a T-34 and a Tiger.


Japan had a decent military but they only really wanted China and wouldnt really care for the other factionsSo, the plastering they got in 39 was what?


The USA might very well try to intervein somehow but lets be honest, the only reason they got into WW2 was because they were attacked. As long as the soviets, germans, and japs didnt touch them, they wouldnt get involved.Happy Times I & II

Doktor
30 Mar 12,, 08:13
Colonel got a new student enlisted.

Happy Times III

:pop:

dave lukins
30 Mar 12,, 11:40
Colonel got a new student enlisted.

Happy Times III

:pop:

I was thinking the Colonel was getting a little inactive so young Jim Ray will keep him on his toes. ;)

1979
30 Mar 12,, 12:43
the German attack:
http://www.tarrif.net/wwii/pdf/DL%20-%20Ardennes,%20Meuse%20and%20Mont-Dieu%20-%20Part%201.pdf

USSWisconsin
30 Mar 12,, 14:10
haha. what do you think?

I'm glad you joined us, this sounds like it could be interesting. :cool: I too would like to hear about the missile sites the Soviet armies were designed to attack early in WWII and the great tank battles fought with dogs.

Doktor
30 Mar 12,, 14:26
I'm glad you joined us, this sounds like it could be interesting. :cool: I too would like to hear about the missile sites the Soviet armies were designed to attack early in WWII and the great tank battles fought with dogs.

+1. Was curious on missiles and dogs as well.

1979
30 Mar 12,, 14:34
the Mechelen incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechelen_Incident) did not happened yet in this alternate timeline , do we assume it bound to happen ?

zraver
30 Mar 12,, 15:36
I have to honestly say that I think that the USSR and German counterpart could easily topple the European powers. The Russian tactics were targeted at charging enough troops that you could easily find weak points and massively expose them,

Got an example of this? Soviet tactics were an evolving process in WWII. In the early stages of the war often they did simply charge. This reflected the lack of experience among the newly minted field officers and a failure in both pre-war planning and current intelligence.


and lets not forget that even with the low supplies and lesser advanced armor, the Russians had the comand of the most advanced and refined special forces units of the era and their main job was to wipe out targets such as AIRFIELDS, HARBORS, and MISSLE sites. Most likely theyd send in these units early to disrupt and cripple defences to pave ways for Soviet and German advancements on all fronts.

What special forces? The most advanced SF units of the time 39-40 were German paratroopers and glider infantry trained to assault fortresses. I don't know of a single airfield assault in the early part of WWII and what missiles? seriously dude?


Lets also not forget that the Germans had n extremely large U-Boat fleet working constantly and the UK is on an ISLAND, so as long as the Germans could hold them off by sea, they were a fairly pointless ally to rely on

Two world wars in real history and the u-boat failed, it might work in this scenario but it might not. Regardless they got the BEF to France both times.


France ha advanced tanks but as previously said, they were at an evolutionary wall, and the soviets could easily run through a tank line, I mean seriously, they beat back the Nazis in , so
Stalingrad, mostly on freaking horseback.

Soviet mass might actually temp the USSR/GUSR to attack through the forts rather than through Belgium which might well decide the war long term if the assault fails. German super heavy artillery isn't ready yet. The Soviet's have a few KV-2's coming on line but can they get close enough on level ground to use their 152mm guns with anti-concrete shells?

Is Stalin going to risk showing the Germans the T-34 and KV tanks? German industry is still more efficient than the Soviets at this point.


Also the soviets had dogs that they would train to crawl under tanks with bombs strapped to their chests to destroy tanks.

Russian field mice did more damage



Japan had a decent military but they only really wanted China and wouldnt really care for the other factions unless they impeded that progress, so their nvy wouldnt hlp much until it was already too late.

Japan and the USSR clashed in 38, the Japanese Army which is the dominant political force is fiercely royalist and thus incredibly anti-communist. Japan's navy in early WWII is the most advanced in the world. The Japanese carriers and destroyers placed with British squadrons might well tip the balance in the Atlantic.


The USA might very well try to intervein somehow but lets be honest, the only reason they got into WW2 was because they were attacked. As long as the soviets, germans, and japs didnt touch them, they wouldnt get involved. Any dissagreements because id love to hear em

The US was already working on an inter-continental bomber to reach Germany before pearl harbor. US naval building was well underway and if Japan was no longer a threat those funds might be diverted to the army and air force especially as FDR has already ordered massive expansion of American air craft production.

dave lukins
30 Mar 12,, 16:46
Jim Ray...I did warn you about waking up the yard dogs ..did'nt I:biggrin:

zraver
30 Mar 12,, 20:14
the Mechelen incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechelen_Incident) did not happened yet in this alternate timeline , do we assume it bound to happen ?

Not bound to happen since the Soviets may well not have allowed the development of German paratroops or Luftwaffe field divisions since that would add to their workload in monitoring the German military and give Germany a rapid reaction force against the Soviets or a force that could rapidly launch a coup against the communist government. In the real history of the Warsaw Pact the poles were not allowed an airborne division until a couple of years after Stalin's death.

The SS is obviously out, but the Hitler Youth is an easy analog transformation into the Young Novemberist. However some SS units would have analongs such as the Gestapo (KGB/NKVD equiv) and SS Polezi (police) and Totenkopft (Political Prison Guards).

Overall German performance is likely to suffer. Why many of the younger Prussian officers will throw in with the commies much like many czarist officers did, long term Prussian militarism and class arrogance is not going to sit well and they will be marginalized at best. For example, Rommel is from Wuttemberg so he is safe. Hausser (who retired in the inter-war period) is Prussian and wont be trusted for long. Kesselring is Bavarian so good but Erich Von Manstein, hell anyone with a Von is not going to be trusted.

Example of same famous German names from WWII who will likely not be trusted (why).
Willhelm List- served as a staff officer of the Imperial German Army (royalist)
Erich Von Manstein (Prussian)
Gunther Von Kluge (Prussian)
Heinz Guderian (Prussian)
Hermann Hoth (Prussian)
Felix Steiner (Prussian)

Besides Rommel the only cvommanders of immediate note are Fritz Bayerlein like Rommel from Wutternberg, however Rommel and Bayerlein are balanced by Kietel and Jodl... Both of those generals had the suction cup noses and show your belly groveling skills to climb any political system.

Mihais
30 Mar 12,, 21:00
Look Z,you've got some imagination,you came with scenario.Comie Germany isn't going anywhere until they solve their class problme.Meaning a sort of civil war before commie victory,a considerable exile and a fe millions dead.after that you won't have ''real'' Germans and not much of a resemblance to the Reichswehr or the Wehrmacht.You'll have just another Red Army with German sounding names or very likely another Soviet Republic.Right now I remember Aleksandr Vasilevsky who served as a junior Lt. in the Russian Army.Zhukov,Rokossovsky and the rest of the bunch were privates or NCO's.Meaning that very few of the actual German officers of WW2 will :a)live b)live in Germany c) be accepted in the army.

Now,if this nightmare would have happened,we'd see by early-mid 30's a few moves.First,everybody forgets anything about Germany as a bulwark against USSR(no Germany is part of USSR).France had ideological worries about USSR and nationalistic ones about Germany.That combines the 2.France in interwar era was relaxed because it felt powerful.It had Germany surounded by its eastern allies,it had the British navy and it felt they can prevent a repeat of 1914 thanks to monsieur Maginot.With all these,you can afford to have internal squabbles.But France did not lacked energy,bravery and skill when it had a challenge,as the Germans found out before and during ww1.You won't have neutrals.You'll have a Maginot line covering Belgian and Dutch borders.You won't have France ignoring the pleas of the eastern allies to give a helping with industrialization and you also won't have said allies so relaxed about USSR(they were a paria state and all Europe will come helping in case they come).You also won't have Italy affording diplomatic adventures in the East,meaning no revisionist Hungary or Bulgaria.

So,while I agree that the world is toast if Germany and USSR jump on it in 1939 in the historical situation of the world,the events prior to this would have also altered the face of the world.
Germany doesn't pay its debts,but the English and the Americans also don't waste their money,thus an easier depression.Britain and France start rearmament sooner and on larger scale.And with some industrial muscle,Romania,Poland and Czechoslovakia can put between 100 and 150 divisions,better armed and trained than was the case historically.Turkey can also be brought into this by showing strength.Italian army and fleet can also join the fun.

In the North,no Swedish iron ore for Germany.No German skill to the extent shown in the invasion of Norway means there's a good chance Norway stays on the side of the good boys,resulting in a showdown between the RAF and VVS over the Baltic,but there's a good chance the RN,the French fleet and the RAF can win this one.

1979
30 Mar 12,, 21:42
Ok ,so how about these guys,
do they get purged ?

Von Runstead Army group commander
Von Leeb Army group commander
Küchler Army, later army group commander
Straus Army comander
Hoepner tank army commader
Kleist tank army commander
Stulpnagel army commander
Riechenau army commander
Schobert army comander
Weichs army commader

Mihais
30 Mar 12,, 21:46
If you can argue that a colonel,major and captain of the Reichswehr CANNOT be purged I'd gladly hear how many similar ranked officers of the Imperial Army were still active in the Red army of 1939?

zraver
30 Mar 12,, 21:50
Look Z,you've got some imagination,you came with scenario.Comie Germany isn't going anywhere until they solve their class problme.Meaning a sort of civil war before commie victory,a considerable exile and a fe millions dead.after that you won't have ''real'' Germans and not much of a resemblance to the Reichswehr or the Wehrmacht.You'll have just another Red Army with German sounding names or very likely another Soviet Republic.Right now I remember Aleksandr Vasilevsky who served as a junior Lt. in the Russian Army.Zhukov,Rokossovsky and the rest of the bunch were privates or NCO's.Meaning that very few of the actual German officers of WW2 will :a)live b)live in Germany c) be accepted in the army.

Czarist officers survived in the Red Army into the 1930's so it took some time to weed them out. The immediate targets will be Prussians and confirmed loyalists. Also the Germans prior to WWII tended to be more circumspect in how they dealt with the officer class. Unlike Russia where there was not a large class of industrialists, Germany has royalists, officers and industrialists and they will have to be broken or co-opted one at a time on the sly. This is what the Nazi's did.


Now,if this nightmare would have happened,we'd see by early-mid 30's a few moves.First,everybody forgets anything about Germany as a bulwark against USSR(no Germany is part of USSR). France had ideological worries about USSR and nationalistic ones about Germany.That combines the 2.France in interwar era was relaxed because it felt powerful.It had Germany surounded by its eastern allies,it had the British navy and it felt they can prevent a repeat of 1914 thanks to monsieur Maginot.With all these,you can afford to have internal squabbles.But France did not lacked energy,bravery and skill when it had a challenge,as the Germans found out before and during ww1.You won't have neutrals.You'll have a Maginot line covering Belgian and Dutch borders.You won't have France ignoring the pleas of the eastern allies to give a helping with industrialization and you also won't have said allies so relaxed about USSR(they were a paria state and all Europe will come helping in case they come).You also won't have Italy affording diplomatic adventures in the East,meaning no revisionist Hungary or Bulgaria.

Maybe, France was still exhausted by WWI and the bravery of WWI is why. France suffered horribly and the French (and British) society was not able to absorb those losses as phlegmatically as the Russians and Germans. An early communist victory in Germany also puts France's economic health in question if she isn't given time to repateri-rape things like coal and industrial output from Germany.


So,while I agree that the world is toast if Germany and USSR jump on it in 1939 in the historical situation of the world,the events prior to this would have also altered the face of the world.

I don't think the world is toast in 39, at least not automatically. In my scenario Zhukov was defeated in 38. He had to be or no Japan with the allies. Soviet forces are going to be lead by either by Timoshenko which poses huge problems for any offensive as he was less than competent on the attack or even worse Budyonny or Voroshilov.

Soviet tanks for the most part are junk by 39. The T-26 has been passed up despite being the best tank of the panzer divisions in this alternate history. The T-28 is going to be the big gun of the communist armored forces and it is slow and vulnerable despite being designed to attack into fortified areas. Also the VVS is a poor addition to the Volksluftwaffe who despite the Mep-1-09 (me 109) lacks most of the other airframes of the WWII lutfwaffe and is instead using Soviet designs like the DB-3 for a medium bomber, Polikarov R-5 for light bombing and attack. Plus the Soviets are likely to limit GUSR volksluftwaffe size and numbers to a much smaller level.

France may only have 5 battalions of high velocity 47mm armed tanks, but the Maltidla II and Cruisers A9-13 of the BEF have good guns (2pdr OQF) against the T-26 tanks which are a development of the Vickers 6 ton. The French also have armored car squadrons armed with 378 Panhard 178's with a high velocity 25mm gun.


Germany doesn't pay its debts,but the English and the Americans also don't waste their money,thus an easier depression.

maybe, the US depression was a nasty mix of gold standard troubles, war debt, housing bubble, stock speculation and automobile and radio market saturation.


Britain and France start rearmament sooner and on larger scale.

Again, maybe...


And with some industrial muscle,Romania,Poland and Czechoslovakia can put between 100 and 150 divisions,better armed and trained than was the case historically.Turkey can also be brought into this by showing strength.Italian army and fleet can also join the fun.

Maybe...


In the North,no Swedish iron ore for Germany.No German skill to the extent shown in the invasion of Norway means there's a good chance Norway stays on the side of the good boys,resulting in a showdown between the RAF and VVS over the Baltic,but there's a good chance the RN,the French fleet and the RAF can win this one.

+1 I like this part. But how bad will the lack of iron hurt the communist Germans? Will the Soviets use trains to ship Iron, troops or finished product?

Doktor
30 Mar 12,, 22:04
I have a question, actually two.

1. How will Stalin solve the 1932-33 famine? Guess the Germans will share the same faith and share the burden.
2. Will there be Great purge in 1938-39? If so will it occur only in USSR or in GUSR as well and to what extent? After they, are preparing for war, right?

Mihais
30 Mar 12,, 22:06
Over the cold dead bodies of the Poles,Romanians,Czechs and Slovaks.Iron like iron,but no oil supply means the soviet Germans have a few tries with maneuver warfare.Invading Poland without beating the Czechs first means inviting them in the right flank(and perhaps an Italo-French expeditionary force).Invading the Czechs first is a tough walk,leaving the bulk of the Polish and Romanian armies to face the Soviets in the east.It will take longer than 6 weeks,and the French might try an offensive if everybody pleads them to move.So the commie Germans might be taken out before the Soviet comrades can achieve anything of substance.

zraver
31 Mar 12,, 03:01
Over the cold dead bodies of the Poles,Romanians,Czechs and Slovaks.Iron like iron,but no oil supply means the soviet Germans have a few tries with maneuver warfare.Invading Poland without beating the Czechs first means inviting them in the right flank(and perhaps an Italo-French expeditionary force).Invading the Czechs first is a tough walk,leaving the bulk of the Polish and Romanian armies to face the Soviets in the east.It will take longer than 6 weeks,and the French might try an offensive if everybody pleads them to move.So the commie Germans might be taken out before the Soviet comrades can achieve anything of substance.

See now your looking at the problems the communists face!

1979
31 Mar 12,, 06:45
.It will take longer than 6 weeks,and the French might try an offensive if everybody pleads them to move.

the Germans had their own Maginot line.

Mihais
31 Mar 12,, 07:12
Z,they have problems only if the world prepares for war against them.Otherwise if the historical Germans and Soviets jump on the world...

1979,yes,they did.But it depends a lot on how many Germans are guarding it,what sort of Germans,whether it covers the Dutch and Belgian borders,how determined are these alternate scenario French etc...

1979
31 Mar 12,, 08:17
during the polish campaign it had 36 divisions (30 along the french border ) if the services and supplies units are included it's roughly one million men, a number
which is unlikely to go down in this alternate timeline.

So how exactly do the french breach the Siegfried line in 1939 ?

Mihais
31 Mar 12,, 09:01
They bypass it.Or they choose to reinforce the easterners by sending forces through Italy or by sea.

1979
31 Mar 12,, 10:10
they would be spent by the time they reach the German border ,
the belgian army was serious about neutrality before the war and matches the number of German divisions guarding the west wall.

as for expeditionary forces a few motorized units could be sent (a la Norway )
but not enough mass to effect the outcome.

Mihais
31 Mar 12,, 17:16
If Germany turns red,there won't be neutrals.France and Britain will make sure Holland and Belgium join them,or else...

1979
31 Mar 12,, 17:25
they did not succeed when Germany turned brown, so why would they succeed now ?

Tarek Morgen
31 Mar 12,, 17:36
the browns were considered a usefule buffer against the red.

zraver
31 Mar 12,, 22:11
If you can argue that a colonel,major and captain of the Reichswehr CANNOT be purged I'd gladly hear how many similar ranked officers of the Imperial Army were still active in the Red army of 1939?

1. different cultural traditions based on a different cultural foundation. In Germany there are three main pillars of the old order- the officers, the industrialists and the nobility. Even post WWI the prior members of the various royal and noble houses retained extensive social influence among large segments of the population. They need to be dealt with individually and with a circumspect hand. In Russia the only classes to contend with were the royals/nobility and officers. Yet even if the USSR they didn't move against both classes at the same time.

2. The German communists get a later start than Stalin, why do you expect them to move faster?

3. There is a much more organized right wing movement. Much like the reverse in Nazi Germany, move to openly and you risk civil war or move slow and force them under ground until their power is broken. However in the case of the Germans, if the communist moved openly the army and right wing would likely win.

But to answer your question directly. Kamenev was a czarist regimental commander. He died in 36 during the great purge. Ditto for Yegorov who died in 37, he was a czarist colonel. Tuchachevsky was a czarist officer we all know his fate in 1937... So former czarist officers survived in the USSR into the late 1930's. It took the USSR 20 years, why do you think Germany which faces a much tougher environment can do it in under 7?

Mihais
01 Apr 12,, 10:19
Because they're Germans.And precisely because the Commie Germans will face a more vicious opposition.Thus a more violent fight.
Also there's the potential for an uprising if the Allies enter Germany.The Hungarian Red Army and the Commie state worked fine as long as the commisars were able to shoot people.But after the defeat and the advance of a coherent opposing force they melted away quite fast.

And no,you didn't answered the question.I didn't asked how many former Czarist officers joined the Reds,but how many were active when the war started.And while there were some,most senior commanders(from colonel up) had a proper biography.Also the German Red Army is made from the scratch,almost like the Wehrmacht.But there's no bother for the Soviets to send advisors.

kato
01 Apr 12,, 12:36
2. The German communists get a later start than Stalin, why do you expect them to move faster?

I'm not precisely sure about the background of this timeline, but the only way a communist Germany works is if it starts off rather early, either using Spartacus in 1918 or the Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1919. That gives 'em a headstart on Stalin actually. And a communist Germany would be based in traditional Bolshevism. Not a good recipe for working alongside Stalin.

1979
01 Apr 12,, 13:50
If you can argue that a colonel,major and captain of the Reichswehr CANNOT be purged I'd gladly hear how many similar ranked officers of the Imperial Army were still active in the Red army of 1939?

the stake you raised is too high , if a officer was a major in 1917 ( like LEEB or RUNDSTEDT ) by 1939 it would already be in position to command a army group or a army.
Ivan Tyulenev , iirc was a lieutenant.

nevertheless a colonel in the German army of 1917 simply does not have enough clout to be a serious threat , even if his rank puts him in a position of regimental commander
there are 800 other regimental commanders just like him .

kato
01 Apr 12,, 17:25
Umm, the German Imperial Army had plenty of communists and social democrats serving in it. A lot of young leftist leaders were WW1 soldiers.

Notable examples would be e.g. Ernst Thälmann (KPD leader, killed at Buchenwald 1944), Rudolf Egelhofer (leader of the Bavarian Red Army, assassinated 1919), Max Levien (leader of Munich Miliary Soviet, purged by Stalin in 1937), Hans Kippenberger (co-leader of 1923 Hamburg Insurrection, purged by Stalin in 1937), Gerhart Eisler (Komintern functionary, HUAC victim, GDR press minister), Hermann Remmele (co-leader of Mannheim Soviet Republic, leader of the 100,000-man Antifascist Combat League from 1930, purged by Stalin in 1939).

Plenty of potential there.

Although stemming from the combination i'd rather see a communist Germany in the 1930s being in opposition to Stalin - a mid-30s government would be formed by exactly those people who in history had fled to the SU when the Nazis took over and who were purged by Stalin in the late 30s.

zraver
01 Apr 12,, 17:30
Because they're Germans.And precisely because the Commie Germans will face a more vicious opposition.Thus a more violent fight.
Also there's the potential for an uprising if the Allies enter Germany.The Hungarian Red Army and the Commie state worked fine as long as the commisars were able to shoot people.But after the defeat and the advance of a coherent opposing force they melted away quite fast.

And no,you didn't answered the question.I didn't asked how many former Czarist officers joined the Reds,but how many were active when the war started.And while there were some,most senior commanders(from colonel up) had a proper biography.Also the German Red Army is made from the scratch,almost like the Wehrmacht.But there's no bother for the Soviets to send advisors.

I showed that former czarist officers who commanded battalions and regiments in WWI rose to the very top of the Soviet army before 1937. The purge forced most out of course, but most were also near retirement and so the absolute number of potential people to consider was already dropping sharply by the time of the purges. People age after all.

As for a more vicious opposition, where was the opposition to the Nazis at the higher levels of German society? The classes that controlled Germany were surprisngly compliant so ong as they thought thier personal feifs were safe. The Nazi's used this to gain control, I simply postulate the commies will as well.

Kato, in this scenario the GCP roughly follows the nazi time line the change in history being Hitler's death in a gas attack in Oct 1918.

kato
01 Apr 12,, 17:32
Kato, in this scenario the GCP roughly follows the nazi time line the change in history being Hitler's death in a gas attack in Oct 1918.
That wouldn't lead to a communist government, that would lead to a civil war around 1935.

1979
01 Apr 12,, 17:38
the browns were considered a usefule buffer against the red.

if the browns were considered a useful buffer against the reds, why did poland, Czechoslovakia, belgium, france surrounded this buffer with fortifications ?

zraver
01 Apr 12,, 18:52
That wouldn't lead to a communist government, that would lead to a civil war around 1935.

Why? It didn't before, it got close but the right wing got lucky when the nazi's were able to reach past the traditional right wing supporters and into the working classes. If the Nazis had not arrived on scene Germany may well have gone communist.

Mihais
01 Apr 12,, 19:02
Come on.You know why.

Z,it started on whether or not senior German commanders of WW2 could have still been active and in position of authority.Yeah,some rose during the war,but the talent selection happened under the watch of the WW1 era officers.It is debatable whether the Commie German soldiers of WW1 could have turned into an officer corp as good as the Wehrmacht possesed historically.I have serious doubts about it.
As for the lack of resistance to the Nazis,let's not put hindsight into forethought.At the time Nazis,although disagreeable in some respects,were a force bent on reviving Germany and keeping the Reds down.They did not shot Krupp or Porsche,nor did they sent Kurt Tank to work at Dachau at gunpoint.

1979
01 Apr 12,, 19:29
They did not shot Krupp or Porsche,nor did they sent Kurt Tank to work at Dachau at gunpoint.

let Rohm run lose and that likely to happen :whome:

Mihais
01 Apr 12,, 19:34
True,but it didn't happen.Instead Rohm got fresh new holes.In the end the faith of the German elites was not misplaced.The Reds won't talk with them,but shoot them on the spot and everyone sane knew that.So no chance any German elite ever talks to the commies.

kato
01 Apr 12,, 20:19
the right wing got lucky when the nazi's were able to reach past the traditional right wing supporters and into the working classes.
Nothing lucky about it, that was very specific background planning exploiting current populist themes.

Provided the Nazis are not on the scene in their original showing in 1932, probably a weakish Center-Right-Extreme-Right coalition would take over at that time, continuing along the lines of the original Brüning and von Papen governments in 1932 to 1933. von Papen attempted to lure the Nazis into a coalition to broaden his supporter base, trying to sweeten the deal by repealing the outlawing of the SA. This act resulted in heavy riots in Berlin with several hundred firefights, resulting in 82 dead in a single night. Hitler's original big strategy was to resist von Papen's suggestion of supporting him, resulting in von Papen's government ultimately collapsing and the next election three months later bringing Hitler to power.

A weakish nazi party might easily fall for von Papen in 1932, resulting in the government moving further to the right, and the Antifascist Combat League, the Iron Front and insurgent Prussian police units (together up to a million men in 1933) taking up arms against the right-wing Harzburg Alliance, leading into a short, brutal civil war - say throughout 1933-34. In order to get the desired results, the nazis would probably lose this war (not unlikely), with a vague, loose social-democrat and communist alliance taking over. Insert a couple uprisings in the following 3-4 years until a purge in particular in the military quietens the situations.

zraver
01 Apr 12,, 23:47
Nothing lucky about it, that was very specific background planning exploiting current populist themes.

Provided the Nazis are not on the scene in their original showing in 1932, probably a weakish Center-Right-Extreme-Right coalition would take over at that time, continuing along the lines of the original Brüning and von Papen governments in 1932 to 1933. von Papen attempted to lure the Nazis into a coalition to broaden his supporter base, trying to sweeten the deal by repealing the outlawing of the SA. This act resulted in heavy riots in Berlin with several hundred firefights, resulting in 82 dead in a single night. Hitler's original big strategy was to resist von Papen's suggestion of supporting him, resulting in von Papen's government ultimately collapsing and the next election three months later bringing Hitler to power.

A weakish nazi party might easily fall for von Papen in 1932, resulting in the government moving further to the right, and the Antifascist Combat League, the Iron Front and insurgent Prussian police units (together up to a million men in 1933) taking up arms against the right-wing Harzburg Alliance, leading into a short, brutal civil war - say throughout 1933-34. In order to get the desired results, the nazis would probably lose this war (not unlikely), with a vague, loose social-democrat and communist alliance taking over. Insert a couple uprisings in the following 3-4 years until a purge in particular in the military quietens the situations.

It was lucky, what set the Nazi's apart from other right wing groups was their ability to transform themselves from regional or single issue party into a party with broad appeal among the working class. Non of the other right wing parties had been able to do that. They were either to narrowly issued focused or too regional. This diluted their power and set them at odds with one another.

zraver
02 Apr 12,, 19:56
So what might a Volksheer and Volksluftwaffe of a Moscow controlled Communist Germany in 1939 look like?

Army,

Size, although the army will undoutably be bigger than the 100,000 allowed by the treaty ending WWI, it is unlikely to be allowed to grow big enough to threaten an invasion of the Soviet Union, or repel an invasion from the same. However it will need to be big enough to fend off Poland or join in Soviet operations against Poland and also fend off France and Czechoslovakia.

The French peace time army in France was 20 infantry divisions, 2 mechanized infantry divisions and 5 cavalry divisions plus 8 colonial divisions in its empire. Reserve formations bring the total of infantry divisions up to 86 and by May 1940 with war time expansion there is a force of 86 infantry divisions, 5 mechanized infantry divisions, 5 mechanized cavalry divisions, 8 cavalry divisions and 3 armored divisions for a total of around 107 field divisions plus fortress troops.

Poland has 26 infantry divisions on active duty plus 4 forming plus a 11 cavalry brigades,. Poland also has mountain brigades and other units but is short of tanks. There are 9 reserve divisions.

Czechoslovakia has 4 fast divisions of a tank brigade and cavalry brigade, 1 motorized infantry divisions and 20 infantry divisions some of which are fortress troops.

Italy has 20 infantry divisions, 3 motorized divisions, 2 tank divisions and 5 alpine divisions.

Total force facing Germany in peace time is 90 infantry divisions, 23 mobile divisions (armored, cavalry, motorized, mechanized). But balanced against the need to defend against 113 divisions is the need to be unable to repel a Soviet invasion. The USSR in 1939 in the West has 87 infantry divisions (110 counting territorial units), 44 cavalry divisions and 25 tank brigades for a total division strength of around 169 divisions with reserves, political and naval units pushing that to around 180

So a GUSR army of 60 divisions plus fortress troops (1/3ish the size of the USSR) is reasonable. Although Stalin is likely to limit reserve formations to prevent a German surge. This gives the German communists the single biggest military in Western Europe, big enough to beat any two comers in fact, but not big enough to threaten Moscow's control.

The size limit imposed by Moscow is one reason the communist may go down roughly similar lines as the historical WWII German military with its focus on panzers and mechanized divisions. So 7 big panzer divisions, 3 light panzer divisions, 5 motorized divisions, 1 mountain division and 3 cavalry divisions plus 39 infantry divisions and 2 fortress divisions. This gives Germany 1 one division lead in mobile assets, although the German tanks are concentrated unlike the allies. The allied advantage is infantry, but facing Germany on three sides no one power is bigger. Plus the Czechs, who before the fall of Austria could likely have fended off Germany forever have now been outflanked.

Equipment as established by my scenario is mostly Soviet T-26 tanks which are upgraded version of the British Vickers 6 ton. The Soviet version had already added 4 tons of weight and German mods are likely to add some more weight. Obvious German mods are adding a radio a more powerful German engine and better optics. The 45mm gun is excellent but the DT machine gun will probably be replaced with the Mg34. The German engine will be important for some of the panzer divisions who copied the Soviet practice of adding 30mm applique armor to their T-26's after the lessons in Finland.

These up armored tanks are likely grouped in breakthrough battalions 1 per each of the big panzer divisions. The light divisions likely have the Bt-3 or 5 tanks for mobility. Plus the BT tanks with their bigger turret offer a version for infantry support armed with either an imported 76.2mm gun or a 75mm L/24 howitzer.

So a GUSR OOB might be equipped with divisions that look like this.

1939 GUSR Panzer divisions 2x panzer regiments x3 panzer battalions. 1st panzer battalion is equipped with up armored T-26. panzer grenadier regiment, artillery regiment, engineer battalion, AAA battalion, AT battalion recon battalion (motorcycles and armored cars)

1939 GUSR Light division 1x panzer regiment of BT tanks, 2x panzer grenadier regiments (1x half track 1x truck) artillery regiment, engineer battalion, AAA battalion, AT battalion, recon battalion (motorcycles and armored cars).

1939 GUSR Motorized division 3x motorized regiments, 1 battalion of BT tanks (infantry support version), artillery regiment, engineer battalion, AAA battalion, AT battalion.

1939 GUSR Cavalry division 3x regiments or 3 squadrons of 4 troops. 1 troop each of each regiment's 4th squadron is BT tanks, AT guns and armored cars.

1939 GUSR infantry division 3x regiments of infantry, artillery regiment, horse drawn AT battalion, engineer battalion, horse cavalry troop.

My scenario had Germany invading Czechoslovakia and Poland at the same time. The panzer and supporting light and motorized divisions taking on Polish infantry and cavalry. It was mostly infantry assigned to deal with the Czechs, though in the south I'd probably put at least a couple of motorized/mechanized units to fend off any adventurism by the Czechs. More infantry plus the mountain division has to fend off the Italians and the French. Germany had a fear of a two front war, so how could they attack on 2 fronts and defend on 2 fronts?

The obvious answer is the Soviet Union, and that is what Poland and the Czechs fear. France and Italy are less concerned about communist shock troops than they are about subversives. In fact I think it highly likely that French communists would be raising hell in France tying her knots as she tried to both support her ally and appease a large political bloc. Given France's real historic timidity in 1939 and 40 combined with an almost full blown communist uprising France is unlikely to be able to attack Germany in support of her allies. Her expedition in real history is likely to be the same here. A token force plus maybe a few divisions to her allies.

The most aggressive western power is likely to be Italy. Yet even in an Alternate history, Mussolini comes up short, his army is poorly led and nothing can change that. Even though his tanks are not as inferior to the bulk of the German tanks as they would be against the new British Maltilda II in 1940, they are still markedly inferior. In Spain in real history the T-26 ripped German and Italian tanks apart.

However the ability to attack the Germans posses does not give them the ability to win. Even if Poland and Czechoslovakia fall full French mobilization combined with Italian forces created a strength of 87 divisions before the BEF which brings it to 97. Still more than half again the size of the German military. Plus the British have 3 more divisions forming and units en-route from the Dominions.

To invade France, the Germans have to have Soviet help. Stalin would send the troops, but the Red Army gutted by the purges and suffering from low morale after being embarrassed by Finland is also using junk equipment. Soviet tanks nearly identical to German models are much less impressive. The Soviet Union lacks the skilled technician classes of Germany so break down rates are higher for example. They use smaller less sophisticated trucks for transport, have major communications issues and coordination is poor thanks to the purges. They are also plagued by doctrinal failures though they don't know it yet. The tank brigades sent west with the T-28 will likely influence the choices Germany makes. The T-28 was designed to attack into fortified zones and so may convince the communists to make a frontal attack on the Maginot line.

zraver
02 Apr 12,, 21:16
The small players like the Belgians and Dutch are somewhat Wildcards. The Belgians are officially neutral and despite claims to the contrary makde in this thread the UK and France will not force them to join them or else. Belgian status as a neutral is a result of the treaty ending the Napoleonic Wars and in 1939 is still force of law. However they don't need to force Belgium to join them. The small country remembers 1914 and can put 5 infantry and 2 mobile divisions worth of troops in the field. The Belgian Army expects 1914 all over again and is ready and Belgian staff officers are talking with their French and counter-parts.

The Dutch have a smaller army with a bit over 4 infantry and 1 mobile divisions in the country but the Dutch air force adds over 150 modern fighters, 14x the number of modern monoplane fighters Belgium has. Holland is also not part of the discussion taking place in Brussels, Paris and London. Everyone things the Dutch are soft, unprepared for war. After all the clog wearers avoid the blood letting of WWI. But this is a somewhat unfair sentiment. In real history the Dutch put up better resistance than the Belgians. Holland resisted for 6 days before the government the win the towel. In those 6 days the Dutch Army continued to fight and the Dutch air force continued to fly despite getting almost no outside help. This is a day longer than it took the Germans to break the Belgians, British and French in real history.

Belgium on the other hand using reserves and hastily raised units massed a force of 22 divisions in May 1940. There were slated to revive the support of multiple British and French divisions. Everyone expects a right hook like in 1914. And after the fall of Poland and Czechoslovakia the Germans do have a serious lead in mobile formations especially formations that are not ad hoc arrangements. Add in Soviet tank brigades and the implied threat is obvious.

It will also lead to the same mistakes by the allied leaders- a concentration to resist the right hook leaving the ardennes under defended. But here the Allies may catch a break. With T-28 assault tank brigades and maybe some rare and on paper terrifyingly effective KV-2 tanks the Soviets and Germans may go for a frontal assault on the Maginot Line rather than looking for a way to infiltrate tanks. This is made even more likely by the types of tanks being used. The German and Soviet T-26 tanks are limited to 10mph or about half the speed of the French Souma S-35. If the big Soviet tanks can break the Maginot Line, the roads behind them promise a faster and more direct advance.

Mihais
02 Apr 12,, 21:44
Here a thing,from real history,somewhat less known.When Germany invaded Poland it all went as everybody knows in the beggining.Poland had a large merchant fleet and a lil' geographical feature called Romanian Bridgehead.There's a rail from Constanta to S-E Poland and in this area many depots,regeneration assets etc... were located in peacetime.There's a logic in this.It's the most secure region in front of a German attack.So the merchant fleet brings Western supplies to Romania,than to S-E Poland and the result is that Germany suffers the fate of 1918.In theory and before the war.What the Germans did at the start of the campaign certainly sucked big time,but for the Poles the situation was not hopeless even with the loss of Warsaw and the industrial base.They had reserves,they had defensible terrain,they had the possibility to be ressuplied and the hope of a French offensive to ease the pressure.What really turned things upside down was the Soviet offense.That fvucked Rydz-Smigly's mind and he ordered the evacuation of everything able to move into Hungary and Romania.But before that happened,the Polish army engaged the Soviets a few times.Vastly outnumbered,and with barely reconstituted units they wiped the floor with the Red Army wherever they met them.So the evacuation may have been premature,but given the circumstances somewhat understandable.

Also,as you know,a lot of German tanks,particularly PzI&II were lost during the Polish campaign.

The point of the argument is to show that absent Wehrmacht level competence a campaign by commie Germany vs. Poland is likely to turn into a slugfest.Absent the conquest of Czechoslovakia(and the addition of Czech tanks&artillery),the need to guard the western border and the correlation of forces gets ugly for the red Germans.

Then there is the probable Italian expeditionary force,likely to include in the first wave the Alpini Corp,Ariete and Littorio divisions,which were good units.There is the possibility that Hungary(~15 divisions)joins the Allies as well as the 30 Romanian ones.

So even the Soviets can be halted.The Germans can even be beaten,depending on how good the Czech and Polish Generals are(or more rightly,how bad the commie Germans are).And France,elgium and Netherlands are still to move,while UK sips tea in the meantime.But if they clear the Baltic,BEF can land at Danzig,Denmark or play other funny games with the Germans.

1979
02 Apr 12,, 22:53
They had reserves,they had defensible terrain,they had the possibility to be ressuplied and the hope of a French offensive to ease the pressure.

nope ,the possibly of resupply fell at the same time as Lvov (all rails towards Romania pased trough that city or Tarnopol but that one fell even sooner )

Mihais
02 Apr 12,, 23:02
May I ask to whom said railroad junctions fell?:cool:

1979
03 Apr 12,, 06:59
May I ask to whom said railroad junctions fell?:cool:

they fell to the soviets but for argument sake lets assume that the Germans are still busy in Czechoslovakia and Poland manage to keep the door from slamming shut .
what kind of supplies could the Wallies send?

zraver
03 Apr 12,, 18:01
they fell to the soviets but for argument sake lets assume that the Germans are still busy in Czechoslovakia and Poland manage to keep the door from slamming shut .
what kind of supplies could the Wallies send?

More H39 and R35 tanks. France also has 44 H35 (older version of the H39) in depot storage, M.S 406 fighters, artillery, ammunition etc. France doesn't have enar the excess capacity of the US, but she can send some stuff.

Tank in particular would be the biggest benefit. Whether WWII (real) Pz I and II or this scenarios modified T-26's and BT tanks the French tanks were superior in every way. The German advantage of a 3 man turret wasn't present in the pz 1 and II's or the Soviet designs.

Italy could send M 11/39's not a very good tank, but better than a tankette. Italy could also supply tankettes and biplane fighters as well as bombers.

The problem is the Soviet invasion is likely to be larger than it was historically. With an obvious need to move troops to Germany to take on the imperialist West the GUSR blitz of Poland for all the tanks and dive bombers and spectacle is likely as not a diversion to pull troops away from the Soviet border. Despite claism to the contrary the Poles did not wipe the floor with the Soviets but were steadily pushed back and Poland took more casualties than the Soviets did. With an invasion of close to 40 divisions worth of troops the Soviets hit Poland with nearly twice the Poles establishment strength.

Poland is effectively doomed. Even with lower performing officers things like the fact all the German tanks are cannon armed and the hammer and anvil nature of the double invasion leave no doubt as to the out come. The Czechs on the hand are a different matter. They to have plentiful cannon armed tanks. If not for the Austrian flank they could hold out for ever. But Austria flanks them and once Poland falls they are surrounded on 3 sides by the Germans who now have Soviet support on the former Polish border.

Romania and Hungary are very much in doubt, a quick fall of Poland will likely make the Romanian and Hungarian governments extremely flexible to the new order as it did in 1939. Bulgaria is already a Russian ally in spirit and with Germany and the Soviets on the same side Bulgaria will happily join with them which creates a Greek front or potentially does.

Mihais
03 Apr 12,, 18:59
And that's the key problem:time.Without the Blitzkrieg(Guderian is no more) Poland can hold a longer time.

The 20 Czech divisions can keep at least 15 German divisions tied.That still makes possible Czech reinforcements into Poland proper.
Also Romania had a mutual defense pact with Poland that wasn't activated at Poland's request historically.If the Soviets move in strength from the start as is in this scenario the pact will be activated.So you can count 40-50 Soviet divisions and brigades out.If Mussolini is active in Hungary pre-war,it is likely the Hungarians are also in an Italian inspired Anti-Commie pact.Hungary was in any case very sympathetic to Poland.If that happens Yugoslavia can be persuaded to allow Italian troops to pass East.Btw,the Anschluss is a tricky thing with a commie Germany.

So,what we're very likely to have is this.~40 Polish divisions &Bde's fighting initially against 35-40 German divisions and 60-70 Soviet.Czech,Hungarian and Italian mobile units can be in theater relatively fast,the rest a bit later.Against Soviet army of 1939,Poland can hold for a longer period than historically the case.And after 6 weeks,the French,Dutch and Belgians are likely to do something in the West to draw the Germans.And,even if Polish ground is taken,Polish army can still keep an area,likely near Slovak and Hungarian borders.The Soviets and the Germans will still be tied,even if they manage to join and they still have to attack against defenses in the mountains.Let's say they spend 3 months in Poland.Winter just came.

There is another aspect,regarding politics.You won't have the surprise offered by the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.You'll have mobilization in due time.

1979
03 Apr 12,, 19:21
I find it odd that you consider the french tanks superior in every way, they score particularly bad in terms of mobility and firepower.

Mihais
03 Apr 12,, 19:30
T-26 is the criteria here,if I read Z right.

1979
03 Apr 12,, 19:44
Romania rearmed the r-35 tanks with soviet 45 mm guns , the canon was that bad.
both t-26 and r-35 are what the British called" infantry tanks " ie slow.

Mihais
03 Apr 12,, 20:27
Yep,but nevertheless both were fairly adequate for the time in question,1939.Obviously the war will take a long time and the developments,upgrades etc...are hard to predict.Soviet have an intact industrial base,so may produce a larger number of T34's when they eventually finalize the design.On the other hand you have the Czech industrial base,the French and the rest adapting to T28 and T34,not Pz4,Panther etc... Germans tried to supplant quality for quantity,now you have allies having to adapt to T34 in large numbers.The posibilities are endless.

zraver
03 Apr 12,, 23:32
I find it odd that you consider the french tanks superior in every way, they score particularly bad in terms of mobility and firepower.

Uhm no they don't, not compared to the T-26. The un-up armored T-26 had a max off road speed of 9mph and armor maxing at 15mm. The 45mm gun was good, it could punch a pz II at over 1000m. Soviet optics were at best mediocre and Soviet maintenance crews were thin on the ground due to a lack of a technical base which also limited field innovations.

The French R-39 had 3x the armor and the SA-18 37mm gun while not an AT gun could defeat the armor of the T-26 and BT series. In 1939 the Char B1bis was superior to anything else in the world but the few KV tanks. It har armor all but immune to German and Soviet guns, its own gun could defeat them at range. France had over 150 of them in service in 1939.

zraver
03 Apr 12,, 23:54
And that's the key problem:time.Without the Blitzkrieg(Guderian is no more) Poland can hold a longer time.[/qute]

The lack of Guderian doesn't automatically mean the lack of blitzkrieg which was as much a function of need as a product of inspiration.

The 20 Czech divisions can keep at least 15 German divisions tied.That still makes possible Czech reinforcements into Poland proper.

The czechs are tied up guarding the Austrian border, no mini-maginot there.


Also Romania had a mutual defense pact with Poland that wasn't activated at Poland's request historically.If the Soviets move in strength from the start as is in this scenario the pact will be activated.So you can count 40-50 Soviet divisions and brigades out.

How do you figure since those Soviet division hit Poland, not the Czechs who do not have a border with the Soviet Union.


If Mussolini is active in Hungary pre-war,it is likely the Hungarians are also in an Italian inspired Anti-Commie pact.Hungary was in any case very sympathetic to Poland.

Hungary is by far the best bet for an active ally in the East, Romania and Bulgaria are not and the Yugoslavs are at best a maybe. They are close to the French but have major issues with Italy.


If that happens Yugoslavia can be persuaded to allow Italian troops to pass East.Btw,the Anschluss is a tricky thing with a commie Germany.

Yugoslavia will not let Italian troops pass through. Italy and Yugoslavia were near to war over Albania. If Italy sends troops it will be via Greece and then Romania.


So,what we're very likely to have is this.~40 Polish divisions &Bde's fighting initially against 35-40 German divisions and 60-70

Poland can put about 33 divisions worth of troops in the field to face 19 German mobile units and and a Soviet force of around 50 divisions.

The Czechs have 30ish divisions which will tie up an equal number of German units but if Poland Collapses, Czech troop density goes down just as the forces arrayed against it go up. Even sending the tank units to Poland won't save Poland, although they may save part of the Polish army.

Germany has about a dozen field divisions and its fortress troops to face France relying on French timidity and slow mobilization. France wont move without the BEF regardless so pre-war commie German sub building offers some real ways to slow this down.


Soviet.Czech,Hungarian and Italian mobile units can be in theater relatively fast,the rest a bit later.Against Soviet army of 1939,Poland can hold for a longer period than historically the case.And after 6 weeks,the French,Dutch and Belgians are likely to do something in the West to draw the Germans.And,even if Polish ground is taken,Polish army can still keep an area,likely near Slovak and Hungarian borders.The Soviets and the Germans will still be tied,even if they manage to join and they still have to attack against defenses in the mountains.Let's say they spend 3 months in Poland.Winter just came.

Hungarians are out unless Czechs want to hand over Ruthenia. Hell Hungary may play its own game to gain back Ruthenia and if Romania jumps in Transylvania


There is another aspect,regarding politics.You won't have the surprise offered by the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact.You'll have mobilization in due time.

Balanced by the utter chaos of French communists acting as a 5th column and throwing general strikes.

1979
06 Apr 12,, 20:27
Uhm no they don't, not compared to the T-26. The un-up armored T-26 had a max off road speed of 9mph and armor maxing at 15mm. The 45mm gun was good, it could punch a pz II at over 1000m. Soviet optics were at best mediocre and Soviet maintenance crews were thin on the ground due to a lack of a technical base which also limited field innovations.

The French R-39 had 3x the armor and the SA-18 37mm gun while not an AT gun could defeat the armor of the T-26 and BT series. In 1939 the Char B1bis was superior to anything else in the world but the few KV tanks. It har armor all but immune to German and Soviet guns, its own gun could defeat them at range. France had over 150 of them in service in 1939.

and 7.5 mph for r-35 , so while it scores better in protection it's mobility and firepower it's not superior .
wrt to b-1 bis, the t-28 model 1939 tank has a gun capable of dealing with the b-1.

1979
07 Apr 12,, 08:47
And that's the key problem:time.Without the Blitzkrieg(Guderian is no more) Poland can hold a longer time.

the tank divisions were split among army corps in poland and not given
any independent operational objectives as opposed to the french campaign.



Also Romania had a mutual defense pact with Poland that wasn't activated at Poland's request historically.If the Soviets move in strength from the start as is in this scenario the pact will be activated.So you can count 40-50 Soviet divisions and brigades out.

Romania's leadership at that time lacked to guts the put up a fight for our lands, but now it would do it over POLAND ? :rolleyes:

1979
07 Apr 12,, 09:56
So a GUSR army of 60 divisions plus fortress troops (1/3ish the size of the USSR) is reasonable. Although Stalin is likely to limit reserve formations to prevent a German surge. This gives the German communists the single biggest military in Western Europe, big enough to beat any two comers in fact, but not big enough to threaten Moscow's control.

The size limit imposed by Moscow is one reason the communist may go down roughly similar lines as the historical WWII German military with its focus on panzers and mechanized divisions. So 7 big panzer divisions, 3 light panzer divisions, 5 motorized divisions, 1 mountain division and 3 cavalry divisions plus 39 infantry divisions and 2 fortress divisions. This gives Germany 1 one division lead in mobile assets, although the German tanks are concentrated unlike the allies. The allied advantage is infantry, but facing Germany on three sides no one power is bigger. Plus the Czechs, who before the fall of Austria could likely have fended off Germany forever have now been outflanked.



I agree with the overall number but not with the force composition .
the equipment that went into the additional 40 inf divisions Germany had in real timeline is enough to fully mechanize another 12 inf div and add more firepower to the existing ones.
my take :
10 panzer, 20 motorized, 4 mountain, 26 infantry (all from first welle ).

there were plans after the fall of France to keep a peace army of:
20 panzer, 10 motorized, 6 mountain, 26 infantry, 23 corps HQ, 10 army HQ,
But there were canceled in July 1940.

zraver
08 Apr 12,, 03:21
and 7.5 mph for r-35 , so while it scores better in protection it's mobility and firepower it's not superior .
wrt to b-1 bis, the t-28 model 1939 tank has a gun capable of dealing with the b-1.

I think you mean the T-28 M1938. And no it could not. The 10 caliber gun was no better at punching armor than the L-24 on the Pz IV. The Char B1 bis 47,m high velcoity AT gun could knock the T-28 out at range while remaining effectively immune to return fire even at close range. At 500m, the L11 gun not the L10 only had 62mm of penetration if it could get a 90 degree impact strike.

1979
08 Apr 12,, 08:15
I think you mean the T-28 M1938.
yes, the tank produced in 1939.



And no it could not. The 10 caliber gun was no better at punching armor than the L-24 on the Pz IV. The Char B1 bis 47,m high velcoity AT gun could knock the T-28 out at range while remaining effectively immune to return fire even at close range. At 500m, the L11 gun not the L10 only had 62mm of penetration if it could get a 90 degree impact strike.


the gun on the panzer IV had 385 m/s muzzle velocity firing a 6.8 kg shell.
the L-10 on the t-28 had 555 m/s muzzle velocity and fired 6.3 kg shell .

the kinetic energy = 954.8 KJoules for l-10
ke= 503.9 KJoules for kvk-37 .

the gun on the t-28 is almost twice as powerful as the gun on the early panzer iv, and all data i had sean gives it comparable penetration with the L-11 mounted on KV-1.

even in a b1 bis vs pz-IVd setup, the french tank was not immune to shots in the tracks or the radiator.

zraver
08 Apr 12,, 21:53
yes, the tank produced in 1939.

the gun on the panzer IV had 385 m/s muzzle velocity firing a 6.8 kg shell.
the L-10 on the t-28 had 555 m/s muzzle velocity and fired 6.3 kg shell .

the kinetic energy = 954.8 KJoules for l-10
ke= 503.9 KJoules for kvk-37 .

the gun on the t-28 is almost twice as powerful as the gun on the early panzer iv, and all data i had sean gives it comparable penetration with the L-11 mounted on KV-1.

even in a b1 bis vs pz-IVd setup, the french tank was not immune to shots in the tracks or the radiator.

Even using the data for the KV1 the tank both the KV and T-28 need to be within 500m to even have a chance of BAE if they can get a 90 degree impact. The T-28's 30mm of armor could be punched at well over 1000m. Even the sides of the B1 bis were all but immune to the Soviet gun outside 500m.

1979
08 Apr 12,, 22:30
If remember trigonometry right it does not need to be 90 deg precisely
anywhere between 85 deg and 105 deg is fine (15 deg deflection on a 60 mm plate only increases LOS by 2 mm)


.

zraver
09 Apr 12,, 01:23
If remember trigonometry right it does not need to be 90 deg precisely
anywhere between 85 deg and 105 deg is fine (15 deg deflection on a 60 mm plate only increases LOS by 2 mm) .

The penetration figures i found for the L11 were 62mm at 500m at a 90 degree impact although I think the site meant 0 degree deflect against a 90 degree plate. The B1 bis had 60mm sloped at 20 degrees which causes two problems for the Russian gun. First it makes the effective thickness more and second the slope can cause ricochets or fuse malfunctions.

1979
09 Apr 12,, 05:34
AFAIK
60 mm @ 20 is the drivers plate, the hull front is sloped even more making it
safe at 500 m from the front.

however the sides are flat and the turret is less armored (46mm @ 22 deg = 50 mm LOS on the sides ) and to that the awkward placing of the radiator.

with aplique armor plates the t-28 is also safe from the front.

zraver
10 Apr 12,, 03:39
AFAIK
60 mm @ 20 is the drivers plate, the hull front is sloped even more making it
safe at 500 m from the front.

however the sides are flat and the turret is less armored (46mm @ 22 deg = 50 mm LOS on the sides ) and to that the awkward placing of the radiator.

with aplique armor plates the t-28 is also safe from the front.

Uhm no, well more accurately maybe. Some sources claim 80mm thick after applique, others 30mm, no production data is known.

1979
10 Apr 12,, 07:06
the sources i had saw (even Russian Wikipedia has the applique scheme )
said 50-60 mm front ( 30 original +20 to 30 mm plates ) 40 mm sides ( 20+20 )

except the upper front hull who retains the original 30 mm but that was sloped at very steep angle.

zraver
10 Apr 12,, 16:25
the sources i had saw (even Russian Wikipedia has the applique scheme )
said 50-60 mm front ( 30 original +20 to 30 mm plates ) 40 mm sides ( 20+20 )

except the upper front hull who retains the original 30 mm but that was sloped at very steep angle.

Just saying there is some question as to the real thickness of the plates which reflects both the loss of records and perhaps uneven application based on local materials. We don't even know if the plates were armor grade.