Thread: Most decisive battle of World War 2

My apologies, I forgot about the 3 Romanian. I don't think it would have mattered, the Soviets were looking to see where the Romanians, Italians and Hungarians were at. And except for the Italians, the other two are going to be in the South. There is really nothing to put behind them. The panzer units in and behind 9A were for the most part divisions in name only- short on men, tanks and trucks. They were also in the worst possible place to be moved South. It was faster to ship units from the West, Germany and AGN than from AGC since the trains had the longest distance to travel, most traffic to deal with headed west from AGC. The rail line could send 24 trains a day and a division required in excess of 100 trains and lacked sufficient north/south lines. I assume about the same for the south but a better railhead into the Baltic states.

Originally Posted by Mihais

So what.Where are the depots,the trains etc... All those are in the W.

how many depots,the trains etc... did the soviets have ?
from kletskaia to kalach there was no rail whatsoever.
all the supply had to go by horse wagons or trucks (not too many of those either).

Originally Posted by zraver

The rail line could send 24 trains a day and a division required in excess of 100 trains and lacked sufficient north/south lines. I assume about the same for the south but a better railhead into the Baltic states.

a double track rail , which ROSTOV-STALINGRAD was not.
my extimate is 16 trains/day in a good day.

Come on!You're comparing the soviets fighting near their jumping positions with the Axis having to move into nowhere under pressure .That would have led exactly to Zraver's scenario. Besides,I have Manstein on my side

I'm not suggesting moving anywhere, just keep the southern pincer at bay ( with the 14th, 16th, 24th panzer and 29 moto div ) and the axis could reroute their LOC trough SALSK.

Originally Posted by 1979

a double track rail , which ROSTOV-STALINGRAD was not.
my extimate is 16 trains/day in a good day.

Ok, so that make sit even harder to move units from AGC to AGS/AD. A typical German army on the move required 40-50,000 tons of truck transport capacity to be able to sustain itself to a max of 400km from the nearest rail head. German rail teams had been replacing track at the rate of 20km/day. The closer to the rail system the less it needed obviously. This need for trucks gutted AGC of transport assets. Much of thise assets had long since broken down, gotten destroyed, or are committed to either A or B. Any divisions moved from AGC, will upon arrival not be able to go anywhere. However divisions fresh from rebuilding in Estonia, Germany and France have their organic transport assets intact and are much less of a burden on the logistics net.

Originally Posted by zraver

Ok, so that make sit even harder to move units from AGC to AGS/AD.

yes it does, but even if it takes 3-4 weeks, to move just those 3 armored formations from 2nd panzer army south, stavka has to consider their presence for subsequent operations.

Originally Posted by zraver

A typical German army on the move required 40-50,000 tons of truck transport capacity to be able to sustain itself to a max of 400km from the nearest rail head. German rail teams had been replacing track at the rate of 20km/day. The closer to the rail system the less it needed obviously. This need for trucks gutted AGC of transport assets.

I do not think, any German field army had that much truck transport capacity in 1942, irc Von Kleist had something like that, during the battle of France,
but the german army had fewer divisions in the field back than.

Originally Posted by zraver

Much of thise assets had long since broken down, gotten destroyed, or are committed to either A or B. Any divisions moved from AGC, will upon arrival not be able to go anywhere. However divisions fresh from rebuilding in Estonia, Germany and France have their organic transport assets intact and are much less of a burden on the logistics net.

not sure what fresh divisions you are referring too,
irc 6th panzer (which was historically committed in dec 42 ),and 7th panzer div were in France at that time, and that's about it.

Originally Posted by 1979

yes it does, but even if it takes 3-4 weeks, to move just those 3 armored formations from 2nd panzer army south, stavka has to consider their presence for subsequent operations.

But that presence is going to be considered where ever they are. Sending them south might well have helped the Soviets by further cutting each divisions allotment of supplies.

I do not think, any German field army had that much truck transport capacity in 1942, irc Von Kleist had something like that, during the battle of France,
but the german army had fewer divisions in the field back than.

Soviets estimates for Operation Barbarossa indicate 40-56,000 tons of truck transport for AGC in June 1941. AGD(A/B) approximated this size in June 42)

not sure what fresh divisions you are referring too,

Not fresh, units that would have been rebuilding if the Soviets had not attacked. The 12th Panzer was moved to Estonia to rebuild where access to the Baltic ports provided easy access to the centers of production. However it was rushed back into the fighting.

irc 6th panzer (which was historically committed in dec 42 ),and 7th panzer div were in France at that time, and that's about it.

the 10th panzer was in 15 Army in June 42 and was being rushed to Tunisia at the same time 6th pz was being sent East. The 7th would deploy East in Feb 43. LSAH and Das Reich was also in France rebuilding as a panzer grenadier divisions.

Originally Posted by zraver

But that presence is going to be considered where ever they are. Sending them south might well have helped the Soviets by further cutting each divisions allotment of supplies.

What's the time frame ?
If they decide to send them before the soviet ofensive (which i personally doubt ) it would help the soviets a bit.
if however they send them south after the soviets reached the Axis LOC, the railline between Rostov and Kalach would not be used for ferrying supplies anyway.

Originally Posted by zraver

Soviets estimates for Operation Barbarossa indicate 40-56,000 tons of truck transport for AGC in June 1941. AGD(A/B) approximated this size in June 42)

you said " a typical German" so I assumed you ment field army not army group.
my mistake.

Originally Posted by zraver

Not fresh, units that would have been rebuilding if the Soviets had not attacked. The 12th Panzer was moved to Estonia to rebuild where access to the Baltic ports provided easy access to the centers of production. However it was rushed back into the fighting.
the 10th panzer was in 15 Army in June 42 and was being rushed to Tunisia at the same time 6th pz was being sent East. The 7th would deploy East in Feb 43. LSAH and Das Reich was also in France rebuilding as a panzer grenadier divisions.

A bit of topic but i'm curious myself why the 7th was not rushed to the eastern front sunner , perhaps even after the bulk of the allied landing ships was comited to Op. Torch , her presence in France must have served some pourpose.

Originally Posted by 1979

What's the time frame ?
If they decide to send them before the soviet ofensive (which i personally doubt ) it would help the soviets a bit.
if however they send them south after the soviets reached the Axis LOC, the railline between Rostov and Kalach would not be used for ferrying supplies anyway.

If the Germans were going to do it and be effective it would have to be early, but there was not a enough transport.

you said " a typical German" so I assumed you ment field army not army group.
my mistake.

No I said army group as in armee group mitte. The OOB for Armee group Sud in June 42 is about the same size as that of Mitte in 41.

A bit of topic but i'm curious myself why the 7th was not rushed to the eastern front sunner , perhaps even after the bulk of the allied landing ships was comited to Op. Torch , her presence in France must have served some pourpose.

Case Anton, the 7th and 10th Panzer divisions had been kept in France toi protect against a Vichy betrayal. After Anton, the 10th was sent to Tunisia and I am guessing as the last armored reserve that could be deployed the Germans wanted to hold on to it. Tunisia wasn't a good spot for it anyway. The American landings meant the supply routes were now under constant threat.

Originally Posted by zraver

If the Germans were going to do it and be effective it would have to be early, but there was not a enough transport.

As far as rail capacity is concern I agree.
wrt to truck transport I do not, because in nov 1942 the german army had over 400,000 trucks, the highest number they ever had throughout the whole war.

The German army was also tasked with defending the most extended front at the greatest distance .They also had the largest number of allies,whose motorization was precarious,to say the least.Do you have any graphic representation of the number of trucks throughout the war?


I was thinking a bit lately of how the war might have been different for the Germans had they switched the commanders.For example,Hitler initially thought to send von Manstein as commander in chief in Africa,but later changed his mind and sent Rommel.Rommel would have certainly gained a panzer corp,given his performane in France.It's funny to think that while Manstein would have captured Malta and worked better with the Italians,Rommel would not have hesitated on the Dvina.

Originally Posted by Mihais

The German army was also tasked with defending the most extended front at the greatest distance .They also had the largest number of allies,whose motorization was precarious,to say the least.Do you have any graphic representation of the number of trucks throughout the war?

1942 was also the height of Axis ground forces overall even if Germany peaked in 43.

Romania added 228,0000 troops to AGS, Hungary added 200,000 and Italy added 235,000 troops.

I was thinking a bit lately of how the war might have been different for the Germans had they switched the commanders.For example,Hitler initially thought to send von Manstein as commander in chief in Africa,but later changed his mind and sent Rommel.Rommel would have certainly gained a panzer corp,given his performane in France.It's funny to think that while Manstein would have captured Malta and worked better with the Italians,Rommel would not have hesitated on the Dvina.

Very nice question.

However, how much farther could Rommel have pushed 56pz corps? While his unit was nearly full strength, the advance of 300 km in just a four days had left the divisions he commanded completely unsupported and almost out of gas. Rommel would have run 56pz corps until the fuel tanks were bone dry, but would it have been far enough, and what could the Soviets do about it?


In the desert how well would Maintstein have done ie, what could have done differently to overcome the resource disadvantage?

Originally Posted by Mihais

The German army was also tasked with defending the most extended front at the greatest distance .They also had the largest number of allies,whose motorization was precarious,to say the least.Do you have any graphic representation of the number of trucks throughout the war?

I do not know how many were actually operational. http://www.angelfire.com/super/ussbs/images/motexhj.gif