No Arctic Convoys

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Von Schadewald
Member
Posts: 2065
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 00:17
Location: Israel

No Arctic Convoys

#1

Post by Von Schadewald » 22 Jul 2007, 00:15

The disaster of Convoy PQ17 meant that 200 aircraft, 400 tanks, and 3000 vehicles didn't reach the Russians. PQ18 was also a near disaster.

If the Germans had shut down the Arctic convoys already in May 1942 by annihilating (ie not one merchant ship gets through) PQ16, could the Russians have survived without this materiel, or were they absolutely critical?

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4455
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 20:23
Contact:

#2

Post by Kunikov » 22 Jul 2007, 02:24

Lend Lease was not critical, it was a huge help but the major battles on the Eastern Front were decided with minimal Lend Lease support, it did bring the war to a quicker end though.


Stephan
Member
Posts: 739
Joined: 09 Feb 2003, 21:34
Location: Sweden

#3

Post by Stephan » 22 Jul 2007, 23:55

Sovjets tended to use the new tanks and planes at lesser important battlescenes. Like in Finland. I think.

But as I know, much of the lorries come to good use! So the weapons played a second grade role yes, but the cars and lorries were pretty useful. Probably the most useful part of all the material send.

Now, there were also other routes more or less used and useful: Via Iran, and via Vladivostok. So a total blockade of the Murmansk-passage wouldnt be lethal - although of course, very unconvenient.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

#4

Post by Art » 23 Jul 2007, 11:47

The Germans almost closed the northern routes of land-lease deliveries in mid-1942. See the table showing the shipments from Western Hemisphere and its distribution between different routes:
http://www.o5m6.de/Routes.html
It is easy to calcualte that in the second half of 1942 140 thousands tonns of cargo were sent via North, 589 thousands - via Pacific and 483 via Iran. So the Northern Route became secondary in comparison with other two. The heavy losses on the North and the contannt strain on naval forces forced Allies to switch the deliveries to other routes, namely to Persian Gulf:
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/S ... r15.htm#b2
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/70-7_09.htm
So the scenario "No Arctic convoys" is very close to the reality.

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

#5

Post by Tim Smith » 23 Jul 2007, 12:58

So, perhaps less Soviet activity on the extreme northern front then? Less pressure on Finland?

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

#6

Post by Art » 23 Jul 2007, 13:21

Less than zero? :)

User avatar
Lkefct
Member
Posts: 1294
Joined: 24 Jun 2004, 23:15
Location: Frederick MD

#7

Post by Lkefct » 23 Jul 2007, 17:07

The Arctic convoys used a great deal of shipping and a large # of escorts that might have been better used in Atlantic. At that point, the Atlantic battles where at a very critical juncture. Bringing that many ships into such close proximity to German air assets, as well as the U boats made life almost impossible on the defenses.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

#8

Post by Art » 24 Jul 2007, 11:18

Information more directly related to the topic. The deliveries of Brittish and American tanks in USSR:
http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/weap ... neral1.htm
The deliveries of planes in 1942:
A-20 667
B-25 108
Total Bombers 775
Hurricane II 1115
P40 Tomahawk 17
P40 Kittihawk 487
P39 Airacobra 192
P51 Mustang 4
Total fighters 1815
O-52 14
Total planes 2604
Last edited by Art on 24 Jul 2007, 12:39, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lars
Member
Posts: 663
Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 17:58
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

#9

Post by Lars » 24 Jul 2007, 12:17

Ah, but at what costs could the Germans stop the Arctic convoys. It would take more Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine assets that were in use elsewhere. Strip the Med of the Luftwaffe, have the Kriegsmarine abandon the battle of the Atlantic, or?

maltesefalcon
Member
Posts: 2047
Joined: 03 Sep 2003, 19:15
Location: Canada

#10

Post by maltesefalcon » 28 Jul 2007, 13:55

Stephan wrote:
But as I know, much of the lorries come to good use! So the weapons played a second grade role yes, but the cars and lorries were pretty useful. Probably the most useful part of all the material send.
Postwar, the Russians took the attitude; that the tanks and airplanes sent; were inferior to Russian designs and not all that helpful. Was partially due to propoganda that Russia felt they won the war, basically. That being said; they never rejected any Allied shipments, in fact continually asked for more.

The quote above is relevant. Even the Russians admitted, the thousands of lorries sent by Britain and the USA had been invaluable. That, and the foodstuffs sent, as well.

If no convoys took place in 1942/43, I believe Russia would have collapsed.

maltesefalcon
Member
Posts: 2047
Joined: 03 Sep 2003, 19:15
Location: Canada

#11

Post by maltesefalcon » 28 Jul 2007, 13:56

Lars wrote:Ah, but at what costs could the Germans stop the Arctic convoys. It would take more Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine assets that were in use elsewhere. Strip the Med of the Luftwaffe, have the Kriegsmarine abandon the battle of the Atlantic, or?
Good point. The converse being, no Arctic convoys would free up the bulk of the Kriegsmarine to rain havoc elsewhere as well.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#12

Post by LWD » 28 Jul 2007, 23:22

Where? Tirpitz isn't going to be much of a problem elsewhere. The German light vessels are only of much use in the channel and the few subs that are freed up have longer transit times.

Von Schadewald
Member
Posts: 2065
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 00:17
Location: Israel

#13

Post by Von Schadewald » 29 Jul 2007, 02:25

How many aircraft did the Luftwaffe deploy to take on the Arctic convoys?

Enough to have made a significant difference if used in Russia or N.Africa?
eg would 100-200 extra Ju87s, 88s, He111s and Fw200s in August 1942 have tipped the balance at Leningrad, Stalingrad or El Alamein?
Last edited by Von Schadewald on 29 Jul 2007, 03:06, edited 1 time in total.

john1761
Member
Posts: 182
Joined: 15 Oct 2004, 19:44
Location: USA

#14

Post by john1761 » 29 Jul 2007, 02:56

The others might but, the FW 200's definitely would be of use in U boat campaign in the N. Atlantic looking for convoys.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

#15

Post by LWD » 29 Jul 2007, 03:22

If the Germans would have used them there. And if it didn't trigger a stronger counter effort by the British. As for North Africa since the Germans were pretty well resource limited not sure the additional planes would have done much good. Vs Soviets maybe some effect. Depends a lot on what the Western allies do with their extra resources.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”