Barbarossa takes place in 1940

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Locked
Politician01
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: 02 Sep 2011, 07:56

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#46

Post by Politician01 » 15 Sep 2011, 20:30

Most people write about the shortcommings of the Germans but what about the USSR?

In that one year from Summer 1940 to summer 1941 they produced some 6000 tanks, some 15 000 aircraft, and tens of thousands of guns and trucks. Also the Red army would have been smaller by what? 2 or even 3 million men?

Not to mention it would have been only some 2 years after the purges not 3 years.

Also nearly no KV and T-34 tanks.

And the winter of 1940/41 was not as hard as the winter 1941/42.

Also could the Siberian divisions be transferred in 1940? By that time Japan has not even decided where to stike/not to strike.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#47

Post by ljadw » 15 Sep 2011, 20:46

Politician01 wrote:Most people write about the shortcommings of the Germans but what about the USSR?

In that one year from Summer 1940 to summer 1941 they produced some 6000 tanks, some 15 000 aircraft, and tens of thousands of guns and trucks. Also the Red army would have been smaller by what? 2 or even 3 million men?

Not to mention it would have been only some 2 years after the purges not 3 years.

Also nearly no KV and T-34 tanks.

And the winter of 1940/41 was not as hard as the winter 1941/42.

Also could the Siberian divisions be transferred in 1940? By that time Japan has not even decided where to stike/not to strike.
A lot of irrelevant things 8O
1)As the winter of 1941-1942 totally was irrelevant for the outcome of Barbarossa,the winter of 1940-1941 also was irrelevant
2)There were in june 1941 some 500 KV1 tanks,and their contribution was irrelevant
3) The Siberian divisions(only a myth)
-most of them were sent to the front in the summer ,when Japan was still undecided
-their influence in the battle of Moscow was not very big:they formed some 10 % of the Russian units .
-and,as Japan only decided at the end of november 1941 to attack PH,this was totally unimportant for the fighting in European Russia .
-the fact that the Russian army was stronger in 1941 than in 1940,was not deciding,what decided the outcome of Barbarossa,were the 6 million men that were sent to the front between june and the end of 1941.


User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#48

Post by phylo_roadking » 15 Sep 2011, 20:58

Indeed, but none of the above was known by Stalin before the war started, and hence it did not deter him from attacking in the first place back in November 1939
After Munich the Soviets were dismayed by the British and French refusal to carry out their promises to Czechoslovakia; they had played thier part in hemming round Germany with their kutual assistance pacts with Poland (twice renewed) and the defence pact with France in the middle of the decade....but the failutre of the Western powers to fulfil their parts was one of the things that persuaded Stalin to stabilise the USSR's western borders by an agreement WITH Germany rather than ones framed "against" Germany :wink:

But once London and Paris actually declared war on Germany after Poland was attacked - Stalin should have recognised that this was them fronting up to their roles at last....and that after that anything could and would happen :wink:
And the winter of 1940/41 was not as hard as the winter 1941/42.
1)As the winter of 1941-1942 totally was irrelevant for the outcome of Barbarossa,the winter of 1940-1941 also was irrelevant
Maybe irrelevant for the outcome, but relevant for the course of the campaign :wink:

On the subject of winters - the winter of 1939-40 certainly lasted as long as the winter of 1940-41; the late Spring Thaw of 1941 forced a month's delay in the start of Barbarossa as Eastern European rivers were still in spate - the same happened in 1940 - in fact, the Spring Thaw across Europe and Scandanavia was 6-8 weeks late that year...hecne the problems in Norway!

1939-40 was the start of the three year La Nina Event, with the Jet Stream moving further south than normal, allowing the "Polar Spiral" to bring down cold air and bad weather from above the Arctic Circle for longer than usual. The 4-6 week Spring Thaw was only arriving in Norway and northern latitudes in late April/May in 1940....how much later then was a 194o Barbarossa going to be delayed THAT year??? 8O
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kenmac
Banned
Posts: 851
Joined: 29 Apr 2010, 17:03

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#49

Post by kenmac » 15 Sep 2011, 21:41

In terms of military equipment Germany v the USSR in 1940 will be more in Germany’s favour than it was in 1941.
Germany will also have around an extra month of campaign time.
However as of May/June 1940 it is likely not to have its Romania ally.
Which will mean the attack will have to come from the Reich itself.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#50

Post by ljadw » 15 Sep 2011, 22:20

If Germany had a month extra of campaign time,it was the same for the SU.
And ,as in 1941 the Germans failed in the SUMMER(the plan was to defeat the SU in a short campaign),the same would probably happen in the summer of 1941:more campaign time was irrelevant for the Germans,because they were strong enough for a short campaign ONLY.

Politician01
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: 02 Sep 2011, 07:56

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#51

Post by Politician01 » 15 Sep 2011, 23:04

ljadw wrote:
Politician01 wrote:Most people write about the shortcommings of the Germans but what about the USSR?

In that one year from Summer 1940 to summer 1941 they produced some 6000 tanks, some 15 000 aircraft, and tens of thousands of guns and trucks. Also the Red army would have been smaller by what? 2 or even 3 million men?

Not to mention it would have been only some 2 years after the purges not 3 years.

Also nearly no KV and T-34 tanks.

And the winter of 1940/41 was not as hard as the winter 1941/42.

Also could the Siberian divisions be transferred in 1940? By that time Japan has not even decided where to stike/not to strike.
A lot of irrelevant things 8O
1)As the winter of 1941-1942 totally was irrelevant for the outcome of Barbarossa,the winter of 1940-1941 also was irrelevant
2)There were in june 1941 some 500 KV1 tanks,and their contribution was irrelevant
3) The Siberian divisions(only a myth)
-most of them were sent to the front in the summer ,when Japan was still undecided
-their influence in the battle of Moscow was not very big:they formed some 10 % of the Russian units .
-and,as Japan only decided at the end of november 1941 to attack PH,this was totally unimportant for the fighting in European Russia .
-the fact that the Russian army was stronger in 1941 than in 1940,was not deciding,what decided the outcome of Barbarossa,were the 6 million men that were sent to the front between june and the end of 1941.
Yeah right irrelevant - where do you get your nonsence from

1. The Winter of 1941/42 was very relevant for Barbarossa - the coldest winter in a 100 years- a normal winter would not have slowed the Germans dont that much and been so hard for them. Its a big difference if you must endure -25 ( normal russian winter) or -40 degrees.

2. But aside from thouse 500 Kv tanks some 1000 T- 34 and ANOTHER 4500 tanks -6000 in total will be missing.

3. Lol Siberian Divisions were a myth - right..... they arrived in September and October and were decisive.

Its just the Soviets have far less stuff - less soldiers, their industry is not as built up ect ect ect
And they get no Lend Lease - and Germany can concentrate on one front
And insteead of building U boats building tanks and planes

Granted they dont have the experience from the Western campaign and many of their tanks are quite weak - but compared to the USSR´s problems.....

Politician01
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: 02 Sep 2011, 07:56

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#52

Post by Politician01 » 15 Sep 2011, 23:09

ljadw wrote:If Germany had a month extra of campaign time,it was the same for the SU.
And ,as in 1941 the Germans failed in the SUMMER(the plan was to defeat the SU in a short campaign),the same would probably happen in the summer of 1941:more campaign time was irrelevant for the Germans,because they were strong enough for a short campaign ONLY.
Yeah right thats why they advanced for over 5 Months and were only stopped because of the early mud period and the extremely hard winter. :roll:

Also they could not concentrate their full force in OTL. Germany had some 5600 tanks in summer 41 - only 3600 were used against the USSR. of the remaining 2000 tanks some 900 were good PZ III and PZ IV.

And dont come with your nonsence: 900 extra tanks would have been irrelevant- no they would have NOT!

With additional 900 Pz III and IV Army group center would not have to had hand over its tanks to the southern front - thus not wasting nearly 2 months. Moscow would have fallen - game over

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#53

Post by phylo_roadking » 15 Sep 2011, 23:22

Yeah right thats why they advanced for over 5 Months and were only stopped because of the early mud period and the extremely hard winter
Actually - this is not correct.

The Rasputitsa, or early mud period as you call it - is awkward because the winter snows and rain start...but it's still warm ENOUGH during the day for this to melt and turn roads to mud...

When the temperature drips ENOUGH, the roads remain frozen during the day - and movement can start again! And it did - the Germans closed on Moscow because the roads froze and they could move again, albeit at some 60% of their previous speed...but still FAR faster than during the Rasputitsa!
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kenmac
Banned
Posts: 851
Joined: 29 Apr 2010, 17:03

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#54

Post by kenmac » 15 Sep 2011, 23:24

ljadw wrote:If Germany had a month extra of campaign time,it was the same for the SU.
And ,as in 1941 the Germans failed in the SUMMER(the plan was to defeat the SU in a short campaign),the same would probably happen in the summer of 1941:more campaign time was irrelevant for the Germans,because they were strong enough for a short campaign ONLY.
Extra campaign time is no good for the Soviets if they are in constant defeat and retreat.
The Germans advanced from June 22nd until the Soviet counter offensive on Decemeber 5th.
An extra 24 or so days may be enough to get Moscow surrounded or take Leningrad.

kenmac
Banned
Posts: 851
Joined: 29 Apr 2010, 17:03

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#55

Post by kenmac » 15 Sep 2011, 23:28

phylo_roadking wrote:
Yeah right thats why they advanced for over 5 Months and were only stopped because of the early mud period and the extremely hard winter
Actually - this is not correct.

The Rasputitsa, or early mud period as you call it - is awkward because the winter snows and rain start...but it's still warm ENOUGH during the day for this to melt and turn roads to mud...

When the temperature drips ENOUGH, the roads remain frozen during the day - and movement can start again! And it did - the Germans closed on Moscow because the roads froze and they could move again, albeit at some 60% of their previous speed...but still FAR faster than during the Rasputitsa!
If they attacked in 1940 they would have an extra 24 days of summer campaign time before the Rasputitsa.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#56

Post by phylo_roadking » 15 Sep 2011, 23:38

It depends when in 1940 they get to launch the attack; in 1941 historically it was the last week of June....

But with the Spring Thaw 6-8 weeks late in 1940, not just a month late as in 1941... 8O
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kenmac
Banned
Posts: 851
Joined: 29 Apr 2010, 17:03

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#57

Post by kenmac » 15 Sep 2011, 23:58

phylo_roadking wrote:It depends when in 1940 they get to launch the attack; in 1941 historically it was the last week of June....

But with the Spring Thaw 6-8 weeks late in 1940, not just a month late as in 1941... 8O
The Spring thaw was late both years by around the same margin.
June had less rain in 1940 however.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#58

Post by phylo_roadking » 16 Sep 2011, 00:16

Rain wasn't the issue in 1941 either that delayed Barbarossa - it was the high level of Eastern European rivers because the thaw was late...

...and of course, this would have also made the SPRING Rasputitsa late :wink: Most people forget there were TWO in the year!
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

kenmac
Banned
Posts: 851
Joined: 29 Apr 2010, 17:03

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#59

Post by kenmac » 16 Sep 2011, 01:10

phylo_roadking wrote:Rain wasn't the issue in 1941 either that delayed Barbarossa - it was the high level of Eastern European rivers because the thaw was late...

...and of course, this would have also made the SPRING Rasputitsa late :wink: Most people forget there were TWO in the year!
Rain = Mud which is always an issue.
Barbarossa was delayed by Hitler in March 1941 for because of the invasion of Yugoslavia.
The invasion could have began around June 1st.
Likely a 2 week delay from the original attack date of May 15th so that would be May 29th.
The rivers where not that hard to cross as the Germans proved as they crossed with ease in OTL and captured bridges in tact anyway.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Barbarossa takes place in 1940

#60

Post by phylo_roadking » 16 Sep 2011, 01:24

Barbarossa was delayed by Hitler in March 1941 for because of the invasion of Yugoslavia.The invasion could have began around June 1st.
That's an old saw that has been disproved often in the past here. From The Second World War: Europe and the Mediterranean by Thomas B. Buell, John N. Bradley, Thomas E. Griess (series editor), Jack W. Dice, and John H. Bradley in the West Point Military History Series -
In his directive for the invasion of Russia, dated December 18, 1940, Hitler demanded that all lengthy preparations be complete by May 15, 1941, thus implying an intention to begin the operation about this time. On subsequent occasions he spoke of commencing the invasion in the middle or at the end of May. Yet the Germans actually invaded on June 22, and then failed to capture Leningrad or Moscow before winter. At first glance, MARITA does not seem responsible for the delay, since both operations were planned simultaneously in late 1940. But the Germans did not origionally plan to advance all the way down the grecian peninsula. Hitler ordered this advance on March 17, 1941, to drive the Commonwealth forces out of Greece. At the time, the OKH Chief of Staff, General Franz Halder, thought the MARITA forces would now be unable to meet the BARBAROSSA deadline, If Halder was right, then the British decision to help the Greeks might inadvertently have helped the Russians. But Hitler dispensed with the plan to attack on the right flank of Army Group South and ordered a holding action in Moldavia instead, so that the Twelfth Army no longer played a vital role in BARBAROSSA. In any case, the German left only two mountain divisions and one infantry division to garrison Greece, freeing the other MARITA forces for early participation in BARBAROSSA.

At the time he decided to smash Yugoslavia, Hitler announced that Barbarossa would be postponed for a month. Unfortunately, no other clear statement from Hitler on the subject has been preserved, right down to the final selection of June 22. In late March, Hitler thought the Yugoslavian operation would force a postponement, but did he continue to think so? The invasion of Yugoslavia caused only a four- to five-day postponement of MARITA. The German divisions which paraded through Yugoslavia suffered only a few casualties and little wear, leaving them fresh for BARBAROSSA, Only the armoured units required a few weeks to refit. In addition, the invasion of Yugoslavia made MARITA much easier because the Germans could outflank their enemies. If Hitler wanted an early start for BARBAROSSA, it is hard to see why the Yugoslavian operation should have deterred him.

The impact of the entire Balkan operation is not easy to assess. The BARBAROSSA planing involved a grand total of 152 divisions and 29 of these were deployed in the Balkans. Three of these divisions remained stationed in Greece, and 11 others were drawn from the OKH reserve for BARBAROSSA. Thus only 15 divisions and the VIII Air Corps had to be redeployed quickly from the Balkans to assembly areas for BARBAROSSA. Apart from the assault on Crete, the Balkan campaign ended in April, leaving amonth to prepare these divisions for BARBAROSSA. But the Germans were executing a complicated movement plan which left little transport available to move the MARITA forces. Even so, they could certainly have initiated BARBAROSSA in May at the cost of committing some MARITA divisions to operations already in progress. The last obstacle to BARBAROSSA was the operation against Crete. This operation required the entire VIII Air Corps (fighters and dive-bombers) which the Luftwaffe needed to support the invasion of Russia. Not until May 29 did Hitler finally set June 22 as the firm date for BARBAROSSA.
Macdonald pays a lot of attention of VIII Fliegerkorps' movements and deployment before during and "during" the battle. Richthofen was order to transfer as many of his support units to the BARBAROSSA assembly areas ANYWAY, even before the invasion began, leading to major difficulties in Greece for his aircraft, espeically on the makeshift fileds used for the Ju52. No spraying equipment to keep down dust, Heer personnel assigned to do it instead and did it wrong; no tanker bowsers, fuel had to be got to the fields in drums, manhandled into position, and hand-pumped - again all by Heer personnel.

He was only really able to use his fighters and bombers in the preparation of the island for invasion - at the end of the third day of the invasion the vast majority of his combat aircraft were transferred away for BARBAROSSA anyway! This was actually a MAJOR break for the defenders, who were freed up from the rigours of digging in for the "Morning Hate" of VIII Flieger's ground attacks and strafing!

So certainly VIII Fliergerkorps assigment to MERKUR didn't involve any delays - the vast majority of its support troops were taken away before the invasion even began - and only a short time into it, so were most of its aircraft!
Available records suggest the OKH accepted the delay of BARBAROSSA for two reasons unrelated to German movements. Once they learned of German intentions, Rumania and Finland needed additional time to prepare to participate in the invasion. In addition, a late thaw in Spring 1941 caused flooding and wet conditions well into June. Of course, at the time neither Hitler nor his generals were much disturbed by the delay. Hitler's intention to begin in May was not very firm. and he changed his mind easily under the press of events. Although no single segment of the Balkan campaign forcd the Germans to delay BARBAROSSA, obviously the entire operation did prompt them to wait. On the other hand, the Germans could have begun earlier had they thought it important. In the last analysis, anticipation of Blitzkrieg success in Russia influenced German thinking more than the Balkan campaign did.
In other words - "hey, let's wait for June anyway, 'cos the Finns and Rumanians aren't ready, and the rivers are swollen, and we're in no great hurry 'cos we'll trundle over them anyway!" NOT necessarily because of the Balkans...

(The book itself has footnoted sources for all those points - but they're not viewable online :()
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Locked

Return to “What if”