Typhoon ends Early

[Cult Icon]

Typhoon is envisioned as one final exploitation operation. Preparations are identical in AGC, and the operation closes after the vyazma-bryansk pockets are cleared in Oct. 20th. The Eastern front then reverts to active defense. The impending Soviet wintercounteroffensive now faces a different situation.

[BDV]

With the extra resources, OTOH, Soviets may get the Kerch-Feodosyia landings right and/or relieve Leningrad. The big issue of the second half of Taifun was how to exploit the bad shape RKKA was in (Kiev/Bryansk/Vyazma pockets in a 3 week span) before post-harvest induction of peasants (the so called "Siberians") were to hit full force in December. If one doesn't exploit, results won't differ much from the historical outcome.

In 20/20 hindsight, the historical jump into the void that moved German forces farther away on an increasingly taxed logistic chain was silly in its rank amateurishness and the hilarious in its disastrous results.

The alternative is to make moves that close on themselves, that not simply launch Wehrmacht into the void, namely 3rd Panzer swinging north full strength to meet up with AGN, trapping Soviet units west of Chudovo-Tver line, and 2nd Panzer swinging South to help the 1st Panzer drive to Rostov, possibly relieving some armor for the takeover of Crimea/Sevastopol (which if it were to fall in November 1941 would ease Axis logistics in the South Ukraine/South Russia). These moves are probably better alternatives.

[Erwinn]

I think they should've gone for Leningrad instead. After capturing it and freeing the Army Group North, they would conduct a defensive 1942 winter and after March they could concentrate on Moscow. This would improve logistical situations as they can use Leningrad as a supply base and they can send a force to capture Archangelsk, maybe severing one side of Land Lease.

However this actions requires a static Army Group South and we know Hitler only cared about Ukraine and it's resources(if you take a look at German strategy after 1941) so it's really a long shot this is happening, especially Hitler in charge.

[magusj]

BDV has it right. The first two-three weeks of Typhoon were an incredible success, second only to Kiev. With 20 20 hindisight (or with some "we wont take Moscow" foresight") the right move is to link up with AGN towards Leningrad (maybe even making an attempt at the city?) and also assisting AGS at Rostov. AGM focuses on shoring up defenses/logistics for the inevitable Soviet counterattack over the winter to try to maximize the ratio of German:Soviet losses, which up to this point had been spectacular.

If we assume that the Germans chew up the Soviet counterattacks over the winter from solid defensive positions the Germans are well positioned for 1942 campaign with reasonable odds of success. The interesting question then becomes do you:
A- the 'obvious' move- go for Moscow (political/transportation/logistic hub with huge morale value) with an entire campaign season to take it but brunt of Soviet army defending it (maybe a good thing IF you win)... possibly enough to de facto win the war
B- Go for Astrakhan to sever Caucuses (and oil) from rest of SU, bomb the limited port/transport facilities in Caspian sea which would be used to transport oil to SU, greatly increasing odds of victory in a battle of "attrition".

I'm not sure which is the better move from a probabilistic standpoint. "A" might win the war in 1942 but maybe riskier, "B" is probably more likely to win the war in the long run (1943) but timing has risks with other theaters coming into play (N Africa/Italy, possible UK army into Caucuses?)

[alltoes]

Numerous times I've seen "Leningrad shorts supply route". If Germany had 100's of vessels capable of transporting supplies, then yes it would help. But it seems to me the RR network out of Germany is relatively extensive. Besides, supplies in a port must be unloaded and then re-loaded onto trucks, trains, wagons, etc.
I agree occupying Leningrad in 1941 would have had a tremendous impact on the upcoming winter, 1942, etc. I also believe its occupation in 1941 could have created a war winning event.

[Erwinn]

Well Germans did manage to evacuate millions of civilians in 1945, it's quite possible to supply Leningrad as well.

[stg 44]

With the extra resources, OTOH, Soviets may get the Kerch-Feodosyia landings right and/or relieve Leningrad. The big issue of the second half of Taifun was how to exploit the bad shape RKKA was in (Kiev/Bryansk/Vyazma pockets in a 3 week span) before post-harvest induction of peasants (the so called "Siberians") were to hit full force in December. If one doesn't exploit, results won't differ much from the historical outcome.

Uh no, the Soviets are not getting the Kerch landings right with extra troops around Moscow, those troops are staying in that area. Same with the Leningrad troops. In fact if the Germans are not off balance in December and are preparing in the October-November pause the Soviets are going to do a lot worse in their counter attacks and probably not make it nearly as far, nor pocket German troops at places like Demyansk, nor force major equipment losses on the German via withdrawal. This scenario is pretty much the one that leaves the Germans in a very much better position than the historical one; they achieved little of value during Typhoon after the November pause, so sitting back in the defensive is about as ideal as things could get for them at that point.

[BDV]

Wehrmacht pressing on after Taifun forced the Soviets to throw piecemeal the meagre forces available in October 15-November 15 timeframe on the Moscow axis. Otherwise they can be used in the Chudovo-Volkhov area, and in the Kalinin (Tver) area. After November 15, as history proves, induction of peasants after harvest netted nice bonus to Soviet troop levels. Here RKKA starts from better position not only in manpower but geographic position.

The Soviet gains would be much less, but given manpower imbalance and the well known Axis materiel shortcomings, there would be some. Overall, a wash compared to historical events.

[SpicyJuan]

With the extra resources, OTOH, Soviets may get the Kerch-Feodosyia landings right and/or relieve Leningrad. The big issue of the second half of Taifun was how to exploit the bad shape RKKA was in (Kiev/Bryansk/Vyazma pockets in a 3 week span) before post-harvest induction of peasants (the so called "Siberians") were to hit full force in December. If one doesn't exploit, results won't differ much from the historical outcome.

What would successful Kerch-Feodosyia landings do in the long-term?

[BDV]

What would successful Kerch-Feodosyia landings do in the long-term?

Make Bustard Hunt impossible or extremely costly.


P.S.

Even if RKKA attacks in the center fail, that would prevent germans from shifting forces to reinforce AGN, which in turn may allow lifting the Leningrad blockade.

IIRC, the Demyansk kessel and the Kholm micropocket resulted from attacks against the 16th Army (AGN component).