Two Phase Barbarossa

[GoldenState]

Two points of departure: The ships carrying panzers after the balkan campaign had not been sunk and the Germans decide that they simply cannot defeat the Soviet Union in one season, but conclude they can over 2-3 years.

This plan would imply an earlier total war footing. Essentially moving up German production progress by about a year.

In Terms of the Eastern Campaign itself:

The saved panzers allow a supporting thrust with the 11th army plus some Romanian cavalry divisions following a beefed up Panzer Corps. This may not be critical, but might allow an easier and more decisive Southern thrust.

The anticipated Winter front line would be just beyond Smolensk which would be stabilized by September 30th. Subsequent thrusts would be mounted once the ground froze, but the purpose would be to destroy Soviet forces in encirclements along the lines of Viyazma and Bryansk. However instead of remaining exposed the following mission would be to carry off or destroy all accessible resources and withdraw back to the Smolensk line.

Having preserved manpower, artillery and panzers compared to our timeline, the hope is that 1942 offensives directed at Moscow and Donetsk Basin would be feasible. If not, only the Moscow offensive would be mounted in 1942. A final oil offensive to follow in 1943

In the end it is believed the Soviet Union will either have to end the war or be reduced to a less dangerous foe along the lines of a greater Nationalist China. How do you think this would have worked out?

[ljadw]

The result would have been vey bad,even catastrophic .

[pugsville]

the german economy WAS at complete war footing in 1939. this is one of the enduring myths of the war. Tooze is a good start. but there was o vast unused factors capacity, manpower or resources that could have been mobilised earlier.

[pintere]

One would have to allow for other factors to be in place as well, but in principal, I think the concept is sound. And one that deserves further exploration.

[Kingfish]

How much did Germany lose in the period Sept-Dec '41?

Were the losses the reason why Germany lost the war in the East?

If no, what difference will stopping at Smolensk make on the overall campaign?

[Boby]

the german economy WAS at complete war footing in 1939. this is one of the enduring myths of the war. Tooze is a good start. but there was o vast unused factors capacity, manpower or resources that could have been mobilised earlier.

Examples? It is impossible to fully mobilizing at 100% every resource and manpower in the First year of the war.

[ljadw]

How much did Germany lose in the period Sept-Dec '41?

Were the losses the reason why Germany lost the war in the East?

If no, what difference will stopping at Smolensk make on the overall campaign?

No : it is basics,and I can't understand why people don't grasp it : distance defeat mobility . 300 divisions do not advance faster than 150 divisions, it is even probable that they will advance slower .

The 150 German divisions could NOT go to Moscow to defeat there the Soviets. 3 years later, the Allies (more motorized and in a better environment ) could not cross the Rhine to defeat the Germans in Germany .

The Allies defeated the Germans in Normandy and than advanced to the Rhine, while "the Hun was on the run " .As long he was on the run, they could advance with small forces, once he recovered, the advance was stopped .

In 1941 Ivan was never on the run . The only way to win was to defeat the Red Army west of the DD line (what implies that it would go west) and than to advance with small forces to the AA line . If the Soviets were recovering east of the DD line, the Germans would fail .And the Germans failed, as would do the Allies 3 years later :lesson : you can't advance with a big ary more than 1000 km in a few months, even (especially) if your army is motorized ,because distance beats mobility .

[ljadw]

but there was o vast unused factors capacity, manpower or resources that could have been mobilised earlier.

that is not correct :it is the opposite : the German mobilisation between june 1940 and june 1941 was a small miracle .

[Ifor]

Sorry but I can't find the information, could you just expand on the item concerning the ship's sunk that were transporting the tanks after the Balkan campaign?

[BDV]

In 1941 Ivan was never on the run.

Oh, he was, but only in selected areas of the front ( 8th Army, ran backwards 1000 km from Niemen River all the way to Oranienbaum). But most of those opportunities turned out to be "Lost Victories" as Fuhrer's bootlicking field exterminators couldn't cope with the battlefield complexities, repeatedly wasting opportunities achieved at great cost in blood by trying classroom solutions to the issues raised by RKKA ("maybe if we stick the hakenkreuz in enough spots on the map Djugashvilli will come realize our awesomeness and give up").

you can't advance with a big army more than 1000 km in a few months, even (especially) if your army is motorized, because distance beats mobility .

AGN advanced 650 km in 3 short weeks. Panzer group 1 advanced all the way beyond Rostov (and back to Taganrog), and that included the Uman detour. Panzer Group 2 went beyond Smolensk, took a detour to Kiev, and still made it past Tula. Panzer Group 3 also got past Smolensk, drove north to Leningrad, then back to Moscow. Panzer Group 4 also got to Leningrad then too detoured to Moscow.

The Wehrmacht could have likely advanced to Moscow and beyond if they would have offered a more complex and thorough challenge than the historical plan to the Russians. However, Selbsttätigkeit not supported by 100 lbs artillery shells takes an Army only so far (and then you have also run out of bodies).

[ljadw]

PzG 3 needed a lot of time to go to Rostov :Afaic Rostov was captured only in november .

[sitalkes]

If you are going to have two phases, then make phase one 1941 and phase 2 1942. Phase one objective Murmansk and Lenningrad. That way you don't have to worry about the distances so much, as you can use the sea as your supply line. Also it gets Finland into the war as a proper ally and cuts the allied supplies to Russia (until the Persian route opens anyway). So you spend the extra time you have building up combined arms forces and building infrastructure - railway lines and railway line conversion facilities. you might also do something about standardising the truck fleet. Your invasion plan would include amphibious assaults from the Baltic meeting up with armoured thrusts coming from the south and east. In the south and central fronts, you only advance slowly. The line would have a huge bulge in it, that's where your 300 divisions come in handy. 1942 your objectives are Moscow and the oilfields.

[pugsville]

cuts the allied supplies to Russia (until the Persian route opens anyway)..

err what about the largest lend lease route ? across the pacific operational august 1941.


"The Arctic route was the shortest and most direct route for lend-lease aid to the USSR, though it was also the most dangerous. Some 3,964,000 tons of goods were shipped by the Arctic route; 7% was lost, while 93% arrived safely.[31] This constituted some 23% of the total aid to the USSR during the war."

"The Persian Corridor was the longest route, and was not fully operational until mid-1942. Thereafter it saw the passage of 4,160,000 tons of goods, 27% of the total"
"The Pacific Route opened in August 1941, but was affected by the start of hostilities between Japan and the US; after December 1941, only Soviet ships could be used, and, as Japan and the USSR observed a strict neutrality towards each other, only non-military goods could be transported.[32] Nevertheless, some 8,244,000 tons of goods went by this route, 50% of the total."
-- from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Leas ... o_the_USSR

see for further.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Route

[sitalkes]

Your second Wikipedia link says the Pacific route opened in October 1941. 50% is better than nothing. If Leningrad (the spiritual home of Russian communism) was lost, it might have had untold political and economic consequences for the Soviet Union. Either it's going to fight very hard to get Leningrad back and there are less troops fighting on southern and central fronts, or the Soviet Union begins to fall apart. Germany's friends (e.g. Vichy France and Spain) would be a little more accommodating; Japan might respond to those German protests more favourably and find some way to obstruct/slow down that Pacific route.

[ljadw]

Germany had no friends and when bad times arrived its allies were very adept in leaving the sinking ship .