The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 18 Jan 2021 23:19

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
18 Jan 2021 20:20
The fundamental intellectual problem here is to use the word "bottleneck" in a literal sense. Unless all components are produced at identical rates there is always a bottleneck.

The fundamental rhetorical move is to assume that when Germany devotes more resources to panzers in general it forgets to spend more on guns and tracks.

It's a ridiculous assumption but allows one to further obfuscate discussion by pushing everything further back the supply chain, always into some morass where uncited details are thrown about and perhaps the reader will tire and give up.

The ultimate bottleneck is labor absent some geographic constraint (e.g. oil being across blockaded seas).
The 1. fundamental intellectual problem here is to make big wave on hand and think others must to believe wave on hand must to be true.

The 2. fundamental intellectual problem here is to have assumption when write give more resources = more tanks must to mean more tanks = how much more tmp need for tmp imagination story.

The 3. fundamental intellectual problem here is to have assumption when write give more resources = more tanks must to have positive total outcome. Maybe opportunity cost on change resources allocations was be much bigger negative on war than more tanks.


It seems to me concept more resources = more tanks can to be sensible.

Complete anti-intellectual for to assume on no researches no analysises and no evidences on how much more resources must to give for to get tanks what was need on imagination story.

Complete anti-intellectual for to assume on no researches no analysises and no evidences on what opportunity cost can ro be.

Big waves on hand like more resources = more tanks = enough tanks for tmp imagination story = nazi Germany can to win war is anti-intellectual.

Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 488
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 18 Jan 2021 23:22

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
18 Jan 2021 23:08
In what mental universe is "a resource can be used more efficiently" the same as "a resource is functionally inexhaustible"?
In what mental universe is "more resources = more tanks" the same as "nazi Germany can to make enough tanks what tmp imagination story want and was not have negative consequences"?

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6387
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Richard Anderson » 19 Jan 2021 02:08

T. A. Gardner wrote:
18 Jan 2021 22:29
If as Rich points out, there were just a few, or one, company producing transmissions for these vehicles that's a bottleneck in itself. Having to produce several different transmissions rather than one or two common ones creates a flow problem when there is limited capacity.
The biggest hole WRT Zahnradfabrik is the USSBS did not do a survey of the plant, but nevertheless it was mentioned numerous times. In the European Summary Report on page 68 it was noted how ZF, along with Maybach, were the major producers of AFV transmissions and engines, which were not expanded and dispersed until 1943. See also the Tank Industry Summary report page 5.

ZF expanded from its original Fredrichshafen plant to a new plant in 1937/1938 at Schwäbisch Gmünd. In addition to taking over the Hemel plant at Chemnitz in 1943, it also took over a French gear production plant at Schlettstatt in Alsace. These plants apparently mostly produced transmissions for the Panzer/StuG III and Panzer IV. In May 1943, it also built a dispersal plant - the Waldwerke - at Passau specifically to produce transmissions for the Panther and Tiger. Similarly, Auto-Union at Siegmar began producing Maybach tank engines in 1944.
The biggest problem with German production was it was inefficient relying on craftsmen and handwork to assemble things. The reluctance to abandon that and move to assembly line production was a major bottleneck in increasing production in Germany.
Not completely, but that manufacturing philosophy was found in some plants, for example at ZF.

In terms of labor,in 1940 ZF employed around 5,200, of whom 83 were foreigners (51 Belgians, 22 Yugoslavians, and 10 other western Europeans). In 1941, the workforce expanded to 5,900, including 311 foreigners, all still Westarbeiter. In 1942 it was about 6,400, including 1,456 foreigners, of whom now about 800 were Ostarbeiter and a few were PW. By 1943, the workforce expanded to about 6,900 with 2,000 of them foreigners, about 200 of them PW and the rest almost evenly split between West and Ostarbeiter. Peak in 1944 was just over 7,000, of whom 2,200 were foreigners, now about 500 Westarbeiter, about 200 PW, and the rest Ostarbeiter. The Waldwerke plant employed just under 2,000 Germans and at peak 334 Zwangsarbeiter, who were employed in building the factory.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 19 Jan 2021 02:23

Richard Anderson wrote:In terms of labor,in 1940 ZF employed around 5,200... In 1942 it was about 6,400...
So ZF supported a larger German tank production with a larger workforce? Quelle miracle!

Too bad any German plan to expand tank production would forget that tanks have tracks...
https://twitter.com/themarcksplan
https://www.reddit.com/r/AxisHistoryForum/
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

Avalancheon
Member
Posts: 373
Joined: 23 Apr 2017 06:01
Location: Canada

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Avalancheon » 19 Jan 2021 03:59

David Thompson wrote:
17 Jan 2021 05:18
A post from Avalancheon, containing insulting personal comments about another forum member, was removed pursuant to the forum rules.
Insulting personal comments, really? Being critical of another user is not the same as insulting them. AHF is a history forum, not a hugbox. At a certain point, there is such a thing as 'over-moderation.'

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 19 Jan 2021 04:26

Avalancheon wrote:
19 Jan 2021 03:59
David Thompson wrote:
17 Jan 2021 05:18
A post from Avalancheon, containing insulting personal comments about another forum member, was removed pursuant to the forum rules.
Insulting personal comments, really? Being critical of another user is not the same as insulting them. AHF is a history forum, not a hugbox. At a certain point, there is such a thing as 'over-moderation.'
I have to second this. IIRC the only personally-directed comment was that another member is disdainful of ATL's. That is a true comment and sounds in intellectual critique. Read any scholarly journal and you will find far more substantial criticism. If this forum cannot abide criticism on intellectual grounds it is not a mark in its favor.
https://twitter.com/themarcksplan
https://www.reddit.com/r/AxisHistoryForum/
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

Avalancheon
Member
Posts: 373
Joined: 23 Apr 2017 06:01
Location: Canada

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Avalancheon » 19 Jan 2021 05:13

Richard Anderson wrote:
18 Jan 2021 02:16
Since there seems to be some confusion on this issue in the post that was deleted, let me clarify.

The Germans began building new Panzer III with 5cm guns (L42) in July 1940 with 17 completed.

The question was regarding "rebuilding" "old" Panzer III with 5cm guns. That began in January 1941 with one completed.

They are two different Panzer III states of being.
There is no confusion on my end, Richard. I am aware of the differences with the Panzer IIIs. The problem is, my sources contradict you on when the re-armament of the older models began. You say this didn't begin until January of 1941. But my sources state that it was already underway by August 1940, with the Ausf E an Ausf F.

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... usf_E.html ''Between August 1940 and 1942 a number of tanks had their main gun replaced by the 5cm KwK L/42.''

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... usf_F.html ''Between August 1940 and 1942 many of the tanks originally built with the 3.7cm gun were rearmed with the 5cm gun, just as with the Ausf E.''
Richard Anderson wrote:
18 Jan 2021 02:16
All Panzer III with 5cm guns, the early L42 or later L60, could only be completed if guns were available. That was a problem in mid 1940 as TMP and others demonstrated earlier; only a fraction of the guns required were being manufactured. That is one bottleneck that we can judge was not entirely eliminated until at least c. March 1941 when the last 40 rebuilt Panzer III 3.7cm were finished as 3.7cm tanks rather than 5c, tanks.

All Panzer III, and indeed essentially all German tracked AFV, utilized transmissions produced by Zahnradfabrik in Friedrichshafen. They were classic "station" manufacturers, with artisans finishing assemblies assisted by journeymen and apprentices. It was not until 1944 that production of transmissions expanded to others like Hemel in Chemnitz. That is a second bottleneck also not dealt with until 1944.
The entire purpose of this thread is to determine what would happen if the Germans decided to increase the production of tanks in a rational, holistic manner on July of 1940. The Germans are not going to blindly create more tank hulls at the expense of other critical components like engines and guns. Thats just dumb. They will increase production of components at a rate commensurate with the increase of tank hulls. Because again, this is a rational production program. Your bottleneck argument isn't relevant.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2619
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Yoozername » 19 Jan 2021 08:14

+??????

User avatar
Georg_S
Forum Staff
Posts: 5566
Joined: 08 Dec 2016 12:37
Location: Sweden

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Georg_S » 19 Jan 2021 08:43

A post by member Avalancheon was deleted as its violated the rules of AHF. The rules says that you must be nice and friendly .

/Georg - Admin
"Information not shared, is lost"

Personal Blog - http://wennallebruderschweigen.blogspot.com/
Support AHF - app.php/support
My Project - www.führerliste.com
Contact: [email protected]

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6387
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Richard Anderson » 19 Jan 2021 09:14

Avalancheon wrote:
19 Jan 2021 05:13
There is no confusion on my end, Richard. I am aware of the differences with the Panzer IIIs. The problem is, my sources contradict you on when the re-armament of the older models began. You say this didn't begin until January of 1941. But my sources state that it was already underway by August 1940, with the Ausf E an Ausf F.
No, I'm afraid you and your sources remain confused. See Jentz, Panzertruppen I, pp. 262 & 264, which details the rebuilds ready for issue by month.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... usf_E.html ''Between August 1940 and 1942 a number of tanks had their main gun replaced by the 5cm KwK L/42.''

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... usf_F.html ''Between August 1940 and 1942 many of the tanks originally built with the 3.7cm gun were rearmed with the 5cm gun, just as with the Ausf E.''
Okay, two sources that repeat the same misinformation. Two wrongs do not make a right or so I am told?
The entire purpose of this thread is to determine what would happen if the Germans decided to increase the production of tanks in a rational, holistic manner on July of 1940. The Germans are not going to blindly create more tank hulls at the expense of other critical components like engines and guns. Thats just dumb. They will increase production of components at a rate commensurate with the increase of tank hulls. Because again, this is a rational production program. Your bottleneck argument isn't relevant.
So you are saying the Germans were dumb? Or are you arguing that the Germans were irrational? The expansion of Zahnradfabrik occurred as described. The expansion of Maybach occurred as described. Until they increased their plant they were limited in their output. In April 1940, production of the 5cm gun was inadequate and the first 17 Panzer III armed with it were not completed until July. Indeed, the Germans would produce tanks "at a rate commensurate with the increase of" tank components...more or less (if you look at Jentz and Doyle, Germany's Panther Tank, you will notice that various component improvements were serial, rather than all at once with new models, which is a microcosm of the production realities). At the critical period you are talking about, the back and forth over the armament of the Panzer III was of more consequence. Contrary to what you argue, they did not "increase production of components at a rate commensurate with the increase of tanks hulls", at least with regards to the 5cm gun "component" of the Panzer III, but instead rather than stopping hull production they simply continued producing the tanks with a 3.7cm gun.

The Germans did indeed "increase the production of tanks in a rational, holistic manner" long before July 1940 as far as I can see, unless you have some evidence of their dumbness and irrationality I'm unaware of?
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 19 Jan 2021 09:23

Hi MP.

Stop it.
Your attempt at humour whilst smirk inducing, only takes the thread down another rabbot hole.

Regards

Andy H
https://twitter.com/themarcksplan
https://www.reddit.com/r/AxisHistoryForum/
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 19 Jan 2021 10:08

Richard Anderson wrote:
19 Jan 2021 09:14
Avalancheon wrote:
19 Jan 2021 05:13
There is no confusion on my end, Richard. I am aware of the differences with the Panzer IIIs. The problem is, my sources contradict you on when the re-armament of the older models began. You say this didn't begin until January of 1941. But my sources state that it was already underway by August 1940, with the Ausf E an Ausf F.
No, I'm afraid you and your sources remain confused. See Jentz, Panzertruppen I, pp. 262 & 264, which details the rebuilds ready for issue by month.
Richard is sloppily conflating conversion being "underway" [Avalancheon's claim] with "ready for issue." He's also using a source - Jentz's Panzertruppen (1997) - that Jentz, in later work, admits got things wrong.

From Jentz's Panzer Tracts series, No. 3-2 (2007):
On September 13, 1940, it was reported that several alte Ausf. 6a/Z.W. Tuerme were made available and had already been modified
p.60

Here's the whole page:

Image

As one can see, the large-scale program to rearm Pz3's was already planned in August and examples of the modified turrets had already been produced in September.

So Richard is confused by the difference between a process being "underway" and completed, and by the difference between Jentz's knowledge in 1997 and 2007. Avalancheon's source probably read the latest research.

From the primary sources quoted by Jentz, it is also apparent how central was the ridiculous short war concept to the re-arming ("Umbewaffnung") project: it would be completed after the campaign in the East (it being a quick and easy fight, most of the weakly-armed Pz3's would survive to be re-armed :roll: ).
https://twitter.com/themarcksplan
https://www.reddit.com/r/AxisHistoryForum/
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012 01:16

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by KDF33 » 19 Jan 2021 15:16

It seems to me there is significant evidence that Germany still had economic "slack" in 1941.

For instance, here is German steel consumption, used in military industry / overall consumption:

1940: 11,508,000 / 23,424,000 tons = 49.1%
1941: 12,570,000 / 28,383,000 tons = 44.3%
1942: 14,043,000 / 30,747,000 tons = 45.7%
1943: 16,368,000 / 31,065,000 tons = 52.7%
1944: 15,378,000 / 28,632,000 tons = 53.7%

52% of German steel went to the military industry in 1940/Q2, but just 48.2% in 1940/Q3. By 1941/Q4 it was down to 40.4%, the lowest quarterly share of the war.

The highest quarterly share, unsurprisingly, was 1944/Q4, with 57.4%.

See this post for details.


In terms of manpower, here is the number of people employed in the metalworking industries. These are the industries that manufactured weapons and ammunition.

30.11.1939: 3,408,000
30.11.1940: 3,846,000 (+ 438,000)
30.11.1941: 3,958,000 (+ 112,000)
30.11.1942: 4,518,000 (+ 560,000)
30.11.1943: 5,004,000 (+ 486,000)
31.07.1944: 5,064,000 (+ 60,000, but for 8 months, not 12)

Almost all the gains in 1941 (112,000) are in the aircraft and optics industries.

See this link, Appendix Table 9, for details.


Lastly, although overall German manpower was already largely committed to the war effort, the Germans seem to have found some slack in 1942. Figures are categories "Handwork", "Trade, banking and insurance", "Administration and services" and "Domestic service" - they constitute the four sectors that the Germans continually pared down during the course of the war.

31.05.1939: 14,198,000
31.05.1940: 12,120,000 (- 2,078,000)
31.05.1941: 11,639,000 (- 481,000)
31.05.1942: 10,610,000 (- 1,029,000)
31.05.1943: 10,312,000 (- 298,000)
31.05.1944: 9,848,000 (- 464,000)

As you can see, there are two big jumps: 1930-40 (the initial mobilization phase), and 1941-42 (reflecting, presumably, the post-Moscow crisis). Otherwise, the yearly paring down averages about 400,000 people.

Source is same link as above, but Appendix Table 3.


Finally, a note regarding foreign workers. The period 1939-41 was characterized by three main sources of external labor: Poles, prisoners of war and free workers from neutral and allied countries. The systematic, Europe-wide impounding of foreign civilian workers only got organized in 1942, again after the Moscow setback.

In the case of the metalworking industries, the data shows the following numbers for foreign workers:

31.05.1940: 34,000
31.05.1941: 323,000 (+ 289,000, average of 24,083/month)
31.05.1942: 569,000 (+246,000, average of 20,500/month)
30.09.1942: 830,000 (+ 261,000, average of 65,250/month)
31.03.1943: 1,300,000 (+ 470,000, average of 78,333/month)
30.09.1943: 1,358,000 (+ 58,000, average of 9,667/month)
31.05.1944: 1,599,000 (+ 241,000, average of 30,125/month)

Source is same link again, Appendix Table 10.

Most of the gains are from 1942/Q2 to 1943/Q1, which is unsurprising given that Fritz Sauckel was appointed Plenipotentiary for Labor Deployment on 21 March 1942. It also correlates with the doubling of German armaments production between 1942/Q1 and 1943/Q2.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6387
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Richard Anderson » 19 Jan 2021 17:40

KDF33 wrote:
19 Jan 2021 15:16
It seems to me there is significant evidence that Germany still had economic "slack" in 1941.
Indeed. There is also considerable evidence that the British Commonwealth, the U.S.A., and the Soviet Union still had economic "slack" in 1941. Taking up the "slack" took time...the Germans started somewhat earlier in taking up that "slack" than did some of the others and eventually, by 1944, took up more "slack" than any of the others, except possibly for the USSR, as demonstrated by Mark Harrison's figures on NNP allocations. If anything, these data demonstrate just how difficult it is to centrally direct a wartime economy in order to get specific outputs while taking up "slack". It is not really different from the evidence and conclusions derived from it found in Tooze's Wages of Destruction.

The problem for this scenario is demonstrating how/why the Germans would divine they would need to take up the "slack" in AFV-related industries early enough to make a difference in the Summer of 1940, while simultaneously overcoming the problems associated with the basic tank designs development that stifled output of the Panzer III (and to a lesser extent the Panzer IV) during 1937-1940, which would in turn result in five more complete Panzer divisions (or whatever was postulated 29 pages ago) by June 1941.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6387
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The Germans increase Panzer production in the Summer of 1940

Post by Richard Anderson » 19 Jan 2021 18:26

I almost hesitate to point this out, since I suspect for many it is obvious, but no matter how much Umbewaffenung planning went on in August 1940, no matter if 53 Panzer III 3.7cm conversions to 5cm were completed at various factories in 1940, until they were accepted by Waffenamt they were unavailable to units. As of 9 June 1941, a total of 172 Panzer III were dispatched for Umbau and 161 were completed by the end of May. Also by the end of may the Waffenamt had accepted 176 rebuilt Panzer III, 68 with 3.7cm and 108 with 5cm gun. The issue is complicated by the rebuild of an unknown number of war damaged vehicles among them. Nevertheless, we know that the first Panzer III 5cm Umbauwagen was accepted by the HWA in January 1941 and was then ready for issue to troops.

BTW, there is no "admission" by Jentz in the Panzer Tracts that he "got things wrong". The Panzer Tracts added additional details of the planning and execution of the Umbewaffenung program not found in Panzertruppen, which was primarily an organizational study. The tables of new production and rebuild acceptances found in Panzertruppen were not amended in the Panzer Tracts, certainly the new build totals found in Panzer Tracts 29 are the same figures found in Panzertruppen.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Return to “What if”