Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#211

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 08 Jun 2021, 17:36

Posting error
Last edited by TheMarcksPlan on 08 Jun 2021, 18:06, edited 1 time in total.
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

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#212

Post by Peter89 » 08 Jun 2021, 17:41

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:36
Peter89 wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:20
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 16:59
Peter89 wrote:
07 Jun 2021, 15:11
Hello guys,

I found some interesting, original pieces. Enjoy!

Turkish defenses on the western frontiers
Image
I can't see it in page but I went to the links and they worked fine. Thanks. Any idea of provenance of date? I'd guess OKH/W during 1941, when they were planning the move through/with Turkey after the easy Batbarossa.


None of what you posted displays
What doesn't it display? Sorry, I don't get what you mean here.
You mean the images? It works fine for me.

http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fenses.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... my_map.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... e_disp.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... h_flak.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fields.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... s_and_.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."


User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#213

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 08 Jun 2021, 18:12

Peter89 wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:41
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:36
Peter89 wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:20
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 16:59
Peter89 wrote:
07 Jun 2021, 15:11
Hello guys,

I found some interesting, original pieces. Enjoy!

Turkish defenses on the western frontiers
Image
I can't see it in page but I went to the links and they worked fine. Thanks. Any idea of provenance of date? I'd guess OKH/W during 1941, when they were planning the move through/with Turkey after the easy Batbarossa.


None of what you posted displays
What doesn't it display? Sorry, I don't get what you mean here.
You mean the images? It works fine for me.

http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fenses.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... my_map.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... e_disp.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... h_flak.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fields.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... s_and_.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
Thanks. I went to the links and they work fine; the /eye-mg format wasn't working.

Any idea of provenance and date? I'd guess OKH/W in 1941 when going through/with Turkey was next up after easy Barbarossa.
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

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#214

Post by Peter89 » 08 Jun 2021, 18:15

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:12
Peter89 wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:41
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:36
Peter89 wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 17:20
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 16:59


I can't see it in page but I went to the links and they worked fine. Thanks. Any idea of provenance of date? I'd guess OKH/W during 1941, when they were planning the move through/with Turkey after the easy Batbarossa.


None of what you posted displays
What doesn't it display? Sorry, I don't get what you mean here.
You mean the images? It works fine for me.

http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fenses.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... my_map.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... e_disp.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... h_flak.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... fields.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... s_and_.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
http://www.kepfeltoltes.eu/images/2021/ ... _railr.jpg
Thanks. I went to the links and they work fine; the /eye-mg format wasn't working.

Any idea of provenance and date? I'd guess OKH/W in 1941 when going through/with Turkey was next up after easy Barbarossa.
The dates are all on the documents, most of them were dated 1941 August, when an easy Barbarossa was hardly on the Germans' mind. The document is called Orientierungsmappe des Führungsstabes "Mittlerer Osten".
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#215

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 08 Jun 2021, 18:20

Peter89 wrote:Middle Eastern Command had (11 divisions, 6 brigades):
That's great if the Afrika Korps is gone, as you assume.

It's a bad assumption though: if Germany weakens SU by 30-40% over OTL during 41, then it easily takes Malta and reinforces North Africa in early 42.

Besides 8th Army you have primarily second-rate Indian divisions, most of which never saw European combat. Their logistics were at peace time levels; the extra supplies needed to maintain them in combat would be out of any proportion to the combat value against a redirected Ostheer.
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

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#216

Post by Peter89 » 08 Jun 2021, 19:09

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
Peter89 wrote:Middle Eastern Command had (11 divisions, 6 brigades):
That's great if the Afrika Korps is gone, as you assume.
It doesn't need to be gone (it only needs to be on the defensive), and it was your prerequisite for your German victory in the SU.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20

It's a bad assumption though: if Germany weakens SU by 30-40% over OTL during 41, then it easily takes Malta
With what?
There are multiple reasons why it was not possible in 1941. The forces and the landing crafts were not ready before the summer of 1942.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
and reinforces North Africa in early 42.
I thought reinforcements are needed in the SU.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
Besides 8th Army you have primarily second-rate Indian divisions,
They might have been "second rate" in early 1941, but in 1940-1942 most of these formations saw intense combat and their equipment levels were good.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
most of which never saw European combat.
They saw Asian and African combat instead.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
Their logistics were at peace time levels;
The buildup of the Allied logistics in the area is remarkable, and it was done without Turkish assistance.

Besides, what these "average" numbers miss (is the whole operational reality, actually): the troops in this theatre spent most of their time on largely peace time supplies. Why? Because both sides tried to sustain their forces and build up resources for offensives. The intensive fighting was rather rare compared to, for example, the eastern front. The Allies beat the Axis in this regard.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Jun 2021, 18:20
the extra supplies needed to maintain them in combat would be out of any proportion to the combat value against a redirected Ostheer.
You see this is something I have a hard time to imagine. Your proposals for a German victory in the east contain notions about force and resource allocations (and decisive irresponsiveness from the Allies), but at the same time, you assume that everything will remain the same in the war. For example, you cut the German commitments in the MTO, which now seems to be the same - or better - for the Germans. This is not realistic. Also you wanted to raise extra resources from the navy, which might imply a worse German situation on the seas, which in turn might imply a better Allied situation in this regard. Not to mention that the original German plan, that called upon the Luftwaffe to bomb the Soviet industry would mean a major commitment for an already exhausted air force.

The Germans would have an impossibly hard time to invade via the Agean or the Black sea, and would have to fight through about 28-34 well entrenched divisions near the straits. If they somehow get to the Caucasus and attack from that direction, they could only rely on a single, differently gauged railway, which they have to re-gauge asap. Either way, it would take time; time, that the Allies can use to reinforce Turkey substantially.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#217

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 09 Jun 2021, 01:53

Peter89 wrote:[weakening Afrika Korps] was your prerequisite for your German victory in the SU.
I do not believe that now and don't recall ever believing so. Where have I ever said so?
-------------------------

As often happens in these threads, we may be lost in different versions of past ATL's. A less generous reading is that you are ducking a direct answer to my actual ATL:
  • SU is 30-40% weaker by end of '41.
  • Ostheer is ~300k stronger by May '42 due to lower casualties in '41 (because more encirclements, lower attrition).
  • Germany does not weaken North Africa, reinforces it by early OR mid-'42, including taking Malta.
  • Turkey either allows German passage or joins the Axis.
I have stated these views here, for example.

Direct question: Is there any feasible hope of Allies holding Iraq/Syria in that situation?

If you don't want to answer the question, fine. Please at least say so.
Peter89 wrote:They saw Asian and African combat instead.
Do you deny that these Indian divisions had lower combat effectiveness than British/Dominion divisions?
Peter89 wrote:would have to fight through about 28-34 well entrenched divisions near the straits.
If Turkey fights Germany in my ATL things are a lot more complicated. I agree that logistics and terrain would preclude a rapid attack though a hostile Turkey to Syria/Iraq. I don't see the Straits being much of an issue but I'd rather not get bogged down on whether the Germans get bogged down (temporarily) there or farther east.
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

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#218

Post by historygeek2021 » 09 Jun 2021, 05:29

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
02 Jun 2021, 13:48

So if America devoted, from April '42, ALL historical Army shipping to defending the MidEast against Germany, and likewise devoted all OTL Soviet LL shipping, it could deploy (not maintain) ~6 divisions by September '42 and 13-14 divisions by February '43.
How many divisions do you think Germany could have logistically supported in the Middle East in 1942 and 1943?

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#219

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 09 Jun 2021, 07:56

Duplicate
Last edited by TheMarcksPlan on 09 Jun 2021, 15:11, edited 1 time in total.
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, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#220

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 09 Jun 2021, 07:56

historygeek2021 wrote:
09 Jun 2021, 05:29
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
02 Jun 2021, 13:48

So if America devoted, from April '42, ALL historical Army shipping to defending the MidEast against Germany, and likewise devoted all OTL Soviet LL shipping, it could deploy (not maintain) ~6 divisions by September '42 and 13-14 divisions by February '43.
How many divisions do you think Germany could have logistically supported in the Middle East in 1942 and 1943?
I appreciate the simple and direct question.

The most simple and direct answer still requires some complication depending on the feasible forks from my ATL, primarily: (1) Turkey joins the Axis or allows passage through its territory or (2) Turkey immolates itself for the Allied cause.

Fork T1: Turkey joins Axis or allows German passage


Reference Turkish railways map:

Image

There are 3 non-overlapping rail routes to southeast Turkey, fed by 4 port complexes: Samsun, Zonguldak, Istanbul, and Aegean (the last having multiple ports of entry including Bandirma on the Sea of Marmara).

Turkey also has roadways which, though not great, can hardly have been worse than those through Belarus and Galicia, over which Ostheer's truck columns supported massive armies.

Those three train lines alone should be good for 15 trains/day per line; at 450t/train that's sufficient for 20 divisions.
Then in the broader ME region we'd have Batumi feeding a former Soviet line to the Caucasus drive. In tandem with trains sent all the way to the Caucasus (as happened OTL in latter Blau), Germany should be easily able to support the maximum Caucasus force, which I can't see exceeding 10 divisions?

So far 30 divisions from ship/rail communications via Bosporus, Black Sea, and the long overland route.

The roads are harder to quantify given their convoluted courses through Anatolia. Freight t-km capacity of German GTR columns in Barbarossa was ~9mil t-km (140 divs, 200t/day out to 300km). If we say Turkey's southern border is 1,000km from the feeder ports (much more than crow-fly distance but allowing for convolutions), that implies 9,000t/day, which would support 45 divisions at 200t/day average or 30 divisions at a higher 300t/day average for intensive fighting.

That road-lift estimate assumes that Germany's GTR lift is identical to OTL Barbarossa, which is certainly an underestimate: (1) most trucks were organic to divisions rather than with the GTR's, (2) Germany loses many fewer trucks (and everything else) in my ATL (and may produce more). A post-SU Heer would certainly demobilize some (most) divisions, freeing trucks and drivers for greater GTR lift.

Regardless of the details, it would be well within Germany's ability to support 30 divisions at Turkey's southern border (truck and rail lift combined), plus another 10 divisions invading Iran from the Caucasus.

Critical point: For this ATL fork, I can't see the W.Allies fielding significantly more than 10 divisions against Germany. Thus I'm not deeply concerned with the details about whether Germany could support 30, 35, 40, etc. divisions into the MidEast. Likely they'd send fewer (20-25 in total) and could clear Iraq, Syria, Palestine with that force. If the W.Allies do deploy 10 (non-second-rate-Indian) divisions against that force, they're PoW donations.

IF someone can show a feasible path to the W.Allies deploying/maintaining, say, 30 more divisions to the MidEast by early '43, then - for the purposes of this probability fork - I'll have to drill down further on the details.

ATL fork T2: Turkey resists German demands for passage/alliance

This is much more complicated. Germany easily conquers Istanbul/Thrace from Bulgaria/Greece, lands from Aegean islands, invades from Armenia over the plains in that region. Turkey is thereby totally destroyed as a nation and military power. But, by blowing up its modern rail lines from Zonguldak and Samsun, plus routes over/through the southern mountain ranges, it can mightily retard German progress (So it seems to me. Alanbrooke and the British thought nothing north of the Turkish border could be held, however). This also seems an unlikely path for Turkey to have taken under ATL conditions. But that's another discussion. I'm happy to have it, I just hope we can keep its strands disentangled from all the others.

---------------------------------


What happens at the Med's other end? I.e. does Spain (1) join the Axis [fork S1] or (2) resist all German demands [S2]?

TMP's background condition: Germany's stronger Barbarossa weakens SU by ~40% re May '42; Germany therefore takes Malta and reinforces North Africa in early/mid '42 (in any event prior to Torch/Alamein).

If S1, Med is closed off from West; Torch is non-viable except perhaps as a landing in Atlantic Morocco (sub-fork where Allies do Torch on OTL schedule THEN Spain joins Axis is a recipe for Allied disaster with sudden disappearance of sea logistics for 2/3 of Torch force - as Eisenhower feared OTL). Absence of Torch frees up resources for Med (minus Allied operation against Canaries, which wouldn't be insubstantial). If S1+T1, this is irrelevant as Allies have no hope of defending north of Suez and Arabian Desert. If S1+T2, it could be more interesting.

If S2, maybe Torch goes ahead as in OTL. That's a drain on MidEast defense but, if T1+S2, MidEast is lost anyway. If T2+S2, Torch and/or MidEast reinforcement becomes an issue for which hard choices have to be made. Also within S2, Germany is simply going to crush Spain - though probably not by the end of '42. This creates the same Western Med outcome as in S1: Germany controls Iberian Peninsula and Tunisgrad never happens (sub-fork involves Allied intervention in Spain, which loses the entire land force to Germany and probably ends the war).

--------------------------------------

At base we have a post-SU Allied coalition capable of supporting maybe 30 high-quality divisions around the Med/MidEast by the end of '42, no more than 15-20 in the MidEast (inc. British 8th Army).

I propose T1/2+S1/2 nomenclature for keeping any discussion of Med-ME probability forks analytically coherent.

T1+S1: Honestly I think this war doesn't last much into '43. Allies lose all of the MidEast and North Africa quickly, are faced with losing all of Eurasia to Germany/Japan if they don't cut bait in Europe and concentrate on holding/reconquering core interests in Pacific and India.

T1+S2: Basically the same as above except delayed due to false hopes in Western Med until Germany overruns Iberia.

T2+S1: With Western Med cut off by Spain's belligerence, Turkey is Germany's only contiguous land foe. Her national core is crushed in a few months but a front feasibly forms in eastern Anatolia while Germany deals with LoC's. Ultimately Germany may need 50 divisions in Anatolia to beat a strong Allied expeditionary force later in the war, but - due to shipping logistics - there's still no way for Allies to defend here unless Med is cleared (which Spain's entry precludes).

T2+S2: Seems unlikely but is the only remotely feasible path to Allied victory over Germany (non-Atom bomb). Still don't see it happening but have to admit it's arguable.

----------------------------

On the 4 T/S conditions sketched above, I would of course have more to say beyond the sketches, should discussion so proceed.

Once again, I have to request that if you make statements about logistics you back them up with a good-faith effort at quantification. Absent that, I can't promise I will bother to respond, nor that I will be able to conceal annoyance and contempt if I do respond.
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

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 3211
Joined: 01 May 2006, 20:52
Location: UK

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#221

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 09 Jun 2021, 09:29

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
09 Jun 2021, 01:53
Do you deny that these Indian divisions had lower combat effectiveness than British/Dominion divisions?
TMP,

Alarmed as I am that I might only inspire annoyance and contempt, I must confess I’ve never seen analysis that directly compared the combat effectiveness of Indian Army formations with that of other Commonwealth formations. Certainly not once both were well-trained and given reasonable missions. Are you thinking only of their effectiveness in the Western Desert?

Regards

Tom

Peter89
Member
Posts: 2369
Joined: 28 Aug 2018, 06:52
Location: Europe

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#222

Post by Peter89 » 09 Jun 2021, 10:27

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
09 Jun 2021, 01:53
Peter89 wrote:[weakening Afrika Korps] was your prerequisite for your German victory in the SU.
I do not believe that now and don't recall ever believing so. Where have I ever said so?
-------------------------
In the first comment of your SU ATL:
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Aug 2019, 11:15
The extra tanks come from not cutting the panzer program from 1,200 to 600 by mid-1940 during the 1939 financial crisis. Instead, cuts are made to the Z-plan and, if necessary, to the Ju-88 program. Projecting that higher rate of production forward, it's quite easy to get to 1,000 more tanks by mid-1941. A bigger panzer program should be attended by greater oversight and analysis. To that end I specify that the Germans begin rationalization of panzer production earlier than OTL by taking later-war steps such as using flow production instead of station production and by loosening up the Wehrmacht's counterproductive quality standards. Labor costs for a Panzer III declined by 50% OTL due to these steps; it's a matter of historical contingency that they did not happen earlier. The extra trucks represent ~6% of those available for Barbarossa. They can come from (1) greater production flowing from greater strategic priority for the Heer, (2) greater overall production from rationalization and better use of occupied Europe (i.e. for labor primarily), (2) the civilian economy, (3) sending only one division with Rommel to Africa, (4) some combination of the foregoing.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Aug 2019, 11:15
As often happens in these threads, we may be lost in different versions of past ATL's. A less generous reading is that you are ducking a direct answer to my actual ATL:
  • SU is 30-40% weaker by end of '41.
  • Ostheer is ~300k stronger by May '42 due to lower casualties in '41 (because more encirclements, lower attrition).
  • Germany does not weaken North Africa, reinforces it by early OR mid-'42, including taking Malta.
  • Turkey either allows German passage or joins the Axis.
These are preconditions that contradict either historical reality or your ATLs.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Aug 2019, 11:15
Direct question: Is there any feasible hope of Allies holding Iraq/Syria in that situation?

If you don't want to answer the question, fine. Please at least say so.
I don't know, because I don't think such a situation could arise.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Aug 2019, 11:15
Peter89 wrote:They saw Asian and African combat instead.
Do you deny that these Indian divisions had lower combat effectiveness than British/Dominion divisions?
In general, yes, because combat value varied from division to division, and was highly dependant on equipment and leadership. There were better ones and worse ones. Some of these divisions were the best of the British Empire in 1942.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
08 Aug 2019, 11:15
Peter89 wrote:would have to fight through about 28-34 well entrenched divisions near the straits.
If Turkey fights Germany in my ATL things are a lot more complicated. I agree that logistics and terrain would preclude a rapid attack though a hostile Turkey to Syria/Iraq. I don't see the Straits being much of an issue but I'd rather not get bogged down on whether the Germans get bogged down (temporarily) there or farther east.
The problem is that the Turks did not let the Allies enter into Turkey and did not improve their ports according to Allies' standards. They did not let Allies into Turkey. Why would they do so with the Germans? Turkey wanted to pursue a policy of independence.

If the Germans were to attack Turkey, there were Allied units ready to jump in. Not to mention the Turkish Army, which was quite big, despite lacking motorization and modern weaponry.

The Turkish railways were not compatible with the Soviet ones, only with the European and ME ones. Thus, the logistical routes to Turkey would mean that the Germans could use a single standard railway of limited capacity via the Balkans, which would also had a sea interdiction, and a railway that circumvents half the continent and had two gauge interdictions.

Germany / Italy also did not have the amphibious capacities to attack both the well-defended Malta and Turkey.

The Persian Corridor in the said period delivered 3-4000t/day. In 1943, it rose to 5000t/day. (Without the Allied shipping improvements as the consequence of the restrictions imposed on the KM.)

The Suez base handled 5000t/day as early as mid-1941.

The Turkish Army and the country was not dependent on food imports, on the contrary, it was a food exporter, and had been stockpiling key foodstuffs for years.

The Allies deliveries to the SU in 1942 would be enough to arm the Turkish Army with tanks, airplanes, guns, motor vehicles, etc. In 1943, they could be armed to the teeth.

The closer the Allies fight to their supply entry points, their logistics would improve and that of the Germans' would deteriorate.

Also, you must understand that the average mainenance and deployment requirements of US divisions does not apply to the deployment of British Empire forces to Turkey. Those numbers are useless in this regard.

Anyway.

What we are talking about here is a major German undertaking (in your ATL, right after the campaign in the SU and the amphibious operation at Malta - if these were possible or adviseable at all), the gains would not justify the effort. The most the Germans could achieve was that they'd be bogged down at the very end of a weak and vulnerable logistical line, where they would be ultimately overcome by the material superiority of the Allies.

If the German Schwerpunkt is in the East, the Allies kick the Axis out of Africa by the end of 1942 the latest, and if not, and the Germans decide to throw more units into Africa, all the better for the Allies, who could massacre the air forces and capture most of the resource-starved Germans.
In any case, the Germans are doomed and have no way to go back to Africa (why would they do it anyway), and a major redeployment of forces is possible if not before 1943, then soon afterwards.

The Germans might easily face about 55 Turkish divisions and about 30 Allied divisions in the region, so I think contemplating whether they could be stopped in Iraq and Syria is a bit irrelevant.
"Everything remained theory and hypothesis. On paper, in his plans, in his head, he juggled with Geschwaders and Divisions, while in reality there were really only makeshift squadrons at his disposal."

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#223

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 10 Jun 2021, 22:19

Peter89 wrote:The Germans might easily face about 55 Turkish divisions and about 30 Allied divisions in the region
You adopt a position of Humean skepticism regarding whether we can project OTL Allied logistics onto ATL: experience and data don't matter; it might be the case that ATL Allied divisions can run on 3lbs/day and/or that they can levitate to the ME.

Yet this skepticism doesn't apply to your own projections.

Given that we would have to agree an answer to Hume to have a productive discussion, and that such answer would not seem to bind you (while binding me), I think we've taken this discussion about as far it can go.
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, 23:32
Location: USA

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#224

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 10 Jun 2021, 22:31

TheMarcksPlan wrote:Once again, I have to request that if you make statements about logistics you back them up with a good-faith effort at quantification. Absent that, I can't promise I will bother to respond, nor that I will be able to conceal annoyance and contempt if I do respond.
@historygeek2021 - although I wrote this in a reply to you, the comment wasn't directed at you specifically (here's where English needs a plural or general "you" - y'all ain't bad for these purposes actually).

I should also say that it's more cantankerous than is justified. If y'all don't feel like having minimally quantified logistical discussions that's fine. I'm just saying that I don't find such discussions productive and will politely disengage from them. Life is returning; the weather is good here; there are better uses of free time than exchanges of non-quantified opinions.
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

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: Could a German invasion of Turkey succeed?

#225

Post by historygeek2021 » 13 Jun 2021, 01:57

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
10 Jun 2021, 22:31

@historygeek2021 - although I wrote this in a reply to you, the comment wasn't directed at you specifically (here's where English needs a plural or general "you" - y'all ain't bad for these purposes actually).

I should also say that it's more cantankerous than is justified. If y'all don't feel like having minimally quantified logistical discussions that's fine. I'm just saying that I don't find such discussions productive and will politely disengage from them. Life is returning; the weather is good here; there are better uses of free time than exchanges of non-quantified opinions.
All good my friend. I was 99% sure you weren't directing that at me, but thank you for completely eliminating my remaining Humean skepticism 8-)

I wish I had the knowledge and data to engage you on this issue quantitatively, but I simply don't know enough about Allied shipping or the Turkish rail system to say anything meaningful. I was curious what you thought about the relative logistical abilities of each side, which is why I asked about the German side of the equation, and I thank you for answering.

Thank you also for the source you provided on Allied shipping. Do you have a source regarding Turkish railways?

Post Reply

Return to “What if”