Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 05:27

Kingfish wrote:
03 Aug 2021 23:20
ljadw wrote:
03 Aug 2021 12:33
''Çompare that to Crusader,and then to Gazala and then to Alamein '' is using the strength of 8 th Army as an argument that the Axis could do what Britain did .
Wrong, the later battles were in reference to the strength of the Axis forces. Your claim that the Germans could not deploy more than 2 Pz divisions because of the terrain simply does not hold water when you factor in the increase in total Axis strength as the campaign progressed.

The Germans deployed only two PzD in Libya .
That the total Axis strength increased ( which is questionable ) has nothing to do with the number of German PzD in Libya .
Total Italian army strength in Libya was in September 1940 211000 men + 34000 Libyans ,which was too big .
At the end of February 1941 it was 105000 + 16000 Libyans.
On 1 June 1942 it was 140000 + 14000. Afrika Korps was 40000 .

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 04 Aug 2021 09:40

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 05:27
The Germans deployed only two PzD in Libya .
The question is not how many they deployed, but the reason for it. You claim is was due to the terrain. The fact that the Axis forces eventually increased over time proves the terrain was not the prohibiting factor.
That the total Axis strength increased ( which is questionable )


Questionable only if you have a problem accepting historical facts.
has nothing to do with the number of German PzD in Libya .
It does because it shows that the Axis could support a force much larger than 2 Pz Divisions in North Africa.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 11:16

1 Axis forces and German PzD are two different things .
2 Italian army in September 1940 :245000. Axis ground forces in June 1942 : 1940000 Thus : no increase .
3 Do not compare German PzD to German ID .The truth is that there were only TWO German PzD in Libya .The reason was the terrain : mountains, no roads, distance, no decent harbor .
4 The Axis did not support 2 PzD, the Italians /or the Germans did it . And the fact that there were 12 Italian and German divisions at Alamein,does not mean that the Axis could have more operational tank divisions at Alamein,because the supply demands of a PzD were much higher than those for an ID .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 11:33

Curiously ,(and it is very suspect )no information is available about the supplies and men that were received by 8th Army and no information are available about the loading/unloading and stock capacity of Alexandria.It is the opposite : everything is focused on Tripoli and the Italian convoys to NA.
The reason is obvious :
the Rommel/Bundeswehr lobby in the US and Germany is telling us ( better lying ) that the defeat of Rommel the Almighty is caused by the incompetence of the Italians who could not transport the needed supplies to NA.
the Bletchley Park lobby is telling us ( better lying ) that the losses of the convoys were caused by Ultra .

Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 445
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 04 Aug 2021 11:55

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 11:33
Curiously ,(and it is very suspect )no information is available about the supplies and men that were received by 8th Army and no information are available about the loading/unloading and stock capacity of Alexandria.It is the opposite : everything is focused on Tripoli and the Italian convoys to NA.
The reason is obvious :
the Rommel/Bundeswehr lobby in the US and Germany is telling us ( better lying ) that the defeat of Rommel the Almighty is caused by the incompetence of the Italians who could not transport the needed supplies to NA.
the Bletchley Park lobby is telling us ( better lying ) that the losses of the convoys were caused by Ultra .
Do you have some evidences about other peoples was lying ?

On topic here person who was inventing not real datas was be ljadw .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 15:38

The defeat of Rommel was not caused by the Italians who could not transport more supplies to NA:even with more supplies Rommel would still be defeated .
After the war, US needed a strong German army against the threat from the East . But there was a lot of opposition in Europe,to crush this opposition US needed to show a good and competent German general .
Rommel,who was dead,which is always a good point, could be presented as a good German ( he was sideways involved in the conspiracy against Hitler ),but was he competent ? He was twice defeated : in NA and in France .
The solution was easy : for NA it was enough to blame the Italians, given the anti-Italian racism and contempt in the US and Britain, every one would believe this fable .
For Normandy , an other excuse was invented : Hitler slept .
No one would dare to criticize Rommel ,and this would be very good for the career of Speidel .
About Ultra ": the convoy losses were 15 % of what was transported
in 1941 1,016,000 GRT was transported and 853,000 arrived at Tripoli
in 1942 : 924000 was transported and 779,000 arrived in Tripoli . Most losses happened by chance, not because of Ultra .
Only a part of what arrived at Tripoli was transported to the front ,and, if more arrived at Tripoli, less would go to the front .
Decreasing returns to scale .

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2624
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 04 Aug 2021 18:13

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 11:33
Curiously ,(and it is very suspect )no information is available about the supplies and men that were received by 8th Army and no information are available about the loading/unloading and stock capacity of Alexandria.It is the opposite : everything is focused on Tripoli and the Italian convoys to NA.
Where have you looked?

Regards

Tom

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2624
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 04 Aug 2021 19:06

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
Most losses happened by chance, not because of Ultra .
Got a source and statistics to back that up?

Regards

Tom

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Takao » 04 Aug 2021 19:52

ULTRA was responsible for about 46% of the ships sunk & 50% of tonnage sunk(including naval vessels).

Ружичасти Слон
Member
Posts: 445
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 16:31
Location: Изгубљени

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Ружичасти Слон » 04 Aug 2021 19:53

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
The defeat of Rommel was not caused by the Italians who could not transport more supplies to NA:even with more supplies Rommel would still be defeated .
After the war, US needed a strong German army against the threat from the East . But there was a lot of opposition in Europe,to crush this opposition US needed to show a good and competent German general .
Rommel,who was dead,which is always a good point, could be presented as a good German ( he was sideways involved in the conspiracy against Hitler ),but was he competent ? He was twice defeated : in NA and in France .
The solution was easy : for NA it was enough to blame the Italians, given the anti-Italian racism and contempt in the US and Britain, every one would believe this fable .
For Normandy , an other excuse was invented : Hitler slept .
No one would dare to criticize Rommel ,and this would be very good for the career of Speidel .
Have you some evidences ?

It seems to me ljadw was make some biggest not real imaginations storys .

Ljadw was invent many things on topic
ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
Only a part of what arrived at Tripoli was transported to the front ,and, if more arrived at Tripoli, less would go to the front .
Decreasing returns to scale .
Ljadw logic
10.000 tons was arrive on Tripoli 8.000 was transport on front.
15.000 tons was arrive on Tripoli 7.000 was transport on front.

15.000 > 10.000 If more arrived at Tripoli
7.000 < 8.000 Less would go to the front

Completest tosh

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3301
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Takao » 04 Aug 2021 20:06

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
The defeat of Rommel was not caused by the Italians who could not transport more supplies to NA:even with more supplies Rommel would still be defeated .
After the war, US needed a strong German army against the threat from the East . But there was a lot of opposition in Europe,to crush this opposition US needed to show a good and competent German general .
Rommel,who was dead,which is always a good point, could be presented as a good German ( he was sideways involved in the conspiracy against Hitler ),but was he competent ? He was twice defeated : in NA and in France .
The solution was easy : for NA it was enough to blame the Italians, given the anti-Italian racism and contempt in the US and Britain, every one would believe this fable .
For Normandy , an other excuse was invented : Hitler slept .
No one would dare to criticize Rommel ,and this would be very good for the career of Speidel .
About Ultra ": the convoy losses were 15 % of what was transported
in 1941 1,016,000 GRT was transported and 853,000 arrived at Tripoli
in 1942 : 924000 was transported and 779,000 arrived in Tripoli . Most losses happened by chance, not because of Ultra .
Only a part of what arrived at Tripoli was transported to the front ,and, if more arrived at Tripoli, less would go to the front .
Decreasing returns to scale .
Your barking up the wrong tree.

It is not about what the Italians shipped versus what the Italians delivered. It is all about what Rommel required vs what the Italians delivered.

853,000 ton delivered in 1941 works out to 83,333 tons per month, or about 3 divisions worth of supplies per month. Certainly there were far more than 3 Axis divisions in North Africa at the time.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 21:10

It was more than 3 divisions of supplies per month,because these 83,000 tons made it possible for the Axis divisions to go to Tobruk in 1941 .There were in June 1941 7 Italian and 2 German divisions at the border with Egypt
Other point : it was not on Rommel to decide what the Axis forces needed,there were 136000 Italians in June 1941 and 33000 Germans .And most supplies were for the Italians .In June 1942 12000 tons were transported for the AK and 30000 for the Italians but during the same month 1 MILLION of tons of coal were transported from Germany to Italy .
The supply problems started in Germany and Italy ,as NA was for both countries a side show and other fronts had priority .
Than was there the problem that the German and Italian railways ( especially the German ones ) had very big problems to transport NOT the needed but the available supplies to Naples where the Italian merchant vessels were waiting on supplies to be transported to NA .The stock,unloading and loading capacity of Naples was limited,that of Tripoli was even lower than that of Naples .
Rommel's supplies came from Germany ,if he was not satisfied,he knew where to protest : the Bendlerstrasse in Berlin .
The Italians could only transport to NA what was available in the docks of Naples and other ports .
The Italians did not blame their MV ,thus why should Rommel do it ?
We know why : allies are always ideal scapegoats .
Why were only 12000 tons of supplies transported to NA for the AK in June 1942 (of which 8000 arrived ) ?
Very simple :
only 12000 tons or a little more were available in Germany ,the East had priority .
the Reichsbahn could not transport more supplies to Naples
Naples could only unload,stock and load a limited amount of supplies for the AK .
The same for Tripoli
The same for the final phase : the transport to the front .
In July the Italian Merchant Fleet transported 100000 to NA of which 35000 for the Germans .
The reason is not that in July the number of available MV increased by 250 % , but that in July there were more supplies available at Naples.
From these 100000 90000 arrived in NA , but no one knows when they arrived at the front :it took weeks to transport supplies to the front .
And, one can question the importance of what arrived at the front .
June 1942 : 5,5568 ton of fuel arrived in NA : what was the result of this ? The Axis failed to capture Tobruk ,but in September 31000 ton of fuel arrived in NA, and the Axis still failed to take Tobruk .
The Italian Merchant Fleet transported what was available in the Italian ports ,thus Rommel knew where to protest, but he was clever enough not to make the OKH even more hostile to him than it already was .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 21:18

Takao wrote:
04 Aug 2021 19:52
ULTRA was responsible for about 46% of the ships sunk & 50% of tonnage sunk(including naval vessels).
No : that is not correct : these losses were caused mainly by aircraft and submarines and the only thing Ultra could say was that there was an Italian MV sailing in a certain direction and the submarines/aircraft had to search to find the ship .
On 100 ton of supplies that was sent to NA,15 tons were lost, or better 85 tons were not lost ,that proves that the reliability of Ultra was very low .
If Ultra was that reliable, why is the BP lobby saying that they were good for 7,5 tons of supplies on 100 that were sent ?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12029
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by ljadw » 04 Aug 2021 21:24

Ружичасти Слон wrote:
04 Aug 2021 19:53
ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
The defeat of Rommel was not caused by the Italians who could not transport more supplies to NA:even with more supplies Rommel would still be defeated .
After the war, US needed a strong German army against the threat from the East . But there was a lot of opposition in Europe,to crush this opposition US needed to show a good and competent German general .
Rommel,who was dead,which is always a good point, could be presented as a good German ( he was sideways involved in the conspiracy against Hitler ),but was he competent ? He was twice defeated : in NA and in France .
The solution was easy : for NA it was enough to blame the Italians, given the anti-Italian racism and contempt in the US and Britain, every one would believe this fable .
For Normandy , an other excuse was invented : Hitler slept .
No one would dare to criticize Rommel ,and this would be very good for the career of Speidel .
Have you some evidences ?

It seems to me ljadw was make some biggest not real imaginations storys .

Ljadw was invent many things on topic
ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 15:38
Only a part of what arrived at Tripoli was transported to the front ,and, if more arrived at Tripoli, less would go to the front .
Decreasing returns to scale .
Ljadw logic
10.000 tons was arrive on Tripoli 8.000 was transport on front.
15.000 tons was arrive on Tripoli 7.000 was transport on front.

15.000 > 10.000 If more arrived at Tripoli
7.000 < 8.000 Less would go to the front

Completest tosh
Never heard of the law of diminishing results ?
The more supplies arrived in Tripoli,the longer it would take to unload and stock them .
More supplies would need more depots who themselves would need more supplies and more supplies would need more trucks,POL,drivers,technicians,spare parts,and for this more MV would be needed,and more depots,which again would need more supplies .

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3087
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Germany could win Barbarossa by suppressing Italy

Post by Kingfish » 05 Aug 2021 00:52

ljadw wrote:
04 Aug 2021 11:16
1 Axis forces and German PzD are two different things .
Up to a point, but beyond that the logistical requirements are very much the same. A tanker from the 15th Pz division ate the same food, drank the same water and used the same fuel as his infantry comrades.
2 Italian army in September 1940 :245000. Axis ground forces in June 1942 : 1940000 Thus : no increase .
Where are you getting your figures? The oft repeated figures of the Italian army involved in Op Compass was around 150K, and this included units stationed at Bardia and Sidi Omar.
The truth is that there were only TWO German PzD in Libya .The reason was the terrain : mountains, no roads, distance, no decent harbor .
No, the reason was logistics. Had the Axis committed to improving the harbors of Benghazi and Tobruk - admittedly a huge undertaking - the other reasons you listed would disappear. Logistics was, and still is, the deciding factor for how big a military force can be deployed and maintained in the field.
4 The Axis did not support 2 PzD, the Italians /or the Germans did it .


Um, the Italians and Germans were the Axis in North Africa.
And the fact that there were 12 Italian and German divisions at Alamein,does not mean that the Axis could have more operational tank divisions at Alamein,because the supply demands of a PzD were much higher than those for an ID .
So now it's supplies that decide how many Pz divisions could operate in NA.
Now why didn't I think of that...
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

Return to “What if”