Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Huszar666
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 18 Dec 2021 14:02
Location: Budakeszi

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Huszar666 » 10 Jun 2022 16:42

historygeek2021 wrote:
09 Jun 2022 18:01
Huszar666 wrote:
09 Jun 2022 17:39
Yeah, overthworing capitalism went soooooo well for... everyone that tried it. Not that capitalism is soooo much more better than socialism...
That's OTL. This is ATL. Without a long war against Germany, the delta in civilian goods will easily be 300% higher by 1943.
So, in this ATL the reds are so much more tolerant of other opinions, exactly WHY? For what exact reason would the reds don't deport, kill or supress anyone that is not a red themselves?
Having more civilian goods (why exactly?) to plunder is better because of...?

I don't know, if you lived in a country that was under the thumb of the reds, but it doesn't look like so. I wouldn't recommend you to go around any ex-red-country talking about how good it would be being under the reds.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 16:52

Huszar666 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:37

If you mean by "worked" that they threw warm bodies at the Germans till the MGs overheated and the survivors were able to overwhelm the defenders, then yes, it indeed worked.
This myth has long been debunked. The Red Army crushed the Ostheer under an avalanche of artillery, of which they had copious amounts in 1941. The problem is that the Soviets were counting on a two-week mobilization period between the declaration of hostilities and the commencement of major combat operations. During this mobilization period, they planned to requisition the trucks and tractors needed to tow the artillery and haul the ammunition into place. It should have been obvious by May 1940 that Germany wouldn't give its enemies a two-week mobilization period. A leader who wasn't hung up on the failure of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact would have put these mobilization measures in place long before the Germans invaded.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 2781
Joined: 08 Apr 2014 19:00

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Cult Icon » 10 Jun 2022 17:37

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:52
The Red Army crushed the Ostheer under an avalanche of artillery, of which they had copious amounts in 1941.
where do you get this theory from?

I do not think that Glantz/Dunn used this theory for June 41- March 42. In their books they focus on the superior force generation capabilities as being decisive. Quantity rather than quality (quality came later on in the war). Also at least prior to 44' the Soviets were peer opponents vs the Axis in terms of firepower. They just had superiority in numbers of guns.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 17:45

Cult Icon wrote:
10 Jun 2022 17:37

I do not think that Glantz/Dunn used this theory for June 41- March 42. In their books they focus on the superior force generation capabilities as being decisive. Quantity rather than quality (quality came later on in the war). Also at least prior to 44' the Soviets were peer opponents vs the Axis in terms of firepower. They just had superiority in numbers of guns.
Yes, in 1941 and 1942 the Soviet Union had to rely on throwing new units of poorly equipped rifle divisions and brigades in front of the Ostheer, because Stalin failed to prepare the country for war. But by 1943 the Soviet Union was pummeling the Ostheer with artillery. Glantz describes this in When Titans Clashed. If Stalin had ordered total mobilization in 1940, the Red Army could have had a decisive superiority in artillery by June 1941.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 2781
Joined: 08 Apr 2014 19:00

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Cult Icon » 10 Jun 2022 18:04

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 17:45

Yes, in 1941 and 1942 the Soviet Union had to rely on throwing new units of poorly equipped rifle divisions and brigades in front of the Ostheer, because Stalin failed to prepare the country for war. But by 1943 the Soviet Union was pummeling the Ostheer with artillery. Glantz describes this in When Titans Clashed. If Stalin had ordered total mobilization in 1940, the Red Army could have had a decisive superiority in artillery by June 1941.
Also critical point Glantz/Dunn use is the evolution of Russian combat formations (motorized/tank, infantry, artillery).

In 1941 there were a lot of huge mech. corps being developed as operational level forces. They had their development interrupted by the German invasion. After and while they were being defeated the Soviets focused on quickly developing and an army of small tank units with only tactical value. It is still a ??? to me whether or not these hugely equipped, presumably high sustainability formations would have been effective or not. If they were to become effective than they could have challenged the German panzergruppen.

Huszar666
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 18 Dec 2021 14:02
Location: Budakeszi

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Huszar666 » 10 Jun 2022 18:37

If Stalin had ordered total mobilization in 1940, the Red Army could have had a decisive superiority in artillery by June 1941.
Pray tell, where would the soviets get those guns from? There were huge gaps in the TOE as it was, even without a few hundred extra divisions.
The Red Army crushed the Ostheer under an avalanche of artillery, of which they had copious amounts in 1941.
They may have crushed the Ostheer in certain places with the sheer number of guns in... 1944, but that was not true for all the places and all the operations. Even in 1944.
Soviet artillery was, let's say, not the best of all the countries involved in the war. On could even hazard to say, it was the worst. See Rshew in December 1942 (Glantz has a book about that op). The massed soviet artillery was basically useless.
That was after 1,5 years of experience, and even 1944 they were not really on top.

If you flood-rush a few hundred divisions and water down the already watered-down quality, even IF you could conjure up stuff enough for a few hundred further divisions (while there already being HUGE gaps in the TOE)... Well...

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13127
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by ljadw » 10 Jun 2022 18:47

Huszar666 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:37
And you don't seem to understand that it actually worked.
If you mean by "worked" that they threw warm bodies at the Germans till the MGs overheated and the survivors were able to overwhelm the defenders, then yes, it indeed worked.
If you see it as tactical, operational and strategical knowledge and capabilities, than not so much.
Even at the very end of the war, German training was lightyears above what the soviets could field (with very few exceptions). Most Front Commanders (Front as Army Group) wouldn't been even entrusted with a Corps in... basically every other nation.

The only thing Stalin would have achieved by putting 600 barely trained division on the western border is to squander even MORE troops and material for even LESS impact in the very first month of the campaign. Oh, and those personel and material would not be there in the autumn.
From a defensive POF the USSR was invincible,from an offensive POV it was poor, till at least 1943 .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13127
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by ljadw » 10 Jun 2022 18:49

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:52
Huszar666 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:37

If you mean by "worked" that they threw warm bodies at the Germans till the MGs overheated and the survivors were able to overwhelm the defenders, then yes, it indeed worked.
This myth has long been debunked. The Red Army crushed the Ostheer under an avalanche of artillery, of which they had copious amounts in 1941. The problem is that the Soviets were counting on a two-week mobilization period between the declaration of hostilities and the commencement of major combat operations. During this mobilization period, they planned to requisition the trucks and tractors needed to tow the artillery and haul the ammunition into place. It should have been obvious by May 1940 that Germany wouldn't give its enemies a two-week mobilization period. A leader who wasn't hung up on the failure of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact would have put these mobilization measures in place long before the Germans invaded.
Victory in the West had weaken Germany : it attacked the USSR with less aircraft and artillery than in May 1940 .

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 19:25

Huszar666 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 18:37
If Stalin had ordered total mobilization in 1940, the Red Army could have had a decisive superiority in artillery by June 1941.
Pray tell, where would the soviets get those guns from? There were huge gaps in the TOE as it was, even without a few hundred extra divisions.
Artillery was the least of the Red Army's problems in 1941. The Red Army had 117,600 guns and mortars when Barbarossa began, less than half of which was with their field forces. Most of it was in reserve. Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, Chapter 6.

The USSR produced 53,600 guns and mortars in 1941. In 1942 they produced 287,000. Glantz, When Titans Clashed, Table R.

Artillery is not an issue for this ATL.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 6509
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Art » 10 Jun 2022 19:32

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 16:32
The link on that thread isn't working. Can you check if there is a current link?
Everything works for me. Anyway that's a link to the entire topic:
viewtopic.php?f=79&t=222370
In terms of sheer manpower, the equivalent of the entire pre-war army, not just those at the front, was lost in 1941 (KIA and POW - even more were lost if we count wounded).
How many of casualties were in military by the evening of 21.6.41? Or from a different angle how many of those serving in active military became casualties by the end of the year? There are no hard stats, but I guess the answer is less than a half in both cases.
Since these were regular soldiers serving three year conscription
The regular conscription term was two years, and in any case I don't see why this statement should be true. USSR called more than 10 million men by the end of 1941. It would be completely unrealistic to expect that they suffered no casualties or insiginificant casualties.

I believe that what sustains the army is the officer corps, whose value and qualification is by definition larger than those of usual riflemen. And these value and qualification increase with rank. Casualties of the officer corps, especially of the higher echelon, were heavy but not hopeless. The Soviet military wouldn't go anywhere if they had lost their entire pool of officers.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 19:44

Looking at the numbers a bit deeper. In the OTL, the Red Army had the following echelons deployed along the USSR's western border:

First Echelon: 57 divisions
Second Echelon: 52 divisions
Third Echelon: 62 divisions

Each division had an authorized wartime strength of 14,000, but only had 8,000-12,000 men when Barbarossa began.

With total mobilization beginning in 1940, each of those divisions could be split to form an extra division, and both be brought up to a full strength of 14,000 men. In the ATL, the Ostheer will be facing twice as many divisions, all much stronger than the OTL, when they try to break through the border, and then they will be counter-attacked by twice as many divisions, all much stronger. And then the Soviet Union will be able to fill in twice as many divisions in reserve, all much stronger than the OTL. And the internal military districts will already have fully trained and equipped divisions standing by as a strategic reserve. The Ostheer would be lucky to make it as far as the Dnieper or Dvina rivers in this ATL.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 6509
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Art » 10 Jun 2022 19:57

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
09 Jun 2022 05:11
Im skeptical creating a offensive capable leadership in a year for 600 divisions would happen.
Why would they need leadership for 600 divisions, when the plan was to mobilize only 303?
Mobilization of the army of 303 divisons was mostly possible with available resources. According to Timoshenko and Zhukov (February 1941)
Needed for the mobilized army - 1 003 917 officers for all grades
Available as of 1.1.41 - 527 456
Graduation of cadets from military schools - 93 138
Promotion of enlised men with higher or completed secondary education - 121 118 (*)
Call of reserve officers - 465 190
Total - 1 206 902
There was a shortage in certain categories (medical officers, tank, signal, engineer officers), but as far as total numbers are concerned, there was even some surplus for replacement of casualties.

* Enlisted men of the active army who graduated from universities or secondary schools (and were undergoing training as reserve officers) were to be automatically promoted to officer positions with the start of mobilization.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 20:01

Art wrote:
10 Jun 2022 19:32
Everything works for me. Anyway that's a link to the entire topic:
viewtopic.php?f=79&t=222370
I was referring to this link in the post you originally cited:

https://liewar.ru/o-nashikh-poteryakh/2 ... vojny.html

It is working now. For some reason it wasn't working on mobile. It doesn't tell us anything about losses below the rank of major general.
How many of casualties were in military by the evening of 21.6.41? Or from a different angle how many of those serving in active military became casualties by the end of the year? There are no hard stats, but I guess the answer is less than a half in both cases.
Per Lopukhovsky, there were 4,004,000 permanent casualties by December 1, during which period there were 2,130,000 field replacements. The starting strength of the frontline forces in the western districts was 2.7 million on June 22, 1941. Even if every single one of the field replacements became a permanent casualty by December 1, 1941 (a highly unlikely assumption), that still leaves 1,873,000 permanent losses from the original field forces, or 56.13%. Add in wounded and the picture is far worse.
The regular conscription term was two years
Conscription was lengthened to 3 years in 1939. Stumbling Colossus, p. 99.

Huszar666
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: 18 Dec 2021 14:02
Location: Budakeszi

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by Huszar666 » 10 Jun 2022 20:49

Artillery was the least of the Red Army's problems in 1941. The Red Army had 117,600 guns and mortars when Barbarossa began, less than half of which was with their field forces. Most of it was in reserve. Glantz, Stumbling Colossus, Chapter 6.

The USSR produced 53,600 guns and mortars in 1941. In 1942 they produced 287,000. Glantz, When Titans Clashed, Table R.
Those are really nice numbers.

I hope, you know, how the su counted "Artillery tubes".
I will confirm your suspicion: yes, they indeed counted EVERYTHING, including 50 and 82mm mortars, light FLAK, AT-guns. Look at the numbers for FIELD ARTILLERY, and the numbers wouldn't look so nice anymore.
but lets see what this site thinks about it:
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/weapons.htm
7,62 M02 and M02/30: 4477
7,62 M33: unknown
7,62 F-22+F-22USV: 4211 (max, probably includes other types)
4,5" Vickers How: 211 (maximum)
12,2 M10/30: 5578
12,2 M09/37: 778
12,2 M38: 1667
15,2 M31: 101
6" Vickers How: 92
15,2 M09/30: 2611
15,2 M10/37: 99
15,2 M38: 1058
10,7 M05 gun: 88 (maximum)
10,7 M10/30 gun: 863
12,2 M31/37 gun: 1255
15,2 M10/30 gun: 137
15,2 M10/34 gun: unknown, but there were only 275 produced at all
15,2 M37: 3123
20,3 B-4: 727
other heavy/superheavy: around 200.
Sooo... instead of having a nice number of 117.600 we have only a not-so-nice for FIELD ARTILLERY of only 27.551. Bummer.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 631
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: Laniakea

Re: Stalin orders total mobilization before Barbarossa

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Jun 2022 20:59

Huszar666 wrote:
10 Jun 2022 20:49

I hope, you know, how the su counted "Artillery tubes".
I will confirm your suspicion: yes, they indeed counted EVERYTHING, including 50 and 82mm mortars, light FLAK, AT-guns. Look at the numbers for FIELD ARTILLERY, and the numbers wouldn't look so nice anymore.
but lets see what this site thinks about it:
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/weapons.htm
7,62 M02 and M02/30: 4477
7,62 M33: unknown
7,62 F-22+F-22USV: 4211 (max, probably includes other types)
4,5" Vickers How: 211 (maximum)
12,2 M10/30: 5578
12,2 M09/37: 778
12,2 M38: 1667
15,2 M31: 101
6" Vickers How: 92
15,2 M09/30: 2611
15,2 M10/37: 99
15,2 M38: 1058
10,7 M05 gun: 88 (maximum)
10,7 M10/30 gun: 863
12,2 M31/37 gun: 1255
15,2 M10/30 gun: 137
15,2 M10/34 gun: unknown, but there were only 275 produced at all
15,2 M37: 3123
20,3 B-4: 727
other heavy/superheavy: around 200.
Sooo... instead of having a nice number of 117.600 we have only a not-so-nice for FIELD ARTILLERY of only 27.551. Bummer.
Per Glantz, of the 117,600 Red Army artillery pieces on June 22, 1941, 56,900 were mortars, leaving 60,700 guns and howitzers. Maybe, if Armchair General is correct, half of these were 45 mm anti-tank guns, leaving the 27,551 field artillery pieces you count. That is still 4x as many artillery pieces as the Ostheer, which had only 7,146 guns and howitzers.

And this was with the reduced level of mobilization in the OTL. In 1942, after total mobilization was implemented, the USSR produced 287,000. Even if the USSR reaches only half of that in the year before Barbarossa in the ATL, the Red Army will still dwarf the Ostheer in artillery, even more than in the OTL.

Return to “What if”