'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Post Reply
Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#31

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 10:36

No. What they say on page 183 is:
Yes, I dont know why are you being disingenuous.
I meant running out of fuel as in they used up all they had and there was none left to issue to the troops.
The definition just changed for the third time.

And you are still attacking a massive strawman.
Temporary shortages hit everyone but my case is that whilst the chaotic conditions of the retreat destroyed the supply line there was always enough petrol to keep the tanks moving-if they had not been crushed and sent fleeing back home

Of course there was enough petrol to keep 30 000 vehicles moving and idlying in massive traffic jams on what appears to be a dozen cartographically significant roads.

And they were also being supplied via the same route they were retreating through,for all intents and purposes a completely bombed out system of bridges and ferries, all effectively, to keep even something like Panzer IV with its moderate fuel consumption moving.


OF COURSE.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3727
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#32

Post by Sheldrake » 03 Mar 2018, 12:53

Michael Kenny wrote:
Sheldrake wrote:
Michael Kenny wrote:The Germans had plenty enough fuel to mount the operation, but could not bring the fuel forward to where it was needed.
I meant running out of fuel as in they used up all they had and there was none left to issue to the troops. Temporary shortages hit everyone but my case is that whilst the chaotic conditions of the retreat destroyed the supply line there was always enough petrol to keep the tanks moving-if they had not been crushed and sent fleeing back home
I am not sure of the point you are trying to make. Logistics is a dynamic process bringing a flow of ammunition fuel and other supplies at a rate of "X" per day/ week etc then consumed by armed forces at a rate "Y." Unless supply lines have been completely cut - such as in Stalingrad There is rarely no fuel at all, just not enough to fill everyone's fuel tank.

Prudent commanders and staff don't allow their tanks to run out of fuel in the combat area, any more than admirals allow their fleet do do so. A tank immobilised for want of fuel is probably going to be lost along with its crew. Not only can it not manouvre, but power traverse and radios will eventually fail. Armoured commanders get very twitchy about fuel. When fuel levels are low commanders will minimise movement, which is easier to do in the advance than the withdrawal.

Sometimes the shortage is exaggerated and there is a game played between different levels of command. Post war German memoirs from panzer commanders include references to subordinates complaining about lacking fuel - and then being told to press on because the senior commander guesses that they have kept a reserve stock. Occasionally Rommel really did lead his Ppanzers to whence they did not have the fuel to return.

There was a


Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#33

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 12:56

I am not sure of the point you are trying to make. Logistics is a dynamic process bringing a flow of ammunition fuel and other supplies at a rate of "X" per day/ week etc then consumed by armed forces at a rate "Y." Unless supply lines have been completely cut - such as in Stalingrad There is rarely no fuel at all, just not enough to fill everyone's fuel tank.
Based on evidence, except for few ferries choked by out-going traffic, it was effectively the same situation as Stalingrad.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#34

Post by Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2018, 13:56

Ulater wrote:
Of course there was enough petrol to keep 30 000 vehicles moving and idlying in massive traffic jams on what appears to be a dozen cartographically significant roads.

And they were also being supplied via the same route they were retreating through,for all intents and purposes a completely bombed out system of bridges and ferries, all effectively, to keep even something like Panzer IV with its moderate fuel consumption moving.
A broken shattered Army in panic-stricken flight is never a pretty sight. However my point is clear. Fuel supplies never got that low that front -line tanks could not move. Running out of petrol because a superior Army shatters your front and runs amok in your supply lines (thus not allowing your fuel to be brought forward) is not the same as not having enough petrol in your supply chain to keep your tanks running. The end-effect may be the same but the cause is not.

http://film.iwmcollections.org.uk/record/1141
Last edited by Michael Kenny on 03 Mar 2018, 14:00, edited 2 times in total.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#35

Post by Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2018, 13:59

Sheldrake wrote:There is rarely no fuel at all, just not enough to fill everyone's fuel tank.
That is my point. The failure of the German Army to hold its front line caused the shortages. It was not that shortages caused the collapse/defeat.

Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#36

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 14:00

A broken shattered Army in panic-stricken flight is never a pretty site. However my point is clear. Fuel supplies never got that low that front -line tanks could not move. Running out of petrol because a superior Army shatters your front and runs amok in your supply lines (thui not allowing your fuel to be brought foward) is not the same as not having enough petrol in your supply chain to keep your tanks running. The end-effect may be the same but the cause is not.

http://film.iwmcollections.org.uk/record/1141
I guess this is supported by the fact that even according to the operational research, vehicles lost to other vehicles were absolutely minimal, in any of the three areas studies by them.

So I really have no idea what are you talking about.

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3727
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#37

Post by Sheldrake » 03 Mar 2018, 14:21

Michael Kenny wrote:
Sheldrake wrote:There is rarely no fuel at all, just not enough to fill everyone's fuel tank.
That is my point. The failure of the German Army to hold its front line caused the shortages. It was not that shortages caused the collapse/defeat.
Up to a point Lord Copper...

It is true that when the Americans overran the 7th Army depots in the Le Mans area the Seventh Army's supply situation became much worse. The disruption to the railway net between Normandy and Germany put a huge strain on German logistics. The shortage of artillery ammunition and lack of replacements contributed to the collapse of the German defence in Normandy.

Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#38

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 14:29

Up to a point Lord Copper...

It is true that when the Americans overran the 7th Army depots in the Le Mans area the Seventh Army's supply situation became much worse. The disruption to the railway net between Normandy and Germany put a huge strain on German logistics. The shortage of artillery ammunition and lack of replacements contributed to the collapse of the German defence in Normandy.

Very small point.

It would have to be demonstrated that any, even large scale destruction of their local supply network, had a bigger impact than losing about 50 bridges and tunnels leading in and out of Normandy, and the general lack Germans faced for some years now.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#39

Post by Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2018, 14:51

Ulater wrote:
I guess this is supported by the fact that even according to the operational research, vehicles lost to other vehicles were absolutely minimal,
If that makes you feel better then I am happy for you. A wreck is a wreck is a wreck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DtkkgEtaRo

Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#40

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 14:53

If that makes you feel better then I am happy for you. A wreck is a wreck is a wreck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DtkkgEtaRo
I dont know what that is supposed to mean.

User avatar
Mobius
Member
Posts: 645
Joined: 12 Jan 2005, 21:45
Location: Glendale, CA
Contact:

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#41

Post by Mobius » 03 Mar 2018, 15:01

Michael Kenny wrote:
Sheldrake wrote:
Michael Kenny wrote:The Germans had plenty enough fuel to mount the operation, but could not bring the fuel forward to where it was needed.
I meant running out of fuel as in they used up all they had and there was none left to issue to the troops. Temporary shortages hit everyone but my case is that whilst the chaotic conditions of the retreat destroyed the supply line there was always enough petrol to keep the tanks moving-if they had not been crushed and sent fleeing back home
If an armored unit was too low on fuel to continue operations wouldn't they canabalize the fuel from half the unit and pour it in the other half to continue? Then when that half got too low on fuel they would do it again to run the last bit of the unit.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#42

Post by Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2018, 15:04

Ulater wrote:I dont know what that is supposed to mean.

It simply means the reason why the tanks were destroyed is not important. The fact that they are destroyed is what really matters.

http://film.iwmcollections.org.uk/record/1493

Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#43

Post by Ulater » 03 Mar 2018, 15:11

It simply means the reason why the tanks were destroyed is not important. The fact that they are destroyed is what really matters.

http://film.iwmcollections.org.uk/record/1493
It very much is important.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#44

Post by Yoozername » 03 Mar 2018, 18:47

How does this support what you are saying at all? Those tanks were bombed, hence the dirt thrown up all over and over-turned condition and missing bogies and suspension??? It was a preliminary bombardment? Do you think they had fuel or not? And how can that matter to your argument?
Summary:
Some indication of what a heavy bombing attack could do to an armoured formation is given by this film showing German tanks wrecked and half-buried by the preliminary RAF bombardment to the opening of Operation "Goodwood" in the vicinity of Emieville.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

#45

Post by Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2018, 19:29

Who said they were connected?

https://youtu.be/h5o1FRHNWEY?t=6m1s

Post Reply

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”