Red Army "superiority"

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#31

Post by ljadw » 02 Oct 2017, 08:46

Omeganian wrote:
ljadw wrote: 10th Tank Division :on 22 june 363 tanks,of which ,following the reports,(we know the value of such reports ) 318 operational .

4 days later, only 4 days :wink: only 39 tanks were left .Reported losses were : 53 tanks . Where were the 226 other tanks ? Mainly they were lost by mechanical defects, shortages of fuel,of ammunition .

Conclusion : more than the half of the tanks of the 10 Tank division were not operational, the reports claimed that 85 % was operational, but paper is patient .
Then how come the cars weren't affected by these shortages? Or did they move without fuel? I don't remember the Soviets possessing that kind of technology.
ljadw wrote:XX corps claimed a lot of things, but the reality is that most of these 200 knocked out tanks had been lost before they saw a German, or before firing a shot .
And before they had a chance to break down or run out of fuel.
ljadw wrote:Reality is also that Omeganian is wrong : the Soviets did not fly (this would have been bad for the Germans ), they advanced to the border (to the satisfaction and relief of Halder) ,but before they arrived where there was the war, a lot of these divisions fell apart .What does not mean that the average Soviet soldier did not fight : he fought and killed a lot of Germans .
If they fought and didn't fly, then how do you explain the tank divisions arriving at the rear with such low personnel casualties?
I did not say that the tank divisions were fighting : the tank divisions were going to the front, but a lot of them never arrived,because during their advance ( most of them were stationed far away of the front),they fell apart :tanks without infantry,ammunition and fuel, infantry and supply trucks without tanks, it was a chaos .But the average Soviet soldier,who fought in the ID (the MC were only a small minority) fought and fought hard :in june the Germans lost 41087 men .More than the same periods in november and december .

It has also been claimed that the tanks (T 34) who were in category 1 of readiness were ful operational,this is more than questionable : they were as showroom cars with a few miles on the counter .

And the situation of the cars was not better than the situation of the tanks .

User avatar
losna
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: 25 Mar 2017, 09:13
Location: Insubria

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#32

Post by losna » 02 Oct 2017, 09:03

stg 44 wrote: This gets us into dangerous 'what if' territory but I'm not sure the lack of say a Torch landing in North Africa would have forestalled disaster at Stalingrad.

What I'm saying is that while the USSR was able to throw all its (and of others) weight against the Wehrmacht, the opposite wasn't true, even at the very beginning of Barbarossa; basically, Germans fought with a hand tied behind their back as early as 1942 - in early 1943 there were 1.3 million men outside the Eastern front, 2/3 of the Ostheer. And this number was only doomed to swell. This seriously invalidates comparisons of capabilities even in 1942, and makes them laughable when done in 1944, with a Wehrmacht basically cut to the bone and the Red Army at full (American) steam.


Omeganian
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Jan 2012, 17:53

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#33

Post by Omeganian » 02 Oct 2017, 10:57

Art wrote:
Omeganian wrote: You don't just go missing or lost in such numbers on the battlefield
I don't see any what this statement is based on
On the fact that this isn't an aircraft division, and its people weren't fighting 50km away from their comrades.
Art wrote: As for stragglers the AFR says unequivocally that a large part were "appropriated" by other units and started to revert by 15.7.
Numbers?
ljadw wrote:But the average Soviet soldier,who fought in the ID (the MC were only a small minority) fought and fought hard :in june the Germans lost 41087 men .More than the same periods in november and december .
Maybe, but how many were fighting? As Solonin points out, the Germans literally weren't slowed down - the infantry divisions went at regular marching speed.
ljadw wrote:It has also been claimed that the tanks (T 34) who were in category 1 of readiness were ful operational,this is more than questionable : they were as showroom cars with a few miles on the counter .
So, first you claim everything outside Category 1 wasn't serviceable, then you claim Category 1 wasn't serviceable as well, and I am supposed to just take it for granted?
ljadw wrote:And the situation of the cars was not better than the situation of the tanks .
The 10th Division arrived at the rear with three quarters of its cars, with losses due to breakdowns and fuel shortage comprising about a third of the total.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#34

Post by stg 44 » 02 Oct 2017, 13:37

losna wrote:
stg 44 wrote: This gets us into dangerous 'what if' territory but I'm not sure the lack of say a Torch landing in North Africa would have forestalled disaster at Stalingrad.

What I'm saying is that while the USSR was able to throw all its (and of others) weight against the Wehrmacht, the opposite wasn't true, even at the very beginning of Barbarossa; basically, Germans fought with a hand tied behind their back as early as 1942 - in early 1943 there were 1.3 million men outside the Eastern front, 2/3 of the Ostheer. And this number was only doomed to swell. This seriously invalidates comparisons of capabilities even in 1942, and makes them laughable when done in 1944, with a Wehrmacht basically cut to the bone and the Red Army at full (American) steam.
You have to weigh that against the Soviets being unprepared for war and not mobilized for it when the invasion came. The 1.3 million men outside of the Eastern Front weren't organized in combat divisions that could have fought in the invasion. Also consider that adding them in would have had an impact on the logistic system...

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#35

Post by Art » 02 Oct 2017, 18:29

Omeganian wrote: On the fact that this isn't an aircraft division, and its people weren't fighting 50km away from their comrades.
Is it a necessary condition to loose man as missing and prisoners? All that I know suggests that it's not. In any case we began from the question of casualties. Casualties of 10 TD were not small by any rate. Actually you can take killed and wounded alone (800 men) and check how they compare with casualties of the opposing German panzer divisions during the same time-frame. That would be a curious comparison.
Numbers?
"A large number of men" (lt. col. Sukhoruchkin).
As Solonin points out, the Germans literally weren't slowed down - the infantry divisions went at regular marching speed.
That is obviously untrue if you're talking about situation of HG Sud as whole. Only few infantry divisions that advanced behind panzer divisions made some 20 km per day and only before the crisis at Dubno developed.

Omeganian
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Jan 2012, 17:53

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#36

Post by Omeganian » 02 Oct 2017, 19:42

Art wrote:
Omeganian wrote: On the fact that this isn't an aircraft division, and its people weren't fighting 50km away from their comrades.
Is it a necessary condition to loose man as missing and prisoners? All that I know suggests that it's not. In any case we began from the question of casualties. Casualties of 10 TD were not small by any rate. Actually you can take killed and wounded alone (800 men) and check how they compare with casualties of the opposing German panzer divisions during the same time-frame. That would be a curious comparison.
2000 in the 11th division, according to Halder.
Art wrote:
As Solonin points out, the Germans literally weren't slowed down - the infantry divisions went at regular marching speed.
That is obviously untrue if you're talking about situation of HG Sud as whole. Only few infantry divisions that advanced behind panzer divisions made some 20 km per day and only before the crisis at Dubno developed.
Yes, he's talking about the infantry available at Dubno.

User avatar
losna
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: 25 Mar 2017, 09:13
Location: Insubria

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#37

Post by losna » 02 Oct 2017, 23:51

stg 44 wrote: You have to weigh that against the Soviets being unprepared for war and not mobilized for it when the invasion came.
Well, they were literally told of the invasion weeks before and didn't believe a word.
That's even worse than Hitler's political idiocy.

The 1.3 million men outside of the Eastern Front weren't organized in combat divisions that could have fought in the invasion. Also consider that adding them in would have had an impact on the logistic system...
Uhm, the 1941 strike didn't need more men than in OTL. What it needed were strategic reserves to feed in to replace losses after the first strike, something that those troops could've well done.

Omeganian
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Jan 2012, 17:53

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#38

Post by Omeganian » 03 Oct 2017, 05:51

losna wrote:
stg 44 wrote: You have to weigh that against the Soviets being unprepared for war and not mobilized for it when the invasion came.
Well, they were literally told of the invasion weeks before and didn't believe a word.
That's even worse than Hitler's political idiocy.
The reports were that Hitler intends to attack with less forces that he threw at France (complete truth), so believing it would have hardly been any less idiotic.

User avatar
losna
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: 25 Mar 2017, 09:13
Location: Insubria

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#39

Post by losna » 03 Oct 2017, 09:32

Omeganian wrote:
The reports were that Hitler intends to attack with less forces that he threw at France (complete truth), so believing it would have hardly been any less idiotic.
I do not think that sending a dozen of reconnaissance planes and spies would have been a great effort.

Omeganian
Member
Posts: 234
Joined: 02 Jan 2012, 17:53

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#40

Post by Omeganian » 03 Oct 2017, 09:40

losna wrote:
Omeganian wrote:
The reports were that Hitler intends to attack with less forces that he threw at France (complete truth), so believing it would have hardly been any less idiotic.
I do not think that sending a dozen of reconnaissance planes and spies would have been a great effort.
The presence of German forces wasn't in question; the German plans were, and these aren't as easy to determine.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#41

Post by stg 44 » 03 Oct 2017, 15:45

losna wrote:
stg 44 wrote: You have to weigh that against the Soviets being unprepared for war and not mobilized for it when the invasion came.
Well, they were literally told of the invasion weeks before and didn't believe a word.
That's even worse than Hitler's political idiocy.
Its a complicated issue that consensus hasn't been reached about yet. There were all sort of messed up intel about it and it was repeatedly wrong about invasion dates that came and went, while when Yugoslavia happened it let Stalin believe that the build up the east was partially that, partially related to deception operations the Germans were running:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Harpune

Then there has been some revelations recently that Hitler was sending Stalin letters explaining the build up in the East and helped lull Stalin into a false sense of security:
https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for- ... n_Knew.htm
losna wrote:
The 1.3 million men outside of the Eastern Front weren't organized in combat divisions that could have fought in the invasion. Also consider that adding them in would have had an impact on the logistic system...
Uhm, the 1941 strike didn't need more men than in OTL. What it needed were strategic reserves to feed in to replace losses after the first strike, something that those troops could've well done.
You're missing the point, historically the forces in the east by August and latter were depleted, yet were suffering major supply issues; what do you think adding full replacements of men and equipment onto that already undersupplied, depleted force would have resulted in?

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#42

Post by Art » 03 Oct 2017, 16:30

Omeganian wrote: Yes, he's talking about the infantry available at Dubno.
That was because they were advancing virtually in vacuum with no forces opposing them.

User avatar
losna
Member
Posts: 118
Joined: 25 Mar 2017, 09:13
Location: Insubria

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#43

Post by losna » 03 Oct 2017, 21:40

stg 44 wrote:
You're missing the point, historically the forces in the east by August and latter were depleted, yet were suffering major supply issues; what do you think adding full replacements of men and equipment onto that already undersupplied, depleted force would have resulted in?
It depends on how much a single man weighs on the logistical system, how many trains have to be used to move men in comparison to ammo and food, I think. However, I didn't thought they were so stretched so early.
BTW, I tend to think that what needed Barbarossa - apart from what I said previously - was to encircle Moscow in late September/early October and then sit there, rebuilding forces to resist through the winter.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#44

Post by ljadw » 04 Oct 2017, 07:14

losna wrote:
stg 44 wrote: You have to weigh that against the Soviets being unprepared for war and not mobilized for it when the invasion came.
Well, they were literally told of the invasion weeks before and didn't believe a word.
That's even worse than Hitler's political idiocy.

Reports are not proofs ,and most reports were wrong .

Besides, as long as the mobile divisions were not observed at the German-Soviet border, there was no danger, and these divisions arrived only in june , and then it was too late to do something .On 5 june there were only 93 German divisions in the East.

They were right not to believe the phantasies from Sorge and associates .

Stiltzkin
Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 13:29
Location: Coruscant

Re: Red Army "superiority"

#45

Post by Stiltzkin » 04 Oct 2017, 11:27

So it was an army not prepared for war vs an army which was and attacked with bulk of forces from very first day.
:lol: I must say this is a good one. :thumbsup:

What gives you the impression or would indicate that the Red Army was not prepared for combat nor war? Or that the USSR was not prepared for long time war? They enjoyed much better odds than Norway or Poland and even not much different from France. I would even say their odds were better than those of France.

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”