Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 23 Jul 2019 04:11

Hi all,

Over in What If there's been some discussion of how much fuel the Ostheer actually consumed, especially in Barbarossa. From Volume 6 of The German Reich in the Second World War I have a figure of 455,000 tons fuel (POL?) for October 1941 until March 1942 (Eastern Front only). Does anyone have the figures from other periods?

Sean.
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 May 2019 11:55
Location: Denmark

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Sean. » 23 Jul 2019 12:43

Hi,

Foreign Military Studies P-190 Consumption and Attrition Rates Attendant to the Operations of German Group Center in Russia (22 Jun.-31 Dec. 1941), p. 98 gives the following figures for Heeresgruppe Mitte for 1941 (see attached picture):
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 23 Jul 2019 16:01

Sean. wrote:
23 Jul 2019 12:43
Hi,

Foreign Military Studies P-190 Consumption and Attrition Rates Attendant to the Operations of German Group Center in Russia (22 Jun.-31 Dec. 1941), p. 98 gives the following figures for Heeresgruppe Mitte for 1941 (see attached picture):
Thanks!

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 24 Jul 2019 03:18

Sean. wrote:
23 Jul 2019 12:43
Hi,

Foreign Military Studies P-190 Consumption and Attrition Rates Attendant to the Operations of German Group Center in Russia (22 Jun.-31 Dec. 1941), p. 98 gives the following figures for Heeresgruppe Mitte for 1941 (see attached picture):

Are these studies publicly available anywhere? Thanks again.

Sean.
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 11 May 2019 11:55
Location: Denmark

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Sean. » 24 Jul 2019 18:05

Are these studies publicly available anywhere? Thanks again.
Via Fold3 you can get a 7-day free trial during which time you will have access to the report in question (do remember to unsubscribe, however, if you do not want to be charged). See https://www.fold3.com/document/160233282/
- Sean

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Richard Anderson » 24 Jul 2019 21:12

During 1940 the Luftwaffe used c. 812,900 metric tons of aviation gasoline. In the first half of 1941, c. 389,400. In the second half of 1941 c. 812,900. In 1942, they used c. 1.584 million metric tons of aviation gasoline (the KM, another 29 metric tons) and c. 2.089 million tons of all POL products (AVGAS, MOGAS, Diesel, lubricants, and fuel oil).

I don't find complete figures for the Heer in 1940 and 1941, but in 1942, they used c. 4.6 to 5.3 million tons of all POL products, with c. 3.9 million (74%) of that consumed on the Ostfront.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 24 Jul 2019 22:05

Richard Anderson wrote:
24 Jul 2019 21:12
During 1940 the Luftwaffe used c. 812,900 metric tons of aviation gasoline. In the first half of 1941, c. 389,400. In the second half of 1941 c. 812,900. In 1942, they used c. 1.584 million metric tons of aviation gasoline (the KM, another 29 metric tons) and c. 2.089 million tons of all POL products (AVGAS, MOGAS, Diesel, lubricants, and fuel oil).

I don't find complete figures for the Heer in 1940 and 1941, but in 1942, they used c. 4.6 to 5.3 million tons of all POL products, with c. 3.9 million (74%) of that consumed on the Ostfront.
Thanks. What's your source, btw? I have access to a very well-stocked research university's library atm, maybe I can snoop around for more details with a good starting point.

So it looks like the LW's share of non-avgas POL was ~25% for 1942 - probably mostly the fleet of trucks etc. for its bases in the east.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Richard Anderson » 24 Jul 2019 23:38

The Heer consumed 268,000 metric tons of MOGAS in June 1941 and total military consumption of all POL products in that month was around 475,000 metric tons. Assuming the 74% holds then that is roughly 351,500 metric tons consumed on the Ostfront. In July, total military consumption was around 360,000 metric tons, August 410,000, September 350,000, October 300,000, November 260,000, and December 270,000. So c. 1.795 million metric tons for June-December 1941 on the Ostfront.

BTW, civilian "cutbacks" would be unlikely to be a source for additional stock...the pre-war civilian total of 3.9 million metric tons of MOGAS and Diesel consumed was slashed to 1.879 million in 1940, 1.586 million in 1941, and 0.994 million in 1942, the last, drastic reduction compensated for by increased use of bottled gas, wood and anthracite burners, and methane, which replaced the lost MOGAS and Diesel (from 0.108 million tons prewar to 0.226 million metric tons in 1940, 0.319 million in 1941, and 0.446 million in 1942.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Jul 2019 01:39

RichardAnderson wrote: total military consumption was around... c. 1.795 million metric tons for June-December 1941 on the Ostfront.
RichardAnderson wrote:In 1942, [LW] used ... c. 2.089 million tons of all POL products (AVGAS, MOGAS, Diesel, lubricants, and fuel oil).
RichardAnderson wrote:in 1942, [Heer] used c. 4.6 to 5.3 million tons of all POL products, with c. 3.9 million (74%) of that consumed on the Ostfront.
So in 1942 the LW's POL consumption was ~40% of the Heer's. Assuming the same held for 1941, the Heer-only POL consumed by Heer would be ~1.1mil tons for 1941. This would imply that AGC consumed slightly less than half of Heer's POL, which seems reasonable given that AGC was the biggest and had a disproportionate share of mobile divisions, especially later in the campaign.
RichardAnderson wrote:BTW, civilian "cutbacks" would be unlikely to be a source for additional stock
For other readers the context of the BTW is my thread in "what if" about stronger Barbarossa forces and addressing the incremental fuel burden. viewtopic.php?f=11&t=242003

Rich I hadn't even thought of substituting fuel from the civilian economy - assumed that was literally scraping the barrels already. Even so, whichever emergency steps were taken in 1942 should have been taken in 1941 (to the extent possible - another research agenda item) given earlier recognition of the strategic crisis. Yes of course that's my answer.
Primarily I envisioned cutbacks to the fuel allotments of the LW/KM. My best estimate of the requirement for 20 divisions right now is 200,000t POL; cutting the LW's budget by 10% seems obviously worth it if - as argued in my operational analysis - those 20 divisions are sufficient to achieve victory for the Ostheer.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Richard Anderson » 25 Jul 2019 16:04

Hey, I've got a great idea! Since Germany doesn't really need a Luftwaffe apparently, then they don't really need to build the synthetic Bergius hydrogenation plants, which produced most of the aviation gas. That saves 0.62 tons of steel per ton of fuel not produced, so about 2 million tons of steel saved! Oh, and perhaps 60,000 workers! Yay!

Meanwhile, in the real world, handwavium does not make massive conversions of civilian use occur over much shorter periods. The 47% reduction in civilian motor fuel use in roughly nine months at the outset of the war was mostly due to basic conservation measures such as eliminating private-use automobiles. Getting the further reduction of 5% 1940 to 1941 required the cumulative conversion of vehicles to non-liquid fuels and increasing the number of Diesel-powered tractors simultaneously, which took time. A further 12% reduction was achieved 1941-1942 as more bottled gas was produced and many more vehicles were converted to wood or anthracite burners, which required constructing more bottle gas facilities and converting more vehicles and that in turn required more industry and labor. At that point, the civilian fuel use had contracted too much and affected industrial capability, so the decision was made to continue to expand the production of bottle fuel and conversions, restoring 2% of the prewar consumption...and then in 1944 the system collapsed.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 25 Jul 2019 19:34

RichardAnderson wrote:Hey, I've got a great idea!
Me too! I'm not even going to address your bad faith argumentation style.
It's so easy for someone to say "handwaving" and requires so much more effort to rebut that. Not going to play that game.

If you want to discuss research. however, I'm happy to do that. What is your source on the fuel stats you shared?

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Richard Anderson » 26 Jul 2019 01:53

I guess I can take you off ignore long enough to respond to this.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
25 Jul 2019 19:34
Me too! I'm not even going to address your bad faith argumentation style.
You don't like emoticons or sarcasm? Too bad.

However, I'm curious if this passive-aggressive style has worked for you before? You were being nice yesterday when you thought you were going to be buddy-buddy discussing research with me. Not the first time you've tried to play that game either.
It's so easy for someone to say "handwaving" and requires so much more effort to rebut that. Not going to play that game.
Okay, frankly I no longer care given you only seem capable of responding to substantive questions with a hand wave.
If you want to discuss research. however, I'm happy to do that. What is your source on the fuel stats you shared?
Have you somehow gotten the idea that I am here to do your research for you? I am not making an argument or taking a position, so by forum rules have zero requirement to "discuss research" with you, provide you sources, or otherwise do anything other than ask questions that you seem unwilling or unable to answer with anything other than 👋.

Back on ignore for you.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 26 Jul 2019 02:06

RichardAnderson wrote:Back on ignore for you.
Thanks you. While I appreciate you occasional research contributions they are not worth your sententious analysis and shallow smugness.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2324
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Richard Anderson » 26 Jul 2019 16:05

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
26 Jul 2019 02:06
RichardAnderson wrote:Back on ignore for you.
Thanks you. While I appreciate you occasional research contributions they are not worth your sententious analysis and shallow smugness.
Better than shallow analysis and sententious smugness.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Hanny
Member
Posts: 817
Joined: 26 Oct 2008 20:40

Re: Statistics on Ostheer fuel consumption?

Post by Hanny » 05 Aug 2019 07:00

Richard Anderson wrote:
24 Jul 2019 21:12
In the second half of 1941 c. 812,900 avgas.
In 1942, they used c. 1.584 million metric tons of aviation gasoline and c. 2.089 million tons of all POL products (AVGAS, MOGAS, Diesel, lubricants, and fuel oil).

but in 1942, they used c. 4.6 to 5.3 million tons of all POL products, with c. 3.9 million (74%) of that consumed on the Ostfront.
So petrol (POL) consumption LW POL for 42 was 2.089 million -1.584 million =505000 tons. And half again of that for 41.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
23 Jul 2019 04:11
So in 1942 the LW's POL consumption was ~40% of the Heer's. Assuming the same held for 1941, the Heer-only POL consumed by Heer would be ~1.1mil tons for 1941.

No it was not, he just spelt out how much it was. Basic maths error. Assuming the same held for 1941, its 250,000 LW POL consumption.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
23 Jul 2019 04:11
This would imply that AGC consumed slightly less than half of Heer's POL, which seems reasonable
That is not being implied or expressed in any way shape or form. No it does not seem reasonable, unless youdont know what to copunt or how to count it.

But certainly more reasonble than your 659,707 tons for 20 Pzr/mot formations, giving it a 16500 klm movement capacity. 519000 AGC consumption includes LW allocation, Pzr Group 2 had LW assets embedded in it consuming POL, recce aircraft/flak Bttns for instance, and was 28% of the 1.795 tons consumed in 41, not 40%. Basic math error.
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
23 Jul 2019 04:11
My best estimate of the requirement for 20 divisions right now is 200,000t POL; cutting the LW's budget by 10% seems obviously worth it if - as argued in my operational analysis - those 20 divisions are sufficient to achieve victory for the Ostheer.
Operational analysis, does not mean what you think it means.

10% of LW fuel consumption not being allocated in 41/2 saves you 755,000 tons, reducing LW POL by 600k to run 20 extra Pzr/Mot in 36 months means the LW has 150000 tons over 36 months, 4200 tons a month instead of 21000 tons a month. 80% reduction in LW fuel, gives you a LW with around 20% of the munitions fuel etc to operate with.

Your own calculation now requires 1.2 million extra tons of oil to convert into POL, where is that comming from?.

How will these Pzr formations not be very badly handeld with next to no LW fuel?, https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a187901.pdf

Soviet relief attacks posed problems of a different sort for the German panzer units. While the Germans devoted themselves to forming and digesting a particular Kessel, Soviet units outside the pocket often had time to gather their operational wits and organise a coordinated counterblow. When delivered, these counterattacks fell heavily on the outer ring of the German armour. The panzer units fared better in these circumstances, since they could often use their own mobility and shock effect to strike at the approaching Soviets. However, the German defensive problem was greatly compounded when the Soviet counterattacks included T-34 or KV model tanks, both of which were virtually invulnerable to fire from German tanks.'2 The predicament of the German armour in these circumstances might have been truly desperate had it not been for the support that attached Luftwaffe antiaircraft batteries provided to most of the panzer divisions. Originally assigned to the spearhead divisions to pro- -: tect them against Soviet air attack, these Luftwaffe batteries-and especially the 88-mm high-velocity flak guns-had their primary mission gradually altered from air defence to ground support.'' Although German armoured units were thus generally successful in repelling counterattacks, the sheer weight of these coordinated relief attempts-especially when supported by the heavier - Soviet tanks-hammered the panzer divisions as no other fighting in the war had yet done.

How will the lorried up MOT formations not be blown to bits getting anywhere near to help in a kessel due to next to no LW air cover and no fuel to move the AA?.
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”