At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
User avatar
RJ55
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 09:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by RJ55 » 03 Dec 2012 09:01

@ LWD. Thanks very much for those links!

I can't remember the exact fuel requirements to a Panzer division to travel one mile, but it is something like 1000 gallons. There were something like 30 panzer divisions and some motorised ones. Even the infantry divisions had some trucks and assault guns. So about over 200 hundred German divisions, and many allied ones from Italy, Finland, Rumania, Hungrey etc, etc. Plus the Luftwaffe, and the navy rewuirements, plus the civilian economies in Germany, the rest of the Axis allies, and the occupied defeated nations, who must have needed some oil. All told, the Axis side would still have need more than the 4% than they had.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 03 Dec 2012 13:50

ljadw wrote:If the Italian navy was short on oil in 1941,this does not mean that Germany was short on oil.
It certainly implies it. The Italian navy was vital to supporting the Axis (inclduing German) cause in North Africa and Italy was dependent on Germany for fuel. If the Germans weren't short of fuel why would they refuse to send it to Italy?
About the KM:there was a problem for the surface fleet (Bismarck,etc) but not for the UBoats,thus,the problem was limited,technical,and not general :the LW was not short on oil,
I didn't say the LW was short of oil I said Germany was and in particular the KM was. Avgas is a more refined and harder to produce commodity than bunker oil. The shortage of the surface fleet indicates that Germany was short of oil and was dealing with the shortage by alocating what they had where they thought they needed it most.
and,Barbarossa did not fail because the oil production was insufficient .
Is there somewhere I said it did? It did however play a critical role especially later in the war at limiting German options and certainly had some signficant impact on when the war ended.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 03 Dec 2012 17:26

I disagree:the fact that the German surface fleet was short on bunker oil,does not mean that Germany as such was short on oil :the needs of the KM always were marginal compared to the needs of the whole WM:in 1938,the estimations for the monthly needs were :(in tons)
WM:484000 ,of which 157000 (30 %) for the KM,civilian economy :205000
And for Italy:who is saying that in 1941,they were dependant on Germany ? What about Romania Did Italy receive less or more fuel in 1941 than in 1940? And,from whom ? The total German requirements in 1938 (military and civilians) were some 8.4 million,and,total production and import in 1941 was 8.5 million.
FRom this forum(KM oil shortage)KM fuel and oil reserves:
1 january 1940: 365000 tons
1 july 1940:328000 tons
1 january 1941:564000 tons
1 july 1941:408000 tons
1 january 1942:300000 tons
Even for the KM,on 1 january 1942,the stocks were 82 % of 1 january 1940. Not that bad .
Of course,Räder was complaining,as every one,but,what was the reason of the shortage ? Production problems ? Refinery problems ?
And,was the bottle half full,or half empty? Was there a shortage,or was the KM biting off more than she could chew ?

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 03 Dec 2012 19:30

ljadw wrote:I disagree:the fact that the German surface fleet was short on bunker oil,does not mean that Germany as such was short on oil :the needs of the KM always were marginal compared to the needs of the whole WM:in 1938,the estimations for the monthly needs were :(in tons)
WM:484000 ,of which 157000 (30 %) for the KM,
30% is not marginal. If you they didn't have a shortage why didn't they produce more bunker oil for the KM and Italian navies?
And for Italy:who is saying that in 1941,they were dependant on Germany ? What about Romania Did Italy receive less or more fuel in 1941 than in 1940? And, from whom ?
When Italy got Rumanian oil during the war it was through Germany from what I've read.
The total German requirements in 1938 (military and civilians) were some 8.4 million,and,total production and import in 1941 was 8.5 million.
That's peace time requirements vs wartime production. For the IJN wartime usage was more than double peacetime. I would suspect similar increases for the KM and Italian Navy. For their respective airforces it was likely even greater. I don't know abut the army but certainly there was increase demad there as well.

Looking at Wages of Destruction from July of 1940 on Germany essentially got all of Rumania's oil. Tooze goes on to say (page 385 of the paperback edition):
By the end of 1940, thanks to ample deliveries from Rumania, the booty taken in France and the low level of military activity in the second half of the year, the alarming decline in Germany's fuel stocks had been repaired.
The capture of fuel in France was a one time event however and once Germany went to war with the Soviets the "low level of military activity" vanished. Indeed on page 411 Tooze goes on to say:
... Germany and its West European Grossraum were starved of food, coal, and oil.
And goes on to make the point that Germany had to supply at least some oil to both France and Italy and further states on page 412:
Germany itself coped only by dint of extreme economy.
Sounds to me like Germany was short on oil.

User avatar
RJ55
Member
Posts: 114
Joined: 10 Oct 2012 09:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by RJ55 » 04 Dec 2012 01:53

Hitler was usually fine about the army advancing, and in those times army fuel use would have skyrocketed. But Hilter nearly always vetoed retreats, even small ones, and so the army's demand for fuel would have been a lot less. Besides, in war a lot of fuel gets destroyed in dumps or while being transported to the front. o I question whether the fuel available was really adequate had Hitler NOT insisted on defending every inch of soil. The Kharkov battle, where the SS Korps and the G.D Pz. Gren Div abandoned Kharkov [against Hitler's express orders], and then counter-attacked brilliantly was another example [as was Manstein's saving of the whole southern wing after Stalingrad by retreating though Rostov] where mobile defence paid huge dividends, saving many lives and the bulk of the heavy weapons and equipment.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 04 Dec 2012 08:47

About Romania and Italy:it is not so that Germany was capturing all of the Romanian oil export:Italy got its part
1940:Romanian oil production :5.81 millionton, domestic consumption :1.862 million,exports to Germany :1.249,exports to Italy :0.342
for 1941:production :5.577 million,domestic:1.811,exports to Germany:2.885,to Italy:O.761
In 1941,the Romanian oil export to Italy was going up by 120 %: had Italy a reason to complain ?
Of course,every one was complaining and whining(Räder also),because they all were saying that the production had to follow the needs/consumption,and,as there was no limit to the needs,....:no one would say:I have enough oil,or even :I have to much oil .Thus,complaining is no proof of shortage .
I also do not see proofs that the KM had not enough oil in 1941:the oil situation did not prevent Rheinübung (Bismarck) and the attacks on the convoys to Archangelsk,the same in 1942:there was enough oil for Cerberus (the return of the capital ships to Germany).
Conclusion :as the operations of the KM were not curtailed/stalled in 1941,one can not say that the KM had not enough oil (after 1941,the situation was changing).What happened was that there were temporary problems,probably caused by refinery problems,but,these problems were quickly solved .
Source for the Romanian oil figures:
AHF:German Oil: P 4

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 04 Dec 2012 12:28

Other points:
1)IMHO,we have not enough informations to be able to say that in 1941 ,Germany was short on oil:
-the fact that the KM received less oil in december 1941 than promised is not enough
-even if the KM would receive several successive months less oil,this would not prove an oil shortage
2)Because ,we don't know why in december the KM got less oil;there could be several reasons,as
-production problems
-refinery problems
-transport problems
-or,some one saying :the surface fleet is doing nothing for the moment,thus,it will get less oil,and,there is a crisis in the Mediterranean,thus,more oil for the Mediterranean;and,if needed,Räder can use his stocks. Thus,a shifting of priorities
3)We also don't know the results of these"shortages":it could be that in january,the KM got more
It is also no so that the surface fleet was doing nothing in 1942:there was Cerberus .Maybe,it was doing less:no Rheinübung bis,but I doubt that this would be caused by oil shortages,IMHO,even with more oil,Rheinübung bis was out of the question,because,not enough capital ships and no air cover .

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 04 Dec 2012 14:03

ljadw wrote:About Romania and Italy:it is not so that Germany was capturing all of the Romanian oil export:Italy got its part 1940:Romanian oil production :5.81 millionton, domestic consumption :1.862 million,exports to Germany :1.249,exports to Italy :0.342
It would help if you read what I said more closely or at least responed like you have. I stated that starting in July of 1940 Germany basically controlled all of Rumanian oil exports and quoted Tooze as a source.
for 1941:production :5.577 million,domestic:1.811,exports to Germany:2.885,to Italy:O.761
So in 1941 Italy got 13% of productoin and ~20% of exports. Not a very big percentage is it? But wait there's more to it again according to Tooze on page 411:
Of more immediate concern to the military planners in Berlin were the Italian armed forces, which depended entirely on fuel diverted from Germany and Romania.
It's pretty clear that Germany controled the Romanian exports and Italy only got them if the Germans so designated.
In 1941,the Romanian oil export to Italy was going up by 120 %: had Italy a reason to complain ?
Of course they did. Up until Italy went to war with France and Britain they could by oil on the world market. Afterwards their only source was as stated above Germany (or Rumania via Germany). They had some reserves going into the war but those essentially dissapeard by 41 and what they got from then until they joined the allies was insufficient for their needs much less adequate to build up a reserve.
... Thus,complaining is no proof of shortage .
I also do not see proofs that the KM had not enough oil in 1941:the oil situation did not prevent Rheinübung (Bismarck) and the attacks on the convoys to Archangelsk,the same in 1942:there was enough oil for Cerberus (the return of the capital ships to Germany).
Conclusion :as the operations of the KM were not curtailed/stalled in 1941,one can not say that the KM had not enough oil (after 1941,the situation was changing).What happened was that there were temporary problems,probably caused by refinery problems,but,these problems were quickly solved .
....
If it was just complaining you might have a point. However there was a lot more than just complaining. I suggest you do a bit more research Tooze's Wages of Destruction is a good place to start. Anything going into the operations of the Italian Navy in any detail will add some more to the picture. It is very clear that the Axis powers were short on oil among other things. Also note that synthetic oil was expensive in terms of both cash and coal and again Germany didn't have a surplus of either of those.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 04 Dec 2012 19:03

If we are talking about 1941,I don't see the relevance of july 1940.Besides,it is not so that starting in july 1940,Germany was controlling Romanian export (this happened in 1941,)
For the whole of 1940,Romania produced 5.8 million ,of which 4 million were exported,of which 1.2 million to Germany(30 %) and 340000 to Italy (8 %) and 62 % (2.5 million) to other countries .
In 1941,the production was:5.6 of which 3.7 million was exported,of which 2.8 million to Germany (75%) and 760.000 to Italy (20 %).In 1941,Italy got more than in 1940.
If we look at the figures,we see that in 1940,Germany got 1.25 and Italy 0.34 ,(=4/1),in 1941 2.8 million to 0.76 million (4/1)and in 1942,Italy got more(0.86) and Germany less (1.82 and 0.37 directly to the ostheer =2.2) which is a comparison of 10/4.
And,in 1941,Italy had nothing to complain :with what they got on oil,they were able to supply NA(more oil would not make better the supply situation),and,it is also not so that the Italian surface fleet was remaining idle because of shortage of oil :it was aiding the supply to NA,and EVEN in september 1943(at the Italian capitulation),when the oil situation was very bad,the Italian surface fleet had still oil enough to leave Genua and sail to Malta to surrender.
Thus,the Italian complaints: :roll: the usual Indian tales .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 04 Dec 2012 19:59

About the Italians,it has been PC to say
first :they were no good
than :they got no fuel from the bad Germans,but the following figures are giving an other picture (sourece :Christos military and intelligence corner:Ultra intelligence and Rommel's convoys)
In 1941,the Italians sent 1.O16.000 ton to NA,of which 853000 arrived
In 1942:it was : 824000 of which 779000 arrived.
IMHO,these figures prove 2 things
1)The Italian fleet did reasonably well
2)They got the fuel they could expect to receive
From an other source(The Italian navy in WWII):the Italian Navy started with 1.666.000 ton fuel and received (till september 1943) 1.308.000 ton

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 04 Dec 2012 20:26

ljadw wrote:If we are talking about 1941,I don't see the relevance of july 1940.
When did I restrict things to 41? In any case the supply position at the end of 40 is certainly relevant to that in 41.
ljadw wrote: Besides,it is not so that starting in july 1940,Germany was controlling Romanian export (this happened in 1941,)
Tooze says otherwise. Care to present some sources for your side?
ljadw wrote:For the whole of 1940,Romania produced 5.8 million ,of which 4 million were exported,of which 1.2 million to Germany(30 %) and 340000 to Italy (8 %) and 62 % (2.5 million) to other countries .
Indeed a fair amount was going to France and Britain in the first half of 40. Whether you are talking the whole of the year or just half Italy wasn't getting very much so what's your point.
ljadw wrote: In 1941,the production was:5.6 of which 3.7 million was exported,of which 2.8 million to Germany (75%) and 760.000 to Italy (20 %).In 1941,Italy got more than in 1940.
That's only half the equation though. Italy essentially used up her pre war reserves in 40 and early 41. The oil they did recieve wasn't enough to get them back to their pre war levels i.e. they may have gotten more oil in 41 than in 40 (that's not certain though as we'd have to know how much they got from other sources in 40) but both were insufficient for their needs.
ljadw wrote:If we look at the figures,we see that in 1940,Germany got 1.25 and Italy 0.34 ,(=4/1),in 1941 2.8 million to 0.76 million (4/1)and in 1942,Italy got more(0.86) and Germany less (1.82 and 0.37 directly to the ostheer =2.2) which is a comparison of 10/4.
And,in 1941,Italy had nothing to complain :with what they got on oil,they were able to supply NA(more oil would not make better the supply situation),and,it is also not so that the Italian surface fleet was remaining idle because of shortage of oil :it was aiding the supply to NA,and EVEN in september 1943(at the Italian capitulation),when the oil situation was very bad,the Italian surface fleet had still oil enough to leave Genua and sail to Malta to surrender.
Thus,the Italian complaints: :roll: the usual Indian tales .
Hardly. The Italians kept their battleships in harbor because of the fuel situation and eventuall resulted to pumping bunker oil out of them to supply their smaller vessels. I'd like to see some sources that support your position that more oil wouldn't effect the situation in North Africa as well. Statments like the above especially when you have supplied nothing to support them result in people not taking you very seriously.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 04 Dec 2012 20:43

ljadw wrote:About the Italians,it has been PC to say
first :they were no good
than :they got no fuel from the bad Germans,but the following figures are giving an other picture (sourece :Christos military and intelligence corner:Ultra intelligence and Rommel's convoys)
In 1941,the Italians sent 1.O16.000 ton to NA,of which 853000 arrived
In 1942:it was : 824000 of which 779000 arrived.
IMHO,these figures prove 2 things
1)The Italian fleet did reasonably well
2)They got the fuel they could expect to receive
From an other source(The Italian navy in WWII):the Italian Navy started with 1.666.000 ton fuel and received (till september 1943) 1.308.000 ton
Well let's take a look at some soruces.
First http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... iterranean
As early as March 1941, the overall scarcity of fuel oil was critical. Coal, gasoline and lubricants were also locally hard to find. During the Italian war effort, 75% of all the fuel oil available was used by destroyers and torpedo boats in escorting missions
http://www.reocities.com/CapitolHill/9226/ww2.html
Finally the latest battleship, Roma, was ready to combat but the Italian lack of fuel grew more and more. The British took advantage of this and organized a massive series of convoys the Italians could not intercept with their heavy units because of fuel lack. Malta once again had offensive capability, and failure in taking Malta was now heavily felt. Sending anything in Africa was almost a suicide in that situation, the Italian Navy managed anyway to send in Africa 86% of material and 92% of men.
http://ww2db.com/ship_spec.php?ship_id=151
Roma was commissioned into the Italian Navy in mid-1942, but by then Italy was already showing signs of a fuel shortage, thus this powerful warship remained in port often.
http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/north-afri ... lysis.html
For full operational efficiency the Regia Marina estimated that it needed 200,000 tons of fuel per month
So they started the war with a bit over 8 months supply and recieved another 6.5 months so in total they had ~15 months of supply for a bit under 40 months. Maybe they got what they cuold expect but it certainly wasn't what they needed.

The source above goes on to say:
... When the war began there was sufficient fuel for about nine months of operations. At no time during the war was this reserve maintained and at one point, April 1942, only some 14,000 tons were available, which represented the residue in fuel storage tanks all over Italy.
...
This fuel shortage was due partially to mismanagement on the part of the Italian government, but primarily to a blatant German refusal to supply fuel in the needed quantities. Admiral Weichold, Kriegsmarine Liason Officer with the Regia Marina, repeatedly asked for fuel to be shipped from Germany, and several agreements were worked out.....yet they were rarely kept by the Germans. Thus, during the second quarter of 1941, the Regia Marina revieved barely 38,000 tons of fuel at a time when the pre-war fuel reserve was virtually exhausted. German shipments of fuel to Italy never reached 50% of the agreed upon figures, which were themselves based upon absurd reductions in the minimum operational requirements. At one point, again in April 1941, the limit of 30,000 tons per month (or 15% of optimum) was set, which in effect meant that vessels had to operate with what they had in their tanks and not expect more than minimal resupply!

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 04 Dec 2012 22:49

Following Christos (who is posting on AHF in the intelligence section),in 1941,234000 ton fuel was sent to NA,in 1942,317000 ton .
That 75 % of the fuel was spent in escorting missions,is something the Germans were not responsible for (neither the Italians).It also would have changed nothing if less was spent on escorting missions.
If Roma had been able to spend more time on sea,so what :it would have been sunk,very quickly .
I am not willing to reopen the whole discussion about the logistics of the AK,which had been discussed ad nauseam,but the conclusion of this discussion is that nothing would have changed if more supplies (i.c; fuel) would have arrived in NA,because it would have remained in the harbors :the logistic system was not able to transport more supplies (i.c. fuel) to the front.
I will ignore your snaping remarks about sources,because ,using Italian complaints about supplies,as sources,results in people not taking you seriously .
Other points :if in 1940,only 30 % of the Romanian export was going to Germany,one can not say that from july on,Germany was controlling the Romanian oil export .
:in 1940 :German oil production was:6.88 million,consumption was :5.86 (3 million for the WM)
:in 1941:8.46 production against 7.3 million consumption (WM:4.56)
:in 1942:8.96 production against 6.48 consumption(4.4 for the WM)
Source : Dietrich Eichholtz,a well-known German economist
You remain free to continue to claim that the surplus of production against consumption in 1940,1941,1942 proves that in 1940,1941,1942,there was a shortage of oil .
After all,it is a free world .
Last edited by ljadw on 04 Dec 2012 23:17, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by LWD » 04 Dec 2012 23:12

ljadw wrote:... If Roma had been able to spend more time on sea,so what :it would have been sunk,very quickly .
Which may or may not be accurate. Certainly the Italians didn't loose many BBs at sea did they? In any case it's not very relevant to the topic at hand.
...Other points :if in 1940,only 30 % of the Romanian export was going to Germany,one can not say that from july on,Germany was controlling the Romanian oil export .
But of coursse one can. Depending on the situation it can even be accurate which I believe it is in this case.
:in 1940 :German oil production was:6.88 million,consumption was :5.86 (3 million for the WM)
:in 1941:8.46 production against 7.3 million consumption (WM:4.56)
:in 1942:8.96 production against 6.48 consumption(4.4 for the WM)
Source :Dietrich Eichholtz,a well-known German economist
You remain free to continue to claim that the surplus of production against consumption in 1940,1941,1942 proves that in 1940,1941,1942,there was a shortage of oil .
After all,it is a free world .
And does this include oil sent to Italy, France, Denmark, etc? By the way listing an indivual as a source is hardly considered adequate sourcing by the standards of this board. If it's published data then where it is published should be mentioned. One of the reasons is so others can see the context. In any case such numbers must be balanced against other information for instance again quoteing from Wages of Destruction page 412.
So tight were fuel rations that in November of 1941 Opel was forced to shut down production at its Brandenburg plant, Germany's largest truck factory, because it lacked the petrol necessary to check the fuel pumps of vehicles coming off the assembly line.
So yes it does indeed look like Germany was short on fuel.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11689
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: At what point did Germany lose WW2?

Post by ljadw » 05 Dec 2012 09:18

About the Roma :if it is not very relevant,why using it in the discussion ?
And,again :if there was enough fuel for the Roma to leave Genua and go to Malta in september 1943,there would be fuel for the Roma to go on combat mission after she was commissioned in the summer of 1942.The reason that she was not doing this,is,IMHO,that some one at the naval staf took the intelligent decision that there was no need for the Roma to leave the harbor :no one needed the Roma to escort a convoy .
I have Tooze,and I disagree with his conclusion :that the temporarily closing of the truck factory was due to a shortage of fuel.Tooze is contradicting himself,because,he writes on the same page :wink: that the factory got an allocation of 102 cubic metres from the WWA.Thus,if these could spare 102 cubic metres,that's indicating that there was no shortage .
Whatever:both exemples(the Roma and the truck factory) are isolated ,out of context exemples:there is no proof that in both cases,it was a shortage of fuel,it could be :transport problems,refinery problems,or,other priorities.
If the Axis could send 7.6 million ton of supplies to NA(source: :wink: :wink: forum of the DAK:Versorgungsconvoys),of which 91.88 arrived (implying a big commitment of navy and air force),if the KM could undertake Rheinübung(no oil shortage for the Bismarck :idea: ) and Cerberus,it is wrong to say that there was a shortage of oil.
Of course,if one can prove that millions of tons of supplies never left Italy because there was no fuel to transport them to NA,or that the KM could not attack the Northern convoys ,because shortage of oil,I would reconsider my position .

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”