Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3546
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#16

Post by T. A. Gardner » 28 Nov 2021, 17:30

It probably would have made sense to do this for the Germans. Spend the time straightening out their lines and improving their defensive posture with an eye to being able to conduct serious but local counterattacks to keep the Soviets from making a breakthrough. Given how the Red Army did at Kursk, their losses against a far more prepared German line backed by reasonably well-equipped mobile forces might have caused a stalemate into 1944 much deeper in Russia.

Sure, eventually the Russians are going to gain the forces necessary to make a crushing breakthrough like Bagration, but until then the Germans would be in a better position than they were with the collapse of their offensive at Kursk.

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

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#17

Post by stg 44 » 28 Nov 2021, 18:53

T. A. Gardner wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 17:30
Sure, eventually the Russians are going to gain the forces necessary to make a crushing breakthrough like Bagration, but until then the Germans would be in a better position than they were with the collapse of their offensive at Kursk.
Given how much they relied on manpower conscripted from liberated territories I don't think this is a given if there is a stalemate as a result of this POD.


ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#18

Post by ljadw » 28 Nov 2021, 19:14

T. A. Gardner wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 17:30
It probably would have made sense to do this for the Germans. Spend the time straightening out their lines and improving their defensive posture with an eye to being able to conduct serious but local counterattacks to keep the Soviets from making a breakthrough. Given how the Red Army did at Kursk, their losses against a far more prepared German line backed by reasonably well-equipped mobile forces might have caused a stalemate into 1944 much deeper in Russia.

Sure, eventually the Russians are going to gain the forces necessary to make a crushing breakthrough like Bagration, but until then the Germans would be in a better position than they were with the collapse of their offensive at Kursk.
If Citadel was cancelled in late June, what would happen with the Citadel divisions ?
If they remained in the East, they would be needed to stop Kutuzov, but meanwhile The Soviets would advance in the South to Romania .
If they left the East, who would stop Kutuzov ?

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

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#19

Post by stg 44 » 28 Nov 2021, 20:14

ljadw wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 19:14
If Citadel was cancelled in late June, what would happen with the Citadel divisions ?
If they remained in the East, they would be needed to stop Kutuzov, but meanwhile The Soviets would advance in the South to Romania .
If they left the East, who would stop Kutuzov ?
Divisions stay where they are preparing to counterpunch the Soviet offensives that everyone knew were coming. 2nd/9th armies had plenty in their sector to defend Orel while Manstein's forces were plenty to defend Ukraine.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3546
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#20

Post by T. A. Gardner » 28 Nov 2021, 22:29

stg 44 wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 18:53
T. A. Gardner wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 17:30
Sure, eventually the Russians are going to gain the forces necessary to make a crushing breakthrough like Bagration, but until then the Germans would be in a better position than they were with the collapse of their offensive at Kursk.
Given how much they relied on manpower conscripted from liberated territories I don't think this is a given if there is a stalemate as a result of this POD.
I thought about that earlier too. That could be a big problem by 1944 in the Red Army is stuck in place and has suffered heavy casualties trying to gain ground.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#21

Post by ljadw » 29 Nov 2021, 07:55

stg 44 wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 20:14
ljadw wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 19:14
If Citadel was cancelled in late June, what would happen with the Citadel divisions ?
If they remained in the East, they would be needed to stop Kutuzov, but meanwhile The Soviets would advance in the South to Romania .
If they left the East, who would stop Kutuzov ?
Divisions stay where they are preparing to counterpunch the Soviet offensives that everyone knew were coming. 2nd/9th armies had plenty in their sector to defend Orel while Manstein's forces were plenty to defend Ukraine.
Manstein's forces were unable to defend Ukraine .
And, without the strategic reserves,the average East Front division could not stop a Soviet attack.
Already before Citadel,the Soviets were attacking,successfully .From Leningrad to the Black sea the Germans were retreating .And every month the Germans became weaker and the Soviets stronger .Look at the situation immediately before Bagration .

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#22

Post by KDF33 » 29 Nov 2021, 08:38

ljadw wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 07:55
Already before Citadel,the Soviets were attacking,successfully .From Leningrad to the Black sea the Germans were retreating .And every month the Germans became weaker and the Soviets stronger .
This is incorrect. During the period of Soviet offensive operations (11/42 - 3/43), the RKKA was weakening in relation to the Ostheer. This is largely why the Soviets suffered reverses in February / March 1943.

The Soviets grew relatively stronger in the later April - June period, largely on account of the sporadic fighting and, therefore, of the low casualties they suffered.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#23

Post by Cult Icon » 29 Nov 2021, 08:40

stg 44 wrote:
28 Nov 2021, 20:14

Divisions stay where they are preparing to counterpunch the Soviet offensives that everyone knew were coming. 2nd/9th armies had plenty in their sector to defend Orel while Manstein's forces were plenty to defend Ukraine.
The result of the Mius Front battle (strong German defense vs strong Soviet offense) is a model of something that would more often occur.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#24

Post by Cult Icon » 29 Nov 2021, 09:06

Citadel was cost inefficient in the North but rather "profitable" in the South if you only look at the personnell losses inflicted on the Soviets. It was something like 1 German for 1.5 Soviet in the North and 1 German for 4.5 Soviet in the South. It was so costly in the North that I doubt that it can be considered a worthwhile fixing attack.

It was also costly in ammunition, air support, fuel, and spare parts. The air attacks were concentrated on the forward edges of the defenses, and in the breakthrough areas. I imagine that the same air support would be more profitably expended on attacking Soviet forces that weren't so well dug-in and protected by minefields.

The same thing with the artillery support. Without a Citadel something like a replay of Kharkov II could have been possible, a large encirclement with hundreds of thousands of prisoners.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#25

Post by Cult Icon » 29 Nov 2021, 09:35

The air support expended at the 2nd Battle of Kharkov was over 7,000 tons of bombs dropped.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#26

Post by ljadw » 29 Nov 2021, 13:45

KDF33 wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 08:38
ljadw wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 07:55
Already before Citadel,the Soviets were attacking,successfully .From Leningrad to the Black sea the Germans were retreating .And every month the Germans became weaker and the Soviets stronger .
This is incorrect. During the period of Soviet offensive operations (11/42 - 3/43), the RKKA was weakening in relation to the Ostheer. This is largely why the Soviets suffered reverses in February / March 1943.

The Soviets grew relatively stronger in the later April - June period, largely on account of the sporadic fighting and, therefore, of the low casualties they suffered.
The encirclement of Leningrad was broken in January 1943.
And the small Soviet reverses in February/March 1943 were not caused by a decrease of the RKKA .
What a lot of people fail to understand is that
1 loss ratios are irrelevant
2 that total strength comparisons are also meaningless .
Why ?
Because the attacker needs to have superiority only where he attacks,while the defender needs to be strong everywhere .
The Germans were in the situation of the French in May 1940 : they had to defend a long front line with insufficient forces,while the Soviets were in the position of the Germans of May 1940 : they could chose the point of attack .
While 6th Army tried to conquer Stalingrad,the Soviets attacked AGC and the losses of AGC were bigger than those of 6th Army before the encirclement .
On 1 November 1942 the strength of the Soviet operational forces (without Stavka reserves ) was 6,6 million men with 7567 tanks,artillery 45000 (without mortars ) and 11610 aircraft.
On 1 July 1943 it was 6,6 million men,10321 tanks,artillery 61000 and 16657 aircraft .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15589
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#27

Post by ljadw » 29 Nov 2021, 13:50

Cult Icon wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 09:06
Citadel was cost inefficient in the North but rather "profitable" in the South if you only look at the personnell losses inflicted on the Soviets. It was something like 1 German for 1.5 Soviet in the North and 1 German for 4.5 Soviet in the South. It was so costly in the North that I doubt that it can be considered a worthwhile fixing attack.

It was also costly in ammunition, air support, fuel, and spare parts. The air attacks were concentrated on the forward edges of the defenses, and in the breakthrough areas. I imagine that the same air support would be more profitably expended on attacking Soviet forces that weren't so well dug-in and protected by minefields.

The same thing with the artillery support. Without a Citadel something like a replay of Kharkov II could have been possible, a large encirclement with hundreds of thousands of prisoners.
These personnel losses are meaningless : it was Manstein who had to retreat to the Romanian border, Kluge did not retreat to Poland .
Citadel failed in July because the Soviets were too strong, it would have failed also earlier,because before July the Germans were to weak .

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

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#28

Post by stg 44 » 29 Nov 2021, 16:34

Cult Icon wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 09:06
Citadel was cost inefficient in the North but rather "profitable" in the South if you only look at the personnell losses inflicted on the Soviets. It was something like 1 German for 1.5 Soviet in the North and 1 German for 4.5 Soviet in the South. It was so costly in the North that I doubt that it can be considered a worthwhile fixing attack.
Boris Sokolov, confirmed by Toppel and others, including the authors of the GSWW series, has found evidence that the Soviets hid a lot of their losses in official reports during Citadel and official stats undercount Soviet losses by at least 25%.

Otherwise I agree with the rest of what you said.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#29

Post by Cult Icon » 29 Nov 2021, 16:40

stg 44 wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 16:34
Boris Sokolov, confirmed by Toppel and others, including the authors of the GSWW series, has found evidence that the Soviets hid a lot of their losses in official reports during Citadel and official stats undercount Soviet losses by at least 25%.

Otherwise I agree with the rest of what you said.
The details of that I don't know (to what extent there is an undercount). Obviously the most famous on is the 5th Guards Tank Army hoax at Kursk.

The losses of the 9th Army were high and effected how well Model could defend the Orel Salient. They were higher than those of 4th Panzer Army and A.A Kempf, and fell on divisions that began the attack understrength anyway.
Last edited by Cult Icon on 29 Nov 2021, 16:42, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

#30

Post by stg 44 » 29 Nov 2021, 16:40

ljadw wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 07:55
Manstein's forces were unable to defend Ukraine .
Historically no because they were worn out from Citadel and were not in their pre-Citadel defensive positions when the Soviets launched their counter offensives. At Belgorod the worn out infantry left without armor support were in scratch trenches well forward of their pre-offensive heavy defensive positions, as Hitler wanted to hold some of the ground taken in the Citadel offensive; that meant the Soviets were able to roll over them quite easily once they rebuilt.
ljadw wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 07:55
And, without the strategic reserves,the average East Front division could not stop a Soviet attack.
If you're only fixated on individual divisions rather than the entire capabilities of army groups backed by air support no wonder you're not understanding how the war actually was fought.
ljadw wrote:
29 Nov 2021, 07:55
Already before Citadel,the Soviets were attacking,successfully .From Leningrad to the Black sea the Germans were retreating .And every month the Germans became weaker and the Soviets stronger .Look at the situation immediately before Bagration .
The front was largely quiet April 1943 to July after the Soviet defeat in 3rd Kharkov. Both sides were preparing for the massive campaigns of summer 1943. The Soviets were not advancing much around Leningrad and the Germans weren't retreating from March 1943 until September 1943 in Ukraine. Bagration was nearly 12 months after Citadel by the way. Your internal conception of the timeline of events seems to be extremely skewed.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”