At what point did Germany lose WW2?

[Aida1]

Total war economy was activated in September 1939

You need to provide sources for that.

[Aida1]

Definitely the day that Germany and Italy declared war on the United States, which they did not have to do. Even though a pact was signed with Japan, the Japanese acted unilaterally in their attack on US, British, and Dutch forces in the Pacific. Hitler could have balked at committing Germany to war against the US, and this would have been generally viewed as perfectly justified.
Without the increased logistical support provided, and military entrance into Europe of the US, Germany would have prevailed, even with it's two-front war. The Soviets would have collapsed first, and then Britain would've exited the war from sheer exhaustion of men and materiel.

Too reliant on the biggest tank; lots of PZKW IV and V would have been better that a handful of Tigers; V weapons were a total waste of resources

The Tiger tank was very useful on the front so it justified the resources used to produce it.

[ljadw]

Definitely the day that Germany and Italy declared war on the United States, which they did not have to do. Even though a pact was signed with Japan, the Japanese acted unilaterally in their attack on US, British, and Dutch forces in the Pacific. Hitler could have balked at committing Germany to war against the US, and this would have been generally viewed as perfectly justified.
Without the increased logistical support provided, and military entrance into Europe of the US, Germany would have prevailed, even with it's two-front war. The Soviets would have collapsed first, and then Britain would've exited the war from sheer exhaustion of men and materiel.

Too reliant on the biggest tank; lots of PZKW IV and V would have been better that a handful of Tigers; V weapons were a total waste of resources

The Tiger tank was very useful on the front

The old myth of quality defeating quantity .

[ljadw]

Total war economy was activated in September 1939

You need to provide sources for that.

Mobilizationn for total war in Germany by Overy
''In July 1941,general Thomas said that 68 per cent of industrial labour worked on direct war contracts .''
That the total war mobilization started only after Stalingrad is a post war invention from people as Klein, Milward, Kaldor ,Galbraith .

[Aida1]

Definitely the day that Germany and Italy declared war on the United States, which they did not have to do. Even though a pact was signed with Japan, the Japanese acted unilaterally in their attack on US, British, and Dutch forces in the Pacific. Hitler could have balked at committing Germany to war against the US, and this would have been generally viewed as perfectly justified.
Without the increased logistical support provided, and military entrance into Europe of the US, Germany would have prevailed, even with it's two-front war. The Soviets would have collapsed first, and then Britain would've exited the war from sheer exhaustion of men and materiel.

Too reliant on the biggest tank; lots of PZKW IV and V would have been better that a handful of Tigers; V weapons were a total waste of resources

The Tiger tank was very useful on the front

The old myth of quality defeating quantity .

Not a myth at all. The Tiger became very important on the eastern front.

[Aida1]

Total war economy was activated in September 1939

You need to provide sources for that.

Mobilizationn for total war in Germany by Overy
''In July 1941,general Thomas said that 68 per cent of industrial labour worked on direct war contracts .''
That the total war mobilization started only after Stalingrad is a post war invention from people as Klein, Milward, Kaldor ,Galbraith .

It certainly became far more efficient under Speer who succeeded in making prduction much higher.

[ljadw]

Speer was continuing the work of Todt .And the production would also be higher if Todt was not killed in an air accident and remained armament minister .

[ljadw]

Definitely the day that Germany and Italy declared war on the United States, which they did not have to do. Even though a pact was signed with Japan, the Japanese acted unilaterally in their attack on US, British, and Dutch forces in the Pacific. Hitler could have balked at committing Germany to war against the US, and this would have been generally viewed as perfectly justified.
Without the increased logistical support provided, and military entrance into Europe of the US, Germany would have prevailed, even with it's two-front war. The Soviets would have collapsed first, and then Britain would've exited the war from sheer exhaustion of men and materiel.

Too reliant on the biggest tank; lots of PZKW IV and V would have been better that a handful of Tigers; V weapons were a total waste of resources

The Tiger tank was very useful on the front

The old myth of quality defeating quantity .

Not a myth at all. The Tiger became very important on the eastern front.

What Fletcher 101 said = that Pz4 and PZ5 were more important than Tigers is questionable,as there is no proof that without Tigers Germany would have done better ,but the opposite = more Tigers and less PZ4/5 is also unproved .There is no proof that without Tigers the eastern front would have collapsed before Bagration .
The big question is if after Stalingrad (when Germany was now in a defensive position ) Germany needed more or heavier tanks and if motorized and armoured artillery was not better, if PZJäger were not better than Panzer.
Given the low positive results from tank commitments and the fact that 100 tanks (Tiger or others ) needed more support from infantry and artillery than 100 tank destroyers,one can ask the question if it was not better to stop the tank production and to switch to the production of tank destroyers which consumed less raw materials or to do the opposite :only tanks and no tank destroyers .
To produce both was a luxury Germany could not afford after Stalingrad .
The same question remains still valide : see the war in Ukraine .

[ljadw]

About the German total war mobilisation , a good source is :
No Room for Miracles:German industrial output in WW2 reassessed ,by Adam Tooze .

[Aida1]

Speer was continuing the work of Todt .And the production would also be higher if Todt was not killed in an air accident and remained armament minister .

Your opinion ,nothing more.

[Aida1]

Too reliant on the biggest tank; lots of PZKW IV and V would have been better that a handful of Tigers; V weapons were a total waste of resources

The Tiger tank was very useful on the front

The old myth of quality defeating quantity .

Not a myth at all. The Tiger became very important on the eastern front.

What Fletcher 101 said = that Pz4 and PZ5 were more important than Tigers is questionable,as there is no proof that without Tigers Germany would have done better ,but the opposite = more Tigers and less PZ4/5 is also unproved .There is no proof that without Tigers the eastern front would have collapsed before Bagration .
The big question is if after Stalingrad (when Germany was now in a defensive position ) Germany needed more or heavier tanks and if motorized and armoured artillery was not better, if PZJäger were not better than Panzer.
Given the low positive results from tank commitments and the fact that 100 tanks (Tiger or others ) needed more support from infantry and artillery than 100 tank destroyers,one can ask the question if it was not better to stop the tank production and to switch to the production of tank destroyers which consumed less raw materials or to do the opposite :only tanks and no tank destroyers .
To produce both was a luxury Germany could not afford after Stalingrad .
The same question remains still valide : see the war in Ukraine .

Does not show much insight as being purely passive, is a recipe for defeat. Even in a defensive phase, you still need tanks.

[ljadw]

Speer was continuing the work of Todt .And the production would also be higher if Todt was not killed in an air accident and remained armament minister .

Your opinion ,nothing more.

It is the opinion of Tooze and Scherner .
During 40 years Anglo-Saxon historians willingly and even enthusiastically believed the inventions from Speer and from Wagenfuhr, who worked for Speer .
Hans Kehrl,chef of the Planungamt in Speer's department ,said in 19444 that since 1942 there was still no amelioration of efficiency in the armaments industry and that 15 % of the workers (750000 ) produced only scrap.

[Yuri]

Thirdly, In the last month, I've been working on digitized German documents regarding Eisenbahn, which can be read at wwii.germandocsinrussia.com. I found in them daily reports with recorded numbers of trains (Versorgungszüge) arriving at the supply base of Army Group Center Minsk-Molodechno. Definitely many more than "only 5-6 trains" were arriving during this period. To be precise,

1) from July 13 to July 31 on average (counting only Heer supply trains!) 12,63 trains were arriving daily in Minsk-Molodechno base;
2) from August 1 to August 16 on average 22,13 trains were arriving daily;
3) from August 17 to August 22 on average 25,33 trains were arriving daily;
4) from August 23 to September 4 on average 29,92 trains were arriving daily;
5) from September 5 to September 19 on average 31,87 trains were arriving daily.

Excellent work! I wish we could have found that level of detail for the Ardennes when we did the ACSDB but it was only fragmentary.

This data may be misleading. When using this data for any conclusions, it is necessary to take into account several important circumstances.
I will now indicate only two of these circumstances.
1. Minsk and Molodechno are located on the same meridian (Molodechno is slightly west of Minsk).
The distance from the original meridian of Barbarossa (Brest) to Minsk is 300 km.
The Wehrmacht supply bases were very close to the starting point at the time of the start of Barbarossa.
The meridian from which the Typhoon was to begin, that is, the march to Moscow, is located east of Smolensk.
Thus, from the Minsk-Molodechno bases to the meridian from which the Typhoon was to start, about 350 km. Consequently, the troops involved in the campaign to Moskow could not feed directly from the Minsk-Molodechno bases.
In order for the supplies that arrived at the Minsk-Molodechno base to be used in combat operations, they must be moved to the east for at least another 300 km. Moving supplies to the base in Minsk-Molozhechno did not solve the problem of supplying troops even by 50%.
2. The rapid conversion of the railway line from Russian to European gauge on the Brest-Minsk section was envisaged in the Barbarossa plan. The speed of re-stitching is 20 km per day, that is, from Brest to Minsk in 15-20 days or from June 22 to July 5-10, 1941. For this purpose, materials, equipment and human resources were created.
In particular, it was envisaged to involve not only the railway units of the Wehrmacht, but also the battalions of the Todt Organization, RAD's battalions and Polish construction organizations from the General Government.
The re-laying of the railway from Minsk to Smolensk could not be carried out at the same speed both due to the lack of necessary supplies and due to the need to use all types of rear units of the Wehrmacht incl. LW's units (security, convoy, road, bridge builders, railway, communications, etc., etc.), police and SS units, OT's and RAD's battalions to fight against the Red Army units, which, being surrounded, tried to go east (see the feldmarschall v. Bock's Diary).
In July-August 1941, the fighting took place not only on the front line, but on the territory up to 400 km in the rear. In July-August 1941, the rear units of the Wehrmacht, the police and SS battalions, OT's and RAD's battalions suffered the greatest losses in the entire war. To the Heer's losses in the amount of 7,000 people per day in August 1941, it is necessary to add at least 2,000 losses per day from the above-mentioned rear units of the Wehrmacht and non-Wehrmacht.

[Aida1]

Speer was continuing the work of Todt .And the production would also be higher if Todt was not killed in an air accident and remained armament minister .

Your opinion ,nothing more.

It is the opinion of Tooze and Scherner .
During 40 years Anglo-Saxon historians willingly and even enthusiastically believed the inventions from Speer and from Wagenfuhr, who worked for Speer .
Hans Kehrl,chef of the Planungamt in Speer's department ,said in 19444 that since 1942 there was still no amelioration of efficiency in the armaments industry and that 15 % of the workers (750000 ) produced only scrap.

Speer is another one you seem to hate.

[Art]

I found in them daily reports with recorded numbers of trains (Versorgungszüge) arriving at the supply base of Army Group Center Minsk-Molodechno

Can you provide link to specific folders or pages whith this information?