Shattered Citadel: A worse Greman Defeat at Kursk

Gela 11 July 1943

The Hermann Goering Division, weathering a storm of Allied naval gunfire and bitter resistence by US 1st Division smashed its way through the American bridgehead on Sicily leaving Montgomery's 8h Army in its' Eastern Sicillian bridgehead as the olly viable Allied lodgement on the island. Over the coming weeks the Allies were faced with a slow, bitterly contested and costly advance over the Cantania Plan.

The impact of the Hermann Goering Division's victory wuld have a critical impact far away in Russia around the Kursk salient.

Prokhorovka Kursk Salient 12July 1943

Throughout the day Romistrv's 5th Guard Tank Army had counter attacked 2nd SS Panzer Corp's positions near the town Russian tank losses had been huge. Hundreds of destroyed T-34s, later counted by the Germans and estimated at 400 tanks littered the battlefield. Rotmistrov's army had immolated itself in a desperate attempt to halt the German advance. Thwe question now was whether the Wehrmacht would continue the Operration Citadel in the southern sector despite the failure of the northern thrust at Ponyri and whether the Red Army could get the reserves it was moving up into postion with decisive effect.

The next few days wuld be crucial. both in terms of the outcome of the battle for he Kursk Salient and for the outcome of the war in Europe as a whole.

Let me guess: the Mius defence line collapses and the Southern Front gets loose in the Germans deep rear, leading to an encirclement of the bulk of Manstein's armor.

ObssesedNuker said:

Let me guess: the Mius defence line collapses and the Southern Gtony gets loose in the Germans deep rear, leading to an encirclement of the bulk of Manstein's armor.

Click to expand...

Wait and see. But the Mius line will play a role. However I have just been setting up the scene for the real POD at the Rastenburg Conference on 13 JKuly.For now I will say that Operation Roland will be taking a more important role in TTL and 2nd SS PanzerKorps will continue to take an imprtant role at Kursk instead of beig transferred to the Mius River. Liebstandate will not be going to Italy either,,,

Howeever, as the title suggests this will bring about a German disaster

13 July The Wolf's Lair Rastenburg

Late on the evening of 12 July von Mnstein and von Kluge had recieved a summons to meet urgently with their Fuhrer at the Wolfschanze, Now two of the Fuhrer's aides escorted he two generals into their meeting with Hitler. At this time nobdy could guess that this meeting would decide the very outcome of the war.

Hitler began the meeting with a lecture on how the Allied invasion of Sicily posed a dire threat to he Italian mainland and how "politically reliable" German divisions were required o deal with he hreat. Manstein however argued that the successful counterattack at Gela by the Hermann Goering Division had destroyed he US bridgehead and that he available German and Italian forces could delay the British and Americans for weeks through strong dellaying actions and that, therefore, they did not need reinforcements at his tme.

Manstein made his case for the continuation of Citadel for the time being. Although the northern offensive was a clear failure there had been considerable success in the south, most recently the previous day's decimation of 5th Gaurds Tank army at Prokhorovka. Manstein believed that, if he were allowed to keep II SS Panzer Corps he Wehrmacht would be capable of continuing the advance on Kursk with III Panzer Corpsin support. They would of course require the support of VIII Air Corps despite von Kluge's appeals for greater air support, A succesful German drive to Kursk and the fall of the city would likely result in a significant destruction ofSoviet forces and at least an important symbolic victory for Germany. ZArmy Group Centre, with the support of army Group South might then complete the destruction of th Kursk Salient as originally planned

Surprisigly Hitler agreed to Manstein;s plan and gave orders for Operation Roland to proceed. Rather than being the limited line straightening exercise that would now only be the sart. he first stage would be the consolidation of German positions but this would be to secure the jummp off positions for attacks to cross the River Psel before driving on to Kursk itself. In the north Kluge was ordered to prepare a renewed offensive to tie down Red Army forces in his sector

However, as the Fuhrer observed Soviet offensives against th southern wing and center of Army Group South were o be expected at some poin in thecoming next few days or weeks. For now however the situation on German 6th Army's front, althugh still dangerous appeared to be stable enough. Manstein would however have to keep a careful watch developments on that sector while proceedng with Operation Roland.

13th - 14July Kursk Salient

Von Kluge returned to his headquarters to find his command under continued heavy pressure around Orel thanks to the Red Army offensive commenced the previous day. With Army Group Centre's situation as it was von Manstein would have to do withouit the promised supporting offensive in the Ponyri sector.

On the Army Grroup South sector the day was spent in preparing the jump off positions for Operation Roland. III Panzer Corps' 7th and 19th Panzer Divisions mounted successful assaults from their Rydinka bridgehead and drove north and northwest to link up with II SS Panzer Corps despite several intense Soviet counterattacks. Meanwhile II SS Panzer Corps stormed Ivanovka and drove 5th Guard Tank army back from its' defensive positions around Prokhorovka,

Despite intense fighting and a severe thunderstorm on the afternoon of the 14th the situation was ripe for a strong, renewed offensive by he panzer spearheads of II SS PanzerKorps and III Panzer Corps. True, the rain had caused ground conditions to deteriorate but this was littlle worse than the conditions encountered and succesfully overcome earlier in Operation Citadel. Manstein had some concerns about the situation in Army Group Centre but, with the promised intensive support from the Luftwaffe that was nothing that the Wehrmacht and elite SS divisons could not overcome. The shortage of infantry divisions to hold an extending right flank might be a serious problem if the Soviets launched another counter attack likwe that at Prokhorovka on 12 July or perhaps something larger. Manstein would need to keep a careful watch on his vulnerable flanks over the next few days given that his mobile reserves were heavily committed to Operation Roland.

Not enough timelines about the death of the fascist beast. I'll be following.

Depending on the way WW2 ends following bigger German defeats at Kursk, 4th Kharkov and in Southern Ukraine there could be some nteresting long term political impacts in Central/Eastern Europe. Suppossing in TTL an early peace spares most of Eastern Europe from Soviet invasion and Germany remains intacct. we will likely still get the Cold War but probably with a larger NATO ad no Warsaw Pact or a much smaller one.

lucaswillen05 said:

Depending on the way WW2 ends following bigger German defeats at Kursk, 4th Kharkov and in Southern Ukraine there could be some nteresting long term political impacts in Central/Eastern Europe. Suppossing in TTL an early peace spares most of Eastern Europe from Soviet invasion and Germany remains intacct. we will likely still get the Cold War but probably with a larger NATO ad no Warsaw Pact or a much smaller one.

Click to expand...

Or more of Europe is Red and a bigger Warsaw pact.

lucaswillen05 said:

Suppossing in TTL an early peace spares most of Eastern Europe from Soviet invasion and Germany remains intacct. we will likely still get the Cold War but probably with a larger NATO ad no Warsaw Pact or a much smaller one.

Click to expand...

Why would there be an earlier peace? Isn't the more likely outcome that more of Germany goes red?

Faeelin said:

Why would there be an earlier peace? Isn't the more likely outcome that more of Germany goes red?

Click to expand...

Depens o whether there is a succesful German general's coup or not. I may find a role for Klaus von Stauffenburg, Friederich Olbricht and Axel von dem Bussche-Streithorst (what a name!) Interesingly the latter really did plot to assasssinate Hitler at the Wolfschanze on 16 November 1943. However, depending on how eventss develop I may need to change the date of the plot's intended implementatio.

Things will then depend on whether the assassination succeeds and he Nazis are overthrown or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axel_von_dem_Bussche

If the coup works and the new German government sues for peace Germay would most likely remain intact but would have to pull out of all occupied territory and submit to Versailles stle peace terms.

If the plot fails then something like OTL is probabl;e but a year or two earlier.

Personally I feel a successful Generals' coup ending might be the more interesting one.

lucaswillen05 said:

If the coup works and the new German government sues for peace Germay would most likely remain intact but would have to pull out of all occupied territory and submit to Versailles stle peace terms.

Click to expand...

Not gonna happen. All of the Allies have already committed themselves to Unconditional Surrender here. By this point, that is the only peace deal the Germans are going to get. The Allies are determined that there will be no "Versaille 2.0" that leads (in their perception) to Germany launching another war down the road. The peace "negotiations" will likely go as follows:

Germans: "Okay, the Fuhrer is gone. How about peace?"
Allies: "Okay, peace. Surrender unconditionally and there will be peace."
Germanss: "WHAT?! You can't be serious, a surrender without conditions? What madness is this?"
Allies: "The kind of madness you get for repetitively violating treaty after treaty with all those you sign and launch multiple wars of aggression."
Germans: "Nein! We could never-"
Allies: "Then we have nothing further to talk about here. We'll meet again when one of us takes Berlin or you agree to accept unconditional surrender, whichever comes first."

Now if the German generals do up-and-accept unconditional surrender, then the fate of the German territories will likely be settled via a Allied conference. All non-German territories will be settled by whoever's army manages to get there first. If the German's still reject unconditional surrender all the way until the end... well, see IOTL.

More Germans killed means less Germans to destroy the western Soviet Union and means a stronger USSR for the Cold-War? Perhaps the Soviets would be in a position to stand up to Kennedy in the Cuban Missile crisis?

ObssesedNuker said:

Not gonna happen. All of the Allies have already committed themselves to Unconditional Surrender here. By this point, that is the only peace deal the Germans are going to get. The Allies are determined that there will be no "Versaille 2.0" that leads (in their perception) to Germany launching another war down the road. The peace "negotiations" will likely go as follows:

Germans: "Okay, the Fuhrer is gone. How about peace?"
Allies: "Okay, peace. Surrender unconditionally and there will be peace."
Germanss: "WHAT?! You can't be serious, a surrender without conditions? What madness is this?"
Allies: "The kind of madness you get for repetitively violating treaty after treaty with all those you sign and launch multiple wars of aggression."
Germans: "Nein! We could never-"
Allies: "Then we have nothing further to talk about here. We'll meet again when one of us takes Berlin or you agree to accept unconditional surrender, whichever comes first."

Now if the German generals do up-and-accept unconditional surrender, then the fate of the German territories will likely be settled via a Allied conference. All non-German territories will be settled by whoever's army manages to get there first. If the German's still reject unconditional surrender all the way until the end... well, see IOTL.

Click to expand...

Even after the Casablanca Conference January 1943 there were divisions among he Allies about the doctrine of unconditional surrender. Churchill may not have been in full agreement.

If a generals' coup does work and they sue for peace the Allies may modify their terms smewhat. Peace terms will still be harsh. Certainly Geremany will have to withdraw to the borders prior to the Anschluss, pay heavy war reparations, hand over surviving Nazi leaders for trial and accept strict limits to their armed forces. There may also be some frm of Alliedoccupation. There may be some concessions over occupation and war reparations but the rest will likely be insisted upon. Allied terms in this scenario might not quite ammount to unconditional surrender but peace terms will be harsh.

However, all the above is mootfor the time being until a time comes where the Nazis have fallen and a new German government seeks terms. I suggest that we hld off on this discussion until that point when we will know the military and political situation

RalofTyr said:

More Germans killed means less Germans to destroy the western Soviet Union and means a stronger USSR for the Cold-War? Perhaps the Soviets would be in a position to stand up to Kennedy in the Cuban Missile crisis?

Click to expand...

Western USSR will be rather less devestated han t was although the Ukranian Independece Army will remain a big problem for Moscow, probably well into the 1950s. A Cold War is still likely to happen but perhhaps for differen reasos. And the geopoltics will differ as well.

Again, while interesting to speculate on these matters doing so hiders the development of the timelie which eeds to concetrate o the 1943 Summer Campaign in Russia ad events in the Western Europea theartre, certanly in Sicily and Italy, perhaps in France as well.

It is for example possible that the Allies could do Operaion Roudup at some poit,possibly also invadigSouthern France instead of invading Italy. In this case a small landing i Italy might take place to assist an overthrow of Mussolini which can still occur in TTL.

With the changes I am likely going to have on the Russian Front a situation where there is some form of German military collapse and an exploitation of this by German generals plotting an anti Nazi coup the end of WW2 in Europe may well be very different from OTL.

Please wait unil I develop the timeline to this point. I need to be concentratin on the military developments on the Eastern Front and the planning of the coup attempt before the time is ripe to develop the above further.

Cross Channel Operations

By the time the Western Allies are in Sicily in July '43 it's already too late for a proper cross-channel invasion that year. By the point everything else needed for a cross-Channel attack is in place, it's going to be a wait until at earliest May of '44 for good weather.
Which was partly why, as far as I understand it, the Western Allies went into Italy in the first place in '43: weather in the Mediterranean was less of a problem than the Channel and after finally clearing Africa they might as well do something with their armies before May/June of '44. Knocking Italy partly out of the Axis with an invasion of Southern Italy (some Italians continued to side with Hitler) and drawing Germans into Italy seemed the best contribution that the Western Allies could make until the Channel could be crossed in '44.

ObssesedNuker said:

Not gonna happen.

Click to expand...

99% right on this one. THe only way it occurs is if the Germans experience a couple successes (i.e. weather and bad decisions screw Sicilian Expedition, Kursk attack is feigned and by really bad luck the Germans win using a mobile defensive tactic). In fact, the scenario appears to have been pretty well thought out here.

Then, and only then, would the Allies accept to terms which would have appeared very much like unconditional surrender: withdrawal from France, Poland, military restrictions, reparations...Even in Stalin accepted, which is perfectly possible, he might just break terms and go for the jugular...and why not?

So, if the Germans make a peace from the utmost position of strength that concedes practically everything, they better hope and pray terms require Wallies have military bases on German soil. Because I cannot imagine terms which will allow the Germans to keep an army any where close to the size needed to prevent a Russian invasion.

In reality, the Germans are screwed any way short of coming up with an A-Bomb using magic. However, a lot less people would die fighting pointlessly for close to two more years. That's motivation enough to make a beggars peace in hindsight, but not good enough when you just had victories in the field and still sit on most of mainland Europe.

lucaswillen05 said:

Even after the Casablanca Conference January 1943 there were divisions among he Allies about the doctrine of unconditional surrender. Churchill may not have been in full agreement.

Click to expand...

Churchill expressed resevations. That is no the same as not being in agreement and ultimately he is (by this point) the junior partner compared to the Soviets and Americans. Not to mention the British public have wholeheartedly accepted that Germany must be crushed and crushed in a manner that ensures they would never rise as a threat again. They would be rather put-off by a sudden and inexplicable about-face on the part of their government. The simple reality is the Allies position on this was settled by Kursk.

If a generals' coup does work and they sue for peace the Allies may modify their terms somewhat.

Click to expand...

Why? From the Allies perspective, the generals are just as much responsible for the war as the Nazis. The coup and attempt to negotiate will reinforce the perception that Germany is clearly losing the war they started. This is likely to harden the Western Allies stance on unconditional surrender, not loosen it.

pattersonautobody said:

99% right on this one. THe only way it occurs is if the Germans experience a couple successes (i.e. weather and bad decisions screw Sicilian Expedition, Kursk attack is feigned and by really bad luck the Germans win using a mobile defensive tactic). In fact, the scenario appears to have been pretty well thought out here.

Click to expand...

The scenario grossly overrates Manstein and underestimates the Soviets, much like Manstein himself when he proposed the backhand blow. The Germans basically resort to all of the defensive tactics they attempted historically, and failed, yet everything changes because the Soviets seem to have suddenly lost all experience of the previous two years they have accrued and magically appear to have lost the significant resources that would allow them to mount more offensives then the Germans could have effectively responded too. They essentially are a cartoonish caricature of the 1943 Red Army instead of what it actually was. It ignores that the Soviets learned from their experience at Third Kharkov and incorporated the lessons from that experience into their training and operational art. As a direct result, later attempts to replicate the success at Third Kharkov (namely at Fourth Kharkov and Zhitomir) were dismal failures. There is no use of the huge mess of deception techniques the Soviets have developed (and proceeded to utilize) by this point and the Germans have apparently developed precognitive powers given how they were able to repeatedly put forces in precisely the right location at precisely the right time to blunt the (bizarrely and a-historically uncoordinated) Soviet offensives. It is telling that the Germans ultimately lost more when the Soviets went onto the offensive then they did smashing their head against the Kursk defenses.

At the strategic level the Germans were better at the offensive than the defensive for one key reason - their strategic intelligence was shit. Oh, the Germans had decent tactical intelligence. Units in the field performed solid reconnaissance, and their electronic warfare section was good at tracking enemy signals in battle. But it was all intended to find which hill the next tank was behind. Once things moved to the higher levels German intelligence varied from poor to execrable, to in many cases actively detrimental. German strategic intelligence functioned well early in the war, but once the allies invested in their own intelligence collection, countermeasures and deception, the Germans were quickly left far behind.

The problem is that while you can attack without good intelligence (although it's certainly not advised), it is nearly impossible to defend without good intelligence (or failing that, superior force that allows you to recover from enemy blows... which the Germans most emphatically did not have). This pattern can be seen continually on the Eastern Front from mid 1943 on, where the Germans consistently misidentified the direction and location of major Soviet thrusts, then had to scramble to counter them, continually losing ground.

Once they were actually fighting on the battlefield, German troops defended with skill, but they were usually in losing fights, because at higher levels they couldn't predict the major blows and deploy their forces properly.

For the Germans to successfully hold the Soviets from 1943-on requires more then luck, it requires divine intervention.

The Allies (including the Soviets!) also turn away from unconditional surrender because... because... reasons? I mean, from the strategic perspective these defeats are ultimately minor set-backs. Germany is still clearly losing ground and well on the way to losing the war. From the Western Allies perspective, this kind of peace will simply lead to a new "stab in the back" myth and another war started by Germany 10-20 years down the road.

In any case, that scenario is kind-of the opposite of what is happening here. It is pretty clear that the Germans are getting set-up for a major encirclement by the Soviet counter-offensives. That is much worse then IOTL, where the German armor was "only" mauled by the Soviet counter-offensives instead of annihilated.

pattersonautobody said:

99% right on this one. THe only way it occurs is if the Germans experience a couple successes (i.e. weather and bad decisions screw Sicilian Expedition, Kursk attack is feigned and by really bad luck the Germans win using a mobile defensive tactic). In fact, the scenario appears to have been pretty well thought out here.

Then, and only then, would the Allies accept to terms which would have appeared very much like unconditional surrender: withdrawal from France, Poland, military restrictions, reparations...Even in Stalin accepted, which is perfectly possible, he might just break terms and go for the jugular...and why not?

So, if the Germans make a peace from the utmost position of strength that concedes practically everything, they better hope and pray terms require Wallies have military bases on German soil. Because I cannot imagine terms which will allow the Germans to keep an army any where close to the size needed to prevent a Russian invasion.

In reality, the Germans are screwed any way short of coming up with an A-Bomb using magic. However, a lot less people would die fighting pointlessly for close to two more years. That's motivation enough to make a beggars peace in hindsight, but not good enough when you just had victories in the field and still sit on most of mainland Europe.

Click to expand...

In this scenario the Gela bridgehead is ovverrun by he Hermann Goering Division which very nearly happened in OTL. The British still have their bridgehead which can be used by US divisions. Sicily will probably take longer but the Allies will likely take the island eventually.

The key factor here is that he German eed to reinforcce Italy is far less pressing for now. Secondly Manstein wanted to continue the atack at Kursk after Prokhorovka(see Ziadelle Mark Healey ch 10 p352 - 357.
Modern research by Georhe Nipe (Decsion in the Ukraine and Blood,Steel & Myth) show that, contrary to Soviet era claims Prokhorovka was a clear victory for II SS Panzer Corps.

However, it is the decision to continue the offenive as desired by Mnstein that will actually result in disaster as will be seen in the next few posts. Developments o the Russian Frot and elsewhere will stem from this change. I won't sy too much but II SS Panzer Corps and III Panzer Crps will be getting a nasty surprise in the near future... This will affect German performance a the Mius (II SS Panxer Corps are never available for their historical counterattack and the Panzers will be weaker at 4th Kharkov than OTL. The Soviets will be launching magor counteroffensives along the Russian front as OL but the German ability to resist them will be far less, possibly causing a collapse or near collapse of Army Group South. That in turn will imact o decisions made by the Western Allies and by anti Nazi generals plotting a coup more serious than actual plotting i he second half f 1943.

Lwet's just say for now that a certain combination of circumstabces and events is going to change the outcome quite significantly and culd bring an earlier end to WW2 in Europe.

Look More Closely Later said:

By the time the Western Allies are in Sicily in July '43 it's already too late for a proper cross-channel invasion that year. By the point everything else needed for a cross-Channel attack is in place, it's going to be a wait until at earliest May of '44 for good weather.
Which was partly why, as far as I understand it, the Western Allies went into Italy in the first place in '43: weather in the Mediterranean was less of a problem than the Channel and after finally clearing Africa they might as well do something with their armies before May/June of '44. Knocking Italy partly out of the Axis with an invasion of Southern Italy (some Italians continued to side with Hitler) and drawing Germans into Italy seemed the best contribution that the Western Allies could make until the Channel could be crossed in '44.

Click to expand...

August, Septembe or even October would be more like it if the Germans appear to be collapsing (Willam rthe Conquerer made his crossing that late in the year) The Allies were planning an assault with three divisions only at this point.They probably don't have the lading craft for a cross channel assault for more than hat at this poit. The main assault is more likely to be a Southern Fraance which would mean at best a much reduced landing in Italy or complee cancellation/postponemen of the Italian invasion plans. Seeing the developing situatio in Russia the Allies may well decide to alter their plans over the summer of 1943

William the Conqueror

lucaswillen05 said:

August, Septembe or even October would be more like it if the Germans appear to be collapsing (Willam rthe Conquerer made his crossing that late in the year) The Allies were planning an assault with three divisions only at this point.They probably don't have the lading craft for a cross channel assault for more than hat at this poit. The main assault is more likely to be a Southern Fraance which would mean at best a much reduced landing in Italy or complee cancellation/postponemen of the Italian invasion plans. Seeing the developing situatio in Russia the Allies may well decide to alter their plans over the summer of 1943

Click to expand...

In his Channel crossing William the Conqueror was landing on a practically undefended shoreline, and with plenty of time for his troops to recover if the voyage turned a bit choppy; he was not in a situation where he needed to worry about landing highly seasick troops, whose tanks it may have been impossible to use in the assault if the seas were too rough, in front of Hitler's 'Atlantic Wall'.
Nor did William the Conqueror didn't have any airborne element to his landing to worry about strong winds or low-cloud playing merry havoc with...