WI: Hitler captured Stalingrad
- Thread starter Bagration
- Start date
Germany still has a large overextended army that is extremely vulnerable to counter attack.
Winning at Stalingrad won't change how flawed the Case Blue campaign was.
Winning at Stalingrad won't change how flawed the Case Blue campaign was.
Well the Soviets would not go to the tables just because they lost Stalingrad.
Winter would still be upon them and Moscow and Lenigrad in hopeless stalemate. Stalingrad gains them nothing except maybe a moral boost because of the name.
Case Blue was launched because Hitler wanted to cut off Russian oil, without that threat i'd say the Russians have it easier beating the Nazis. The war was lost for them anyway, 2 years later the Allies land in France. Still just a question of who egts to Berlin first.
Winter would still be upon them and Moscow and Lenigrad in hopeless stalemate. Stalingrad gains them nothing except maybe a moral boost because of the name.
Case Blue was launched because Hitler wanted to cut off Russian oil, without that threat i'd say the Russians have it easier beating the Nazis. The war was lost for them anyway, 2 years later the Allies land in France. Still just a question of who egts to Berlin first.
It is still hopeless.
The entire Don bend is hanging over the flank and just wating to crash down.
Stalingrad in itself is important but it is the gateway to Caucasus and the oil.
Case Blue was probably the best option in 1942 but failed.
Going full tilt for the oil (without Stalingrad) is useless. Going for Stalingrad in isolation will not gain any strategic advantage.
Ivan
The entire Don bend is hanging over the flank and just wating to crash down.
Stalingrad in itself is important but it is the gateway to Caucasus and the oil.
Case Blue was probably the best option in 1942 but failed.
Going full tilt for the oil (without Stalingrad) is useless. Going for Stalingrad in isolation will not gain any strategic advantage.
Ivan
Capturing Stalingrad would have interdicted the Russian oil supply from the Caucasus and caused them a major headache. Without the diversion of forces into the Caucasus, the Germans would have probably handily defeated the Russian counter-attack, just as they did the simultaneous Russian offensive around Rzhev. Germany would have been in a much stronger position in the next summer.
There is no simple answer to this because we do not know what the Germans do after they take Stalingrad. They would likely turn south and run out of steam. Their flanks would be stronger, but more likely than not the Russians still cut them off and drive to Rostov, trapping even more Germans.
Germany's best chance is to give up on the southern drive because they simply did not have the fuel to cross that distance and support it if they were to run into any resistance. The moment they realize its unwinnable they dig in where they are, keep the majority of their forces as reserves to react to counter offensives.
JUst like Rhzev, it is possible that the Germans might be able to fight RUssian counter-offensives to a standstill. However, as Obsessed Nuker pointed out, the USSR had 2.5 million men to bring to bear in this theater while the Germans in this scenerio would have 1.4 million.
Most likely best case "non-insane" Hitler scenerio is a fighting retreat back to Rostov. If the Germans are lucky, the Russians lost way too many men driving the Germans back. The ROmanians, Hungarians and Italians are spared destruction and are still "in it to win it" for 43 unlike OTL where they withdrew a lot of forces and lost the desire to fight.
Further, the Kursk battle of ATL will likely be around Rostov or Kharkov. The Germans will likely be on defense and RUssians on offense. The Russians still probably win. I heard plausible scenerios where a mobile defense in 43 would work, which is possible given no Stalingrad disaster ATL.
However, the US invades Italy. Italy still leaves war. The Germans lose in Aug 1945 when Berlin is nuked and the RHine is crossed. Perhaps Poland and Yugoslavia are in the western camp post war. Hungary and Romania are probably occupied by the stunted Russians.
Germany's best chance is to give up on the southern drive because they simply did not have the fuel to cross that distance and support it if they were to run into any resistance. The moment they realize its unwinnable they dig in where they are, keep the majority of their forces as reserves to react to counter offensives.
JUst like Rhzev, it is possible that the Germans might be able to fight RUssian counter-offensives to a standstill. However, as Obsessed Nuker pointed out, the USSR had 2.5 million men to bring to bear in this theater while the Germans in this scenerio would have 1.4 million.
Most likely best case "non-insane" Hitler scenerio is a fighting retreat back to Rostov. If the Germans are lucky, the Russians lost way too many men driving the Germans back. The ROmanians, Hungarians and Italians are spared destruction and are still "in it to win it" for 43 unlike OTL where they withdrew a lot of forces and lost the desire to fight.
Further, the Kursk battle of ATL will likely be around Rostov or Kharkov. The Germans will likely be on defense and RUssians on offense. The Russians still probably win. I heard plausible scenerios where a mobile defense in 43 would work, which is possible given no Stalingrad disaster ATL.
However, the US invades Italy. Italy still leaves war. The Germans lose in Aug 1945 when Berlin is nuked and the RHine is crossed. Perhaps Poland and Yugoslavia are in the western camp post war. Hungary and Romania are probably occupied by the stunted Russians.
They wouldn't get across though, maybe right around stalingrad itself, but not in force. They wanted Baku and didn't have the fuel to get there.
But 6th Army isn't attritioned to Hell and back meaning they can mount better defences. Depending on when and how Germans capture Stalingrad Germans could assemble enough mobile forces to wipe out Don bridgeheads and shore their positions on the river. Without them and 6th Army remaining strong and coherent force Soviets don't have time to assemble troops and prepare for "Uranus". Uranus wasn't smooth and easy operation as it was, presence of several uncommited strong divisions means it will be even more problematic.
But as I've said, it depends on when & how.
South? Germans likely stall along OTL lines due to logistics but are in less vulnerable position because they are stronger overall. Soviets probably try offensive somewhere but even if they make gains it will not be OTL level of collapse.
How do 1.4 million men hold back 2.5 million men, especially when the 1.4 million are stretched on a 1,000 mile front?
It wouldn't. There was another railway leading from Baku to Astrakhan and beyond. And in fact, the Germans actually did capture Stalingrad (or at least most of it). It was the attempt to hold it that did them in.
You mean they didn't capture like 90% of the city? Nothing got through Stalingrad OTL, so I really don't see its capture being more than a minor logistical hit.
Deleted member 1487
While you are right, the rail line you speak of was a wartime construction and not really that heavy a line, plus it was being interdicted by a lot of aerial bombardment of Astrakhan. A fair bit of supplies coming into the Caucasus was coming via Baku and the Caspian, plus some via Iran and the rail line connecting Baku to Tehran. Oil getting out of the Caucasus was heavily interdicted by the German position on the Volga, plus Soviet panic about Germany capturing Baku led them to destroy some of the oil production there. Really though the major oil/supply highway was the Caspian and to a lesser degree via Iran.
No the OTL capture of Stalingrad was a major logistical hit to the Soviets; they were able to supply troops to the Southeast of the city due to the Astrakhan rail bypass, but they were just using that as a more local supply route, with the Caucasus getting supplies via water transport via the Caspian Sea.
Sorry if this diverges a bit from the OP but what if Hitler decided that the oilfields were too far or too likely to be sabotaged to be worth capturing and ordered instead that they be bombed?
Lets say that Stalingrad falls in September 42 following along the estimates Paulus gave ( 10 days fighting/ 14 days re-grouping). It falls because the Army Group is never split up, so no drive into the Caucasus as of yet. Paulus, logically will now turn about and clear the Soviet bridgeheads on the R.Don.
All this brings us up to early October before the drive to the Caucasus begins in earnest. The Soviets in Maikop or Grozny have had lots of time to blow every oil source ahead of the German advance ( Stalingrad's fall makes them more trigger-happy). Hitler seeing there is no chance of capturing Baku intact( or even reaching it before winter) decides to bomb the place to rubble*. Richthofen had started Operation Blau with 480 bombers of which a 323 were serviceable. Allowing for attrition, we'll say he has 250 available and assume that the Germans airfields are a little further south than OTL.
Soviet flak and air defenses round Baku would be heavy but I don't think it would be enough to prevent the Luftwaffe inflicting huge damage and knocking the fields out for up to eight months.
The Germans still have to clear the Eastern Coast of the Black sea.( Perhaps before 1943 is over with help from Italian Alpine troops)
They still have to deal with the Soviet's winter counter-attack somewhere along the Eastern Front.
However, they would be in a better position than OTL especially if Hitler paused the main advance at this point ahead of winter realizing he won't get much further than Grozny before then due to logistical difficulties.
*OTL, Hitler ordered the destruction of Grozny and Baku in October but by that point the luftwaffe had been too weakened from the constant demands of the fighting at Stalingrad to mount attacks in sufficient strength to destroy these targets.
Lets say that Stalingrad falls in September 42 following along the estimates Paulus gave ( 10 days fighting/ 14 days re-grouping). It falls because the Army Group is never split up, so no drive into the Caucasus as of yet. Paulus, logically will now turn about and clear the Soviet bridgeheads on the R.Don.
All this brings us up to early October before the drive to the Caucasus begins in earnest. The Soviets in Maikop or Grozny have had lots of time to blow every oil source ahead of the German advance ( Stalingrad's fall makes them more trigger-happy). Hitler seeing there is no chance of capturing Baku intact( or even reaching it before winter) decides to bomb the place to rubble*. Richthofen had started Operation Blau with 480 bombers of which a 323 were serviceable. Allowing for attrition, we'll say he has 250 available and assume that the Germans airfields are a little further south than OTL.
Soviet flak and air defenses round Baku would be heavy but I don't think it would be enough to prevent the Luftwaffe inflicting huge damage and knocking the fields out for up to eight months.
The Germans still have to clear the Eastern Coast of the Black sea.( Perhaps before 1943 is over with help from Italian Alpine troops)
They still have to deal with the Soviet's winter counter-attack somewhere along the Eastern Front.
However, they would be in a better position than OTL especially if Hitler paused the main advance at this point ahead of winter realizing he won't get much further than Grozny before then due to logistical difficulties.
*OTL, Hitler ordered the destruction of Grozny and Baku in October but by that point the luftwaffe had been too weakened from the constant demands of the fighting at Stalingrad to mount attacks in sufficient strength to destroy these targets.
Even with Stalingrad having fallen, the successive into the Caucasus leaves them with a line in Southern Russia and the Caucasus are too riddled with weak points that the Soviets can focus their winter counter-offensive on. Worse case for the Germans is the Soviets concentrate against the Hungarians and Italians on the Don, blow through them, and take Rostov. This effectively cuts the entirety of Army Groups A and B off from Army Group South with the sole line of communications being across the Kerch straits, which is probably insufficient to supply all of Army Groups A and B*. If Hitler refuses to allow the Army Groups to retreat (which is all too likely given that he only let them withdraw IOTL because of the Stalingrad encirclement), then a subsequent Soviet drive along the Sea of Azov to the Kuban River will cut off even that.
Patterson has already effectively highlighted the best-case scenario for Germany (short of Stalin losing it).
And if that happens, then forget about Germany ever managing to put together enough men for Kursk or even hold a solid defensive line in 1943.
*Patterson informed me in another thread that a rail bridge capable of ferrying ~1000 tons of supplies was constructed across the Strait by the Germans. That is double the minimum requirements of the 6th Army. Unfortunately for the Germans, Army Groups A and B is four times as large as the Sixth Army alone and therefore probably require at least four times the supplies.
Patterson has already effectively highlighted the best-case scenario for Germany (short of Stalin losing it).
And if that happens, then forget about Germany ever managing to put together enough men for Kursk or even hold a solid defensive line in 1943.
*Patterson informed me in another thread that a rail bridge capable of ferrying ~1000 tons of supplies was constructed across the Strait by the Germans. That is double the minimum requirements of the 6th Army. Unfortunately for the Germans, Army Groups A and B is four times as large as the Sixth Army alone and therefore probably require at least four times the supplies.
Last edited:
A possible outcome, given Stalin's penchant for paranoia, but a low-probability one given that at the beginning of September there was one point where Stalin thought that Stalingrad had fallen and his first reaction was to try and figure out how he might realign Soviet defenses to adjust for that rather then to have anyone shot.