AHC: Successful Barbarossa

How did Barbarossa not succeed, I mean it certainly wasn't completely successful but the operation captures thousands of square miles and destroyed much of the Soviet military.

If you mean could Barbarossa defeat the Soviets though. Then no. It was simply too big not to fail. The operation logistically could have defeated the USSR. It just wasn't happening. In fact if we reran Barbarossa a thousand times than the majority would see the Soviets do much better than OTL.
 
How did Barbarossa not succeed, I mean it certainly wasn't completely successful but the operation captures thousands of square miles and destroyed much of the Soviet military.

If you mean could Barbarossa defeat the Soviets though. Then no. It was simply too big not to fail. The operation logistically could have defeated the USSR. It just wasn't happening. In fact if we reran Barbarossa a thousand times than the majority would see the Soviets do much better than OTL.

It did not succeed in its objectives. It was supposed to capture Leningrad, Moscov and Ukraine - and destroy the soviet army. It came close on many of them, but not the destruction of the soviet army.

With an outlook resembling our TL Barbarossa, I can offer a few changes that would tip the Balance towards success, but I'm not exactly sure how it could be done.

Imagine no war in Greece, hence more armor supplied for AGS in time for Barbarossa's begining (Pattersonautobody has a thread about this). Also, much less strain on the airborne transport capacity and airborne forces. This goes to AGN (see something like it in Viking's three fish TL).
Net effect has to be - not sure it will be :
First phase:
1: a rapid collapse in the North. Leningrad is taken on the run
Leningrad becomes a transport hub (shipping) for further strikes south east to extent the railways. Alternatively, more armor for AGC.
2: AGC initially as OTL
3: AGS performs as good as AGC IOTL.

Second phase:
AGN: Put pressure on Moscow from the North-west
AGC: Typhoon not derailed/postponed as AGS made their own pincers in the first phase.
AGS: Hopefully has enough strength left to capture the Crimea. Maybe a strike towards Rostov, but logistically only possible with feeble opposition. This is however possible because of AGC's progress.

Last phase: AGN and AGC converge and encircle and capture Moscow. Rail links from Leningrad support this huge army sufficiently to bring forth winter clothing (this is a tricky point covered in Vikings TL, need to capture Russian trains possible in Leningrad)
AGS: Moves forward as far as possible.

This should be a roughly successful Barbarossa, but not trivial to accomplish.
 
Is there any possible way in which Hitler's Operation Barbarossa could have been successful? If so, how?

The simplest and easiest POD is to have Yugoslavia join the Axis on 27.3.1941 as per OTL and Germany immediately provide "security" to assist this, probably one Division, This may see them stay a nominal probably non participatory Axis country much like Bulgaria. Then resist Mussolini's squeals re Greece-he can stew in his own juices.

Invade the USSR on about the 18th April, two months before OTL. That extra time may well be the charm in terms of getting to Moscow or taking SPB on the bounce.
 
The easiest way is for Stalin to lose it and start shooting the Soviet leadership and causing a total collapse, a la The Anglo-American Nazi War. Barring that the Germans have too much going against them, particularly in terms of logistics.
The simplest and easiest POD is to have Yugoslavia join the Axis on 27.3.1941 as per OTL and Germany immediately provide "security" to assist this, probably one Division, This may see them stay a nominal probably non participatory Axis country much like Bulgaria. Then resist Mussolini's squeals re Greece-he can stew in his own juices.

Invade the USSR on about the 18th April, two months before OTL. That extra time may well be the charm in terms of getting to Moscow or taking SPB on the bounce.
That wouldn't work. The previous winter had been unusually wet, causing the rivers to flood and everything to turn to mud for longer than usual. Because of the poor infrastructure of the area the roads were largely unpaved and thus turned to mud, while the railroads were of a different gauge than those of the Germans. The Germans themselves didn't think that an attack could happen before mid-May, and even then the overly long muddy season and logistics issues makes it uncertain if it would have been wise to launch Barbarossa much before they did.

For reference this is what a Russian road during the biannual muddy season looks like:

mud-on-eastern-front.jpeg
 
Last edited:
The easiest way is for Stalin to lose it and start shooting the Soviet leadership and causing a total collapse, a la The Anglo-American Nazi War. Barring that the Germans have too much going against them, particularly in terms of logistics.

That wouldn't work. The previous winter had been unusually wet, causing the rivers to flood and everything to turn to mud for longer than usual. Because of the poor infrastructure of the area the roads were largely unpaved and thus turned to mud, while the railroads were of a different gauge than those of the Germans. The Germans themselves didn't think that an attack could happen before mid-May, and even then the overly long muddy season and logistics issues makes it uncertain if it would have been wise to launch Barbarossa much before they did.

For reference this is what a Russian road during the biannual muddy season looks like:

mud-on-eastern-front.jpeg

These are some very good points. I was unaware the previous season had been so wet. I think a month of preparation extra than otl and a start in late May could even make a difference. Each week of good weather gained will assist the German forces greatly. It's enough to make an unlikely Scenario more likely that's for sure. And, as you say, getting that much closer may well cause Stalin to lose it.

Ps: some Russian secondary roads are that bad now in the rainy spring and autumn seasons. Trust me, I've been stuck on them.
 
These are some very good points. I was unaware the previous season had been so wet. I think a month of preparation extra than otl and a start in late May could even make a difference. Each week of good weather gained will assist the German forces greatly. It's enough to make an unlikely Scenario more likely that's for sure. And, as you say, getting that much closer may well cause Stalin to lose it.

Ps: some Russian secondary roads are that bad now in the rainy spring and autumn seasons. Trust me, I've been stuck on them.
The whole year was a weird one climate wise. First there was the aforementioned spring muddy season, but the autumn muddy season was exceptionally muddy, and finally the winter of 1941-1942 was one of, if not the, coldest of the 20th century (the temperature in much of Western Russia at the time was regularly between -20 and -30 degrees Celcius).
 
I think with the original plan, there are a few changes that would improve things for the Germans, but such changes would still only be minor as far as the end result is concerned. Even, a different plan, wouldn't make much difference.
Then there is the Balkan option how bigger difference would no distractions in the Balkans be? Again, some - because of the road conditions etc., you may be able to start by a few weeks earlier, but nothing more.

It does get more interesting though with the 'freedom in the East' option, e.g. Peace deal with Britain - maybe June/July 1940, or the RAF lost the BoB!
Wiking's TL here is a good example of how it may have gone.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Barbarossa succeeded in destroying the Soviet pre-war army, in fact it more or less succeeded twice over. (At some point in the autumn, the Germans had verified the capture or killing of Soviet forces equal to their estimates of the Soviet army.)
The problem was that it was unable to destroy the new forces being raised in the interior. The Soviet mobilization was too quick and comprehensive for Barbarossa to reach it.

The whole plan was built on faulty assumptions.
 
The simplest and easiest POD is to have Yugoslavia join the Axis on 27.3.1941 as per OTL and Germany immediately provide "security" to assist this, probably one Division, This may see them stay a nominal probably non participatory Axis country much like Bulgaria. Then resist Mussolini's squeals re Greece-he can stew in his own juices.

Invade the USSR on about the 18th April, two months before OTL. That extra time may well be the charm in terms of getting to Moscow or taking SPB on the bounce.

Mud is still the issue. The earliest the Germans get going is the first week of June.

So, perhaps have the coup not occur, and this allows for more limited German operations in Greece. This allows the Germans to start in AGS on Day 1 of the invasion, which perhaps butterflies away Kiev, which makes AGC attack Moscow on time, or if everyone here thinks logistics is too much of a mess, allows AGC to divert forces north to take care of Leningrad.
 
The timing of the start of Barbarossa is irrelevant, unless you are a German general attempting to explain the monstrous fuck up you have made.

The issue is the rate of mobilisation of the soviet armies and level of soviet resistance. That's independent of weather.
 
British leadership panics, and agrees to a negotiated peace in 1940 after/at the Fall of France.

Since there is no war in Europe, US congress terminates lend lease, and allows free trade with Western Europe. ("A German dominated Europe is an unfortunate reality ww must deal with", says President Lindbergh after his election in 1940. "Trade allows us to show there is an alternative to totalitarianism, and improve a lot of the subject people of Europe.").

With no outside support, Yugoslavia, Greece, and Turkey see no option but to submit to German demands, and Germany acquires bases in all three. The Germans begin rapid construction of the Berlin/Baghdad railway, including a spur towards the Caucasus mountains.

No more blockade. Germany is free to buy oil and strategic materials on world markets. It does using the wealth of a looted Western Europe, and British reparations payments, including thousands of American trucks. Plus the whole German armed forces are now facing East.

Stalin somehow convinces himself the German won't attack, and ignores intelligence to the contrary.

The Germans however can not believe that Stalin won't see the attack coming. So they prepare for a long war, including campaigning thru the Winter, and winning over the local population ("There will be plenty of time for Germanization after we have smashed the USSR").

Barbarossa begins in 1941, with German attacks from Eastern Europe, and from Turkey towards the Caucasus, including bombing raids on the Baku oil fields.
 
Last edited:
Stalin somehow convinces himself the German won't attack, and ignores intelligence to the contrary.

In this scenario, Germany is nominally at peace following the signing of a deal with the UK. It's going to be pretty hard to ignore the fact that your neighbour who is supposedly at peace is nevertheless running their economy on a war footing and massing troops on your border. Stalin wanted to believe that Germany wouldn't fight a two-front war, but he cannot believe that Germany will never attack him.

The Germans however can not believe that Stalin won't see the attack coming. So they prepare for a long war, including campaigning thru the Winter, and winning over the local population ("There will be plenty of time for Germanization after we have smashed the USSR").

Barbarossa begins in 1941, with German attacks from Eastern Europe, and from Turkey towards the Caucasus, including bombing raids on the Baku oil fields.

How is Germany preparing for a long war yet still starting Barbarossa as OTL? If you want long war preparations, you will actually have to devote time and resources to that. Granted no BoB and no planning for Sealion will free up significant resources, but I doubt it's going to be enough to significantly increase the capabilities of the german economy by 1941, unless we somehow also introduce all the rationalization methods employed later without any force driving them.
 
Look at Calbear's timeline,it's where they succeeded.

But this is the weakest point in Calbear's TL. He deliberately hand waived this and said the important point of his TL was what happened after.
IIRC the details was no Mediterranean involvement and the Germans bringing winter gear for their occupation forces. While the first part is suggested here and sensible in various flavors, the latter part is basically a joke.
 
Top