Barbarossa: how would you do it?

[Shaby]

You should read what I responded too. Context is important. While your canned answer may or may not have merit, it does not apply to what I posted. There was a plan for WINTER CLOTHING. Hitler ignored it. There were also studies of expendable which showed there were not enough of many categories. The Logistical command recommended not to attack.

My analysis of stockpiles of war materials was not an analysis of the rail and road network in the Soviet Union. It is not an analysis of whether the Soviet Army can but cutoff and destroyed.

Oh sorry. Didn't realize this.

In regards to winter clothing, Germans faced a stark choice - ammunition, fuel, food, clothing IIRC, in that order. Once more, basic rules of logistics nailed them and something had to give. It simply could not all be delivered in time. The operation was supposed to wrap up months before winter and logistic network was supposed to handle smaller amounts of supplies in terms of ammo and freed up bulk to be used for other items to support what by that time was hoped would be occupation forces.

It did not play out that way.

I just rushed to write an answer. Sorry once more.

 

[Catspoke]

The Soviet Union has to be defeated in 1941, or at least almost defeated with a stromg follow up campaign in 1942. Even if you think its going to be easy I would plan on some contigency backup.

1) Do a Battle of Britain light, increase the ratio of fighters to bombers, do more of the July over the channel like attacks, see if the British are serious, back off if they are, preserve more of your medium bomber force for Barbarossa.
2) Increase incrementally armor and truck production above the pathestic levels OTL
3) Increase rail repair capability ahead of time.
4) Pick a few nationalities you can work with in the east to get help, preferably the Baltic peoples who are predisposed to working with you.
5) Tell Mussolini your master plan ahead of time, so he doesn't get jealous of your move into Rommania and invade Greece (preserve those Ju52s lost over Crete for air resupply). At the same time, lend a couple of battalions of 88mm AA/ATG guns for North Africa so the Italians having something to deal with the Matilda so maybe (a big maybe) the Afrika Corps doesn't have to go to Africa. Keep the Italian air force that was in Belgium doing something useful in the med.
6) Don't do the Bismarck raid, keep Bismarck in nothern Norway as the center of a task force supporting an effort to seize Murmansk early or at very least keep the British from raiding your supply (OTL Bremese loss)

Of course the danger is the Soviets figure out from all of the above what you are going to do and take counter measures that cancel out any advantages gained.

 

[BlondieBC]

In regards to winter clothing, Germans faced a stark choice - ammunition, fuel, food, clothing IIRC, in that order. Once more, basic rules of logistics nailed them and something had to give. It simply could not all be delivered in time. The operation was supposed to wrap up months before winter and logistic network was supposed to handle smaller amounts of supplies in terms of ammo and freed up bulk to be used for other items to support what by that time was hoped would be occupation forces.

It did not play out that way.

I just rushed to write an answer. Sorry once more.

It has been 20 years since I did a lot of reading on the Eastern Front, so I can't give sources.

The Germans had 1-2 winter uniforms per solider on the Eastern front, closer to 1 than 2. If identified as a critical resource, it could have handled. There were reports indicating the problem, but they were ignored. So they uniforms were sent as low priority items. Much arrived a late. Often soldiers in rear units took 2-3 winter uniforms. And as one got farther from the railheads, one became less likely to get the uniforms.

To be fair, many of the rear commanders did not know of the critical shortage in the relevant time window. If they had, much of the problem is fixed. And if I did not know it was a critical item, I might well have my men take two uniforms. An extra change of clothes is pretty standard/useful. A front line infantry unit may not be able to carry two uniforms with them, but at a Luftwaffe base or army support unit, it would be very handy to have a full change of clothes and coats.

As to the ammo/fuel shortages. First, the Germans did not have the workers work weekends/holidays for the first month or two. They worked the standard civilian schedule. There are a lot of other little things that could have been done, and were recommended to be done, but they have faded with time from my memory. These type actions show how overconfident the Nazi were, even before they attacked.

On ammo, the corp and army level reserves continued to fall on a weekly basis, even before the army was deep into Russia. Again the logistical recommendations were ignored.

While none of these problems could have been prevented 100%, they could have been made a lot less worse. But then we are down to the WW1 dilemma. If Germany knew how long the war would be, it would not attack.

 

[Corbell Mark IV]

I may be wrong but I thought that was the point

Elite Assault troops being tounge in cheek - let them exponge their crimes with their blood....

THat's the way I read it too.

Assign third rate troops jobs for Elite Assault Troops...

Then sit back and watch the justice.

Just make sure your war plans don't hinge on their success.

 

[NoOneFamous]

1. Shoot Hitler
2. Shoot Himmler and Goering.
3. Make peace with the Brits and withdraw all forces from France and Belgium. Promise to withdraw from Denmark and Norway within 1 year after the end of the USSR.
4. Shut down the concentration camps and disband the General SS
5. Concentrate on destroying the Red Army.
6. Make deals with the Ukrainians and Balts

 

[sloreck]

1. Co-opt the Balts, Ukranians, Tatars, Byelorussians. When you win you can screw them over, but not until then. Co-opt anti-communist Russians.
2. Ghettoize the Jews and use their labor for something useful. As with #1, you can"deal" with them at leisure and the locals will either not care or help.
3. Railway troops - many of the "losers" that went in to einsatzgruppen could be used to regauge Russian RRs, work in RR depots etc. The ONLY reliable means of transport in the USSR is RRs as there are essentially no useful hard surface roads/ 4 season roads. Russian RRs are 6' gauge not 4' 8 1/2" and they have taken or destroyed most of the rolling stock. Having troops trained to do this and also to help operate RRs will make logistics much better.
4. Think about winter - clothing, lubricants etc.
5. Go for Moscow first - it is the transportation hub, and the administrative center in a very centralized society. Sure some/many bureaucrats will escape, but many won't & the whole process of trying to re-establish bureaus in Kazan or where ever will take time and be way less efficient. Don't take all of the city, surround it, take enough structures to house your forces during the winter if need be and let the rest starve be shelled/bombed.
6. If needed in 1942 go for the oil, at least to where you have isolated the oil producing areas from the rest of Russia or made transport of oil reduced so that the Red Army has no mobility to speak of.
7. GO EARLY! Do not be distracted elsewhere - go as soon as the mud season is over - your mobile campaign begins with one mud season & ends with the next...

IMHO doing the above gives the Germans a shot, not a sure thing.

 

[Orry]

On no account declare war on America.... ever.... for any reason....

 

[AdA]

1. Back in July 40:
a. Cancel BoB
b. Apoint Speer for minister in charge of production, fully mobilize industry.
c. Get an integrated international production plan going.
d. Get a large scale international trainning program going
e. Make a decent inteligence assement of the threat
f. Make a proper lessons learned study of the first campaigns
g. Create a SAHCE structure (That's right, Supreme Axis High Command Europe)
h. Make a peace with France of the "no harm done, lets be friends kind"

2. Properly doing a to g means
a. No side shows
b. Your allies are now operating your way, up to your standards.
c. Lots more trucks, tanks, aircraft
d. e and f led to the PaK40 and the PzKfwIV G being introduced early
e. SAHCE leads a victorous combined invasion of the USSR at the same time it unveils a peace plan that will grant independence to Soviet Republics, promote freedom of religion including Islamic, etc...

3. Send your ASBats to reahab. They're high as kites

 

[Orry]

SEHCE.....

European not Axis sounds friendlier and opens the possibility of British co-operation later you can still ensure its a German in the top slots.

Maybe give naval and air jobs to brits when they come on board - Harris has to be better than the fat man.....

 

[AdA]

SEHCE.....

European not Axis sounds friendlier and opens the possibility of British co-operation later you can still ensure its a German in the top slots.

Maybe give naval and air jobs to brits when they come on board - Harris has to be better than the fat man.....

We might as well just call it Supreme Headquarters Anticommunist Powers in Europe. SHAPE

No Brits, the role of SHAPE(1940) is to keep the Brits down and the Russians out!

But let's bring in the Turks and take time to arm and train Iran so they can threaten to close the Ormuz strait.

I've now run out of smileys so I'll leave at that...

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

Easy.

Don't invade Poland - make better relations with US/France/UK - convince them Communism is the REAL threat, then be Part of a coalition that attacks Russia...

 

[Shaby]

Easy.

Don't invade Poland - make better relations with US/France/UK - convince them Communism is the REAL threat, then be Part of a coalition that attacks Russia...

??? Why would there be a coalition to attack the USSR at any time? Such a notion is purely Nazi ideal, not shared by all the Germans, not to mention that a few top Nazis themselves had grave doubts on the Barbarossa. And why would UK and France cooperate to aggrandize Germany, which they could surely see would result from this war against Soviets? How could anyone convince them of Soviet being the real threat, when it was Germany who prepared for war and dismembered Czechoslovakia?

France/UK themselves had no outstanding quarrel with the Soviets and, in fact, viewed them as potential allies against the Third Reich. USA would want absolutely nothing to do with this and getting them to join this war is nothing short of ASB.

Poland would be appalled at the prospect of becoming a battlefield of ideologies. Unless Soviets attacked them and brought them to the brink of defeat, they would never join the German crusade against Bolsheviks.

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

But the scenario would make a better barbarossa...

Stalin was only seen as the lesser of two evils.

UK and France tried to appease Germany (to a certain point), so if German does NOT attack Poland the point where UK and France said NO is NEVER reached. Communism is something that all Western nations despised (in a way).

If Stalin began to spread communism to other countries (or began nibbling at other countries) realpoliitik would take over and a "quiet" Nazi Germany would be seen as the lesser evil...

Points of conflict:

China - Chinese communists (Russian puppets) vs. KMT (American puppet) - without an European war Japan would be soon out of the picture.

 

[Shaby]

But the scenario would make a better barbarossa...

Doubtlessly. Until it came time for German troops (most likely making up majority of invasion forces) to withdraw and give independence to Ukraine, Byelorussia and other splinters of Soviet Union independence and free rule.

Stalin was only seen as the lesser of two evils.

True to some extent.

UK and France tried to appease Germany (to a certain point), so if German does NOT attack Poland the point where UK and France said NO is NEVER reached. Communism is something that all Western nations despised (in a way).
If Stalin began to spread communism to other countries (or began nibbling at other countries) realpoliitik would take over and a "quiet" Nazi Germany would be seen as the lesser evil...

Again true, but they learned to live with communism. And Stalin learned to keep communism for himself. He was not about to go on random conquest spree around East Europe without both other parties at odds with each other.

Points of conflict:

China - Chinese communists (Russian puppets) vs. KMT (American puppet) - without an European war Japan would be soon out of the picture.

Yeah, this just might do it. But it would be really long way in coming. Really, really long way. As you may know, I have a timeline I am writing that has some of these things we discuss here actually happening, though after the Poland is divided between Germany and Russia, which makes all this a great bit easier to do. Stalin would not do anything he did OTL without Nazi-Soviet pact. Had there been no war, he would be quite content to sit still.

BTW, KMT becam American puppet only late in WW2, in 1940 Americans sympathized with Chinese fight against Japan. I hardly see them taking sides in internecine Chinese conflict.

 

[BlairWitch749]

regarding the winter uniforms

just canceling typhoon solves this; the germans could supply on the oka line and if they just do some minor line straitening after kiev they would have no problem being in well constructed quarters with warm clothing by the time winter would come

 

[ruisramos]

Interesting points here, but I think this is getting a little off topic. My goal was to discuss how better, without hindsight and the influence if Hitler/Nazi leadership, would a militarily led Germany and its armed forces fare better in the Eastern front.

Politically, and with the Nazi political apparatus removed from power, I can see Germany making quite overtures to the West (in this case the sole remaining enemy in the West – the UK) to about a negotiated peace, maybe even offering to release the conquest countries including a rump Poland but I’m sure they would insist on the UK recognizing their supremacy in the European Continent with a sphere of influence covering most of it with a neutral weakened France.

But those considerations apart the exercise I though of was mainly focused on the military options. Without the meddling from Hitler and the influence of Nazism, the Whermacht Generals would be free to conduct a more professional campaign. They were experts at maneuver warefar, or at least better than the Soviets at this point, so without the insane goals and rash decisions like holding the line till the last man the war in the East could have been much longer. And if was longer and the Soviets had to endure greater hardship who knows if the SU wouldn’t just collapse under the social straines of the conflict?

Now, regarding the military startegy/tactics I’m personally rather fond of a strategy aiming on taking Moscow before the winter sets in, thus robbing the SU the possibility to use their main RR hub and, if not destroying, at least sent into disarray the centralized beaurocracy of the Soviet State. To achieve this goal I think the Germans would have to concentrate on an axis of advance directed at Moscow while protecting their flanks, instead of trying to overrun everyplace at the sametime. A second important goal at the beginning of the conflict would also be to take the port of Murmansk and the Kola Peninsula to close one of the channels of trade of the SU. Also they should avoid the mess to urban fighting by simply surrounding the main urban areas and leaving 2nd class formations to deal with the mopping up/securing those pockets of free territory in their rear.

Also I agree that without the support of the local populations those efforts are doomed. So offering local self-governing to the “released” populations would greatly improve Germany’s ability to support the prolongation of the conflict.

Taking Moscow and if Stalin is able to evacuate with a functioning government/state apparatus somewhere beyond the Urals, the Germans should than dig in for the Winter and on the next spring go for the second strategic target: the Caucuses’ oil fields.

 

[BlondieBC]

regarding the winter uniforms

just canceling typhoon solves this; the germans could supply on the oka line and if they just do some minor line straitening after kiev they would have no problem being in well constructed quarters with warm clothing by the time winter would come

True, this also solves the problem and gets a better defensive line.


I was focusing on that with the uniforms in existence, it would be possible to get one winter uniform to each of the front line troops. Now your solution reduces casualties even more by providing more shelter. Winter uniforms alone probably only reduces by half the cold casualties. Your solution will reduce by well over 95% except where the Soviets are able to destroy the shelter.

Now, regarding the military startegy/tactics I’m personally rather fond of a strategy aiming on taking Moscow before the winter sets in, thus robbing the SU the possibility to use their main RR hub and, if not destroying, at least sent into disarray the centralized beaurocracy of the Soviet State. To achieve this goal I think the Germans would have to concentrate on an axis of advance directed at Moscow while protecting their flanks, instead of trying to overrun everyplace at the sametime. A second important goal at the beginning of the conflict would also be to take the port of Murmansk and the Kola Peninsula to close one of the channels of trade of the SU. Also they should avoid the mess to urban fighting by simply surrounding the main urban areas and leaving 2nd class formations to deal with the mopping up/securing those pockets of free territory in their rear.
..

Taking Moscow and if Stalin is able to evacuate with a functioning government/state apparatus somewhere beyond the Urals, the Germans should than dig in for the Winter and on the next spring go for the second strategic target: the Caucuses’ oil fields.

Post June 1941 and barring another huge mistake by Stalin, I am not so sure it is possible and end up with Germany in a stronger position. The destruction of the Soviet Armies in the Ukraine was something that urgently needed to be done. And I don't see the existing forces/supply in any other location to have a realistic shot at taking and holding Moscow beside diverting the one panzer army back to the Moscow attack.

The only other solution would involve better supplies for the trust on Moscow and shorter pauses to improve the supply situation. IMO, this requires logistical planning and effort predating the invasion. More supplies have to be built up and we need a better logistical plan (convert RR faster, more narrow gauge RR engines, etc). It is not a hard problem for the Germans to solve, it just takes the GHQ (Hitler) taking logistics more seriously, but not seriously enough to realize Germany should not invade. Or we need a little bit more rational Hitler, but not a lot more rational.

It is sort of the WW1 dilemma. Once you realize the war will last many years and be a war of attrition that will ruin your nation even in victory, you cancel the war. You don't plan for the 4 year conquest of Russia. It is a writeable TL, but a hard to write POD.

 

[AdA]

Interesting points here, but I think this is getting a little off topic. My goal was to discuss how better, without hindsight and the influence if Hitler/Nazi leadership, would a militarily led Germany and its armed forces fare better in the Eastern front.

Politically, and with the Nazi political apparatus removed from power, I can see Germany making quite overtures to the West (in this case the sole remaining enemy in the West – the UK) to about a negotiated peace, maybe even offering to release the conquest countries including a rump Poland but I’m sure they would insist on the UK recognizing their supremacy in the European Continent with a sphere of influence covering most of it with a neutral weakened France.

But those considerations apart the exercise I though of was mainly focused on the military options. Without the meddling from Hitler and the influence of Nazism, the Whermacht Generals would be free to conduct a more professional campaign. They were experts at maneuver warefar, or at least better than the Soviets at this point, so without the insane goals and rash decisions like holding the line till the last man the war in the East could have been much longer. And if was longer and the Soviets had to endure greater hardship who knows if the SU wouldn’t just collapse under the social straines of the conflict?

Now, regarding the military startegy/tactics I’m personally rather fond of a strategy aiming on taking Moscow before the winter sets in, thus robbing the SU the possibility to use their main RR hub and, if not destroying, at least sent into disarray the centralized beaurocracy of the Soviet State. To achieve this goal I think the Germans would have to concentrate on an axis of advance directed at Moscow while protecting their flanks, instead of trying to overrun everyplace at the sametime. A second important goal at the beginning of the conflict would also be to take the port of Murmansk and the Kola Peninsula to close one of the channels of trade of the SU. Also they should avoid the mess to urban fighting by simply surrounding the main urban areas and leaving 2nd class formations to deal with the mopping up/securing those pockets of free territory in their rear.

Also I agree that without the support of the local populations those efforts are doomed. So offering local self-governing to the “released” populations would greatly improve Germany’s ability to support the prolongation of the conflict.

Taking Moscow and if Stalin is able to evacuate with a functioning government/state apparatus somewhere beyond the Urals, the Germans should than dig in for the Winter and on the next spring go for the second strategic target: the Caucuses’ oil fields.

Can't be done. Forces avaiable for OTL Barbarossa were not enouth for it to work, so even after everything that could possibly go wrong having gone right, it was doomed the moment they realised they had to A:Take Moscow B: Destroy Soviet Forces in AGS sector and had to choose one.
So to have a credible Barbarossa you have to totally redesign the Axis forces in such a way they can do both at the same time. (and note that does not mean the Germans would win, it just gives them a credible chance of doing so)

 

[juanml82]

Do not attack. Prepare huge fortifications in the border, including the Romanian border. Standardize equipment with allies. Focus in British trade, but back off if there is too much risk of antagonizing the Americans.
Even if the British pull the Italians out of Libya, they can't invade Europe on their own.
Sit and wait.

 

[AdA]

worst in 42

Waiting is not an option. The soviets had wasted 1937 to 1939, and were getting back into shape.
If they had one more year:
1. They would have lots more T34 and transioned to the much better T34M
2. The Airforce would have the Yak I30 and the MiG3 fighters and the Pe2 bomber and would have learned how to use them.
3. All those newly promoted post purges Divisional and Corps commanders would have time to learn their jobs.