You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
alternatehistory.com
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=380636
I did a thread recently about a different strategy during Barbarossa and the resulting logistics helping capture Moscow, which led me into reading about logistics for Barbarossa and I was struck how wet weather really impacted the campaign of 1941. And just browsing through Stolfi's "Hitler's Panzer East", a terrible book BTW in its arguments, but nevertheless with some interesting data about the Barbarossa campaign, and the author suggested that a drought in 1941 could have led to the fall of Moscow in 1941.
Its an intriguing idea because floods, wet roads, and mud especially by late Autumn really hurt Axis logistics. The USSR was periodically subject to drought or at least dry weather as in 1946-47 when that resulted in famine, so its not impossible.
So what if there was a drought in the USSR in 1941? How would it have impacted logistics if there wasn't the late floodings and mud, plus the early Rasputitsa in October-November 1941? I'm not suggesting an early start to the invasion, rather the impact of dry weather once the historical invasion began. For one thing it would really help Guderian in his drive into Ukraine in late August and into September, as his units suffered badly from flooding and mud during his push. For another Typhoon was pretty much immediately subjected to serious mud issues during the initial pocket battles and that seriously hampered truck logistics from early October on and bogged down the Axis offensive in all directions. A lack of significant mud until November would dramatically improve logistics and mobility for Axis units on the attack and dependent on truck borne supplies, while also helping rail conversion units get their job done sooner, as wet weather really impacted the rate of rail conversion.