No Manstein

[jmc247]

Primarily because Model shot himself and Rundstedt fought in the West.

Model was a skilled general who though fairly amoral was unlike Manstein in that he was at least willing to fall on his sword instead of making excuses like a number of German generals for their actions and their loss. I believe he also told Hitler to pound sand when it came to using his troops to put down the Warsaw upring. Rundstedt was an old man who though being a coward when it came to dealing with the Bohemian Corporal was at least willing to be fired twice I believe for saying the war needed to end.

 

[Snake Featherston]

Model was a skilled general who though fairly amoral was unlike Manstein in that he was at least willing to fall on his sword instead of making excuses like a number of German generals for their actions and their loss. I believe he also told Hitler to pound sand when it came to using his troops to put down the Warsaw upring. Rundstedt was an old man who though being a coward when it came to dealing with the Bohemian Corporal was at least willing to be fired twice I believe for saying the war needed to end.

More detailed version of what I was referring to, yes.

 

[Julian]

Model was a great commander because he got things done. Other commanders, including Manstein, were certainly brilliant tacticians and performed well in the war. However, a vital aspect of being a commander is dealing with ones superiors. The vast majority of high ranking German commanders failed to deal with Hitler or force him to accept their point of view, especially later in the war. Model however was held in great esteem by Hitler and was one of the few men who could actually intimidate him, rather than the usual reverse. Combined with a masterful propensity to control intelligence and convert even the most unrealistic orders into excellent battle plans he was able to fight as he wished rather than as Hitler wanted, and it shows. Even in 1944 in the retreat from Leningrad he was able to pretend to follow Hitler's orders, retreat in an orderly fashion, and preserve the majority of German forces intact while inflicting heavy Soviet losses.

 

[Mostlyharmless]

While most people agree that Walter Model was a good man to send for when your front had been broken and you were facing disaster, there is some doubt whether he was the ideal man to command an attack. In particular, Steven Newton is quite critical of his performance at Kursk http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=newton model kursk&f=false. As well as the issue of the two months delay, he seems to have been ineffective during the attack. Possibly this is due to his instincts taking him to the place where the problems were most serious. This is useful if you are defending but German theory in attack was to reinforce success rather than failure.

 

[BlairWitch749]

While most people agree that Walter Model was a good man to send for when your front had been broken and you were facing disaster, there is some doubt whether he was the ideal man to command an attack. In particular, Steven Newton is quite critical of his performance at Kursk http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=newton model kursk&f=false. As well as the issue of the two months delay, he seems to have been ineffective during the attack. Possibly this is due to his instincts taking him to the place where the problems were most serious. This is useful if you are defending but German theory in attack was to reinforce success rather than failure.

Model was brilliant on the attack... Bayilstock, Smolensk, Kiev, Vyzama, Briansk; he played a critical role, and his division alone took 200,000 prisoners

Kursk is a case of many factors... he specifically shared photos with Hitler and told him he didn't like the attack; Manstein, Speer and Guderian and the OKH war diary all verified this. Kluge's plan of attack was stupid and kept the panzers in reserve for a breakthrough Model was sure wouldn't come instead of using them to crack the Russian front lines to allow an advance in the first place. Model also got fucked in the allotment of new armored vehicles; the main striking power of the army was concentrated in Mansteins 3rd Germanic, 2nd ss and 48th panzer corps... Model had lower concentrations of cutting edge equipment and on top of that the supposedly good stuff he got had issues such as the ferdinand tigers enjoyed flame thrower baths due their their not having machine guns

And when the attack didn't get anywhere after 2 days, he called it off and put his foot down and threatened his resignation if the attack continued... few others could be so brave to Hitler

 

[Snake Featherston]

I might note that I agree with Blair here, and that Model had the good sense to realize that the attack had failed and to refuse to reinforce failure. If von Manstein had continued his own offensive longer, it could have potentially produced an encirclement victory for Ivan Konev, whose forces were mostly unphased by the battle and were fresh and ready to assume the offensive, in addition to Vatutin's which would in this case be the bait for the Soviet trap.

 

[Snake Featherston]

While most people agree that Walter Model was a good man to send for when your front had been broken and you were facing disaster, there is some doubt whether he was the ideal man to command an attack. In particular, Steven Newton is quite critical of his performance at Kursk http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=newton model kursk&f=false. As well as the issue of the two months delay, he seems to have been ineffective during the attack. Possibly this is due to his instincts taking him to the place where the problems were most serious. This is useful if you are defending but German theory in attack was to reinforce success rather than failure.

On the contrary, Model was very good at the attack and was actually rather more frugal with his men's lives than was the norm for either side in that war. His "defensive" use of firepower instead of trusting in willpower to overcome firepower meant his forces were able to attack with fewer losses than was the case elsewhere in terms of Axis warfare. Model's accomplishments in Operation Typhoon were tactical masterpieces, and his strategic withdrawal of Army Group North ensured it remained the most intact German force in terms of WWII (admittedly it was trapped in the Courland Pocket, but still).......

However in terms of more mobile, fluid operations Erich von Manstein is a leap and a bound above most of his contemporaries. Third Kharkov in particular was brilliant as it enabled the Germans to hold the initiative one last time and thwart the second Soviet attempt to win the war all along the front.

 

[BlairWitch749]

On the contrary, Model was very good at the attack and was actually rather more frugal with his men's lives than was the norm for either side in that war. His "defensive" use of firepower instead of trusting in willpower to overcome firepower meant his forces were able to attack with fewer losses than was the case elsewhere in terms of Axis warfare. Model's accomplishments in Operation Typhoon were tactical masterpieces, and his strategic withdrawal of Army Group North ensured it remained the most intact German force in terms of WWII (admittedly it was trapped in the Courland Pocket, but still).......

However in terms of more mobile, fluid operations Erich von Manstein is a leap and a bound above most of his contemporaries. Third Kharkov in particular was brilliant as it enabled the Germans to hold the initiative one last time and thwart the second Soviet attempt to win the war all along the front.

Model never really got the opportunity to command panzer armies on the attack when the Germans held the initiative, so our ability to see into what his talents in this arena is pretty limited

regardless agreed with snake

 

[Deleted member 1487]

On the contrary, Model was very good at the attack and was actually rather more frugal with his men's lives than was the norm for either side in that war. His "defensive" use of firepower instead of trusting in willpower to overcome firepower meant his forces were able to attack with fewer losses than was the case elsewhere in terms of Axis warfare. Model's accomplishments in Operation Typhoon were tactical masterpieces, and his strategic withdrawal of Army Group North ensured it remained the most intact German force in terms of WWII (admittedly it was trapped in the Courland Pocket, but still).......

However in terms of more mobile, fluid operations Erich von Manstein is a leap and a bound above most of his contemporaries. Third Kharkov in particular was brilliant as it enabled the Germans to hold the initiative one last time and thwart the second Soviet attempt to win the war all along the front.

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

Model was considered a thorough and competent leader but was known to "demand too much, and that too quickly", accepting no excuses for failure from either his own men or those who outranked him. His troops were said to have "suffered under his too-frequent absences and erratic, inconsistent demands", for he frequently lost sight of what was or was not practically possible. Yet his dislike of bureaucracy and his crude speech often made him well liked by many under his command.[2]

 

[Snake Featherston]

Well, to be fair the same applies to a number of good generals. See: Patton, George S. or Zhukov, Georgi K.