What if Hitler did not retire the use of paratroopers?

Deleted member 1487

@wiking
I completely forgot about my old idea for a Nazi push into the Middle East (though it requires a pre-Crete PoD):
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/an-attempt-to-get-nazis-in-the-middle-east.306868/

Paras, based in Rhodes, take Cyprus, which is then used to cover a supply route into axis-friendly Syria and Iraq, in conjunction with a combined early Italo-German push into Egypt
Interesting premise for the above thread, but seems to require multiple PODs and no major butterflies from Wever living. Also I don't think Rhodes has the infrastructure to base and airlift an entire airborne division, nor is Cyprus that easy of a nut to crack, especially given that air support there would be really tough:
Med_Eastern.gif


Rhodes is a lot further from Cyprus than Southern Greek air bases are from western Crete. Plus with the limited air base space on Rhodes, getting the necessary air support is going to be nearly impossible, while the landing space is in the Eastern part of Cyprus with the air base at the capital, the RAF air base.

If Turkey joined Germany and let them use Turkish land for air basing then maybe taking Cyprus could work.

Looks like it might be an option from Adana:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adana_Şakirpaşa_Airport
 
Interesting premise for the above thread, but seems to require multiple PODs and no major butterflies from Wever living. Also I don't think Rhodes has the infrastructure to base and airlift an entire airborne division, nor is Cyprus that easy of a nut to crack, especially given that air support there would be really tough:
Med_Eastern.gif


Rhodes is a lot further from Cyprus than Southern Greek air bases are from western Crete. Plus with the limited air base space on Rhodes, getting the necessary air support is going to be nearly impossible, while the landing space is in the Eastern part of Cyprus with the air base at the capital, the RAF air base.

If Turkey joined Germany and let them use Turkish land for air basing then maybe taking Cyprus could work.

Looks like it might be an option from Adana:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adana_Şakirpaşa_Airport

Apparently the Italians had (at least) 3 air bases in Rhodes in 1940
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rhodes_(1943)#Italy
The Italian Royal Air Force had 3,000 personnel and about 60-65 aircraft in Rhodes, under air commodore Alberto Briganti. The Gadurra air base, near Kalathos, had no planes, as its torpedo bombers had been moved to Italy some months earlier, and the Kattavia airport had been abandoned in early 1943 and rendered unusable. The only active air base was in Maritsa, where the 30th Bombing Wing had twelve bombers, one transport squadron with four Savoia-Marchetti SM.81 and one Savoia-Marchetti SM.75, and a group of 40 fighters, mostly FIAT CR.42 and FIAT G.50, with six Macchi C.202.

as well as one each on Kos and Leros (which could be used by the longer-ranged bombers to make room for the Ju-52s on Rhodes)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kos
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leros

During Italian rule, Leros, with its excellent deep-water port of Lakki (Portolago), was transformed into a heavily fortified aeronautical and naval base, "the Corregidor of the Mediterranean", as Mussolini boasted.
while SBS units landed on Kos, occupying the port and the airfield near the village of Antimachia


As to the strength of the British force on Cyprus, believe it or not, apparently they only had 1500 men!!! And Churchill couldn't be bothered to reinforce the place.

IMO, if they can achieve surprise, the Fallschirmjager would have a decent chance of securing Cyprus in a coup de main.
 

Deleted member 1487

To airlift one regiment of the division something like 500 Ju52s were needed, which is what was used at Crete and they could only move one regiment at a time.

I can't access the page in the link, but 1500 defenders is not going to end well for Britain. The big issue though is that the Ju52 did not have the range to make a round trip with a full load of paras:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_52#Specifications_.28Junkers_Ju_52.2F3m_g7e.29
about 900km range, round trip assuming pure straight lines the entire way, not deviations (which is utterly impossible), is about 1000km:
https://www.distancecalculator.net/
 
I know I'm pointing out the obvious but a main component of a successful air drop is having control of the air. The early part of the Russian campaign most likely could have utilized air drops against key crossroads or objectives that could possibly allowed the armored spearheads to be even more effective. The total dominance of the Luftwaffe would have allowed them to pick and choose where and how. But many of these would have been on the fly, not an endearing situation for elite troops who like to plan.

The area I think might be most intriguing would be Rommel's push to Suez. Planned attacks against the airfields in El Alamein and Alexandria might have allowed Rommel to crack through the bottleneck at El Alamein and actually reach Cairo. Now this would have had to be coordinated prior to the 1st attack at Alamein before Rommel lost half his strength. The key targets would have to be allied airfields to temporarily knock out British airpower and allow the Luftwaffe free rein during this key battle.
 
Just to ask and not to disparage any paratroopers (as my own Grandfather was a paratrooper), but in the grand scheme when did they really successfully employ? Look at D-Day and Market Garden they have to get saved. Was it a proper operational concept for use of exceptional troops to do mass jumps?

Paratroopers, by definition, are lightly equipped infantry with very limited heavy equipment support. You can drop them (assuming certain preconditions are met), but once you drop them, they are on their own until help reaches them. Parartroopers, once they step out of the plane, can't retreat if things go wrong, whereas the guys on the ground are able to pull back if they encounter something unexpected.

If you try to drop paratroopers, and the other side have either a significant number of fighter planes, it can really ruin your day. Ditto flak.

If you try to drop paratroopers from too high, or in too high a wind, they'll be so scattered they'll not be able to do anything. If you drop them from too low, their parachutes won't work properly, which is a bit awkward for the chaps stepping out of the plane. When you drop paratroopers, you can't entirely control where they land, and an individual platoon could be scattered all over the shop. As the paratrooper is coming down, guys on the ground with bang sticks can make life really inconvenient.

All of those factors feed in to how you can use them. You need control of the air, you need surprise, you need to be able to get the cavalry there to relieve them fairly quickly, and you need a purpose for what they're doing. For all that Market Garden screwed up in a number of areas, the principle of using the paras to grab the bridges so that a route of advance for the iron coffins was sound. Whether the route was right, or the resources could have been better used elsewhere is a separate question. Grabbing a port or an airfield or a bridge, that's fine. Holding it for any significant length of time, not going to happen.

Oh, and parachuting onto a small island is no-ones idea of fun. A moderate wind, and half your force land in the sea carrying somewhat more than their own body weight. That's not ideal.
 

Deleted member 1487

I know I'm pointing out the obvious but a main component of a successful air drop is having control of the air. The early part of the Russian campaign most likely could have utilized air drops against key crossroads or objectives that could possibly allowed the armored spearheads to be even more effective. The total dominance of the Luftwaffe would have allowed them to pick and choose where and how. But many of these would have been on the fly, not an endearing situation for elite troops who like to plan.

The area I think might be most intriguing would be Rommel's push to Suez. Planned attacks against the airfields in El Alamein and Alexandria might have allowed Rommel to crack through the bottleneck at El Alamein and actually reach Cairo. Now this would have had to be coordinated prior to the 1st attack at Alamein before Rommel lost half his strength. The key targets would have to be allied airfields to temporarily knock out British airpower and allow the Luftwaffe free rein during this key battle.
One option if by some chance the Fallschirmjager are operations for day 1 of Barbarossa is dropping behind Riga and seizing the city against the weak Soviet forces that were there, which including the HQ of Northwest Front. The population was very friendly and tried to rise up against the Soviets, with German military help that would succeed and then decapitate the Front command, as well as bar the retreat of the Soviet 8th army across the Dvina into Estonia. Some can still slip out to the East, but most won't be able to due to the rapid advance of the German 18th army to the river in conjunction with 4th Panzer Group. That then leaves Estonia open to 18th army's advance. But if Crete happens than the 7th Flieger won't be available on June 22nd. Still after that there are options in July and August for drops in Estonia from say Riga provided the Germans don't get nearly as torn up at Crete as per OTL. Then of course in late August-September there are options to drop around Leningrad where too again the Luftwaffe had air supremacy thanks to VIII Fliegerkorps. So there are plenty of planned options for a large scale para drop in 1941 in Russia, though mostly in the North.

The problem with the Egyptian drop option is that it is way too far from airbases capable of handling the necessary number of Ju52s.
 

EMTSATX

Banned
@David Flin I agree and completely about the Pacific ocean. I don't know if Downfall happened if there were plans to jump into the home islands (my knowledge about the Pacific theater is not what it should be.)

When the 101st became a "Air Assault" that they Airborne was a dead as a concept. I understand that is what was needed in Vietnam.

I just happen to believe that that mass Assaults could have allocated in better way. Really one Country in WWII had the ability to pull it off. Overall Overlord was a "Murphy's law" type situation and Market Garden was a great idea the logistics nightmare.

I am talking about massed attacks not what was discussed here. Dropping of Elite missions (like Skorenzy grabbing Mussolini).
 

Deleted member 1487

Yes the boys of the All American division. Know fort Bragg well. I guess I was talking about the Screaming Eagles going over to Air Assaults. Which was what's needed.
The 82nd did a combat drop in the 1980s. There is still a role for airborne para drops.
 

EMTSATX

Banned
The 82nd did a combat drop in the 1980s. There is still a role for airborne para drops.
That would be "Urgent Fury"? Grenade? I think that for sure there is a purpose for Paratroopers. I just see it for commandos. SEAL teams, SAS, Spetznaz people like that.

I just don't see the 82nd doing a jump into NK, or Iran...
 
173rd Abn did drop at Katum in 1967 with 2/503 plus one artillery battery etc (team 3 and 6 of LRRP were inserted two days before)
173rd Abn did drop in Iraq at Bashur Airfield, the last battalion sized drop
70 from 504th, 82nd did drop in Afghanistan
One Company from 3rd Ranger Bn jumped in Afghanistan. I was at a Ranger reunion and there were five or six from one of the Ranger Bns
hanging out with we from RVN LRRP days and I was talking with whom I thought was a young sergeant. He was the company commander and
had made the Afghanistan jump. I was most impressed.
 
As to the strength of the British force on Cyprus, believe it or not, apparently they only had 1500 men!!! And Churchill couldn't be bothered to reinforce the place.

Crete was Greek (it is wise not to ask a Greek what happened to the Cretan Turks) but Cyprus was seen as of Turkish importance by the Turks as it was still nominally under their suzerainty until just before WW1. There was a very real chance that a German/Italian invasion of Cyprus would trigger a Turkish response and entry into the war on the Allied side. With all the other claims on Commonwealth forces the 1,500 troops formed both support services and were a tripwire not a defensive force. One might wonder if the Axis could do a deal with the Turks to offer them Cyprus but the Turks could recognise the thin end of the wedge.
 
None of those were absent around Leningrad or Moscow provided enemy resistance could be turned from behind, which airborne ops would allow.

Come on. You were the one mentioning the swampy terrain on the Leningrad front. Swampy and forested and short on decent roads, I'll add. All of that is a problem for the paratroopers, you say; but it isn't for German armor at the end of its logistical tether? To continue with the Market Garden comparison, all of the German armored leftovers would never have stopped the Allied ground forces - were it not for the fact that the terrain was extremely difficult, channelling those Allied forces into chokepoints. See the resemblance?

Now, the situation on the Mozhaisk front is rather different and there is a decent possibility there, yes. But that's because the ground forces there would have a shot at having the mobility, range and, possibly, logistics needed. The points I made. In other words, the point remains that for airborne operations to work, you need ground forces quickly and effectively coming in, like in Varsity.
 

Deleted member 1487

Come on. You were the one mentioning the swampy terrain on the Leningrad front. Swampy and forested and short on decent roads, I'll add. All of that is a problem for the paratroopers, you say; but it isn't for German armor at the end of its logistical tether? To continue with the Market Garden comparison, all of the German armored leftovers would never have stopped the Allied ground forces - were it not for the fact that the terrain was extremely difficult, channelling those Allied forces into chokepoints. See the resemblance?

Now, the situation on the Mozhaisk front is rather different and there is a decent possibility there, yes. But that's because the ground forces there would have a shot at having the mobility, range and, possibly, logistics needed. The points I made. In other words, the point remains that for airborne operations to work, you need ground forces quickly and effectively coming in, like in Varsity.
Depends on where around Leningrad, most of the area was swampy, but apparently enough wasn't that Panzer and motorized corps were able to operate. A good drop zone/target would have been the rail/road junction at the town of Krasnogvardiesk:
Leningrad_Map_1941.jpg



Here is a detailed German military map of the area, too big to hotlink:
http://wwii-photos-maps.com/germancityregionalmaps/slides/Leningrad.jpg

The big difference is that there aren't Soviet armored left overs and they didn't stop German armored units in 1941 until they were literally on the outskirts of the city on the Neva river. Of course if the paras drop behind the defensive line on the rail supply point sustaining the front line on the Luga, then the line will collapse that much more quickly and allow for a shot at Leningrad proper without the infantry being able to fall back in order on the city. The Paras would help clear the way for the armor, as the Soviets were down to using newly raised infantry formations without much heavy equipment and the German light infantry would do quite well in the forested areas when on the ground, as they did IOTL once they depeloyed into the region in September after the siege began. The Germans were not at the end of the logistical tether in August-September 1941 around Leningrad, it was the closest part of the front to Germany and supplies were being shipped in via the Baltic ports. The issue for this area was in July, but by August the situation had been dramatically improved.
 
Krasnogvardeysk is named Gatchina today, a historical town. If you look it up on Google maps on the 1 km scale, centering the town in the center of your screen, you'll see some 15 bodies of water - today, and that is not counting rivers and streams but only lakes, ponds and the like. Back then, it was worse, with the terrain largely not drained in the whole area, and General Raus, while boasting about how easily his division took the strongly fortified enemy lines there, still has to say that "tank-proof watercourses or swamps ran along nearly the entire front of the outer defenses".

That said, I'm making a general point here, not just discussing a single instance or case study. It would be nice if you acknowledged the general point already, since you seem not willing to discuss it.
 

Deleted member 1487

Krasnogvardeysk is named Gatchina today, a historical town. If you look it up on Google maps on the 1 km scale, centering the town in the center of your screen, you'll see some 15 bodies of water - today, and that is not counting rivers and streams but only lakes, ponds and the like. Back then, it was worse, with the terrain largely not drained in the whole area, and General Raus, while boasting about how easily his division took the strongly fortified enemy lines there, still has to say that "tank-proof watercourses or swamps ran along nearly the entire front of the outer defenses".

That said, I'm making a general point here, not just discussing a single instance or case study. It would be nice if you acknowledged the general point already, since you seem not willing to discuss it.
Which general point?
Also the areas the Fallschirmjager deploy in the Netherlands were watery and they managed to touch down fine and only ran into trouble due to resistance at the drop points being unexpectedly heavy, while the same situation at Crete was an issue, though the paras managed to do fine in the rough mountain terrain.

In terms of the city itself if that was deemed too unfit of terrain, they could deploy to the north/northwest where there is open ground based on the terrain map I posted before.

Raus was talking about the Luga defense line, which is well south of the area I'm suggesting the paras drop.
 
Which general point?

Now really. You need me to repeat it.
Airborne operations, alone, seldom succeed, only under exceptional circumstances. You need the other half: ground troops that advance quickly and link up, valorizing the key terrain the paratroopers captured.
Ground troops need strength - the one point you seem to be assessing - but also mobility, range, and logistical wherewithal. Points you still don't seem to see.

Also the areas the Fallschirmjager deploy in the Netherlands were watery and they managed to touch down fine and only ran into trouble due to resistance at the drop points being unexpectedly heavy, while the same situation at Crete was an issue, though the paras managed to do fine in the rough mountain terrain.

In terms of the city itself if that was deemed too unfit of terrain, they could deploy to the north/northwest where there is open ground based on the terrain map I posted before.

Yes, you don't see the point. The point isn't just that some terrain is less suitable for paratroopers; but also that some terrain - often the same kind of terrain - isn't suitable for quick, mechanized, armored movements.

Raus was talking about the Luga defense line, which is well south of the area I'm suggesting the paras drop.

Exactly. That's the point. You can have paratroopers behind Krasnogvardeysk. That won't change that the panzers have to cross swampy ground to link up with them.

From Kolobanov's wiki page in English (bold is mine):

At the Battle of Krasnogvardeysk on 20 August 1941 (part of the Battle of Leningrad), Kolobanov's unit ambushed a column of German armour. The vanguard of the German 8th, 6th and 1st Panzer Divisions was approaching Krasnogvardeysk (now Gatchina) near Leningrad (now St Petersburg), and the only Soviet force available to stop it consisted of five well-hidden KV-1 tanks, dug in within a grove at the edge of a swamp. KV-1 tank no. 864 was commanded by the leader of this small force, Lieutenant Kolobanov.

The German forces attacked Krasnogvardeysk from three directions. Near Myza Vojskovitsi (German:Wojskowitzy), Seppelevo, Vangostarosta (now Noviy Uchkhoz), Ilkino and Pitkelevo settlements, the geography favoured the Soviet defenders as the only road in the region passed the swamp, and the defenders commanded this choke point from their hidden position. Lieutenant Kolobanov had carefully studied the situation and readied his detachment the day before. Each KV-1 tank carried twice the normal amount of ammunition, two-thirds of which were armour-piercing rounds. Kolobanov ordered his other commanders to hold their fire and await orders. He did not want to reveal the size of his force, so only one tank at a time engaged the enemy.

The 6th Panzer Division's vanguard entered directly into the well-prepared Soviet ambush. The gunner in Kolobanov's KV-1, Andrej Usov, knocked out the leading German tank with its first shot. The German column assumed that the tank had hit an anti-tank mine and, failing to realize that they were being ambushed, stopped. This gave to Usov the opportunity to destroy the second tank. The Germans realized they were under attack but were unable to locate the origin of the shots. While the German tanks fired blindly, Kolobanov's tank knocked out the trailing German tank, boxing in the entire column.

Although the Germans now knew where they were being attacked from, they could only spot Lieutenant Kolobanov's tank, and now attempted to engage an unseen enemy. The German tanks got bogged down when they moved off the road onto the surrounding soft ground making them easy targets. Twenty-two German tanks and two towed artillery pieces were knocked out by Kolobanov's tank before it ran out of ammunition.[1] Kolobanov ordered in another KV-1, and 21 more German tanks were destroyed before the half-hour battle ended. A total of 43 German tanks had been destroyed by the five Soviet KV-1s (two more remained in reserve).

For their actions, Lieutenant Kolobanov was awarded the Order of the Red Banner and Andrej Usov was awarded the Order of Lenin.

---

This is, may I remind you, the location you pointed out as suitable terrain. Now tell me this doesn't echo the situation of XXX Corps on their road to Arnhem.
 

Deleted member 1487

Now really. You need me to repeat it.
Airborne operations, alone, seldom succeed, only under exceptional circumstances. You need the other half: ground troops that advance quickly and link up, valorizing the key terrain the paratroopers captured.
Ground troops need strength - the one point you seem to be assessing - but also mobility, range, and logistical wherewithal. Points you still don't seem to see.
.
I wanted you to be explicitly clear so that there was no misunderstanding on the point you wanted me to agree on. The answer isn't quite that cut and dry, much depends on the terrain, airborne resupply, opposition, etc. During WW2 the types of objectives sought against the opposition experienced meant that success was best had by forces that were quickly linked by ground forces, but there were exceptions like Crete where the airborne seized the objective on their own and inflicted heavily disproportionate casualties despite having minimal support via the sea and none via land.

Yes, you don't see the point. The point isn't just that some terrain is less suitable for paratroopers; but also that some terrain - often the same kind of terrain - isn't suitable for quick, mechanized, armored movements.
.
I thought you were suggesting that they'd have a problem landing in the the swampy ground. The thing is the Germans did advance over that terrain and got to the edge of Leningrad pretty quickly once they went on the attack.

Exactly. That's the point. You can have paratroopers behind Krasnogvardeysk. That won't change that the panzers have to cross swampy ground to link up with them.
.
And they advanced across it fine per OTL and got to Leningrad. They had to fight their way there, but the Soviets were so overloaded fighting forces at the front, they didn't anything to spare to deal with an entire division behind their lines at the same time. Unlike with Market-Garden there was no extra armored corps rebuilding on the drop zone.

From Kolobanov's wiki page in English (bold is mine):

At the Battle of Krasnogvardeysk on 20 August 1941 (part of the Battle of Leningrad), Kolobanov's unit ambushed a column of German armour. The vanguard of the German 8th, 6th and 1st Panzer Divisions was approaching Krasnogvardeysk (now Gatchina) near Leningrad (now St Petersburg), and the only Soviet force available to stop it consisted of five well-hidden KV-1 tanks, dug in within a grove at the edge of a swamp. KV-1 tank no. 864 was commanded by the leader of this small force, Lieutenant Kolobanov.

The German forces attacked Krasnogvardeysk from three directions. Near Myza Vojskovitsi (German:Wojskowitzy), Seppelevo, Vangostarosta (now Noviy Uchkhoz), Ilkino and Pitkelevo settlements, the geography favoured the Soviet defenders as the only road in the region passed the swamp, and the defenders commanded this choke point from their hidden position. Lieutenant Kolobanov had carefully studied the situation and readied his detachment the day before. Each KV-1 tank carried twice the normal amount of ammunition, two-thirds of which were armour-piercing rounds. Kolobanov ordered his other commanders to hold their fire and await orders. He did not want to reveal the size of his force, so only one tank at a time engaged the enemy.

The 6th Panzer Division's vanguard entered directly into the well-prepared Soviet ambush. The gunner in Kolobanov's KV-1, Andrej Usov, knocked out the leading German tank with its first shot. The German column assumed that the tank had hit an anti-tank mine and, failing to realize that they were being ambushed, stopped. This gave to Usov the opportunity to destroy the second tank. The Germans realized they were under attack but were unable to locate the origin of the shots. While the German tanks fired blindly, Kolobanov's tank knocked out the trailing German tank, boxing in the entire column.

Although the Germans now knew where they were being attacked from, they could only spot Lieutenant Kolobanov's tank, and now attempted to engage an unseen enemy. The German tanks got bogged down when they moved off the road onto the surrounding soft ground making them easy targets. Twenty-two German tanks and two towed artillery pieces were knocked out by Kolobanov's tank before it ran out of ammunition.[1] Kolobanov ordered in another KV-1, and 21 more German tanks were destroyed before the half-hour battle ended. A total of 43 German tanks had been destroyed by the five Soviet KV-1s (two more remained in reserve).

For their actions, Lieutenant Kolobanov was awarded the Order of the Red Banner and Andrej Usov was awarded the Order of Lenin.

---

This is, may I remind you, the location you pointed out as suitable terrain. Now tell me this doesn't echo the situation of XXX Corps on their road to Arnhem.
So they only forces available to stop them were 5 tanks according to your link. What would those 5 do with an entire division behind them? Especially armor unsupported by infantry then having to deal with enemy light infantry in terrain that favors infantry? If anything those paras would aid the advance immeasurably by overloading Soviet defenses. What your entire spiel fails to note is that the Germans pushed through that ambush and went on to take the city and encircle Leningrad soon after.

Also I've seen that narrative disputed for it's accuracy and given that a number of cherished Soviet stories have proven to be myths, like the last stand of the Guardsman around Moscow:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panfilov's_Twenty-Eight_Guardsmen#Afanasyev_Report
Just made into a Russian movie BTW, same with the 'enemy at the gates' Zaitsev sniper duel being unsubstantiated, it is likely this is another one of the heroic Soviet myths of the era (BTW it wasn't just the Soviets, the Stuka pilot Rudel's claims are largely Nazi myths too as proven by research into claims histories and Soviet records for areas where claims were made).


PeculiaritiesMap11.jpg

http://www.allworldwars.com/Peculiarities-of-Russian-Warfare-by-Erhard-Raus.html
App. 10. Russian defense against German break-through of the Leningrad line (September 1941)

218. The area of Krasnogvardeysk, south of Leningrad, had been developed according to the above-mentioned principles into an outlying fortress. During early September 1941, it presented great difficulties to the advance of several German corps. Krasnogvardeysk blocked all highways and railroads leading to Leningrad from the south, thus constituting a main bulwark of Russian resistance. The Russians defended it tenaciously. Repeated attacks by several infantry divisions were repulsed. Only in the course of a general attack on the Leningrad Line, and after bitter pillbox fighting in the area immediately surrounding Krasnogvardeysk, was that town finally taken from the rear by a carefully prepared surprise break-through to the west of it. This typical example of the Russian method of defending a methodically fortified zone, and its capture by means of an adroitly led attack, will be discussed in detail in the following paragraphs.

219. Appendix 10 shows the defense system of Krasnogvardeysk. That system had been prepared long in advance, and consisted of an outer belt of concrete and earth bunkers, with numerous intermediate installations which were interconnected by trench systems that could easily be defended. There were tank-proof watercourses or swamps almost everywhere in front of the outer defense belt. Where this natural protection was lacking, wide antitank ditches had been dug.
So a para-drop behind the city and attacking it from the rear would have made the job of the armor divisions much easier and resulted in the breach of a critical defensive position the Soviets held outside the city, which gave them time to build up defenses around the city proper.
 
Top