WI: Barbarossa operation not delayed?

Leningrad was completely surrounded during the siege, and left to its own devices. How would the fall of Moscow affect it?

Well not completly. Supplies were funneled in along the ice road out of the Moscow area. It also tied down an entire army group. The bridgehead east of Leningrad tied down 8 German divisions by itself. Had Moscow fallen, I think there is little doubt that AGC reinforcement would have been sent North to finally take Leningrad and force a link with the Finns along the Karelian Istmus and the Svir river.
 
I think capturing Moscow (even if everything else stays the same) would have to important consequences:

1. It would be an important symbolic victory. The capital has fallen... ok, in 1812 Moscow fell too, but it wasn't the capital then.

2. Moscow is an important railroad hub. Take it, and logistics become a lot more difficult.

However, it's deepest Russian winter, the Siberian troops will arrive, and the Wehrmacht is strained. Maybe the Germans can get it, but will lose it not too much later. (In this case I fear that Hitler will order to destroy everything in Moscow he can.)

Though if the Germans can hold the Siberians out...

Also perhaps some general somehow kills Stalin, takes power and creates a rump state in Siberia.
 
I reckon Moscow would become a large scale Stalingrad but instead of just the south being retaken the whole centre is blow open leading to a much more successfull Soviet counter offensive and maybe even stopping Germany from launching another offensive until 1943,imagine Bagration in the winter of 1941.

Heinrici:"If we had not stood and fought during that winter there would only be one way to describe the situation-disaster"

Tony,the foresight war was a great read but one thing I didnt get was how the Germans took Moscow in late 1941 but were in Perm in Mid 1943,I mean even with updated technology theres no way the Germans could advance that fast against an enemy thats second only to the Japanese in fanaticism,coupled with extremely extended supply lines and with the Soviets recieving massive British aid.
 
The germans would have attacked earlier only if the weather would have allowed it. Having your panzers stuked up in the mud is not a strategic gain.

As for Moscow, I don't know if the germans could have taken it. The russians would have put up an hell of fight for her and concentrated most of their forces around the city.

Also perhaps some general somehow kills Stalin, takes power and creates a rump state in Siberia.

Unlikely. They didn't revolt before during the purges, why they should do it when the rodina is under attack by an enemy who wants to destroythe whole nation and enslave the russian people?
 
The Balkans didn't delay the start of Barbarossa, the late arrival of transport to divisions expected to start Barbarossa did. The Germans were flailing around France trying to find trucks to send east in early 1941, and didn't succeed until just before the start of Barby. Perhaps if they started collecting earlier and put more effort into their own truck production from the day the war started Barby could go in as soon as the weather allowed.

That said I think Moscow was the key strategic hub of European Russia, so even if it's fall didn't make the Soviets collapse it would severely hamper their ability to continue the fight as a great power, and thus make surrender a more enticing proposition.
 
If Moscow was about to fall would Uncle Joe stay in fight or would he flee?

IMO Stalin didn't flee from Moscow because he was somewhat reassured by the arrival of Siberian troops. IMO if things got really hopeless, he would flee - after all, who could lead the Motherland to victory but him?

Riain said:
The Balkans didn't delay the start of Barbarossa, the late arrival of transport to divisions expected to start Barbarossa did. The Germans were flailing around France trying to find trucks to send east in early 1941, and didn't succeed until just before the start of Barby. Perhaps if they started collecting earlier and put more effort into their own truck production from the day the war started Barby could go in as soon as the weather allowed.

That said I think Moscow was the key strategic hub of European Russia, so even if it's fall didn't make the Soviets collapse it would severely hamper their ability to continue the fight as a great power, and thus make surrender a more enticing proposition.

That and the heavy spring rains. Most of the border rivers were flooded IIRC
 

Deleted member 1487

The weather only allowed for about a month advance of the timetable, but serious issues remain. Yugoslavia would exist even without Greece, but that can be settled to a managable level if Hitler did not insist that they join the Axis. This was not the only problem, but it did turn out to be the straw for the camel's back. So if things do for some fortuitous reason play out and the invasion happens around the 28th of May? Well, there are several issues: the pockets in the Ukraine. Typhoon had to be delayed while Guderian diverted his panzers to close the pocket. This delay cost about a month or more, but the attack on Mosow would not be able to continue anyway, as the rail lines that supported Typhoon were not built yet and really were not ready until after the pockets were dissolved. The extra troops and equipment not wasted in the Balkans would be available, but this would not be enough to close the pockets without Guderian and they would be an extra drain on a taut supply situation. Though a net boon, they are not decisive.

If the Germans do reach Moscow with better weather, the same troops that stopped the Germans' advance OTL are still there and are going to stop them again. The extra time and weather will just help the Germans dig in before the real cold hits. This may actually prevent as many winter casualites as OTL, but it doesn't change the strategic situation. The dilemas of 1942 are still unchanged, but now the Germans have more men and have had some more time to work on the rail system. Butterflies will change the course of the war, but the outcome is likely unchanged.

Barbarossa was a toss of the dice and when Russia does not collapse as expected, the initial "oh fuck what now?" reaction still happens. From here on out, German has lost the initiative and flails about for a feature to capture and win. When the Russian army doesn't stand and fight, they are not captured. Therefore they could not be the goal; one cannot destroy and defeat what does stand and fight. The extra troops not tied down in the Balkans can be used in Russia which means something like 300,000+ troops plus equipment. This also means that the Fallschirmjager can be used, but they are likely to be used against Malta and in African campaign, as there were not many opportunities for their use in Russia outside the light infantry role (I know they were historically used in Russia, but they really were misused and wasted). The partisan situation gets better as the Balkan troops are used in behind the lines ops. That means too that it is likely Russia is destroyed worse, as more men are running around destroying villages and going after guerillas. But it does mean that supply lines are better off, so the massive support that the Russians had from partisans, especially in later war intelligence and sabotage ops., gets reduced by the extra commitment of troops.

It is likely to mean more Russian casualties to move forward and the war takes a bit longer, but nothing major changes in the outcome, just how long Russia survives as a communist state before the mortal wound of WW2 catches up with her.
 
s

Although a small number of divisions took part in the operations in the Balkans they use around 1/3 of the mobile forces and panzers available at the time.
The Germans could have made some minor adjustments and Barbarossa would have been a total success.
1-Improve their logistics.(find a way to make use of the Russian rail system)
2-Cancel production of Mark III and switch to Mark IV or use its chassis for assault guns.(this was done later on when it was obvious that the Mark III was useless)
3-Cancel the airborne assault of Crete. The paratroopers would have seen better use in Russia and Germany would have had more transport aircraft.(the British at this time were having a hard time to bomb Berlin and other German targets from their more modern bases in England let alone try and bomb Romanian oil field from a improvised base in Crete)
4-Give the commanders clear objectives and stoop switching targets.
5-Put the economy on a war footing and start mass-producing.(this was a political decision. Hitler didn’t believe in mass-production it didn’t sit well with the Nazi ideology)
The biggest mistake Hitler made was to declare war on the US.
 
In the practical sense, this means that the British can probably total Romania's oil fields by bomber or commando raid while building up forces in Greece. By the time it becomes clear that the USSR will not fall in a single campaign Italy has lost all of North Africa and fears for Sicily while the British have 8-10 divisions in Greece plus several Greek divisions much better equipped PLUS the announcement of the US entering the war.
Assuming that Greece wants to play along.
The Greek government very well knew that there would be a German response, if they allowed British bombers to be stationed in Greece and bomb Romania. Greece did not have to win anything out of this, it would only lose. The Greek government knew very well, that provoking a German attack and transforming the Greek landscape to a battlefield for German and British forces was not in their interests.
Therefore, the Greeks may indeed seek a diplomatic solution with Italy, when they realise they cannot oust the Italians from Albania, which they probably couldn't in 1941 after both sides became exhausted. In return the border is changed a bit and Greece gets to keep parts of Southern Albania (which were inhabited by Greeks in a large part anyway). Perhaps a solution can be worked out concerning the Dodecanese too?

During the rest of the war, Greece goes neutral, the British leave Crete.

Two butterflies that result from this development are:

1. The Italians get annihilated in Northern Africa, since no British forces are necessary in Greece and the Aegean.

2. The Germans still have an intact paratroopers' force. They may use it against Malta, but they would have to do this pretty fast if they wanted to and only if they seriously envisioned forming an Afrika Korps. Which again means, that the Italians would have to survive 1941 in North Africa. This is questionable as the "Operation Compass successfull" thread pointed out. Furthermore do not forget that in the "Operation Compass successfull" thread the British still committed troops, ships and aircraft in Greece during the German invasion. Without the invasion taking place, the British have even more resources to throw at the Italians.

At a later point during 1942, with North Africa secured and the Dodecanese still in the posession of Italy, the British may decide to invade the Dodecanese. With Greece neutral, mostly Italian troops are stationed there and they are probably doomed if the British decide to give it a serious try. Then you have Ploesti threatened by RAF air attacks.
 
Last edited:
I said it before, I'm going to say it again. Early Barbarossa might turn into early disaster for Nazi regime, instead of crushing Soviets completely. It is virtually unknown among Western historians, but Red Army was on heightened alert in Spring 1941 and was preparing to fight defensive battle. Sure it wasn't a "war in everything but actual fight" state of alert, but officers' vacations were cancelled and troops knew what to do in case of German attack. However, nobody expected Germany to attack that late, so on June 14 TASS issued infamous statement that all rumours of forthcoming war with Germany are groundless provocations of imperialist media and Red Army went into a state of chaos known as "summer maintenance". Lots of officers went on vacations, lots of tanks and artillery pieces were disassembled for maintenance, supplies had been placed into long-term storage far from troops' location etc. The rest is history.

Now, assuming an earlier attack, Wehrmacht would be dealing with somewhat more prepared foe, and German list of advances against entrenched Red Army is spotty (from Vyazma victory to Murmansk defeat). It wouldn't be too ASBish to assume OTL Spring 1943 or even Spring 1944 (that's pushing it, but not quite to ASB territory) frontline as peak of German success...
 

Deleted member 1487

That does bring up a very interesting point. If the Germans attack earlier that means they run into a prepared Red Army, which could mean they don't advance nearly as far. This is actually a good thing for Germany, as they are likely still to inflict large casualties on the enemy, though not as many, and are not as far forward and out of logistic range, which in turn could mean more survive the winter. That would be a interesting war, one in which the maneuver phases last longer and the Russians actually try and stand and fight instead of retreating and drawing the Germans in, thus overextending them. That would mean no Stalingrad or siege of Leningrad, but more troops and industry for the Soviets. That would be interesting indeed...
 
IMO Stalin didn't flee from Moscow because he was somewhat reassured by the arrival of Siberian troops. IMO if things got really hopeless, he would flee - after all, who could lead the Motherland to victory but him?



That and the heavy spring rains. Most of the border rivers were flooded IIRC

And if the Germans are lucky Stalin will live. If he dies someone more competent might take power.

The weather only allowed for about a month advance of the timetable, but serious issues remain. Yugoslavia would exist even without Greece, but that can be settled to a managable level if Hitler did not insist that they join the Axis. This was not the only problem, but it did turn out to be the straw for the camel's back. So if things do for some fortuitous reason play out and the invasion happens around the 28th of May? Well, there are several issues: the pockets in the Ukraine. Typhoon had to be delayed while Guderian diverted his panzers to close the pocket. This delay cost about a month or more, but the attack on Mosow would not be able to continue anyway, as the rail lines that supported Typhoon were not built yet and really were not ready until after the pockets were dissolved. The extra troops and equipment not wasted in the Balkans would be available, but this would not be enough to close the pockets without Guderian and they would be an extra drain on a taut supply situation. Though a net boon, they are not decisive.

If the Germans do reach Moscow with better weather, the same troops that stopped the Germans' advance OTL are still there and are going to stop them again. The extra time and weather will just help the Germans dig in before the real cold hits. This may actually prevent as many winter casualites as OTL, but it doesn't change the strategic situation. The dilemas of 1942 are still unchanged, but now the Germans have more men and have had some more time to work on the rail system. Butterflies will change the course of the war, but the outcome is likely unchanged.

Barbarossa was a toss of the dice and when Russia does not collapse as expected, the initial "oh fuck what now?" reaction still happens. From here on out, German has lost the initiative and flails about for a feature to capture and win. When the Russian army doesn't stand and fight, they are not captured. Therefore they could not be the goal; one cannot destroy and defeat what does stand and fight. The extra troops not tied down in the Balkans can be used in Russia which means something like 300,000+ troops plus equipment. This also means that the Fallschirmjager can be used, but they are likely to be used against Malta and in African campaign, as there were not many opportunities for their use in Russia outside the light infantry role (I know they were historically used in Russia, but they really were misused and wasted). The partisan situation gets better as the Balkan troops are used in behind the lines ops. That means too that it is likely Russia is destroyed worse, as more men are running around destroying villages and going after guerillas. But it does mean that supply lines are better off, so the massive support that the Russians had from partisans, especially in later war intelligence and sabotage ops., gets reduced by the extra commitment of troops.

It is likely to mean more Russian casualties to move forward and the war takes a bit longer, but nothing major changes in the outcome, just how long Russia survives as a communist state before the mortal wound of WW2 catches up with her.

And if the Germans can dig in before the Siberian Divisions get there...
 
Van Creveld (Hitler's Strategy 1940-41: The Balakn Clue) chews through the numbers regarding moving divisions from the Balkans to Barbarossa jump-off points, and points out that it caused no delay. Indeed units which could have been moved earlier were left in place because there was no point moving them up as there was no transport awaiting them at their destination.

The weather only becomes a factor when units are ready to move, which they were not. Rivers could be flooded or bone dry on June 1st, it wouldn't matter because the unit transport didn't arrive until the 12th.
 
Top