WI: Leningrad instead of Kursk

Cook

Banned
Just to clarify, with "linking up" i ment, that the german offensive reaches the finnish lines, which allows the Fin leaders to place their troops elsewhere, not that finnish troops would participate in the offensive.

So, just to be clear; you are saying that where the German advance finishes would move until it would finish up being at the Finn’s finishing line.
;)
 
That one is the easiest to answer: Leningrad. It is like the hypnosis Stalingrad had.

And while it was a siege, people shouldn’t think there wasn’t a lot of heavy fighting associated with Leningrad. Harrison Salisbury’s The 900 Days is a good book on the subject.

Just finished that book. It's a good one.

The basic German strategy for Leningrad was to take the city in mid-1941, join up with the Finns and strike south towards Moscow. This would be a huge blow to Soviet industry.

By mid-1943, however, an assault on Leningrad would be pointless. Industry had moved East, the Finns were all but depleted as a fighting force and fighting a city battle no longer appealed to the Germans.
 
Originally Posted by Rubicon
I still say the best opppurtunity [sic] for the Germans to take Leningrad would be in late July/early August -41.

I agree 100% that the best “opportunity” was near Aug 41, but the OP was what if 1943 limited attack not on Kursk but Leningrad. I played with the WI as per OP.
Originally Posted by Kerblo By mid-1943, however, an assault on Leningrad would be pointless. Industry had moved East, the Finns were all but depleted as a fighting force and fighting a city battle no longer appealed to the Germans.

The 1943 Kursk op in OTL was worse than pointless. This is a simple What If those panzers do NOT take the deathride and a limited 1943 attack is made to re-isolate the 2nd largest city in Soviet U, shorten the frontline and score political / diplomatic points for German vs minor Axis. Hitler, Keitel, Manstein all thought a assault must be made in 1943. M. for military, K according to Guderian for political, and WTF Hitler really was thinking is known only to the Devil and his nemesis.

Kerblo: IF we assume the Germans make a “forehand” attack and not Manstein’s other suggested “backhand”…. THEN Was there any attack that was not pointless?? [I think we ALL agree M’s “backhand” counter stroke would have been best.]

The question is: Would an attack on the Soviet Volkhov Front that re-isolated the Leningrad Front [and perhaps the 2nd Shock & Soviet8th of Volkh Front] have been a less “pointless” op than the OTL Kurck attempt to "cauldron" the Soviet 70A, 65A, 60A, 38A 40A ?

An operation against the Toropets bulge was not really a possible 43 choice after Demyansk and Rzhev Salients both abandoned to shorten the worst archipelago –ish of the frontline.

Again I am not an insane Germfan pining for Swaz over Leningrad. I merely played around with N’s OP that said What if Lgrad better than Kursk in 43?

Operationsbefehl Nr. 5, 13.3.43 suggests that after a successful Citadel [LOL] Leningrad was next. This What If reorders German One Two planned 43 punches. Discussion worthy even if the Germans fail worse than OTL Kursk.

Indeed even wiser for Germany [and feared by Ike et al for the next year] than M’s “backhand” was if on 15May43 Hitler actually authorized an abandonment of territory to a defensive "East Wall" rather than an OTL statement of only in extremis.

The OP point remains NOT the best German option but a viable WI for debate.
 
Last edited:
Well in 1943 which would be the year we’re dealing with an attack on Leningrad disregarding the Soviets forces massed in the central & southern sections of the front could be disastrous. A major reinforcement in Army Group North couldn’t be hidden and given the Soviet 2 to 1 advantage in effective manpower across the whole front, they can reinforce their forces in the north and launch offensives against weakened German lines elsewhere
 

Daffy Duck

Banned
interesting

Just finished that book. It's a good one.

The basic German strategy for Leningrad was to take the city in mid-1941, join up with the Finns and strike south towards Moscow. This would be a huge blow to Soviet industry.

By mid-1943, however, an assault on Leningrad would be pointless. Industry had moved East, the Finns were all but depleted as a fighting force and fighting a city battle no longer appealed to the Germans.


Agreed on that.. by 1943, whats the point? In 1941, the Germans needed the Finns to cross the border and help take Leningrad. Had the Finns helped conquer Leningrad and helped cut off the northern ports, the USSR would have been in serious trouble - short term. Then again, the northern forces (going after Murmansk) seriously underestimated the forces they were facing.
 
Top