WI Stalin abandons Moscow in October 1941?

So, by the second week of October 1941, the Soviets seemed to be in a pretty desperate position. Zhukov's inspection of the Mozhaisk defense line found huge gaps open to German assault which led to the general later stating that, 'all the approaches to Moscow were open'. From, the Soviet perspective it seemed that if the Germans attacked in strength they would easily capture the capital. Diplomatic missions and government staff had already been evacuated to Kuibyshev. Shops suffered from widespread looting, demolition charges were being set on key installations and Beria had just taken the opportunity to flee to the Caucasus claiming it was a 'visit'. Stalin seemed to consider leaving before his resolve stiffened. By October 18th he had decided to stay and declared Moscow a fortress.

What if Stalin had not stayed? Would Moscow be set ablaze to deny it to the Germans? What of the Winter 1941 counter-attack? Would the counter-attack have been as successful without access to OTL staging areas around Moscow( sheltered airfields etc) Could Stalin have kept the War going from Kuibyshev or elsewhere? Thoughts?
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Stalin kept a train ready to help him flee at the last moment. If Stalin evacuates, it likely means he has decided Moscow can't be defended, so it likely means that Moscow is burned, and a new defensive line is built in the east. Now the units there will fight to the death, but the reinforcements from Siberia will likely be on the new line to the east.
 

sharlin

Banned
What ever happens a lot of people die, you could see Moscow becoming as bloody as, if not more bloody than Stalingrad was.
 
By the time Taifun offensive was launched, it weather doomed this last-ditch effort to failure from the start. Assuming that Germans still reached Moscow and committed their troops to urban combat, the winter counteroffensive would easily lead to Stalingrad-scale catastrophe. Just imagine the situation where German artillery is shelling the ruins of Kremlin, and then HG Mitte announces that they would have to stage a hasty retreat or risk encirclement at the ruins of the Soviet capitol.

If Germans could somehow advance past Zagorsk and severe the last horizontally running railroad in the vicinity of Moscow, the Soviet counteroffensives would become much harder as the remaining Soviet defensive armies would have to organize their supply and reinforcements along single rail lines. Moscow was vitally important as a supply hub and the heart of the railroad network of European Russia, and the OTL frontlines left the Germans exposed and RKKA to a position where they could easily transport troops along the front to exploit breakthroughs and reinforce threatened sectors.

http://www.pbs.org/behindcloseddoors/maps/battle_for_moscow.png
 
Moscow is a huge city (like 8 million people). Even if Stalin leaves and the city gets surrounded, somebody will be left in charge, you can scrape enough milita, police, communist party officials, and whatever regular army forces are still around to scape up a defence that keeps the Germans out of most of the city, until the December 1941 counter attack occurs to open up communication with the city again.

Using Leningrad as an example the Soviets aren't going to be too concerned if even a million civilians die in the process.

It would make for an epic moment in history though.
 
In 1941, it was more like 4.500.000 people that lived in Moscow, but otherwise you are correct.
 
Hmm, I remember reading that Moscow's aerodromes were essential during the Soviets winter counter attack as they allowed the Red airforce to shelter their aircraft from the extreme winter cold. With the Germans beseiging Moscow they would no longer be available. Would this mean that a Soviet relief op would have to go ahead with air parity rather than superiority?

Also what of the Soviet electrical sub stations*? Steam and Water plants around Moscow, Tula etc provided power to the Soviet defense industry. If only a few of these were damaged it could put a major dent in the Soviets ability to continue arms production at least in the short term ( six months or so).
*OTLs Eisenhammer plan in 1943 was aimed at these.

Also would Stalin appoint a central figure to take defense of the Capital? It seems pretty politically dangerous*. Better to abandon the place if he was truely convinced it was undefendable. Torch Moscow. Establish a new defensive line and then aim the winter counter attack at re-capturing Moscow.
* If Stalin left and someone else stayed(Zhukov etc) and saved the capital it would make Stalin look very weak and cowardly methinks. It would certainly create a potential rival for him ( or more accurately in Stalin's paranoid mind it would).
 
Hmm, I remember reading that Moscow's aerodromes were essential during the Soviets winter counter attack as they allowed the Red airforce to shelter their aircraft from the extreme winter cold. With the Germans beseiging Moscow they would no longer be available. Would this mean that a Soviet relief op would have to go ahead with air parity rather than superiority?
).

Yes the Russians are weaker here, but the German here have to maintain a seige of Moscow and hold a front outside, far away from sources of supply, and the Russian are blocking the rails and best roads through Moscow.

Also what of the Soviet electrical sub stations*? Steam and Water plants around Moscow, Tula etc provided power to the Soviet defense industry. If only a few of these were damaged it could put a major dent in the Soviets ability to continue arms production at least in the short term ( six months or so).
*OTLs Eisenhammer plan in 1943 was aimed at these.
This would hurt in 1942. But a bunch of industry was already in the process of being moved east. A lot would depend on how damaged these things were during the battles (assuming the Russians retake these in December). Life in the city would be miserable for a while in any case without heat (and fresh water?).

If Stalin left and someone else stayed(Zhukov etc) and saved the capital it would make Stalin look very weak and cowardly methinks. It would certainly create a potential rival for him ( or more accurately in Stalin's paranoid mind it would).
Stalin certainly worried about stuff like this. Moscow is too important though. Stick an old discraced buddy like Budenny in charge of the city.
 
I played a lot of SPI's Battle of Moscow this winter, which starts in October 1941 and goes through February 1942. I played the Soviets and lost Moscow and Leningrad, although only just. I was unable to retake either city--all of the rail lines go through Moscow. With them out of Russian control, the Germans can effectively put reinforcements where they need to be to blunt a Russian assault.

Of course, it's just a game (albeit a very good one), but I think that's pretty accurate, at least in the short run. It's a lot easier to defend a line when you control the point to point movement along it.
 
Stalin wasn't inclined to leave Moscow, and this was from personal subjective reasons that it's difficult to see circumstances changing all that much. As far as the outcome of the battle, it was logistically preordained before it started: at Viazma and Briansk the Germans shot their bolt, and after that they were never going to take Moscow.
 
By the time Taifun offensive was launched, it weather doomed this last-ditch effort to failure from the start. Assuming that Germans still reached Moscow and committed their troops to urban combat, the winter counteroffensive would easily lead to Stalingrad-scale catastrophe. Just imagine the situation where German artillery is shelling the ruins of Kremlin, and then HG Mitte announces that they would have to stage a hasty retreat or risk encirclement at the ruins of the Soviet capitol.

If Germans could somehow advance past Zagorsk and severe the last horizontally running railroad in the vicinity of Moscow, the Soviet counteroffensives would become much harder as the remaining Soviet defensive armies would have to organize their supply and reinforcements along single rail lines. Moscow was vitally important as a supply hub and the heart of the railroad network of European Russia, and the OTL frontlines left the Germans exposed and RKKA to a position where they could easily transport troops along the front to exploit breakthroughs and reinforce threatened sectors.

http://www.pbs.org/behindcloseddoors/maps/battle_for_moscow.png

Typhoon was not so much doomed from the weather as from the simple logistical overstretch inherent in it. It pushed both the Wehrmacht and the Red Army to their mutual worst extremes of the war and in this scenario Hitler's armies snapped and Stalin's kept going. Typhoon is doomed from logistics, not weather. The German problem was one of simply how to sustain a drive to Moscow, and without resolving that problem no political changes alter logistical reality.
 
Abandoning Moscow would be the most idiot strategic move in history. Moscow was the center of the Soviet rail network, communications,and logistics. Leaving it to the Germans would cut the Red Army in two, leave large formations out of supply, and make organizing a counteroffensive nearly impossible. Essentially it would guarantee Soviet defeat, which is why Stalin and Zhukov tried to hold it at all costs; losing it would mean defeat, simple as that.
 
Top