WI:Stalingrad is not as heavily bombed

One of the reasons cited for the German defeat at Stalingrad was the city landscape after it was bombed by the Luffwaffta. The city ruins made it difficult for soldiers and tanks to move through the city, and gave the russians an advantage defending it.

How would the battle of Stalingrad be affected if the Germans didn't bomb the city as much?

Could the Germans have prevented renefrocements from across the Volga from landing if they heavily bombed the Harbour area?

Could the Germans win?

How would the Eastern Front be affected?

Would more troops be moved into the Eastern Front or would some be moved to other areas like the Afrika corps?

Would this allow a German win, or truce in WWII?
 
For the Germans, the best solution for Stalingrad was to stay away. This was actually the original plan. The sixth army was to simply make sure that no Soviet army came out of Stalingrad and attacked Army Group South's advance into the Caucuses.

The German generals seemed to know that attacking the city was risky, expensive and could offer little payoff. The river prevented surrounding the city which meant a head on attack. Bombed or not, you never want to attack a city head on. At best, the 6th army would be beaten up, leaving Army Group South's supply lines vulnerable to attack.

The problem was, on paper, in Berlin, it was a target that couldn't be resisted. Stalingrad had a tractor factory that was converted to make tanks and the threat of armored divisions being created in the city was possible. The city was on the Volga and taking it would cut Russia in half, cutting off troops to defend the south and oil to fuel the north. They had an easy time taking city after city before. They failed to take Moscow but that was in the late fall while now it was the summer. And they had the 6th, one of the most powerful armies in the world, on the doorstep just waiting to attack the city.

I don't blame the German high command for attacking the city though(mostly because I'm very glad they lost the war) because they've had such luck not listening to their generals in the field before.
 
Case blue gets thrown off once the 6th army gets sucked into stalingrad, even without the bombing creating lots of rubble to stiffen last ditch defensive positions
 

Orry

Donor
Monthly Donor
I remember watching a program that suguested that the bombing occured too early in the attack.

The theory was that beinging in an already bombed building that is bombed is a lot safer than being in a building the first time it is bombed or shelled. The main reason being that the blast in an already bombed building is not contained and so is a lot less dangerous and there is less chance of being caught in a fire - anything that is likely to burn has already burnt.

It is true that bombing a built up area does tend to turn it into good defensive terrain if the troops in the area have time to recover and re-organise. Roads are blocked etc so it is difficult to advance quickly on the attack.

I think it is not so much the bombing or not - but the fact that Stalingrad was not origionally the target of the 6th Army - had it always been their goal and they had launched attacks from the get go it would probably have fallen - instead it was another one of Hitlers after thoughts that diverted forces away from primary objectives and (fortunetly) helped to lead to the fall of the Third Riech.
 
Top