WIf in 1941 the Nazi seige of Moscow succesfull

[alephh]

Moscow had lost lot of its importance before and during the German push:

+ The Soviet Government had been evacuated to Kuibyshev
+ Bulk of industry had been evacuated
+ Part of the population had left the city
+ Basically anything valuable not nailed down was evacuated or about to be evacuated

I don't think that losing Moscow would have been a decisive event.

The biggest problem, for the Russians, would have been the fact that most railway-lines run through Moscow. Since the railways were the only way to supply armies, the future battles and campaigns would have been focused on Moscow. This may have turned everything into a rather immobile battle of attrition - exactly what the Germans wanted to avoid.

Sure it would have been - momentarily - a big morale sinker, but considering the tight grip that Soviet government had over the population - and over the information and news - surely they would have just continued the battle as usual. The Soviet Union lost many major cities - Minsk, Kiev, Kharkov - and it made zero effect.

Interesting question is, how much the Western powers would have scaled down their support to the Soviet Union because of the loss of Moscow...

 

[Beer]

Moscow had lost lot of its importance before and during the German push:

+ The Soviet Government had been evacuated to Kuibyshev
+ Bulk of industry had been evacuated
+ Part of the population had left the city
+ Basically anything valuable not nailed down was evacuated or about to be evacuated

I don't think that losing Moscow would have been a decisive event.

The biggest problem, for the Russians, would have been the fact that most railway-lines run through Moscow. Since the railways were the only way to supply armies, the future battles and campaigns would have been focused on Moscow. This may have turned everything into a rather immobile battle of attrition - exactly what the Germans wanted to avoid.

Sure it would have been - momentarily - a big morale sinker, but considering the tight grip that Soviet government had over the population - and over the information and news - surely they would have just continued the battle as usual. The Soviet Union lost many major cities - Minsk, Kiev, Kharkov - and it made zero effect.

Interesting question is, how much the Western powers would have scaled down their support to the Soviet Union because of the loss of Moscow...

Hi! Yes, while the worth of Moscow was somewhat diminished by evacuation, the morale hit and even more the transport situation would be a major blow. But the battles even focused on the Moscow region don´t need to become attrition warfare. Knowing the likely "Red Arrow Lanes" of the Russians is a boon for the Heer and the landscape around Moscow lets you fight mobile. It´s not like the swamp around St. Petersburg that negated much of the German Perk in mobile and Tank warfare.

 

[archaeogeek]

Hi! Yes, while the worth of Moscow was somewhat diminished by evacuation, the morale hit and even more the transport situation would be a major blow. But the battles even focused on the Moscow region don´t need to become attrition warfare. Knowing the likely "Red Arrow Lanes" of the Russians is a boon for the Heer and the landscape around Moscow lets you fight mobile. It´s not like the swamp around St. Petersburg that negated much of the German Perk in mobile and Tank warfare.

In fall, the mud, in winter, the cold; both negate the german perk in mobile warfare. Also at that point the germans have no perk in mobile and tank warfare, the soviets were about to show them how a really mobile war is done.

Also, I would consider the blow of losing Moscow less than the simple fact that the rampaging hordes of german was there to kill everyone.

 

[Blackfox5]

Moscow had lost lot of its importance before and during the German push:

+ The Soviet Government had been evacuated to Kuibyshev
+ Bulk of industry had been evacuated
+ Part of the population had left the city
+ Basically anything valuable not nailed down was evacuated or about to be evacuated

I don't think that losing Moscow would have been a decisive event.

I agree. The Soviet Union would continue to fight. Lend Lease would continue. But the Germans get a huge propaganda victory.

A lot depends on when the Germans take Moscow. If they take it in late November, they probably don't have enough time to prepare adequate defenses, and the Soviet winter counterattack takes it back and still kills lots of Germans. If they take it early enough (because Hitler doesn't divert the panzers to Kiev), then the Germans probably don't go much beyond that (preferring to shore up flanks in the Ukraine) and prepare defenses. Even though they suffer from inadequate winter preparation, they probably defend quite well provided the Soviet counterattack is still directed towards Moscow.

Another question is what Japan does if Moscow falls. Supposedly, the Japanese were waiting to see if the Germans took Moscow before they entered the war. There were several Imperial conferences about this, but ultimately it was decided to strike south instead and initiate war against the United States and the European colonial powers. I don't know how realistic Japanese intervention is, but it is a possibility. Although Japanese participation won't be too spectacular in terms of military conquest, it does eliminate the possibility of Lend Lease supplies from America's Pacific coast to Vladivostok, which was quite substantial.

Hitler saw Moscow as the third objective, behind the Leningrad and the Donestk Basin. I'm not sure he'd be too happy. Assuming the Nazis still lose the war (which is likely), we can imagine a lot of people wondering what would happen if he moved panzers to the Ukraine like he wanted instead of giving in to his generals.

 

[Intosh]

For me, Moscow siege will be a giant Stalingrad for the Germans.

By Hitler orders, more and more Germans troops will be send fighting in the urban areas. And germans superiority in armored and mobile warfare will be of no utility in a giant house to house battle.

And siberian troops will counter-attacked as in OTL and germans troops will be encircled so the Stalingrad comparison will be verified to the end.

And please, no belligerants in WWII except maybe the Japanese used any kind of chemicals or biologicals weapons. So no even in the worst fightings in Stalingrad, never the Germans used nerves gas on the Soviets...

 

[Beer]

Hi! When I look at some posts here, why do they just put OTL into TTL 1:1? Chocolate and strawberry icecream are both icecream, but they are not the same, and OTL and TTL are two diffrent kind of worms.
When I read about how the Red Army shows the Wehrmacht how mobile warfare is done TTL (even OTL the Russians and I give full credit to them as the major allied weight in WW2 Europe theater well before the US, did not really show the Heer how mobile warfare was done. The Heer was mostly swamped by massive numbers) I shake my head. Newsflash: Not until very late in the war, there was no single major operation by the Sowjets that did not depend substancially on the shifting of units, tanks, food, other supplies by and through the Moscow rail hub.
TTL the Wehrmacht holds the City. Yes, clearing it will be messy in the extreme and the Moscow salient will come under massive pressure until Army Groups Center and South mop up the Ukraine and fortify the salient more. But: The mobilty, force projection ablity and supply situation of the Russians is seriously hampered. And will stay like that for some time. Compensating for Moscow will not be easy or fast. If the Heer can fortify the city at least a bit before the inevitable counterattack, it is doubtful if the Sowjets can encircle Moscow in a tight grip or encircle it at all. Many here underestimate the importance of the logistics/transportation/supply hub Moscow was. And the Red Army of 41/42 is not the Red Army of 1945.

 

[archaeogeek]

Hi! When I look at some posts here, why do they just put OTL into TTL 1:1? Chocolate and strawberry icecream are both icecream, but they are not the same, and OTL and TTL are two diffrent kind of worms.
When I read about how the Red Army shows the Wehrmacht how mobile warfare is done TTL (even OTL the Russians and I give full credit to them as the major allied weight in WW2 Europe theater well before the US, did not really show the Heer how mobile warfare was done. The Heer was mostly swamped by massive numbers) I shake my head. Newsflash: Not until very late in the war, there was no single major operation by the Sowjets that did not depend substancially on the shifting of units, tanks, food, other supplies by and through the Moscow rail hub.
TTL the Wehrmacht holds the City. Yes, clearing it will be messy in the extreme and the Moscow salient will come under massive pressure until Army Groups Center and South mop up the Ukraine and fortify the salient more. But: The mobilty, force projection ablity and supply situation of the Russians is seriously hampered. And will stay like that for some time. Compensating for Moscow will not be easy or fast. If the Heer can fortify the city at least a bit before the inevitable counterattack, it is doubtful if the Sowjets can encircle Moscow in a tight grip or encircle it at all. Many here underestimate the importance of the logistics/transportation/supply hub Moscow was. And the Red Army of 41/42 is not the Red Army of 1945.

You have the weakest grasp of russian operations I have seen. The russians were able to assemble forces in a single position where the germans were weak despite both armies not having a massive disparity in actual on the field manpower. That's how you do mobile warfare.

 

[Beer]

You have the weakest grasp of russian operations I have seen. The russians were able to assemble forces in a single position where the germans were weak despite both armies not having a massive disparity in actual on the field manpower. That's how you do mobile warfare.

LOL! I´m old enough to have talked with Veterans of BOTH sides! And I heard a lot about the pro and cons both armies had and more important, some tidbits about the times fortune seemed to favour one or the other side.
You make the mistake to think what happens OTL has to happen the same TTL, which is false determinism! OTL Germany had seriously stretched, often overstretched supply lines and normally fewer soldiers available. Russia had the numbers, "General Winter", lacking, but not so overstretched supply lines and a still functioning rail hub in Moscow.
BTW, I surely want to know your definition of mobile warfare, since even russian veterans admitted that the Heer, if the circumstances were halfway equal or only slightly favouring the Sowjets, normally handed them their balls. Normally the Red Army relied on numbers and "sledgehammer", not the fencing foil of "true" mobile warfare.(except late in war, when Germany was short on almost anything) And this comes from the mouths of russian veterans. Yes, the SU had some top strategists too, nobody denies that, but if you take of the pink glasses, you see that most times it was brute, huge numbered force swamping the German lines.
e.g. Charkov after Stalingrad. The Russians had around a 7:1 advantage in numbers, far more Tanks and all and the moral boost from Stalingrad victory. Germany had a moral low, was on the defensive against a far more numerous foe, but von Manstein had more operational freedom from Hitler than most times. And Manstein and his forces kicked the Russians in the guts. That´s mobile warfare too!
Anyway, the point is that TTL one of the big bonus points, the important rail and supply hub Moscow is NOT in russian hands anymore. This puts a serious crimp in any movement of the Red Army! So the concentration of force you boast about, will be far more sluggish, sometimes not on time, because the units have longer, less good marching ways, needed supplies normally coming from/through the capital are late or not coming at all. Ersatz Tanks stuck in the middle of nowhere since they can´t be moved via rail in some cases and the list goes on.
Logistics is a very big part of war (and one of the reasons the Wehrmacht ran out of steam after outrunning the supply lines in Russia) and loosing Moscow is a logistics nightmare for the Russians. It was that important as a transport and supply center! It depends on the butterflies in the TTL scenario, if this loss is a war changing one or not, but whatever the case, Russia´s hand took a serious hit. War is more than just, hey, I have so-and-so many tanks, the reasons why the tanks are there (or not) are important too. So keep your hasty judgement of others in check!