The New Eastern Front

[Jenisch]

Well, lets think about this a little.
As it is by the start of 1944 vast amounts of German production are thanks to various forms of forced slave labour.

I take it that is still going on in this rather silly fantasy.......if not then by whom how is that to be made up?

Yes, it was slave labour, but it worked very well, like it worked in my country for centuries and in many others. Speer provided better conditions for the "workers", and they would have better conditions if there was not a blockade and the Germans could feed them better. In fact, without the blockade, Fustanga Europe would produce much more, because the blockade prevented many critical raw materials needed for the industrial production (this don't even includes a Lend-Lease, because if yes, it would be even better). Even Italy would have appreciable industrial gains in this scenario. Again, I'm not even touching in the US and British participation, because they would bring something like a revival of the German armed forces as far as the joint effort is concerned, particularly the Luftwaffe in order to kick the Commies back to their lands.

 

[pbfoot]

Well, lets think about this a little.
As it is by the start of 1944 vast amounts of German production are thanks to various forms of forced slave labour.

I take it that is still going on in this rather silly fantasy.......if not then by whom how is that to be made up?




No my friend, you mistake what I am getting at.
I am not condescending to anyone.

It is a fact that even with blue-prints and staff to help them countries can have severe problems producing other people's complex military kit
(and in the case the case of the American MG42 you might say not so complex).

and then think of the Merlin made faster and better by packhard

 

[Jenisch]

and then think of the Merlin made faster and better by packhard

A shame they couldn't use it in the twin-Mustang. =/

 

[michaelmaltby]

".... Yes, it was slave labour, but it worked very well, like it worked in my country for centuries ..."

Give your head a shake, Jenisch. We're not talking harvesting f**king sugar cane.

MM

 

[Jenisch]

".... Yes, it was slave labour, but it worked very well, like it worked in my country for centuries ..."

Give your head a shake, Jenisch. We're not talking harvesting f**king sugar cane.

MM

The " f**king sugar cane" Brazilian slave labour and was not much different in terms of the physical effort from the one that allowed Germany to match the Soviets in plane and armored production in 1944, that was my point.

Let's see something more about it:

Buckley argues the German war economy did indeed expand significantly following Albert Speer's appointment as Reichsminister of Armaments, "but it is spurious to argue that because production increased then bombing had no real impact". But the bombing offensive did do serious damage to German production levels. German tank and aircraft production, though reached new records in production levels in 1944, was in particular one-third lower than planned.[17] In fact, German aircraft production for 1945 was planned at 80,000, "which gives an idea of direction Erhard Milch and the German planners were pushing", "unhindered by Allied bombing German production would have risen far higher".

Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Those slaves were certainly damn capabe, and they would be even more if the Nazis could receive material and military help from the Allies. And don't forget guys; atomic bomb: the Commies are f*cked. ; )

I don't even need to talk about the atomic bomb. Just the bombing effort the USAAF and the Bomber Command would be able to muster against the Russians would cause a severe dispersion of their fighter forces (they would suffer the same problem as the Germans, less attack planes for more interceptors). They would be able to turn Baku in an inferno with a few attacks.

 

[andy2012]

I'd have to agree with you the Germans could have also could have greatly helped the U.S. effort, no matter what the Soviets had could they really stopped the bomb? Eyewitness - Germans Tested A-Bomb In October, 1944 'I Saw Nazis Test A-bomb' - Author Rewrites History my source

 

[tyrodtom]

How much sugar cane have YOU cut Jenisch ? How many aircraft, tanks, rockets, have you manufactored ? Was anybody with a gun or a whip standing by, making sure you did it right ? How can you possibly make a comparision ?

 

[tyrodtom]

I'd have to agree with you the Germans could have also could have greatly helped the U.S. effort, no matter what the Soviets had could they really stopped the bomb? Eyewitness - Germans Tested A-Bomb In October, 1944 'I Saw Nazis Test A-bomb' - Author Rewrites History my source

The Rugen island that this witness claims to be the site of the German a-bomb test is not some remote island. It has been one of the most popular vacation resorts location in Germany, and has been for well over a century. Had a Strength thru Joy resort there during the Nazi era. Not a very believable site for weapon testing. Like setting off a a-bomb in Yellowstone National Park.

 

[tyrodtom]

Some of us seem to be forgeting the American a-bomb project had several Soviet spies right in the middle of it. You really think they'd stand by and let that weapon be successfully deployed against Russia ?

 

[andy2012]

Well you never know, I've heard that that Old Faithful has a green tinge!!!!8)

 

[Jenisch]

How much sugar cane have YOU cut Jenisch ? How many aircraft, tanks, rockets, have you manufactored ? Was anybody with a gun or a whip standing by, making sure you did it right ? How can you possibly make a comparision ?

Mate, it's simple: they did it with slave labour. Yes, the slave labour had it's problems, but they managed to match the Soviet industrial production supported by the Lend-Lease in 1944; in middle of the naval blockade, need for naval production and the bombing. You need to take your hat off for the Germans, and accept the fact they would outperform the Soviets quantitatively and qualitatively had they were alone against them. With the US and British providing material and direct military support like the creator of the topic proposes, only someone who is blind cannot see that the Russians would be in big trouble.

If the Allies and the Germans make such treaty to fight the Communists before the Germans started to move the crack SS divisions and the Luftwaffe for Normandy, that means before D-Day, the success of Bragation would certainly be much unsure. The Western Allies certainly would launch a massive bombing campaign against the Baku oil fields, while the Allied fighters would be ready to support the Luftwaffe and the German Army. While such operations were being conducted, the Allied forces would be already in Europe preparing defenses against the Soviet invasion. With the German plus Allied soldiers in strong defensive lines in Europe, plus airfields with thousands of planes just waiting the Russians and air attacks being conducted against their homeland and Army, it would be possible to contain them.

 

[tyrodtom]

Jenisch you seem intent on changing a aviation history forum into a alternate history forum.
Ever thread you've started on this forum has been some alternate history variation that somehow ending up with the defeat of Soviet Russia, and this is your latest.

When you suggest that anyone should take their hats off to a regime that enslaved hundreds of thousands of people, and murdered them by the thousands, all to prolong a evil system . And then to suggest that it's our fault that they didn't feed them better, is more than I can stomach.

 

[Gixxerman]

in order to kick the Commies back to their lands.

....er, exsqueeze me?
I think you'll find it was Germany that invaded Russia.
Russian doesn't actually go beyond the pre June 1941 'peace-line' until surprisingly late in 1944.

and then think of the Merlin made faster and better by packhard

....and even in the most co-operative environment with every resource possible and with the Agreement signed in Sept 1940 it still takes almost a year (Aug 1941) to make the first 2 and fuill production doesn't happen until 1942.

It's a fair point to mention the Merlin in the US and I conceed that is a fine example of things working out
(note though that it is a whole unit and not just parts)
but even when it works out I think it is fair to point out that as I originally mentioned time is still a relevant issue 1944 is completely unrealistic in the scenario for doing much good for the Hitler gang.

You need to take your hat off for the Germans, and accept the fact they would outperform the Soviets quantitatively and qualitatively had they were alone against them.

Well, ignoring you provocative quip, they did in fact have a period of fighting against them
(I'd call their huge initial successes a fair offset to the later German production numbers).
The net result is still the same.
Germany has decisively lost before 1944.....the defeat at Moscow in 1941 shows this Stalingrad copper-plates it.
The jaunt into the southern Russian area is nothing but tactical and a diversion delaying the inevitable.

The German command (as it had done with the British airforce) grossly over-estimated German abilities disastrously under-estimated Russian capabilities.
They went into the war calculating that the Russians had an active strength of 175 divisions that with reserves it could come to 250.

Halder put the reality well once the attack had begun "Until now we have identified 348 divisions", these are the words of a man who has started to understand the scale of the overwhelming swamp Germany had been crazy enough to decide to try to wade through.

Russia has the manpower Germany can never hope for and is producing tanks, anti-tank guns artilliary pieces which will remain the equal (on every practical level) of anything Germany can field and in numbers that Germany can never hope to match.
It is Germany playing catch-up with Russia's tanks not the other way around.
520 Panthers at peak says it all.
Russia made a vast 35,500 T 34's between 1940 - 1944 to Germany's total of 6,000 Panthers.

Bringing in the allies in 1944 does nothing to change the German defeat in my view, it's far too late.
Material assistance in the form of raw materials is the best you could possibly hope for by then Germany's losses of experienced personnel are far too great to just gloss over as if it doesn't really matter and the Russian forces are just too strong (and it is they that have the growing pool of experienced personnel by this stage).

....and in fact this is what happened in the air.
At the end of the war Germany was littered with thousands of their most up to date but unused brand new planes, numbers of planes was not the issue because although they didn't have the fuel to fly them they also had far too few trained crew left.

Besides in 1944 you'd never see the British switch to fighting along side Hitler's army too much death misery has been too widely dished out to the British nation and even the most anti-communist of Americans in 1944 is going to prefer to see the USA batter all 7 shades out of Japan before they'd step in to help the nazi regime

(and the final guarantee of all of this is that you can bet that if ever such a thing as this were plausible then the western public would have the truth about what was happening to the Jewish people of Europe the east put centre stage before them.
There's not a hope in hell of it ever coming to pass).

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Jenisch you seem intent on changing a aviation history forum into a alternate history forum.
Ever thread you've started on this forum has been some alternate history variation that somehow ending up with the defeat of Soviet Russia, and this is your latest.

What ifs.... can be fun but I do wonder sometimes at the intent or thinking of some who can be relied upon to always post up scenarios which invariably and inevitably end up with Hitler's regime surviving or winning.

I'm all for free speech a variety of POV but sometimes I can't help wondering where some are coming from with these imaginings.

When you suggest that anyone should take their hats off to a regime that enslaved hundreds of thousands of people, and murdered them by the thousands, all to prolong a evil system . And then to suggest that it's our fault that they didn't feed them better, is more than I can stomach.

Yes indeed, there have been a few real eye-poppers lately.

I've no doubt Stalin was a wicked monster too but the nazi evil was the worse one, you could simply be born worthy of nothing but death, no matter what you ever actually did or said, under the nazi ideology.
That was their unique evil which Stalin did not match in anything like the same way.

Oh dont get me wrong he (Stalin) his regime killed multi-millions too, but in large part due to the consequences of a policy (like collectivisation of farming) rather than actually setting up an industral murder machine as Hitler's gang did.

 

[tyrodtom]

Let's not forget Stalin was in power from 1924-1953, 29 years, and most of the murders under communism occured under his rule.
Hitler was in power from 1933-1945, 12 years, but the vast majority of the murders occured in the last 6 years. Give Hitler and his cronies another 17 years to do their evil, and they would have made the communist look soft.

 

[Jenisch]

Jenisch you seem intent on changing a aviation history forum into a alternate history forum.

Not at all. I like to discuss alternative scenarios, and as far as I know this is allowed here.

Ever thread you've started on this forum has been some alternate history variation that somehow ending up with the defeat of Soviet Russia, and this is your latest.

I created this topic?!

About my threads and posts, well, some people like to paint a view that the Soviets single handled defeat Nazi Germany or would defeat it regardless of the Western Allies. I try to debunk those views, mainly based in the Chaos Theory. And in fact, I talk more about the Germans stoping a Soviet conquest of the Reich than vice versa.

And I don't discuss just alternative history, here's a topic I created yerterday: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/warbirds-firing-guns-31861.html

When you suggest that anyone should take their hats off to a regime that enslaved hundreds of thousands of people, and murdered them by the thousands, all to prolong a evil system . And then to suggest that it's our fault that they didn't feed them better, is more than I can stomach.

I don't discuss with moral interestes. And I'm not sugesting it was fault from nobody, just stated a fact about the conditions of food avaliable in Festunga Europa. My "take your hat off" expression perhaps wasn't the best I could use, but I just wanted to say that you should accept that Nazi Germany would be considerably more stronger industrially and qualitatively than the Soviet Union without the war against the West.

 

[Jenisch]

....er, exsqueeze me?
I think you'll find it was Germany that invaded Russia.
Russian doesn't actually go beyond the pre June 1941 'peace-line' until surprisingly late in 1944.

Yes, that's why I said the initial date is vitally important for this thread.

....er, exsqueeze me?
I think you'll find it was Germany that invaded Russia.
Russian doesn't actually go beyond the pre June 1941 'peace-line' until surprisingly late in 1944.

Yes, that's why I said the initial date is vitally important for this thread.

Russia has the manpower Germany can never hope for and is producing tanks, anti-tank guns artilliary pieces which will remain the equal (on every practical level) of anything Germany can field and in numbers that Germany can never hope to match.

Ah, so can you explain me why Germany produced almost the same quantity of armored vehicles and planes than the Soviet Union in 1944? And this was with full Lend-Lease support, and the multi front war for the Germans. Germany wanted to built 80,000 planes in 1945. Now, you want to tell me that without all the factors from the multi front war it would be the same?

And please, don't tell me the Russians had tecnological parity with the Germans, because this is simply not truth. By 1944, the Germans had the the 109s all with MW50 injection, which with the proper tactics were superior to any Russian plane, and superior to a considerable margin against the basic Yak-9 most fielded by them. Germany also had an indisputable advantage in aeronautical technology, like in jet planes, which the Russians tried to mount rockets in the back of their La-7s and Yak-3s to try cope. Had the war happened only in the East, Germany would be able to produce only for that front, like the Soviets did, with introduction of new aircraft and improvements of existing models being certainly much faster than historically, not to mention the quatity.

About the ground war, I will talk about the main factor that were the armored forces: The T-34 cannot be said as being comparable with the Tiger and Panther, because the Germans machines were superior to a considerable degree. The Panther was able to wipe out many crude produced T-34s, that didn't have proper sights and rangfinder, the Russians needing to shoot the machine gun to draw the balistic line to shoot at close distance, long range hits being rarity. In the Russian steppes, the German tankers simply destroyed dozens, sometimes hundreds of those tanks with crews frequentely poorly trained and with inferior tactics and inadequate radio communication. That's why most "more numerous" T-34s produced during the war we lost. The T-34 was a superb machine, much superior to to oposition when arrived, but this didn't last long, and soon even the Panzer IV with the long barrel gun was able to more than compete with it. The T-34 was a simple machine, and just because this simplicit it wasn't in pair with the mid-war German tanks. If the Germans didn't have a war in the West, they would produce more and better thanks. It would be not by any means likely, and even less certain that Russia would defeat Germany alone under such circumstances, specially with the Germans being able to muster a similar strenght in the skies. The Russians could have simply not hold the attriction from the wartime economy and the casualities. End of the story.

I recommend you to read Normandy Crucible: The Decisive Battle that Shaped World War II in Europe. The author makes some very good points about the D-Day and the success of the Russian offensives in '44.

 

[Gixxerman]

Jenisch

You might choose your words more carefully, you said "kick the commies back to their lands"
It was in fact the invaders, Hitler's German forces who were in the process of being firmly booted back to their country.

But I am fascinated to work out where does Germany get the crews to do any of this miraculous incredibly speedy resurrection you describe from?

Even if I was to accept your claim that German industry was able to match (and sustain) Russian levels of war material output (which I don't, my info is that Speer's big drive to produce was a rise fall, in effect a one-time hollowing out Germany's stocks of materials and it could not be sustained) you still have no way of (in 1944 and on) making up the vast losses in experienced crew.

You can malign Russian equipment if you like, yes it was crude in places and yes in some aspects German kit looks much more advanced but that was why I said in any practical sense.
The Panther does compare well with the early T 34, on a one-to-one basis but like all the big German tanks they very rarely fought on terms circumstances favourable to them.
By 1944 the T 34/85 to all intents and purposes matches the Panther et al neutralises their abilities - particularly as the Russians are fielding them in vastly greater numbers.
Not forgetting the Su 85/100/122's which are very effective tank killers - and yes that is against the best German tanks - or things like the weak transmissions, or even things like poorly made leaky fuel lines the resultant unreliability which plagued all of the heavy German tanks to the very end.

I'll give the book a read if I can find it - you do know it has had some very mixed reviews regarding the authors selective accounting of the tale. don't you?
(apparantly the British Montgomery are the real villans of the piece, not the Germans and the quality of opposition Monty the Brits faced is entirely ignored as he castigates them, apparantly, it doesn't bode well for the rest of it if you don't mind me saying).
But even so I am still firmly of the view that regardless of whatever qualitative lead Germany held in equipment
(and even that needs qualifying.....what use your kit if it doesn't work properly in the winter of the land you chose to invade - or your slave workforce is producing poor quality individual components?)
they were so vastly outnumbered quantitively.

.....and in sheer manpower terms Germany is calling up old men children in 1944
(in fact they had started using the children in 1943 things were so bad by then).

The history is that Germany simply didn't have the reserves to call to arms for all the new kit they did produce (which is my point about Germany being littered with lots of their brand new best aircraft at the war's end, it wasn't just that they had no fuel to fly them with).
So where do the men come from to fight if Germany produces even more?

The notion that either the USA or the UK would actually fight on Hitler's side is preposterous so devoid of any connection to any plausible scenario of reality as to be not worth even considering in this.

 

[michaelmaltby]

".... And please, don't tell me the Russians had tecnological parity with the Germans, because this is simply not truth."

In the cold freeze up of December, 1941, with the spires of Moscow in sight -- technical superiority did SFA for the Nazis. Guns froze, vehicles had to run constantly, airpower was ineffective, steel became brittle, and the list goes on and on ....

Hitler thought he could win because he was a gambler -- and he overestimated the Germanic 'geist' and underestimated his enemies - racially and politically.


You go ahead and sing the praises of slave labour all you want -- but I pity the poor soldier or pilot that had to use the stuff. (I wouldn't even want to use equipment made in France after the Occupation ).

Question for you Jenisch: would you buy a Brazilian-made Volkswagen that unpaid, whipped, slave labour had put together ...? It's not quite the same as sugar.

MM

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... About my threads and posts, well, some people like to paint a view that the Soviets single handled defeat Nazi Germany or would defeat it regardless of the Western Allies. I try to debunk those views"

"Some people"? No one on this Forum holding that view comes to mind. And the members of this Forum are your playmates ... not some other audience of exUSSR revisionists.

MM

 

[Jenisch]

Jenisch

You might choose your words more carefully, you said "kick the commies back to their lands"
It was in fact the invaders, Hitler's German forces who were in the process of being firmly booted back to their country.

And after the war the Commies did what with Eastern Europe? I used the term more to describe the objective in an informal way. But make no mistake that the Communists were damn invaders just ike the Nazis. Just because the Communism is an historical criminal political organization (by Western values) and not an outlawed in most of the world, I will not let of say this.

But I am fascinated to work out where does Germany get the crews to do any of this miraculous incredibly speedy resurrection you describe from?

No naval blockade, no historical production levels of submarines, no Lend-Lease for the Soviets, no bombing, no multi-front war.

Even if I was to accept your claim that German industry was able to match (and sustain) Russian levels of war material output (which I don't, my info is that Speer's big drive to produce was a rise fall, in effect a one-time hollowing out Germany's stocks of materials and it could not be sustained) you still have no way of (in 1944 and on) making up the vast losses in experienced crew.

The German industry matched the Soviet in tank and armored vehicle production in 1944. Only if you want to be blind you won't see it, check in any source. Without all the factors from the war in the West, again only someone who wants to be blind will not see it. The German industry was more than capable of outclass the Soviet both in quantity and qualitity had it was alone against it. Speer's rise&fall achivements were a result from the multi front war (those factors being tanks, and later U-boats and other fighter aircraft, the two factors from the Western Allies). The Soviets had an opposite scenario, where their Allies give them specific itens such as trucks, in order for them to focus on certain itens like tanks. Cut all this and cut the German disadvantages and you will notice how the situation would be critical for the Russians. And since you are talking about the Soviet Union alone, don't compare historical wartime years. With the Germans focused in the East since the starting, their losses would be certainly different; you have more planes, more tanks, more trucks = you have less casualities. I present you the Chaos Theory if you don't know it. In the scenario the creator of this topic proposes, not will even comment about the capabilities of the German and Allied forces being able to stop the Soviets, particulary before D-Day.

The Panther does compare well with the early T 34, on a one-to-one basis but like all the big German tanks they very rarely fought on terms circumstances favourable to them.

Because they couldn't be produced in adequate numbers due to the multi-front war.

By 1944 the T 34/85 to all intents and purposes matches the Panther et al neutralises their abilities - particularly as the Russians are fielding them in vastly greater numbers.

Don't think so. The Panther's specifications were simple: a simple but modern design to ouperform the T-34. The lateral armor of the Panther was more vulnerable, but this was more than compensated with it's frontal armor and superior gun and optics. Panthers produced in numbers were more than capable of outperform any T-34, and they were complemented by Tigers. The Germans would be able to put an adequate number of those machines in case the war was only in the East, They would be also capable of providing air support for them and destroy thousands more of the Russian tanks.

Not forgetting the Su 85/100/122's which are very effective tank killers - and yes that is against the best German tanks - or things like the weak transmissions, or even things like poorly made leaky fuel lines the resultant unreliability which plagued all of the heavy German tanks to the very end.

Again, you don't considerate Chaos Theory factor.

About the maintence problems:

Most of the shortcomings were considered acceptable once design flaws were rectified.

Panther tank - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Germans would be able to overcome such problems with a single front war. While this was not obtained, the Panzer IV would be there to complement the more heavy tanks with the traditional good performance it offered.

you do know it has had some very mixed reviews regarding the authors selective accounting of the tale. don't you?

Unfornately, if doesn't fit to your taste, I must be careful with it isn't?