What went wrong most for Germany? (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

It was impossible to bomb Stalingrad into any worse of a state. Stalingrad had become a massive pile of rubble and it provided excellent cover for the ground troops. Rubble is much easier to defend than standing buildings.

The object of Moscow was to destroy the Soviet communication and rail centre, which has been mentioned. Capturing the city would have slowed all Red Army reserve movements to any of the other fronts. It would have affected all those actions to the west of Moscow, most importantly at the time being Leningrad. All reserves that moved to the front against the Wehrmacht went through Moscow. It was the rail center of the Soviet Union. It mattered little to the Wehrmacht if they could use it or not, they would have destroyed the Red Armies capability to move troops quickly.

The object of Leningrad was simply to destroy a garrison in it's rear area and link up with the forces of Finland. The siege of Leningrad occured because the Wehrmacht knew it was a pointless venture to waste troops on.

The object of Stalingrad was political when concerning the city itself. When concerning the whole operation, it was far from political. The original plan called for an advance of the 6th Armee and 4th Panzer Armee on the River Don. The 6th Armee would arrive just north of Stalingrad with the city on it's right flank. This would cut off the Caucasus, with Stalingrad included leaving a small avenue of escape through Stalingrad (although risky because of the Luftwaffe) and just south of the city.
4th Panzer Armee was to advance south into the Caucasus after capturing Rostov on Don (the north-western point of the net on the Caucasus). They would swoop in, destroy all Red Army forces in there and capture the oil fields. Stalingrad itself was never an objective.

The Red Army, however, melted away from the advancing Army Group South. Hitler took this as an all out rout of the Red Army and diverted forces from the 6th Armee to head south with the 4th Panzer Armee. This deprived the 6th of it's armour, but it still had to move on to it's objective which it did capture thus encircling the Caucasus. However, Hitler then ordered the 6th into Stalingrad ...and the rest is history.

During Operation Barbarossa, the only thing that halted the panzers were the weather and the mud baths the Russians called "roads". Hitler wanted his forces to press on faster but had to be told, repeatedly, that it wasn't possible. The one thing that stopped a full advance on Moscow was the diversion of panzers from the attack on Moscow to encircle the forces outside Kiev, which was the biggest encirclement in history.
 
As for the T-34s still being made, the Russians were very good at building out of nothing. They did in just about all of the cities that were laid to rubble or waste and were being sieged. The factory would be destroyed and they would continue to build.
 
Cheers for that reddragon :D , could that have been countered?

It would have affected all those actions to the west of Moscow, most importantly at the time being Leningrad.

Aha! Cheers PlanD. :D

All reserves that moved to the front against the Wehrmacht went through Moscow.

Nice! :D

This would cut off the Caucasus, with Stalingrad included leaving a small avenue of escape through Stalingrad (although risky because of the Luftwaffe) and just south of the city.

Yeah I mentioned that.

However, Hitler then ordered the 6th into Stalingrad...

What an idiot. :rolleyes:

The one thing that stopped a full advance on Moscow was the diversion of panzers from the attack on Moscow to encircle the forces outside Kiev, which was the biggest encirclement in history.

Also THE biggest mistake of WW2 IMHO, I think the main critic of this was Guderian?

DerAdler said:
The factory would be destroyed and they would continue to build.

There's destroyed, then there's destroyed, but if that was all that could be done...

I still say ALL bombers should have hit it though?
 
That would frustrate me, I can only guess how Hitler felt about it! :lol:

The Stalingrad factory was a weird one, unlike the Kirov plant etc it seemed to be copied rather than moved?
 
It was a waste of resources having tanks such as the Panzer III or earlier on the battlefield. Also the Kingtiger was a waste of resources. If the Germans had of fielded a large army of Panthers they could have been more successful. Also if they weren't pumping help to Italy they could have devoted more resources to attacking the Allies and winning. Also more long-sightedness in aircraft design such as redesigning the engines of the He-177 Grief which would have made it an effective Heavy Bomber for Germany. A squadron or two of Horton flying wings as fighters, fighter-bombers, and bombers would have done a lot of damage to the Allies at least during their initial period in operation.
 
The Horton Ho-229 if that is what you are talking about did not fly until 1945 and still had a lot of work on it.

Germany had to invest in Italy, if they did not then the Soft Underbelly would have been just that.
 
HealzDevo:

It was a waste of resources having tanks such as the Panzer III or earlier on the battlefield.

True to a point, but the Stugs/JgdPz's and Pz38 for e.g. were still very useful.

Also the Kingtiger was a waste of resources.

It was an effective 'hero tank' IMHO, pity about the mechanicals/quality. :cry:

If the Germans had of fielded a large army of Panthers they could have been more successful.

Don't forget the T34/76 and Sherman and Cromwell 75mm's could take the Panther/JagdPanther out (and frequently did). Not so the KonigsTiger. 8)

Also if they weren't pumping help to Italy they could have devoted more resources to attacking the Allies and winning.

IMHO Britain itself should have been ignored and it's Empire attacked sooner with help from Japan/Italy.

Also give out plans for the PzIV-F2+, StuG-G, Hetzer and FW190.

Also more long-sightedness in aircraft design such as redesigning the engines of the He-177 Grief which would have made it an effective Heavy Bomber for Germany.

Have you got a picture of the He-177 Grief please?

A squadron or two of Horton flying wings as fighters, fighter-bombers, and bombers would have done a lot of damage to the Allies at least during their initial period in operation.

I know it would be a great NachtJager/bomber, dunno about dayfighter/bomber?
 
Heinkel He 177 Greif

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/he177.html

heinkel177.jpg

lrg0355.jpg

Captured He 177A-5 in flight.
 
DerAdler said:
I think it would have been a great day fighter. Why would it not have?

Dunno, it had stealth ability, good speed/handling, range and could cary 2 seats and a good payload (3 X 1000) so IMHO should have been used to bomb radar installations and intercept radar-eqipped Nightfighters and bombers.

Perhaps not having it as a day-fighter would keep it a secret?

Still, I'm not sure of it's fighter performance. I have the data, I'm just incapable of understanding it. :oops:



Cheers for the pics Gnomey. :D

Is that the plane on CharlesBronsons siggy? 8)

If so, I was gonna ask about that!
 
schwarzpanzer said:
DerAdler said:
I think it would have been a great day fighter. Why would it not have?

Dunno, it had stealth ability, good speed/handling, range and could cary 2 seats and a good payload (3 X 1000) so IMHO should have been used to bomb radar installations and intercept radar-eqipped Nightfighters and bombers.

Perhaps not having it as a day-fighter would keep it a secret?

Still, I'm not sure of it's fighter performance. I have the data, I'm just incapable of understanding it. :oops:



Cheers for the pics Gnomey. :D

Is that the plane on CharlesBronsons siggy? 8)

If so, I was gonna ask about that!

There were actually 2 versions. A single seat fighter and a 2 seat day fighter. The V6 was the first 2 seat version.
 
schwarzpanzer said:
Is that the plane on CharlesBronsons siggy? 8)

If so, I was gonna ask about that!

CharlesBronsons siggy is of a Messerschmitt Me-264/6m which is the 6 engined version of the Me-264.

Here is some info on the 4 engined version. I dont believe any 6 engined versions were completed but I may be wrong.

Type: Ultra Long Range Bomber
Origin: Messerschmitt AG
Engines:
Four 1,700 hp BMW 801D or G 18-cylinder radials

Dimensions:
Span: 43m
Length: 20.90m Height: 4.30m

Weights:
Empty 46,627lb.
Max. Loaded 123,460lb.
Performance:
Max. Speed: 565km/h (351mph)
Max range at 217mph 9,321 miles
 

Attachments

  • 264_129.jpg
    264_129.jpg
    5.9 KB · Views: 220
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
schwarzpanzer said:
Is that the plane on CharlesBronsons siggy? 8)

If so, I was gonna ask about that!

CharlesBronsons siggy is of a Messerschmitt Me-264/6m which is the 6 engined version of the Me-264.

Here is some info on the 4 engined version. I dont believe any 6 engined versions were completed but I may be wrong.

Type: Ultra Long Range Bomber
Origin: Messerschmitt AG
Engines:
Four 1,700 hp BMW 801D or G 18-cylinder radials

Dimensions:
Span: 43m
Length: 20.90m Height: 4.30m

Weights:
Empty 46,627lb.
Max. Loaded 123,460lb.
Performance:
Max. Speed: 565km/h (351mph)
Max range at 217mph 9,321 miles
Thought I recognised it from somewhere. I had a look last night and found the ME264 which I thought was it but it only has 4 engines, thanks for clearing that up Alder.
 
DerAdler:

There were actually 2 versions. A single seat fighter and a 2 seat day fighter. The V6 was the first 2 seat version.

I know, I'm just not sure if it'dve make a good single-seater?

Thanks for the Me-264/6m info DerAdler, great stuff! 8) :D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back