AH by Gary Gygax: "Victorious German arms: An alternate military history of World War Two"

[Max Sinister]

From some book about AH I learned that among other things, the book suggests a quick victory at Stalingrad. Why not.

[stevep]

Jun 15, 2023 4:49:02 GMT Max Sinister said:

From some book about AH I learned that among other things, the book suggests a quick victory at Stalingrad. Why not.

  Have seen it suggested that Stalingrad could have been taken quickly, on the march and possibly that's the case.  However the Germans would still have to maintain substantial forces in the region to prevent a counter attack and any advance down the west bank of the Volga, while it gives a wide river as a flank protector would mean a long defensive line and even longer logistics chain.  You might have had both army groups trying to close on Baku but that's a hell of a long way and will stretch logistics massively.  That would also make the entire force - 2 army groups or much of - vulnerable to a counter attack and could lead to and even greater disaster that OTL.

  The big issue is logistics as much as Soviet resistance.  How far can the Germans reach without major breakdown of something?

 

[Max Sinister]

Jun 15, 2023 8:30:28 GMT stevep said:

Jun 15, 2023 4:49:02 GMT Max Sinister said:

From some book about AH I learned that among other things, the book suggests a quick victory at Stalingrad. Why not.

  Have seen it suggested that Stalingrad could have been taken quickly, on the march and possibly that's the case.  However the Germans would still have to maintain substantial forces in the region to prevent a counter attack and any advance down the west bank of the Volga, while it gives a wide river as a flank protector would mean a long defensive line and even longer logistics chain.  You might have had both army groups trying to close on Baku but that's a hell of a long way and will stretch logistics massively.  That would make the entire force vulnerable to a counter attack and could lead to an even greater disaster than OTL.

  The big issue is logistics as much as Soviet resistance.  How far can the Germans reach without major breakdown of something?

Scuse me, what's with the link in your post? It doesn't work for me.

Whether Stalingrad might work... well, if the "Führer" hadn't insisted that the Wehrmacht should take Stalingrad AND the Caucasus at the same time... Robert Harris' idea that blocking the oil flow from Baku to Moscow would cripple the Red Army doesn't sound too bad, but I didn't dig deeper. Some have pointed out that there was another pipeline, albeit with lower capacity, from Astrakhan to Saratov, bypassing Stalingrad.

[stevep]

Jun 15, 2023 9:28:47 GMT Max Sinister said:

Jun 15, 2023 8:30:28 GMT stevep said:

  Have seen it suggested that Stalingrad could have been taken quickly, on the march and possibly that's the case.  However the Germans would still have to maintain substantial forces in the region to prevent a counter attack and any advance down the west bank of the Volga, while it gives a wide river as a flank protector would mean a long defensive line and even longer logistics chain.  You might have had both army groups trying to close on Baku but that's a hell of a long way and will stretch logistics massively.  That would make the entire force vulnerable to a counter attack and could lead to an even greater disaster than OTL.

  The big issue is logistics as much as Soviet resistance.  How far can the Germans reach without major breakdown of something?

Scuse me, what's with the link in your post? It doesn't work for me.

Whether Stalingrad might work... well, if the "Führer" hadn't insisted that the Wehrmacht should take Stalingrad AND the Caucasus at the same time... Robert Harris' idea that blocking the oil flow from Baku to Moscow would cripple the Red Army doesn't sound too bad, but I didn't dig deeper. Some have pointed out that there was another pipeline, albeit with lower capacity, from Astrakhan to Saratov, bypassing Stalingrad.

  Sorry, don't know how a link got established as it wasn't my intention.   Have removed it.

  Yes simply blocking access to Baku for the Soviets, especially since their other primary sources at that date were in areas already taken/threatened in the region north of the Caucasus Mts could have gravely weakened the Soviets.  Imports from the US could have made up the shortfall a bit but only really via the Trans-Siberian route and that would take capacity from somewhere else.  Possibly an advance to the Astrakhan region without trying to push to Baku, or at least close enough to enable the blocking/damage of that pipeline as well. 

  To be frank I wasn't aware of any pipelines in this period from Baku.  However have also read that the Volga was such a vital supply route - for general movement of stuff - that the relatively short period where the Germans had control over one side in the Stalingrad region caused them some significant problems.  It wouldn't have gained the Axis any additional oil in the short term at least but could have gravely weakened the Soviet ability to counter attack effectively.

[Max Sinister]

Jun 15, 2023 15:09:47 GMT stevep said:

Jun 15, 2023 9:28:47 GMT Max Sinister said:

My bad, I just assumed they used pipelines (because oil pipelines are 19th century tech after all, so there didn't seem to be a good reason for the SU not having them). But I checked, and apparently the first gas pipeline (Saratov-Moscow) in the SU is from 1946, and the Grozny–Tuapse oil pipeline from 1928 - the only one pre-WW2.

And yes, the Volga was very important. Although I once read that they also had a less important route Astrakhan-Saratov - by rail, I assume.

[575]

Jun 24, 2023 12:12:52 GMT Max Sinister said:

Jun 15, 2023 15:09:47 GMT stevep said:

My bad, I just assumed they used pipelines (because oil pipelines are 19th century tech after all, so there didn't seem to be a good reason for the SU not having them). But I checked, and apparently the first gas pipeline (Saratov-Moscow) in the SU is from 1946, and the Grozny–Tuapse oil pipeline from 1928 - the only one pre-WW2.

And yes, the Volga was very important. Although I once read that they also had a less important route Astrakhan-Saratov - by rail, I assume.

By rail floating the tanker waggons from Baku and then railing them on.

[Max Sinister]

Jun 24, 2023 14:25:33 GMT 575 said:

Jun 24, 2023 12:12:52 GMT Max Sinister said:

My bad, I just assumed they used pipelines (because oil pipelines are 19th century tech after all, so there didn't seem to be a good reason for the SU not having them). But I checked, and apparently the first gas pipeline (Saratov-Moscow) in the SU is from 1946, and the Grozny–Tuapse oil pipeline from 1928 - the only one pre-WW2.

And yes, the Volga was very important. Although I once read that they also had a less important route Astrakhan-Saratov - by rail, I assume.

By rail floating the tanker waggons from Baku and then railing them on.

Good to know.