In my opinion a change of operations wouldn't change a thing for the Germans, their production, transport, research and supply problems will hobble them no matter how brilliant their generals are.
Had a worthwhile War Production committee been formed before the war, linking forward thinking military personell with industry leaders, it would have changed the course of the war. Had this committee forced streamlining of production, as in the US, the German government would build state of the art facilities for private industry, forcing out less productive cottage industry in Germany which persisted the entire war. Reducing the number of different models of equipment, BEFORE the war started would in itself drastically improve German chances. Had this Committee the power to force a change to full wartime economy say in 1940, this again alters the war. Now imagine linking this committee with the German research programs, taking them out of the hands of Nazi political appointee's. The fruits of research would be put into the design pool quickly, efficiently, increasing the pace of improvement. Anti shipping rockets, Infa Red equipment, radar, nuclear, etc programs would most likely bear fruit and/or earlier.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

If Rumanian troops are so unrealiable, and the Soviet juggernaut so powerful, then why did Finland, a nation not even approaching Rumanian fiscal or industrial standards in 1940, hold off the Russians so well during the Winter War?

Thats easy enough to answer. The Finns held off the massive Russians easily for several reasons. One big thing that helped the Finns-besides fighting on familiar ground, besides being excellent fighters, was the fact that Junior Russian commanders (at least during this early war period) basically could not think of what to do in a situation, and not have a much higher ranking officer, tell them what to do.

Kill the head, and the body panics. This is stated in numerous books about the Eastern Front.

__________________
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

Rumania holds all of those advantages at the least, Carl. My question was rhetorical. :P

Finland had several HUGE advantages.
1) Remember that it was called the Winter War. Guess why? Give up? It was fought during the fall and winter within miles of the arctic circle. In dense virgin forests whose nasty terrain, especially in winter, makes triple canopy jungle look inviting. Also, please glance at a map of Finland. It should show at least several hundred lakes dotting face of this relatively tiny country. This doesnt come close to representing how marshy and wet Finland is when it isnt frozen, most of Finland is one big fen. One reason why the Soviets attacked in winter was to avoid the swamps!!!! Counterpoint, most Romanians dwell on its coastal plain, flat cropland that looks a lot like Kansas.

2)The Finns highest military leaders had ALL served with dinstinction with either the Russian or German forces during WWI. Most had graduated from the academies of either St. Petersburg or Potsdam.

3)The Germans maintained a close relationship with Finland even between the world wars. Finnish officers were trained in German OT schools, beside German officer candidates. These schools are regarded to be the best on earth at the time, giving Germany some of the brightest officers to see combat. Romanian officers were appointed for political reliability, and for the most part trained indigenously. This relationship meant that the Finns in 1939 were using German infantry techniques, high concentrations of mobile MG's and subMG's is an example, that the rest of the world had yet to adopt.

4)Finland's other neighbor was Sweden, a country of close kinship with mostly sympathy in its heart for Finland. Romania's neighbors wouldnt piss on it if was on fire, to use one of my favorite euphamism's. Sweden herself sent wargoods, fuel, and other supplies to the Finns, not to mention smuggling them goods from other countries using nuetral Swedish ships. Sweden even accepted most of Finlands children to protect them and relieve the burden of feeding them from Finland. Would Hungary do that for Romania? How about Bulgaria or Poland? I dont think so.

These are only a few of the many examples proving Finland and Romania are two very different cases.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

1. Northwestern Bessarabia is covered in dense forests and rivers passable only at key fords. This is evidenced by 'Strategy and Tactics' which outlines Rumania attacks into the region shortly after its annexation.

2. Germany and Italy both would lend Rumania aid. While Finland offered little, Rumania is Germany's key source of patroleum. It is doubtful the Western allies would go so far as to supply Germany even during a war with the Soviets, especially early on when the Soviets have yet to break through Rumania.

3. Rumania had at least one Mountain Corps, one Royal Guards division, one Frontier division, and one German-trained armored division. These were all considered to be "crack". All divisions in the Rumanian Army were equipped with a company of Czech anti-tank guns, following German doctrine.

4. The IAR-80 is far superior to the F2A, with which Finland fought its war. The German Bf109, Fw190, and Ju87 will lend themselves heavily to the Rumanian war effort.

5. Germany would provide Rumanian with the PzrKpf III and IV/75 if the need arises, especially when Ploesti begins to find itself endangered. Rumania had at least one true "motorized" division on record.

For the third or fourth time, the IAR-80 only arrived in 1942, The Finns fought the Winter War in '39. Compare Spitfires built in '39 to models built in '42.
Italy couldnt supply itself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Germany could and did offer little in the way of Equipment to any of its allies, even less to Romania because of distance and infrastructure problems.
Dont even make me list the crack units in the Finnish army!!!!!
Germany only started supply Romania with PIII's and PIV's in '43(after they lost most of their stuff), until then they have junk.
Whoopity Doo Daa, Romania has 4 or 5 crack divisions, with no trucks, short on MG's and 1940 style AT guns(which denotes 37mm Skoda pieces).
End analysis Romania is only a small footnote in WWII history. Your OnWar list comparing Romania to the British Commonwealth is dead wrong, considering the amount of men and material those colonies/countries provided the UK. Canada produced more meaningful wargoods than Italy alone. Romania ground up 300,000 peasents then switched sides.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

My legimate argument is based off an article published in a respected military history magazine. Their own research indicates that Germany would never have gained so much or pushed so far without Rumanian aid.

There is no timeline set for the Soviet invasion. The Soviet Army is still in an effective shambles after reorganization.

Germany did not offer Rumania much, and it wasn't because of infrastructure issues. It lay on Hitler's personal dislike for Carol and his regimé after their murder of a key Iron Guard leader. Hitler declined to sell them machine tools or trucks, and similarly barred them from purchasing foreign items from firms under German suzerainty. Germany would invest considerably into Rumania's defense, just as they did in Finland's. The fact that Rumania's oil is of such value is an even more convincing fact.

In a defensive battle, even static infantry can be useful. Rumania did field at least one fully mechanized cavalry division. The Rumanians were armed, at the start of the Barbarossa campaign, with anti-tank guns which the German army recommended for its own use. Hindsight is a poor argument in claiming these were useless prior to the campaign in Russia. Until then, they were highly sought after and rare in even most modern armies.

Italy can supply Rumania if the issue is a Soviet invasion and not a Second World War in Africa or the Balkans. Especially in the way of heavy artillery, fighter aircraft, and light armored or mechanized vehicles.

Germany would supply Rumania with the finest war matériel avaliable if it came down to a communist invasion.

Hitlers dislike for Carol is a very small side issue. Infrastructure is the main reason Romania got less than the other allies. Hungary and the Czechs bordered Germany proper and had many more miles of modern railroad, and paved roads. Shipping a trainload of equipment to Prague or Budapest was far less taxing than to send one to Bucharest. Some Romanian railways are even of different gauge.
Also the Romanians were not well regarded by the Germans. Whether they were great or not, I dont care. Also the Germans knew that machine tools and such shipped to Romania would be wasted. As stated Romania was a backward nation with a very low literacy rate, and no history of major heavy industries. Sending them much needed machine tools would only be a drop in the bucket towards the amount of infrastructure that would need to be built to support an infant Romanian armaments industry. They lacked modern factories, power plants(without which you have nothing), skilled workers, and everything else you need to produce war material. So as the Fuhrer, give me a reason why you would send Romania tools you desperately need yourself.
Romania was turned down in Fall/Winter of '39/'40 by the Czech's because all the Pz-38's were already reserved for Germany. Again, had Germany let Romania purchase many of the Pz-38's would Germany have won in France? What the hell good would they have done in Romania? Romania was allowed to purchase some of them from the Germans after the French campiagn, as many as the Germans could afford to lose. The Germans were always so hurting for equipment they couldnt afford to send the Romanians much, not because there was a vendetta.
Germany would invest in Romania's defence, with Werhmacht troops, not by supporting the Romanian regime.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

The military magazine 'Strategy & Tactics' is in disagreement. According to 'Romania: Forgotten Axis', an article on the topic of Rumania's military contributions during the campaign 'Barbarossa', Rumania was in many vital undertakings held back by Hitler's dislike for Rumania following the Iron Guard incident discussed previously.

Although I find issue with your information on the Pz38, I can state that this would not have been the only issue at hand. You seem to waive aside the fact that Germany imports its patroleum from Rumania exclusively, and during the war, invested heavily to defend the Ploesti fields, now endangered by Soviet army groups.

Meanwhile, Rumania possessed a treasury in all cases disproprtionate to its vast and unfortunate dependance on agriculture. The Ploesti fields allowed Bucharesti to make a number of purchases far in excess of what might be theoretically possible for a nation of its status.

As we have seen before, Rumania went so far as to equip all divisions with Czech-made anti-tank artillery pieces. Yet beyond your argument concerning tankettes and armored vehicles, Rumania attempted to purchase certain domestic production rights, light and heavy machine tools, and motorized vehicles such as trucks and prime movers.

Hitler barred the Czechs, Swedes, and Swiss from providing such items. Later, he would extend this to occupied France and Hungary, which he did permit to construct certain domestic models of tankette based on the same designs which Czechslovakia nearly provided to Rumania.

Rumania made a far greater contribution during the war with Russia than did Hungary or even Slovakia. Germany would here be now compelled to support Antonescu with not only heavy artillery and medium tanks, but tools and moulds for machine weapons and modern arms.

AFrican supply problems for Rommel were brought on primarily by the fact that ULTRA and the cracking of Italian codes at the time had all the shipping schedules from Italy to North Africa. When you read the other guy's mail all the time it is easy to have your recon aircraft "stumble" upon the supply convoys.

1)Romanians(Roms) dont have the skilled workers to operate the machines
2)No factory exists to house the tool
3)Not enough power plants run the tool
4)Roms would be forced to import strategic materials, taking them from German plants
5)Lack of roads and rails to move materials and finished products to and fro
I apologize for the earlier post, on rereading the passage it was Pz-35's not 38's that Germany blocked the sale of in '39. In October '40 several Pz-35's and Pz-38's were released for sale to Romania, when they were replaced by German tanks in their respective units. The machine tools and equipment was blocked to keep the stuff flowing to Germany. Every Czech and French vehicle the Germans blocked from the Roms went into combat in a German unit.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

1. Rumania had at least three major factory lines and production centers, not the least of which was able to construct domestic and foreign aircraft during the course of the Second World War. Fw 190s and Bf 109s were later built in Rumania with German aid.

2. In this case, as you seem to ignore, the Rumanian front is vital to German security and industry, as Ploesti is the single and most readily-avaliable source of petrol.

3. Rumania could buy neither the plans and rights to production nor the necessary tools to produce armored or motorized vehicles during the war. Yet even by 1943, Germany had regulated some units from service.

4. Rumania possess iron ore, patroleum, and coal. Within one year, they could at least power major factories. They did posses some tools and power-production during the war. How else cold the IAR have appeared?

5. Germany could readily afford to send both industrious minds and knowledgeable minds to their Rumanian ally - especially in this circumstance.

6. Rumania could not even buy rights to certain weapons which they could produce. Hungary made lesser contributions and was given leave to build the Turan. This defies your argument that Germany needed everything for its own defense.

1. Rumania had at least three major factory lines and production centers, not the least of which was able to construct domestic and foreign aircraft during the course of the Second World War. Fw 190s and Bf 109s were later built in Rumania with German aid.

Name any German city with a population over 100,000 and I will show you 3 major factory lines. Also, they only built 180 IAR’s with many imported parts. That’s pitiful. Some German and French aircraft were locally assembled/upgraded in Romania, with very few local parts. Some 700 were assembled between April ’41 and early ’44, less than 20 a month.

2. In this case, as you seem to ignore, the Rumanian front is vital to German security and industry, as Ploesti is the single and most readily available source of petrol.

Yes, the Romanian front was vital to the Germans. That’s why the Germans and their Hungarian allies would annex Romania and use Wehrmacht troops to keep the place, if prior to ’44 Romania looks like it will fall. The Germans had several different contingency plans drawn up for this eventuality


3. Rumania could buy neither the plans and rights to production nor the necessary tools to produce armored or motorized vehicles during the war. Yet even by 1943, Germany had regulated some units from service.

The licensing rights weren’t withheld from Romania just to punish them. Italy attempted to purchase the licensing rights to build Tigers in early ’43. It wasn’t the German government but the Henschel Company who ended Italy’s attempt by charging exorbitant prices for the license fees. The Italians did not have the cash, so no Tigers. These giant fees were charged by all German defense contractors and applied to anyone, thus most German allies chose to produce their own inferior equipment then to copy better German designs. This is one of the major reasons the Germans lost the war, because the Czech, French, Hungarian, and Polish AFV companies kept building obsolete models when they could have been building Panthers.


4. Rumania possesses iron ore, petroleum, and coal. Within one year, they could at least power major factories. They did posses some tools and power-production during the war. How else cold the IAR have appeared?

So? To build tanks and aircraft you need magnesium, nickel, copper, rubber, brass, aluminum, paraffin’s, ethylene, manganese, molybdenum, sodium, coke, asbestos, lead and many other raw materials. Does Romania have all or even most of these, plus the infrastructure to bring them to market even near efficiently? I know for a fact that Romania had little coal and a large portion of what they used during the war they imported. To make steel you need coke, a coal derivative. Romania has almost zip for aluminum also. So as I said earlier, Romania would be forced to pull resources out of German plants, to run theirs. Not bloody likely.

05. Germany could readily afford to send both industrious minds and knowledgeable minds to their Rumanian ally - especially in this circumstance.

SEE PREVIOUS RESPONSES
It was better and easier for Germany to bring skilled Romanian workers to Germany, which they did.

6. Rumania could not even buy rights to certain weapons, which they could produce. Hungary made lesser contributions and was given leave to build the Turan. This defies your argument that Germany needed everything for its own defense.


1) Hungary’s major AFV producer was Manfred Weiss, a company with which several German firms had stakes in.
2) Landsverk L-60 went into production in Hungary in the mid-thirties. By 1940 MW had years of production experience, a pool of workers, adequate production facilities, tools, and everything else already in place.
3) The Turan was a licensed modified copy of the Pz-38 (t) built by CKD/Praga a Czech company, who charged little in the way of fees. The Germans had nothing to do with the deal. The turret and power train were the only major differences. The Hungarians locally built nearly every component, even the entire motor and transmission

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

1. The point is, Rumania could build viable combat aircraft which could still perform as well as most other fighters avaliable on the market at the time. While this is not true for dedicated fightercraft or interceptors, it is the case for ground-support or ground-attack aircraft, which is what the IAR-80 was primarily outfitted for.

2. A German annexation of Rumania is not a contengincy we must consider. The chief question here is the viability of Rumania's army and capabilities. Neither simply cease to be even if Antonescu's regimé does.

3. According to 'Strategy & Tactics', the rights for licenscing were time and again withheld purposefully, often at Hitler's own insistence.

4. Rumania could still have aquired the materials, which by then, Italy nor the British would demand. Costs would be far inferrior to those during the Second World War, and therefore, Bucharesti, with large amounts of cash on hand thanks to their oil industry, could afford to make such mass purchases during the short-term.

5. There were still skilled workers in the Rumanian area. If there was reason to send these to work domestically, they would be regulated to such jobs.

6. To counter your argument:

1) By 1939, 80% of Rumania's economy was in German hands. 40% of its agriculture, 20% of its viable industry, and 33% of its total population were siezed when Bessarabia, the southern Dobruja, Wallachia, and Moldavia fell to Soviet, Bulgarian, or Hungarian demands. Yet Rumania's industry, during the war, produced the IAR-80, hundreds of German fighters, and their own tank destroyer late during Barbarossa.

2) Rumania had been working on the IAR-80 since prior to 1939.

3) The Turan was a modified copy of Czech tankettes, correct. Yet if it was indeed that cheap, why could Rumania - with vast income from Ploesti and little else to spend it on - not purchase the rights?

1. The point is, Rumania could build viable combat aircraft which could still perform as well as most other fighters avaliable on the market at the time. While this is not true for dedicated fightercraft or interceptors, it is the case for ground-support or ground-attack aircraft, which is what the IAR-80 was primarily outfitted for.
My point wasnt if they could, but how little, the veritable drop in the bucket

2. A German annexation of Rumania is not a contengincy we must consider. The chief question here is the viability of Rumania's army and capabilities. Neither simply cease to be even if Antonescu's regimé does.
Seems relevent to me if the Germans thought it was

3. According to 'Strategy & Tactics', the rights for licenscing were time and again withheld purposefully, often at Hitler's own insistence.
Because they couldnt build what they wanted to buy without witholding/subverting resources Germans. IMHO, it was a good idea. How many could they have built anyway?
200?

4. Rumania could still have aquired the materials, which by then, Italy nor the British would demand. Costs would be far inferrior to those during the Second World War, and therefore, Bucharesti, with large amounts of cash on hand thanks to their oil industry, could afford to make such mass purchases during the short-term.
WWII was a war of attrition, materials used by Romania couldnt be used by Germany

5. There were still skilled workers in the Rumanian area. If there was reason to send these to work domestically, they would be regulated to such jobs.
Many/Most went to Germany, Czech.

6. To counter your argument:

1) By 1939, 80% of Rumania's economy was in German hands. 40% of its agriculture, 20% of its viable industry, and 33% of its total population were siezed when Bessarabia, the southern Dobruja, Wallachia, and Moldavia fell to Soviet, Bulgarian, or Hungarian demands. Yet Rumania's industry, during the war, produced the IAR-80, hundreds of German fighters, and their own tank destroyer late during Barbarossa.
And look at the good it did them. During the entire war Romania failed to come close let alone equal a single month of US production, of anything. INSIGNIFICANT.

2) Rumania had been working on the IAR-80 since prior to 1939.
And she was one helluva craft for all that work

3) The Turan was a modified copy of Czech tankettes, correct. Yet if it was indeed that cheap, why could Rumania - with vast income from Ploesti and little else to spend it on - not purchase the rights?
Not tankette copy, light tank copy. Again, could Romania build them without subverting resources better used elsewhere? Romania was allowed to purchase vehicles, see Gemini's post at OnWar(great post btw, he found quite a bit of info)

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

1. The point of the matter is, Rumania was able to build a potent aircraft which made its name as a ground-support weapon. The IAR, for all your statements against it, performed well. Rumania also produced hundreds of front-line German fighters during the war.

2. Our issue is the Rumanian army and its capabilities. A German occupation would not suddenly alter any of these.

3. The Hungarians didn't build anything near the number necessary with the own Turan. It did subvert German resources, however. Why not extend the same privledge to Rumania?

4. Again, Hungary was given "minor" gifts in German eyes, for far less sacrifice or effort.

5. Once more, Rumanian workers would stay in Rumania during a war with the Soviets, esp. where transport and logistic are concerned.

6. Again ...

1) We are not comparing Rumania to the USA, which is at least one hundred ties their superior.

2) My point still stands. Rumania developed something approaching a modern aircraft even with nearly half its industry under Soviet control or in ruins.

3) And Hungary could afford to flagrantly waste German resources on the 'Turan', which would have been just as 'worthless' even in their hands. Remember, Rumanian armored troops had been German-trained even before the war. If anything, Gemini's post backs my argument. Hitler withheld items from them which would not have taxed Germany at all to provide. I don't see where your argument is going besides: "Rumania didn't do any of the things you said it didn't do."

All I am trying to point out that Romania and Romanian troops were so insignificant, they hold little value. Volkssturm, and other rear echelon units could have performed the function of the few hundred thousand Romanians. Sure, they fought, just not in any numbers that could effect the war at large.

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.

And my point - derived from articles written by a magazine which bases its articles on campaign and strategy - is that the Rumanian nation contributed far more than any other Axis ally to Germany's cause on the Russian front.

Rumania contributed more men than any other Axis ally of Germany on that front. Finland made no great gains and often refused to overstep previous territorial lines. The Hungarians and Italians are oft neglected, but then again, little is written even of their triumphs. Slovakian troops were placed behind the lines. Spanish forces often evaporated. Rumania, however, helped to sieze Odessa, the Ukraine, and the Crimea. Rumanian oil kept Germany in the war.

All of Germany's allies were of little use because of her failure to supply them. Had Germany the production to supply its allies with top notch gear, and bring those formation's on par with German levels, the war may have gone different.
One major difference separating the two sides in the war was each sides willingness to supply their allies. The US supplied the UK and Russia with whatever they could, no charge. The UK gave away all they could spare, for free. The Germans charged their allies for stuff they couldn’t even use. The Germans warehoused competent French aircraft and aircraft parts while their allies were scraping the barrel for everything that could get aloft. Then parceled them out over the next few years for outrageous fees.
In July ’40 the Germans inventoried all their captured French gear. They had something around 1,500 French aircraft engines, in running order, which they sat on, using them on bizarre projects like the Gigant, or just letting them rot. What kind of difference could these have made in the hands of their allies? Something on the order of 5-600 French tanks in either running, or easily repaired order were in German hands. Italy received about 50, Finland got less than Italy about 25, 200-250 were taken into German service and the rest were warehoused in France. In ’44 these came in handy, around 100 being retrofitted as SP guns usually armed with 75mm AT guns and used against the Western Allies. Again, how useful would they have been in the hands of Germany’s allies in ’41 if Hungarian and Romanian forces had 200 French tanks given to them?
Had Germany been able to reconcile the Nazi’s and profiteering industry giants, and German production reached decent levels, they could have supplied their allies with trucks, tanks, etc. But because German production levels were so low, especially early in the war, they couldn’t afford to lose anything, and when they did they tried to get top dollar for it, from allies!!!!!

[ 09 September 2001: Message edited by: talleyrand ]

__________________
It's a sick, sick world. I'm a happy man.