Youre not very conducive to discussion are you?

Garrisoning rail lines in very difficult... Look at Soviet partisan activity in the run up to Bagration...

Actually I dunno why Im bothering...

__________________
"Watch that Fu*ker, he'll 'ave someones eye out!" King Harold at Hastings 1066.

Discussion? you call chromebone discussion? & you can't even admit when a point you've made has been debunked,like the rolling stock. The Python image emerges.

or this...
I cant read a load of balls.....

or this...

Still... I prefer the idea of filling Gigants with Panzer IVs and dropping them on the Russians...

As Mcenroe would say ; YOU CAN"T BE SERIOUS!

There are several components to railroads necessary for their operation. Remove any and the system stops working.

First, there are the rails themselves. The German's opponets would likely pull up portions of these, burn the ties, trash the road bed etc. Bridges would likely be blown up as well.

The next part is ancillary infrastructure. Coaling stations, water towers, switch yards, switch and signal sites etc. All of these would also likely suffer heavily.

Then there is the rolling stock and locomotives. The former is useless without the later. In Russia for example, in the opening campaign of 41 the Germans captured alot of rolling stock but few locomotives. The rolling stock proved largely worthless as a result.
Now, the other problem that could arise is locomotive design. Most of this period were coal fired. Coal would have to be shipped to these areas to supply the locomotives. Also, the size of the water box determines the range between water stations.
Russian locomotives for example had larger water boxes than German ones. Therefore, the distance between water stations was too great to use German locomotives even after resizing the gage of the track. Additional sidings and water towers had to be constructed.

So, we come back to the same problems of logistics. The Germans have limited ability to supply their forces by sea. Rail systems will not be available immediately following the advance. So, it comes back down to trucks and horse drawn wagons supplying the army initially. The problem here is that this has a sustainable range of about 400 to 500 miles at most. Beyond that combat power begins to degrade significantly as the supply system cannot keep up.
It happened to the Germans in Russia and North Africa. It happened to Montgomery in his pursuit of Rommel. It happened to the Japanese and the Americas too.

The Southern route is simply too big a theater for the Germans to rapidly and suddenly conqueror. Instead, they will find themselves drawn into a wide ranging war of attrition on multiple fronts and a huge empty rear needing garrisoning. It is a real tar baby for the Germans.

Nicely put T.A...

I just couldnt be bothered with it anymore.

What interests me is the psyhcolgy behind those who seem to profess that German could have won and how they could have done it.

Seems a bit perverse to me but then Im English...

I stopped taking it seriously after the whole 'How many tanks can you fit in a Gigant' thread ages ago. Never listened to reason on that thread either...

__________________
"Watch that Fu*ker, he'll 'ave someones eye out!" King Harold at Hastings 1066.

Let's all relax in here ok?



If you disagree, fine, but let's not turn this into a flamewar.

__________________

WWII Forums Rogues Gallery - send in your photo!
Comments, questions or feedback? Contact me at

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." Socrates

I cant believe you guys are bashing this guy because the thread is about a what if regarding a german victory in WW2

what else are we going to talk about in a WHAT IF section

__________________

As Otto rightly says, if you're going to participate in the 'What If' section you'll need to be able to agree to disagree...

( Which is why I choose never to get involved in the 'what ifs' ! Me262s in the Battle of Britain or nuke-equipped V2s don't interest me : I'm only really into what did happen.... )

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

Never said how many tanks fit in a 323 Za. Yet another innacurate insult. I mentioned an airlift that a book covered. I even mentioned the book. Why you keep rambling about such unrelated irrelevance is quite weird.

As for the conquest of Egypt point,

A German panzer expert, General Wilhelm von Thoma, went to Libya in October 1940 and reported to Hitler that Suez could be captured with only four panzer divisions. At the time, Germany had 20 panzer divisions, and none were involved in active combat operations.

& again, Germany would have little opposition in the Baku front after Russians beaten. Brits would likely be run out of north Iraq as part of a southern pincer, which would end up at southern shore of Caspian sea to capture ports as a block to any allied supply attempts. Then head north to Baku.

& with Brits run out of north Iraq & Egypt, they would be hard pressed to cause damage to Turkish rail system.

Hitler should have sent a logistics expert. The answer would have been far different. At the Alamein position the Germans were barely able to maintain 2 panzer and 2 motorized divisions on the defensive.

The difference being without Barbarossa, all the fuel would go to Africa, making the maintenance of 4 Panzer divisions much easier.

& as for locomotives, they could be ferried across the straights of bosporus. & Regarding Germans in Baku being too far strung out for supplies etc, the opposite would be true, Brits would have the long, ( No rail ), supply situation coming up from Iranian ports through mtns of north Iran.

Germans had rail system from Turkey to Armenia & Russian commando raids would be unlikely for Turkish rail system, ( Armenian perhaps ), because they would have to air dropped from across the Black sea. Would they swim back? Same situation for Brits( long walk back to south Iraq ). Only exception would be small plane fly in, fly out type missions.

After 6 months, Germans would have oil running & would be able to deal with any attack north or south because they would have no fuel problems like Brits coming from south would have, or oiless Russians from north. & other supplies would come by rail.

Now, it is also possible rail system ran all the way from Armenia to Baku, after all Russians built Armenian rail system just after 1900. & Brits were in Baku during the 20's. they weren't riding camels. Rather they would have had some good roads built. the biggest oil find in the world would no doubt have good roads built around it, perhaps railheads too. The distance from Armenia & Baku is what 250 kilometers? much shorter than distances traversed in africa & Russians steppes. Supply would have been much easier for Germans, obviously in Baku than in Libya or the vast expanses of mother Russia.

Let us not forget the vast amount of supplies that US ran through Iran corridor was done with trucks, not rail. I suppose the Germans had not the same truck driving skill as Americans did?

Flip through this link & you'll see Baku changed hands a few times. Brits, Turks, ( almost ), & Russians. Not exactly an unconquerable locale.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...sazerb/246.htm

as well as the agreement on the Baku-Batumi pipeline on the usage of
Azerbaijani and Transcaucasian railroads created a legal basis for Turkey to get the use of Baku oil.

Transcaucasian railroads, did we get that? & that was WW1.


& here is map of Georgia. Germans may send northern pincer through there. Terrrain not too rough. & below is the status of roads/rails circa 1926-1940.
http://www.thewineman.com/geo_map.htm

In 1926 Georgia had reached its prewar level of industrial production; transportation was restored; area under cultivation exceeded its pre-war level and cultural construction expanded as well. As a result of socialist construction and the successful completion of the first five year plans, Georgia had transformed itself into an industrial-agrarian country with a diversified, collectivized agricultural system. In 1937, industry's share in Georgian economy was 75.2% and 800 new industrial installations were constructed. The industrial enterprises built or totally reconstructed under Soviet power reportedly accounted for more than 80% of Georgia's industrial productivity. More than 8,000 km of highways and 250 km of raillines were built. By 1940, Georgia's Gross Industrial Product had increased by a factor of 10,2 over its 1913 level.

8000 km of highways, & 250 km of railines. A bit different than Libya eh?

Sounds like some kinda Barbarossa to me..?! Which you were meant NOT to do, right?

And considering the road conditions in Russia/Georgia. The Germans found out that the roads were , eh, not really roads as we call them. Besides the Soviets made false maps of roads, cities etc until the end of cold war so that the enemy would not know how to move in their country in case they were attacked.

Also like the article I put earlier says the Baku oil was moved by tankers not by trains or trucks. I guess they had a very good reason to that? I must suppose the conditions would not make it possible??!

And if the Soviets wanted to move spies/partisans they did have the Black sea navy to do that. No need to swim.

__________________

The article I put mentions Turkey getting oil by train.
& not even close to Barbarossa. The distances are not even in the same league. A small front through Georgia is not even close to attacking all along Polish border & Romanian border simultaneously. Not even close. & Russian maps mean very little, German photo recon planes would tell the tale with aireal photos.

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/c...pe/europea.htm

A look at the map shows just how much further it is from Romania to Baku that it is from Georgia to Baku.

I see the discussion seems to have cooled down however I can't help but get involved here.

We all know that Turkey was neutral until the end of the war. Keeping Turkey out of the war was a great achivement accomplished by Ismet Inonu, who was the second president of Republic of Turkey after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. He was also the second man in the Independence War of Turkey against British supported Greek. After the victory, again Ismet Inonu was sent to Switzerland to sign Loussane Treaty which is the basis of recognition of Turkey in the international community today. Yet he has left all 3000 aegean islands to greek in Lousanne. We cursed after him while we were driving on the Aegean coast and listening to the greek radio broadcasting from a greek island 2 miles away .

Got a little bit off topic there sorry, so lets get back to our question "what if Turkey got involved?".

It is really hard to tell whose side would Turkey be in case war was inevitable. It is known that Turkey used to supply Reich with chromium, and Hitler gave money to Turkey to build some air defense. I think Inonu double played. Both axis and allied were afraid that Turkey would get in the war on the opposide side. If turkey had joined axis Baku would be just a step away from Kars which is Germans interest, meanwhile Turkish army would not hesitate a second to attack Mosul and Kirkuk by having the support of Wehrmacht behind. Mosul and Kirkuk are being considered as Turkish soil and those cities are the only ones which Turkey tried to get back and could not. still today Turkish government is stirring up the area in order to avoid an independent Kurdish state to be established. So Germans would not have to worry about the Brits in Iraq. But they would probably have trouble in the northeast. Caucasian geography is a harsh one. Turkish army lost over supposedly 50.000 men in WW1 not because of Russians but due to winter. It is called Sarikamis Operation, which later to be called Sarikamis disaster. Well it was mostly due to lack of command and winter equipment but it might give you an idea about the conditions over there. The topic is being discussed in wikipedia ;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Battle_of_Sarikamis

What would happen in the caucasians is up to your imaginations.

What if Turkey joined Allies? The answer is I probably would not have been born because my grandfather would be dead before he got married. I have no doubt that we would fight back with everything we had. But that would not make much difference. However Germans had to deal with local resistance forces supported by the allies. That the same resistance spirit repelled French from south of Turkey, Russians from the east of Turkey in WW1. After that, Germans had Brits in the south and Russian in the east to deal with. In the case Turkey's joining the allies if I was in Hitler's shoes I would ride the way over the black sea.

There is a proverb in Turkish slang, "If my aunt had balls, than she would be my uncle." So I think it is better to keep the things as they happened.

Well that's all for my history knowledge. Excuse the grammar and spelling mistakes please.

Regards.

__________________

"The victor will never be asked if he told the truth."
A.H.

Karem,

Turkey was in two military campaigs against Russia of which neither one was successful,in fact they were both desasters. Do you think that Turkey would want go to war with Russia again?

Im not to familiar with Turkey's military and economic might but after WW1 the Ottoman Empire was no more. If im not mistaken wasnt there an economic collapse and the country in a disastrous state?? Please inform me I might be mistaken.

Thanks

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

Nope , Turkey wouldn't even think of going to war Russia. That must be one of the reasons why we were neutral at that time. But I repeat, if Turkey joined axis we would definetly take it on the Brits in Iraq. You see, in 1925 Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was preparing for an operation to take back Mosul, but just in that time a revolt in southeast of Turkey kept Turkish army busy. That revolt was provoked by the Brits, obviously. But politics is a game you have to play.

After WW1 Turkish state collapsed that is true, however the new founded secular republic showed great success rebuilding the country and the economy. About after a decade from the decleration of independence great investments were made, these including the railroads that you people were talking about. However with Mustafa Kemal taking his hands off the politics -due to cirrhosis- the spirit was lost and today here is the IMF depended middle eastern country which is trying to join the E.U.

However all these progress that have been made was not enough to get into a full scale war against Russia or Germany.

You see they had planned to take back Mosul but a riot kept them away from doing it. This should give you an idea about the situation of the miltary and the economy.

__________________

"The victor will never be asked if he told the truth."
A.H.

That I agree with!!!

__________________
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler

And don't forget that even if the Wehrmacht had taken Moscow and driven the Red army behind the Urals they still had no chance whats so ever of winning the war.

British and American air power would do to Germany what the U.S. 20th air force did in Japan, and if that wasn't enough before August '45.....Armageddon.

Damn! And Lawrence of Arabia was dead already!

__________________

The angry thread is back better put on my oven gloves.

__________________
Man of the Year 1942

Regards, Richard