Hey, I think I recognize that road as a US forest service logging road I used last fall to get to a remote campsite!

Possibly, but you write as if you were describing a picnic. A.G. North was unable to take Leningrad during or after a long siege, Stalingrad we already know about even if assaulted by the strongest grouping in the Axis + Allies armed forces at the time. Are we sure that with Ukrainian digression or not, A.G. Centre would be physically able to take Moscow? </font>[/quote]Actually you know if the Finns and Army Group North had actually launched an attck on Leningrad and invaded the city proper not lay siege to it i doubt it could have held out.

Hitler divided Army Group South into two groups Heers Gruppen Sud (Stalingrad)und A (Baku Oilfields)had Army Group South had been held together as one Stalingrad would have fallen.

And had Hitler ordered Army Group Centre an allout attack on Moscow it would have capitulated as well.

And in conclusion Za Rodinu, where did i say it would have been a picnic, my senarios would have been costly, i say at least 1 million Germans would have been killed and as many or if not more again wounded, but if that what it took to knock out the Soviets then so be it.

As well interesting here is that Hitler´s goal of operation Typhoon by Forczyk was to destroy the bulk of the Soviet Army in front of Moscow and NOT taking Moscow. That is what Hitler said literally in his order....or did he?

__________________

Roddoss you overestimaste the power and strenght of the German war machine. But whats even more important is that you greatly underestimate the Russians..........

This is exactly what Hitler did!!!

__________________
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

By the way the Germans only layed siege to the City after a full out invasion failed and so did the bombardment of the city.

__________________
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

Well, in my estimation, capturing Moscow may have led to a collapse of the Soviet Union. Now, let me justify this. I read in a book quite some time ago(the title of which escapes me, I will endeavor to find it in my library again) that Stalin would not leave Moscow, not even under threat of death or capture at the hands of the Germans. Also, the Soviet Army had most of its command and control functions located in Moscow. Now, had the Germans captured Moscow and Stalin not fled, this would have been a large victory for the Germans. Not only would they have Stalin, they would have cut the nervous system out of the Red Army, leaving it in a state of utter chaos.

I would like to state my opinion as to what the Germans should actually have attempted to accomplish. I believe that the idea of either Hitler, or his High Command, that capturing cities or acquiring massive amounts of land was ill advised. The German Army’s operations should have been based upon destroying the Red Army. Only through the destruction of the Red Army could the Germans have hoped to hold their vast tracks of land they wished to have. It would have been important in the opening stages of the war to concentrate on this objective alone. Namely, because if the Red Army was given time to lick it’s wounds at all(as it was), it would gain the numerical strength to overwhelm even the best armed and trained army. Thus, the opening weeks of the war would have to be decisive, otherwise what is happened would only happen again.(Please tell me if that sentence makes sense.) (Also, I read some where that as the war went on the quality of the Soviet infantry went down. Can anybody either confirm or deny this for me? Thanks!)

Bill

Bill, I don't quite agree with your premises. "If" the Germans did conquer Moscow I am not sure if they could keep it as if Op. Typhoon succeeded they would be completely exhausted and out on a logistical limb. Historically while the Soviets were struggling to keep the Germans at arms length they were also building up a large force for a what almost was a disastrous conter-attack in Dec. 1941*, so a german victory at Moscow wouldn't guarantee anything as they most likely would be able to keep it. Burn it to the ground, maybe, keep it, I doubt it.

The problem would be "if" the Germans did manage to stick to Moscow, the Soviet railway system would be amputated of a centrally important hub, virtually cutting it in two. But again this is "if" they manage to hang on. Stalin and the High Command would be able to get on a train and continue the war from elsewhere, I can assure you Stalin had no death wish, no suicide in the bunker, this rat had a lot of places to go as compared to the other rat.

As for the decrease in quality of the Soviet infantry, this occurred only very late in the war as the manpower pool was getting a bit shallow, and there were a lot of new recruits with no military training at all, drafted as the Red Army advanced from liberated lands, POWs, guerillas, etc. Given time they could be brought to top notch, but given the accelerated tempo of operations in 1944-45 this was an improvised scheme, therefore imperfect.

* Later on they pulled the same trick at Stalingrad and Kursk, so this is a recurring pattern. The Moscow counter-offensive worked badly in the end because the Sovs were at large operations and ove-reached themselves (Stalin got overconfident as usual), but the doctrine was there already.

__________________

I agree with Za that simply taking Moscow would not lead to the winning of war as it would not have resulted in the destruction of the Soviet military power. The factories behind the Urals were getting ready to produce huge numbers of planes, tanks etc. while Germans were not making anything in big numbers.

---------

Just an interesting fact on the winter 1941-42 battles fron General Raus´s " Panzer operations".

The reason why the Germans were able to hold the Soviets back was the fact that the Germans held onto the easy supply areas knowing if they lost them they would be detroyed. The Red Army was allowed to enter areas where supply was hard to deliver where there was no decent roads ( if there were any to call a decent road ) which is the reason why the front at one point looked like a huge puzzle with missing pieces.

So while the Germans did get "enough" supplies the Red Army was in real trouble with troops entering areas where only minimal amounts could be delivered.

__________________

Thank you Za for the valuable information. A sideline question: What were the approximate amounts of manpower in the German Army Groups on the eastern front at this time?

Thanks,
Bill

Bill, these what-if questions tend to be somewhat "iffy" as one has to define very well the underlying premises, otherwise it's very easy to become lost in cloudcuckoo land. I don't very much like to participate in this kind of debates because of this, and because most of the times you can get all your answers through wargaming. Wargames, of which there is a plethora in the market, are exactly what-ifs on the move, you can try your hypothesis, tune up or down your parameters and see what comes out.

Also we have to take into account that What-ifs benefit from our perfect 20/20 hindsight, the commanders at the time had absolutely not a fraction of knowledge of what was going on, and obviously were unaware of the result and afterwaves.

[soapbox mode off]

As for your question, it will take some research as I don't have that kind of data at hand. It's relatively easy finding Orders Of Battle for the time, but as for effective force levels for the units involved it's another matter.

Kai, I wasn't aware of that statement, and I find it somewhat difficult to swallow. Positions with less bad (i.e., I don't believe any German unit had good access) access to supply lines or depots would be more effective in defence than those out on a limb, so the latter would have more difficulty in holding their position. Raus makes it look like this was done on purpose, "I got wet because I decided not to open my umbrella". Teutonic bovine faecal matter

__________________

I think the psycholigical impact of Moscow being taken may have been more important than the tactical advantages. I also think if the Germans had taken Moscow and secured their flanks it would have taken a hell of a lot to get them out of there.

__________________

That's the beauty with ifs, you can postulate anything. The old saying "the sky's the limit" is not even true, you can if away a German moon base if you feel like.

__________________

Another question should be, " IF " the Germans did capture Russia's best and most heavily defended city, how many casualties might they have suffered?

I agree with Za as well, if the Germans managed to capture Moscow, they would have never been able to hold on to it.

__________________
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

My challenge to all and sundry, if Moscow had fallen and that also Leningrad and Stalingrad had also fallen to the Germans then which city would take up the mantle of the Soviet capital that is just as vital as Moscow in regards as to the Military, economical, communications, transport and polital heartland i would be very interested in what you guys have to say on that.

Perm is just one. This was and still is military town.... Not so much today as it was in ww2 and the cold war.

During ww2 it was the main producer of fighter planes.

__________________
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

Well, Za, I guess it´s always just how you like to look at it.

I think this does explain why the frontline got so puzzle-like as the Germans were holding onto some very important roads to the extreme and then again, this in my opinion explains better why the Red Army did not crash the the AGC during the winter. the Germans were in no real position to attack on a larger scale but then again the Red Army could nto unleash all its power because it was left without the supply it needed to carry on the attack.

Later on during the war the Red Army was better prepared for longer periods of attack but during the first winter the methods were still rather fetching, which is no surprise.

__________________