Under what condition could the Germans have forced a stalemate in the east after Stalingrad

If you loose the war in the air you loose it on the ground...and fast.
-Monty-

I don't think scrapping the Luftwaffe would have won the war for the Germans.

I don't think that bikes would give the Germans tactical mobility. Firstly because of the climate and infrastructure of the theatre, and secondly because tank riding infantry is faster.

 

Za how did the Hilfkreuzers make around the world voyages ? by the useage of Milch Cows and other freighters disguised as Allied transport vessels. there was works of course of KM aircraft carriers with photos on several sites, but again without the proper workings of each branch what was the use and the plans were tossed, the ships carved up and used for other war ships.

remember guys this is a what-if you cannot hope to accomplish much with stating the obvious as to what really happened during the war. I go back to what I firmly believe in and that is from the vets in this case.............the workings of both branches due to the ego of maniacs in charge led to the doom of both the Wehrmachts elite organizations over the Pacific and the Atlantic, both units lost face, and any type of control over and on Sea space.

E ~

 

The Germans did manage to make a successful series of attacks well beyond Soviet projections right after the Soviet counteroffensive (after Stalingrad). I do not suppose that Stalingrad finished the German Army in Russia, but it did end the most dangerous of the German attacks into Russia.

I suppose if Germany had more aircraft, had more artillery, had luck (involving that prisoner the Russians captured that told them the exact time of the offensive), had delayed the Italian Offensive, and if Russia didn't have knowledge of ULTRA intercepts through its spies, Germany could conceivably win at Kursk, or at least make a stalemate. Though what that would do in the long run, I have no idea.

 

Everyone always forgets the Cheat code they never entered

But I disagree even more tanks against the Russians at kurst would have done little.

 

Yes, but were Hilfskreuzers effective or relevant? How many were they and how long did they last, How much tonnage did they sink? Were they worth the effort or were they another unconventional weapon that in the end was really not much worth the effort?

Wise caveat, should be carved in stone!

I believe I had mentioned above that Germany had shot it's bolt after Kursk, not after Stalingrad.

 

to the Hilfkreuzers ...yes it was of some importance to be on the lookout for raiders disguised, the 6-7 on the ocean kept the Allies guessing through their whole existence always holding any ship suspect. The question remains as the latest news of both the Sydney/Kormoran remains, as the Sydney was looking for the German schiff, found her and then the un-explainable getting in so close so the Kormoran could use it's 150mm's. As the Hilfkreuzers were really only early war boats it is really hard to say if they paid for themselves in worth but a couple of the ships did rack up some impressive tallies on their long voyages.

 

Effective or not, the fact remains that they created an awful scare and the RN did divert disproportionate means to chase off such a small threat. If nothing else, this made them pay for themselves pretty well.

German Auxiliary Cruisers
Armed merchantmen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

beautiful page:
Auxiliary Cruiser

 

M ~ I know your last link quite well over the years. When the Hilf K's were found in the Pacific the Allies really freaked, one: how the heck did they get there and why were they there ?? of course the myths started to build like : Will the German navy provide several bases of attack on Allied shipping, surface and of course the feared U-boats ?

go back to Wiki and click the Orion on the link provided and note when you're on that page the map below of the voyage of that crazy ship, you'll see what I mean.

 

Impossible for a stalemate with Stalin as head, he would have destroyed russia in an effort to get victory, much the same as Hitler did, when the tide turned, and was willing to feed the German people to the grinder, and little compassion for their plight..had Speer not stopped the destroying of infastructure, as Hitler had ordered, Berlin would be no more, and million plus would have been tossed back a hundred years into the rubble...same as seeking a stalemate with churchill...maybe another leader, but not these 3

bf109 Emil

 

Its still possible that the Germans could have stalemated the East, at least for a couple of years or more. To do this they would have had to have moved to a strategy that Hitler likely would not have approved. But, if this were approved it might likely have worked.

1. The panzer divisions on the Eastern front are reduced to large brigades in size. They retain a two battalion panzer element with about 100 or so tanks total authorized strength. They also have a two battalion regiment of panzergrenadier mounted in mostly halftracks where possible. The support is limited to a battalion or two of self-propelled guns and a battalion of engineers. By reducing these formations in size the Germans are better able to keep them mobile and use them as reserves. Their two panzer battalions are whenever possible one of Panthers or Tigers and one of Pz III/IV.

2. Infantry divisions are given a minimum of about a dozen self-propelled guns like the Marder or equivalent. In addition, the Germans scrounge up every antitank gun they can and give each division at least 24 in their complement. Size is less important than presence. These are always motorized.

3. The Germans make a maximum effort to supply every infantry division with four batteries of artillery of at least 75mm in size. Captures, new production, whatever is available is used to accomplish this.

4. Artillery takes a precidence to flak in shell production.

5. The Luftwaffe and SS units are de-motorized immediately.

6. The surplus Luftwaffe personnel are not sent to 'field divisions' but rather sent as replacements to the Wehrmacht bringing a minimum of 20 divisions up to strength.

7. The infantry formations manning the front are instructed to move to positions that will allow maximum defensive postures and the front is adjusted to this new line.

8. The new panzer brigades, along with some new ones formed in France and sent East are used as mobile reserves with each army group receiving several.

9. New artillery formations similar to the Volksartillerie Brigade of late war are formed and supplied to each army group to counter Soviet artillery strength.

10. The Luftwaffe in the east is reorganized into fighter units and ground support units only. The later are for combating breakthroughs, while the former are for wittling down Soviet air strength.

11. Each Corps is given a minimum of one STuG battalion and one self-propelled PanzerJäger battalion. The intent is to use these in battery strength with the assigned divisions. This with the intrinsic company of panzerjäger in an infantry division should give each division about 20 to 30 AFV supporting it in combat.

12. Vehicles like the Brummbär are cancelled as worthless.

13. The Germans concentrate production of infantry support weapons on mortars and machineguns. The 75mm and 150mm infantry guns are phased out in favor of 81mm and 120mm mortars.

14. More effort is made to provide engineers to open roads, railroads, supply lines, and build forward defense systems for units. The intent is to provide a WW 2 version of the Hindenburg Line of WW 1.

 

I am assuming that this new strategy would be for a defensive war?

 

Of course. I would also add that once a defensive line is established that the Germans up their efforts in the rear and depopulate the entirety. Now, this would be in accordance with Nazi thinking of the time and a complete atrocity but it would cut partisan activity to near zero.

 

I must say that such a notion would definately seem more beneficial. A few questions though.

Approximately what date were you thinking of?

Where would this defensive line be?

Also if the West is scraped free or left with a pure skeleton force then wouldn't that be cause for alarm of a rebellion or worse a second front being opened with the help of the allies?

 

Looks like the Hadrian's Wall strategy to me. Mutatis mutandis, of course

 

Logistics in a stalemate favour a huge advantage in Soviet Russia's advantage....even a stalemate, and Germany building forces in the end, they had more planes then fuel to fly them..or enough high octane aviation fuel to train new pilots....Tiger I tanks capture on rail cars after the Ardennes where left on flatbed rail cars for want of fuel...Naval ships stayed in port for lack of fuel oil....even the last year before Italies surrender resulted in numerous Battleships, Heavy cruisers having not scene action for over a year for lack of fuel to heat the boilers...personal auto's where now a thing of the past...Galland had said how dis heartening it was for JV44 the cream of jet pilots...to be towed to the end of the runways waiting for the oder/radar stations to okay to take off, when fuel for the tractor was un available thus made towing of the much heralded jet to be done with cows...prior to Zitadelle it was proposed to Hitler that the quick war with Russia wasn't possible...but a defensive line...back at the initial starting point of june 22 1941 was....hitler and i see his point claimed over a milliom lives have been lost by German forces in russia...to give back a million square miles of land was both unreal in political scope with German people and thus looked for a big push, one that would tip the tide...a bulge at the Kursk salient..and Gehlens notes indicated 40% of Soviet armies, as well as a large number of tank armies where their...he hope for and gambled for one big last push...to finally encircle, and cripple russia's ability to resist...