Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Could the Western Allies defeated the German's without the Soviets

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Axis are simply restricted by the port capacity of Benghazi and Tripoli and the lack of a usable rail line. This meant a reliance on trucks to move the supplies forward. Granted, with no eastern front the ground forces have access to more trucks but that is only part of the problem If a port can only handle X,000 tons of supply per month then there is no point in sending more troops than the ports can supply.

    Add in the fact that the further you move from the ports the more trucks you need. You eventually reach the point where you start eating the fuel needed by the army to fuel the trucks. If you increase the fuel tonnage to compensate you then reduce spares (extremely critical in the desert), ammunition, food, water, troops, etc.

    NB**

    Just a point on spares and how critical they were in Africa, the example of Rommel's first move forward to Tobruk in April 1941 is instructive. Of 155 German and ~ 160 Italian tanks of all models that began the advance, ~ 120 German and 140 Italian tanks were off the road without even getting into battle. Of the 80+ German tanks requiring heavy repair, nearly 60 required new engines (approximate numbers quoted as I am not at home with the books).

    All of this occurred in just over one week of operations. It was weeks before 5th Lt and Ariete could even field more than 50-60 tanks apiece.
    The Purist

    Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by The Purist View Post
      The Axis are simply restricted by the port capacity of Benghazi and Tripoli and the lack of a usable rail line. This meant a reliance on trucks to move the supplies forward. Granted, with no eastern front the ground forces have access to more trucks but that is only part of the problem If a port can only handle X,000 tons of supply per month then there is no point in sending more troops than the ports can supply.

      Add in the fact that the further you move from the ports the more trucks you need. You eventually reach the point where you start eating the fuel needed by the army to fuel the trucks. If you increase the fuel tonnage to compensate you then reduce spares (extremely critical in the desert), ammunition, food, water, troops, etc.

      NB**

      Just a point on spares and how critical they were in Africa, the example of Rommel's first move forward to Tobruk in April 1941 is instructive. Of 155 German and ~ 160 Italian tanks of all models that began the advance, ~ 120 German and 140 Italian tanks were off the road without even getting into battle. Of the 80+ German tanks requiring heavy repair, nearly 60 required new engines (approximate numbers quoted as I am not at home with the books).

      All of this occurred in just over one week of operations. It was weeks before 5th Lt and Ariete could even field more than 50-60 tanks apiece.
      Now, I will say that had the Germans thought more outside the box they might have solved some or all of this problem. The way to do that is build a large number of cheap landing barges that are capable of carrying the supplies foward more efficently than trucks. I'd suggest the Japanese Diahatsu style landing craft as a point of departure. Built of wood (non-strategic material), cheap and easy to mass produce on the Mediterrainian coast these could have moved supplies forward easier than masses of trucks could.
      The Germans did use a small number of MFP landing craft but these are steel, large, and relatively complex to build. They could never get the number needed to North Africa nor could they build them locally in yards like they could have something like a Diahatsu. This sort of ship could have even been built in Tripoli.

      Comment


      • Guys lets move forwarx to knocking the Italians out of the war

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
          Guys lets move forwarx to knocking the Italians out of the war
          Do you ever check what you're typing or is it your way of taking the **** out of people?
          www.histours.ru

          Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ShAA View Post
            Do you ever check what you're typing or is it your way of taking the **** out of people?
            Your answer to this question can be found by looking at his location. How do you spell your own city wrong?
            Кто там?
            Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
            Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Stryker 19K30 View Post
              Your answer to this question can be found by looking at his location. How do you spell your own city wrong?
              Lol, this is the sign of a true master
              www.histours.ru

              Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

              Comment


              • All right Gents. Address the post, not the poster if you please.

                Thanks,....ACG Staff
                The Purist

                Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
                  Guys lets move forwarx to knocking the Italians out of the war
                  L,

                  That's a difficult question to address because we have not established how the British have have modified their post summer 1940 actions (they have options). While the Axis could not build up fast emnough in Africa to take Egypt they may be able to pen the British and CW back at Alamein while forcing basing rights for a/c and light naval forces from the Vichy.

                  The question then becomes one of whether the US sends troops to Egypt or attempts Torch further south along the Atlantic and then marching north. If the Allies are going to concentrate on germany with a/c the Med may simply be cordoned off. Britain can't win in Africa alone, at least not easily, not against main strength of the LW and 12 axis divisions . The Allies may have to opt for a laning in 1944 in Spain and push inland to secure a continental bridghead and forcing a poor infrastructure on the German reaction.

                  Its hard to force an Italian defeat when the US may not even want a Mediterranean involvement other than to secure the middle-east and block a southward move from Casablanca.

                  The problem with vast scope changes in ATL is they quickly become unmanageable.
                  The Purist

                  Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

                  Comment


                  • How about after operation compass for a POD Germany was worn out after the battle of francetc and the kprps didnt arrive until 41

                    Comment


                    • And I use my phone to reply SHAA get over it

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
                        And I use my phone to reply SHAA get over it
                        ahh the evil auto spell.

                        Comment


                        • So what Lionhearti suggests that Germany and the entire Axis sans Operation Barbarossa is far weaker.

                          I hafta ask Lionhearti how does this equate, that the entire Axis manage to so heavily weakened?

                          I say bollocks to that, the Axis that is not been bled white in the Eastern Front would be a vastly stronger force both Industrially and as well as millitarily.

                          Also one aspect that has me stumped, does anyone know why all the transports in the Luftwaffe and the Regio Aeronautica seem to vanish into (and pardon the pun) thin air. Or is it that some think that the Luftwaffe and Regio Aeronautica does not play a more significant role of supplying the North African campaign.

                          Comment


                          • I dealt with this earlier The Axis ate strong short term in Europe projecting the power out of it will be next to impossible the britsh did quite a bit of damagein 1940 to 41 with no Soviet help resources and trying to defend everything while pissible if only dealing with UK but nezlxt to impossible with the US the lead in doctrine will start to shrink while the productiin gap widens immensely Germany was already losing in the Alantic by 41

                            Comment


                            • The bottom line here is that Germany lacked the resources, East Front or no, to stage a massive aerial campaign over several years time and completely lacked the naval resources to win at sea against the Western Allies.

                              Yes, they could prosecute a guerre de course submarine campaign that would eventually end in defeat. The only time that strategy is successful is when the prosecuting nation is also a sea power and can eventually dominate the seas with conventional sea power as the US did in the Pacific.

                              A sustained air war requires massive quantities of petroleum Germany doesn't have, a massive and expensive aircraft development and manufacturing base that is not up to what the Germans face in the West, and a very expensive and sustained pilot training program to replace losses.

                              Britain moved most of their pilot training to places like Canada where there was no interruption by the war and there was access to decent flying weather along with plentiful fuel.
                              The US started a massive program far in excess of anything Germany could manage in this realm.

                              The same goes for manufacturing. The US and Britain adopted assembly line techniques early and sought to reduce material and manpower requirements per plane. The Germans stuck, mostly because of unions and the meister system of skilled craftsmen, with almost hand produced aircraft in smaller factories.

                              The vast majority of Allied production is also completely out of reach of Axis attack while most of the Axis is within Allied bombing range.

                              In R & D the Germans are hendered by a combination of lack of resources again and a slow development period for aircraft. Worse, is the fact that the military side of the Luftwaffe has control of the development process as well as control of doling contracts out to manufacturers.
                              What happened in Germany is that manufacturers were locked into producing certain types of aircraft and the Luftwaffe played favorites with the producers. They also ignored new potential producers such as Henschel who was relegated to just ground attack aircraft (a minor niche in the Luftwaffe's eyes) and making parts for "real" aircraft manufacturers. You weren't going to see Mercedes or Opel building aircraft in Germany like Ford and GM did in the US.

                              In terms of operational development you can also see that the Germans frequently committed less than fully developed equipment into limited service while continuing to try and work out the bugs with lots of pre- and in- production fixes. This gives the Allies a heads up on what is coming down the road from the Germans in a managable amount.
                              The Allies on the other hand generally didn't introduce into service new equipment until it was fully developed and tested. When they finally did throw it into service they did it in strength often to the surprise of the Axis.

                              Also the longer the war goes the greater the gap in technology for the Germans becomes. That is, the Germans were losing the technology war right from the get go. Where they had significant leads to begin with they coasted. Where they could have gained new technologies and a lead they often languished more committed to current models and usage than a full committment to new and different. Also, as I commented earlier, they also accepted alot of really half @$$ed developed stuff into production.
                              Another problem they seemed to have was a penchant for "nifty" engineering ideas that were insane crap as weapons systems. Things like the Me 163, V-2, or Jumo 004 jet engine are typical.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Lionhearti View Post
                                I dealt with this earlier The Axis ate strong short term in Europe projecting the power out of it will be next to impossible the britsh did quite a bit of damagein 1940 to 41 with no Soviet help resources and trying to defend everything while pissible if only dealing with UK but nezlxt to impossible with the US the lead in doctrine will start to shrink while the productiin gap widens immensely Germany was already losing in the Alantic by 41
                                I suggest that you get a book on WW2 and check your facts on the issue of the so called "Damage" the British were doing to Germany in 1940 and 1941.

                                The Germans defeated the bloody French in 1940, could have captured the whole bloody BEF if it were not Hitler's insane reasoning, and the loss of something like 750,000 long tonnes or war materiel in Norway and France, so genious explain how was this damaging to the Germans.

                                The only damage in 1940 was the Germans basically screwed up the BoB, they had by many who studied the BoB the RAF by the balls and then switched to London instead of continuing to attack the RAF.

                                You have to be kidding about the Germans losing the Battle of the Atlantic in 1941, check your facts before sprouting nonsense, the Germans managed to sink a grand total during 1941 of 3,617,526 GRT although records don't show how many ships and aircraft were lost by the Germans in sinking this amount the Germans had lost 35 U-Boats to enemy action during this period.

                                So much for your vaunted losing the Atlantic War in 1941.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X