Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
per70
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: 13 May 2015 21:32
Location: Norway

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by per70 » 29 Apr 2021 17:31

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
28 Apr 2021 21:30
OTOH this cuts short the rest period prior to early Vyazma.
Another interesting tidbit.

In response to the Soviet attack on August 17th, the Germans decided to move the 87th Infantry Division by rail from Minsk to the Smolensk area to provide 9th Army with some reserves. The division was brought up using 40 trains.

Without a crisis at the front, those 40 trains could probably be put to better use bringing much needed supplies forward.

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 18:14

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 06:09
If you're going to include Panzer Group 4 in an attack on Moscow, I recommend starting a new thread, as it simply isn't contemplated in the ATL proposed in this thread. Please provide a timeline for when and how Hitler/Halder would make the decision to reroute Panzer Group 4 from Luga to Smolensk and how long this would take, etc. You'll also need to provide a timeline showing the whereabouts of Panzer Group 3's two corps if they aren't assisting AGN and attacking Velikiye Luki.
As it were, TMP has asked me for specifics on this so I will get to those in my response to him.
In the ATL proposed in this thread, the whereabouts of Panzer Group 3 are not specified. There is no way that Schmidt's XXXIX Panzer Corps could be dispatched to AGN in mid-August and participate in a drive east of Smolensk on September 1. Likewise, there is no way that Kuntzen's LVII Panzer Corps could attack Velikiye Luki on August 22 and be ready for a major offensive 10 days later. So, for purposes of the ATL in this thread, AGN does not receive an extra panzer corps from Panzer Group 3, nor does it have its flank at Velikiye Luki covered by Panzer Group 3, meaning it has to cover this flank with its own weak panzer formations and there is therefore no way that Leningrad falls in 1941 in this thread's ATL.
Your argument does not follow. If we are taking the position 4th PzGr stays with AGN, as of September 6th AGN had 35 Divisions to roughly 25 divisions for the Soviets; even if 4th PzGr is diverted to take Velikiye Luki, with its 3 panzer divisions and 2 motorized divisions, that still leaves 30 Divisions to 25 Soviet. Further, you have specified that no reserve armies are built on the Leningrad axis in September so how, exactly, do the Soviets defend both Leningrad directly and prevent a German advance on the Svir from September on? 4th PzGr can secure the flanks over the course of August and then launch what was IOTL the Tikhvin Offensive sometime in September.
Please give a cite for this figure. I cannot recall ever reading that the Western and Reserve Fronts fielded 1,000 tanks against Army Group Center during the Battle of Vyazma.
Here you go, and there's also The Viaz'ma Catastrophe, 1941 which provides the following breakdown:

Western Front - 486 tanks
Reserve Front - 301
Briansk Front - 257 (259)
Total - 1,044
Please give a cite for this, as the world's foremost English language expert on the Red Army in WW2, David Glantz, is of the view that the Soviet Western and Reserve Fronts did in fact substantially weaken themselves in their counterattacks against AGC in August and September, and that this left them weaker against Operation Typhoon on October 1.
The Via'zma Catastrophe by Lopukhovsky (Pg 75) it is stated that the fronts on the Western strategic axis received more than 193,000 replacements in the month of September.
The encirclements in 50th Army's sector (Bryansk) were due to the offensive by Guderian's Second Panzer Army. In this thread's ATL, Guderian's Second Panzer Group would be forming the southern pincer of the Vyazma encirclement, because, unlike the OTL, Panzer Group 4 is still at Luga/Leningrad. There are only 2 panzer groups participating in this ATL's Moscow offensive, not three as in the OTL.
And 50th Army was encircled and destroyed by 2nd Army under Weichs, not 2nd PzGr under Guderian:

Image
According to Glant'z Barbarossa, 98,000 men escaped the Vyazma encirclement from 29th army and 33rd army. The below map is an attempt to show which Soviet armies would be damaged/destroyed in this ATL's initial offensive. Red indicates Soviet armies attacked by AGC, blue indicates Soviet armies attacked by AGS at Gornostaipol. An "X" indicates that the army is destroyed, and a slash indicates that it was severely damaged.
Okay, you're playing fast and loose here with terms and armies by taking escapees as representative of armies surviving despite having lost their headquarters, most of their troops and virtually all of their equipment; those are not armies ready for battle, but shattered survivors. You need to pick a standard here because shifting between citing 12 armies and then showing nuance on the matter of 29th and 33rd Armies is pretty clearly disingenuous on your part. If you wish to look at the manpower situation in particular, let's look at what they had as of October 1st:

Western Front - 545,000
Reserve Front - 478,000
Briansk Front - 225,000
Total: 1,250,000

Because there is no Briansk pocket outside of 50th Army, that saves just 3rd Army with 42,000 men and 13th Army with 45,000 men. In the first 2-3 weeks of October, Soviet losses were somewhere between 900,000 and 960,000 men; since we are assuming 3rd and 13th Armies survive, I think we can thus take the lower estimate of 900,000. In which case, the Soviets have only about 350,000 troops left even in this reduced scenario. This is why I said you need to pick a standard and stick with it.
By my count, this leaves 10 full or partial strength Soviet armies in AGC's sector that were deployed to that sector by the end of August in the OTL. The Soviets only fielded 3 new armies in September in the OTL. 2 of these went to Leningrad, which is not under threat in this ATL in September, so they would be sent to Moscow. Whether the 10th Army is deployed to Moscow depends on how well AGS is doing. But at a minimum, that leaves 12 Soviet armies for AGC to contend with after it has completed its initial encirclement at Vyazma in early September.
I honestly don't know what you're talking about because the Soviets raised five armies in September and none of them were 10th Army. To quote Glantz, who you seem to take as authoritative:

Image

Specifically, as already shown, seven armies historically survived in October and the only real change here is that you've had 3rd and 13th survive as well, which is nine armies on paper. That would be an average strength of about 39,000 men per Army. The average army strengths must then be compared:

Briansk - 49,000 average
Western - 43,000 average
Reserve - 72,000 average

As you can see, Post ATL V-B, the remaining armies would be severely understrength compared to their previous averages.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: America

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by historygeek2021 » 29 Apr 2021 20:54

The Second Army wouldn't be in position to attack 50th Army or anywhere else on September 1. It would be screening the gap between 6th Army and 2nd Panzer Group, from Gornostaipol to Roslavl. The only reason Second Army was able to (partially) encircle 50th Army in the OTL is because (1) it had a month and half to move forward after taking Gomel on August 19 and (2) 3 panzer groups were conducting encirclements on its northern and southern flanks. In this ATL, Second Army wouldn't have 3 panzer groups on its flanks - it would be providing flank protection between AGS and AGC.

Regarding Leningrad, Army Group North required half of Panzer Group 3 to break through to Schllisselburg by September 8, with the other half of Panzer Group 3 covering its flank at Velikiye Luki. Eight Soviet Armies were deployed in its path prior to September. The historical reality is that AGN required all of Panzer Group 3 in order to accomplish the encirclement of Leningrad. Without Panzer Group 3, AGN would come up short

On Map 2, which I've posted twice now, Glantz lists the Soviet armies raised each month. There is an easy way to reconcile this with the table you posted from When Titans Clashed. When Glantz lists an army as formed on the first of the month in When Titans Clashed, on Map 2 he shows it as having formed in the previous month.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: America

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by historygeek2021 » 29 Apr 2021 21:24

Here is Glantz's list of destroyed Soviet armies in 1941 from When Titans Clashed:
Titans - list of destroyed armies.png
If we translate this onto Glantz's Map 2 from Barbarossa, we get the following:
Soviet armies destroyed.png
Green indicates Soviet armies destroyed in OTL engagements (Minsk, Uman, Roslavl). Blue indicates Soviet armies destroyed in this ATL at Gornostaipol. Red indicates Soviet armies destroyed or damaged at Vyazma with a September 1 attack by AGC.

By my count, that leaves 7 Soviet armies in AGC's sector that would not be severely damaged in the attack:

13th Army
22nd Army
30th Army
34th Army
43rd Army
49th Army
50th Army

In addition, from Glantz's table in Titans, we know that the following armies were deployed to the Leningrad sector after Panzer Group 3 was sent to assist AGN:

52nd Separate Army (28th August)
42nd Army (1 September)
55th Army (1 September)
54th Separate Army (5 September)
4th Separate Army (26 September)
52nd Separate Army (28 September)

Without Panzer Group 3 assisting AGN, it is likely that most if not all of these armies would be available to be deployed at Moscow in September.

Thus, up to 13 Soviet armies, in addition to the survivors of the armies encircled at Vyazma, would be available for the defense of Moscow in September alone. With Army Group South not doing as well as in the OTL either, there would be still more Soviet armies available in October, November and December.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 29 Apr 2021 21:31

HistoryGeek2021 wrote:The Second Army wouldn't be in position to attack 50th Army or anywhere else on September 1. It would be screening the gap between 6th Army and 2nd Panzer Group, from Gornostaipol to Roslavl.
That's a pretty big exaggeration. As stated in the OP, AGS's extra mobile corps forces the Dniepr and (with ID's) starts to roll up Central/SW Front opposition in the Dnepr-Desna area by August 23rd, as a result of which 2nd Army's right wing shifts far eastward from OTL:

Image

AOK 2's right wing is no farther west than Chernigov by Sept 1.
History Learner wrote:And 50th Army was encircled and destroyed by 2nd Army under Weichs, not 2nd PzGr under Guderian:
AOK 2 definitely broke through 50th Army's lines and outflanked it but PzGr2 was essential to closing the ring around 50th Army. Here's October 8:

Image

OTL Vyazma involved 12 mechanized divisions (3 in reserve); here we have 16. Maybe it's feasible to use the extra 4 divisions to encircle 50th Army?

Seems a minor issue though. Western/Reserve/Bryansk Fronts combined are going to be terribly outnumbered after Vyazma even in 50th Army survives.

Instead of rushing ahead of the ID's and logistical train towards Moscow, AGC can pivot to its flanks and destroy 50th in mid-September.

The 4 additional mechanized divisions, for example, could advance in reserve as OTL, but then pivot into 50th Army's rear by September 8th or so - once the ID's have caught up to the eastern edge of the Vyazma salient and allowed the PzDiv's to man the outer ring securely. They charge south together, with one or two divisions breaking back west to meet 2nd Army. That flank maneuver probably bags most of the OTL Bryansk PoW haul, as BF will have pivoted forces to the southern side of the Vyazma salient (i.e. 3rd or 13th Armies).
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 29 Apr 2021 21:38

per70 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 17:31
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
28 Apr 2021 21:30
OTOH this cuts short the rest period prior to early Vyazma.
Another interesting tidbit.

In response to the Soviet attack on August 17th, the Germans decided to move the 87th Infantry Division by rail from Minsk to the Smolensk area to provide 9th Army with some reserves. The division was brought up using 40 trains.

Without a crisis at the front, those 40 trains could probably be put to better use bringing much needed supplies forward.
40 more trains would certainly help. As noted in Logistik im Russlandfeldzug, AGC's logistical troubles forced artillery firing restrictions from the day Taifun began.
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 21:51

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 20:54
The Second Army wouldn't be in position to attack 50th Army or anywhere else on September 1. It would be screening the gap between 6th Army and 2nd Panzer Group, from Gornostaipol to Roslavl. The only reason Second Army was able to (partially) encircle 50th Army in the OTL is because (1) it had a month and half to move forward after taking Gomel on August 19 and (2) 3 panzer groups were conducting encirclements on its northern and southern flanks. In this ATL, Second Army wouldn't have 3 panzer groups on its flanks - it would be providing flank protection between AGS and AGC.
You need to examine the map I posted earlier; 2nd Army was between 2nd PzGr and 4th PzGr; not the 3rd nor did it have three panzer groups on its flanks. If we are assuming 2nd PzGr has been shifted to take the place of 4th PzGr, than 2nd Army is already providing the flank protection since it's on the flanks. Given 2nd Army under Weichs in August historically was able to encircle and destroy Central Front, is there any reason to assume it couldn't do the same for at least 50th Army while fending off 3rd and 13th? Alternatively, of course, 2nd Army and 2nd PzGr could screen 50th Army on its own while 2nd Army encircles and destroys 3rd and 13th like it did with the two army Central Front? As TMP has noted, the Germans have four more Panzer/Motorized divisions here than historically.
Regarding Leningrad, Army Group North required half of Panzer Group 3 to break through to Schllisselburg by September 8, with the other half of Panzer Group 3 covering its flank at Velikiye Luki. Eight Soviet Armies were deployed in its path prior to September. The historical reality is that AGN required all of Panzer Group 3 in order to accomplish the encirclement of Leningrad. Without Panzer Group 3, AGN would come up short
Except that ignores the Soviets, by your own admission, have denuded Leningrad of at least three armies because of their focus on Moscow. You have to decide, now, which way it is; are they transferring forces to the Moscow Axis or not?

Image

In early September, you are arguing 42nd Army, 54th Army and 55th Army are stripped defend Moscow. That leaves just 23 Army and 8th Army to defend not only the city of Leningrad directly but the entire Lake Ladoga corridor. How, exactly, are the Soviets supposed to stop with one Army what they couldn't do with four? Yes, AGN is missing a single Corps, but are you seriously going to advance the argument this represents a more serious relative force detachment than the Soviets missing 60% of their armies in early September?
On Map 2, which I've posted twice now, Glantz lists the Soviet armies raised each month. There is an easy way to reconcile this with the table you posted from When Titans Clashed. When Glantz lists an army as formed on the first of the month in When Titans Clashed, on Map 2 he shows it as having formed in the previous month.
Which rather distorts the situational picture. 10th Army comes into being in early October and then is disbanded by October 17th.

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 21:55

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:24
52nd Separate Army (28th August)
42nd Army (1 September)
55th Army (1 September)
54th Separate Army (5 September)
4th Separate Army (26 September)
52nd Separate Army (28 September)
You're double counting here; 4th and 52nd are the same thing, just re-named. The Soviets only raised five armies, per Glantz, in September not six.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: America

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by historygeek2021 » 29 Apr 2021 22:21

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:31
AGS's extra mobile corps forces the Dniepr and (with ID's) starts to roll up Central/SW Front opposition in the Dnepr-Desna area by August 23rd, as a result of which 2nd Army's right wing shifts far eastward from OTL:

...

The 4 additional mechanized divisions, for example, could advance in reserve as OTL,
Can you explain where these extra mobile units are coming from?

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: America

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by historygeek2021 » 29 Apr 2021 22:22

History Learner wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:55
historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:24
52nd Separate Army (28th August)
42nd Army (1 September)
55th Army (1 September)
54th Separate Army (5 September)
4th Separate Army (26 September)
52nd Separate Army (28 September)
You're double counting here; 4th and 52nd are the same thing, just re-named. The Soviets only raised five armies, per Glantz, in September not six.
My bad. That's still up to 5 Soviet reserve armies that would be free to reinforce Moscow in this ATL.

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 22:31

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 22:22
History Learner wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:55
historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:24
52nd Separate Army (28th August)
42nd Army (1 September)
55th Army (1 September)
54th Separate Army (5 September)
4th Separate Army (26 September)
52nd Separate Army (28 September)
You're double counting here; 4th and 52nd are the same thing, just re-named. The Soviets only raised five armies, per Glantz, in September not six.
My bad. That's still up to 5 Soviet reserve armies that would be free to reinforce Moscow in this ATL.
At the cost of loosing Leningrad as well as 8th and 23rd Armies, sure.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 287
Joined: 17 Dec 2020 06:23
Location: America

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by historygeek2021 » 29 Apr 2021 22:33

History Learner wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:51
historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 20:54
The Second Army wouldn't be in position to attack 50th Army or anywhere else on September 1. It would be screening the gap between 6th Army and 2nd Panzer Group, from Gornostaipol to Roslavl. The only reason Second Army was able to (partially) encircle 50th Army in the OTL is because (1) it had a month and half to move forward after taking Gomel on August 19 and (2) 3 panzer groups were conducting encirclements on its northern and southern flanks. In this ATL, Second Army wouldn't have 3 panzer groups on its flanks - it would be providing flank protection between AGS and AGC.
You need to examine the map I posted earlier; 2nd Army was between 2nd PzGr and 4th PzGr; not the 3rd nor did it have three panzer groups on its flanks. If we are assuming 2nd PzGr has been shifted to take the place of 4th PzGr, than 2nd Army is already providing the flank protection since it's on the flanks. Given 2nd Army under Weichs in August historically was able to encircle and destroy Central Front, is there any reason to assume it couldn't do the same for at least 50th Army while fending off 3rd and 13th? Alternatively, of course, 2nd Army and 2nd PzGr could screen 50th Army on its own while 2nd Army encircles and destroys 3rd and 13th like it did with the two army Central Front? As TMP has noted, the Germans have four more Panzer/Motorized divisions here than historically.
Fourth Panzer Group would still be at Luga in this ATL. In the OTL there were 3 panzer groups conducting the encirclements at Vyazma and Bryansk. In this ATL there would only be 2. Second Army would be a screening force covering the chasm between AGS and AGC, incapable of encircling anything.
Except that ignores the Soviets, by your own admission, have denuded Leningrad of at least three armies because of their focus on Moscow. You have to decide, now, which way it is; are they transferring forces to the Moscow Axis or not?

In early September, you are arguing 42nd Army, 54th Army and 55th Army are stripped defend Moscow. That leaves just 23 Army and 8th Army to defend not only the city of Leningrad directly but the entire Lake Ladoga corridor. How, exactly, are the Soviets supposed to stop with one Army what they couldn't do with four? Yes, AGN is missing a single Corps, but are you seriously going to advance the argument this represents a more serious relative force detachment than the Soviets missing 60% of their armies in early September?
I listed the Soviet armies that were deployed to Leningrad after AGN was reinforced by Panzer Group 3. AGN was unable to take Leningrad before Panzer Group 3 or these additional Soviet armies arrived, and it was struggling badly to defend its overextended flanks. AGN on its own was incapable of defeating the existing Soviet forces at Leningrad. Therefore there was no need for these 5 Soviet reserve armies to be deployed to Leningrad in this ATL.
Which rather distorts the situational picture. 10th Army comes into being in early October and then is disbanded by October 17th.
The Soviets were struggling to train and equip their new armies, so some of them, like the 10th Army had to be re-formed multiple times. Nevertheless, the Soviets succeeded in stopping the Germans in the OTL by raising more armies than the overextended Germans could handle. The proposed ATL doesn't change anything in that regard.

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 22:57

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 22:33
Fourth Panzer Group would still be at Luga in this ATL. In the OTL there were 3 panzer groups conducting the encirclements at Vyazma and Bryansk. In this ATL there would only be 2. Second Army would be a screening force covering the chasm between AGS and AGC, incapable of encircling anything.
I'm well aware that 4th PzGr would still be on the Luga, hence why I specified 2nd PzGr being shifted to the former's OTL position. The issue with 2nd Army is that nothing you are saying here excludes the possibility given 2nd Army was guarding AGC's flanks in August historically and still managed to achieve the Gomel salient and destroy Central Front. Why, specifically can they not repeat such? Can you substantiate your position here?
I listed the Soviet armies that were deployed to Leningrad after AGN was reinforced by Panzer Group 3. AGN was unable to take Leningrad before Panzer Group 3 or these additional Soviet armies arrived, and it was struggling badly to defend its overextended flanks. AGN on its own was incapable of defeating the existing Soviet forces at Leningrad. Therefore there was no need for these 5 Soviet reserve armies to be deployed to Leningrad in this ATL.
You have to provide any evidence of this; if we are just citing the OTL situation, then you are being disingenuous concerning 2nd Army and Briansk Front in AGC's sector, given what historically occurred with 50th Army and prior performance by 2nd Army against Central Front. Since you are clearly able to examine the wider situation in the AGC sector, you need to be consistent in your argumentation concerning AGN's. Yes, AGN would be down a single Corps from 3rd PzGr but the Soviets would be down, in early September, three of their historical five armies. If you are taking the position that one German corps is equal to three Soviet armies, than you need to explain why Briansk Front-with three armies-survives despite the Germans having four more mobile divisions at the start of this alternate Typhoon compared to OTL-incidentally, also about a Corps.

Likewise, you are ignoring the context of AGN's sector prior to the arrival of said Corps:
As Schmidt’s units were being transported to Heeresgruppe Nord, a concentrated effort was finally under way to take Leningrad. Enough infantry divisions were now in position to support Panzergruppe 4’s flanks, but the objective had once again been changed. The differences between Hitler and the OKH were somewhat resolved in the new plan. Instead of assaulting Leningrad directly, the city was to be cut off, with the help of the Finns on the Karelian Isthmus, and the population would be left to starve to death or surrender.

Before von Manstein left for the south, his LVI Motorized Corps went into battle near Staraya Russa. The Soviet 34th Army bore the brunt of the attack and lost 12,000 men captured, along with 140 tanks and 240 artillery pieces captured or destroyed.

On August 24, General Georg-Hans Reinhardt’s XLI (motorized) Corps made it to Krasnogvardiesk, about 32 kilometers from Leningrad, before being stopped in fierce fighting with the Red Army’s 41st Rifle Corps. The same day, Schmidt’s XXXIX (motorized) Corps, now also controlling the 18th Motorized Division, prepared to move out and envelop Leningrad from the southeast.
Either one German Corps is worth three Soviet armies or it isn't, you cannot have it both ways.
The Soviets were struggling to train and equip their new armies, so some of them, like the 10th Army had to be re-formed multiple times. Nevertheless, the Soviets succeeded in stopping the Germans in the OTL by raising more armies than the overextended Germans could handle. The proposed ATL doesn't change anything in that regard.
It very much does, by moving up the German attack by a month, a month which just so happens to be the low point of Soviet army creation in 1941. You can't exactly stop the Germans with armies if you are not making armies, no?

History Learner
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: 19 Jan 2019 09:39
Location: United States

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by History Learner » 29 Apr 2021 23:21

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:31
AOK 2 definitely broke through 50th Army's lines and outflanked it but PzGr2 was essential to closing the ring around 50th Army. Here's October 8:

Image

OTL Vyazma involved 12 mechanized divisions (3 in reserve); here we have 16. Maybe it's feasible to use the extra 4 divisions to encircle 50th Army?

Seems a minor issue though. Western/Reserve/Bryansk Fronts combined are going to be terribly outnumbered after Vyazma even in 50th Army survives.

Instead of rushing ahead of the ID's and logistical train towards Moscow, AGC can pivot to its flanks and destroy 50th in mid-September.

The 4 additional mechanized divisions, for example, could advance in reserve as OTL, but then pivot into 50th Army's rear by September 8th or so - once the ID's have caught up to the eastern edge of the Vyazma salient and allowed the PzDiv's to man the outer ring securely. They charge south together, with one or two divisions breaking back west to meet 2nd Army. That flank maneuver probably bags most of the OTL Bryansk PoW haul, as BF will have pivoted forces to the southern side of the Vyazma salient (i.e. 3rd or 13th Armies).
Sounds likely, and reasonable. If it does play out that way, then the balance of forces is even worse against the Soviets than OTL, but with the added bonus of Soviet force regeneration/transfers being less, the better weather and, finally, the fact the Soviets don't have defensive rings defending Moscow.

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Member
Posts: 2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: Kiev/Moscow 1941: The Gornostaipol Option

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 29 Apr 2021 23:23

historygeek2021 wrote:
29 Apr 2021 22:21
TheMarcksPlan wrote:
29 Apr 2021 21:31
AGS's extra mobile corps forces the Dniepr and (with ID's) starts to roll up Central/SW Front opposition in the Dnepr-Desna area by August 23rd, as a result of which 2nd Army's right wing shifts far eastward from OTL:

...

The 4 additional mechanized divisions, for example, could advance in reserve as OTL,
Can you explain where these extra mobile units are coming from?
OTL Vyazma - 12 mech divs committed plus three in reserve.

ATL - 16 mech divs - same as AGC started with.

I should have said 4 more committed or something more precise than extra.
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

Return to “What if”