The worlds newest army

[pardus]

What's that saying? Amateurs talk tactics while professionals talk logistics?

I recently heard some guy with a PhD or whatever, give a lecture on "Why the Germans lost WWII"

His bottom line was, that while the Wehrmacht was the best fighting force in the conflict, with regards to equipment, tactics etc...
They concentrated everything on fighting to the detriment of logistics, which proved to be their downfall.
Very interesting.

 

[CDG]

I recently heard some guy with a PhD or whatever, give a lecture on "Why the Germans lost WWII"

His bottom line was, that while the Wehrmacht was the best fighting force in the conflict, with regards to equipment, tactics etc...
They concentrated everything on fighting to the detriment of logistics, which proved to be their downfall.
Very interesting.

I've also read/heard this view espoused in books and documentaries. It's my understanding that many historians attribute their loss on the Eastern Front to their lack of concern for the required logistics of fighting in the Russian winter.

 

[pardus]

I've also read/heard this view espoused in books and documentaries. It's my understanding that many historians attribute their loss on the Eastern Front to their lack of concern for the required logistics of fighting in the Russian winter.

Yeah, I don't fully buy into it though.
Given the huge lack of trucks, and oil, to name but two essential requirements for the successful prosecution of the war, and the obvious fact that the German system supplied 3 million men during Barbarossa, leads me to think there is more than a lacking logistic system. Particularly given the anal nature of the Wehrmacht.

 

[CQB]

An historical illustration is the Spanish Campaign of Napoleon & one Arthur Wellesley his opposite British number. Napoleons men relied on loot with a side order of pillage, after battle to get by as there was nothing in place compared to their enemy. Whilst this worked well further north in lush Europe it didn't go do well in dry central Spain. Wellesley fed and victualled his men well, a trade he'd learnt in India, which had a lot to do with his victory in Spain. Better fed, better led. So yes, a long winded way to agree Admin & Log is vital. But I digress ( yet again).

 

[CDG]

Yeah, I don't fully buy into it though.
Given the huge lack of trucks, and oil, to name but two essential requirements for the successful prosecution of the war, and the obvious fact that the German system supplied 3 million men during Barbarossa, leads me to think there is more than a lacking logistic system. Particularly given the anal nature of the Wehrmacht.

The Germans didn't lack the ability for the logistics, they just didn't do it. They expected to be in Moscow by the time winter hit, and when they got bogged down they were too far behind the 8-ball to ever catch up. German soldiers were using newspaper and straw to try and insulate their summer uniforms. I read somewhere that there were something like 15k recorded limb amputations due to frostbite in the German Army that winter.

 

[AWP]

The Wehrmacht suffered from a number of logistical problems in Russia:

- Distance. The further it advanced the harder it became to sustain the armies. This is further complicated by distances between army groups.
- Roads. At times the Russian "road" network was little more than trails. It bore little resemblance to anything the Germans had encountered and certainly not on that scale. Additionally, they could not sustain the amount of traffic required. Periods of high precipitation and traffic volume reduced the roads to quagmires, further hindering logistical efforts.
- Volume. The further the log train traveled the more fuel, rations, and spare parts it required. This detracted from supplying the front which required more vehicles which used more parts, fuel, men and rations...now you have a circular problem.
- Rail. I think we can file the Soviet rail system under "LOL."
- Hubris. It didn't expect a protracted war, nor a winter war, and it showed.
- Fuel. In addition to hubris the Germans lacked the fuel reserves to sustain ANY war.
- Arrogance. Had Hitler allowed commanders to shorten their defensive lines it would reduce the manning requirements for those vast spaces plus the distances needed for resupply.
- Sheer numbers. As @pardus pointed out, the number of available trucks and the number of troops to support them were out of proportion.
- Two fronts. Russia plus the desert and then later Russia plus Italy/ the Med divided German's meagre resources.

None of the above takes 1944 into consideration, but by then the war was "over" and not applicable to the crucial period from 1941-1943. The only hope Germany possessed was the quick capitulation of the Soviet Union and we all know that would never happen.

 

[pardus]

The Germans didn't lack the ability for the logistics, they just didn't do it. They expected to be in Moscow by the time winter hit, and when they got bogged down they were too far behind the 8-ball to ever catch up. German soldiers were using newspaper and straw to try and insulate their summer uniforms. I read somewhere that there were something like 15k recorded limb amputations due to frostbite in the German Army that winter.

For the first winter.
The Germans never had a problem with winter after that first year.

 

[DA SWO]

My experience (limited as it is) with non 1st world militaries is no one wants to be a log/intel/support guy. They all wanted to be Lt/Capt/Maj/Col Macho and support is not macho.

We have the same problem to some extent, but tell people to suck it up.

 

[BloodStripe]

I've also read/heard this view espoused in books and documentaries. It's my understanding that many historians attribute their loss on the Eastern Front to their lack of concern for the required logistics of fighting in the Russian winter.

To that point, in 1943 Hitler wanted more Tigers, so he delayed the largest tank battle in history for a few more months at Kursk.. That proved a disaster as the Russians churned out far more T34s than the Germans knew what to do with.

 

[AWP]

To that point, Hitler delayed the


In 1943 Hitler wanted more Tigers, so he delayed the largest tank battle in history for a few more months. That proved a disaster as the Russians churned out far more T43s than the Germans knew what to do with.

Tigers and Panthers, both of which were still teething and not ready for the battlefield. The extra time not only allowed for more T-34's but also more anti-tank trenches and guns to be constructed/ employed. The tanks mattered, but ultimately the trenches and AT guns were the deciding factor.

 

[Dienekes]

Tigers and Panthers, both of which were still teething and not ready for the battlefield. The extra time not only allowed for more T-34's but also more anti-tank trenches and guns to be constructed/ employed. The tanks mattered, but ultimately the trenches and AT guns were the deciding factor.

Makes me think of the quote "A good plan executed violently now is better than a perfect plan executed later".

 

[BloodStripe]

Tigers and Panthers, both of which were still teething and not ready for the battlefield. The extra time not only allowed for more T-34's but also more anti-tank trenches and guns to be constructed/ employed. The tanks mattered, but ultimately the trenches and AT guns were the deciding factor.

Just as many Tigers were destroyed by the Germans during Kursk as the enemy destroyed because PM was a nightmare. The Germans did not want that to end up in the Russians hands so they blew up their disabled tanks they had no clue or way of fixing.

 

[pardus]

Tigers and Panthers, both of which were still teething and not ready for the battlefield. The extra time not only allowed for more T-34's but also more anti-tank trenches and guns to be constructed/ employed. The tanks mattered, but ultimately the trenches and AT guns were the deciding factor.

The depth of the Russian defensive's was crazy. IIRC Hitler did not want to go ahead with the attack but was convinced otherwise.

 

[AWP]

Just as many Tigers were destroyed by the Germans during Kursk as the enemy destroyed because PM was a nightmare. The Germans did not want that to end up in the Russians hands so they blew up their disabled tanks they had no clue or way of fixing.

I vaguely recall an issue with the engines in the Panther and something similar (or transmission problems?) in the Tiger. You're right though, they destroyed a lot of their own tanks.

The depth of the Russian defensive's was crazy. IIRC Hitler did not want to go ahead with the attack but was convinced otherwise.

He didn't, but he didn't stop it. I want to say some of the German generals were against it, but Citadel was executed through inertia more than anything. By the time of the attack I doubt many Germans supported the action, but shrugged, sighed, and went on their way. It was a pointless offensive.

 

[0699]

Many nations field excellent fighters. Far fewer have much in the way of intel or logistics. And NONE of them can put it all together like the Americans.

I agree with you about the logistics part. No one does it as well as Americans. Especially when you look at all the extraneous bullshit we bring to the battlefield and the amount of vehicles we put on the road. IIRC, one of the ways American soldiers identified German infiltrators in the Battle of the Bulge (Panzer Brigade 150/Operation Greif) was that Americans rode 1-2 in jeeps and the Germans, not used to having a lot of wheeled vehicles, put 4 Germans in every jeep. Easy day spoting the Germans. Look at all the PXs and Burger Kings in Iraq back in the day.

I don't agree with you on the intelligence part. I've seen way too many piss-poor intelligence briefs and we've seen too many intelligence failures to be able to support that.

 

[DA SWO]

I agree with you about the logistics part. No one does it as well as Americans. Especially when you look at all the extraneous bullshit we bring to the battlefield and the amount of vehicles we put on the road. IIRC, one of the ways American soldiers identified German infiltrators in the Battle of the Bulge (Panzer Brigade 150/Operation Greif) was that Americans rode 1-2 in jeeps and the Germans, not used to having a lot of wheeled vehicles, put 4 Germans in every jeep. Easy day spoting the Germans. Look at all the PXs and Burger Kings in Iraq back in the day.

I don't agree with you on the intelligence part. I've seen way too many piss-poor intelligence briefs and we've seen too many intelligence failures to be able to support that.

I think our ability to suck data in is unsurpassed, we need to do a better job understanding what we sucked in.

 

[AWP]

Pulling in data isn't the same as processing or analysing that data. You have to separate the wheat from the chaff and turn the grain into flour. At times the volume of data collected exceeds our ability to process it all. I've also seen lazy -2 shops over here, conventional stuff, where they did a copy-paste from one estimate to the next. I've watched others produce dynamic products (One, an AF Intel guy is now doing "interesting things. Nice to see one of the good guys win) whcih were then ignored.

As an outsider I think Intel failures come down to processing the data, understanding it, and a commander's will to use the information.

 

[Gunz]

I recently heard some guy with a PhD or whatever, give a lecture on "Why the Germans lost WWII"

His bottom line was, that while the Wehrmacht was the best fighting force in the conflict, with regards to equipment, tactics etc...
They concentrated everything on fighting to the detriment of logistics, which proved to be their downfall.
Very interesting.

And not only logistics but lack of resources. I forget the exact figure but something like 60 or 70% of the Wehrmacht's transport was horse-drawn.

 

[Marauder06]

...

I don't agree with you on the intelligence part. I've seen way too many piss-poor intelligence briefs and we've seen too many intelligence failures to be able to support that.

There are always things that could be improved, but America's intelligence apparatus is the best in the world when it comes to military operations. That's why every other country we're involved with asks for it.

 

[0699]

There are always things that could be improved, but America's intelligence apparatus is the best in the world when it comes to military operations. That's why every other country we're involved with asks for it.

What specifically do they ask for? Our analytical capability? Or our gathering capability? I agree with @Freefalling in his above post; we can gather raw information like no one's business, but that's simply a factor of money and technology. I don't think our analysts and our ability to gather are equivilent.