Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The MAIN Reason Why Germany Lost WW2 - OIL

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

  • #31
    Was the Libyan oil accessible with 1930's technology though? In Manchuria there was discovered in the 1950's enough oil that the Japanese wouldn't have had to worry about a US embargo. But it wasn't in any way accessible with 1930's technology even if they had discovered it.

    Comment


    • #32
      Looking at some basic overviews theyd found a few points where oil was seaping from the ground so they were doing exploration but the Italians didnt even have the technology to do the exploration, then the start of the war cut that off before theyd even found a viable field.

      The Italians had some exceptionally good desert explorers, they just didnt use them in this case.

      If theyd done an exploration deal with Shell or someone experienced, if theyd put their money in drills instead of tankettes things would have been a lot different.

      Or the royal navy would have sunk a lot of Italian tankers.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Yevgeny View Post
        Cool story. There is only one thing missing in it, something called railroads. In reality Germans had captured thousands km of railways almost intact in 1941 which remain the primary way of delivering supplies to the front throughout the whole war. As a matter of fact most of the major battles were fought along the railroads and/or around railway hubs. Indeed rural areas were dominated by dirt roads no question about that but still there were plenty of roads with hard surfaces linking large cities and towns. According to statistics by 1940 USSR had 143 400 km of roads with hard surfaces (mainly gravel, crashed stone and cobblestone) including 7100 km of roads with asphalt and concrete surfaces. Most of them constructed in western parts of the country.
        And there only two things missing, the Soviet rolling stock and engines.

        Congratulations for the Germans capturing railroads, but without compatable engines and trucks, they had to regauge.

        Everything that rolled went eastwards with men and machinery to set up new factories. What couldn't was destroyed.

        Comment


        • #34
          Both. Germans used captured rolling stock plus regauded existing network. According to statistics Soviets lost to Germans 16 000 locomotives and 428 000 rail cars both destroyed and captured. In addition Germans regauge 15 000 km of railways in 1941 alone.

          Comment


          • #35
            I find that a staggering figure considering the directives and consequences for the loss of rail stock.

            ..according to that list, the Heer had captured a remarkably modest 2,237 rail cars and 231 locomotives from the Soviets as of November 1 1941. There might be some captured stock not evident in the list - for example rail stock captured by the Finns and the Rumanians, and of course rail stock captured after November 1st has to be added. Captured Soviet stock was only of limited use to the Germans anyway (which may also be implicitly evident in the small numbers), for they re-gauged the Soviet 1520 mm system to continental 1435 mm gauge.
            https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=132150

            Comment


            • #36
              Exceedingly stupid to not knock out, or make an Armistice with Britain BEFORE turning on the Soviets.

              You dont leave an armed enemy behind you. It made a perfect unsinkable base for the Allies to hit the Reich daily (and nightly) and as a huge depot/assembly area for the invasion in 44

              Comment


              • #37
                Guys still are not looking at this from a 39/40/41 perspective.

                The British and French had been driven from the continent, heavy equipment lost, men barely with Lee Endfields.

                They were desperately short of every type of weapon, and in no position to invade any time soon. British night bombing was largely ineffective and a nuisance. The US was technically neutral and had a pitifully small army, something the the 18th largest in the world. Hitler had no idea of Pearl Harbor.

                The Germans had already succeeded in rapid victories beyond even the wildest expectations. Even against the previous formidable foes, the French and British.

                The Germans saw the Soviets as:

                Lackluster due to the last war. (this war was far more mobile compared to the Western front)
                Politically unstable due to purges and general brutality.
                A poorly performing army due to the Finish debacle.

                The whole "kick in the door and the whole rotten structure" mentality was not limited to the Germans, many other viewed the Soviet Army as poor.


                Its very easy to mock decisions with the knowledge of future events.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Linedoggie View Post
                  Exceedingly stupid to not knock out, or make an Armistice with Britain BEFORE turning on the Soviets.

                  You dont leave an armed enemy behind you. It made a perfect unsinkable base for the Allies to hit the Reich daily (and nightly) and as a huge depot/assembly area for the invasion in 44
                  Not to mention it tied down a reasonably susbstantial number of German assets in the West, was responsible for dealing a significant blow to the Luftwaffe in '39/'40 (which had an impact on its ability to operate in the East in the months/year ahead) and carried out numerous peripheral operations (admittedly with varying degrees of success) against Germany and its allies which further distracted the latter from its primary, continental operations. Perhaps not war winning factors for the Allies in their own right, but every little helps.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Kilgor View Post
                    I find that a staggering figure considering the directives and consequences for the loss of rail stock.
                    https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=132150
                    231 locomotives is not a small number comparing with total amount of 2500 locomotives used by Heer. The figure is from the same forum:

                    https://forum.axishistory.com//viewt...087854#1087854

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Yes, it is a small number, to put that in perspective:

                      Lend Lease provided nearly 2000 steam locos, and nearly 11,000 flatcars.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        In short thank you for adding some interesting details to the point I was trying to make here - that Germans were heavily dependent on rail transport throughout the war, just like Soviets. I really appreciate that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Kilgor View Post
                          Guys still are not looking at this from a 39/40/41 perspective.

                          The British and French had been driven from the continent, heavy equipment lost, men barely with Lee Endfields.

                          They were desperately short of every type of weapon, and in no position to invade any time soon. British night bombing was largely ineffective and a nuisance. The US was technically neutral and had a pitifully small army, something the the 18th largest in the world. Hitler had no idea of Pearl Harbor.

                          The Germans had already succeeded in rapid victories beyond even the wildest expectations. Even against the previous formidable foes, the French and British.

                          The Germans saw the Soviets as:

                          Lackluster due to the last war. (this war was far more mobile compared to the Western front)
                          Politically unstable due to purges and general brutality.
                          A poorly performing army due to the Finish debacle.

                          The whole "kick in the door and the whole rotten structure" mentality was not limited to the Germans, many other viewed the Soviet Army as poor.


                          Its very easy to mock decisions with the knowledge of future events.
                          We started mobilization in 1939. At the beginning of 1939 we had under 200k Soldiers in the Army and at the end of 1941 we had 1.4MM Soldiers. So if we're looking at this 41 isn't really on point though.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Pretty sure that the Selective Service bill didn't pass until late 1940 for the US. It was only really pushed after the fall of France put the bejebus up people.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Because they were bitch-ass motherfuckers. Also, Hitler.

                              I love you krauts tho

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X