Another Russian Front factor was, of course, the fact that Stalin had previously ruthlessly purged the Russian Officer Corps.
There were few good trained officers and those that there were had political officers breathing down their tunics.

j-flieger's points about production and planning difficulties remains a very good one: with so many competing agencies and Allied blockades and bombings the German never really got into their stride once the war had begun and to a very large extent fought with same planes at the end as they did at the beginning: 109, Ju-88 He-111 etc.
I think they could have manned a bomber foprce easily enough: Britain did, albeit at an appalling cost in lives.

Rudel - 519 tanks, over a thousand trucks, two battleships, five air to air combat kills. The only man to receive the decoration. Hartmann (352 kills) did receive the Knight's Cross with silver oak leaves, crossed swords and diamonds.

I have often read that the purge was instigated by Rheinhard Heydrich feeding disinformation to the Soviet security services. I thin it may have been called Operation Rubicon, but I'm not sure.

Also, it must be remembered that heavy saturation bombing was very much a British -Bomber Harris's - invention: blitzkrieg essentially called only for air support and German thinking was always allied to large mobile land armies, never to strategic warfare at a distance. I guess that's why they never really bothered with a navy or with completing the one aircraft carrier Hitler ordered.

Originally posted by Estragon
Also, it must be remembered that heavy saturation bombing was very much a British -Bomber Harris's - invention: blitzkrieg essentially called only for air support and German thinking was always allied to large mobile land armies, never to strategic warfare at a distance. I guess that's why they never really bothered with a navy or with completing the one aircraft carrier Hitler ordered.

That's exactly what I was trying to say. Thaks Estragon.

German thinking was a lot along the current thinking of the US Air Force (use of precision weapons to get maximum effect on important targets). The Ju 88 was used extensively as a dive bomber (SturzKampf Flugzueg) as well as the Ju 87. Even though many aviation history authors claim the Ju 87 was flawed, it was a battle winner when the Germans had a modicum of air superiority. With it they could knock out bridges, etc. (Lancaster bomber on a night mission - CEP two miles, B-17 at 20,000 feet - CEP of 2500 feet, Ju 87 in a dive - CEP of less than 90 feet). The whole concept was to do as much damage as possible with a few aircraft as possible. Don't forget that the German aircraft industry was not really geared for large scale military production in 1933. They were starting from scratch as far as large scale production was concerned. Even though the Germans bypassed the Versailles Treaty from Day One, the aviation industry still had to be built up considerably to even reach the level of supporting medium bombers. There was also the need to build up production of weapons for the Whermacht. What the Germans were doing was trying to stuff ten pounds of production into a five pound industrial bag. There simply was not enough manpower and resources to do everything. With the concept of a quick, short, sharp conflict (Blitzkrieg), the subject of statergic bombers becomes moot. You win the war before the enemy's production becomes an issue. I still maintain my position, the loss of the war in the Soviet Union was mainly caused by Hitler's (and the Nazi's) racial policies towards the Slavs ("Slavs are Slaves"). When it's win or die (as for the Russians), the stategy and weapons of the other side is less of an importance than the sheer will to survive.

[Edited on 16-5-2003 by jagdflieger]

[Edited on 16-5-2003 by jagdflieger]

There is much in what you say here, j-flieger: it is a matter of fact that the Germans (e.g. in the Ukraine) were frequently hailed as liberators and they blew the advantage.
Quite significant numbers of "Soviet people" fought as volunters for the Wehrmacht; but the advantage of popularity was thrown away.
Much can be laid at the door of Hitler's delay in the invasion, however and it remains unclear just what his aim was in Russia.
A deal was not impossible: one recalls what the Kaiser gained by Brest-Litovsk.
The best soldiers in the world at the behest of a madman.

pretty familar doesn't it?

Originally posted by mad scientist
The Soviets were only able to hold on due to massive aid from the US ( the Studebaker made the Soviet Army mobile )and their ability to move their industrial base east of the Urals. Without these 2 factors they would have only been able to sustain lightly armed forces, no match for the Wehrmacht

The Studebakers were shipped beginning in 1942 and their majority came much later. By that time, the German offensive was already running out of steam. While immensely helpful to Russia, the lend-lease was still a little short of a game changer.

Originally posted by Estragon
Also, it must be remembered that heavy saturation bombing was very much a British -Bomber Harris's - invention: blitzkrieg essentially called only for air support and German thinking was always allied to large mobile land armies, never to strategic warfare at a distance. I guess that's why they never really bothered with a navy or with completing the one aircraft carrier Hitler ordered.

No it was not! Saturation bombing was used by all air forces during WW2 - including the Nazi's as the rolled across Europe (Rotterdam flattened), then into the Blitz over the UK. There was carpet bombing in the Spanish Civil War too. The British ended up bombed Germany by night en masse, while the US did it by day (mostly) in Europe and over Japan. The Germans bombed the UK (and elsewhere) throughout the war – which I suppose morphed into the use of the V1 and V2 weapons.

Had the Germans had the economic capacity to develop a large strategic bombing arm then they would have had to develop escorts and technologies associated with such a force. Views of a bomber to reach the US and get back again were more fantasy than reality in the context of the economic output and technological challenge.

The Nazi's DID bother with a navy - the U-boat arm was pretty significant in both world wars and the sur-face fleet in both wars was also not inconsequential.

Regards

Someone made the point (6 years ago!) that Messerschmitt was not a natural choice for a large aircraft, the implication being that this means it could not have been produced successfully.

In reply to that point I would mention that a company specialising in producing medium and large flying boats, and whose very name means 'over the sea' created its first ever production fighter and called it the Spitfire

Originally posted by jagdflieger
German thinking was a lot along the current thinking of the US Air Force (use of precision weapons to get maximum effect on important targets).

The US Air Force aspiration for accuracy was not unique. All air forces carpet bombed, as I stared previously, and all sought to perfect accuracy. The RAF also undertook accurate bombing of industrial, transport and military targets, plus pioneered high-risk low level precision raids e.g. Gestapo HQ in the Hague, to name but one.

Of course CAS missions over Europe, Africa, the Far East (and everywhere in between) were by definition precision-targeted and in principle there was little difference to a Hurri-bomber attacking a Japanese bunker in Burma or a Stuka hitting a tent in a Polish field.

Regards


[edit on 24/9/2009 by paraphi]

Originally posted by waynos
In reply to that point I would mention that a company specialising in producing medium and large flying boats, and whose very name means 'over the sea' created its first ever production fighter and called it the Spitfire

Supermarine did build flying boats...

But they really specialised in the Schneider cup... the big boats were only to pay for that.