Comments by "Aleksa Žunjić" (@aleksazunjic9672) on "4th Panzer Army is shattered! BATTLESTORM STALINGRAD E36" video.

6th Army was beyond saving, because they relinquished most of their horses, and fuel situation was dire even before Soviet attack. Therefore, even if they started retreating immediately they would suffer great losses, and even worse, Army Group A would be cut off. Overall, staying in place protracted a war for 6-12 months. Without that whole southern sector of the front would collapse in late 1942/early 1943, and Soviets would likely advance and take hold of all right-bank Ukraine before spring mud.
12
German generals tended to blame Hitler and Romanians because neither of them could defend themselves (Hitler being dead and Romanians being on the other side of Iron Curtain). Same with "hordes" of Soviet artillery and tanks.
8
It is incredible that @TIKHistory still insists on making whole episodes for a single day of the war in most cases ;) By this rate encirclement will be completed around Christmas :D
6
Well, prices of fuel tend to rise when you make war against Russia :P
5
@Karelwolfpup Original Soviet gun (F-22) had a barrel designed for more powerful round, but chamber could only accept munition of 385mm in length. Germans rechambered them to use PaK 40 ammunition, thus relatively good AT performance for mid war . French guns that Romanians had were actually old French design from 1897 that could not be rechambered in this way because barrel could not withstand high velocity ammunition. As for Soviet 45 mm guns, there were actually several of them. 45 mm anti-tank gun M1937 was captured by Germans in large quantity but performance was similar to 3.7 cm Pak 36 or even worse. Later variant 45 mm anti-tank gun M1942 had performance more similar to PaK 38 but Germans did not capture many of these .
2
Well, Germans preferred to keep 7.62 cm Pak 36(r) for themselves :D It was shipped all the way to Africa ;) As for 4.5 cm Pak 184/1(r), it was mostly used on remote sections of the front (Finland for example). Armor penetration was already low, only real advantage was relative lightness which allowed it to be used in mountains, forests etc ... It would not help Romanians much on the open steppe.
1
@dandondera2618 Romanian cavalry divisions did not have regimental AT guns in their TOE. They did have "light artillery" and it is likely they would use Soviet 45 mm guns (1937 model) in such capacity, but as I said penetration power of 1937 model was similar to 3.7 cm PaK - i.e. obsolete by 1942.
1
@dandondera2618 Unlikely. Soviets lost their pre-war tank fleet in first few months of the war, and were essentially tankless at the end of 1941. Since BTs and T-26 were not produced any more, they became a rare sight except in a far East. Light tanks that Romanians may encounter would be T-60 and T-70, but from 1942 T-34 made majority of Soviet tank fleet. Romanians managed to employ 75 mm Reșița Model 1943 only in early 1944 and in small numbers, otherwise they were dependent on German handouts and that did not go too well.
1
@dandondera2618 You said they were encountering T-26 right up to November 1942, which is wrong. At worst, up to November 1941.
1
You are simply overthinking logistic :D Germans came to Stalingrad in August and already in November proverbial has hit the fan. There was barely 3 months to do something over vast distance.
1
@jouniosmala9921 Do you really think you could build a rail track from Rostov to Stalingrad in a two months, in a war ravaged country, while your army tries to advance into Caucasus :D
1
@jouniosmala9921 Just remember that it is 400 km in a straight line :D
1
@jouniosmala9921 Well, even 250 is a lot for a two months period during wartime in a devastated country while you try to keep offensive going.
1
@jouniosmala9921 Germany did not have logistic problems supplying troops up to Kiev while they did hold that city, because it was well developed railway hub and they have captured lot of Soviet rolling stock. In fact, Soviet railway was well developed until Rostov and Kharkov , and as you mentioned until Kalach . Stalingrad was not well connected because it had Volga, but since Germans could not capture Volga they had difficulties there. Doubling railway troops would not solve the problem, except reducing combat strength and reducing supplies to armies in the field. Overall, during the war armies rarely build new railway lines, especially long lines. They simply repair existing.
1
@jouniosmala9921 I do not disagree on you in principle (about the state of Soviet railroad, gauge differences etc ...) I'm simply stating obvious fact that Germans did not have the time to double existing track that runs from Stalingrad to somewhere between Kalach and Balashov in a given time (max 3 months) . You are envisaging completely different organization of Wehrmacht , with some kind of railroad troops building railway as soon some territory is captured, which is in my opinion unrealistic considering German capabilities.
1
@jouniosmala9921 You would want 60 000 railroad workers without taking into account that these would have to be fed, washed and guarded while they are working :D Plus, rails would have to be made and transported deep into Russia all the while supplying armies . You would soon find yourself in a position where you would have to choose between supplying your spearheads or your railroad troops.
1
Basically 97/38 was a divisional artillery (similar to ZiS-3) , not dedicated anti-tank gun . It could serve in latter role in the beginning of the war, but as war progressed, similar to other "universal" designs, it became obsolete.
1
@DoddyIshamel It was a captured French gun and basically designed in 1897 :D I.e. it was divisional artillery piece with ranging equipment to fire it indirectly. On the other hand PaK 40 was not good in indirect fire, as it only had rudimentary equipment and crews were not well trained enough to be real artilleryman. As for conversion of 97/37 it did not change gun itself, it simply added muzzle brake and split trail carriage. Barrel length remained the same, i.e. muzzle velocity remained practically the same.
1
@DoddyIshamel Romanians did not have the luxury to use it a as purely AT gun, because they lacked everything including artillery. They used it as "universal" gun with mixed success. And that is a whole point of my discussion - it was divisional artillery piece and it was used as such by Romanians despite German meddling.
1
@DoddyIshamel Romanians didn't have dedicated AT units, it was all lumped under artillery . Reason, as I said, is simply lack of heavy weapons .
1
@DoddyIshamel In 1942 Romanian regiment would have "heavy weapons" company that would typically include mortars, 37mm and 47mm AT guns, but these were not used exclusively as AT guns. Instead, being obsolete, their use was mostly against infantry and pillboxes. Note that this theoretical company rarely had full complement of weapons. Theoretically, divisions (nor regiments !) would have additional platoon of 6 97/38 guns, but these were not always present, and in any case were included in divisional artillery, since there was not enough of them to go around. You could find TOE of a Romanian WW2 division if you search the net, but have to be careful not to confuse never fulfilled plans with reality on the ground.
1
@DoddyIshamel I told you, search Romanian division TOE and you will find your answers. 97/38 was not main German AT gun, far from it :) It was attempt to use captured French guns. I never said these guns were not used as AT guns, I said they were not dedicated AT guns. Instead, they were divisional guns just like ZiS-3
1