Search results

  1. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    Why not have it all? If you standardize on the Panzer IV in 1938, you get the economies of scale to enable more StuGs like you say while enabling better logistics overall via the standardization as well as higher output to enable a quicker modernization of the existing divisions/keep pace with...
  2. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    All valid ideas, and definitely worth it; I'm mainly just throwing out the ideas I know of, not "do this and no more". I'm also focusing in on the grand strategic level, because 400k additional casualties by early 1942 means the Soviets have to be weak somewhere in late 1941 and we can be sure...
  3. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    Again, totally agreed; the Kiev Diversion, the Kalinin Diversion, etc were war changing decisions. I'm just focusing in on changing it via an alternate AFV policy, given the thread topic. A function of having economies of scale and larger overall AFV production would help with that, even...
  4. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    Agreed in general, I just meant in terms of focusing in on what could be done through the purview of this thread. The Germans made a lot of mistakes with AFVs and I think that avoiding those could've been decisive.
  5. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    Also, I'd have focused on the VK30.01 over the Panther for the Germans. No heavies either after the Tiger I, as they weren't needed and sucked up resources.
  6. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    More tanks for Barbarossa would result in 7% more casualties; decisive in 1941, probably not but I think it would be enough to ensure the fall of Leningrad due to primacy of the defense of Moscow to Stalin in terms of the placement of reserves. Alternatively, it could also mean Stalin writes off...
  7. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    @sillygoose instead of the L60 50mm, do you still think using the dual purpose L41 75mm cannon was possible? For those who don't know, said gun was available in 1935 and, while less powerful than the later KwK40, it was however much more powerful than the L24 and aforementioned 50mm L60. It...
  8. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    New French designs would have little effect on the course of the war; they were still new to mass production of modern tanks and the existing doctrine, organization and experience just wasn't there. The first DCR wasn't even stood up until January of 1940, with their armored formations rated by...
  9. History Learner

    You are in charge of armored vehicle doctrine and design in 1939...

    For the Germans, standardize on the Panzer IV Chassis with the short 75mm for the infantry support role as OTL but also the L60 50mm for the Anti-Tank role. Also, to quote from The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze: Between the continued allocation of resources and economies of scale, the...
Back
Top