Books on Case Blue and the soviet side of WW2

[aspqrz02]

On a lighter note, you might find "Russia's War: Blood on the Snow" a TV Documentary series using lots of archival footage, lots of interviews with participants and etc. and from the Russian side, an interesting view. The 3 DVD set allegedly covers 1924-53, but 7 of the 10 episodes are about WW2.

http://www.amazon.com/Russias-War-Blood ... n+the+Snow

The companion book, by Richard Overy (same title) is also good, and sumarises a lot of the material released from the Soviet archives to that point (1999).

http://www.amazon.com/Russias-War-Blood ... +%2B+Overy

Phil

[Vic]

Most books have already been listed after 20 posts.

Must say I was especially influenced by Citino's 'Dead of the Wehrmacht'.

2 more titles that are worthwhile:

-Stopped at Stalingrad , Hayward (on the role of the Luftwaffe)

-The Red Army Handbook, Zaloga (on the Soviet OOBs)

I used to consult Feder von Bocks and Franz Halders war diaries a lot for Case White and Yellow but they are only of limited value for Case Blue as both generals are quickly retired after the start of operations.

best,
vic

[Keunert]

Thank you all, that's enough to read for the next decade.

[MengJiao]

ORIGINAL: sulla05

I wouldn't call it prescience on Hoth's part. German planes still had the run of the eastern front until after kursk, and the invasion of Italy, so the Germans had detailed reconnaissance of the Soviet formations.

It is not whether Glantz is right or wrong. He is stating unequivically that the Soviets forced Hoth to turn northeast. But we know Hoth was talking to Manstein in May about going that direction. If a writer wants to interject his own ideas that is fine. However he should state " this is what I think happened " not saying " this is what happened and here is the proof".

There are many stories about Kursk that have been put forth by writers years ago that many people still believe are true. Most people are shocked to find out the the panzer divisions in AGS actually gained in tank strength and Kursk was not the death of the panzerwaffen. The real reason the battle was called of was because of the invasion of Sicily and the movement of troops from AGS and AGC.

All I am saying is that there are books out on the eastern front that have slants. Many have a German slant to the history, many have a Soviet slant. Glantz's books are great reads and full of information and I am very glad that I have purchased a lot of his works.

You are entirely correct of course. I would just note a few things that might be worth considering. One is that Kursk is a pretty odd book even for Glantz and I think one of its problem is that somebody (perhaps his co-author) suggested that he put some interpretive narrative into his (dry) summaries of the fighting. Normally, Glantz separates his opinions and interpretations very strictly from his basic narrative which is why he is usually so dry. In Kursk there is a lot of interpretation and some of it is pretty enlightening (eg. that Kursk was not all Hitler's fault and that many commanders thought it would work), but in other places the interpretation intrudes disturbingly and misleadingly.

The end of the Kursk offensive remains obscure even in Glantz's book on it. It may be worth noting that the northern attack didn't do nearly as well and was hit by a counter offensive against the entire Orel salient, though I'm sure it cannot have helped that troops were pulled out of the AGS to deal with problems in the west.

[sullafelix]

I was just wondering about the northern flank the other day.

I was asking myself if Model had ever had any success at higher command levels in an attack. I know he did very well in defense but maybe the northern attack at Kursk wasn't just too few forces. Maybe he had one eye all the time on the Orel salient and didn't want to bloody his troops too much.

[bobarossa]

I'd like to add the book Black Cross Red Star, Vol 3 by Christer Bergstrom. It covers the air war over Russia during the Case Blau time period. It has a lot of detail on air war during this battle (plus some over other parts of Russian Front). I just finished reading it and it appears the aircraft are way undermodeled in DC2. The author makes it appear that air attacks were vital in supporting and defeating attacks during this period. My brief play with second Kharkov (just got game last week) makes me wonder if air attacks are worth making. In a recent attack, I lost 20 109's in one battle versus 20 Soviet fighters and the book shows that no German JG lost 20 aircraft is a single month. Germany killed between 3x and 10x as many aircraft as the soviets (depending on month).

And regarding some earlier posts on optimistic victory claims, the book shows that from July through November, the Germans claimed about twice as many kills as actually occurred while the Soviets claimed about 4x as many as actual.

[Pawsy]

A great what if scenario would be Mansteins backhand blow strategy instead of Kursk forehand attack. Or his idea to attack early after the capture of Kharkov