Best german general of the war

Mikser · Post by **Mikser** » Fri Jul 13, 2001 3:07 pm

I don't know. Certainly it wasn't made to be strictly a bomber, rather, it was designed as a versatile fighter-bomber from start ("Can it carry bombs?" "Yes mein Führer, the necessary equipment just hasn't been fitted"). Certainly the real problem was in the development of the engine, and afterwards, the production of it in large enough quantities(Service life was around,what,20 hours?). But still, I agree in that what Germany needed was an interceptor, not a ground-attack aircraft.

Micha · Post by **Micha** » Fri Jul 13, 2001 7:48 pm

I have read that the reason (or at least one of the reasons) that the Me 262 was delayed about a year was that Hitler wanted it have dive-bombing capability, which caused great constructional problems.

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sat Jul 14, 2001 12:33 pm

Originally posted by Mikser:
I don't know. Certainly it wasn't made to be strictly a bomber, rather, it was designed as a versatile fighter-bomber from start ("Can it carry bombs?" "Yes mein Führer, the necessary equipment just hasn't been fitted"). Certainly the real problem was in the development of the engine, and afterwards, the production of it in large enough quantities(Service life was around,what,20 hours?).

"It would take another year before the 262 was ready for operational service. Had it entered mass production at this time - in the summer of 1943 - just as the U.S.A.A.F. strategic bombing campaign was intensifying, it may have indeed been capable of influencing the American daylight bombing campaign. However, once the jet was demonstrated to Hitler, he ordered it developed as a bomber - a role it was patently unsuited for. This last delay proved fatal for the 262's effect on the course of the war."

http://home.nycap.rr.com/airwarrior/ME262.html

Try as hard as you like to blame this on the engines, in reality the fatal blow to this plane was Hitler's demand it be a bomber. In this case Hitler was an idiot. Yes, the engines were a problem, early on, in '42 and early '43. However, the plane, as a fighter, would have been available in large numbers in mid '43 were it not for the insistence of Hitler that it be a bomber. It eventually came out as fighter-bomber to appease Hitler (but its bomber ability would be ignored; it was used as a fighter), but by then it was too late for the plane to affect the course of the war in Europe.

[ July 14, 2001: Message edited by: Ed Cogburn ]

Ramjet · Post by **Ramjet** » Sun Jul 15, 2001 1:02 am

Manstein is without a doubt the greatest General of the 20th century of any Army. Read his book, "Lost Victories" and you will agree. B.H. Liddell Hart wrote "The general verdict among the German Generals I interrogated in 1945 was that Field-Marshal von Manstein had proved the ablest commander in their Army, and the man they had most desired to become it's commander in chief."

SoleSurvivor · Post by **SoleSurvivor** » Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:30 am

Mitcha I guess you're mixing this up with the Ju 88(though I can be wrong on this)and the several attempt to heavy bombers("Uralbomber" Designs by various airplane designers)

No, The me 262 wasn't designed to carry bombs, the equipment had to be fitted afterwards which caused design changes. After all, bombing at the speed of a jet plane isn't exactly as easy as throwing eggs out of a balloon/zeppelin.

If you want a bomber, stick to the Arado Jet Bomber design. The Go 229 (also known as Ho 229) was supposed to be capable of F/B roles afaik. After all, it didn't see action in war since it was too late.

Don Shafer · Post by **Don Shafer** » Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:27 pm

Hmmmm, must be a different version of "Panzer Leader" you have. Mine specifically says that Hitler made the call for 2nd Panzer to head south to help capture Kiev. Guderian repeatly asked Kluge and Bock to go to Hitler and convince him to go for Moscow first.

Originally posted by Kuniworth:

Altough Hitlers decision it was Guderian that then prompted and convinced him on moving the whole panzergroup south. Maybe Guderians mistake(Bock and Kluge were not to happy) cost Germany Moscow...beacuse what if substansial panzerforces hade been kept in AGC. Could that have speeded up operation typhoon by some crucial weeks?

jager506 · Post by **jager506** » Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:48 pm

Why is Kesselring hardly ever mentioned as one of the greatest German generals? In the game, he's the only other with a 9 rating. His imaginative and elastic defense in Italy was quite legendary, and he accomplished this despite being crushingly outnumbered in armor and aircraft.

And I think Guderian is not given enough credit. Aside from his brilliant field record from 1939-1941, he was also the founding father of the panzertruppe, and later as Inspector General of tank troops, he kept the repeatedly mauled panzer force in being as a fighting force. (with help from Speer of course) Without old Heinz, it's possible the war would have been over in 1944.

As for Manstein's Lost Victories, I've read at least once that he faked his memoirs (especially after events in late 1943) - think it was Clash of Arms (forget the author's name) but it's this 1000-page general WWII history book.

RickyB · Post by **RickyB** » Fri Jul 20, 2001 12:20 am

Originally posted by Don Shafer:
Hmmmm, must be a different version of "Panzer Leader" you have. Mine specifically says that Hitler made the call for 2nd Panzer to head south to help capture Kiev. Guderian repeatly asked Kluge and Bock to go to Hitler and convince him to go for Moscow first.

Guderian wrote what he wanted, at times. After Smolensk was captured, this is exactly what Bock and Guderian wanted. However, Halder wanted the right flank of AGC cleared first in a limited attack, with an attack toward Moscow to follow. Over time, the plan grew to include sending part of Guderian's group to help with Kiev. This was more Halder's plan originally than Hitler's. Guderian did not want his group split up and at some point had a personal meeting with Hitler. He came out of this meeting with the agreement that his entire group would head south to Kiev, rather than just a part. This messed up the rest of Halder's plan, which was to use the part of Guderian's group to help the attack toward Moscow.

I don't have my sources handy but will review this tonight to verify some of what I wrote, as it is vague and unsure, and post any corrections tonight.

Dan in Toledo · Post by **Dan in Toledo** » Fri Jul 20, 2001 5:36 pm

I just wanted to give my few cents worth:

The Germans had so many great generals, Guderian, Rommel, Model, Kleist, Hoth, Kesselring, but the #1 German general of the war is......(drumroll please)...............

MANSTEIN

His performance in the Stalingrad rescue attempt and the stablization of the Eastern front after Stalingrad was nothing shortly of spectacular. No other general could have given the Germans the strategic iniative after losing 1/4 of all of their army equiptment in the Stalingrad battle.

Thoughts anyone??

jager506 · Post by **jager506** » Sat Jul 21, 2001 8:21 am

Originally posted by Dan in Toledo:
I just wanted to give my few cents worth:

MANSTEIN

His performance in the Stalingrad rescue attempt and the stablization of the Eastern front after Stalingrad was nothing shortly of spectacular. No other general could have given the Germans the strategic iniative after losing 1/4 of all of their army equiptment in the Stalingrad battle.

Thoughts anyone??

For the record, I also consider Manstein Germany's greatest overall general, but the victory at Kharkov in March 1943 IMHO could have been replicated by any reasonably competent German commander. The Russians had taken heavy losses and were at the end of their logistical umbilicals. Stalin, believing that the Germans were totally wasted, was also making the unrealistic demand that they reach the Dnepr before the mud came.

What's actually more impressive was Manstein's holding the Rostov corridor open so 1st Panzer and 17th Armies could escape. If those armies had been cut off and destroyed, the Russians would probably have been in Berlin a year or so earlier.

SoleSurvivor · Post by **SoleSurvivor** » Sat Jul 21, 2001 9:47 am

This thread isn't dead. No? Well let's shoot it. Yes, to me it's Manstein.

jager506 · Post by **jager506** » Sat Jul 21, 2001 2:10 pm

Originally posted by SoleSurvivor:
This thread isn't dead. No? Well let's shoot it. Yes, to me it's Manstein.

Hey Survivor

I notice you have a Europa Universalis homepage on your profile. I've tried the game a few times but I generally suck at real-time strategy, preferring turn-based ones. Isn't the game by a German company? Personally I think it's a neat game - nice sound, graphics, scope and breadth and pretty realistic for a RTS game. Pretty accurate portrayal of Europe affairs in 1492-1792 period. Compared with Age of Empires for example which is totally historically unrealistic if fun to play.

Mark

SoleSurvivor · Post by **SoleSurvivor** » Sat Jul 21, 2001 4:54 pm

Well yes EU is fine. I wouldn't talk about the sound though. Most accuracy can be reached with an inofficial free add-on called IGC. Generally the strategy in EU is to build up economy and expand at a resonable speed.If you're too slow, you'll decline. If you're too fast you get into Anti Bad Boy wars with coalitions of half of Europe (Did I say Napoleon? no, that was some time after 1792) BTW I don't play it as an RTS game. The EU bboard game was played on a per-month basis. I usually hit the pause key for orders every some month. It gives you the time needed to get the greater scope of things

g00dd0ggy · Post by **g00dd0ggy** » Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:30 am

I think Manstein wins it for me - his record is fantastic - author of the victory in France, captured Sebastopol, brilliantly saved the Southern flank in 42/43 - I cannot believe anyone thinks that any half competent general could have achieved this. Every comentator I have ever read is hugely impressed with Manstein's achievement here. From November onwards the entire front collapsed around him (especially following the destruction of the Axis satellite armies) yet he made a good stab at breaking through to Stalingrad, allowed the extrication of Army Group A, stalled the Soviet offensive and retook Kharkov. There was a real risk at this time of the Southern Flank (Army Groups A, B and the new Don) being swept away - Manstein prevented that. Bear in mind that by Feb 43 the Russians were 10 miles from Zaporozhe - the situation was critical and the Dnepr crossings in their sights. Had these fallen Manstein's Army Group would have been cut off from its fuel supplies and...disaster.

His "backhand blow" tactic for Summer 43 was about the only workable one - if you have ever played the 43 scenario it is undoubtedly the best way to play it. He argued agaist Zitadelle unless it could be launched much earlier - which it couldn't.

Obviously Kursk wasn't one for the CV, but he acquitted himself well during the subsequent retreat and was a major factor in keeping the front together and saving First Pz Army in April 44 while chopping up 18th Gds Corps - then getting sacked for his pains.

Hitler thought Manstein a fair weather general, good if he had the equipment and means but not if he didn't. I can't agree - he was a brilliant General.

As for others - I like Heinrici, but he was a defensive specialist and can't really compare his achievements with Manstein's (although he certainly wasn't a fair weather general!). Also Zhukov has to be very highly rated.

And monty of course ; )(I'm English )