Matrix Games Forums

Just because some of you may be interested- Nigel Askey does a discussion on Soviet casualties on youtube. He has authored some of the best data on Barbarossa (sure the TOE's he presents in his books have some issues-but nothing major). Just to help broaden understanding, if anyone is so inclined.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ybLMbENdck

Some of his TOE data and the way he has chosen to abstract motorcycle squads (without supporting references) leave much to be desired.

But I have found nothing else that detailed better the level of vehicle/truck pools or their production than what he presented in his Barbarossa series.

As far as I know, Askey is discredited by his calculations. On the one hand, he counts only the killed Germans and compares this with all the possible dead, wounded, and missing Russians. I would question any of his calculations and double-check 10 times.

I have no idea where you have that impression from but that is incorrect. There are 20 pages in volume IIB dedicated to Wehrmacht (Heer, Kriegsmarine, Luftwaffe) and Waffen-SS casualties from June 1941 to February 1942 across all fronts and also the eastern front analysed separately in more detail, with table breakdowns or entire subsections dedicated to air unit personnel losses at fronts outside of Germany, at the home front in Germany, in training and other causes, ground personnel losses at fronts, flak/paratrooper/airlanding unit losses for example. There are more types than just that.

Further breakdowns include dead, missing/POW, wounded, unfit and a clarification for officer losses from the total value.

These also use multiple sources and attempts are made to piece together the most accurate picture as much as it is possible across these sources.

I am not an analyst of Western historians publicists of all those who speak on the topic. In this case I refer to the statement of the TIK who criticizes Askey. In this case, you should refer to TIK and its video for details.

As far as I understand Askey does not have wide access to the Russian archives to analyze Soviet data, which is why his data is not built correctly, from which he also draws far-reaching conclusions.
In general, I would be careful with all the conclusions of Askey, and double-check his data.

I know that video, in my opinion it is a completely wrong video (like most TIK videos in my experience) but that is neither here nor there.

Soviet losses are drawn from separate sources. His own research (using various websites to access materials online when they are unavailable in physical form to him, such as TsAMO RF files, or using contacts in Russia to send him the information), the Krivosheev study (in both English and Russian), Lev Lopukhovsky's works, Nevzorov's works, Mikhalev's works and several other Russian authors or works/documents that are named in the footnotes as well as in the bibliography section at the end of his books. The specific ones I've mentioned are the names that spring to mind almost immediately because of specific sections that I have read more than once.

EDIT: like the historian Stephen Kotkin who specialises on Stalin/the Soviet Union has said on at least one occasion, you do not necessarily need individual authorisation to have access to Russian archive documents. There are ways to circumvent that through Russian contacts who have access and are willing to share Russian archival documents through photographs and such.

Askey, seems credible enough.

From his presentation:

https://www.operationbarbarossa.net/wp- ... g-2022.pdf

Page 4 should dispel your myths about his credibility.

Pages 5-6 detail the research and page 7 is very interesting.

Page 8 as well.

There is some really good stuff in that PDF, pages 13-14 are interesting as well as pages 16-17 which show the NKVD losses.

The replacement rates and over filling in 13-15 are interesting.

In general some really good stuff in this PDF.

Page 20 is very interesting showing the POWs from the various pockets and their breakdowns.

We will never know for sure about the fate of people trapped in the encirclement. The Germans reported on the same numbers of prisoners of war, but they did not distinguish the difference between a military and a civilian man. They seized and recorded everyone as prisoners for reporting. To have more numbers.

This, for example, rests on criticism of Krivoshev's work at the moment, sometimes people could go through the lists several times. He fell into the cauldron near Vyazma, was recorded as missing, left the encirclement, even in Winter, without trial, was enlisted in the troops, was captured, again passed as missing, and as a result, he also died. It's the third time I've gone through the lists.