SEND BRITAIN BOMBERS, MORE DESTROYERS, WILLKIE URGES; R. A. F. IN WIDE ATTACK (2/12/41)

Microfilm-New York Times archives, McHenry Library, U.C. Santa Cruz | 2/12/41 | James MacDonald, Robert P. Post, W.L. White

[CougarGA7]

The logistical problem in Russia was far worse than anything seen in North Africa. Not only was there the issue on the Russian rail gauge like you said (with the addition that these Soviet rails were relatively sparse and mostly single tracked), but there was also the problem of delivering the what they could get though to the front line units themselves. This was done mostly by horse and wagon and what little vehicular logistical support there was for these Army Groups were captured French vehicles that the didn’t have any parts for. Additionally, they are already in a bind on their rubber supply. The need in a report that will come out at the end of the month will state that they need 13,000 tons of rubber per month and that they were only producing 7,300 tons. The balance is expected to be filled by blockade runners from South America (hopefully). The distances that they had to move the supplies will become so long that it will just exasperate the problem even more. And there are even more detailed issues that will come up that make things even worse that I wont even go into right now. I have a copy of the quartermasters reports from Panzer Group 2 that I got from the National Archives that I continue to work on translating and I keep finding little nuggets as I go through it.

[BroJoeK]

PzLdr: "And one could argue that in the grand scheme of things, the Suez canal was strategically of greater importance than Moscow."

With a genius of 20-20 hindsight, we've decided that strategically, Hitler should have secured the Mediterranean at Gibraltar and Suez before taking on Stalin.
Iirc, that's also what Goering said after the war.

On the other hand, if there was ever even such a thing as "German victory in the East," then it surely required the taking of such key cities as Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad.
Their symbolic value alone to Russia could have allowed Hitler to negotiate a new treaty with Stalin, exchanging these key cities for peace.

As to which German armies suffered greater logistical problems -- what a great question!
Let's see...

• Rommel's supplies went by train to Italy, then by ship to North Africa, then by truck to the Africa Corps.
  And any one of these legs could be longer than a supply route to the Russian front.
  Plus, once leaving the safety of Italy, Rommel's supplies were subject to attack by British submarines and aircraft.

  The lengths of these supply lines suggest to me that, for example, a new tank leaving the Ruhr in northern Germany would take at least weeks and maybe months to reach Rommel.

• Yes, supplies for the Eastern Front did have to first change from narrow to wider gage trains, then to trucks and horse-drawn wagons.
  On the other hand, especially in the beginning, these were not usually as subject to enemy attack as Rommel's supplies.

  So, that same tank shipped from the Ruhr could reach Guderian in Russia in a matter of days.

Bottom line, which German armies were more constrained by logistics, Africa Corps or Eastern Front? Hmmmmmmmmm....
More data required...