Talk:Operation Winter Storm

Question

General Heim is not mentioned here he is described as 'the scapegoat of Stalinigrad'. What was his role?

Requested move

Soviet operations of the Second World War are in English, when used as the title of an article. For example, Operation Uranus and Operation Little Saturn use the English translations of the codenames. In English literature, Winter Storm (sometimes Winter Tempest) also tends to be used over Wintergewitter. In any case, if Soviet operational names are in English, it would make sense if this article name was also in English. JonCatalán^(Talk) 06:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• I see this has been moved already; but support per nom, in case anybody wants to move back. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Operation Winter Storm/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Two minor style issues:

• The infobox seems a bit empty. No location, strength of the opposing forces or casualties.
• The lead could use some wikification (names of armies, units, places, etc.)

Asides from that, this seems to me like an excellent, professional article, that certainly meets the GA criteria. Cheers, Nudve (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Based on the Good Article criteria:

Well-written

• 'In late November, the Red Army completed Operation Uranus, concluding in the encirclement of Axis personnel in and around the city of Stalingrad. - 'resulting' instead of 'concluding' sounds better I think
• 'As the Red Army continued to build up strength, in an effort to allocate as many resources as possible to the eventual launch of planned Operation Saturn' - 'the' planned Operation Saturn
• 'Ultimately, due to the reluctance to weaken certain sectors in order to redeploy certain units to Army Group Don' - repetition of certain
• ' The German force would be pitted against an array of Soviet armies, which were preoccupied with beginning the destruction of the encircled forces and the progress of its southwards offensive around the lower Chir River.

' - Not clear who the 'its' is referring to in terms of 'its southwards offensive', could this be clarified?

• 'The German offensive, beginning on 12 December, caught the Red Army by surprise and made large headway on the first day' - replace 'beginning' with 'began' 'cos it's one of those noun-plusing things.
• 'On 22 November 1942, the Red Army closed its encirclement of Axis forces in Stalingrad; the product of Operation Uranus' - result, not product, really
• 'The encircled German forces would be resupplied by air, requiring roughly 680 metric tons (750 short tons) of supplies per day; the assembled fleet of 500 transport aircraft were insufficient for the task' - I think a 'however' after the semi-colon would clarify things a little better
• 'Furthermore, sections of the Volga River's Western banks were still held by Soviet forces.[10]

' - This seems a little out of place directly following supply concerns - perhaps it should be moved to the start of the section.

• 'In fact, the German field marshal was doubtful on whether or not the relief operation could afford to wait to receive all units earmarked for the offensive' - This also seems a little out of place, but just the start - perhaps clarify as 'Manstein believed that the situation for 6th Army was so dire that he was doubtful as to whether or not the relief operation could afford to wait to receive all units earmarked for the offensive'
• 'the Red Army's offensive in the area commenced on 30 November, involving around 50,000 soldiers, and forcing Manstein to use the 48th Panzer Corps in an attempt to hold the area' - 'forcing' to 'forced'
• 'Much of the personnel promised for the relief effort never arrived, party due to the poor transportation service to the front; some units originally chosen to be transferred under the command of Army Group Don were retained by their original commands' - party to 'partly' and 'much' to 'many'
• 'Some units in Army Group Don were in no shape to conduct offensive operations, due to losses sustained in the past month of combat, while many new formations which had been promised did not arrive on time' - the last part of the sentence is repetitive given the sentence before it.
• 'In that sense, the 48th Panzer Corps became embroiled in the defensive battles for the Chir River, as the Soviet pushed in an attempt to overrun the airfield at Tatsinskaya (being used to resupply German forces in Stalingrad by air).[' - 'In that sense' seems out of place - perhaps replace with 'As a consequence'?
• 'Despite early gays, the 57th Panzer Corps was not able to achieve decisive results' - 'gays' to 'gains'
• 'Paulus was not impressed, although agreed that the best option continued to be an attempted breakout as early as possible' - although he agreed'
• 'As the Red Army chased after the retreating Fourth Panzer Army towards the Aksai River and broke through the German defense on the banks of the Chir River, it also began to prepare for Operation Ring—the reduction of encircled forces in Stalingrad.[92]

' - replace 'chased after' with 'pursued'

Factually accurate

• Infobox needs more details, as above
• Please wikilink various armies, places and individuals, particularly in the lead, as above

Broad in coverage

• Passes

Neutrality and Stability

• Passes in both areas

Illustrated

• Passes, all images check out

An excellent article and very informative; please go over the comments above. When they are solved I will pass the article. Skinny87 (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I've done everything except one. The infobox can't contain more information, because there's none to add. I don't have figures for specific Soviet strength prior to the German offensive; sources are more preoccupied with Operation Uranus (and describing that) than they are with Operation Winter Storm. Even von Manstein doesn't have any detailed numbers of the strength of his forces, so I can't even add German strengths. Nor are there figures for losses (even for Operation Uranus); the big thing for sources is the encirclement of the 6th Army, not German personnel losses for that small period of time. JonCatalán^(Talk) 15:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, everything else is solved so I'll pass the article, although I'd suggest that if you wish to take the article any further up the chain you would need to find casualty numbers. Skinny87 (talk) 16:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Data on the strengts of the Soviet 2nd Guard Army etc

Data on the strengts of the Soviet 2nd Guard Army. By October 23 (the date the army had been formed), 1942, this army was composed of:

• 1st Guard Rifle Corps (35 764 men)
• 13th Guard Rifle Corps (37 664 men)
• 2nd Guard Rifle Corps (17 136 men)
  The total strength was 90 564 men.

Data on 4th Mech. corps. By Dec 1 the 4th Mechanized corps had 11 703 men, 79 T-34 tanks and 77 T-70 tanks and 97 BA-64 (armoured cars).

In addition, 300th, 98th, 3th Guard and, partially, 87th and 38th rifle divisions were deployed to reinforse the 4th Mech corps while 2nd Army had been being deployed.

Source: Исаев А. В. Сталинград. За Волгой для нас земли нет. — М.: Яуза, Эксмо, 2008. (Isaev A.B. Stalingrad. There is no land for us behind Volga. Moscow. Exmo.) Pages 369-370. ISBN 978–5–699–26236–6.
I believe it may be helpful.
Best regards
--Paul Siebert (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe that 2nd Guard Rifle Corps you have listed is actually 2nd Guard *Mechanized* Corps. This is what Erickson has listed on page 9 of The Road to Berlin. This also makes much more sense in terms of the listed manpower--17,000 is the size you'd expect a mechanized corps to be. Jparshall (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Data on the strengts of the Soviet that took Manstein's blow

I probably didn't make myself clear. The above source states that, despite a considerable forces were positioned on the edge of the outer encirclement, the only Soviet troops that directly opposed Manstein's major blow when the Winter Storm started was the 4th Mech. corps. The 2nd Guard Army, that played a major role in the subsequent Manstein reversal, had been ready for the battle not earlier than on 16th Dec. Therefore, the numbers of Soviet troops in the "Participating Soviet forces" section are misleading.
--Paul Siebert (talk) 05:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The section mentions that those numbers are specifically for Soviet forces deployed for Uranus, not against Winter Storm. According to the sources used for the article, the first Soviet unit to be attacked was the 57th Army, not the 4th Mechanized Corps. JonCatalán^(Talk) 05:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

More concretely, it was only the 302th rifle division of 51th Army (not 57th), that ceased to exist on 12 Dec afternoon. As a result, on 14 Dec the Manstein spearhead made contact with the 4th mech. corps that was deployed there. It, along with remnants of infantry troops, was the only force that held a front line while the 2nd Guard army was being deployed there. By 18 December only 150 2nd Army's trains of 156 had arrived. In other words, the Winter Storm's fate was pre-determined during the battle between Manstein's army and the 4th Corps. During the battle 4th corps lost 52 tanks, 994 KIA, 3497 WIA and 1075 MIA.--Paul Siebert (talk) 06:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

So, your original assertion that only the 4th Mechanized Corps was available opposite of Manstein's direction of attack was wrong. He also had to cope with the 302th rifle division, whether it was subsequently destroyed or not. What about the 13th Tank Corps, which Erickson claims was present during the battle? If this is to be included, I will need the following:

1. A citation that it was the 302th rifle division of the 51st Army.
2. The strength of the 302th rifle division on the eve of the offensive, and the strength of the 4th Mechanized Corps; a citation for each, as well.
3. I need to add the source that this comes from to the bibliography. Could you provide it using the following template?{{cite book | last = | first = | coauthors = | title = | publisher = | date = | location = | isbn = }}

Thanks. JonCatalán^(Talk) 06:21, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

In regards to your latest addition, that should really be a footnote. The source needs to be added in the bibliography, using the same template as the other publications. The footnote should have only author (date), p. ##. I will format it for you, but you need to add the source to the bibliography. JonCatalán^(Talk) 06:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

My initial assertion was almost correct. According to my source, the 302th rifle division was smashed by 12 Dec afternoon and ceased to exist as a separate unit (page 365). The source tells nothing about its initial strengts. Off the top of my head, a Soviet rifle division was about 70% of German division during this period of the war. I can provide more precise numbers if necessary.

As regards to 13th corps, the source mentions it briefly. Initially the plan was to attack both flanks of the Manstein's 6th Panzer division with 4th corps (plus 235 tank brigade, flame-thrower KV-8 that were efficient for street fighting, but not against German Pz-IV, threfore almos all tanks were lost at Verkhne-Kumskiy, plus 234th tank regiment, plus 87 rifle division) from one side and 13th from another, but plans were broken as a result of the Manstein's rapid advance. The source states that at 14 Dec the 4th corps was the only force opposing Manstein (pg 170). By 15 Dec other forces started to arrive: during that day one battalion of the 87th rifle division. On 17 Dec the corps was reinforced with 85th tank brigade (17 tanks) and 20th anti-tank brigade (6 or 7 76mm anti-tank cannons) (pg 374). The 4th corps' defence had been broken only by 19 Dec. By that moment 2nd Army was ready for battle. In addition, a part of 5th shock army (that initially was planned to participate in Saturn) was sent to behind the 4th corps' defence line: 300th, 98th rifle and 3rd Guard divisions, two tank brigades (80 tanks) (pg 375).

Hope it will be helpful
--Paul Siebert (talk) 07:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

PS. In regards to my recent addition, I myself realized it should be a footnote afterwards. Thank you for doing that.--Paul Siebert (talk) 07:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

No Tigers in Winter Storm?

A very good article on a subject often glossed over in histories of the Stalingrad campaign. My only quibble is that the Tiger tanks mentioned in the text apparently didn't participate in the operation.

The reference cited for the Tigers is Erickson (1983) p. 12. But on p. 15 Erickson places the Tigers with the 6th Panzer Division's 65th Panzer Battalion, a unit that had been disbanded early in 1942 and was no longer part of the division. Unfortunately neither mention of Tigers is referenced.

Another reference used in the article (McCarthy & Syryon 2002) states that Tiger Battalion 503 "was also to be added to the relief force" but arrived too late (p. 145). Wilbeck (2004) writes on p. 58 that Tiger Battalion 503 wasn't sent to Army Group Don until 27 December 1942, arriving in January 1943. Glantz (1995) makes no mention of Tigers in his account of Winter Storm, writing on p. 142 that they first went into action in the South on 7 January 1943.

By way of negative evidence, General Raus makes no mention of Tigers in his account of Winter Storm (Raus 2002).

In light of the above, I think the evidence for Tigers in Winter Storm is shaky at best, and all mention of Tigers should be deleted unless better evidence is available.

One final nitpick: In the reference section, the McCarthy & Syryon title "Panzerkrieg" is misspelled as "Panzerkieg".

References:

Erickson, John (1983). The Road to Berlin: Stalin's War with Germany. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07813-7.

Glantz, David M.; Jonathan House (1995). When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler. Lawrence, Kansas: Kansas University Press. ISBN 0-7006-0717-X.

McCarthy, Peter; Mike Syryon (2002). Panzerkrieg: The Rise and Fall of Hitler's Tank Divisions. New York City, New York: Carroll & Graf. ISBN 0-7867-1009-8.

Raus, Erhard; Newton, Steven H (tr) (2002). Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941–1945. Da Capo Press. ISBN 0-306-81247-9.

Wilbeck, Christopher W (2004). Sledgehammers: Strengths and Flaws of Tiger Tank Battalions in World War II. Bedford, Pennsylvania: The Aberjona Press. ISBN 0-9717650-2-2

Hunpecked (talk) 08:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Usage of Tiger I edit.

I have removed the reference to Tigers being directly involved in WS. However they were still used in the defensive fighting around the Rostov-on don sector in jan-feb so they were at the front during the stalingrad campaign. So pics still are relevant. Added link to 503rd heavy tank batt. noted they didnt arrive for the start of OWS. Hope ok Irondome (talk) 01:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The picture of the Tiger I

states "A battalion of Tiger I tanks was deployed to Army Group Don to strengthen the German drive to Stalingrad." - this is simply NOT true! and as it has already been cleared , that in Winter Storm no Tiger Is were user, I suggest the picture of the Tiger I removed! Peterachim64 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:18, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Citations to Manstein's Lost Victories

Lost Victories is hardly a reliable source, being self-serving, dated and POV driven. I propose replacing these citations with Robert Citino. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@K.e.coffman, well said. 171.76.0.69 (talk) 18:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)