Winter of 1941/42 and the lack of proper equipment

[ljadw]

If the winter was that harsh as Dr Göbbels claimed,and if the Ostheer received no winterclothing,as all authors are parotting,no German soldier would have survived the winter of 1941/1942.Without winterclothing,no one could survive -30 C
The truth is that the numbers of amputations were 0.5 % of the manpower of the Ostheer =15000 on 3 million .
With,or without winter clothing,there still would be amputations .
In november,the winter clothing was waiting in Poland and Germany (operation Boog),but,because of Typhoon,the soldiers had to wait on the winterclothing,which arrived only partially in december .
Source :winterkleidung oder munition

The severity of that winter is and the lack of winterclothing are welldocumented in contemporary accounts. Denying these wellknown facts is an
exercise in futility. One needs only to google on winter 1941-1942 to find scientific papers about this winter being the severest of the 20 th century.
Not an invention of dr Goebbels but a wellknown scientific fact.

Hm:is the weather was that severe,how is it possible that 96 % of the German soldiers were not suffering from frost-bite ?

[ljadw]

Some weak reasoning there, ljadw. It wasn't as if 100% of the soldiers were standing out in the snow 100% of the time. To claim that 96% of the troops received winter clothing because they weren't incapaciteted by frostbite is laughable, and flies in the face of known facts abut the supply of the troops. If they had all that good winter clothing, then why did they feel the need to steal clothes and blankets from Russian civilians, or throw out civilians in the snow when taking over their houses?

The facts are the facts ,and are undeniable :if the Germans had no winter clothing,only a few would have survived the winter .
About the origin of the winter clothing :unless you can prove that the 96 % Germans who had no frost-bite,were saved because they were stealing clothes from the civilians,the most likely explanation is
a)the soldiers who returned from Germany to the front were also bringing winter clothing
b)we know that winter clothing was waiting to be transported to Russia,but that there were delays.
And,about throwing the civilians out of their houses :this had nothing to do with winter clothing:even when they had winter clothing,the Germans expelled the civilians from their houses .because,even with winter clothing,it was cold at night .
BTW:even in the summer,the civilians were expelled from their houses.

[ljadw]

I used to slap parts on Chryslers on the assembly line with a guy named Karl Meyer who had a metal plate in his skull. He said he got it when he was with the Germany Army in Jan. 1942 on the front before Moscow. A mortar shell landed nearby and a clod of dirt that it dislodged struck him in the helmet. This would not normally cause injury. However, on that day the temperature was -55F.
Over the years, I have spoken to dozens of "Ostfront" veterans from German, S.U., Finn and Rumanian armies. Every one spoke of how hard that winter of 41-2 was. We all know that ex-soldiers love to exaggerate, but it is unlikely that every one of these men would relate a similar tale of misery if it were unfounded. Statistics I have seen tend to confirm their perception.
In a similar vein, I have seen some try to belittle the weather as an important factor in the failure of the German 1944 Ardennes attack. Whether these amount to breast-beating by the side that won or prompted by the old "Nazi bad, ----- (our guy) good" nonsense, in both cases it is disingenuous.

I know the story of the night when it was minus 55C.I know also when and where ,but ,I am surprised that you are using this History Channell argument to "prove" that the winter 41-42 was colder than other winters .
Was the 41-42 winter colder than the 40-41 winter ? Etc,...
The fact that there was ONE night when the temperature was minus 55,does not prove that the winter was colder than other winters,that he even was cold :it proves nothing .If it was cold for the Germans,it also was cold for the Soviets,unless,some one can prove that the cold stopped at the Soviet side .
And,about the Ardennes :the winter had NOTHING to do with the German failure:already,after 3 days,the attack had failed .

[julian]

It is pretty silly to present an argument denying the severity of the 1941-1942 winter and the lack of winterclothing. All very well documented.

[ljadw]

It is very silly to say everything is very well documented,but not being able to give ONE exemple (of course,I did not expect anything else).
It also is very silly to pontificate and to expect being believed .(unless you were the pope,and,even then )
The winter was not that harsh and most soldiers had winterclothing,otherwise there is no explication for the fact that at least 96 % of the Ostheer did not suffer from frostbite .
Of course,for some one living in Benidorm,the winter(all winters) was harsh,but, I doubt that for the average German soldier,who had the experience on continental winters,the winter was that harsh,and,for the Russians,it was an average winter.

[Christoph Awender]

Hello,

Posting a report about the winter 1941/42 written by the IVb of the Totenkopf division.

The troops were in general porly equipped for winter warfare in Russia. There was an outright want of winter clothing and especially felt boots. There were hardly enough fur coats available to supply the sentries. Therefore, frostbite occured in increasing measurem hands and feet being especially susceptible to it. The period of moderately cold weather is particularly dangerous. Water at near freezing point shrinks the footgear through which it has seeped and thus promotes frostbite of foes and feet.
Frequently also motorcyclists and men who rode for any length of time in open trucks suffered from frostbite. As long as no proper clothing were available, constant instructions of troops in precautionary measures proved to be the only help. Troops were to halt frequently during their drives, so that they could warm uo through exercise. In positions it was also necessary to intensify the fight against the indifference of soldiers who had been uninterruptedly engaged in heavy fighting and wrre completely exhausted physically. Company commanders and especially NCOs, the battalion surgeon and his assistant, were the only ones who enforced precuationary measures. They had to see to it that every individual soldier took every opportunity for the care of his feet and changed wet socks as often as possible. This had to be done from the start, not only when the feet began to swell or when it became impossible to put on or remove boots. Old time NCOs , still in service in great numbers, proved their worth in this matter; their untiring personal efforts kept a high number of troops in shape for action. On the other hand, the young, battle tried NCOs sadly failed in this respect. Precisly these insignificant measures were the sole means in the prevention of frostbite.

During the fluctuating offensive-defensive operations which later on took place in the pocket, and before any assistace had come from germany, the troops gradually helped themselves to winter clothing, especially felt boots from enemy dead, although german winter clothing were sent in sufficient quantitythese arrived much too late. On the whole, however and considering the heavy defensive engagements which were continually in progress, all through the winter frotsbite never reached the point of causinf a marked decrease in the troops combat strength. Serious frostbites required amputation of the lower leg, were very rare. Amputations of one or several toes were more frequent. We were able at the time to issue anti-frostbite ointment in sufficient quantity.

/Christoph

[julian]

It is very silly to say everything is very well documented,but not being able to give ONE exemple (of course,I did not expect anything else).
It also is very silly to pontificate and to expect being believed .(unless you were the pope,and,even then )
The winter was not that harsh and most soldiers had winterclothing,otherwise there is no explication for the fact that at least 96 % of the Ostheer did not suffer from frostbite .
Of course,for some one living in Benidorm,the winter(all winters) was harsh,but, I doubt that for the average German soldier,who had the experience on continental winters,the winter was that harsh,and,for the Russians,it was an average winter.

Aside from the manuscript quoted before,any unit history or memoir will present the same story of an extremely cold winter and insufficient winterclothing. You are the only person in the world who chooses to deny that. That winter was extremely cold all over Europe.
Something that is also well documented.

[ljadw]

I am not the only one:I am in the company of Fieldmarshall Milch,whose opinion was that the 1941/1942 winter in European Russia was an average one (given that the German propaganda invented the "harsh winter" as an excuse for the failure of Barbarossa,the opinion of Mich is reliable);this is mentioned by ...Irving ,who cannot be accused of being biased,in Hitler's War .
The fact (not an invention) that the number of frost-bite cases durin the 41/42 winter was very low (some 4 %) indicates
a) that most soldiers received winter clother (one way or an other)
b) that the winter was not that harsh
BTW:that the winter outside the SU was extremely cold,is irrelevant ,of topic and a strawman :nobody claimed the opposite .
The record low temperature in Moscow (since the observations started) was not in 1941,or in 1942,but in january 1940 (minus 42.2 Celsius),thus,the claim that the 1941/1942 winter was the coldest in 50 years,a century,etc,is very doubtfull.....unless....some one can produce the lists of Soviet winters classified following the cold

[julian]

An excerpt from MS D 035 'The effect of extreme cold on weapons, wheeled vehicles and track vehicles' Generaloberst Rendulic.

"Weapons
The extreme cold of the winter 1941-1942 showed to our surprise that the mechanism of rifles and machineguns and to some extent even the artillery became absolutely rigid. It was necessary to apply heat to them carefully in order to make them fit for firing again, a condition which disappeared again after firing. It became evident that the lubricants used (grease and oil) froze in the extreme cold and became hard as stone. This was an intolerable situation affecting as it did readiness for action. The troops immediately made various experiments and determined that kerosene was cold –resistant and suitable as a lubricant. It was available in the country where it was used for lighting. The only drawback was that it had no lasting properties and had had to be renewed frequently. Furthermore it was not known whether it id not attack the metal. At any rate was obtained that the weapons functioned again even in extreme cold.

By winter of 1942-1943 we had cold-resistant lubricants available. No other effect of extreme cold on weapons was noted.



Motor vehicles



As far as motor vehicles were concerned, it was the same. Completely unaware of the fact that grease and oil had frozen and hardened like stone, we tried to make the vehicles start by towing them. The result was that the motor was badly damaged and the differential was ripped to pieces. It was necessary to thaw out the vehicles by carefully applying heat to them before moving. It took up to two hours before the vehicles were ready to start. Extemporized means, as in the case of the weapons, were not available. As far as I can recall, cold-resistant greases and oils for vehicles were not to be had before the winter of 1942-1943.

From the very beginning chrysanthine was available which was mixed with the water for the radiator preventing freezing in temperatures not below -25)c. In extreme cold the water had to be drained from the vehicle after driving and had to be brought into the quarters. I do not know whether later a substance of greater cold-resistance was found. Very satisfactory in summer as well as in winter were the air-cooled vehicles, not dependent on water, which were manufactured exclusively by the Steyr plants in Austria. ……….
"

[julian]

I am not the only one:I am in the company of Fieldmarshall Milch,whose opinion was that the 1941/1942 winter in European Russia was an average one (given that the German propaganda invented the "harsh winter" as an excuse for the failure of Barbarossa,the opinion of Mich is reliable);this is mentioned by ...Irving ,who cannot be accused of being biased,in Hitler's War .
The fact (not an invention) that the number of frost-bite cases durin the 41/42 winter was very low (some 4 %) indicates
a) that most soldiers received winter clother (one way or an other)
b) that the winter was not that harsh
BTW:that the winter outside the SU was extremely cold,is irrelevant ,of topic and a strawman :nobody claimed the opposite .
The record low temperature in Moscow (since the observations started) was not in 1941,or in 1942,but in january 1940 (minus 42.2 Celsius),thus,the claim that the 1941/1942 winter was the coldest in 50 years,a century,etc,is very doubtfull.....unless....some one can produce the lists of Soviet winters classified following the cold

What utter nonsense. Statistically, the winter of 1941-1942 was extremely harsh. And the lack of winterclothing is mentioned in all unit histories...
I think the manuscripts by Rendulic quoted here are enough illustration. If I had the time to waste on such a typically useless internetdiscussion, I could put a lot of quotes from unithistories here. But I am not going to try to prove that the world is round to somebody who is notorious for always taking a contrarian view.
The german soldiers and officers who served at the front knew what the difficulties caused by extreme cold where and that was not only the lack of winterclothing as is shown by the last text I quoted.
Funny that you consider David Irving unbiased. Not really the average view on him. Another typical contrarian statement by you.

[ljadw]

Refusing to understand (as I expected) :the last thing we could expect from Irving,that he would refute the using as excuse for the failure of Barbarosssa of the mythical winter of 1941/1942.
Irving is saying that the 1941/1942 winter was an average Russian winter,and,knowing his opinions,for once ,we can believe him .
BTW:I like how you continue to make own-goals :
a) saying :the winter was extremely cold
b)saying :the Germans had no winter clothing
c) ignoring the fact that in april 1942 the Germans were still there (without winter clothing)
d)saying :the fact that the Germans had no winter clothing was unimportant .
I like to see you surviving without winter clothing in your extremely cold winter

[julian]

I think Rendulic's manuscripts clearly show the improvisations resorted to in answer to the lack of winterclothing. Similar information can be found in numerous unit histories,etc......
Denying the harshness of the winter of 1941-1942 flies in the face of wellsourced historical facts.
Coming up with Irving only confirms the lack of credibility of the theory.
Those that really served during that winter knew better.

[ljadw]

Using Rendulic is of course going of topic ,hyjacking the thread:we are not discussing the effects of cold weather on the German weapons/trucks,but
a)was the winter of 1941/1942 harsher than other Russian winters,and:how much
b) what was the impact of this weather on the German soldiers :was it causing frost-bite losses,and:how much
c) did the Ostheer receive winterclothing,and,how much
On point A :I have given a source (and,in this case,it can not be suspected to be biased,IMHO ,it will result in Irving losing his honorary membership of Stormfront)that is saying that the 1941/1942 winter was average
On point B :I have given figures on the number of frost-bite cases ,and,there were almost insignifiant
On point C :I have given a source (Winterkleidung oder Munition) that is saying that at the end of november 1941,trains with winter clothing were ready to go to Russia .
Although it is unlikely that every one had received winter clothing before the real cold was arriving,it is obvious that in january 99.99 % of the Ostheer had received winter clothing,unless...some one would claim that one could survive minus 20 Celsius with summer clothing .

[julian]

All unithistories,memoirs,... consistently prove that most german soldiers did not have winterclothing in the winter of 1941-1942 and had to resort to improvisations. The first manuscript by Rendulic quoted here again, illustrates that:"It was possible to requisition some fur and felt boots from the natives for a small fraction of the troops. Winter clothing was also removed from the enemy dead. But it was not until the spring of 1942 that warm underwear,gloves and protectors arrived from home,and sufficed only to supply only a small part of the troops. The bulk of them,during the winter campaign of 1941-1942 did come near to having a complete outfit of winter clothing for each man. At best,they only had some one article ".

[Ronald Lameck]

For Ljadw: Nothing quite like letting your own predisposition stand in the way of the facts was written. Mr. Meyer worked beside me for about 2.5 years. He spoke of -55 FAHRENHEIT as that temperature scale was still in common use in Canada at the time (1973). That is about -49C or -50 C. Quite the difference from -55C if you have exer experienced such temperatures, as I have.
I know ZERO of a "History Channel" or what it is supposed to be. I know what he told me and, while anyone is capable of lying or even exaggeration, I knew him to be a fair and honest man. His experiences were very similar to those of dozens of others I have spoken to across the years who were on the Ostfront at the time. I doubt that 100% of them are lying or even mistaken. Perhaps your bias is over-riding your intellect?
You must also consider WIND as an important factor in weather. A couple of years ago here, it was "only" about -35C in January, but the wind produces a chilling effect. This is sometimes measured in watts but most people, most of the time convert it to an "equivalent temperature." To us, it felt like -56C to -58C at its maximum. I have never seen wind chill effects included in historical weather reports - or wind data generaly unless it was truly exceptional - The same could as easily be true on the steppes o fthe S.U. as on the prairies of Canada. You need to consider that the Red Army - by experience - had clothing, equipment and lubricants suited to the conditions. That is a huge advantage. Try starting a car with 30W oil in the engine some day when its -40C. Good luck.
Measuring the effect of weather solely by the number of frostbite cases is also a fool's errend. Many people in my city get frostbite in winter, but seldom so serious as to be debilitating. But I've been out in -43C with bare hands trying to change radiator hoses. The weather certainly affects one's efficiency and effectiveness. It can make one tired very quickly. As Vince Lombardi put it, "exhaustion makes cowards of us all."
Re: 1944 Ardennes. The maximum penetration in that offensive occurred on 26 Dec. On 19 Dec. U.S. 106th Inf. Div. was surrendering en masse. U.S. 101st Airborne Div. was being surrounded at Bastogne. Hardly the end of the attack. Oh well. Enjoy your fantasy world.