Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (2) 1 [2]   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Soviet evacuation of Odessa, split from discussion on Historia magazine
MMM
Posted: December 19, 2011 05:08 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



The Soviet Command of Odessa, I presume... But the real decision factor would've been (it was actually) the Supreme Command, aka STAVKA, aka Stalin!


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
guina
Posted: December 19, 2011 05:39 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 339
Member No.: 1393
Joined: April 16, 2007



Yeap,local command.

This post has been edited by guina on December 19, 2011 05:40 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
Petre
Posted: December 19, 2011 08:46 pm
Quote Post


Locotenent colonel
*

Group: Members
Posts: 894
Member No.: 2434
Joined: March 24, 2009



From a russian memorialistic (e-)book :

Rear-admiral Jukov informed us he received the Directive of Stavka of the Supreme Command for the evacuation of Odessa, and he read it:
"Due to the threat of loss of the Crimea, the main base of the Black Sea Fleet, and to the fact that at present the army is not able to simultaneously defend the Crimean peninsula and the Odessa Defense Area, Stavka of the Supreme Command decided to evacuate the ODA and with its troops to strengthen the defense of the Crimean peninsula.
Stavka orders :
1. Bravely and honestly fulfilled their mission, the soldiers and the commanders of the ODA, in the shortest time evacuate the troops from the Odessa area on the Crimean peninsula.
2. Commander of the 51. Separate Army - put all the forces of the army to keep the Arabat Spit, the Chongar Isthmus, the southern coast of Sivash and the positions in Ishun until the arrival of the troops from the ODA.
3. Commander of the Black Sea Fleet - proceed to the transfer from Odessa troops, material and equipment to the ports of the Crimea: Sevastopol, Yalta and Feodosia, or other suitable places.
4. Commander of the Black Sea Fleet and Commander of the ODA - to plan the troops disengagement from combat, their cover and the transfer, with a particular attention to mentain of both flanks of the defense till the end of the evacuation.
5. Commander of the ODA - all which can not be evacuated ( weapons, equipments and plants, communications and provisions ) must destroy, by designating responsible persons.
6. On landing in Crimea, the troops of ODA will subordinate to the 51. Army.
7. To confirm the preparation and the execution."

Stavka of the Supreme Command
I.Stalin B.Shaposhnikov


This post has been edited by Petre on January 16, 2012 07:27 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
Dénes
  Posted: December 19, 2011 09:04 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



QUOTE (Petre @ December 20, 2011 02:46 am)
"... With the threat of loss of the Crimean Peninsula, the main base of the Black Sea Fleet, and the fact that at present the army is not able to simultaneously defend the Crimea peninsula and the Odessa Defence Area, Stavka of the Supreme Command decided to evacuate the ODA and with its troops to strengthen the defense of the Crimean peninsula. "

That's exactly what I've said earlier.
Thanks for posting the source, Petre.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on December 19, 2011 09:10 pm
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
dragos
Posted: December 19, 2011 10:17 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



But what is the source? biggrin.gif

Indeed, here is an excerpt from N. Krylov, Defence of Odessa 1941

user posted image

user posted image

However all this "splitting the hair in four" discussion seems to sound like: unless there was some bloody street fighting in Odessa and the Soviets fought to the last man then Romanian troops did not conquered Odessa, which is childish IMO.

Some points to consider:

- Early in the war the German doctrine advocated to avoid urban fighting and to besiege and bomb the cities into surrender. This changed as the war progressed and Hitler became more and more involved into direct military strategy.

- Battle for Odessa means more than fall of the city itself. It was an entire operation along the southernmost Easter Front. It's like the Battle of Kiev, no major urban struggle, but major blow for the Soviets with some 400,000 captured. Of course, the Romanian victory pales in comparison because of the the amount of losses sustained to achieve objective.

- The Battle of Odessa was the largest independent military operation carried by an ally of Germany on the Eastern Front.

PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Petre
Posted: December 20, 2011 09:40 am
Quote Post


Locotenent colonel
*

Group: Members
Posts: 894
Member No.: 2434
Joined: March 24, 2009



Sorry ! I was rushed and I missed :
Ilya Ilyich Azarov, "Besieged Odessa", 1962
The author of the memoirs I. Azarov was member of the Military Council of Odessa Defense Region.

The Directive of Stavka no. 002454.
to the COs of BlackSea Fleet, Odessa Defense Area, 51.Separate Army and the People,s Commissar of the Navy, on the evacuation of the ODA
Sept.30, 1941/ 01.10 - here :
http://www.oboznik.ru/?p=9846

From the same book :
With the loss of Crimea, we can lose Odessa too, because the supply from Caucasus, if the enemy captures the Crimean airfields, would be almost impossible.
The Military Council of the Sov. Navy reported the situation in Stavka and made suggestions : while the fights in Crimea are at Perekop, it is possible an orderly withdrawal of troops from Odessa and to strengthen with them the defense of Crimea. The loss of Odessa, as reported by the Military Council of the Sov. Navy, if we manage to keep Crimea – is the lesser evil.
The demands of the Fleet Military Council were accepted. Now our challenge is the best implement of Stavka Directive.
(...)
The loss of Crimea will entail the loss of Odessa. Sea communication will be under the constant air attacks of the enemy. He immediately will bring his aircraft in Crimea. The tragedy is that there is no force that could deter the enemy. The 51-th Army is unable to ...


This post has been edited by Petre on January 16, 2012 07:35 pm
PMEmail Poster
Top
MMM
Posted: December 20, 2011 04:29 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



QUOTE (dragos @ December 20, 2011 01:17 am)
unless there was some bloody street fighting in Odessa and the Soviets fought to the last man then Romanian troops did not conquered Odessa, which is childish IMO.

Some points to consider:

- Early in the war the German doctrine advocated to avoid urban fighting and to besiege and bomb the cities into surrender. This changed as the war progressed and Hitler became more and more involved into direct military strategy.

- Battle for Odessa means more than fall of the city itself. It was an entire operation along the southernmost Easter Front. It's like the Battle of Kiev, no major urban struggle, but major blow for the Soviets with some 400,000 captured. Of course, the Romanian victory pales in comparison because of the the amount of losses sustained to achieve objective.

- The Battle of Odessa was the largest independent military operation carried by an ally of Germany on the Eastern Front.

I never implied we didn't actually conquer Odessa!
I also do not wish to cast any shadow upon the Romanian Army, including its performances at the Odessa action. I am aware, though, of the fact that the decision and the very moment of the actual conquering of the city belonged to the Soviet authorities - THAT was my point!
Nobody ever said that Odessa was conquered without a battle or anything like that!
As for the splitting the hair, I think a consistent number of threads on this forum fit the description very well... wink.gif Some comrades have even surpassed 2.000+ posts by splitting hairs!!!
Oh, one last thing about the independent action: some German troops participated along the Romanian ones; the planning of the operation, purely Romanian, showed the results quite adequately, when we also have to see the replacement of commanders because of their attitude - see General Ciupercă!
It's loke we really wanted to buy a candy just for ourselves, but when we finally managed to do it, the price was too high, the candy was out-of-date and the Wehrmacht pretty much wanted a taste as well! cool.gif
My guess is that Odessa was a pretty good lesson for all the sides involved, but only the Red Army understood it in time!


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
udar
Posted: April 21, 2012 06:59 am
Quote Post


Plutonier
*

Group: Members
Posts: 281
Member No.: 354
Joined: September 24, 2004



What was the actual German involvement, something like an infantry regiment and two artilery batteries or so?

It wasnt something significant, or to make any big diference. If we go on that line, the Romanian participation in Crimeea (and even Caucasus) was procentual way bigger and much important compared with German involvement in Odessa assault.
PMEmail Poster
Top
Dénes
Posted: April 21, 2012 07:40 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



Don't forget the Luftwaffe.

Gen. Dénes
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
udar
Posted: April 22, 2012 07:36 am
Quote Post


Plutonier
*

Group: Members
Posts: 281
Member No.: 354
Joined: September 24, 2004



QUOTE (Dénes @ April 21, 2012 07:40 am)
Don't forget the Luftwaffe.

Gen. Dénes

And how big was the Luftwaffe involvement there? More then one or two Stukas squadrons?
PMEmail Poster
Top
Dénes
Posted: April 22, 2012 02:08 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



Definitely yes, because the Rumanians did not have any Stukas at that time.

Gen. Dénes
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Victor
Posted: April 22, 2012 06:10 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4350
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (udar @ April 22, 2012 09:36 am)
QUOTE (Dénes @ April 21, 2012 07:40 am)
Don't forget the Luftwaffe.

Gen. Dénes

And how big was the Luftwaffe involvement there? More then one or two Stukas squadrons?

KG 27 Boelcke
KG 51 Edelweiss
II./JG 77

The latter was moved from the sector on 28 August.

In September, III./StG 77 was brought in to support the anti-shipping raids and they did manage to sink one destroyer and damage several others.

So two flotillas and 2 groups.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
udar
Posted: April 23, 2012 08:30 pm
Quote Post


Plutonier
*

Group: Members
Posts: 281
Member No.: 354
Joined: September 24, 2004



QUOTE (Victor @ April 22, 2012 06:10 pm)
QUOTE (udar @ April 22, 2012 09:36 am)
QUOTE (Dénes @ April 21, 2012 07:40 am)
Don't forget the Luftwaffe.

Gen. Dénes

And how big was the Luftwaffe involvement there? More then one or two Stukas squadrons?

KG 27 Boelcke
KG 51 Edelweiss
II./JG 77

The latter was moved from the sector on 28 August.

In September, III./StG 77 was brought in to support the anti-shipping raids and they did manage to sink one destroyer and damage several others.

So two flotillas and 2 groups.

I see, thanks for answers to everyone. So, what was the exact number of airplanes involved? I just want to see how important this was, because the German ground troops involved wasnt at all significant as far as i know (related to their number).
PMEmail Poster
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (2) 1 [2]  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.2971 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]