Patton pushes on (what if)

[Kagemusha]

Generally yes, I'd say the shape of Red Army in mid 1941 was catastrophic. On top of all organizational issues, shortage of new equipment, lack of quality commanders and all those others things I already spoke about, there were deep institutional flaws that had to be addressed. On the other hand, quality of troops was good enough. Of course German soldiers had the advantage as they were veterans of two major campaigns. Compared to that only a small part of Russian troops was involved in Winter War and during invasion of Poland, combat was rare and was pretty much consisted of units of regimental size.

Troops on the border with Finland were in better shape than those on the border with the Reich. They were more experienced, their defensive positions were better and, equally important, weren't changed in 1941 and they faced relatively small number of Germans. Entire AOK Norway consisted of 70,000 men, that's 9 divisions organized in 3 corps. Basically, everything in the North depended on Finland and that's where I agree with PJ - Finland was never an enthusiastic Axis partner as it became one out of pure necessity.

I don't know much about the specific battle of Tikhvin, sources in English are rare and non-existent in Serbian and I can't speak Russian. Or Finnish for that matter. I do know a few words of Hungarian but I don't think that's enough .

From what I remember about Tikhvin, it was a relatively small scale encounter (compared to what was happening in the south). Russian 4th army was initially pushed back, then it received reinforcements and managed to recapture the town. This was happening as the Battle of Moscow was entering its final stages so naturally not much attention was paid to Tikhvin.

So in general, troops in the north were better than their counterparts in the south, they were facing small German army and reluctant Finnish army. They performed better for that reason in the beginning. Of course in the later periods of the war, Red Army troops in the north were totally outclassed by those in the south. Were the Finns actually committed to the war effort instead of just to reoccupying territories lost in the Winter War, we would have probably seen totally different scenarios in the north.

I think Glantz, whom you have showed appreciatian in this thread disagrees with you about Tikhvin, or Tikhvinsk-Kirishsk offensive operation as it is officially called.

According to one of the leading historians of the Eastern Front David Glantz: "the concept of blitzkrieg failed for the first time in the Second World War... anticipating" the Soviet victory at Moscow.
I think the reason why the operation is not so well known is that the battle of Moscow has completely overshadowed it. Nevertheles,The battle at Tikhvin was also significant in its direct assistance to the Red Army in the battle of Moscow. Instead of sending troops from the Army Group North to Moscow, Germans were forced to reinforce their armies in the north with divisions from the Army Group Center as well as with other divisions which Germans initially planned to use at Moscow.

Another quote from David Glantz: "During this most critical period of the war, 32 percent of the Wehrmacht's forces, operating north of the Pripiat Marshes, including almost two full panzer groups, were tied down in combat along or adjacent to" Tikhvin. Wehrmacht lost in the battle 45,000 troops.

So i would conclude that The operations around Tikhvin were actually more likely over shadowed by Moscow, rather then insignificant. While the operation helped achieving victory at Moscow, by bogging down German forces needed in Moscow. It also had Strategic importance for the whole Northern Front between SU, Germany and Finland.Here is a map that gives a good overall picture of the front:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...942_map_en.png

The striped area at North is the area the attacking phase of the Operation reclaimed from Germans. Had Germans advanced to River Svir, that would have achieved the condition Finnish command had set for further major advance preferably towards Icy Sea or optionally towards Leningrad. Finnish Karelian army had 5 divisions and 3 separate Brigades near river Svir, between Lakes Ladoga and Onega. While at Karelian Isthmus there were 7 divisions at Karelian Isthmus North West from Leningrad basically doing nothing. During the negotiations between Finnish headquarters and German OKW. Meeting at River Svir was accepted by both sides as condition for further Finnish offensive. Marshall Mannerheim used that agreement from Autumn 1941 right untill the disaster of Stalingrad as excuse for staying at defense.

If even half of those divisions would have been aimed towards North during Autumn or winter 1941. It would have completely tipped the balance at Northern front. Which would have most likely resulted in fall of Murmansk and Arkangelsk, from which about 40% of Lend lease arrived to SU. Also had Germans reached Svir. Leningrad would lost even the "road of life" over Lake Ladoga thus its chances of survival the siege would have taken a rather large turn to worse, possibly releasing large forces from German army group North to other directions.

EDIT: Greg. Here is an author you want to read if you are interested on the Soviet aspect of the war:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Glantz