Operation Silverfox (Silverfuchs)

spidge · 25-04-2006, 02:20 PM

The German plan to take Murmansk:

The failure of Silberfuchs was to have a lasting effect on the course of the war. While the rest of the Russian lines had collapsed in 1941, the forces of R.I. Panin's Northern Front had held, causing severe casualties of up to 15% on the German attackers. German failure can be attributed to a number of factors: the terrain, first and foremost, hindered the advance, and the assault lacked a Schwerpunkt (point of maximum effort), the main factor in the successful Blitzkrieg strategy. The lack of a focus point for the German-Finnish attack meant that the necessary breakthrough was not possible, and the stagnation of the front was inevitable.
The port of Murmansk was to remain in Russian hands throughout the war, and around a quarter of all lend lease material was received through this port (the remainder coming through Vladivostok (almost half), Persia (quarter) and Black Sea (rest). The supplies coming through this port helped the Soviets quickly recover from the disasters of 1941.
The war in the north dragged on until September 1944, when the Finns sued for peace and the Lapland War began, but at no point was a decisive victory on this front a possibility.

von Poop · 25-04-2006, 02:43 PM

The Blitkrieg strategy also revolved around the Kesselschlacht(?spelling?) or Cauldron/kettle-battle relying on encirclement to allow placement of the strategic schwerepunkt at exactly the right place. Could it be that the German's military thinking was not fully evolved when it came to attacking Ports? Also bearing in mind Adolf's confusion over Naval matters. (speculation)

very brief list of sub-campaigns to Silverfox here:
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/ref...antry_division
The Feldgrau info is sketchy on the 169th
http://www.feldgrau.com/InfDiv.php?ID=116.

Are we talking a strictly land-based strategy to take out the port with naval attacks on the convoys only, or was Murmansk ever seriously attacked from the sea?
It'd be nice to learn more on the Convoy's destination and Germany's attempt to bag it.

spidge · 25-04-2006, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Von Poop

It'd be nice to learn more on the Convoy's destination and Germany's attempt to bag it.

What convoy?

von Poop · 25-04-2006, 05:05 PM

"the convoys" as in ones destined for murmansk, I thought I'd punctuated it badly.

I meant Murmansk as.... A destination for Convoys.
Suspect it should have read

"the Convoys' (plural?) destination"

Apologies.

spidge · 25-04-2006, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Von Poop

"the convoys" as in ones destined for murmansk, I thought I'd punctuated it badly.

I meant Murmansk as.... A destination for Convoys.
Suspect it should have read

"the Convoys' (plural?) destination"

Apologies.

I do not think the capture of the port (seaward) was the intention but to cut the rail link from Murmansk.

von Poop · 25-04-2006, 05:38 PM

Trying to find a map with force dispositions indicated on it, the one on the Wikepedia article you quoted initially isn't much cop.
I think describing Murmansk as the target for the offensive is fair enough but as my Naval understanding, especially of the Kriegsmarine surface fleet is sketchy I was just wondering how much Naval action was concentrated on the port itself as opposed to the fighting amongst the convoys' which I have some awareness of.

Gotthard Heinrici · 02-05-2006, 08:07 PM

I think General Eduard Dietl was in command of this operation wasnt he? He later died in an air crash following a visit to Hitler's Headquarters.

25-04-2006, 02:20 PM	#1 (permalink)
spidge Legendary Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 8,027	Operation Silverfox (Silverfuchs) The German plan to take Murmansk: The failure of Silberfuchs was to have a lasting effect on the course of the war. While the rest of the Russian lines had collapsed in 1941, the forces of R.I. Panin's Northern Front had held, causing severe casualties of up to 15% on the German attackers. German failure can be attributed to a number of factors: the terrain, first and foremost, hindered the advance, and the assault lacked a Schwerpunkt (point of maximum effort), the main factor in the successful Blitzkrieg strategy. The lack of a focus point for the German-Finnish attack meant that the necessary breakthrough was not possible, and the stagnation of the front was inevitable. The port of Murmansk was to remain in Russian hands throughout the war, and around a quarter of all lend lease material was received through this port (the remainder coming through Vladivostok (almost half), Persia (quarter) and Black Sea (rest). The supplies coming through this port helped the Soviets quickly recover from the disasters of 1941. The war in the north dragged on until September 1944, when the Finns sued for peace and the Lapland War began, but at no point was a decisive victory on this front a possibility. __________________ Spidge, ------------------------------------------------------- My Avatar is the memorial to the 22 Commonwealth Coastwatchers at the Temakin Cemetery on Betio (Tarawa Atoll) who were beheaded by the Japanese on 15th October 1942. http://www.dva.gov.au/media/publicat...mem_beito.html "You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war." (Winston Churchill made this prophetic pronouncement in a House of Commons speech in 1938, just after Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement with Hitler. Chamberlain returned from Germany with the signed agreement in hand, proclaiming that "peace in our time" had been achieved. Churchill attacked Chamberlain's "politics of appeasement" in this and many other speeches.) What did the Australians do in ww2 and other conflicts? Check out this site: http://www.diggerhistory.info/00-pag...ster-index.htm

25-04-2006, 05:38 PM	#6 (permalink)
von Poop I Like Tanks Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Perfidious Albion. Posts: 8,373	Trying to find a map with force dispositions indicated on it, the one on the Wikepedia article you quoted initially isn't much cop. I think describing Murmansk as the target for the offensive is fair enough but as my Naval understanding, especially of the Kriegsmarine surface fleet is sketchy I was just wondering how much Naval action was concentrated on the port itself as opposed to the fighting amongst the convoys' which I have some awareness of. Last edited by von Poop; 25-04-2006 at 10:39 PM.

02-05-2006, 08:07 PM	#7 (permalink)
Gotthard Heinrici Pog mo thon Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 3,856	I think General Eduard Dietl was in command of this operation wasnt he? He later died in an air crash following a visit to Hitler's Headquarters. __________________ *"The Eastern front is like a house of cards. If the front is broken through at one point all the rest will collapse."* - General Heinz Guderian

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
THE WAFFEN-SS: Divisional Service History, Brigade/Battalion Unit List + Unit Notes.	Christos	Axis Units	74	30-05-2008 11:42 PM
Operation Bagration	Gotthard Heinrici	Battle Specifics	15	01-05-2008 05:41 PM
Operation Blazing May 1942	en830	NW Europe	6	22-02-2007 10:04 PM
Operation Pike	Kyt	The Eastern Front	0	27-11-2006 02:34 PM
Operation Alacrity - British US bases in the Azores	spidge	General	2	05-11-2006 08:22 PM

25-04-2006, 02:43 PM	#2 (permalink)
von Poop I Like Tanks Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Perfidious Albion. Posts: 8,373	The Blitkrieg strategy also revolved around the Kesselschlacht(?spelling?) or Cauldron/kettle-battle relying on encirclement to allow placement of the strategic schwerepunkt at exactly the right place. Could it be that the German's military thinking was not fully evolved when it came to attacking Ports? Also bearing in mind Adolf's confusion over Naval matters. (speculation) very brief list of sub-campaigns to Silverfox here: http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/ref...antry_division The Feldgrau info is sketchy on the 169th http://www.feldgrau.com/InfDiv.php?ID=116. Are we talking a strictly land-based strategy to take out the port with naval attacks on the convoys only, or was Murmansk ever seriously attacked from the sea? It'd be nice to learn more on the Convoy's destination and Germany's attempt to bag it.

25-04-2006, 05:05 PM	#4 (permalink)
von Poop I Like Tanks Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Perfidious Albion. Posts: 8,373	"the convoys" as in ones destined for murmansk, I thought I'd punctuated it badly. I meant Murmansk as.... A destination for Convoys. Suspect it should have read "the Convoys' (plural?) destination" Apologies.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)