"Rail War" of Soviet partisans in 1943

“Rail War” and “Concert” became the largest operations of the Bryansk partisans during the Great Patriotic War.

Many sources indicate that the “Rail War” was launched to support the Red Army operation on the Kursk Bulge. Meanwhile, some historians dispute this fact, since the Battle of Kursk lasted from July 5 to August 23, 1943. The partisan operation began on August 3 and lasted until September 15. In this case, the question arises as to why the destruction of German communications began so late.

At the same time, there is no doubt that the “Rail War” made a huge contribution to the Victory of the Red Army over the Nazi invaders.

It is worth noting that before the development of the operation began, there were two plans. The first was proposed by Colonel Ilya Grigorievich Starinov, one of the organizers of the partisan movement. In his opinion, it would be more expedient to destroy locomotives rather than rails. This damage will be much more difficult for the Germans to level out.

The second plan belonged to General Panteleimon Kondratievich Ponomarenko, the Chief of the Central Headquarters of the partisan movement. He believed that it was much more difficult to destroy locomotives than rails. Meanwhile, blowing up railway tracks will bring no less results than destroying trains, since the Germans have a shortage of rails.

After the war, many historians will write that Ponomarenko was mistaken and the Third Reich did not have any shortage of railway tracks. At the same time, Germany had a shortage of steam locomotives, which indicates that Starinov was right.

Be that as it may, the operation was developed on the basis of Ponomarenko’s plan. More than 100 thousand Soviet partisans took part in the “Rail War”, who carried out subversive activities on a front stretching about 1000 km.

According to some reports, from August 3 to September 15, 1943, about 215 thousand rails were destroyed, which undoubtedly created serious problems for the Wehrmacht.

The number of explosions has reached such a number that the situation is becoming dangerous. There is a targeted attack on trains and draft locomotives. If this situation continues in the near future, then the entire railway connection will be at risk. In particular, we are talking about the threat of disruption of supplies to all front-line operations

- wrote the commander of the 559th German commandant’s office.

In addition, it was Operation Rail War, which then smoothly flowed into Concert, that showed the Soviet command that the partisan movement was a huge force.

However, the above-mentioned operation also had its disadvantages. Firstly, the order did not indicate which railway tracks needed to be destroyed. As a result, the partisans even blew up the railway track that the Wehrmacht did not use at all. According to historians, Operation Rail War caused more damage to the country's railway property than the Nazis did during their retreat.

Secondly, most of the important communications were carefully guarded by Wehrmacht units. As a result, to undermine them, the partisans often had to engage in battle, which led to large losses among movement participants.

Comments

[svp67]

Meanwhile, blowing up railway tracks will bring no less results than destroying trains, since the Germans have a shortage of rails.

Well, there were no ATGMs back then, everything had to be done by hand... And yet the partisans made their contribution to our Victory. But you need to analyze your mistakes and try not to make them again.

[your vsr 66-67]

According to historians, Operation Rail War caused more damage to the country's railway property than the Nazis did during their retreat.

Secondly, most of the important communications were carefully guarded by Wehrmacht units.

And be that as it may, the partisans greatly helped the Active Army and at the same time caused confusion in the actions of the enemy!
Not only did the Nazis have to restore the tracks and often do this with the involvement of the civilian population of the occupied territories, they also had to withdraw significant forces from the front to fight the partisans and protect the railroad. d. ways!

[Puskarinkis]

The problems of the partisan movement began after the execution of Tukhachevsky. One can argue why, but under his leadership the structure and base of the partisan movement/resistance movement was created. Given the general strategy of “little loss and on foreign territory” and political realities, the question naturally arose: against whom is such a structure being prepared? The issue was resolved radically and the entire structure, bases, documentation, developments and those involved were destroyed. And when the war began and large territories were captured, a mass of troops found themselves behind enemy lines, surrounded or scattered, the leadership urgently adopted a strategy of action in the occupied territories borrowed from the partisans of 1812 - the “scorched earth” strategy. Instead of giving the order to the encirclement to disperse and disrupt the enemy’s communications, the leadership orders to make their way to the front at any cost, and sends young and ardent communists/Komsomol members behind the front line with the task of burning down the houses of civilians in order to drive the fascists out of their “winter quarters” into the cold. And at the same time, women, children, old people... That's why the residents caught Zoya and handed her over to the Germans, not wanting to burn or freeze, not understanding the plans of the command, which promised "with little blood and on someone else's...". During the first year of occupation, faith in Soviet power was greatly undermined by the rash actions of the command. Ilya Starinov tried to unite and streamline the partisan movement and create training and coordination centers. He opposed the "rail war", but it turned out as it turned out...

[Lewww]

According to historians, Operation Rail War caused more damage to the country's railway property than the Nazis did during their retreat.

I have repeatedly noticed that many modern “historians” are narrow-minded people.
How is it possible and why is it necessary to compare the incomparable?
The partisans, by blowing up the rails, caused damage to the Third Reich, i.e. to the Germans. For the undermined paths were restored by the Germans and subsequently used by the Germans (and their allies).
But the Germans, by blowing up railway tracks during their retreat, were already causing damage to the USSR.
It can be assumed that the damage caused to the enemy’s economy by partisans during the war years apparently significantly exceeded the damage caused to the railway economy by the Nazis.
But what is the use of such an assumption, what is the conclusion from it?