>>17808394
>What if they attacked in september and had three extra weeks of good weather?

Mud season wasnt good weather
And mud season was what really killed the timetable, winter actually helped the advance to resume because the roads became solid again

And the other anon is right, by December they had no more reserves. Even if Von Bock successfully encircle Moscow because of some divine effort of highspeeding Typhoon, he had nothing to stop the overwhelming Soviet December counteroffensive which pushed back the German lines 200-300 kilometers, and that offensive is inevtiable regardless of weather

Moscow was never the issue to begin with. Barbarossa was planned for 6 weeks. I dont think you realise what a serious miscalculation that is. The Germans (and other observers) expected that the Red Army would be destroyed in the opening blow, that the Soviet state would collapse, and the rest would be Wehrmacht driving up the highways against local resistance and capture the grainfields, industry and oil refineries intact.
It was not meant to be against a constant organized fighting resistance, the logistics, manpower and timetable was never prepared for it.
When Hitler said "we only need to kick in the door, and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down", that actually summarize the rationale behind Barbarossa

The whole Moscow debate mostly gravitates around post-war bullshit by the German generals to blame every mistake on Hitler to make themselves look good, but the truth is that Barbarossa had failed long before then, and many of Hitlers concerns about the operation was proven right
The push for Moscow was out of desperation for a knock-out blow because the Germans kept telling themselves that the Red Army were on their last leg. It was wishful thinking.
Most historians also argue that even if Moscow had been captured, it wouldnt have been that big of a deal. Moscow was no longer the capital at the time, and the Germans would still desperately need oil