What is the difference between German blitzkrieg and Soviet deep battle?
To summarize: deep battle / defense in depth is about setting up multiple lines of defense rather than a single, beefy line so that any force that breaks through the first line has to deal with the second line, any force that breaks through the second line has to deal with the third line, etc.
This was possible mostly due to the Soviet's immense manpower advantage, and the idea was about breaking the momentum of the blitzkrieg by exhausting the attack the deeper it went - until eventually the attackers were so worn out that they could be pushed back and their progress undone by a single massive counter-attack. The climate of the USSR definitely helped in this too (muddy roads, brutal winters), hence the entire concept was to use the Germans' blitzkrieg strategy against them.
Naturally, though, this kind of defense tends to result in huge casualties on both sides, but especially the defending side.
>>865550
That's not what deep battle is. Deep battle is an offensive theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_operation
More encompassing
>>865572
Deep battle is not the same as defense in depth. The relevant bit of deep battle involves offense, in which infantry supported by artillery and heavy armoured vehicles achieved breakthroughs on the lines in which light armor and mechanized infantry can pour in before the enemy is able to close the gap. From there they can exploit weakness behind the lines and encircle enemies.
Your description of defense in depth is accurate, tho.
>>865550
Trick question, Blitzkrieg wasn't a doctrine Auftringtaktik was.
