kursk

German campaigns and battles 1919-1945.

Moderator: sniper1shot

Re: kursk

Postby paul_atrydes » Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:53 am

There is no my problem, there is problem that Pak (sf) in most researches is not mentions.
paul_atrydes
Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:22 am

Re: kursk

Postby Jan-Hendrik » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:23 am

Really? Which serious research did not mention them??

Jan-Hendrik
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
 
Posts: 1973
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen

Re: kursk

Postby paul_atrydes » Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:50 am

They are not mentioned at comparison of opponents' forces. For example "Kursk 1943: a statistical analysis" table 1.2.
I will say more, in the same table in German manpower on Eastern front is counting only ground forces (Heer) w/o LW and KM.
paul_atrydes
Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:22 am

Re: kursk

Postby ljadw » Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:04 pm

paul_atrydes wrote:They are not mentioned at comparison of opponents' forces. For example "Kursk 1943: a statistical analysis" table 1.2.
I will say more, in the same table in German manpower on Eastern front is counting only ground forces (Heer) w/o LW and KM.

LW and KM manpower were never used for a comparison of opponents'forces:I don't think it would be relevant to count airforce mechanics.
For the allied manpower in the west,NA,and Italy:air force ground strength never was included,only the number of aircraft .
ljadw
Supporter
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:46 pm

Re: kursk

Postby paul_atrydes » Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:04 pm

ljadw wrote:LW and KM manpower were never used for a comparison of opponents'forces:I don't think it would be relevant to count airforce mechanics.
What about AA units? Anyway in the Soviet figures personell of VVS are present.
paul_atrydes
Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:22 am

Re: kursk

Postby Michate » Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:00 am

Luftwaffe personnel on Eastern front was roughly 500,000 (I do have some exact figures) at the end of 1942 (including not only Luftwaffe soldiers of all kinds, but also suppoorting Org. Todt and RAD personnel, as well as Luftwaffe field division soldiers (which are already counted in most army personnel strength reports, so they would be doubly counted).

Until the end of 1943, due to unit and personnel shifts (Reich defence against strategic bombing had to be strengthend, also due to retreats, less new air fields and communications lines were needed) and formal inclusion of Luftwaffe filed divisions into the army strength dropped to roughly 300,000, and less in 1944. For comparison, Luftflotte Reich personel strength increased to over a million.

BTW, not all Soviet air force personnel is always included in Soviet strength figures. For the example of the battle of Kursk, there were units of the strategic air defence and bomber force in the area, which were not subordinated to the fronts and are not included in front strength figures.

BTW 2, the mentioned Zetterling book has tables with SP guns included. And if you include them as AFVs, then you have to subtract them from Pak/artillery strength figures.
Michate
Contributor
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:29 am

Re: kursk

Postby paul_atrydes » Sun Aug 08, 2010 1:22 am

Michate wrote:BTW, not all Soviet air force personnel is always included in Soviet strength figures. For the example of the battle of Kursk, there were units of the strategic air defence and bomber force in the area,
There were no any units from VVS of PVO (air defence) in the area of battle.
which were not subordinated to the fronts and are not included in front strength figures.
Units of ADD (aviation of long-range action) are reserves of Stavka.
BTW 2, the mentioned Zetterling book has tables with SP guns included. And if you include them as AFVs, then you have to subtract them from Pak/artillery strength figures.
SP guns are obviously AFV and their account among artillery is forgery.
paul_atrydes
Member
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:22 am

Re: kursk

Postby ljadw » Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:22 am

if SPG were AFV,they would be called AFV:the German term is :sturmgeschuetze (geschuetze being artillery).
ljadw
Supporter
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:46 pm

Re: kursk

Postby Michate » Sun Aug 08, 2010 11:40 pm

There were no any units from VVS of PVO (air defence) in the area of battle.


May be, but aircraft of neighbouring fronts took part in the battle as well.

Units of ADD (aviation of long-range action) are reserves of Stavka.


Exactly. And as such, not included in the fronts' strength figures.

SP guns are obviously AFV and their account among artillery is forgery.


Poppycock, SP guns are SP guns with clearly defined roles much different from either tanks or assault guns. Hummel and Wespe SP guns e.g. were indirect firing artillery. To lump them together with tanks is pretty meaningless.

Soviets had the strange habit to lump all different kinds of tracked vehicles together, Germans had different reporting practice, taking a closer look at actual combat functions. While it makes the tasks for historians a little bit harder at times, it creates no forgery.
Michate
Contributor
 
Posts: 203
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:29 am

Re: kursk

Postby nebelwerferXXX » Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:24 am

nebelwerferXXX wrote:The largest concentration of armor given to a German general.
4th Panzer Army (Hoth)
3rd Pz Div
Gross Deutschland Div
11th Pz Div
SS Liebstandarte Adolf Hitler
SS Das Reich
SS Totenkopf
6th Pz Div
19th Pz Div
7th Pz Div

1,000 tanks
350 assault guns


The Gross Deutschland Division, there were four tank battalions, of which one was equipped with Tigers, and six infantry battalions.

source:
Tanks in Battle
nebelwerferXXX
 

Re: kursk

Postby nebelwerferXXX » Fri Aug 13, 2010 2:23 am

PANZERKEIL: German Army Group South ZITADELLE offensive
The tanks would advance in a succession of wedges, with the Tigers in front at the tip, and the Panthers and PzKw IVs fanned out to their rear. Behind these would be lightly armed infantry with automatic weapons and grenades, and at the base of the wedge heavier forces with mortars in armored personnel carriers.

Since 5th July the Army has destroyed 1,032 enemy tanks...'
nebelwerferXXX
 

Re: kursk

Postby Jerry » Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:46 am

nebelwerferXXX wrote:The largest concentration of armor given to a German general.
4th Panzer Army (Hoth)
3rd Pz Div
Gross Deutschland Div
11th Pz Div
SS Liebstandarte Adolf Hitler
SS Das Reich
SS Totenkopf
6th Pz Div
19th Pz Div
7th Pz Div

1,000 tanks
350 assault guns


6th Pz Div, 19th Pz Div, and 7th Pz Div were not part of 4th Panzer Armee at Kursk....FWIW.

Jerry
When you're in command..... command!
User avatar
Jerry
Associate
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 4:48 am
Location: USA

Re: kursk

Postby nebelwerferXXX » Sun Aug 15, 2010 6:49 pm

Jerry wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The largest concentration of armor given to a German general.
4th Panzer Army (Hoth)
XLVIII Panzer Corps (von Knobelsdorff)
3rd Pz Div
Gross Deutschland Div
11th Pz Div
SS Panzer Corps (Hausser)
SS Liebstandarte Adolf Hitler
SS Das Reich
SS Totenkopf

Army Detachment 'Kempf'
6th Pz Div
19th Pz Div
7th Pz Div

1,000 tanks (including Tigers & Panthers)
350 assault guns


6th Pz Div, 19th Pz Div, and 7th Pz Div were not part of 4th Panzer Armee at Kursk....FWIW.

Jerry


The 6th, 19th & 7th Panzer Divisions belonged to Army Detachment 'Kempf'...
nebelwerferXXX
 

Re: kursk

Postby Jerry » Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:27 am

nebelwerferXXX wrote:
Jerry wrote:
nebelwerferXXX wrote:The largest concentration of armor given to a German general.
4th Panzer Army (Hoth)
XLVIII Panzer Corps (von Knobelsdorff)
3rd Pz Div
Gross Deutschland Div
11th Pz Div
SS Panzer Corps (Hausser)
SS Liebstandarte Adolf Hitler
SS Das Reich
SS Totenkopf
6th Pz Div
19th Pz Div
7th Pz Div

1,000 tanks (including Tigers & Panthers)
350 assault guns


6th Pz Div, 19th Pz Div, and 7th Pz Div were not part of 4th Panzer Armee at Kursk....FWIW.

Jerry


The 6th, 19th & 7th Panzer Divisions belonged to Army Detachment 'Kempf'...


Right, and Army Detachment Kempf was not part of 4th PzAOK.
When you're in command..... command!
User avatar
Jerry
Associate
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 4:48 am
Location: USA

Re: kursk

Postby nebelwerferXXX » Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:19 am

The Two x 2,500-ton 800-mm 'super guns', One x 1,500-ton 'land monitor' and Six x 140-ton 'super heavy tanks' makes a big difference in the Battle of Kursk. Converting the steel used would make more tanks---100 Panzer IV tanks---25 Tiger tanks---50 Panther tanks.
nebelwerferXXX
 

PreviousNext

Return to Campaigns and Battles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests