709 infanterie division Gliederung in 1944

German unit histories, lineages, OoBs, ToEs, commanders, fieldpost numbers, organization, etc.

Moderator: Tom Houlihan

Post Reply
Eduard
Supporter
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

709 infanterie division Gliederung in 1944

Post by Eduard »

Does anybody have the gliederung of the 79 infanterie division in 1944. I'm specially interested in its AT abt.

Thanks

Eduard
User avatar
Dackel Staffel
Associate
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:04 pm

Post by Dackel Staffel »

Hi,

Just for a beginning in your search for the 79 Infanterie Division.

Commander : General leutenant Friedrich Weinknecht oct 1943- aug 1944
Composition :
Infanterie Regiment 208
Infanterie Regiment 212
Infanterie Regiment 226
Artillerie Regiment 179
Panzerjager Abteilung 179
Pionier Bataillon 179
Aufklarung Abteilung 179

So long.
Last edited by Dackel Staffel on Tue Jan 27, 2004 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All we need it's a Dackel in each pocket
User avatar
Dackel Staffel
Associate
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:04 pm

Post by Dackel Staffel »

Hi,

Just for a beginning in your search for the 709 Infanterie Division.

Commander : General leutenant Karl Wilhelm von Schliedben dec 1943- aug 1944
Composition :
(Fest) Grenadier Regiment 729
(Fest) Grenadier Regiment 739
Grenadier Regiment 919
Artillerie Regiment 1709 :?:
Panzerjager Abteilung 709
Pionier Bataillon 709
Nachr.Abt 709

So long.
All we need it's a Dackel in each pocket
User avatar
Dackel Staffel
Associate
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:04 pm

Post by Dackel Staffel »

Hi,

Don't know which one, the 79th or the 709th ? Fortunaly, there was no 790. Infanterie Division.

So Long
All we need it's a Dackel in each pocket
Eduard
Supporter
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

panzer abteilung composition

Post by Eduard »

Thanks boys,

I would like to know more detail about the Pzjag Abt.

Thanks
User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Post by Shadow »

Dackel Staffel wrote:Hi,

Don't know which one, the 79th or the 709th ? Fortunaly, there was no 790. Infanterie Division.

So Long
Hello EDUARD!

What my friend Dackel Staffel is getting at is that on your post heading you have the 709 INFANTRY DIVISION but in your question you have the 79 INFANTRY DIVISION!!!!!
WHICH ONE ARE YOU LOOKING FOR????

best regards -
Signed: "The Shadow"
User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Post by Shadow »

ANYWAY!

For information on the 179 Panzerjaeger Abteilung of 79th Inf.Div. see:

http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gli ... Abt179.htm

For information on the 709 Panzerjaeger Abteilung of 709th Inf.Div. see:

http://home.swipnet.se/normandy/gerob/infdiv/709id.html

Hope this is of some help!
Signed: "The Shadow"
Eduard
Supporter
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:08 am

709 Pzjag Abt composition

Post by Eduard »

Thanks gents,

What I'm looking for is the kind of selfpropelled AT guns that were used.
David Constable
Supporter
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:52 pm
Location: Redditch, England

Post by David Constable »

The following is all the information I have.

709.Inf.Div.(bo.)
Pz.Jg.Abt.709
1.(Sf.)Kp [nine 7,5cm (Sf.) Pak 40] [probably Marder I conversions]
2.(mot.Z)Kp [twelve 7,5cm Pak 40]
3.(Flak)(mot.Z)Kp [nine 3,7cm Flak]

79.Inf.Div.
No definate information before August 1944, however it was probably a standard German equipped unit.
August 1944
Issued 14 JgPz 38(t) Hetzer (PzJäg38(t)) für 7,5cm Pak39.

Regards David
User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Post by Shadow »

709th Inf.Div.:

“As it was organized on 1 May, the Panzerjaeger Abteilung had nine - 7.5 cm Pak 40 AT guns on tracked chassis. No deliveries of Marders have been found in the documents covering the period from May 1943 until D-Day. Either the SP AT guns were delivered before May 1943 or they are some kind of locally made conversion, possibly using captured French vehicles. The Panzerjaeger Abteilung also had twelve - 7.5 cm Pak 40 (mot Z) and nine 3.7 cm Flak guns (mot Z).”

7.5 cm PAK 40 Development started in 1939, entered service in late 1941, basically a scaled up PAK 38, remained as standard AT gun until the end of war

3.7 cm PAK 36 The standard AT gun of the Wehrmacht at the outbreak of War, and one of the best until 1941.
The 3.7 cm PAK 36 was a Rheinmetall produced towed anti-tank gun that was also used on a variety of self-propelled mounts. Production began in 1929 and initially had spoked wheels for horse traction in 1934 it appeared with steel wheels and pneumatic tyres for vehicle traction.
It could penetrate 38mm of armour at 350m (760 m/s) but against French, British and Russian medium tanks it had no chance! Later it was converted to fire a heavy shaped-charge bomb that was fitted over the muzzle of the gun and fired by a blank cartridge. At short ranges this was very devastating!
Many carriages were converted after 1941 to the dual purpose 75 mm infantry support/anti-tank gun.
Signed: "The Shadow"
David Constable
Supporter
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 12:52 pm
Location: Redditch, England

Issues

Post by David Constable »

Interesting about no issues.

I think if I had to place money on it I would go for Marder I. Most seem to have gone to France. I know that some ended up in Russia, but that was with a unit that had been in France.

Would issues show those that were simply transferred within France from one unit to another.

David
User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Re: Issues

Post by Shadow »

David Constable wrote:Interesting about no issues.
I think if I had to place money on it I would go for Marder I.
David
David:

I'm leaning towards that also......when 709th upgraded from Kp. to Abt. in Mar.-Apr. 1944.

But, hard to discount his sources:

6
Gliederung der 709. I.D., Stand 1.5.44, T312, R1566, F000217.

7
Lieferungen der Pz.Fahrzeuge Bd. ab Mai 1943, BA-MA RH 10/349.

:?
best -
Signed: "The Shadow"
Post Reply