Russian losses at Kursk

[Alex262]

Hello


Anyone has information about the personnel and material losses at the Battle of Kursk. So far I had read over 2500 tanks and assult guns, but my source is somewhat innacurate.

Thanks for any infor!

Cheers!

[Abwehr]

2500 is probably much too high. I would recommend reading Nipe's "Decision in the Ukraine" for a good in depth study of tank losses at Kursk, although the book primarilly concerns Prochorovka and not the entirety of the campaign.

I don't have it on hand, so I can't help more than that. Sorry.

[pak40]

some may disagree with me BUT, i wish that the losses would have been more catastrophic. But I can only now dream.

Chris

[Timo]

Why would one wish for more Russian casualties? Yet another SS/NS supporter?

[Abwehr]

some may disagree with me BUT, i wish that the losses would have been more catastrophic. But I can only now dream.

Chris

Why would you wish that more people had died?

[Alex262]

some may disagree with me BUT, i wish that the losses would have been more catastrophic. But I can only now dream.

Chris

Anotherone that thinks war is a video game, where peope dead are only valued as points rather than people...many of which innocent who were cut in the middle.

I only wish the germans had won the battle because it was against their odds. Playing computer games I like to "play" against the odds and I like the german side because I like the military stuff. But when it comes down to the real thing, I can only feel relief they lost the battle and ended the madness.

[heinz kling]

Why would one wish for more Russian casualties? Yet another SS/NS supporter?

The only good commie is a dead commie.

[Abwehr]

To say that all Russians are communists is no different than saying that all Germans are Nazis.

[pak40]

looky here! people who think communism was a decent way of life, or maybe never knew the effects of Stalinism.

that is the only reason i would ever cheer the Wehrmacht! too many people i know were victims of his brutal dictatorship and the gulags. i do not hate Russians, I hate Communists and those who support or who would fight for them.

i only like the Wehrmacht because they had better looking stuff. Hitler was a maniac, not as bad as Stalin or his toady Beria. the Germans at least made it difficult for Stalin and the other commies to get the rest of Europe later.

AND, I'd like to see someone defend Beria.

in conclusion, sorry about the way i made my post, the Soviet Army to me is still one of the most disgraceful militaries of all time. And their leaders were worse.

Chris

[Timo]

looky here! people who think communism was a decent way of life, or maybe never knew the effects of Stalinism.

...Who said it was a decent way of life? The discussion is not about the effect of the regime on common people, it's about Russian losses at Kursk.

that is the only reason i would ever cheer the Wehrmacht! too many people i know were victims of his brutal dictatorship and the gulags. i do not hate Russians, I hate Communists and those who support or who would fight for them.

...That's very sad for those victims you know, but still you make a basic mistake: cheering for the military forces of one evil regime just because you dislike the other.

i only like the Wehrmacht because they had better looking stuff. Hitler was a maniac, not as bad as Stalin or his toady Beria. the Germans at least made it difficult for Stalin and the other commies to get the rest of Europe later.

Thus you cheer for a regime that is responsible for the Holocaust and tens of millions of other deads? Because you dislike Stalin and Beria? Because the Wehrmacht had "better looking stuff"? I know Stalin made more victims, especially among his own countrymen, but still we're dealing with two equally evil regimes here. The grass wasn't any greener on the german side of the hill. The other way around Harro Schulze-Boysen made the same mistake when he choose to support the Soviets because he wanted to fight Nazism.

AND, I'd like to see someone defend Beria.

...Why? It's the SS/Waffen-SS forum

in conclusion, sorry about the way i made my post, the Soviet Army to me is still one of the most disgraceful militaries of all time. And their leaders were worse.

The war in the east was a dirty war with disgraceful behaviour from both sides, Germans and Russians. And as "Abwehr" pointed out: not every Russian was a communist, just like not every German was a nazi. If their military leaders were worse is definitely open for discussion (differences in military doctrine, tactics, equipment, etc.) but that's another topic for another forum.

[Vinnie O]

For those interested in the raw numbers for Kursk, you can simply download enough data to choke a horse from --


http://www.vy75.dial.pipex.com/data.htm


The data files were intended for dBASE IV, but work just fine in Excel or Access.

These data were very carefully assembled using the best German and Russian information available in 1995. There is no longer any reason to argue about it.

This data was used to produce "Kursk 1943: a Statistical Analysis" by Niklas Zetterling, which may still be in print. I have this book. It replaces all previous accounts of the battle, unless you like reading about individual tank drivers.

Making sense of the raw data is not simple, although absolute numbers are easy to get. For example, the Germans lost exactly 59 Pzkw-III and 72 Pzkw-IV.

But since data on repairs and replacements are also included, German (or Russian) strength in a given unit on a given day is a matter of very fancy computation.

If you have any interest in Dupuy, QJM, or the analysis of combat, you should download the files and get of copy of Zetterling's book.

[Das Tot]

Please, if you know, tell me where one could download video clips (in all formats) of all these? Thank you

[Frederick L Clemens]

Making sense of the raw data is not simple, although absolute numbers are easy to get. For example, the Germans lost exactly 59 Pzkw-III and 72 Pzkw-IV.

But since data on repairs and replacements are also included, German (or Russian) strength in a given unit on a given day is a matter of very fancy computation.

If you have any interest in Dupuy, QJM, or the analysis of combat, you should download the files and get of copy of Zetterling's book.

Good points, Vinnie. And after all, even if one does have perfect numbers on losses, it still doesn't tell you who won or lost, it's just one factor in the bigger equation, just like territorial/population/resource/industrial capacity gain, domestic/international perception, etc.

I assume you are aware of Chris Lawrence's (Dupuy Institute) upcoming book on Kursk? I believe he will have the best statistical info as well a good narrative description. I look forward to seeing his manuscript or book in the not too distant future.

[militaryhistorywriter]

Dear Gentlemen,
You can get a copy of The Battle Of Kursk by David M. Glantz & Jonathan M. House and their figures are extremely reliable and accurate. May God Bless-Major Robert A. Lynn, USMCR

[Frederick L Clemens]

Extremely reliable and accurate? What's your basis for making that claim? Have you verified their numbers with primary sources? Glantz & House did not, they used Soviet secondary sources which tended to be politicized. And I can tell you that there are some strange errors in the information on the German forces. So, although the book is better than previous books, it is not better than Zetterling and it is not the last word.