Elefant in Kursk

[Darrin]

And just where do you get these percentages from? I wasn't aware of any documented comparison between German claims and actual Soviet losses- is there one?

Nicklus Zetterling discusses this in his Kursk 43 book.

[Matt L]

Why? Obviously the hole in the armor was damage , but the statement means internal damage- something that required more than just a patch...

[Matt L]

Nicklus Zetterling discusses this in his Kursk 43 book.

Ah- don't have that one but I'm curious to read it and learn on what he bases the statements. I wouldn't have thought it easy at all to get accurate Soviet loss records...

Can you give me page numbers so I can find the quote?

[Darrin]

Nicklus Zetterling discusses this in his Kursk 43 book.

Ah- don't have that one but I'm curious to read it and learn on what he bases the statements. I wouldn't have thought it easy at all to get accurate Soviet loss records...

Can you give me page numbers so I can find the quote?

He primariarly uses kiroshev and other published rus TANK des data from all causes data to base his rus numbers on. Then adds up all the ger claims from ALL units to compare it with.

In fact if the ger claim reduced numbers are a good indicator during july and aug the rus lost over 9000 tanks des on the entire front. The ger reported less than 1600 tanks during the same 2 month period on the EF. That means for each ger tank des OVER 5.6 rus tanks were des on avg for july and aug.

The ger army actually did better than avg for the last 6 months or the year as a whole. A higher destrction liklyhood is certainly evident for the rus during the summer. This may explain some of the uneven numbers we see in frendand des and number of rus claims as des.

See p. 126.

[Matt L]

Thanks Darrin. I don't know how much I trust published Soviet data- there's always been what's reported and what's the truth. I'd trust actual primary sources more- unit loss reports and the like. It's easy to simply quote someone else, but all too often mistakes are just perpetuated- look at the whole bow MG on the Ferdinand issue- for a long time it was said that the Ferdinand was a spectacular failure in Zitadelle and it was largely due to the lack of a bow MG; that's simply not the case if primary sources are examined... and as I said earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if it was the published Soviet reports of so many being knocked-out by infantry with Molotov Cocktails that is the source of the myth. Published Soviet data are questionable at best.

[Darrin]

Ah, okay- well one of the reports I quoted mentions vehicle transfers to units other than sPzJägAbt 653 and 654- perhaps that's where they went. I kind of figure that the total losses are most important anyway- if there's no mention of these vehicles being lost, they can be assumed to have still been on strength somewhere.

As far as I know the elephants were only in the two jag bats and the reg HQ. I know of no other units that were assigned elephants of any type. With a max of 89 by the 1st of jul and no more made thier was not enough tanks to fill more bats. In fact with just 50 tanks left in total by the end of july the bats did not have enough as it is.

It may be the missing 4 elephants were not des or even reasigned to other units. They may of ended up being sent back to the interior or factories for major repair. Such tanks would permanently be removed from the units and reissued to whatever appropriate unit needed them when ready.

[Darrin]

Thanks Darrin. I don't know how much I trust published Soviet data- there's always been what's reported and what's the truth. I'd trust actual primary sources more- unit loss reports and the like. It's easy to simply quote someone else, but all too often mistakes are just perpetuated- look at the whole bow MG on the Ferdinand issue- for a long time it was said that the Ferdinand was a spectacular failure in Zitadelle and it was largely due to the lack of a bow MG; that's simply not the case if primary sources are examined... and as I said earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if it was the published Soviet reports of so many being knocked-out by infantry with Molotov Cocktails that is the source of the myth. Published Soviet data are questionable at best.

Well the tanks did not traval alone. They were escorted by inf that even if you managed to surpress the movment could still reach out to 1000m and kill you with thier MGs. Not to mention calling in arty fire on the tanks if they were truly isolated from thier own inf and under rus att. Then the tanks did not stray very far from each other allowing tanks to blow dangerous inf off with thier own HE guns. Not a very eff use of elephants but one the rus inf would be quiet scared off.

I agree with you the MG in the elephant seems to be a small part of the problem. The panther had a MG yet it still had huge des rates as well. Both of these tanks were first deployed at this time. And both suffered from much higher losses than any other ger tank. The panther was not a huge failure because it missed a MG. Therfore the MG was a small part of the whole issue with the elphants failure.

It seems inital design flaws were the culprit in both combined with inadequate training and employment. The MG if it played a part at all in the elephants demise at kursk was minmal.

[Matt L]

As far as I know the elephants were only in the two jag bats and the reg HQ. I know of no other units that were assigned elephants of any type.

Yeah, that's what I thought to, but I was sure I read something about a small number being transferred to another unit- other than 653 or 654- but of course, I can't find it now Maybe I imagined it

And I agree with your last post completely. In trying- in vain it seems- to find what I thought I'd read, I went over all the technical reports and such and it seems that there were quite a few spontaneous engine fires, and dozens of other faults found to be strongly contributing to the poor serviceable rate of the Ferdinand at first. It was a veritable plague of problems, and what's more frustrating, from the German perspective, is that once these were worked-out - the Elefant was a very effective tank-killer. Had more time been available to work out the little problems, it might have fared far better in it's first actions.

I think it's fair to say that it's multitude of sometimes very small design flaws that contributed greatly to the less-than-excellent performance of the Ferdinand in Russia.

As ridiculous as it sounds, lack of spare parts seems to have played a not insignificant role too. The nature of the battles- many defense lines deep, months to prepare, etc.- lead to an unbelievably high rate of tanks being damaged and put out of action- not total losses for the most part. This put an incredible strain on the repair sections and it's not hard to imagine that after a short time and being damaged again and again, vehicles would simply become irrepairable. This is something I wouldn't necessarily say is the fault of the machine. I'll have to really look at other battles during Zitadelle, but right now it sure sounds as if the mines and massed artillery were particularly problematic where sPzJägRgt 656 operated. I can't immediately recall having read of such a rate of vehicles hitting mines anywhere else.

You know, I'm really glad that this question was asked- I've learned a lot researching it!

[Darrin]

Finally, there is a report on p. 63 that states:

"The total amount of enemy equipment destroyed by the entire Panzerjäger Regiment [656] from 5. July 1943 to 5. November 1943 consists of: 582 tanks, 344 anti-tank guns, 133 cannon, 103 anti-tank rifles, 3 aircraft, 3 armored cars and 3 assault guns" and "654 tanks and 610 guns by 29.11.1943"

and "Ferdinand Situation for sPzJägAbt 653 and 654 (period 30.6.1943 to 30.11.1943):

5-14.7.1943- sPzJägRgt 656 (both sPzJägAbt 653 and 654) 19 total losses
29.7.1943- sPzJägAbt 653 13 total losses reported
29.7.1943- sPzJägAbt 653 26 total losses reported
20.11.1943 - sPzJägAbt 653 4 further total losses reported

Total Ferdinande lost during Zitadelle: 19; total lost by 20.11.1943: 62. Kill:Loss ratio: 10.55:1

I suspect the losses reported for 29.7.1943 could have been those vehicles lost and left behind during the withdrawl from Orel, not that there were that many destroyed in action on this day, as there are no losses reported for any day between 14.7.1943 and 29.7.1943 or 29.7.1943 and 20.11.1943.

Matt

Matt

Can I ask two things about the above info. Is the the third line with 26 reported des the 654 bat. Otherwise the 654 bat is not specific listed.

Secondly are the total tanks des by the 29th of july equal to 58 tanks. This certainly is different to the number of elephants des I saw in zetterling book. He list just 39 des during the entire month of july in total.

[The Phonebook]

Sorry to but in, but, I'm a newbie and don't know where to start...

The Elephant was a diaster. It had no machine-gun, so, it was easy to kill among Soviet troops. They got up along the hull and threw stachel charges and flame-throwered the hatches, causing mass casualties among the crews. Then, afterwards, the survivors withdrew to Italy, where they were used as long-range artillery.

It was re-designed, and served in the Western Front for the duration of the war.

[Sebastian Pye]

Phonebook, you could start by reading the previous posts on the topic, then you would know it wasnt such a disaster as its commonly portrayed.
Btw long-range artillery? I thought they continued to be used primarily as tankdestroyers.

[The Phonebook]

In the Italian boot, since it was hard for tanks to operate in such mountainous conditions, the gun of the Elefant was used as self-propelled artillery.

[The__Transporter]

to the phonebook,
if you are going to give out facts on the subject please make sure u adress the right tank, the ferdinand did not have a hull mounted mg, but the elefant did,...

Cheers

[Christian Ankerstjerne]

There was no difference between the Ferdinand and the Elefant - it was merely two different names for the same vehicle.

[greenhorn]

Ferdinand returned to Nibelungenwerkes for a refit: as below.

Apart from the hull mounted MG, commander's cupola, zimmerit paint....