THE EASTERN-PRUSSIAN OPERATION, 1945

[Igorn]

Guys,

I am working on the Eastern-Prussian operation of 1945 and would be interested if someone could recommend me some Western sources about this operation.

Eastern Prussia had a most powerful defense system, including concrete fortifications. The Heilsberg reinforced area alone had over 900 long-term defense structures, covered with anti-tank trenches. The German grouping numbered up to 45 divisions with 580 thousand soldiers and officers, 8,200 cannons and mortars, some 700 tanks and assault guns. The defense of East Prussia involved 200 thousand Volkssturm members. Ground troops were supported by 775 aircrafts. By the beginning of the offensive the Soviet troops had 1,669 thousand men, 25,426 guns and mortars, 3,859 tanks and self-propelled artillery installations, and 3,097 war aircraft.
On January 13, the Soviet troops launched an offensive. A thick and dense fog hung over the battlefield. Using the fog as a cover, the enemy let the infantry and tanks come close, then opened fire and started a counterstroke. This hampered the advance, but the Soviet offensive grew increasingly stronger.
On January 21, the Soviet troops liberated Gumbinnen, and on the following day Insterburg. The enemy put up stubborn resistance and it took many hours of fierce fighting to seize Gumbinnen. The defeat of the enemy near Insterburg opened the road to Konigsberg and forced the Germans to retreat from the area of the Masurian Lakes. The Soviet Army began to pursue the enemy.
On February 10, Soviet troops began to liquidate the enemy grouping, pressed against the gulf to the southwest of Konigsberg. During these days extraordinary energy and courage were displayed by the 38-year-old Commander of the Front General I. Chernyakhovsky.
On February 18, General Chernyakhovsky received a fatal wound on the battlefield near Malsak. The General was buried in Vilnius.
On March 29, the enemy grouping located southwest of Konigsburg ceased to exist. It took 48 days to crush the grouping. Only a small part of the enemy units managed to cross the gulf and reach the bay bar, Frische-Nherung.
On April 6, , the Soviet troops began the storming of Konigsburg.
On April 9, the Germans defending Konigsburg surrendered.
On April 13-25 the remainder of the Eastern-Prussian German grouping concentrated on the Zemland peninsula was crushed by Soviet troops. The ground troops were backed by Baltic Fleet aircraft, war ships and submarines. During the East-Prussian operation more than 25 German divisions were destroyed, 12 divisions lost from 50 to 75 percent of their personnel. The Soviet Army took over the whole of East Prussia and liberated a large part of Poland's northern regions.

East Prussian Operation, 1945.
630 000 German troops killed or captured (this number includes members of the Wehrmacht, Waffen SS, Volkssturm, and the various police formations). (http://wolnapolska.boom.ru/index-cc.html)

Best Regards from Russia,

[Taifun]

Couple of good backgound sources...a book by Christopher Duffy and a book also titled "Hitler's Last Bastion". Schiffer publishing has a couple of good books on the subject.

[Gebirgsjaeger]

East Prussian Operation, 1945.
630 000 German troops killed or captured (this number includes members of the Wehrmacht, Waffen SS, Volkssturm, and the various police formations). (http://wolnapolska.boom.ru/index-cc.html)

Igorn,

keep in mind that the Soviets often took everyone prisoner who was wearing an uniform like train personnel (Reichsbahn), hitleryouth, woodcutters, fire-fighters and so on. Surely you´ll deny this because that doesn´t fit your view of the oh-so glorious red hordes.

[donwhite]

Christopher Duffy's book is called 'Red Storm on the Reich' and contains a good general narration of the events occuring. The only other sources that occur to me is John Erickson's 'Road to Berlin' which possibly is stronger on its Soviet Sources rather then Western and also David Glantz's privately published commentary on the symposium (1985?) on the Soviet Offensive drive from the Vitsula to the Oder which Duffy in his work calls a master piece of scholarship.
Just a comment of the fortifications in the 'Heilsburg Triangle' which occurs to me after reading Erhard Raus's observations in a book subtitled 'German defense measures on the eastern front' (I don't the exact or main title-I will check it out when I get home).
Although the area was heavily fortified, those fortifications were in some cases in a unprepared or unready state similiar to the situation that occured with the 'West Wall/Siegfired Line' where years of neglect led to many pill boxes having no heavy weapons fitted or having apertures that were insufficient for the fitting of more modern weapon pieces. The exact observation from Raus was referring to the ridiculous situation where keys could not be obtained to unlock a series of pillbox defenses that had laid dormant for some time but were now urgently needed for the defense.

Cheers

[Igorn]

Downwhite,

Thanks for the information. Can you send me a link where one can order these books over the web?

Best Regards from Russia,

[Qvist]

1. The Soviet strength figures appear accurate. The Soviet losses amounted to 584,778 or a daily average of 5,677. The Red Army also lost 3525 tanks, according to Krivosheev.

2. I would treat the German casualty figure given here with extreme scepticism. There is almost certainly no really reliable German documentation for the losses in this operation, so it is certain to be a Soviet estimate, and I have yet to see a published Soviet estimate of German "killed and captured" that is anything close to reality.

As in so many other similar cases, these figures are invalidated by their basic lack of correlation with the German strength. If there were more than 600,000 German killed and captured, It is hard to see how the German losses could have been much less than a million when wounded are taken into account, and this figure alone is equal to more than half the total strength of the Ostheer in early 1945. Simulataneous with the East Prussian operation going on, the Red Army was employing well above 2 million men in the Vistula-Oder operation, about 1 million in the East Pomeranian offensive operation, some 600,000 men in Western Carpathian offensive operation and about 750,000 men in the Vienna offensive operation - how likely do you think it is that about half the Germans in the field at the time became casualties just in the East Prussian operation?

cheers

[Igorn]

Qvist,

First of all the German casualties figures stated on the http://wolnapolska.boom.ru/index-cc.html are not Russian estimate. Second point, this figure includes not only Wehrmacht casualties but also losses of Waffen SS, Volksturm and the various police formations. The third point is that the much vaunted Konigsberg strong-hold fell in three days and its garrison surrendered. And the hard fact is that the Russian Army annihilated and defeated twenty five! (25) German divisions in the Eastern-Prussian operation and achieved a brilliant win in this important battle.

Best Regards from Russia,

[Qvist]

First of all the German casualties figures stated on the http://wolnapolska.boom.ru/index-cc.html are not Russian estimate.

No? How do you know? What is it based on then? As far as I can see, there's no reference in the link you provide. And since the German reporting system had largely broken down by the time the East Prussian operation ended, what else could it be based on? And the "killed and captured" formula is a giveaway in itself, this is a mode of counting that never turns up in any German documentation, but is a mainstay of published Soviet estimates.

Second point, this figure includes not only Wehrmacht casualties but also losses of Waffen SS, Volksturm and the various police formations.

Yes, I know. But "various police formations" are not likely to have been very numerous, and W-SS strength is also included in the strength of the Ostheer.

The third point is that the much vaunted Konigsberg strong-hold fell in three days and its garrison surrendered. And the hard fact is that the Russian Army annihilated and defeated twenty five! (25) German divisions in the Eastern-Prussian operation and achieved a brilliant win in this important battle.

Well, what is the relevance of this judgment with regard to the points I raised? More generally, are you interested in finding neat illustrations to your conviction of how fantastic the Red Army was, or are you interested in trying to acquire an accurate view of what actually happened? If the latter, then you might want to consider that the Red Army employed for this operation forces who were almost as strong as the whole German Army in the East, and lost during the course of it a number of tanks that exceeds the total available to the whole Ostheer at this point. Certainly, the East Prussian offensive was a big success that contributed heavily to the very high German losses in 1945, but it was also a victory that was purchased at a heavy cost and the general relation of forces prevailing at this time and the general state of the German army did not really make any other outcome even vaguely possible. To count German divisions at this stage of the war, when most divisions were largely empty shells, is basically an exercise in futility. The long and the short of it is that the Red Army drove another nail into the coffin of the Wehrmacht, at a heavy cost and with the benefit of a crushing superiority of forces. I don't se why this would be considered a shame by anybody, or why there is a need to pretend that this was some supernatural achievement rather than the usual, real-life, hard-won gain due to predictable factors. And less still why it has to be illustrated by casualty figures that are plainly of a sort there is no reason to attach credibility to.

cheers

[Howard]

Privyet Igorn,

as already mentioned I'd unreservedly recommend Duffy's book. If you speak or at least read German there are two books which I'm currently reading: Der Kampf um Ostpreussen and So fiel Königsberg.

The second one is written by the general in command of Festung Königsberg and is very interesting. If you need some more details just let me know.

[Igorn]

Hi Howard,

Thank you for information. Can you send me a link to the website where is Duffy's book can be purchased on line.

Best Regards from Russia,

[Igorn]

And since the German reporting system had largely broken down by the time the East Prussian operation ended, what else could it be based on? And the "killed and captured" formula is a giveaway in itself, this is a mode of counting that never turns up in any German documentation, but is a mainstay of published Soviet estimates.

Don't look for execuses. The hard fact is that the German grouping in the East Prussia was completely defeated and annihilated. And point you are trying to make here that German reporting system was broken down by that time is not a serious argument to deny heavy German casualties in this battle.

Yes, I know. But "various police formations" are not likely to have been very numerous, and W-SS strength is also included in the strength of the Ostheer.

Qvist, for your information, only Volksturm formations in the Eastern-Prussian operation had 200 thousand people and as you guess those formations were defeated in East Prussia by the Russian Army. Of course, German statistic does not include Volksturm casualties in the list of German losses. The same goes for police formations and Algemaine SS.

Best Regards from Russia,

[Qvist]

OK, taking a deep breath and maintaining my patience....

Don't look for execuses. The hard fact is that the German grouping in the East Prussia was completely defeated and annihilated. And point you are trying to make here that German reporting system was broken down by that time is not a serious argument to deny heavy German casualties in this battle.

Excuses for what? The point under discussion here is the German casualty figure during the EP operation. But possibly you're not particularly interested in problematising an inherently difficult issue as long as you have a figure you can call "heavy". And where did I write that German casualties in EP were not heavy? Of course they were heavy!

What's you logic here? You have a figure you have seen somewhere of whose origin you have no clue, which does not correlate well with what other data we do have, and of which there is every reason to be sceptical. This is my point. Yours seem to be that the figure is trustworthy, despite the fact that you do not know anything about its origin or basis.

Qvist, for your information, only Volksturm formations in the Eastern-Prussian operation had 200 thousand people and as you guess those formations were defeated in East Prussia by the Russian Army. Of course, German statistic does not include Volksturm casualties in the list of German losses. The same goes for police formations and Algemaine SS.

200,000 Volkssturm; source? The problem with German statistics in this case is more that there probably aren't any that can give a viable picture of losses, regardless of what is included or not. Police formations and Allegemeine SS is a practically irrelevant element in this connection, numerically speaking, I would think.

[Igorn]

What's you logic here? You have a figure you have seen somewhere of whose origin you have no clue, which does not correlate well with what other data we do have, and of which there is every reason to be sceptical. This is my point. Yours seem to be that the figure is trustworthy, despite the fact that you do not know anything about its origin or basis.

Qvist, report to you that my figures are based on the below listed sources:

Muller-Hillebrand, B. Das Heer 1939-1945, Vol. 3, Table 55.
Kriegstagebuch des OKH, Vol. 4, pg. 858. Bernard und Graefe Verlag fur Wehrwesen, Frankfurt am Main.
Lange, W. Korpsabteilung C, pg. 115-116. Vowinckel, Neckargemund, 1961.

200,000 Volkssturm; source?

Muller-Hillebrand, B. Das Heer 1939-1945, Vol. 3, Table 55.
Kriegstagebuch des OKH, Vol. 4, pg. 858. Bernard und Graefe Verlag fur Wehrwesen, Frankfurt am Main.
Lange, W. Korpsabteilung C, pg. 115-116. Vowinckel, Neckargemund, 1961.

Best Regards from Russia,

[Howard]

Hi Igor,

try this link to the UK version of Amazon. I guess they deliver to Russia....


/www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/03068 ... 87-1335861

[Qvist]

Qvist, report to you that my figures are based on the below listed sources:

Muller-Hillebrand, B. Das Heer 1939-1945, Vol. 3, Table 55.
Kriegstagebuch des OKH, Vol. 4, pg. 858. Bernard und Graefe Verlag fur Wehrwesen, Frankfurt am Main.
Lange, W. Korpsabteilung C, pg. 115-116. Vowinckel, Neckargemund, 1961.

No, they are not, as you will see if you take another look at your own link. This states the following:

^ - Muller-Hillebrand, B. Das Heer 1939-1945, Vol. 3, Table 55.

^^ - Kriegstagebuch des OKH, Vol. 4, pg. 858. Bernard und Graefe Verlag fur Wehrwesen, Frankfurt am Main.

^^^ - Lange, W. Korpsabteilung C, pg. 115-116. Vowinckel, Neckargemund, 1961.

The markings before each of them is what identifies which figure each work has been used as a reference for. Müller-Hildebrand has been used for the German July-October 43 figure, KTB OKW has been used for the Brody Pocket losses and Lange has been used for the Bagration figure. None of them have been used for the EP figure.

That figure, like most of the others, is marked ~, which does not correspond to any of the works listed at the bottom of the page (and may of course also mean simply "approximately"). This leaves only one possible source among those listed, namely:

Encyklopedia Drugiej Wojny Swiatowej, Wydawnictwo MON, Warszawa, 1975.

A Polish encyclopedia published in 1975. Where do you think the figures in that encyclopedia are likely to originate? :)

cheers