Encirclement Battles of WWII

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#31

Post by Kelvin » 26 Jun 2013, 17:59

Art wrote:And here are Soviet data mentioned from the report submitted by Pokrovsky and Bagramyan on 2 October 1941:
Image
As of 1.09.1941 the complete personnel strength was:
5 Army - 93 412 men
21 Army - 106 831
26 Army - 85 456
37 Army - 113 718
Units subordinated to the Front HQ - 53 303
Total - 452 720
Losses in the first days of September would decrease those figures somewhat especially for the 5 and 21 Armies. Pay attention to a very small number of remaining tanks (64). In addition four railroad engineer brigades had some 12500 men on 1.09.1941. There were apparently some losses suffered by air force, SOS, replacement and construction units, patients in hospitals etc. of the South-West Fronts, yet the report makes no mention of them. The conclusion is that we have a bracket of total losses in the pocket from 450 (Pokrovsky) to 510 (KTB OKW) thousands men.

Hi, Art, some sources like wiki also includes 38th Army in the list of encirclement of Kiev, was 38th Army were also destroyed in this battle ? Or not included in battle of Kiev ?

And I rarely find any casualty list of Soviet commanders in battle of Kiev, In battle of Uman, I know 2 Army commanders, 4 Corps commanders and 11 divisional commanders were captured but regarding Kiev battle, hardly find that. ( What I know is Front commander was killed and commander of 5th Army was captured in Kiev.) Any data on that available ?

lhughes41
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: 01 Oct 2011, 20:09

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#32

Post by lhughes41 » 04 Nov 2013, 00:07

Interesting thread. For those who have studied encirclements could they occur in bad terrain like rough or forested or did mobile forces require clear? Tunisia, leningad listed above suggest they could be done in tougher terrain. Thoughts?


South
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: 06 Sep 2007, 10:01
Location: USA

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#33

Post by South » 04 Nov 2013, 11:40

Good morning IHughes41,

My thoughts are that the variables are much more numerous than the tough terrain.

Stillwell, Slim, Mao and Giap might define bad terrain from a different perspective than those in Europe.

Re Cherkassy, some quotes:

"Vehicles had to be dug out laboriously", "The slopes were steeper than could be presumed from looking at the map" "The river, below and above Lisyanka, was 30 to 50 feet [sic] wide, had a rapid current,.. several tanks attempted to drive across but the river was too deep."

Above quotes from pg 30, Historical Study, OPERATIONS OF ENCIRCLED FORCES, German Experiences In Russia, Department of the Army Pamphlet No. 20-234, 14 January 1952.

This booklet is obviously out of print however use of the US Library's "Inter Library Loan Service", typically available at public libraries (I still hope), although with a sharp fee hike as of last week. If you make a request at your local library, the booklet, frequently fitted with a hard cover, will arrive from places where there is an interest in this stuff. Examples I've experienced are eg Loan Dept,Library at Virginia Military Institute, Stanton, Virginia.

My personal opinion - again, my own personal opinion; not from the professional literature, is that I'd rather have better quality and dedicated leadership than a low-quality leadership's concerns over terrain and weather conditions.


Warm regards,

Bob

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 3348
Joined: 05 Jun 2003, 17:22
Location: USA

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#34

Post by Kingfish » 04 Nov 2013, 14:18

lhughes41 wrote:Interesting thread. For those who have studied encirclements could they occur in bad terrain like rough or forested or did mobile forces require clear? Tunisia, leningad listed above suggest they could be done in tougher terrain. Thoughts?
Encirclements can occur in all terrain types, and the type of terrain that benefits (or hinders) the encirclement can actually work in reverse once the trap is shut. The vast, open steppes of Russia allowed both sides to bag large number of enemy troops, but that vastness also allowed the defender to filter significant portions out of the cordon. Conversely, close terrain benefits the defender, but if his opponent can somehow get behind him he will only have to hold a few locations, such as a mountain pass or river crossing.
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

AJFFM
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 22 Mar 2013, 21:37

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#35

Post by AJFFM » 04 Nov 2013, 17:17

As the eastern front demonstrates the best terrain for encirclement operations is open terrain. Most of the major encirclements there happened in the Ukraine and North Caucasus steppe.

Usually the encircled party was stretched thin along an axis centered around point of strategic or operational importance and the attacking party uses armour for deep penetration (isn't there a better way to say it :) ) in weak spots probed before the attack. Once the break occurs sealing the penetration is hard if not impossible and the attacker usually sends motorised infantry on the heels of tanks or simply uses the tanks as transports as the Red army did.

In the larger encirclements bad terrain plays a role in that the best units are trapped in the bad section (usually wood\urban areas) while the flanks are in open terrain and guarded by weak troops.

AJFFM
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 22 Mar 2013, 21:37

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#36

Post by AJFFM » 25 Jan 2014, 21:17

Hello and sorry for not updating earlier

Front: Eastern

Campaign: Bagration

Battle: Vitebsk encirclement

Date: 22/6/44-30/6/44

Attacking Forces: 1st Baltic Front and 3rd Belorussian Front

Defending Forces: 3rd Pz Armee

Units encircled: LIII corps

Result: Total destruction of the LIII corps. Partial destruction of VI corps and XXVII corps (4th Armee).

This was the opening move of Bagration. Preparing for this for months, this was part of the Vitebsk-Orsha offensive, the Northern arm of the pincer move against AGC. 2 Guards armies, 1 Tank army, one Cavalry-Mechanised Group and 2 air armies. Although not the largest and most powerful parts of the fronts, both were facing weak German defenders defending an extended front with insufficient troops. The result was nonetheless spectacular and proved the maturity of Soviet operational art.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10054
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#37

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 05 Feb 2014, 23:19

AJFFM wrote:As the eastern front demonstrates the best terrain for encirclement operations is open terrain. Most of the major encirclements there happened in the Ukraine and North Caucasus steppe.

.......

In the larger encirclements bad terrain plays a role in that the best units are trapped in the bad section (usually wood\urban areas) while the flanks are in open terrain and guarded by weak troops.
The Axis army group trapped in Tunisia was not encircled in the common usage of the term, but I am wondering how that event can be described. The Anglo US forces did use their advantage with terrain - the sea, and their numbers in the air, to cut off supply and prevent withdrawl of the Axis air and ground forces in Africa. I this mere semantics, or is there a real difference between a group encircled only by ground force & a group which is trapped by a combination of different military forces?

Aber
Member
Posts: 1124
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 22:43

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#38

Post by Aber » 05 Feb 2014, 23:45

Arguably Tunisia after Operation Vulcan was an encirclement; IIRC the British armoured divisions who broke through encircled the divisions still facing 8th Army in the South. Granted the Germans had little to gain by fighting on as they could not escape by sea, but they collapsed and surrendered fairly quickly.

AJFFM
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 22 Mar 2013, 21:37

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#39

Post by AJFFM » 06 Feb 2014, 20:51

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
AJFFM wrote:As the eastern front demonstrates the best terrain for encirclement operations is open terrain. Most of the major encirclements there happened in the Ukraine and North Caucasus steppe.

.......

In the larger encirclements bad terrain plays a role in that the best units are trapped in the bad section (usually wood\urban areas) while the flanks are in open terrain and guarded by weak troops.
The Axis army group trapped in Tunisia was not encircled in the common usage of the term, but I am wondering how that event can be described. The Anglo US forces did use their advantage with terrain - the sea, and their numbers in the air, to cut off supply and prevent withdrawl of the Axis air and ground forces in Africa. I this mere semantics, or is there a real difference between a group encircled only by ground force & a group which is trapped by a combination of different military forces?
While that is true I think the fact that the allies had full air-sea control denying German retreat makes it as close to an encirclement as possible. Another feature of encirclement, denying manoeuvrability in space and time, exists in this case.

steverodgers801
Member
Posts: 1147
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 19:02

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#40

Post by steverodgers801 » 07 Feb 2014, 04:33

They were encircled in the sense they had no where to retreat to. Allied control of the air and sea completed the task.

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#41

Post by Kelvin » 09 Jul 2014, 08:09

Art wrote:And here are Soviet data mentioned from the report submitted by Pokrovsky and Bagramyan on 2 October 1941:
Image
As of 1.09.1941 the complete personnel strength was:
5 Army - 93 412 men
21 Army - 106 831
26 Army - 85 456
37 Army - 113 718
Units subordinated to the Front HQ - 53 303
Total - 452 720
Losses in the first days of September would decrease those figures somewhat especially for the 5 and 21 Armies. Pay attention to a very small number of remaining tanks (64). In addition four railroad engineer brigades had some 12500 men on 1.09.1941. There were apparently some losses suffered by air force, SOS, replacement and construction units, patients in hospitals etc. of the South-West Fronts, yet the report makes no mention of them. The conclusion is that we have a bracket of total losses in the pocket from 450 (Pokrovsky) to 510 (KTB OKW) thousands men.
Hi, Art, I see some sources, although 450,000 men in Kiev encirclement, 150,000 escaped from it successfully, is any officical Soviet report from Soviet Southwestern Front estimate on their loss, like how many Corps or divisions destroyed, how many divisions survived in this battle ? Thank

User avatar
John Hilly
Member
Posts: 2618
Joined: 26 Jan 2010, 10:33
Location: Tampere, Finland, EU

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#42

Post by John Hilly » 11 Jul 2014, 16:52

Kelvin wrote:Hi, Art, I see some sources, although 450,000 men in Kiev encirclement, 150,000 escaped from it successfully, is any officical Soviet report from Soviet Southwestern Front estimate on their loss, like how many Corps or divisions destroyed, how many divisions survived in this battle ? Thank
I think you are on wrong tracks in searhing destroyed Corps Kelvin! In fact Corps were and are only HQ organizations, under whom different divisions and other units were subordinate.

So Corps were not destroyed, only their HQs and connected logistic units could've beeen destroyed.

With best, J-P :milwink:
"Die Blechtrommel trommelt noch!"

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 7028
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 20:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#43

Post by Art » 12 Jul 2014, 20:45

Kelvin wrote: Hi, Art, I see some sources, although 450,000 men in Kiev encirclement, 150,000 escaped from it successfully
According to the report a part form which is posted above it was estimated that by 2.10.41 15 thousands men left the pocket. Even if it's an understatement, I believe the real number was far smaller than 150 thousands. According to the same report with appendices the losses of artillery weapons were:
5 Army - 62 152-mm gun-howitzers, 97 152-mm howitzers, 30 122-mm guns, 148 122-mm howtizers, 15 107-mm guns, 17 85-mm AA guns, 79 76-mm guns, total 448
37 Army - 21 152-mm howitzers, 34 152-mm gun-howitzers, 171 122-mm howitzers, 20 107-mm guns, 85 76-mm guns, total 396
26 Army - 7 152-mm gun-howitzers, 14 152-mm howitzers, 52 122-mm howitzers, 6 107-mm guns, 62 76-mm guns, total 141
No info on the 21 Army
Total with regimental 1194 guns artillery
Other calibers: 300 45-mm AT guns, 107 37-mm AA guns, 128 76-mm AA guns.
From anti-aircraft forces 154 85-mm AA guns, 114 76-mm AA guns, 48 37-mm AA guns, total 316
70 airplanes were lost, of them 61 not operational remained on airfields.
According to available reports as of 1.09.41 four armies (5, 21, 26 and 37) posses the following weapons:
241 429 rifles
20 878 self-loaded rifles
1760 medium machineguns
3347 light machineguns
2627 submachineguns
193 AA MGs
101 DShK MGs
29 122-mm guns
42 107-mm guns
521 76-mm guns
32 76-mm mountain guns
161 76 and 85-mm AA guns
434 45-mm AT guns
31 37-mm guns
24 203-mm howitzers
213 152-mm howitzers
361 122-mm howitzers
198 120-mm mortars
77 107-mm mortars
352 82-mm mortars
598 50-mm mortars
22 028 various automobiles
1593 tractors
274 motorcycles
1 medium tank
2 BTs
11 T-26s
35 T-27s
16 T-37s
69 armored cars
Most may be considered lost, I guess

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#44

Post by Kelvin » 13 Jul 2014, 18:14

Hi, Art, thank so much for your report for Southwestern Front. May I ask you if report contains the scale of loss : like how many divisions survived ? and how many completely destroyed or some just suffered a loss but still can fight after refitting ?

From David Glantz slaugherhouse book, they said during the battle of Kiev, 5th Army command staff was disbanded, 26th Army was encircled and destroyed but 21st and 37th Armies were encircled but escaped. So I guess 5th and 26th Armies perhaps were completely destroyed and another two suffered a crippling loss but still a fighting organization, what do you think ?

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10054
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Encirclement Battles of WWII

#45

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 14 Jul 2014, 03:57

The Ruhr pocket or 'encirclement' bagged 325,000+ German soldiers, and marked the end of a coherent front in the west. It also achieved one of Eisenhowers core objectives of capturing Germanys primary industrial region.

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”