Rebuilding the 14. Panzer-Division, 1943

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Freikorps, Reichswehr, Austrian Bundesheer, Heer, Waffen-SS, Volkssturm and Fallschirmjäger and the other Luftwaffe ground forces. Hosted by Christoph Awender.
Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#16

Post by Sid Guttridge » 17 Apr 2016, 16:57

Hi CNe505,

About 10% of the manpower of all divisions was on leave, on courses, convalescing, in transit, etc., at any one time and part of the non-combatant "tail" of many divisions was outside the encirclement.

In addition, all divisions still had men training in depot.

60th Division was unique. It was the former Brigade Danzig expanded to divisional size. It was the last Welle 1 active division formed.

Furthermore, if I remember correctly, it was the only division raised in the new Wehkreis XX (West Preussen) and so it may have had more manpower available in depot than most.

Cheers,

Sid.

CNE503
Member
Posts: 2395
Joined: 23 Aug 2010, 13:01
Location: Dijon, Bourgogne, France

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#17

Post by CNE503 » 17 Apr 2016, 17:11

Hi Sid,

I'm aware of these particuliarities, and you're right to insist on them, but it didn't seem to me sufficient enough to explain how so much veterans were saved from the catastrophe along the Volga western banks or found elsewhere...
If we consider the process which was used to rebuild some other destroyed divisions at the same time, it was either by absorption (of a complete division, such as the 345. or 386. Infanterie Divisionen (motorisierte) or such as the verstärkten Grenadier Regimenter numbered between 875 and 891), or by inclusion of a lot of young draftees from the age class 1925 called on May 1943 to a very small nucleus of veterans cadre, mainly in the divisional combat support and combat services support units (for instance, it was the case of Kampfgruppen 371 and 389 which were later expanded to infantry divisions status).
The 60. Infanterie Division (motorisiert) wasn't rebuilt absorbing an Ersatzheer unit, so it should have been the other way, with a lot of inexperienced young recruits.

Except if it was a particuliar process, which would be the most interesting one to study. But I didn't find so much sources to clarify this point...

Cheers,

CNE503
"Sicut Aquila" / "Ils s'instruisent pour vaincre" / "par l'exemple, le coeur et la raison" / "Labor Omnia Vincit"


Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#18

Post by Sid Guttridge » 17 Apr 2016, 17:25

Hi CNE503,

I see that 60th Motorized was the German division closest to Kalach where the Soviet pincers closed round Stalingrad. Perhaps some of its sub-units ended up outside the encirclement from the start?

Cheers,

Sid.

CNE503
Member
Posts: 2395
Joined: 23 Aug 2010, 13:01
Location: Dijon, Bourgogne, France

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#19

Post by CNE503 » 17 Apr 2016, 17:27

Yes, maybe, it is an interesting track that I must explore. But no time to do it for the moment... If anybody has information about the particular process of rebuilding the 60. Infanterie Division (motorisiert) early 1943 from soldiers who escaped its destruction in the Stalingrad pocket, I would be glad to read it!

Cheers,

CNE503
"Sicut Aquila" / "Ils s'instruisent pour vaincre" / "par l'exemple, le coeur et la raison" / "Labor Omnia Vincit"

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#20

Post by Sid Guttridge » 17 Apr 2016, 17:34

Hi CNE503,

Correction. Wrong battle at Kalach.

Sorry,

Sid.

CNE503
Member
Posts: 2395
Joined: 23 Aug 2010, 13:01
Location: Dijon, Bourgogne, France

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#21

Post by CNE503 » 17 Apr 2016, 18:09

I think the only consistant elements that escaped the pocket were regrouped in the ad hoc Gruppe "Pfeiffer" (named after the 94. Infanterie Division commander who took its command). 14. Panzer Division was well-represented in this group, but I didn't remember that 60. Infanterie Division (motorisiert) was...

CNE503
"Sicut Aquila" / "Ils s'instruisent pour vaincre" / "par l'exemple, le coeur et la raison" / "Labor Omnia Vincit"

dshaday
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 29 Dec 2013, 19:57

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#22

Post by dshaday » 17 Apr 2016, 19:49

Hi
Sid Guttridge wrote: You are attempting to reverse reality.
No.

I am pointing out that your specific comment/conclusion about the W-SS is flawed and ignores reality. What you have just posted does not alter that fact, or refute the data I have posted.

Since this has already been discussed at length (by us) in another thread, I suggest that you not clog this thread up with off topic comments but go back to that original thread.

Regards

Dennis

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#23

Post by Sid Guttridge » 18 Apr 2016, 12:49

Hi Dennis,

Of the two of us, only one has even attempted to contribute anything to the subject matter of this thread. And no, it wasn't you!

It is impossible for me to "refute the data (you) have posted", when you haven't actually contributed any.

Repeatedly claiming to have refuted the arguments of others is mere grandstanding if you have not actually done so.

Have you anything to offer on 14th Panzer or 60th Motorized? If so, please offer it up.

If you wish to dispute the points I make regarding the constriction in the mechanized resources available to the army in 1943 due to the creation of armoured battalions within the Waffen-SS, why not do so on the "Why the Waffen-SS" thread? As before, I will happily join you there.

Cheers,

An ever co-operative Sid.

dshaday
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 29 Dec 2013, 19:57

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#24

Post by dshaday » 18 Apr 2016, 13:20

Sid
Sid Guttridge wrote: It is impossible for me to "refute the data (you) have posted", when you haven't actually contributed any.
You appear not to have understood my posts and the comments in them -See below.
Sid Guttridge wrote: If you wish to dispute the points I make regarding the constriction in the mechanized resources available to the army in 1943 due to the creation of armoured battalions within the Waffen-SS, why not do so on the "Why the Waffen-SS" thread? As before, I will happily join you there.
You are mistaken.
All my posts here have only been about your (off-topic) comment on the justification of the Waffen SS, and the example of long unit training times of the 9th & 10th SS as proof of this. I though this was abundantly clear.

I am happy to continue this issue on the original thread regarding the justification of the W-SS. Lets hope you have something new/accurate to add. So far I see re-hashed material that has been refuted.

Since we both agree to go to the original W-SS thread, there is no need to reply or clog up this thread with W-SS posts.

Dennis

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#25

Post by Sid Guttridge » 18 Apr 2016, 14:00

Hi Dennis,

So, still nothing to contribute on thread here yet?

Simply replying with a contradictory opinion is not what I call "refutation".

Nor does merely claiming to have refuted something make it so.

Let me know when next you refute on "Why the Waffen-SS" and I may join you there.

To quote a wise man, "there is no need to reply or clog up this thread with W-SS posts."

Cheers,

Sid.

dshaday
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 29 Dec 2013, 19:57

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#26

Post by dshaday » 18 Apr 2016, 19:22

Hi Sid
Sid Guttridge wrote: Simply replying with a contradictory opinion is not what I call "refutation".
My post was not contradictory opinion. It contained both facts and logic showing (as per the old thread) that your re-hashed example of the 9/10 SS Divs is meaningless, and does not support your speculative conclusion. My post merely summarised some of what I had already posted in detail on the old thread.

Since you now appear reluctant to post new data on the old thread, in order to back up your opinions on W-SS "justification', we can let things be for the moment.

Dennis

dshaday
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 29 Dec 2013, 19:57

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#27

Post by dshaday » 19 Apr 2016, 12:25

Hi

Regarding the re-build of the 14th Panzer Division in 1943:

The Germans also determined on the basis of existing personnel whether or not to rebuild a destroyed division. The German 6th Army contained 3 panzer divisions, all rebuilt after their destruction at Stalingrad.

The 14th Panzer Division was able to draw on several sources after it’s destruction.
• Those elements attached to Lt Gen Ferdinant Heim’s XLVII. Panzer-Korps, which was the mobile reserve behind the Rumanian 3rd Army on the Don and so escaped encirclement.
• It’s functioning Replacement Battalion in Germany.
• The large number of wounded in rear hospitals due to the division’s extended period of combat at the front.
• Those men on leave or specifically flown out of the pocket because of their expertise etc.

Thus there were enough men to re-build the division.

When the Germans did re-build a division from scratch it generally took about 3 months to assemble the required personnel. For the 14th Pz Div strength in 23 March 1943 (just before it’s re-build which began in April - my comment) was 79 officers, 1,054 NCOs and 4,721 men. By 20 June (circa 3 months later) it was close to deployable strength with 282 officers, 2,181 NCOs and 9,450 men.

Which means that the 14th Pz Div started it’s re-build with about 40% of its enlisted men, 40% of it’s NCOs and 25% of its officers (my comment).

The war diary of the 24th Pz Div (also re-built after Stalingrad) gives an almost identical story.

-----

This should help to silence speculation by some(one) that the scratch built 9/10 W-SS Divs took too long to build simply because the 3 x Army Pz Div rebuilt after Stalingrad took less time. This concocted comparison, of itself, does not somehow prove that the W-SS were inefficient/wasteful of resources.


Page 45-46, "Germany's Panzer Arm". By R. L. DiNardo


Dennis

dshaday
Member
Posts: 628
Joined: 29 Dec 2013, 19:57

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#28

Post by dshaday » 19 Apr 2016, 16:32

Hi

In "The Panzer Legions: A Guide to the German Army Tank Divisions of World War 2 and their Commanders" By Samuel W. Mitcham.
we see that the third and last Pz Div, also destroyed at Stalingrad and rebuilt afterwards, was not as lucky as the 14th and 24th Pz Divs as discussed above.

The depleted 16th Pz Div was withdrawing from Stalingrad when the Russian offensive cut across its line of march. The vanguard of the division, which included the 16th AT Bn, 2nd Pz Reg, I/64th Rifle Reg and 16th Pz Eng Bn were pushed outside the pocket.

The new 16th Pz Div was re-formed in France, and started off with 3,400 veterans from the original division, plus 600 Hiwis. It was re-built using the existing 890th Mot Grenadier Reg, and other GHQ units and replacements from the 7th Army.

So that is, again, a good start with survivors and trained units available to be immediately incorporated into the new division. It was not rebuilt from scratch.

Dennis

CNE503
Member
Posts: 2395
Joined: 23 Aug 2010, 13:01
Location: Dijon, Bourgogne, France

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer Division, 1943

#29

Post by CNE503 » 20 Apr 2016, 20:55

Dennis,

Thanks for sharing this, it is very interesting. First I must read it properly, then I'll come back to discuss it.

Best regards,

CNE503
"Sicut Aquila" / "Ils s'instruisent pour vaincre" / "par l'exemple, le coeur et la raison" / "Labor Omnia Vincit"

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: Rebuilding the 14. Panzer-Division, 1943

#30

Post by Sid Guttridge » 24 Apr 2016, 19:00

Hi Dennis,

Delighted to see your positive contribution on the subject!

The decision to rebuild all the Stalingrad divisions was a prestige political one and was possible because the resources were still available within the Ersatzheer. Thus they were back in the field relatively quickly.

Later on, when the Germans had less resources available and losses mounted, they had to make differential decisions as to which divisions to rebuild, as you say.

The Waffen-SS divisions raised at the same time from scratch were comparitively slow to field because the SS did not have the infrastructure to do so quickly. (Indeed, it seems to have strained to sustain some existing divisions. 1st, 2nd and 3rd W-SS Divisions. although suffering very heavy casualties, were not annihilated, and apparently spent 6, 11 and 5 months respectively out of the line and rebuilding in France over 1942-43, only returning to the Eastern Front in the immediate wake of Stalingrad.) By contrast, the Army did have the infrastructure. The same men, fed into the Ersatzheer at the same time, would probably have been fielded much more quickly. This is one factor that calls into question the utility of the Waffen-SS as a force independent of the Army and particularly of its creation of new Reich-raised divisions in mid war. Thus the comparison with the rebuilding 14th Panzer Division is instructive and apposite.

Cheers,

Sid

Post Reply

Return to “Heer, Waffen-SS & Fallschirmjäger”