Why yes of course, why wouldn't it? It was an organic part of the division after all.Ok, here's what I'm trying to get at...http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gli ... n/35ID.htm or as close to the pre-"sealion reorganisation" of the infantry divisions in the First Wave as I have to hand...
1/ Would or would not any MT allocated to Pionier-Bataillon 35 comes from the totals on p.188 of Schenk for the 35th ID?
No, why would it? It wasn't a motorized battalion after all. Nor is there any indication that it was bicycled aside from Schenk's claim that the 35. Infanteriedivision was organized that way.2/ Would Pionier-Bataillon 35 have been fully motorised for Sealion - given that one of its companies was being put on bicycles to improve their mobility/flexibility?
"We" have nothing of the sort - "that" is YOUR assumption that there was a "reorganization". What in fact is known is the assault scales of the divisions - at least according to Schenk for a typical division.3/ we have "before" Sealion reorganisation, and "after" Sealion reorganisation MT totals for the 35th ID; if any elements of Pionier-Bataillon 35 were motorised BEFORE the reorganisation, would this MT not be accounted for already in the "before" Sealion reorganisation figures I.E. in the figures Urmel provided...? As opposed to them being allocated MT out of the additional MT that Schenk's figures show?
Then show me a Gleiderung for it that shows how it differs from 17. Infanteriedivision, which - oddly enough - is its compatriot inActually, the figures from Schenk we've been discussing are for the 35th ID, not the 17th.
XIII A.K.
No you weren't.This is what I assumed; that they didn't abandon all their support MT of course, that's why I brought the question up last night...I was actually trying to use your figures (or Chris' or whoevers)...
Unless that typically tortured syntax was meant to read "the Panzers were formated with full mobile support, which was included in the MT list in the First Wave".That's assuming - and no, I'm not nitpicking for the sake of it, Schenk simply doesn't say - that the S- and U-panzer "units" were formated with full mobile support. And that it was included in the MT listed for the First Wave...as opposed to arriving later, remembering what he said about them coming ashore with extra stores and fuel to extend their radius of operations. Thus the First Wave MT figures may not include them...
Why not? They would be for the 17. Infanteriedivision working from the Gleiderung. Why would it differ so radically from its landing mate the 35. Infanteriedivision?You gave him figures for the panzers' MT...he chose for some reason to chalk those numbers up against 35th ID's MT totals! You go on to pick that aspect up in your post of tonight...
Exactly. That's what the translation comes out as...except there was no "reorganization". What is being described is the loading schematic and troop allocation for a specific tactical operation. You might as well try to reconstruct the W.E. of a British division or the TO&E of an American division in June 1944 by taking numbers from the NEPTUNE loading plan. IT DOESN'T WORK. And yet after acknowledging that simple fact - "Schenk's list isn't a TO&E as such" - you are still going to torture the subject until it is inside out - as per usual - but I'm not playing.That's the thing; Schenk's list isn't a TO&E as such, it's what he describes as "the "strength" of a reorganised infantry division"; up until this point I was indeed assuming that the "49 tanks" were the S- and U-panzers that were supposed to go ashore simultaneously with the 35th ID's first echelon...and yes you can see the tanks on the loading diagrams for XIII Army Corps...