Wehrmacht of 1943 invades Russia in 1941?

[Kingfish]

The Germans in 1941 not were of the Panzer divisions. The so-called Panzer divisions of the Wehrmacht were in fact divisions of armored infantry. Soviet tank divisions of the sample of 1941 proved the futility of "pure" armored divisions.

What do you consider a Panzer division if not what the Germans fielded in '41?

In terms of tank strength they were roughly similar to a US light armored division

[Paul Lakowski]

Wehrmacht Panzer Divisions had the same basic structure through out the war. The TOE changed mostly because of dwindling stocks of armaments & personnel strengths.

Their use did change through the war usually according to shifting control of air superiority ; in addition to providing army support to the controlling side - it more importantly allowed increasing Intel/reconnaissance information.

With that factor the reserves & Panzer Korps could be held back and deployed when & were they were needed the most to maximise the effect on enemy forces.

Without that factor , army forces had to be deployed as close to the front as possible to be able to react to enemy attacks or break through.

[Guaporense]

As the internet's impression of the Eastern front. The reality was very different: tank and anti tank guns only consumed 6% of the ammunition over 75mm of the German army. Hence, only a small fraction of the firepower of the army was related to tank warfare.

Ammunition usage is not indicative of a weapon system's value. Case in point: in terms of tonnage the amount dropped by USN dive bombers were minuscule compared to the heavy bomber fleets, but who is going to say the USAF B-17s and B-24s had a more significant impact on the war in the pacific?

In the fraction of casualties inflicted tanks were certainly way less than 6%. While the fraction of total casualties inflicted by airpower was usually less than 5%. From 1941 onwards, WW2 in Europe was a war of attrition and infantry inflicted over 90% of all casualties.

Dupuy's Numbers Prediction and War estimates the Fraction of firepower in the air in 60 engagements in Italy from September 1943 to June 1944, on average for all 60 engagements the fraction of total firepower in airpower were:

Allied firepower ----- 5.23%
German firepower --- 2.85%

So, ground weapons usually represented 95-97% of the firepower in ground warfare engagements (more actually considering the density of aircraft sorties in the Eastern front was much lower than in Italy), how was that distributed?

By weight in 1944, German ammunition consumption was composed of, among rounds over 75 mm only:

Mortars ----------------- 8.9%
Tank and anti-tank ---- 6.0%
Infantry Guns -------- 10.6%
Field Guns ------------ 60.9%
Heavy Artillery --------- 7.2%
Railroad Artillery ------ 0.5%
Rocket Artillery -------- 5.9%

from: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 1579064253

Artillery in all it's forms was 85.1% of the ammo consumption, mortars were 8.9% while tank and anti-tank guns were only 6.0%.

On the internet people often discuss tanks and aircraft as if they were responsible for inflicting the vast majority of casualties but that was not remotely the case: combined, they were responsible for much less than 10% of inflicted casualties, probably less than 5%. Tanks were specialized weapons made for specialized functions: armored spearheads to penetrate the enemy's frontlines. Aircraft's main role in the war was in temporarily disrupting logistical supply and psychologically harassing the ground troops, and not in actually inflicting losses on the enemy. And since WW2 was a war of attrition after 1941, the role of infantry divisions, whose weapons inflicted >90% of all casualties, was overwhelmingly more important than tanks and aircraft combined in deciding the outcome of the war.

These facts help to explain why the Allies didn't win the war so easily: the USSR had 3 tanks produced for each German tank in 1941-1943, while the WAllies had 10 to 1 superiority in airpower in 1943-1944. Thing is, in terms of infantry related firepower, despite being heavily outnumbered, the Germans had a comfortable superiority over the USSR: in 1944 they fired 1.540.933 tons of shells while the USSR fired back 1.000.962 tons, which enabled them to inflict massively disproportional casualties on the Red Army that mostly offset their vast numerical inferiority in everything, from manpower, to tanks, to aircraft.

[Kingfish]

Counting shells fired or enemy casualties is not seeing the forest for the trees. The true value of a weapon system is judged by its ability to influence the opposing side's capability to wage war, and in that regard the tank is every bit as essential, if not more so, than that of the rifle and howitzer.

To drive that obvious point home one need only look at the post WW2 alliances and how they applied the lessons learned on the battlefield to their respective armed forces. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact organized their armies around the tank-heavy formations, with all the ancillary components organized and equipped to support the tank.

[Yuri]

To drive that obvious point home one need only look at the post WW2 alliances and how they applied the lessons learned on the battlefield to their respective armed forces. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact organized their armies around the tank-heavy formations, with all the ancillary components organized and equipped to support the tank.

I wouldn't say that. I served in the Central Group of Troops of the Warsaw Pact - in 48th motor rifle division. Here is its structure: one tank regiment (three tank battalions and one motorized rifle battalion); three motorized rifle regiment (one tank battalion and three motorized infantry battalions); one artillery regiment; rocket battalion; jet battalion; antitank battalion; battalion ATGM etc. We can say that it is the structure of the German Panzer division of 1941 in finalized form. I served as a infantryman in 210th motor rifle regiment. The commander of 3rd company tank battalion was senior lietenant - party war. Here is what he constantly reminded us: "Remember guys, a tank without infantry is a coffin for four. Infantry without tank - a pile of meat on the meadow". All five divisions of our group were the same. An alloy of infantry, tanks and artillery. Which component is the most important impossible to determine.

[stg 44]

To drive that obvious point home one need only look at the post WW2 alliances and how they applied the lessons learned on the battlefield to their respective armed forces. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact organized their armies around the tank-heavy formations, with all the ancillary components organized and equipped to support the tank.

I wouldn't say that. I served in the Central Group of Troops of the Warsaw Pact - in 48th motor rifle division. Here is its structure: one tank regiment (three tank battalions and one motorized rifle battalion); three motorized rifle regiment (one tank battalion and three motorized infantry battalions); one artillery regiment; rocket battalion; jet battalion; antitank battalion; battalion ATGM etc. We can say that it is the structure of the German Panzer division of 1941 in finalized form. I served as a infantryman in 210th motor rifle regiment. The commander of 3rd company tank battalion was senior lietenant - party war. Here is what he constantly reminded us: "Remember guys, a tank without infantry is a coffin for four. Infantry without tank - a pile of meat on the meadow". All five divisions of our group were the same. An alloy of infantry, tanks and artillery. Which component is the most important impossible to determine.

A couple of questions for you based on that: did you have combined arms battalions that were mixtures of tanks and motorized/mechanized infantry? What was Czechoslovakia like when you were stationed there and did the Czechs react positively or negatively to Soviet soldiers?

[Kingfish]

To drive that obvious point home one need only look at the post WW2 alliances and how they applied the lessons learned on the battlefield to their respective armed forces. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact organized their armies around the tank-heavy formations, with all the ancillary components organized and equipped to support the tank.

I wouldn't say that. I served in the Central Group of Troops of the Warsaw Pact - in 48th motor rifle division. Here is its structure: one tank regiment (three tank battalions and one motorized rifle battalion); three motorized rifle regiment (one tank battalion and three motorized infantry battalions); one artillery regiment; rocket battalion; jet battalion; antitank battalion; battalion ATGM etc.

I am familiar with the MRD divisions, but note I said armies. Of the five front line armies of the Group Soviet Forces West three were tank armies, with Third Shock army boasting (at one time) four armored divisions. Even the 8th and 20th Guards included tank divisions in their OOB.

BTW, what is a 'jet' battalion?

[Yuri]

I am familiar with the MRD divisions, but note I said armies. Of the five front line armies of the Group Soviet Forces West three were tank armies, with Third Shock army boasting (at one time) four armored divisions. Even the 8th and 20th Guards included tank divisions in their OOB.

If you use the terms armies, we invade the area of the strategy.
Here we should take into account the circumstances of the strategic plan. For example, infantry is easier to transfer in the Western theater of war; or to take into account the people's army of the GDR; and some moments that influenced the structure of the Soviet armies in GDR.

BTW, what is a 'jet' battalion?

Sorry, right, apparently Anti-aircraft missile battalion (in russian - division).

[Yuri]

A couple of questions for you based on that: did you have combined arms battalions that were mixtures of tanks and motorized/mechanized infantry? What was Czechoslovakia like when you were stationed there and did the Czechs react positively or negatively to Soviet soldiers?

If you take a regiment separately, then Yes, you can say it was a mixture of tanks and infantry with the addition of artillery and mortars. Each battalion has a mortar battery (6 120 mm sample 43). In regiment was an artillery "abteilung" (in russian - division), in which was a battery of 122 mm howitzers M-30 sample 38. We were taught to work together with tanks and artillery on the March, in the attack and defense in counterattacks.
Almost all the senior officers of the regiment were veterans of the war. The regimental commander, for example, ended the war a Lieutenant platoon commander. The Deputy commander for the technical part - he started as a partisan in Belorussia, in 1944 in army - the driver, the lend-lease armoured carrier. Even the commander of an economic platoon of our battalion - starshina (feldwebel) was a veteran of the war from 22 June 1941 in the same division. The division came under attack 56 AK (mot). He retreated from the border to Leningrad (Oranienbaum). Many times he was wounded and finished the war at the 2 nd Ukrainian front in Czechoslovakia. After the war he re-enlist and asked what would be transferred to 48th division (division was in Odessa military district). As a result, in 1968, was again in Czechoslovakia. And as a militarymen and as a man he enjoyed great respect from all of us.
Taught us a lot and day and night: night - 60%; day - 40% of the training hours. Don't know how after my demobilization, but in my time the regiment was very well prepared.

Regarding your second question, I don't know whether to allow the heads of this forum to speak on this subject?

[stg 44]

Regarding your second question, I don't know whether to allow the heads of this forum to speak on this subject?

Thanks for the answers. For the second question you can send me a private message if you don't want to post in this thread.

[Paul Lakowski]

The Germans in 1941 not were of the Panzer divisions. The so-called Panzer divisions of the Wehrmacht were in fact divisions of armored infantry. Soviet tank divisions of the sample of 1941 proved the futility of "pure" armored divisions.

I don't understand this. There were precious few armoured infantry [Panzer Grenadiers] in the Panzer divisions of 1941, but they did have the highest numbers of tanks per division.