Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Post by jesk » 23 Sep 2018 06:36

Paul Lakowski wrote:
22 Sep 2018 22:45
In any kind of mobile battle, displacing wagon divisions 3 times a day is impossible. No sooner had they dug in all the artillery and regiments, battalions etc , they would have to move again. I gather heavy wagon artillery required 2-8 hours to set up and presumably the same amount to tear down to move, to say nothing of the travel time in-between.
These are all assumptions about probable battles. How many guns per kilometer front do you need for a normal situation. And will not there be too many displacements during the battle? The distance to the goal is a kilometer and the review is the same. The target moves for hundreds of meters, the gun is slightly behind it unfolds. I watched a documentary about battles in East Prussia. The Soviet artilleryman complained, for the day he had to change position three times, each time with the digging out of the frozen earth.

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: RE: Hitler Reforms The Panzerwaffe - (April 1943).

Post by jesk » 23 Sep 2018 06:47

Robert Rojas wrote:
22 Sep 2018 23:05
Greetings to both citizen Jesk and the community as a whole. Howdy Jesk! Well sir, in deference to your point OR points-of-view as "articulated" within your posting of Saturday - September 22, 2018 - 12:58pm, old yours truly was curious if you were actually being serious with your assertions OR were you being tongue-in-cheek with your commentary? A clarification on your part would be greatly appreciated. I, for one, find your cavalier attitude toward this subject more than a bit disturbing. It's just some sobering food for thought. Humble pie anyone? Well, that's my latest two cents, pfennigs or kopecks worth on this not so hypothetical topic of interest - for now anyway. As always, I would like to bid you an especially copacetic day over in your corner of White Russia.

Best Regards,
Uncle Bob :idea: :roll: :|
You just did not catch the thought. Serious discussion of history is not possible, with those gross errors in the distribution of divisions by area. A million German soldiers were in Norway and Kurland, when the Russians attacked the Vistula. It was there they were going to decide the outcome of the war. The Germans frankly played a giveaway, removing a lot of shooting soldiers from their path.

Image

The Fuhrer: German soldiers from Norway do not need to shoot at Russians, they are already not easily on their way to victory.

Image

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Post by jesk » 23 Sep 2018 07:08

Hitler threw out German soldiers from Germany so that they did not interfere with her occupying. The European Union is the project of Adolf Hitler. He dreamed of uniting the United States and Europe in one bloc. Being together is the main thing in the life of Europeans in Hitler's opinion. To be together, always! And he would have punished the British for Brexit, cruelly punished.

Image

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 601
Joined: 22 Jan 2014 03:16

Re: RE: Hitler Reforms The Panzerwaffe - (April 1943).

Post by thaddeus_c » 23 Sep 2018 15:36

Robert Rojas wrote:
23 Sep 2018 05:43
Greetings to both citizen Thaddeus_c and the community as a whole. Howdy Thad! Well sir, in respect to your posting of Saturday - September 22, 2018 - 7:01pm, old yours truly is intrigued with your idea and suggestion of CASEMATE TYPE VEHICLES. In terms of machinery, what exactly did you have in mind here?
that was a thinking out loud question, in considering that production of turrets was a bottleneck in numbers of proper tanks. so that by the end of 1942 any reorg. of Panzerwaffe (or guess more accurate to state "the German side") would have to consider that they were using STuGs in tank role anyways?

some consideration might be given to not introducing Panther? building some number of Panzer IVs and Tigers but rather attempt to ramp up the SPGs like Wespe and Hummel, and introduce a smaller casemate type like Hetzer.

if they could have schemed the PAW weapons earlier, to my understanding basically a horizontal mortar? huge numbers of those could have been motorized.

of course they were proceeding in the opposite direction seeking fewer numbers of super heavy tanks? and not until desperate Panzerfaust sought mass produced weapon?

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Post by jesk » 23 Sep 2018 16:56

I will formulate the thought as follows: the split of divisions in quality, into motorized and infantry, distracts from the account of their quantity. After calculating the quantity, the consideration of quality becomes meaningless. In January 1945, 7 divisions on the Vistula on the front 160 km, 2 in reserve, meant the front opened. Even if all 9 divisions were tank, the defense would be crushed.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1396
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Re: Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Post by Paul Lakowski » 27 Sep 2018 21:23

jesk wrote:
23 Sep 2018 16:56
I will formulate the thought as follows: the split of divisions in quality, into motorized and infantry, distracts from the account of their quantity. After calculating the quantity, the consideration of quality becomes meaningless. In January 1945, 7 divisions on the Vistula on the front 160 km, 2 in reserve, meant the front opened. Even if all 9 divisions were tank, the defense would be crushed.

Where are you going to get the mythical tank forces to fill these divisions? What about the nearly 55,000 vehicles to support such a force in the field?

Since they had less that 500,000 vehicles in the army inventory [after plundering civilian stocks], that's more than 10% of the whole force!

This sounds like the bean counting logic that crippled NATO planning and dominated the politics of that conflict.....far to much Soviet Science of War logic and no where near enough understanding of ART OF WAR.

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Hitler reforms the Panzerwaffe- April 1943

Post by jesk » 28 Sep 2018 07:28

Paul Lakowski wrote:
27 Sep 2018 21:23
jesk wrote:
23 Sep 2018 16:56
I will formulate the thought as follows: the split of divisions in quality, into motorized and infantry, distracts from the account of their quantity. After calculating the quantity, the consideration of quality becomes meaningless. In January 1945, 7 divisions on the Vistula on the front 160 km, 2 in reserve, meant the front opened. Even if all 9 divisions were tank, the defense would be crushed.

Where are you going to get the mythical tank forces to fill these divisions? What about the nearly 55,000 vehicles to support such a force in the field?

Since they had less that 500,000 vehicles in the army inventory [after plundering civilian stocks], that's more than 10% of the whole force!

This sounds like the bean counting logic that crippled NATO planning and dominated the politics of that conflict.....far to much Soviet Science of War logic and no where near enough understanding of ART OF WAR.
2171 cars per division probably a lot, all this indirectly concerns the topic.

Image

Return to “What if”