Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 18:13

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 15:20
What he is referring to is tanks needing longer term repairs getting left behind in retreats and being written off later; things is they weren't actually destroyed in the initial combat operation where they were damaged, as you claimed, but were waiting to be repaired for whatever reason (I listed several above) and only actually became losses when they were left behind later on. So it would be accurate to say they weren't combat losses in that sense of being destroyed in combat, just abandoned when they couldn't be evacuated; similar thing happened at Korsun during the attacks to help the encircled forces breakout, there were a bunch of mechanical breakdowns in the mud and lack of fuel and recovery vehicles prevented their recovery so they were blown up. They weren't combat losses in the sense of being lost due to combat per se even though they were lost in the course of combat operations, but they were lost when they had to be left behind or blown up.
The most long-winded and pathetic attempt to obfuscate the scale of German losses I have seen for a long time. You simply refuse to accept reality and try and sneak in 'alternate facts' to lower the number of German write-offs.
This sentence is a beauty:
They weren't combat losses in the sense of being lost due to combat per se even though they were lost in the course of combat operations
So they were then.....,
but now they are not.....
even though they were....
at one time......
just not now..........

Anyway off you go again, round and round the garden................

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 15:20
In terms of total lost on both sides as a result of a specific operation, in this case Citadel, total write offs on both sides are accurate, but that isn't the full story. Damaged was another category, but most of those were repaired and returned to service. The long terms repairs later written off due to retreats would more accurately be counted as losses in other operations, as those later operations is when they became write offs, though technically they wouldn't be combat losses.
There is a simple term that could help you avoid this mental gymnastics. It is 'tank casualty'. I know you believe German casualties are further sub-divided into 'combat loss/mechanical breakdown/lack of spares/ran out of fuel etc but that is just trying to avoid facing reality.

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 15:20
Just understand that the issue is more how modern history books report numbers than the German record keeping system.
No. The issue is people like you who totally ignore the number of German tank casualties and then obsessively winnow the written-off figures to exclude a good number of destroyed tanks as 'non combat losses..

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 18:16

Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 17:52
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 15:20

You said they were all destroyed, not simply damaged. If you said damaged then I wouldn't have really taken nearly as strident a position against your claims,
That is completely untrue. You are now flat out lying.
I have never at any time in this thread said 'they were all destroyed'
I am very careful with the terminology and its your intemperate manner that leads you to tilt at windmills.

I repeat you are lying.
I never said 'they were all destroyed'
You should try to remember what you wrote then:
Michael Kenny wrote:
21 Dec 2021 06:00
KISS version:
For a variety of reasons the Germans would recover every tank wreck that looked as if it might at least be a source of spare parts and thus these wrecks would appear on their tank states as 'in repair'. A good number of these wrecks were never repaired and thus at a later date would simply disappear from the count when the Unit moved and could not carry the wrecks with them. Thus a tank knocked out and destroyed in (say ) June might have to be left behind when the Unit had to retreat in August and the loss would be then be marked as 'abandoned/self-destroyed'. This known problem with German tank numbers has been exploited by those who are 'admirers of the German military' who simply count any tank not listed as a total loss as still operational. The picture is further manipulated by the way only the German tanks listed as 'total losses' in an engagement are compared to the total of all Allied tanks reported as lost/damaged. The best way to work out actual German losses is to compare the daily totals and note the drop in runners as the battle unfolds.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 18:29

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 18:16

You should try to remember what you wrote then:
I do remember.
I never said the Kursk casualties were all destroyed. Even the quote you used to try and claim otherwise does not say they were all destroyed as the qualifier explains with A good number of these wrecks I realise you have been caught lying and now have to grasp at straws to try and recover from being caught out so by all means keep digging....................

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 20:08

Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 18:29
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 18:16

You should try to remember what you wrote then:
I do remember.
I never said the Kursk casualties were all destroyed. Even the quote you used to try and claim otherwise does not say they were all destroyed as the qualifier explains with A good number of these wrecks I realise you have been caught lying and now have to grasp at straws to try and recover from being caught out so by all means keep digging....................
Wrecks means destroyed. Damaged does not equal a wreck. Actual wrecks were not listed as 'in repair' so they could salvage them for parts, they were just harvested and written off since keeping unrepairable AFVs on the books would mean they wouldn't get issued a replacement for it and it would take up space needlessly.

If you want actual combat casualty info refer to Lawrence's book which has destroyed and combat damaged numbers for both sides during Citadel, the info exists and is available in book form, so you don't need to speculate based on non-operational ratings on specific dates.

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2854
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 22 Dec 2021 20:48

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:08
Damaged does not equal a wreck. Actual wrecks were not listed as 'in repair' so they could salvage them for parts, they were just harvested and written off since keeping unrepairable AFVs on the books would mean they wouldn't get issued a replacement for it and it would take up space needlessly.
Do you have a primary source that details that procedure? I would like to see it so that I can try to reconcile some artillery casualty numbers for 26 Panzer Division in September 1943 in Italy.

Regards

Tom

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 21:08

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:08


Wrecks means destroyed. Damaged does not equal a wreck. Actual wrecks......
Now you resort to semantics.
Any tank 'damaged' in combat or that became a 'casualty' but was never put back into action is a total loss. You want to parse the causes of those losses so as to exclude as many of them as possible from your made-up class of 'combat loss'. You can pretend you are doing this because you are really, really interested in the minute detail of the actual cause of loss but in fact you are doing it so you can exclude as many panzers as possible from your made-up 'combat loss ' category. Far from looking for an answer you already have an answer and are working backwards to manipulate the data to make reality fit your fantasy.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 21:19

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:08
keeping unrepairable AFVs on the books would mean they wouldn't get issued a replacement for it and it would take up space needlessly.
There were so few Panzer replacements sent that this made no difference to Unit holdings. It was not done to keep the numbers up but to keep hold of replacement parts. A ready source of spares to hand is far more practical than a promise that maybe, just maybe, you might possibly get a couple of tanks if your number were really low. A bird in the hand etc.

Burnt-out panzers were recovered so they did recover hulks and take up space needlessly with total losses.

viewtopic.php?p=2248252#p2248252

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 21:42

Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:19
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:08
keeping unrepairable AFVs on the books would mean they wouldn't get issued a replacement for it and it would take up space needlessly.
There were so few Panzer replacements sent that this made no difference to Unit holdings. It was not done to keep the numbers up but to keep hold of replacement parts. A ready source of spares to hand is far more practical than a promise that maybe, just maybe, you might possibly get a couple of tanks if your number were really low. A bird in the hand etc.

Burnt-out panzers were recovered so they did recover hulks and take up space needlessly with total losses.

viewtopic.php?p=2248252#p2248252
Ok, I see you can't read the source. It says all were recovered except for the burned out ones which were harvested and blown up. Nowhere does it say they were recovered and marked as 'in repair'. Your quote only supports what I said:

Image

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 21:51

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:48
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 20:08
Damaged does not equal a wreck. Actual wrecks were not listed as 'in repair' so they could salvage them for parts, they were just harvested and written off since keeping unrepairable AFVs on the books would mean they wouldn't get issued a replacement for it and it would take up space needlessly.
Do you have a primary source that details that procedure? I would like to see it so that I can try to reconcile some artillery casualty numbers for 26 Panzer Division in September 1943 in Italy.

Regards

Tom
I don't have original German repair procedure manuals, but I do have US historical study about it:
https://history.army.mil/html/books/104 ... _104-7.pdf

The worst damaged chassis might have been cannibalized for parts if there were shortages of parts; by effectively stripping the tank and rendering it a loss they could return several others to working order, but that isn't a combat loss as Michael was claiming, but rather an administrative loss due to supply issues. This was a rare procedure based on desperation that would have been more common in specific situations where supply was bad or late in the war when supply was breaking down due to the bombing.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 22:01

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:42

Ok, I see you can't read the source. It says all were recovered except for the burned out ones which were harvested and blown up. Nowhere does it say they were recovered and marked as 'in repair'. mg]
Nice try. It starts by mentioning 12 Tigers and then says 'all of the Tigers with the exception of the two Tigers that had been burnt out'. If it had been about the 12 Tigers and another 2 at some other location it would not need to say 'with the exception of '.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 22:04

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:51
but that isn't a combat loss as Michael was claiming, but rather an administrative loss due to supply issues. .......

Great. Now we have another fantasy class of German tank loss. An 'administrative loss'.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 22:08

Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 22:01
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:42

Ok, I see you can't read the source. It says all were recovered except for the burned out ones which were harvested and blown up. Nowhere does it say they were recovered and marked as 'in repair'. mg]
Nice try. It starts by mentioning 12 Tigers and then says 'all of the Tigers with the exception of the two Tigers that had been burnt out'. If it had been about the 12 Tigers and another 2 at some other location it would not need to say 'with the exception of '.
It says all the Tigers with the exception of the two burned out ones. You just wish it were referring to the burned out ones as well.

BTW here is what you wrote originally:
Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:19
Burnt-out panzers were recovered so they did recover hulks and take up space needlessly with total losses.

viewtopic.php?p=2248252#p2248252
Here is what you wrote in the link:
Michael Kenny wrote:
30 Jan 2020 20:51
Panzer Truppen 2 page 129 has some interesting information about 'burnt out' vehicles. It would suggest that burnt out Tigers were recovered:

The 'burned out' Tigers were at the Werkstatt so had been recovered to that position and it appears that they were reluctantly left behind because of the shortage of towing vehicles.
The quote says nothing like what you claimed here nor does your own words support what you wrote above.
Last edited by stg 44 on 22 Dec 2021 22:12, edited 2 times in total.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 22:10

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:51



https://history.army.mil/html/books/104 ... _104-7.pdf

The worst damaged chassis might have been cannibalized for parts if there were shortages of parts

From your source:

The Germans experienced very few instances in which it was not considered worthwhile to recover a disabled tank. The guiding principle was that no tank would be abandoned unless it was blown to bits or completely burnt out. In every other case recovery was mandatory, even though cannibalization was often the only possible use to which the recovered vehicle could be put.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3372
Joined: 03 Dec 2002 01:42
Location: illinois

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by stg 44 » 22 Dec 2021 22:13

Michael Kenny wrote:
22 Dec 2021 22:10
stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 21:51



https://history.army.mil/html/books/104 ... _104-7.pdf

The worst damaged chassis might have been cannibalized for parts if there were shortages of parts

From your source:

The Germans experienced very few instances in which it was not considered worthwhile to recover a disabled tank. The guiding principle was that no tank would be abandoned unless it was blown to bits or completely burnt out. In every other case recovery was mandatory, even though cannibalization was often the only possible use to which the recovered vehicle could be put.
Ok? The Germans recovered all repairable vehicles. They wrote off the ones they cannibalized later. It would still be considered a total loss pretty quickly if they decided it wasn't repairable or they opted to strip it for parts. No where does it say it was listed as a long term repair as you claim.

You're inventing ideas to support your emotional desire for the Germans to be somehow hiding losses for some reason.

Incidentally it is pretty funny you quoted the section that disproves your claim that they recovered burned out chassis and kept them on the books.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7437
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Operation Citadel cancelled in late June

Post by Michael Kenny » 22 Dec 2021 22:27

stg 44 wrote:
22 Dec 2021 22:08

It says 'all the Tigers with the exception of the two burned out ones.
It does not. You are making things up again.

It says: ' all of the Tigers with the exception of the two Tigers that had been burned out.'


The use of 'the' clearly indicates they are part of the original 12. These 2 are the exceptions.

This is the last reply from me about this specific matter.

Return to “What if”