'Ran out of fuel' excuse for defeat.

[Michael Kenny]

I am trying to find examples where German tanks 'ran out of fuel' whilst attacking in NWE. I know they had these problem when they broke and ran in panic in late August but are there any example where Units were stopping/losing tanks during an advance to combat?
If fuel shortages at the front line rather than in the rear (a very important distinction often overlooked) were the norm then obviously the effects of said shortages should be seen in all situations rather than overwhelmingly being seen during the panic-stricken flight when the broken Germans fled Normandy.
For example the OR report on a German column found around La Baleine in July 1944 found 8 Panthers, 2 Stug and a Pz IV scattered around the roads with all being in good working order apart from a couple with Rocket and AP strikes. Clearly in this location the Germans ran off leaving fully fueled/armed vehicles rather than turning to face and engage their pursuers.

[Yoozername]

Maybe there were orders or some other circumstances. From reading this...

http://www.historynet.com/operation-cob ... pocket.htm

...it sounds like chaos.

This is the report that you are referring to?

https://forum.axishistory.com//viewtopic.php?t=87408

[Michael Kenny]

I keep reading claims that a major cause of tank abandonment in 1944 was 'running out of fuel' I have read many a report and have yet to see a column for 'ran out of fuel' losses. I hope someone can point me to a report that shows/quantifies these Panzers with empty fuel tanks.
The La Baleine tanks were in good working order. The crews simply left them and ran.

[Yoozername]

It seems obvious that the report you cite shows that some AFV were abandoned outright, and the threat of air attack was very real. AFV need 'trains' of supply trucks etc. to operate. Clearly the threat of air attack is very real for the soft vehicles as well as the AFV. I went through the report and bolded AFV and what I take from it.

Perhaps you can cite these other reports? The one here shows a clear threat of being under air attack. Having a low fuel level in a tank, and having no means to get more fuel, and being under air attack, would certainly make isolated panzers feel they should explore other options. And these abandonments could be from tankers that had been fighting for weeks.

German fuel issues were certainly a problem even before the Ardennes Offensive. An attack plan that factors in capturing fuel is never a good idea.

The La Baleine tanks were in good working order. The crews simply left them and ran.

It wasn't that simple...the whole area was under air attack.


Point 1: Two camouflaged Panthers were placed in an orchard and facing the main road from ST. DENISLE GAST. They were probably in this position for several hours as there were signs that meals had been cooked. Craters caused by 500 lb bombs were seen within 50 yards of the tanks; these are thought to have been dropped by American Thunderbolts which are known to have been operating in the area. The tanks had not been hit but the crews apparently baled out, set fire to their tanks, and destroyed one of the guns by leaving an HE round in the chamber.

Does not say if they ran out of fuel or if they had fuel but apparently had been attacked by air

Point 2: A 75 mm SP with thick, concrete reinforcement of the turret was found pushed off the road by a Bulldozer. This SP was undamaged but 5 strikes from the air (cannon or machine gun) had made "cups" in the concrete. There was a 500 lb bomb crater 35 yards away. If the SP had been left to block the road it would have been set on fire by its crew; as it was not, the presumption is that it was abandoned in haste.

Does not say if they ran out of fuel but apparently had been attacked by air

Points 3 and 4: Round about points 3 and 4 a number of 500 lb bomb craters were observed. At point 3 a Panther had been left on the road in perfect condition with full complement of petrol and ammunition. At, point 4 another Panther was found undamaged in every respect. If the commanders of these tanks had wished they could have travelled down the right hand bank of the stream and attempted a crossing as Shermans later succeeded in doing.

abandonment due to air attack apparently

All along the river bank between point 2 and the bridge at LA BALEINE an assortment of "B" vehicles, all burnt out beyond recognition, had been pushed off the road by Bulldozers. A fair estimate would be eight vehicles (lorries and cars).

On the east side of the bridge a wrecked German saloon car was found at the foot of a 10 foot bank.

Point 5: A Panther was found to have been hit in the engine by a rocket projectile. It had brewed up.

destroyed by air attack

Between the bridge and point 5 were a lorry towing a Howitzer and a saloon car; all three were completely wrecked and burnt out. RP strikes on the ground were numerous in this area.

One hundred yards south of Point 5 was another lorry towing a Howitzer; the lorry was a charred wreck but the Howitzer seemed to be undamaged.

A: Just north of corner A, by the edge of the wood, was a burnt out lorry which had been towing a 50 mm A tk gun. A Pupschen rocket gun was also found at this point; both guns were undamaged. At corner A, where many RP strikes were observed, was a Panther which had not been hit by anything and appeared to have been abandoned intact. Also at this corner were 5 armoured troop carriers (half tracks) which were all completely destroyed. RP was definitely responsible in one case and probably in all, but the damage was too great to allow accurate estimation.

abandoned intact but no mention of fuel/ammunition

Point 6: A troop carrying lorry was found burnt out; RP strikes were numerous in this area and the lorry was probably destroyed by this means.

Point 7: A Mark IV Special was found completely wrecked and pushed off the road; the great number of strikes in the immediate vicinity would suggest that it had been hit by RP.

destroyed by air attack

A little further up the road were a saloon car and a lorry, both completely destroyed and burnt.

Point 8: A Panther was found wedged between a barn and a high bank; it also had stones in the tracks. A broken towing hook and tracks on the ground showed that another tank had tried to tow it and failed. This Panther had received no damage of any sort but was set on fire by the crew in the presence of the farmer.

destroyed by crew to prevent capture due to 'bogging' between buildings

In an orchard opposite Point 8 was a Volkswagen which had been hit in the engine by cannon or machine gun fire from the air.

A few yards up the road from Point 8 an armoured car (captured from the Americans and painted with German markings) had brewed up as a result of a hit in the engine. Although this looked like RP damage there were no strikes or debris anywhere near the point where the fire took place.

Point 9: A lorry was found burnt out; again there were no signs of rocket strikes.

In fields just off the road, at points marked x on the map, there were cars abandoned in various states of destruction. None of these had been hit by RP.

Point 10: A 75 mm SP gun was found burnt out but with no visible sign of the cause of the fire. A few yards away was a 50 mm A/tk gun, the breech of which had been deliberately destroyed.

destroyed by fire no cause determined

Point 11: A Panther had an AP hit in the engine and another on the left driving sprocket; the left track was off. The gun had its barrel completely destroyed in the manner that suggested deliberate destruction on the part of the crew. This Panther had brewed up but the tyres were intact. It was a long way from the nearest area where rocket strikes were observed.

immobilized by AP hit and possibly destroyed by crew

[Ulater]

"The Allied invasion of 6 June 1944 found the individual companies of the “Hitlerjugend” Panther battalion billeted to villages around Le Neuborg, France and the battalion staff company in the town itself.26 On being ordered to the invasion front, the fastest way the leadership of the 12th ss Panzer Regiment could get its Panthers there was by driving them. The sixty-six tanks of this unit covered a distance of 140 kilometres to reach the Normandy combat zone, travelling from 6 to 8 June 1944 under incessant air attack. For a tank unit in the Second World War, this was a sizeable distance. A number of tanks would be expected to fall out, despite maintenance halts.27

The march of the battalion began at 1 p.m. on 6 June 1944 and evening found the companies in the following locations: The 1st Company had reached Berthouville, the 2nd was in Barsen, the 3rd was in Le Thiel-Nolent, and 4th Company had reached in St. Claire. The battalion staff company had reached Boissy. Late evening saw the battalion continue west via the route Thiberville- Orbec-Monnai-Gace. From there the march continued all day on 7 June 1944 via Trun-Falaise-Thury Harcourthen to Amaye in the Maizet district.28 Here the battalion was dispersed and waited for fuel on the night of 7–8 June 1944. It is noted at this point that a single Panther that had become separated from its company rejoined it.29"


Here is the relevant part from ORO-T-117: https://i.imgur.com/s3ZeSR2.jpg?1

[Michael Kenny]

The quote you gave is from the paper in this thread:

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 0#p2081080

and the table you give is from Coox and Naisawald

https://www.merriam-press.com/surveyofa ... warii.aspx

a bargain at $1.99 for a pdf download.

and whilst I consider it a great overview of the subject it was written in The Korean War and so not as good or as detailed as the wartime surveys. It has no insights on how many tanks 'ran out of fuel'. I am looking for specific example where a Panzer Unit was engaged in combat and had tanks 'run out of fuel' during the advance and the tanks were abandoned on the battlefield.
Showing that HJ outran its supply trucks is not something I would categorise as 'running out of fuel'. Any fast-moving tank unit can do this and indeed the Allied advance in late 1944 was hampered by just such a 'shortage'

Would I be correct in assuming you are CM?

[Ulater]

Showing that HJ outran its supply trucks is not something I would categorise as 'running out of fuel'.

Then you have a strange threshold of evidence, but okay, this was one well positioned allied unit, or an opportune airstrike away from fitting that definition.

I am looking for specific example where a Panzer Unit was engaged in combat and had tanks 'run out of fuel' during the advance and the tanks were abandoned on the battlefield.

Which again, is basically suggesting, for example, Wittmann going "oh crap" as his Tiger sputtered to a halt in the middle of Villers Bocage, and remembering that he forgot to fuel up that morning.

I have never seen anybody suggesting that. And nobody would suggest that, because it is completely outrageous.

Any fast-moving tank unit can do this and indeed the Allied advance in late 1944 was hampered by just such a 'shortage'

Yes, when you are advancing not hampered by enemy activity, its an unfortunate logistical problem, when you are retreating with enemy behind you, its means losing tanks, because they run out of fuel.

They are still lost. Its still a total loss. It still was not caused by a 75 mm gun here, a mine there, or a plane overhead, it was caused by a lack of fuel.

Would I be correct in assuming you are CM?

I dont know what a "CM" is.

t was written in The Korean War and so not as good or as detailed as the wartime surveys.

It would not be much different.

[Michael Kenny]

Let me clarify.
One of the most common excuses for the hundreds of discarded Panzers lining the roads out of France is that they 'ran out of fuel' or 'broke down' Now if there was a general fuel shortage (rather than a Units rear echelon being destroyed as in the rout) then fuel shortages should strike in all situations rather than only when in flight mode. Advancing tanks should also 'run out of fuel' whilst they are pointing towards the enemy. Instead of 100% of the 'dry' tanks being found showing their rear end facing the enemy. I am suggesting that the 'ran out of fuel' excuse is a fig-leaf used to try and explain away the panic-striken flight and try and mitigate the dishonour of simply abandoning your equipment (be it gun,stalled vehicle or tank) so you can run faster. I say the Panzers obviously had enough fuel to start the journey home and thus could just as easily done a 180 degree turn and faced the enemy. Rather than do this the crews fled home and top speed and then when the disorganised rabble found they had no supporting fuel truck they exited and ran.
I am asking those who believe fuel shortage is the reason why hundreds of undamaged tanks were found lining the route of the German retreat what evidence they have for the claim. It is accepted that (for example) the BEF & French in 1940 and The Soviets in 1941-42 simply abandoned their fully-functioning tanks during their ignominious retreats and I see no attempts to explain away those crushing defeats as due to 'fuel shortages'. The circumstances of those flights Are exactly the same as the 1944 German flight.

[Michael Kenny]

They are still lost. Its still a total loss. It still was not caused by a 75 mm gun here, a mine there, or a plane overhead, it was caused by a lack of fuel.

No. It was caused by the Panzer Divisions being defeated in battle and the Allies destroyed their supply system. Caused by the Allies crushing and destroying the German Army.

[seppw]

They are still lost. Its still a total loss. It still was not caused by a 75 mm gun here, a mine there, or a plane overhead, it was caused by a lack of fuel.

No. It was caused by the Panzer Divisions being defeated in battle and the Allies destroyed their supply system. Caused by the Allies crushing and destroying the German Army.

There's some circular reasoning going on in your brain.

[Michael Kenny]

There's some circular reasoning going on in your brain.

I take that to mean that you also have no evidence for the 'lack of fuel claims?

[Yoozername]

I am trying to find examples where German tanks 'ran out of fuel' whilst attacking in NWE. I know they had these problem when they broke and ran in panic in late August but are there any example where Units were stopping/losing tanks during an advance to combat?
If fuel shortages at the front line rather than in the rear (a very important distinction often overlooked) were the norm then obviously the effects of said shortages should be seen in all situations rather than overwhelmingly being seen during the panic-stricken flight when the broken Germans fled Normandy.
For example the OR report on a German column found around La Baleine in July 1944 found 8 Panthers, 2 Stug and a Pz IV scattered around the roads with all being in good working order apart from a couple with Rocket and AP strikes. Clearly in this location the Germans ran off leaving fully fueled/armed vehicles rather than turning to face and engage their pursuers.

I am also struggling with the intent of this post.

You say 'ran out of fuel' whilst attacking in NW, yet cite the actions around La Baleine, which by most accounts is not an attack but a poor defense and actually a chaotic retreat? Also, you say a Panzer IV was found intact, but clearly the report says...

Point 7: A Mark IV Special was found completely wrecked and pushed off the road; the great number of strikes in the immediate vicinity would suggest that it had been hit by RP.

The lack of available fuel would preclude a sane attackers use of armor. It would certainly restrict the mobility of units, and your search for this 'attacking without fuel' premise seems to want to prove something?

I detailed the report you cite. No comment on that?

[Michael Kenny]

I detailed the report you cite. No comment on that?

In my original post I said combat -ready tanks were simply thrown away. You were good enough to copy the full text confirm this. What can be added?

Also, you say a Panzer IV was found intact, but clearly the report says...
Point 7: A Mark IV Special was found completely wrecked and pushed off the road; the great number of strikes in the immediate vicinity would suggest that it had been hit by RP.

My actual words:
found 8 Panthers, 2 Stug and a Pz IV scattered around the roads with all being in good working order apart from a couple with Rocket and AP strikes

The lack of available fuel would preclude a sane attackers use of armor. It would certainly restrict the mobility of units, and your search for this 'attacking without fuel' premise seems to want to prove something?

That lack of fuel was not the primary reason for throwing away combat-ready tanks. Rather than try and give the impression these tanks were only casualties because of a lack of fuel (and the unspoken conclusion they would have fought if the had fuel and/or they were too powerful to be knocked out in tank v tank action and could only be stopped by lack of fuel) it should be noted they are broken and fleeing units who were in full flight. That these were not tanks that were willing to fight and were only prevented from defending themselves by fuel shortage. I suggest a tank that 'ran dry' at Trun clearly had the option to turn and fight Argentan with the fuel that eventually got it to Trun.

[Ulater]

One of the most common excuses for the hundreds of discarded Panzers lining the roads out of France is that they 'ran out of fuel' or 'broke down' Now if there was a general fuel shortage (rather than a Units rear echelon being destroyed as in the rout) then fuel shortages should strike in all situations rather than only when in flight mode. Advancing tanks should also 'run out of fuel' whilst they are pointing towards the enemy.

I hope you realise you are talking about an army that wanted to demotorise prior to Barbarrosa due to strategic lack of fuel, let alone tactical one?

And you were provided with atleast one example of units advancing towards enemy running out of fuel happening. Seeing as said units were under attack while moving, argument of "out-running" your supply chain is not at all convincing.

I am suggesting that the 'ran out of fuel' excuse is a fig-leaf used to try and explain away the panic-striken flight and try and mitigate the dishonour of simply abandoning your equipment (be it gun,stalled vehicle or tank) so you can run faster

Panic-stricken flight. Now evidence for that statement would be very nice.

I am asking those who believe fuel shortage is the reason why hundreds of undamaged tanks were found lining the route of the German retreat what evidence they have for the claim.

History and reality.

It is accepted that (for example) the BEF & French in 1940 and The Soviets in 1941-42 simply abandoned their fully-functioning tanks during their ignominious retreats and I see no attempts to explain away those crushing defeats as due to 'fuel shortages'. The circumstances of those flights Are exactly the same as the 1944 German flight.

It was a Red army sanctioned apologia to bs their way out of their losses by claiming they "left tanks on the battlefield", "they broke down", "run out of fuel", "drowned", and so on in their early reports.

And I dont know If you havent noticed, but KV losses are widely explained away with mechanical breakdowns and fuel shortages in 1941, or outright abandonment, and T-34s to a lesser extent too.

[Michael Kenny]

I hope you realise you are talking about an army that wanted to..............

And the endless list of excuses trotted out to explain any German defeat/poor performance is trotted out. Admitting they were outfought is never to be faced.

Panic-stricken flight. Now evidence for that statement would be very nice.

Ok I admit that was a deliberate choice by me to use those words. Why? Because it is a standard term in translated German accounts when describing Allied soldiers under attack by them. I simply turn it around. What is the problem?
People in glass houses............

It was a Red army sanctioned apologia to bs their way out of their losses by claiming ................

And this is wrong and modern-day German Army apologia to bs their way out of their losses by claiming.............. is correct because.......??????

And I dont know If you havent noticed, but KV losses are widely explained away with mechanical breakdowns and fuel shortages in 1941, or outright abandonment, and T-34s to a lesser extent too.

Yes. As I said earlier all retreating Armies throw away their equipment. Because they are beaten and in full flight. The fuel shortage is caused by the defeat. Not that the defeat is caused by a lack of fuel.