Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Post Reply
Ulater
Member
Posts: 246
Joined: 09 Mar 2015, 20:36
Location: USA

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#91

Post by Ulater » 20 Dec 2018, 23:36

Yoozername wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 22:20
Ulater wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 20:12
LSSAH at the end of 1943, ready/short term repair/long term repair/all. I believe there also was a report from November of the Panther abteilung of LSSAH action around Zhitomir, where they lost 65% of servicable vehicles in one week of action mostly to mechanical breakdowns.

30 November - Pz III - 3/1/2/6, Pz IV - 24/45/7/76, Panther – 15/53/12/80, Tiger – 2/14/9/25
1 December - Pz III - 4/1/1/6, Pz IV - 24/43/7/74, Panther – 15/53/12/80, Tiger – 2/14/9/25
2 December - Pz III - 3/2/1/6, Pz IV - 24/45/6/75, Panther – 23/46/11/80, Tiger – 3/13/9/25
3 December - Pz III - 3/2/1/6, Pz IV - 24/43/7/74, Panther – 29/40/11/80, Tiger – 3/13/9/25
4 December - Pz III - 4/1/-/5, Pz IV - 30/39/5/74, Panther – 28/41/11/80, Tiger – 4/12/9/25
18 December - Pz III - 2/2/1/5, Pz IV - 33/24/9/66, Panther – 12/35/28/75, Tiger – 7/8/9/24
19 December - Pz III - 2/2/1/5, Pz IV - 18/39/9/66, Panther – 12/35/28/75, Tiger – 5/10/9/24
20 December - Pz III - 2/3/-/5, Pz IV - 24/33/7/64, Panther – 8/39/28/75, Tiger – 3/11/10/24
21 December - Pz III - 1/3/1/5, Pz IV - 6/48/9/63, Panther – 4/43/28/75, Tiger – 2/12/10/24
22 December - Pz III - -/4/1/5, Pz IV - 12/42/9/63, Panther – 9/38/28/75, Tiger – 2/12/10/24
23 December - Pz III - -/4/1/5, Pz IV - 16/38/9/63, Panther – 7/40/28/75, Tiger – 3/11/10/24
This sort of information just gives the combat power of the unit in my opinion. There is too much missing information, and since the devil is in the details, it is hard to really make any conclusions. From memory, the unit had just got back from Italy, the Panther tanks were relatively new, but the Panzer IVs and Tigers might be a mix of old and new? Given the early production issues with Panthers, there could be reasons based on that. It would be most interesting to know the cycle of runners becoming short or long term repair, the reason(s), and the flow the other way from repair to runners. It would be nice to have the Dec 5-17 numbers.

One can say that actual write-offs and destructions may be low on the Tigers and Panthers, but it is also true that Panzer IV is the majority tank Dec 23...Panthers do have a good number in short term repair, but so do the Panzer IV...Panzer IV have less long term repair and Panther have over 1/3! Basically, these guys are on the disabled list and questionable.

I think discussions like these, especially when mixing data from the Western and Eastern front, especially given the distances concerned, and air power considerations, just ends up going nowhere...and sometimes worse, blurry photos start popping up...
You are right.


Considering that Western front was mainly a developed infrastructure compared to the east, and Normandy was a very small theatre compared to the extent of Operation Bagration for example, taking examples of this from Normandy is not really constructive or a good evidence, because that kind of is "the best case scenario" for tank realibility.

I dont think that making comparison with a tank from earlier decade, which had to sacrifice manueverability (and reliability) for 30 mm addon armor to resist british guns in 1942 could say anything good about the Panther.

And we would also need all the missing info to go with those numbers - combat action the unit participated in, causes for repair, distances traveled on the map and so on.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#92

Post by Christianmunich » 20 Dec 2018, 23:57

Richard Anderson wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 22:33
Michael Kenny wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 20:55
Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 20:43


* They are also useless for comparing vehicles of different armies because other armies did not keep battle damaged vehicles on the books.

You forget the advantage this gives . It disguises the number of total losses because these total losses are listed as long-term repair.
Never mind that yet again he doesn't know what he is talking about. "Other armies", by which I mean the British and American armies, evacuated any vehicle that required 4th or 5th echelon maintenance that could not be repaired by the unit. It did not require "battle damage" for them to evacuated, it merely required the repair be such that it could not be done by the unit.

Meanwhile, those "other armies" did indeed still keep those "vehicles on the books" that were evacuated as repairable, as well as many vehicles that turned out not to be repairable - a consequence of the simple fact that the Allies conducted an assault of continental Europe. OPLAN NEPTUNE specifically ordered that "Z" vehicle casualties would not be evacuated to England (where initially all the arsenals, base depots, and Heavy Maintenance (Tank) companies were) and instead would be held for later evaluation. The result was a backlog, which manifested as the abnormally large RAC report for August and that FUSA's first loss compilation was six weeks into the campaign. Until the evacuated vehicle was finally assessed, it was still "on the books" as non-operational, just not with its original unit, it was the actual "write off" that took it off the books.

I said they evacuate battle damaged vehicles. They do, this is no exclusive statement, they can also evacuate any damage they wish but they evacuated battle damaged vehicles. Please understand the basic english, I can do nothing else besides giving correct statements. It is at you to properly understand them.

No offense you should not lecture people on those numbers especially me because I understand them better.

Want me to show this Mr Anderson?

Here is a quote of yours in regards to the 7th August 1944:
Could you possibly be any more obtuse? There is extensive data available for cause of loss as well as good data on tank states ... So, if some German is claiming 14 Shermans hit/abschuss/totalausfalle/knocked out on a particular day at a particular place and no such losses were incurred, then it is unlikely that it is me playing a "numbers game
At this point you purposefully have chosen to not mention the tank state data which you had access to and openly available, you tell people there are no 14 casualties. You basically tell the person that you know the pretty "unknown" tank state numbers and nothing is there.

Here is the data spreadsheet you had compiled and open in front of you because you actually mentioned "tank states" but concealed the numbers:
losses.jpg
losses.jpg (170.16 KiB) Viewed 825 times
Here is what you told another user while having the data above open in front of you:
on the other hand if, as in this case, there are effectively few or no enemy losses for the date or location when claims are made then the claims are likely invalid. But then that's just my biased view of reality
You never mention this data despite having it and together with Kenny tell people "only 5 " tank casualties mentioned in the unit diary. Maybe you should not criticize people for understanding the numbers correctly.


Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#93

Post by Michael Kenny » 21 Dec 2018, 01:33

Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 21:15


Then you just support my claim. Thanks for this, like nearly all claims I have made in my "flag ship" posts you actually support what I claim. Then we can move on. The Panther was not significantly more "unready" than other German tanks. Exactly what I said and you sign off on it. Ok.
I am quite happy to confirm the Panther was as equally unreliable as a Pz IV, Tiger or even a Hetzer. They were all, by Allied standards, dogs.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#94

Post by Michael Kenny » 21 Dec 2018, 01:37

Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 23:57
Maybe you should not criticize people for understanding the numbers correctly.
You seem to entered a terminal decline since I proved the '22 kills' that were central to one of your Tiger fables were in fact Schneider confusing 2 seperate days-or as I prefer to say total fabrication.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#95

Post by Cult Icon » 21 Dec 2018, 01:46

Ulater wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 23:36
And we would also need all the missing info to go with those numbers - combat action the unit participated in, causes for repair, distances traveled on the map and so on.
It's offensive operations (including heavy night movements) in heavily mined, wooded terrain until mid-Dec. (battle of the Kiev Salient) Then the 48.PzK was used in heavy defensive actions. (Zhitomir-Berdichev offensive)

Thread on the subject. I will add material from Leibstandarte III in the coming months, when I have time:

https://forums.armchairgeneral.com/foru ... v-dec-1943

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#96

Post by Michael Kenny » 21 Dec 2018, 01:48

Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 23:57

At this point you purposefully have chosen to not mention the tank state data which you had access to and openly available, you tell people there are no 14 casualties.

In plain language there is no reported engagement on August 7th where we can see a full squadron of tanks knocked out. No attack and no repulse. Thus the engagement is a figment of Fey's imagination.
The event never happened so there is no need to check records to see if ghost tanks appear on it.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#97

Post by Christianmunich » 21 Dec 2018, 02:05

Michael Kenny wrote:
21 Dec 2018, 01:37
Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 23:57
Maybe you should not criticize people for understanding the numbers correctly.
You seem to entered a terminal decline since I proved the '22 kills' that were central to one of your Tiger fables were in fact Schneider confusing 2 seperate days-or as I prefer to say total fabrication.
You will even repeat refuted in other threads hoping people there don't know it. Your dishonesty knows no bounds Mkenny. Trurly remarkable. The 22nd were never part of my verification process. A simple copy paste of my original posted research shows.
2nd August

Schneider claims 22 tanks knocked out[35]. Schneiders remarks are ambiguous and likely based on a mistake. In his book, Tigers in Normandy Schneider mistakes the recollections of Tiger commanders as two separate instances while those are actually the same. He describes the events of the 3rd August also on the 2nd.

Remember no direct info from the 1st company.
At no point do I ever mention the 22 again in the verification process. Tiger claims were unimportant for the most part for most of my claims, I researched the kills due to British records.

Again you are shown to just lie about your opponents argument really are. The more you see the other person is correct the more desperate you become. In the other thread we have now shown that you cut of Tiekes quotes so they don't show the information that refutes you claims. Since I know you I knew this is likely and requested a screen of the page, you and Tom declined to do this. Which was no surprise, you both cut the quotes short. Another kind user then provided them and showed Panthers were never intended where you put them nor was there any mentioning of any Panthers doing anything there. The Panthers reported exactly where I already put them in my extensive uncontested research. With every piece of information we get further away from your version. You were so desperate to even fake the distance numbers, after getting called you simply said you don't have to respond to this. I wonder what evidence you and Mr Anderson have that shows far more Tiger kills. Losing on all fronts Kenny, like the Wehrmacht. All other the "flagship" threads my claims get proven.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2615
Joined: 25 Apr 2006, 16:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#98

Post by Yoozername » 21 Dec 2018, 02:12

And we would also need all the missing info to go with those numbers - combat action the unit participated in, causes for repair, distances traveled on the map and so on.
Very true. It was mentioned that StuGs were not as active, or some such, in this thread (can't bother looking back), which is BS. The Sturmartillerie brigades were referred to as 'fire-brigades'. Sometimes traveling from infantry division to infantry division in consecutive days.

The StuGs assigned to Panzer Divisions didn't sit around either. The StuGs assigned to infantry divisions might stay more or less within that division sector.

BTW, didn't LSSAH have StuGs?
Report on the visit to the Eastern Front of
the commander of Sturmgeschütz Ers. or. Ausb. Abtl. 200 (08/30/1943 - 09/22/1943)
The assault guns have often been moved from one sector to another without any consideration. One battalion was ceded to 11 divisions in a period of only 10 days; another battalion to 4 ( Armee) in a period of only 5 weeks. A high artillery commander has compared the assault artillery with firefighters in this regard. Vehicle casualties are almost always the product of overload and lack of maintenance and less of enemy fire. Battalions of assault guns would be much more effective if they operated within only one division.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6349
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#99

Post by Richard Anderson » 21 Dec 2018, 02:20

Christianmunich wrote:
20 Dec 2018, 23:57
I said they evacuate battle damaged vehicles. They do, this is no exclusive statement, they can also evacuate any damage they wish but they evacuated battle damaged vehicles. Please understand the basic english, I can do nothing else besides giving correct statements. It is at you to properly understand them.
Yes, I properly understand your sins of omission as well as your sins of commission. I could as easily say "they evacuate mechanical damage", leaving the less schooled to believe that battle damaged vehicles were not evacuated.
No offense you should not lecture people on those numbers especially me because I understand them better.
Really? You have yet to give any proof of that.
Want me to show this Mr Anderson?

Here is a quote of yours in regards to the 7th August 1944:
For those interested in context, the posts were part of the old "Will Fey and the 14 Shermans" thread viewtopic.php?p=1521962#p1521962 Is there some reason you want to make others search for the post when it is so easy to link to it?
At this point you purposefully have chosen to not mention the tank state data which you had access to and openly available, you tell people there are no 14 casualties. You basically tell the person that you know the pretty "unknown" tank state numbers and nothing is there.
So how could I possibly "purposefully have chosen to not mention the tank state data" when I specifically mentioned the tank state data in that post? :roll: Nor was the tank state data particularly a secret, especially given that I have never - until now - declined not to share it when requested. How, pray tell, do you think you got hold of this data? Do you suppose someone hacked my files? :roll:

So if you really want to claim that Fey's claim of 14 tanks knocked out are "proven" by 29th Armoured Brigade reporting 14 Sherman tanks "KO'ed or not fit in 24 hours" and another six "not fit, repairable in 24 hours", then by all means go ahead... :roll:
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#100

Post by Michael Kenny » 21 Dec 2018, 02:24

Christianmunich wrote:
21 Dec 2018, 02:05
..........my extensive uncontested research..........
Yep, uncontested by fact. Shown by being caught out posting a fake War Diary entry and relentlessly defending a '22 tank' kill-claim that was a dating error.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#101

Post by Christianmunich » 21 Dec 2018, 02:27

Michael Kenny wrote:
21 Dec 2018, 02:24
Christianmunich wrote:
21 Dec 2018, 02:05
..........my extensive uncontested research..........
Yep, uncontested by fact. Shown by being caught out posting a fake War Diary entry and relentlessly defending a '22 tank' kill-claim that was a dating error.
Now it gets just sad. My original published texts are quoted above showing you are wrong about the 22, and "wrong" is a kind term. But you don't know what else to do so you just say it again. Hmmmmm fine with me Kenny.

See you in the 5:1 you could explain the people why you cut of the Tieke quotes for locating the Panthers before actually the locations were mentioned. Hmmm

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#102

Post by Cult Icon » 22 Dec 2018, 04:30

-on the 2-4 Tigers- If Agte is correct than Tiger commanders Wittmann and Wendorff hogged these vehicles during these battles.

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#103

Post by Christianmunich » 22 Dec 2018, 20:07

What do you mean by hogged?

Christianmunich
Banned
Posts: 801
Joined: 26 Nov 2018, 18:37
Location: Germany

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#104

Post by Christianmunich » 22 Dec 2018, 20:20

Richard Anderson wrote:
21 Dec 2018, 02:20

For those interested in context, the posts were part of the old "Will Fey and the 14 Shermans" thread viewtopic.php?p=1521962#p1521962 Is there some reason you want to make others search for the post when it is so easy to link to it?
No I am happy if they read the full thread over years where Kenny gas lights people with you as cameo reinforcements. I simply quoted the best parts to save people some time. I hope many here know by reading my post that I am trustworthy and objective so my selection of quotes gives a good idea of what happened. But like I said more than happy if they read themselves especially your reaction after I mentioned the numbers and you said "I think i mentioned those but here are the numbers again". I hope they read. Credibility is a powerful thing should only be given to those who earned it. Me for example


So how could I possibly "purposefully have chosen to not mention the tank state data" when I specifically mentioned the tank state data in that post? :roll: Nor was the tank state data particularly a secret, especially given that I have never - until now - declined not to share it when requested. How, pray tell, do you think you got hold of this data? Do you suppose someone hacked my files? :roll:
You think it is clever to keep this discussion rolling? You mentioned the tank states and acted like they tell people there was nothing you knew the numbers and decided to not put them in. There is no doubt about your trustworthiness now
So if you really want to claim that Fey's claim of 14 tanks knocked out are "proven" by 29th Armoured Brigade reporting 14 Sherman tanks "KO'ed or not fit in 24 hours" and another six "not fit, repairable in 24 hours", then by all means go ahead... :roll:
Who cares in this context. You withhold the data to support your case. Over years you and kenny. If Fey did it or Egger or maybe neither is irrelevant. It just shows the value of your posts. Every post you make has a specific purpose if evidence will not support your case you will conceal it and argue the opposite. Same as the other guys with the Hohenstaufen book, cut off the quote and hope nobody notices. People should just know this, that is all I am saying. Level the playing field so to speak. I try to earn credibility by never being wrong and being honest. You guys act like Lawyers for a specific agenda. People hopefully notice the difference.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Analyzing "Readiness rates" of German vehicles and their misuse as indicator of reliability

#105

Post by Cult Icon » 22 Dec 2018, 20:46

Christianmunich wrote:
22 Dec 2018, 20:07
What do you mean by hogged?
Occupied instead of the more junior crews. This is how they racked up the kills

Post Reply

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”