91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Brady
Member
Posts: 1022
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by Brady » 24 Apr 2020 18:00

91st Luftlande Division, Does anyone know what there inherent AT capacity was, in terms of AT gun's or SP's if any ?

The 709th:

709th Infantry Division. On D-Day it included about 11,530 troops, somewhat under strength. Its artillery was mostly captured Soviet types, but it had a self-propelled tank destroyer battalion with 14 75mm Marder III and ten StuG III assault guns.

Did any of those get anywhere the beach, Utah, the Stugs and marder's

User avatar
jpz4
Member
Posts: 583
Joined: 04 Mar 2006 21:43
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by jpz4 » 27 Apr 2020 12:28

Brady wrote:
24 Apr 2020 18:00
...but it had a self-propelled tank destroyer battalion with 14 75mm Marder III and ten StuG III assault guns.
Sorry, but this is completely wrong. :roll: Where does it come from? It would be correct for Pz.Jg.Abt.243 though.
In reality Pz.Jg.Abt.709 had 9 Marder I (Lorraine) in 1.Kp.; 12 motorized Pak40 in 2.Kp.; and 9 3,7cm Flak (at least some self-propelled) in 3.Kp.
The 91.LL.Div. only had a divisional antitank-company with 12 Pak40.

Both divisions also had Pak in their infantry regiments. These are a bit complex though. 6 x 7,5cm Pak and 3 x 5cm Pak38 in the regiments of 709.I.D. and 3 x Pak40 and 3 x Pak38 in the regiments of the 91. There's also talk of an extra 4,7cm Pak in 14./919. There was also Georg.Btl.795 with 3 x Russian 4,5cm.

Elements of Pz.Jg.Abt.709 did see action on D-Day. Some fought at Neuville-au-Plain and other were committed further east. The antitank guns op 14./919 were mostly committed on the coast or near beach exits (west of the inundated area).
Antitank elements of G.R.1058 (from 14./1058) were south of Ste.Mère-Église.
Last edited by jpz4 on 28 Apr 2020 12:03, edited 1 time in total.

spannermann
Member
Posts: 426
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 20:07
Location: UK

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by spannermann » 27 Apr 2020 16:11

Hi,
So which unit lost those two StuG III on the very northen edge of Ste Mere Eglise on the 7th June 44 ? both well photographed.

cheers Leonard Paul

User avatar
jpz4
Member
Posts: 583
Joined: 04 Mar 2006 21:43
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by jpz4 » 27 Apr 2020 16:29

Those belonged to 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243 a.k.a. Stu.Gesch.Abt.1243.
1.Kp. was also present on the day and lost three Marders further north. 2.Kp. lost a third StuG further north as well.

Brady
Member
Posts: 1022
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by Brady » 27 Apr 2020 16:50

jpz4 wrote:
27 Apr 2020 12:28
Brady wrote:
24 Apr 2020 18:00
...but it had a self-propelled tank destroyer battalion with 14 75mm Marder III and ten StuG III assault guns.
Sorry, but this is completely wrong. :roll: Where does it come from?

D-Day 1944 (2), by Steven J. Zaloga

……………………..

TY though for clearing that up it sounds much more complex, and that they had a lot more AT capacity at there disposal than Zaloga suggests

What do you mean by Motorized PAK 40's, that they had trucks to pull them ?

So, It would Seam that the 709, Inherently had a better AT capacity in terms of guns and mobility of those guns than the 91st had ?

One of the French 4.7's you mention I presume ? :
Image

User avatar
jpz4
Member
Posts: 583
Joined: 04 Mar 2006 21:43
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by jpz4 » 27 Apr 2020 17:09

My copy of that Osprey (2004) book says "12 towed anti-tank guns and 9 self-propelled 75mm tank destroyers" (p.17) I think you may have mixed up the numbers with those of the 243.I.D.? ;-)

Yes, one of those 4,7cm Pak. This one was part of the coastal defenses, but the company appears to have obtained one for use behind the coast.
The type of motorization is typically difficult to determine unless there is evidence. The three regimental companies are linked to trucks, (probably French) halftracks and possibly Renault UEs. These varied between the companies, which also makes confirmation more difficult.

The 91.LL.Div. was a recent creation. Most new infantry divisions in early 1944 appear to have had only a divisional antitank company and three more Pak with each infantry regiment. As time progressed divisional antitank capabilities could improve. In the static divisions this varied wildly, but it was more typical for standard divisions. (like the 352. and 353.I.D.)

spannermann
Member
Posts: 426
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 20:07
Location: UK

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by spannermann » 27 Apr 2020 19:51

Hi jpz4,
Thanks for the answer on the StuG III, two years ago I stood at the spot where the closest StuG to Ste Mere Elise was knocked out, that is the one with the US Airborne 57mm alongside, its all built up now and within the town limits of Ste M Eglise, but only a couple of hundred yards north of the town centre right by the Hotel du Ville. It was very close.

When I visited Utah Beach in 1964, there were two of those French 4,7cm anti-tank guns in the dunes, side by side, no wheels of course.

cheers PAUL

ne

spannermann
Member
Posts: 426
Joined: 23 Aug 2006 20:07
Location: UK

Re: 91st Luftlande Division and the 709's AFV's

Post by spannermann » 28 Apr 2020 15:54

Hi all,

Found my 1964 photo of the two French A/T guns at Utah, photo dated 17/08/1964.
Was in the Utah Beach museum last June, but no sign of these guns.

cheers PAUL
pictures_0004.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

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