Sturmpanzer Brummbar in Action?

[Cult Icon]

There are 4 pistol ports on the Sturmpanzer, two on each of the turret sides and also two MP40 racks for easy access. The ports could be locked or unlocked.

[Cult Icon]

Sept-October the Sturmpanzer 217 saw diverse deployments with many units in the Westwall and Aachen battles. There is evidence of an effort to mix them with other armored vehicles. Their combat losses were also relatively low, indicating their anti-infantry role.

They were grouped in various manner (roughly equivalent platoon and company mixtures for support):

Panther & Sturmpanzer IV
Jagdpanzer IV/Hetzer/Stug (?) & Sturmpanzer IV
Stug assault howitzer (105mm) & Sturmpanzer IV
Sturmpanzer IVs (alone)

[Cult Icon]

So for Jan 1945 each Sturmpanzer IV was issued with one Mpi and 2 LMG on board. Other MPi were carried by crews.

[Yoozername]

Thanks CL, great stuff.

I always thought that a SturmArtillerie Division would have been a natural development using similar weapons. That is 2 Stug IV battalions, One JagdPanzer IV battalion (mixed L48/70), and a SturmPanzer battalion as core armor. Two panzergrenadier battalion and a heavy weapons PG battalion, and indirect support from just a company of 12 cm mortars (motorized). Basically, Panzer IV chassis AFV. Basic mission is to develop breakthrough for actual panzer units. They would cooperate with infantry divisions, and especially with those units artillery attached to the infantry divisions. Perhaps a Wurfrahmen 40 capability along with the Heavy Weapons PG battalion.

[Cult Icon]

I finished the book, a very good one and a fun read. The new Sturmtiger book has already been published.

So the 3./Sturmpanzer 217 was used in dom butgenbach supporting 12.SS PR, however the whole battalion had only 12 out 36 Sturmpanzers operational after their move there. Strengths hovered in this lower range in Dec- Jan, the terrain, worn nature of the equipment (low total losses and heavy use in the battle of Hurtgen Forest, Aachen, Westwall fighting) depleted the battalion. The mechanical issues of the worn Sturmpanzers largely stemmed from the overweight nature of the vehicle (29 tons) putting too much stress on the chasis.

The majority of the fighting in Jan was in support of 3.FJD in blocking and counterattacks against the American counter-offensive, fighting US 30.ID and elements of 1.ID

[Cult Icon]

Thanks CL, great stuff.

I always thought that a SturmArtillerie Division would have been a natural development using similar weapons. That is 2 Stug IV battalions, One JagdPanzer IV battalion (mixed L48/70), and a SturmPanzer battalion as core armor. Two panzergrenadier battalion and a heavy weapons PG battalion, and indirect support from just a company of 12 cm mortars (motorized). Basically, Panzer IV chassis AFV. Basic mission is to develop breakthrough for actual panzer units. They would cooperate with infantry divisions, and especially with those units artillery attached to the infantry divisions. Perhaps a Wurfrahmen 40 capability along with the Heavy Weapons PG battalion.

They were used in breakthrough roles at Italy and at Kursk as well, alongside other vehicle types.

These howitzer weapons (including the STUH 105mm) seems to have been underrated in this hobby due their anti-infantry role. They were much more powerful against infantry and buildings. The anti-tank armor that supported them took most of the losses while the Sturmpanzers were presumably doing the heavy blows. The Sturmtiger was even more extreme and was designed to level urban buildings with a single shot.

The Sturmpanzer IV reminds me of the Soviet heavy SPG (ISU/SU 122/152). The Soviets also attacked with T-34s forming the first wave and the SPG behind them as support. In US tank battalion histories the two howitzer equipped platoons were often merged into a 6- gun group for direct and indirect fire. The US howitzer shermans sometimes expended hundreds of rounds of indirect fire in an engagement, and were often used as an additional artillery battery to supplement motorized tubes. Given the small amount of tank to tank combat in US independent tank units (due to small numbers of German armor that contacted them in the Western Front outside of the Ardennes) it makes me wonder if it was better off equipping tank battalions with more 105mm armed Shermans than having so few of them in every battalion. There was plenty of tank destroyer battalions to go around anyway.

The Sturmpanzer IV also alternated between direct and indirect fire, but without the close integration with tube artillery.

[Cult Icon]

Schwere Panzerjager Regiment 656 at Kursk (s.Pz.Jag.Abt.653, s.Pz.Jag.Abt.654, Sturmpanzer-Abteilung 216, Panzer Abteilung FKL 301)

It seems like a natural development to install the 150mm on a Panther chasis, perhaps the need for more anti-tank weapons delayed this.

[PanzerModeler]

Are there any photos of the "Proto-Brummbar" mentioned from the first post?

[Cult Icon]

Are there any photos of the "Proto-Brummbar" mentioned from the first post?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturm-Inf ... 3%BCtz_33B

[PanzerModeler]

Ahh okay, I thought you were referring to a prototype Sturmpanzer IV and not to the StuIG-33.

[Cult Icon]

To compare to the ammunition capacity of the Sturmpanzer IV, the personal account of a siG 33 (150mm) gunner (Helmet Seibert, 13th company, GR 916, 352.VG) in the ardennes says that the gun was drawn by 6 horses and the ammunition limber carried 16 rounds. During training these guns were pulled by RSO fully tracked tractors but these were removed and reallocated. This may have happened due to material shortages.

The heavy guns constituted the 4th platoon of the company, with the other 3 platoons equipped with two 75mm infantry guns each. Light platoons subordinated to battalions, while the heavy platoon to the regiment.

The siG 33 HE shell had a shrapel effect of 50 meters.

[Cult Icon]

Operation Citadel's Sturmpanzer grouping:

XXXXI Panzerkorps
(General der Panzertruppen Josef Harpe)
18.Panzer-Division (Generalmajor Karl-Wilhelm von Schlieben)
86.Infanterie-Division (Generalleutnant Helmuth Weidling)
schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 654 [Ferdinand]
Panzerkompanie (Fkl) 313
Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 177
292.Infanterie-Division (Generalleutnant Wolfgang von Kluge,
WIA 20 July)
schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilung 653 [Ferdinand]
Panzerkompanie (Fkl) 314
Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 244
schwere Panzerjäger Regiment 656
Sturmpanzer-Abteilung 216 [45 Sturmpanzer]

[Cult Icon]

According to a unit history of the 653 Heavy PzJ battalion, the attack for Hill 257.7 (Op Citadel) involved Luftflotte VI air assault (bombing raids) and artillery preparation. The Ferdinands, accompanied by infantry of 292.ID and 86.ID, attacked in the first wave supported by two FKL companies.

Second wave was the Sturmpanzer 216 and the Stug 177 and Stug 244

[Cult Icon]

+ Strength of Luftflotte VI supporting the 9th Army (686 aircraft)

186 FW190 Day fighters, 39 BF-109 Night fighters

92 JU-88, 152 HE-111

159 JU-87, 58 BF-110

+ According this unit history, the two Stug battalions were each given one infantry division to support. The Sturmpanzer 216 came up behind the Ferdinands and "fired over" them, giving direct support.

[Cult Icon]

Funklenkpanzer (Jaugliz) has photographs of the FKL units (first wave, behind them the Ferdinands), with Stug controller vehicles dressed in Gille suits. A Ferdinand in the high grass with only the turret exposed.