Joachim Peiper's tactics

[Sheldrake]

the immediate issue with the thesis is that it focuses too much on BOB and not enough on EF 1943-1945, and Normandy 1944.

Well, its the Battle of the Bulge that brought Peiper to popular attention. (or was it the Battle of the Bulge film and Robert Shaw?) The LAH had an undistinguished record in Normandy and before then Peiper was a battalion commander. There may also be an element of US centered reflected glory. Peiper commanded the 6th SS Army battlegroup that got the furthest and had to be fought to a standstill be US armour and paratroops - therefore he has to be the best German soldier...

There are other candidates for military excellence from the German side. General von Manteuffel is a better comparison with Rommel. Ludwig Heilmann, was an outstanding battlaion and regimental commander and did a fine job with under trained recruits in the 5th FJ Division in the Battle of the Bulge.

I think the paper missed a trick or two. While it is valid to compare the leadership ethos in the SS and Herr, the scope could have also included the airborne ethos of the FJ - which has something in common with US WW2 and post war elite ethos.

[jacobstuart]

Hi jacobstuart,

Lies? Trump-speak is OK for a mere US President, but we demand higher standards here.

On what grounds do you say "Lies" rather than "mistaken", "in error", etc, etc,?

Cheers,

Sid

Please use your eyes.

In 19:00, 9. Dec 1943, SS-1. Panzer Regiment reported 176 tanks under all kinds of conditions (serviceable, maintenance or marching).
In 17:45, 10. Dec, reported 176 tanks under all conditions.
In 18:00, 12. Dec, reported 172 tanks under all conditions. (4 tanks total lost within 48 hrs.)
In 18:00, 15. Dec, reported 169 tanks under all conditions. (3 tanks total lost within 72 hrs.)
See NARA T-314 R-1173 pp. 157, 177, 209 and 253.

For this, you have only two reasonable scenarios:
Scenario one - Peiper attacked, suffering heavy casualty but prevailed. His repair units recovered the damage tanks as Peiper controlled the field.
Scenario two - Peiper attacked, confronted heavy fortified PAK fronts, but managed to retreat before suffering more casualty.
As Theodor Wisch called out offensives two time within December 10, apparently two was impossible.

Meanwhile:

On December 10, 1943, Peiper's style of command hit rock bottom, directly under the eyes of his patron and Leibstandarte commander Teddy Wisch. In the Radomyschl region, advancing in the general direction of the south, after crossing a ridge, Peiper's armoured group faced a Soviet defensive position. Without taking care of the tactical situation and the strength of the defensive fire Peiper pushed his forces forward. Observing the "turkey shooting" of his own troops, the Division commander stopped the attack. Several hours later the headstrong Peiper attempted a frontal attack again. Moving forward, at once his troopers were under heavy fire. Burning and exploding armored vehicles and tanks lay crippled on the plain. Again, a furious division commander had to stop the attack and ordered Peiper back. Deeply disappointed about the qualities of his friend Peiper, he left the scene. Arriving at the divisional command post, Wisch issued an order on the correct tactical use of armed forces!
See Jens Westemeier, A Biography of Himmler SS Commander

The bias is obviously. Fed by misleading hints Westermeier's piece is trying so hard to fabricate the so called "Dec 10 turkey shoot" which was nonexistent at all.

[Michael Kenny]

On 10/12/43 Wood & Dugdale show 29 tanks fit and 163 under repair.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Waffen-Panzer- ... 0952886707

[jacobstuart]

According to NARA T314 R1173 pp. 157, 177, 209 and 253.
In 19:00, 9. Dec 1943, SS-1. Panzer Regiment reported 176 tanks under all kinds of conditions (serviceable, maintenance or marching).
In 17:45, 10. Dec, reported 176 tanks under all conditions.
In 18:00, 12. Dec, reported 172 tanks under all conditions. (4 tanks total lost within 48 hrs.)
In 18:00, 15. Dec, reported 169 tanks under all conditions. (3 tanks total lost within 72 hrs.)

2 tanks total lost per day, so-called "turkey shooting".

Could you please give the full report. How many fit, how many in repair and how many in long-term repair. Having a total of say 200 tanks on the books 'could' be correct even if 125 are in workshops.

The break down is,
12/9 19:00
EB/KI/LI/AdM
Tiger - 4/10/10
Panther- 6/53/17
Pz IV - 8/47/15
Pz III - 2/2/2
12/10 17:45
Tiger - 2/12/10
Panther- 5/54/17
Pz IV - 7/15/48
Pz III - 1/3/2
12/12 18:00
Tiger - 2/8/10/4
Panther- 5/26/28/17
Pz IV - 10/31/8/18
Pz III - 1/3/1
12/15 18:00
Tiger - 4/9/10
Panther- 15/31/29
Pz IV - 28/29/9
Pz III - 1/3/1

EB: Einsatzbereit / KI: in kurzer Inst. /LI: in langer Inst./AdM: Auf dem Marsch

I'd sent you the full NARA rolls via cloud if you'd like to share Wood & Dugdale's pieces.
I assume the 200 includes figures of Assault Guns and Pazerjaegers as NARA and other sources showing only 176 tanks in total owned by LAH by then.

[Michael Kenny]

We are going round in circles

https://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic ... 7#p2009107

[Cult Icon]

Well, its the Battle of the Bulge that brought Peiper to popular attention. (or was it the Battle of the Bulge film and Robert Shaw?) The LAH had an undistinguished record in Normandy and before then Peiper was a battalion commander. There may also be an element of US centered reflected glory. Peiper commanded the 6th SS Army battlegroup that got the furthest and had to be fought to a standstill be US armour and paratroops - therefore he has to be the best German soldier...
.

This paper was written in 2004 (well before masses of good EF books were published) so his sources were limited.

1.SSLAH was one of the better units on the Northern wing of AGS (Nov 43- April 1944) and fought in many counter-attacks/defensive actions/raids/counterstrikes. It can be compared to other units in the Zhitomir Berdichev series, Hell's Gate, etc. Balck in his memoir comments favorably about it and it was one of his core units (48.PzK). It was reduced to a regimental battlegroup in 1944 after a series of crises, and fought in Normandy will a low standard of readiness. It failed in BOB but it was rebuilt and it and 12.SS succeeded in spearheading the Gran bridgehead clearing operation. This was its last operational success. OP Spring awakening and its aftermath was a fiasco and the war was over 2 months later.

Peiper's performance as a regiment and battlegroup commander should be analyzed in light of the duration of his service.

[Michael Kenny]

It was reduced to a regimental battlegroup in 1944 after a series of crises, and fought in Normandy with a low standard of readiness

The Divisions Combat Ratings from page 797 of 'Fire Brigades'.

1/9/43.............I
1/10/43............I
1/12/43............II
31/12/43...........II/III
31/1/44............II/III
1/3/44.............II//III
1/6/44.............II
1/7/44.............I
1/8/44.............I

Claims that the Division in Normandy was of a 'low standard' were not shared by their own Generals.

[Max104740]

According to NARA T314 R1173 pp. 157, 177, 209 and 253.
In 19:00, 9. Dec 1943, SS-1. Panzer Regiment reported 176 tanks under all kinds of conditions (serviceable, maintenance or marching).
In 17:45, 10. Dec, reported 176 tanks under all conditions.
In 18:00, 12. Dec, reported 172 tanks under all conditions. (4 tanks total lost within 48 hrs.)
In 18:00, 15. Dec, reported 169 tanks under all conditions. (3 tanks total lost within 72 hrs.)

2 tanks total lost per day, so-called "turkey shooting".

Could you please give the full report. How many fit, how many in repair and how many in long-term repair. Having a total of say 200 tanks on the books 'could' be correct even if 125 are in workshops.

The break down is,
12/9 19:00
EB/KI/LI/AdM
Tiger - 4/10/10
Panther- 6/53/17
Pz IV - 8/47/15
Pz III - 2/2/2
12/10 17:45
Tiger - 2/12/10
Panther- 5/54/17
Pz IV - 7/15/48
Pz III - 1/3/2
12/12 18:00
Tiger - 2/8/10/4
Panther- 5/26/28/17
Pz IV - 10/31/8/18
Pz III - 1/3/1
12/15 18:00
Tiger - 4/9/10
Panther- 15/31/29
Pz IV - 28/29/9
Pz III - 1/3/1

EB: Einsatzbereit / KI: in kurzer Inst. /LI: in langer Inst./AdM: Auf dem Marsch

I'd sent you the full NARA rolls via cloud if you'd like to share Wood & Dugdale's pieces.
I assume the 200 includes figures of Assault Guns and Pazerjägers as NARA and other sources showing only 176 tanks in total owned by LAH by then.

Good evening,
I am new to the forum but I hope to give a little help.
I noticed that in 12 Dec strenghth report are present 39 tanks Auf dem Marsch, if I are not wrong the translation of these words is "in transit", new tanks that have just been delivered to the unit.
If I am right in two days this Panzer-Regiment lost 43 tanks and received 39 new tanks, please correct me if I am wrong,
cheers
Max

[Harro]

Indeed, "Auf dem Marsch" means replacements assigned to the Division but yet to arrive (both new vehicles and those send away for long term repair that have been repaired and are on their way back). For the past two and a half years "jacobstuart's" presence in this forum was solely aimed at discrediting Westemeier and by now he is grasping at straws by applying poor maths.

Casualty reports and assignment dates and figures for replacements from the Panzer-Regiment would be very interesting but I don't think these survived. Tanks, as we see, could easily be replaced but experienced tanks commanders and crews is a different kettle of fish.

[jacobstuart]

According to NARA T314 R1173 pp. 157, 177, 209 and 253.
In 19:00, 9. Dec 1943, SS-1. Panzer Regiment reported 176 tanks under all kinds of conditions (serviceable, maintenance or marching).
In 17:45, 10. Dec, reported 176 tanks under all conditions.
In 18:00, 12. Dec, reported 172 tanks under all conditions. (4 tanks total lost within 48 hrs.)
In 18:00, 15. Dec, reported 169 tanks under all conditions. (3 tanks total lost within 72 hrs.)

2 tanks total lost per day, so-called "turkey shooting".

Could you please give the full report. How many fit, how many in repair and how many in long-term repair. Having a total of say 200 tanks on the books 'could' be correct even if 125 are in workshops.

The break down is,
12/9 19:00
EB/KI/LI/AdM
Tiger - 4/10/10
Panther- 6/53/17
Pz IV - 8/47/15
Pz III - 2/2/2
12/10 17:45
Tiger - 2/12/10
Panther- 5/54/17
Pz IV - 7/15/48
Pz III - 1/3/2
12/12 18:00
Tiger - 2/8/10/4
Panther- 5/26/28/17
Pz IV - 10/31/8/18
Pz III - 1/3/1
12/15 18:00
Tiger - 4/9/10
Panther- 15/31/29
Pz IV - 28/29/9
Pz III - 1/3/1

EB: Einsatzbereit / KI: in kurzer Inst. /LI: in langer Inst./AdM: Auf dem Marsch

I'd sent you the full NARA rolls via cloud if you'd like to share Wood & Dugdale's pieces.
I assume the 200 includes figures of Assault Guns and Pazerjägers as NARA and other sources showing only 176 tanks in total owned by LAH by then.

Good evening,
I am new to the forum but I hope to give a little help.
I noticed that in 12 Dec strenghth report are present 39 tanks Auf dem Marsch, if I are not wrong the translation of these words is "in transit", new tanks that have just been delivered to the unit.
If I am right in two days this Panzer-Regiment lost 43 tanks and received 39 new tanks, please correct me if I am wrong,
cheers
Max

I hardly think so.

First, there is no records of brand new tank received by LAH in December 1943, not even in NARA.

Second, since someone proclaim "Auf dem Marsch" means "those send away for long term repair that have been repaired and are on their way back", remember LAH has double figures tanks under "long term maintenance" at that time, where would they go?

Apparently on their way back to the frontline from the rare factory.

[Harro]

It is not a matter of interpretation, it is simply what it means.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Jacobstuart,

Your reply did not adress my question, so I repeat it:

Lies? Trump-speak is OK for a mere US President, but we demand higher standards here.

On what grounds do you say "Lies" rather than "mistaken", "in error", etc, etc,?

You are making a serious character attack. You must either put up, shut up or moderate your accusation. Which is it?

Cheers,

Sid

[reth]

wer is das.pdf

(142.1 KiB) Downloaded 49 times

Dear all, I have a question about an SS-Obersturmbannführer and his identity. Since on 16-19 May 1942 he visited The Netherlands with the staff of Himmler, I assume he was a member of the staff at the time... I have TWO pictures of him and perhaps anyone knows immedialtely who this person is?? I would be much obliged.. Kind regards, Joost
How can I include the pictures?

[reth]

Another question regarding Himmler's staff: Does anybody have a picture of and/or more info on his staff member Koch? I have no further details but he also accompanied Himmler while visiting Holland from 16/19 May 1942...Best regards, Joost

[Sheldrake]

Well, its the Battle of the Bulge that brought Peiper to popular attention. (or was it the Battle of the Bulge film and Robert Shaw?) The LAH had an undistinguished record in Normandy and before then Peiper was a battalion commander. There may also be an element of US centered reflected glory. Peiper commanded the 6th SS Army battlegroup that got the furthest and had to be fought to a standstill be US armour and paratroops - therefore he has to be the best German soldier...
.

This paper was written in 2004 (well before masses of good EF books were published) so his sources were limited.

1.SSLAH was one of the better units on the Northern wing of AGS (Nov 43- April 1944) and fought in many counter-attacks/defensive actions/raids/counterstrikes. It can be compared to other units in the Zhitomir Berdichev series, Hell's Gate, etc. Balck in his memoir comments favorably about it and it was one of his core units (48.PzK). It was reduced to a regimental battlegroup in 1944 after a series of crises, and fought in Normandy will a low standard of readiness. It failed in BOB but it was rebuilt and it and 12.SS succeeded in spearheading the Gran bridgehead clearing operation. This was its last operational success. OP Spring awakening and its aftermath was a fiasco and the war was over 2 months later.

Peiper's performance as a regiment and battlegroup commander should be analyzed in light of the duration of his service.

Sorry, but the paper was a masters thesis at Fort Leavenworth which had access to a lot of primary source material supported by academic historians.

Regardless of what its own officers thought, Geyr v Schweppenberg thought it the worst readiness before D day, claiming it had been bled white of talent and left with a ill disciplined NCO corps. The LAH did not seem to have distinguished itself in Normandy, or at least it did not come to as much notice as as a troublesome opponent as the 9, 10 or 12SS whose stubborn actions frustrated various Anglo Canadian operations. Sure they added firepower of Bourgebus ridge at the end of Op Goodood, but a battlegroup was turfed out of one village by a British battlegroup.