Obviously, if delays are too severe this will impact accuracy, on the other hand casualties might even be overstated, for instance those missing whose whereabouts are still unkown might be written off. This affected material losses equally, e.g. the 9th PzD, untraceable AFVs were declared a loss.But isn't there a risk that the unit keeping the casualty records would understate their own casualties? In that case it would seem impossible to get even a generally accurate picture
accuracy of zetterling s statistics
Re: accuracy of zetterling s statistics
-
- Member
- Posts: 177
- Joined: 14 Sep 2007, 19:18
- Location: Wisconsin USA
Re: accuracy of zetterling s statistics
See Zetterlings article from an old issue of Journal of Slavic Military Studies, "Analyzing Russian Front Combat" where he explains some of difficulties and near impossibility of obtaining 100% consistent and "accurate" figures from among wartime documentation. The KOSAVE report for example (Kursk, C.Lawrence's initial Kursk project 20 some years ago) cites a few examples where the researchers examining records at NARA and BAMA, to determine each German division's casualties and AFV losses on each day of the battle sometimes found multiple casualty and weapons loss reports from each of 3 different echelons: Division, Corps, and Army, multiplied by the several different HQ section officers reporting: Operations, Personnel, QM, Transportation, and finally the Medical Officers, all submitting reports for the same day - but none of them reporting exactly identical figures!