80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 25 Oct 2020 15:48

As a result, by the end of 1943, the structure of personnel in Flakdiv, located on the expanded territory of the Reich, was as follows (for example, 24.FlakDiv - air defense of Vienna)
======================================
German:
«Das Personal bei der Flak bestand nur bei den leitenden Funktionen aus Soldaten. Andere Aufgaben wurden durch Behelfspersonal erledigt. Insgesamt waren bei der 24. FlakDivision bis zu rund 16.200 Personen eingesetzt.
Es waren dies:
- 4,000 Flaksoldaten
- 4,000 Luftwaffenhelfer (Oberschüler und Gymnasiasten der 6. und 7. Schulstufe sowie Lehrlinge - alles 16 bis 18 jährige)
- 1,800 Männer des RAD (Reichsarbeitsdienst)
- 2,000 Flakwaffenhelferinnen
- 1,500 RAD-Maiden (Frauen im Reichsarbeitsdienst)
- 1,500 Mann ausländisches Hilfspersonal (hauptsächlich Italiener und russische Hilfswillige)
- 800 Flakwehrmänner der Heimatflak (Betriebsangehörige von Großbetrieben sowie Landarbeiter)
- 600 Stabshelferinnen

Frauen kamen hauptsächlich im Stab, an den Scheinwerfern bzw. an den Nebelmaschinen zum Einsatz, wurden in geringerer Zahl aber auch bei den MESS - und Trossstaffeln, in Ausnahmefällen auch an den Geschützen - allerdings nicht als Geschützführer oder Munitionskanonier - eingesetz».

====================================
My Engl.:

«Only the main functions near antiaircraft guns were carried out by soldiers. All other work was executed by support personnel. As a whole in 24. Flakdivision 16,200 persons were used nearby. It were:
- 4,000 soldiers anti-aircraft gunners;
- 4,000 assistants to Air forces (Oberschüler and Gymnasiasten boys of 6th and 7th school steps and as pupils - all are more senior 16 till 18 years)
- 1,800 men RAD - an imperial labour duty
- 2,000 assistants- women anti-aircraft gunner
- 1,500 maidens from RAD (women of an imperial labour duty)
- 1,500 men the foreign voluntary personnel (mainly Italians and Russian volunteer assistants)
- 800 personnel of local air defence (from working large manufactures and agricultural workers)
- 600 headquarters assistants (women).

Women mainly carried out headquarters functions, were used in crews searchlights and smoke plants, less often used in measuring stations of a fire control and crews a cable /aerostat/ layers, in unusual cases at antiaircraft guns, but never as commanders or the carrier of shells ».

======================================
That is, less than 25% of the personnel of the Luftwaffe's anti-aircraft divisions are actually Luftwaffe personnel.
75% of the personnel are not from the Luftwaffe.
These 75% percent of those who repelled the attack of strategic bombers can not be used "in the East "(useless).

User avatar
TheMarcksPlan
Banned
Posts: 3255
Joined: 15 Jan 2019 22:32
Location: USA

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by TheMarcksPlan » 27 Oct 2020 15:47

Yuri wrote:the structure of personnel in Flakdiv
How many guns were in a Flakdiv?
https://twitter.com/themarcksplan
https://www.reddit.com/r/AxisHistoryForum/
https://medium.com/counterfactualww2
"The whole question of whether we win or lose the war depends on the Russians." - FDR, June 1942

Jan-Hendrik
Member
Posts: 8537
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 12:53
Location: Hohnhorst / Deutschland

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Jan-Hendrik » 27 Oct 2020 15:56

As Lw.Flak.Divs. were only staffs to coordinate the different FlakRgter and FlakAbtlng. it depends which units were subordinated to them at which moment.

These were no 'static' Divisions like a Heer InfDiv.

Jan-Hendrik

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 17 Nov 2020 17:40

TheMarcksPlan wrote:
27 Oct 2020 15:47
Yuri wrote:the structure of personnel in Flakdiv
How many guns were in a Flakdiv?
The equivalent for a German Luftwaffe anti-Aircraft Division (mot.) is Army Corps (mot.).
The German Luftwaffe anti-Aircraft Corps is, accordingly, an Panzer Group/Army.
Thus, the anti-Aircraft Division and anti-Aircraft Corps of the German Luftwaffe do not have their own Combat units.
However, they have a powerful structure Division-Nachschub (referred to in short form as Regiment D.): transport, supply, maintenance, communications and logistical units.
All anti-Aircraft Divisions and anti-Aircraft Corps "in the East" are motorized. For example, the car-Borne ammunition reserve in a anti-Aircraft division (mot.) is 1,000 tons or 400 vehicles with a load capacity of 2.5 tons. The ammunition depot, maintenance units and all other is also motorized.
For example, changes in the structure of the 10th anti-Aircraft division (mot.) from July to October 1943 (from Kursk/Belgorod to Kiev).
1. July 1943 (Kursk)
10FlakDiv_DenckName_43-07-27_Kursk-Belgorod().jpg
2. September 1943
10_FlakDiv_Gliederung_Stand_43-09-08.jpg
3. October 1943 (Kiev)
10_FlakDiv Gliederung Stand 43-10-20.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 17 Nov 2020 19:39

In the beginning, a refinement to my posts in this thread.
In the table post 35 from September 25, 2020 18: 27, I have specified incorrectly Lw.Flak.Abt.501, should I./Lw.Flak.Reg.501.
Then, in post 36 of September 25, 2020 18: 55 I have specified for the 9th Anti-Aircraft division "approximate number of guns 600-650". That's right, about 300 guns. 600-650 is the number of guns including Fla-Batl., Heer. Flak. Abt., FlakAberGrupp and all Anti-Aircraft Abteilung of the Tank and Motorized divisions in zone action 9.FlakDiv.
Ammunition consumption and vehicle mileage only for guns of the 9th Anti-Aircraft division.
9_FlakDiv_Gliederung_Stand_42-10-29.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 17 Nov 2020 21:01

Now let's look again at table 7 on page 21 in Zamansky's work.
Dan Zamansky - The Study-21Ttabl7.jpg
Looking at the "bare" numbers in this table, the unsophisticated reader will draw the appropriate conclusion. However, the guns themselves do not mean much if they do not shoot in the direction of the enemy. Thus, we will try to look at Zamansky's figures, taking into account "the appetite " of guns in different theaters of war. At the same time, we will "forget" (that is, we will not specify) that in Northern Norway, Finland, East Prussia, Eastern Poland and Romania anti-aircraft artillery of the German Luftwaffe operated against VVS (the Red Army air force).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

charwo
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: 05 Sep 2020 04:43
Location: Ohio

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by charwo » 17 Nov 2020 21:29

Michael Kenny wrote:
07 Sep 2020 06:14
PanzerModeler wrote:
07 Sep 2020 01:18
wasn't the Soviet war effort SIGNIFICANTLY propped up by Lend-Lease?
If your house catches fire and your family are trapped inside....
if the fire brigade turn up and rescue your children.........
if 4 of the firemen die during the rescue....
Do you then praise the people who made the fire engine and tell the surviving fireman that without the contribution of the factory workers they could not have accomplished anything?
This is a facetious argument. Bravery counts for nothing, training counts for nothing, civilian goods count for nothing, only CAPACITY matters. And when the fireman's families boast they would have put the fires out anyway, regardless of "help", you call them out on their crap.

As for Allies, if they followed the idiot path of the historical, then yeah, splatter, but there's more than one way to skin a Nazi cat, none of which involve atomic delights.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 17 Nov 2020 21:59

As we have established, the "appetite" of the 88 mm guns of the I./Flak.Reg.501 is 11 times stronger than that of the guns of the 1st (Berlin) Anti-Aircraft Division.
Some might think that I specifically chose the most "voracious" 88 mm guns in the "East". On the contrary, I chose the least "voracious" Abteilung. In June 1942, I./Flak.Reg.501 operated as part of the Flak.Reg.42. This month, the Flak.Reg.18 operated near the Flak.Reg.42. So, in the Flak.Reg.18 in June 1942, 88 mm guns fired a minimum of 3,500 shells and a maximum of 6,000 shells. Thus, in the Flak.Reg.18 88 mm guns "voracious" guns of the 1st (Berlin) Anti-Aircraft Division from 13.9 to 23.8 times.
But this is not the end.
The Zamansky table was compiled at the end of 1943. Starting from Kursk "in the East", for every shell that the German Wehrmacht artillery fired towards the enemy, there was one lost shell (lost for all reasons - either blown up by the enemy or captured by the enemy or blown up by the Germans themselves, so that it was not captured by the enemy). Thus, we get that for 88 mm guns "in the East" requires (rounded) from 22 to 47 times more shells than for 88 mm guns standing "on the extended territory of the Reich".

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1716
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Yuri » 17 Nov 2020 22:30

Let's sum up the intermediate result.
According to the Zamansky method, 88 mm guns "in the expanded territory of the Reich" were 5.2 times more than "in the East".
However, the total number of 88mm shells spent (including lost) "in the East" is from 4.6 to 9.1 times more than "in the expanded territory of the Reich".

User avatar
Appleknocker27
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 17:11
Location: US/Europe

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Appleknocker27 » 18 Nov 2020 14:49

Yuri wrote:
17 Nov 2020 22:30
Let's sum up the intermediate result.
According to the Zamansky method, 88 mm guns "in the expanded territory of the Reich" were 5.2 times more than "in the East".
However, the total number of 88mm shells spent (including lost) "in the East" is from 4.6 to 9.1 times more than "in the expanded territory of the Reich".
Great info, great posts, many thanks. Curious, were the LW mobile FLAK batteries (heavy) used as traditional artillery in the East? Thus the higher shell expenditure? Seems pretty odd that heavy AA guns would be that busy against a tactical air force that operated at low altitudes.
If this was brought up earlier I apologize, I joined this thread only recently.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 9307
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 18 Nov 2020 19:27

Appleknocker27 wrote:
18 Nov 2020 14:49
... Curious, were the LW mobile FLAK batteries (heavy) used as traditional artillery in the East? Thus the higher shell expenditure? Seems pretty odd that heavy AA guns would be that busy against a tactical air force that operated at low altitudes.
Either way it would be a expense of fighting the Soviet military.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 7440
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Michael Kenny » 18 Nov 2020 19:30

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
18 Nov 2020 19:27


Either way it would be a expense of fighting the Soviet military.
Wonder how many replacement barrels they went through?

User avatar
Appleknocker27
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 17:11
Location: US/Europe

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Appleknocker27 » 18 Nov 2020 20:37

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
18 Nov 2020 19:27
Appleknocker27 wrote:
18 Nov 2020 14:49
... Curious, were the LW mobile FLAK batteries (heavy) used as traditional artillery in the East? Thus the higher shell expenditure? Seems pretty odd that heavy AA guns would be that busy against a tactical air force that operated at low altitudes.
Either way it would be a expense of fighting the Soviet military.
No question, I was just curios about the specific role.
I saw the earlier LL comments, funny how no one ever mentions the contributions of the Romanians, Hungarians, Italians, Finns, etc. to the Germans when saying the Soviets received help from the West.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 9307
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 19 Nov 2020 07:37

Michael Kenny wrote:
18 Nov 2020 19:30

Wonder how many replacement barrels they went through?
If you know the barrel life, number of rounds to wear one out, then you can do some arithmetic with quantity of ammunition expended.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 9307
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: 80% Of German Equipment & Manpower Was On The Eastern Front

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 19 Nov 2020 07:44

Appleknocker27 wrote:
18 Nov 2020 20:37
...

I saw the earlier LL comments, funny how no one ever mentions the contributions of the Romanians, Hungarians, Italians, Finns, etc. to the Germans when saying the Soviets received help from the West.
The only thing I have on that is a rather negative magazine article from the late 1970s. It described the weapons, and training of the several Axis minor nations. I don't know what the disarming of the Italians or the invasion of Hungary six months later cost the Germans. They did occupy a lot of battle space in the east.

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”