1942 5cm Pak in 90. leichte Division (mot.) ?

[Gary Kennedy]

I don't think those charts show authorised strengths, they look more to my eye like actual holdings; Ist as opposed to Soll. I have seen those represented graphically, it 'might' explain why there was such a ruck of them in the file quoted. Is that one we can see online anywhere as I'm not familiar with it?

I don't know of a way to define Coy/Pl/Sqd strengths from those types of figures, or here, hieroglyphics. If they are what I think they are it's very much a strength return.

I've had my own issues and disappointments with Nafziger list documents over the years. The one I linked to is credited to an original German source, copied from NARA, T313 Roll 458. The original may be available online, and would probably put the figures in a better context.

Gary

[Dili]

So the German source says Pzjg IB or that was added "creatively" by Nafziger or someone else?
I already know he is to not be trusted with Italian stuff putting Semoventi in 1940...was expecting he was a bit better with more mainstream stuff but seems not.

[Urmel]

I don't think those charts show authorised strengths, they look more to my eye like actual holdings; Ist as opposed to Soll. I have seen those represented graphically, it 'might' explain why there was such a ruck of them in the file quoted. Is that one we can see online anywhere as I'm not familiar with it?

I don't know of a way to define Coy/Pl/Sqd strengths from those types of figures, or here, hieroglyphics. If they are what I think they are it's very much a strength return.

Gary

It’s 100% an Ist, not a Soll.

[Dili]

Daumiller sperrverband of Sonderverband 288:
23 lmg squad(i suppose 1 per squad if so this would mean 230 men at 10 men per squad). 2 M50, 2 leATR, 6 37AT, now an interesting thing: 11 20FLAk, 2 88FLAK but the symbols are Luftwaffe ones.

More on arrival of this unit in Urmel website https://rommelsriposte.com/2009/03/01/t ... to-africa/

[Urmel]

The 88s were not part of the Sperrverband, they were attached for a time.

[Urmel]

Pz.Jg. 605 still with Pzjg IB in October 42?

Battistelli says they did not convert until October 42.

[MarkN]

I don't think those charts show authorised strengths, they look more to my eye like actual holdings; Ist as opposed to Soll.

Correct. The word "stand" in the top right corner identifies them as being a record of current state - ie. Ist.

[MarkN]

So the German source says Pzjg IB or that was added "creatively" by Nafziger or someone else?

Nafziger just copied data and lists he found elsewhere. His errors, and there are many, are in his transcribing, typing errors etc etc. Errors in content are errors in the original document or the original author whose work he lifted.

[Richard Anderson]

Nafziger just copied data and lists he found elsewhere. His errors, and there are many, are in his transcribing, typing errors etc etc. Errors in content are errors in the original document or the original author whose work he lifted.

Don't forget the problems he created by "translating" all the designations to English too.

[Gooner1]

I believe that this was discussed but my search came up empty.

Dr. Niehorster puts 6 50mm PAK in each infantry company since division had 24 of such compagnies that means a big number of pieces. Besides the others already in AT company, Recon Bn, Pio Bn.

Also 6 50mm guns per company means already there about 60 men. Any idea if this is a typo? are those numbers supposed to Battalion level and not at company level ?

http://www.niehorster.org/011_germany/4 ... frika.html

The commonly quoted figures for the 50mm Pak in the German-Italian Tank Army on the eve of the October Alamein battle is 290. So for 90th Light to have 192 of them would leave 98 50mm and 68 76.2mm Pak for the rest of the German forces there I guess. Feasible but not probable.

On the other hand such an anti-tank gun heavy division was probably ideal for the way Rommel expected to fight the Alam Halfa battle, being the veritable mobile Pak Front for when the British tanks come out.


BTW that link to Niehorster is not a current one? This is the one I get going through the Index http://www.niehorster.org/011_germany/4 ... fr_90.html

[Dili]

The 88s were not part of the Sperrverband, they were attached for a time.

I suspected that.

So the German source says Pzjg IB or that was added "creatively" by Nafziger or someone else?

Nafziger just copied data and lists he found elsewhere. His errors, and there are many, are in his transcribing, typing errors etc etc. Errors in content are errors in the original document or the original author whose work he lifted.

What i have got from him is unworkable regarding the Axis, Italians is what i searched more and it is absurd the mistakes there.

Pz.Jg. 605 still with Pzjg IB in October 42?

Battistelli says they did not convert until October 42.

Well they arrived with 27 PzJG IB in Feb-March 41 unless they weren't in much combat they could not have survived. I think only a small number arrived as replacements. In your tank arrivals to N.A research did you get any side info in SP AT's like Marders and PzJg IB?

I believe that this was discussed but my search came up empty.

Dr. Niehorster puts 6 50mm PAK in each infantry company since division had 24 of such compagnies that means a big number of pieces. Besides the others already in AT company, Recon Bn, Pio Bn.

Also 6 50mm guns per company means already there about 60 men. Any idea if this is a typo? are those numbers supposed to Battalion level and not at company level ?

http://www.niehorster.org/011_germany/4 ... frika.html

The commonly quoted figures for the 50mm Pak in the German-Italian Tank Army on the eve of the October Alamein battle is 290. So for 90th Light to have 192 of them would leave 98 50mm and 68 76.2mm Pak for the rest of the German forces there I guess. Feasible but not probable.

On the other hand such an anti-tank gun heavy division was probably ideal for the way Rommel expected to fight the Alam Halfa battle, being the veritable mobile Pak Front for when the British tanks come out.


BTW that link to Niehorster is not a current one? This is the one I get going through the Index http://www.niehorster.org/011_germany/4 ... fr_90.html

One is the authorized the other(yours) is reality i think. Thanks for the numbers.

[MarkN]

I think only a small number arrived as replacements.

I think the number of replacement PzJag.I for PzJagBtl.605 is a fair bit higher than people currently believe. The 'true' number will only come about after somebody makes an effort to research it thoroughly.

[Dili]

Just found in wiki, source referenced is Jentz , Thomas L. Panzerjaeger (3.7 cm Tak to Pz.Sfl.Ic): Development and Employment from 1927 to 1941 (Panzer Tracts No. 7-1) Boyds, MD: Panzer Tracts, 2004. ISBN 0-9744862-3-X

Twenty-seven Panzerjäger I's equipped Anti-tank Battalion 605 in North Africa. It arrived in Tripoli, Libya between 18 and 21 March 1941. Five replacements were sent in September 1941 but only three arrived on 2 October, the others being sunk on board the freighter Castellon. At the start of the British Operation Crusader the battalion was at full strength but lost thirteen vehicles during the battles. Four more replacements were sent in January 1942 so that it mustered seventeen at the beginning of the Battle of Gazala. Despite the shipment of another three vehicles from September–October 1942, the battalion only had eleven by the beginning of the Second Battle of El Alamein. The last two replacements received by the battalion were in November 1942.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerj%C3%A4ger_I

[Dili]

So they were not much employed compared to tanks. Not even a full replacement arrived. 5+4+3+2=14

[Urmel]

They also got the Dianas.