Artillery in Normandy 6.6.1944

[SASH155]

The French 10 cm howitzers are French 10.5 cm howitzers? (Perhaps a Zetterling typo?)

The Germans aften termed 105,, pieces 100mm...the Czech howitzers were also actually 105mm IIRC.

Actually the Czech Skoda 10cm howitzers, both the vz. 30, in German parlance known as the leFH-30(t) and the much more common vz. 1914/19... leFH-14/19(t), which was also captured from Greece- re-designated by the Germans as the leFH-318(g), as well as from Yugoslavia- leFH-316(j) and Poland- leFH-14/19(p), were really of 100mm caliber, not of 105mm caliber, and therefore had to have their own ammuntion production. The citing of a "10cm" weapon in French service on the other hand would most likely be a typo indeed. However, it should be pointed out that the French navy used 100mm guns of various models on board many of their ships.

[SASH155]

"10./A.R. 1716 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-"Gerätebatterie Graf Waldersee")"

More on this subject:

Nafziger in his "The German Order of Battle: Infantry in World War II" lists in the ORBAT of the 716th ID that as late as April 1944 the 10th battery of the 3rd Battalion of the 1716th Art. Reg. was equipped as follows:"10th Self-Propelled Battery (3 150mm sFH and 3 LMGs)".

Relying on other sources (Chazette, Zaloga, Buffetaut in Histoire et Collections etc...)as well as Nafziger I have filled this out with details that were often left vague or contradictory in the original for a comprehensive study I have been working on for the last year or so of all the German units present in Normandy on 06/06/1944; here is how my take on this appears:

"The 10th Battery was equipped with three 15cm sFH-13/1 (Selbstfahr) schwere Panzer Haubitze auf Geschützwagen Lorraine Schlepper SdKfz-135/1 SP howitzers, and three 7.92x57mm MG-34 or MG-42 GPMGs (or possibly three captured French 7.5x54mm MAC FM-24/29 LMGs (MG-116(f)."

Note: The use of captured French small arms by this unit is unconfirmed. Also, as this thread seems to indicate, this battery may have had as many as six of these SPHs, not just three as found in Nafziger et al. Also it seems that the 21st Panzer Div. had many more 15cm SPHs than those acknowledged in Nafziger- who lists only one 6 gun battery in their ORBAT (he also does not list the type at all; I surmized that they might have been 15cm sFH-18 schwere Panzer Haubitze auf Geschützwagen III/IV (Selbstfahr) SdKfz-165 Hummels, but this now seems incorrect)

[jpz4]

Fascinating thread guys! Great work. Really curious about the fate of those 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 of 8./A.R. 1709. Would be interesting if they were indeed transferred to 716.I.D.

Initially I had been hoping these guns might explain an odd story from Helmut Günther (SS-AA17), but it now looks that is unlikely. Still he does speak of close contact with a Leutnant of a Heer Pz.Art.Abt. when positioned on the west side of the Prairies Marécageuses de Gorges (2nd half of June). Apparently this Lt. was VB for "zwei Geschütze einer Panzerartillerieabteilung auf Selbstfahrlaffette". Currently I can't explain his claim (if he was right). I doubt StuHs from Stu.Gesch.Brig.902 could be an option here. If he was wrong he might have been confusing the nature of Art.Abt.456 and 457....
It is clear however this Lt. spend considerable time with Günther and his men (and their paths crossed again shortly before operation Cobra) so there must be some truth in the story.

PS Has anybody checked records for 243.Inf.Div.? At some point that division took over part of the sector controlled by 709.I.D. The Bod. Waffen (Atlantic Wall) from that sector should have transferred to that division. Since I don't recall the exact date, it might be worth excluding that division once and for all.

[RichTO90]

Relying on other sources (Chazette, Zaloga, Buffetaut in Histoire et Collections etc...)as well as Nafziger I have filled this out with details that were often left vague or contradictory in the original for a comprehensive study I have been working on for the last year or so of all the German units present in Normandy on 06/06/1944; here is how my take on this appears:

For the last year or so? How's that going for you? Seriously, I might be able to fill in some of your gaps for you.

Cheers!

[SASH155]

It is slow anad painstaking, and the sources, as we have seen, are often contradictory, even many of the primary sources. Any help is welcome; Mr. Nafziger sometimes leaves things very vague in his work or is not precise as to types of weapon in each unit, probably due to the inadequacies of the primary sources, and that no-one but the veterans who actually fought in the units would be able to say with any certainty what they were equipped with, and most of them have now passed on. Some of the work is speculative, based on good guesses, and is an attempt to flesh out the ORBATs a bit more.

[RichTO90]

It is slow anad painstaking, and the sources, as we have seen, are often contradictory, even many of the primary sources. Any help is welcome; Mr. Nafziger sometimes leaves things very vague in his work or is not precise as to types of weapon in each unit, probably due to the inadequacies of the primary sources, and that no-one but the veterans who actually fought in the units would be able to say with any certainty what they were equipped with, and most of them have now passed on. Some of the work is speculative, based on good guesses, and is an attempt to flesh out the ORBATs a bit more.

My sympathies.

Unfortunately, although I have the greatest respect for George's work to a large extent it remains largely as massively flawed effort. At times he seemed unaware of the difference between Soll and Ist, as well as many other nuances of German organization (the same crops up in his work on other forces), failed to resolve internal inconsistencies and contradictions, and appeared to have lost his way perhaps in trying to do too much. He is a good start, but it is neccessary almost from the start to dig into the primary sources to find where he goes astray...as in the matter of the 15cm Sfl.

Niklas's work is also of course seminal, but it suffers from something of the opposite of Nafziger's problem - he is too narrowly focused on the combat units of 7. Armee so misses many of the nuances of the interplay of commands in Ob. West and the Occupied Countries.

Studying the input of various members of this fine site and other similar ones is also an excellent source for new information as well as interpretations of fragmentary data - such as this great discussion.

The result for me, at least as of my last update on Saturday, is 210 pages on various aspects of the roganization, strength, and losses of Ob. West from 6 June 1944 to the end of the campaign. Eventually I hope to edit and organize the KTB of 7. Armee and 5. Panzerarmee to go along with it, with the ultimate hope of publication, but progress on that has been slow.

Cheers!

[SASH155]

Excuse my ignorance of German, but what do "Soll and Ist" mean? I assume reserve/2cd line vs. first line units?

[TH]

No, even simpler.
Sollstärke = authorised strength
Iststärke = actual strength

[Manuferey]

The citing of a "10cm" weapon in French service on the other hand would most likely be a typo indeed.

1) Sash155,

As I have mentioned earlier, I have seen at least one German artillery map of the Cotentin peninsula of 1942 that mentions "15 cm fr" for "15.5 cm K416(f) and K418(f)" guns and "10 cm fr" for "10.5 cm K331(f) guns (I am sure of the types of guns based on the batterie). So it may not be a typo after all but a direct transcription of the German source.

Fascinating thread guys! Great work. Really curious about the fate of those 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 of 8./A.R. 1709. Would be interesting if they were indeed transferred to 716.I.D.

Initially I had been hoping these guns might explain an odd story from Helmut Günther (SS-AA17), but it now looks that is unlikely. Still he does speak of close contact with a Leutnant of a Heer Pz.Art.Abt. when positioned on the west side of the Prairies Marécageuses de Gorges (2nd half of June). Apparently this Lt. was VB for "zwei Geschütze einer Panzerartillerieabteilung auf Selbstfahrlaffette". Currently I can't explain his claim (if he was right). I doubt StuHs from Stu.Gesch.Brig.902 could be an option here. If he was wrong he might have been confusing the nature of Art.Abt.456 and 457....
It is clear however this Lt. spend considerable time with Günther and his men (and their paths crossed again shortly before operation Cobra) so there must be some truth in the story.

2) Niels,
I assume you have considered :
1) that Günther could have mistaken a 7.5 cm Pak (Sfl) on Lorraine chassis of PzJg-Abt. 1709 or a 7.5 cm (Sfl) auf 38t of PzJg-Abt. 243 for a self-propelled field gun (a 7.5 cm Pak40 (Sfl) would have resembled a 10.5 cm leFH18 (Sfl) with its large muzzle) or
2) that we should read "Panzerjaegerabteilung" instead of "Panzerartillerieabteilung".

3) Separately, I’m trying to make sense of a German document dated June 16, 1944 that references another German document of April 8, 1944 (maybe Jos can pull a copy of the April document from his magic hat ) regarding the ammunitions available in Festung Cherbourg. The June document seems to provide some corrections to the April data including:
« lg.s.F.H.13 = 52%, nur 1 Geschütz vorhanden » [i.e. "only 1 gun available"]
21 cm K.39/41 = 12%, nur 4 Geschütze vorhanden »
(I don't know what the percentages mean.)

The only "lang.s.F.H.13" in the Cotentin peninsula I have come across so far are the self-propelled ones of Batterie Reichenau (8./1709). Since the only 21 cm K39/41 in the area were those of MKB Marcouf which had been captured by June 16, I assume that the corrections apply to April 1944.
Still, one 15 cm (Sfl) in the Cotentin peninsula in April 44 would mean that all three of the self-propelled guns of 8./1709 could not have been transferred to Batterie Graf Waldersee in early 1944.

Emmanuel

[jpz4]

Niels,
I assume you have considered :
1) that Günther could have mistaken a 7.5 cm Pak (Sfl) on Lorraine chassis of PzJg-Abt. 1709 or a 7.5 cm (Sfl) auf 38t of PzJg-Abt. 243 for a self-propelled field gun (a 7.5 cm Pak40 (Sfl) would have resembled a 10.5 cm leFH18 (Sfl) with its large muzzle) or
2) that we should read "Panzerjaegerabteilung" instead of "Panzerartillerieabteilung".

Your assumptions are right, I've considered those options as well. However Günther speaks continuously about a "VB [Vorgeschobene Beobachter]". Everything between the " " is a direct quotation. He also describes how the VB took out the position where they thought a US Observer was operating from. Everything suggests this was done with indirect fire, which makes me doubt a 7,5cm gun was used for this. If 7,5cm guns were used after all, we may have to reconsider the use of StuGs as well. (From what I've read I don't think 902 had any StuHs at the time).
I guess this will remain a mystery for now.

Niels

[jopaerya]

266. I.D.: 10./A.R. 266 = 6? x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-St.Bttr. (K) 159)
344. I.D.: 10./A.R. 344 = 6 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-10.-11./A.R. 344)
347. I.D.: 7./A.R. 347 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-bo.Art.Zug 441)
708. I.D.: 4./A.R. 1708 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-4./A.R. 658)
709. I.D.: 8./A.R. 1709 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-"Gerätebatterie Reichenau")
711. I.D.: 8./A.R. 1711 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-Sf.Bttr. without number/name)
712. I.D.: 8./A.R. 1712 = ? x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-Sf.Bttr. without number/name)
715. I.D.: 4./A.R. 671 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) ( 01-06-1943 )
716. I.D.: 10./A.R. 1716 = 3 or 6 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-"Gerätebatterie Graf Waldersee")
719. I.D.: 7./A.R. 1719 = 3 x 15 cm s.F.H. 13/1 (Sf) (ex-bo.Art.Zug 442)

Regards Jos

[Rui]

...
3) Separately, I’m trying to make sense of a German document dated June 16, 1944 that references another German document of April 8, 1944 (maybe Jos can pull a copy of the April document from his magic hat ) regarding the ammunitions available in Festung Cherbourg. The June document seems to provide some corrections to the April data including:
« lg.s.F.H.13 = 52%, nur 1 Geschütz vorhanden » [i.e. "only 1 gun available"]
21 cm K.39/41 = 12%, nur 4 Geschütze vorhanden »
(I don't know what the percentages mean.)

The only "lang.s.F.H.13" in the Cotentin peninsula I have come across so far are the self-propelled ones of Batterie Reichenau (8./1709). Since the only 21 cm K39/41 in the area were those of MKB Marcouf which had been captured by June 16, I assume that the corrections apply to April 1944.
Still, one 15 cm (Sfl) in the Cotentin peninsula in April 44 would mean that all three of the self-propelled guns of 8./1709 could not have been transferred to Batterie Graf Waldersee in early 1944.

Emmanuel

Hi Emmanuel

About the 15 cm s.F.H. 13 and his ammo...

Let's see what Gander in his Heavy Artillery (Airlife/Crowood Press, 2004) says: (page 47)

The Howitzer
In 1939 the 15 cm s.F.H. 13 disappeared from the German weapon holding reports.
In 1940, the Germans recaptured the 15 cm s.F.H. 13 from the Netherlands (15 cm s.F.H. 406(h)) and from Belgium (15 cm s.F.H. 409(b)), that were given to them, by Germany after WWI as war reparations, and their ammunition.
These howitzers had a different calibre, (149.7mm), from the "standard" German "15 cm"

The Ammunition
The ammunition's production ended in 1918.

The SP Howitzer
In 1942, 102 howitzers were mounted in the Lorraine Schlepper, by Alfred Becker.
(Jentz's Panzer Tracts No.10 - Artillerie Selbstfahrlafetten: 94 SPH manufactured)
All ammunition was given to the SP batteries, to be used until it run out, without no further production.
The SP howitzers were sent to North Africa (Jentz says 30 SPH), served in France (Jentz says 64 SPH), but (there is always a but ) Gander states that, there are reports that mention the use of SPH on the Eastern Front. (That was a surprise to me, because Jentz, don't mention their use in this theater of operations!)


Regards,
Rui

[RichTO90]

3) Separately, I’m trying to make sense of a German document dated June 16, 1944 that references another German document of April 8, 1944 (maybe Jos can pull a copy of the April document from his magic hat ) regarding the ammunitions available in Festung Cherbourg. The June document seems to provide some corrections to the April data including:
« lg.s.F.H.13 = 52%, nur 1 Geschütz vorhanden » [i.e. "only 1 gun available"]
21 cm K.39/41 = 12%, nur 4 Geschütze vorhanden »
(I don't know what the percentages mean.)

Hi Emmanuel,

I can only think that the percentages are of the Erste Muni Ausstattung? Based upon other units I would expect that 52% would be somewhere between 50 and 100 rounds for the 15cm and probably less than a dozen for the 21cm. That would be by piece of course, so with four pieces on hand their probably were about 40 rounds in total available for the 21cm.

Cheers!

[Rui]

Hi Emmanuel

From another great post, Erik E, mentions "ALL the captured weapons in use 1.3-1944", and there isn't any 15 cm s.F.H. 13 from the Netherlands (15 cm s.F.H. 406(h)) and from Belgium (15 cm s.F.H. 409(b)).

Topic:http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=26380

Erik E also mentions the guns scrapped in December 1943:

there was a decicion called "Rüstungskonzentration" done in May 1943.
The reason for scrapping was lack of ammunition, spareparts and some were worn out....

Only the 15 cm s.F.H. 409(b) appears, with 34 pieces (to be) scrapped.


So, based in my previous post and in this info for Erik E, the only 15 cm s.F.H. 13 in German use, were mounted on the Lorraine Schlepper chassis, and their ammo were for use in SP howitzers.
Meaning that the Festung Cherbourg had some ammo for the 15 cm s.F.H. 13 (Sfl.).


Regards,
Rui

[Manuferey]

Thanks Rich and Rui for your information.

Emmanuel