29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Discussions on all aspects of the USSR, from the Russian Civil War till the end of the Great Patriotic War and the war against Japan. Hosted by Art.
Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 5569
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Art » 17 Oct 2016 05:40

Paul Lakowski wrote: Right now it just looks like you guys bias is drowning any chance to explore this any further.
Well, right now the thing that is drowning any chance to explore this any further is a reluctance of a topic-starter to post original documents. I see no sense in discussing anything without them.

Stiltzkin
Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 11 Apr 2016 12:29
Location: Germany

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Stiltzkin » 17 Oct 2016 05:45

Well, TSAMo documents are desirable and usually represent the most accurate information.
https://books.google.de/books?id=QvY_Bw ... e&q&f=true

http://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/1 ... chudo.html

Additionally, if I remember correctly, the Forum rules do demand personal interest and the initiative to conduct individual research on each topic.
Last edited by Stiltzkin on 17 Oct 2016 05:48, edited 1 time in total.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23326
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by David Thompson » 17 Oct 2016 05:48

Michael Kenny -- You wrote:
I think a request for the exact Russian wording/description of the classes of destroyed/damaged tanks is far from an unreasonable request. Asking if they can read Russian is also relevant.
We don't require that level of sourcing here; the source originally given ("Russian document TsAMO f38 on11371 d16 l11,13") is sufficient for Interested readers to find out more on their own. As the rules state, AHF operates as an information exchange, not a research service.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6368
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Michael Kenny » 17 Oct 2016 06:10

David Thompson wrote: We don't require that level of sourcing here; personal questions to another poster are rarely relevant and aren't authorized by the forum rules.
I asked earlier if the originals could be posted and was told they would not be because the poster thought someone would copy them and use them without crediting him. That is why I dropped down to asking for the exact Russian wording ("stuck in mud and sunk in bogs")for the classes of tanks and nothing else. Translation is an art and not a science.
I pointed out an earlier post in this thread where a claim was shown to be in error (with a source) so there is some confusion already.
Art wrote: Well, right now the thing that is drowning any chance to explore this any further is a reluctance of a topic-starter to post original documents. I see no sense in discussing anything without them.
Agreed.

Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1432
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Paul Lakowski » 17 Oct 2016 06:45

David Thompson wrote:Michael Kenny -- You wrote:
I think a request for the exact Russian wording/description of the classes of destroyed/damaged tanks is far from an unreasonable request. Asking if they can read Russian is also relevant.
We don't require that level of sourcing here; the source originally given ("Russian document TsAMO f38 on11371 d16 l11,13") is sufficient for Interested readers to find out more on their own. As the rules state, AHF operates as an information exchange, not a research service.
Well put. If Art & Michael wish to do their own research & present it , that would be welcomed here, but not as attacks on others.

This is not a court of law.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 5569
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Art » 17 Oct 2016 08:07

Paul Lakowski wrote: Well put. If Art & Michael wish to do their own research & present it , that would be welcomed here, but not as attacks on others.
I didn't attack Miles anywhere. I just believe he is wrong. It's not a personal attack and not against forum rules.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 5569
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Art » 17 Oct 2016 08:11

One post by Michael Kenny was removed. Please avoid unrelated discussion of other members here.

Art
Forum Staff
Posts: 5569
Joined: 04 Jun 2004 19:49
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Art » 17 Oct 2016 08:29

David Thompson wrote: We don't require that level of sourcing here; the source originally given ("Russian document TsAMO f38 on11371 d16 l11,13") is sufficient for Interested readers to find out more on their own. As the rules state, AHF operates as an information exchange, not a research service.
I think we should distinguish between what is required by forum rules and what would be desirable or useful for discussion. I am agree with Michael that scans or original text of documents instead of their interpretation would be welcome. Of course, members are in their right to comply and not to comply with such requests.

Miles Krogfus
Member
Posts: 438
Joined: 08 May 2015 19:54
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Miles Krogfus » 17 Oct 2016 17:30

Hi everyone. I have mentioned the misbehavior of Will Fey and another German in relation to material I have searched out, and could bore you with other examples of misconduct that I have experienced, but Michael and others on this forum are very intelligent and honest and should be able, as I do, to seek and find documents that relate to their research interests. For example, Art has presented a number of Soviet strength and loss figures documents in their original Russian, and I have noted the official tank loss categories that they mention.
I assure fellow members of the AHF (1) that if they care enough, they can locate all the terms in Russian that list these types of Soviet losses and (2) translations into English of these same documents are available more and more in books being published. Seek and you will find. I care enough, so you may care enough too . . .
In the case of the document I quote, I translate correctly and so if I read another attempted subtle accusation that I would post tainted material on this site whose members I have shown respect for, I will cease posting here in order to avoid disturbing those whom wish to avoid certain realities they dislike.
Last edited by Miles Krogfus on 17 Oct 2016 21:00, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6368
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Michael Kenny » 17 Oct 2016 19:03

Miles Krogfus wrote:. . .
In the case of the document I quote, I translate correctly and so if I read another attempted subtle accusation that I would post tainted material on this site whose members I have shown respect for, I will cease posting here in order to avoid disturbing those whom wish to avoid certain realities they dislike . . .
It is called 'Peer Review'. You put forward your case and others point out possible errors. Much of what I posted here in the early years is now out of date and overtaken by newer research.

For example this was posted by me in 2015 but several earlier posts of mine say the exact same thing:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 3#p1933093

It was shown to be 100% wrong by this poster:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 0#p1933060

No one is error free.

I did not take it as a personal slight and by contacting him I was able to update and correct the sequence of events on 18/7/44. The poster most kindly supplied me with copies of his original documentation and I like to think that which I gave in return was as helpful to him.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6368
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Michael Kenny » 17 Oct 2016 19:18

Art wrote: I think we should distinguish between what is required by forum rules and what would be desirable or useful for discussion.
Original Soviet wartime documents is almost impossible for me to access and I can not read Russian anyway. I rely on Russian posters to do this for me. In return I think I do a fairly good job of making obscure British documents/books available here. I have lost count of the arguments that turn on simple translations and only by seeing the original wording can you spot potential errors.
If you want an example there is Wittmann's post Villers radio interview where he describes his kills as 'kampfwagen'.
Some seize on this claiming that he was not talking about tanks or he would have used the word 'panzer'. It is only by having the complete interview you can hear him describing his Tigers as 'kampfwagen'.
Telling posters to go and get the original documents themselves may be allowed by the forum rules but I consider it totally against the spirit of the place.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 6368
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Michael Kenny » 17 Oct 2016 19:39

By coincidence a critical translation 'dispute' has just surfaced in another thread

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 9#p2043749

Miles Krogfus
Member
Posts: 438
Joined: 08 May 2015 19:54
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Miles Krogfus » 24 Oct 2016 01:42

1944 losses 001.jpg
In April 1945 when the FHO issued detailed charts on the condition of Russian armor units based on captured records, this change was made to the 1944 Verluste: a return to the 30,077 from Heer claims, but no change to the 50% reduction of Luftwaffe claims.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Paul_Atreides
Member
Posts: 558
Joined: 09 Sep 2008 08:05
Location: Russia, St. Petersburg

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Paul_Atreides » 24 Oct 2016 18:50

Thanks for interesting document. When the first reappraisal was made? It's closer to real Soviet losses in 1944 - ~21-23 thousands tanks and SPGs.
There is no waste, there are reserves (Slogan of German Army in World Wars)

Miles Krogfus
Member
Posts: 438
Joined: 08 May 2015 19:54
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: 29,009 Total Soviet Armor Combat Losses 1944

Post by Miles Krogfus » 26 Oct 2016 20:43

FHO II C figures, using the revised April 1945 numbers, yields for 1944 31,167 Soviet tank and SU combat losses compared to the Soviet official figures of 29,009 a 7.44 % difference. Using the 1943 actual Soviet figure of 32,539 and then revising the German claims to be 100% of Heer and the FHO revised reduction for Luftwaffe claims yields 35,909 a 10.36 % difference.
The German Eastern Front "Totalausfalle" losses for June 1941 through December 1944 are 15,673 Panzers and 5,231 AG, a total of 20,904 while the Russians claimed 70,366 a difference of 336.62 %

"Totalausfalle," armor totally removed from their combat units by being destroyed or badly damaged and sent away for possible repair, is as the 1943 and 1944 Soviet loss figures I give above. AHF members who have carefully studied Russian loss categories comprehend this.
Last edited by Miles Krogfus on 27 Oct 2016 14:51, edited 2 times in total.

Return to “The Soviet Union at War 1917-1945”