Classification of a wreck

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
User avatar
Contender
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 11 Jan 2008 14:57
Location: Pa

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Contender » 10 Oct 2019 01:10

Michael Kenny wrote:
09 Oct 2019 22:46
That is my real name in my posts
Honestly that is not impressive given that some of the worst hypocrites and liars imaginable have tied their accounts to their real name, face, address & phone number, etc. see social media & youtube meltdowns (if you care about that sort of thing). Trust is built regardless of what you call yourself with a record of good well researched posts but that does not excuse lack sources nor does that mean I should take it on "faith" that a good poster is correct about something without a source. Good posting does not mean infallibility.
Michael Kenny wrote:
09 Oct 2019 22:46
I did 'show' and it is a simple matter for my 'show' to be checked.
This is called telling not showing, showing is posting a picture or excerpt in this case.
Somehow I do not think you were very fun as child during “show and tell” time. :lol:
Michael Kenny wrote:
09 Oct 2019 22:46
before you brought it up
Hmm I didn’t bring this or any book up the “Zetterling” book as already being discussed I was only curious about the discrepancies you mentioned & wanted a scan or pic to corroborate your claims. I think I am in danger of derailing this thread so I’m going to lurk for a while.

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 01:24

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 00:56

No need to thank me, it has been my utmost pleasure seeing you writhe around.
Always happy to 'writhe' if it means I can post pics of scrap panzers.
Just for you here is a new photo (actually a screen grab of a filmed 'panning' shot assembled into a single view) of a Normandy wreck. . Short term repair maybe?
Enjoy!

Panther wreck.....widest ty.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Michael Kenny on 10 Oct 2019 01:31, edited 1 time in total.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 01:25

Michael Kenny wrote:
06 Oct 2019 15:36
Yoozername wrote:
05 Oct 2019 22:36
Or maybe just look at the West on May 31 1944? Basically before D-Day. 1244 operational, and 222 in repair (~15%)? The report I posted was from June 25th. If your theory had any credibility, there should be many dozens of smoking hulks being kept on the books.
Using counts from May 1944 instead of when the action started is disingenuous. 1st SS kept good records and the number of wrecks they carried is quite high,

Lehr tank states normandy.jpg
So, please go back and correct this. Thanks. And "Why did you leave out the JagdPanzer IVs?" Did all those question marks interfere with your assertion of 'good records'?

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 01:28

Michael Kenny wrote:
10 Oct 2019 01:24

Always happy to 'writhe' if it means I can post pics of scrap panzers.
widest ty.jpg
Being out of context suits you.

And now that we have addressed, and corrected, your confusion over the Lehr data... Care to finally comment on how it does not support your argument?

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 01:32

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 01:28
.. Care to finally comment on how it does not support your argument?
Asked and answered many times. Please re-read my earlier replies.
Polish Panther- (2)v.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 01:50

Michael Kenny wrote:
06 Oct 2019 20:12
Yoozername wrote:
06 Oct 2019 19:17
I don't think that this data supports your argument. Long Term repair is generally 14 days. The numbers for July 1st certainly show that the Long term repairs have been reduced?
Whilst you can say the data does not confirm my argument it does not disprove it either. The 'in repair' total is still 39 Pz IV. They might have changed the designation of the crocks but they did not greatly increase the number of tanks fit for action. The hurdle is the move into 'fit for action' not a reclassification of the type of damage preventing use. It is entirely possible some (or even all) the 10 left in long-term repair are total losses being carried for spares. Lehr was hammered in the first fortnight of its debut in Normandy and lost the use of well over half its tanks.
How can I have missed this error? They don't have to 'greatly increase the number of tanks fit for action'. They decreased the Long terms, moved some to short term, and DID increase the fit for actions by 33% (not bad). So, again, where are the hanger queens? The 10 Long Terms? The 29 short terms? The onus is on you and your assertions. From June 18th to July 1st, The Long Terms decreased 65%.

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 01:55

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 01:50
They decreased the Long terms, moved some to short term, and DID increase the fit for actions by 33% ..........The Long Terms decreased 65%.
Decreased but not eliminated. I stand by my original assertion. Please re-read my earlier replies if you are still confused..

Polish Panther (14)sm.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 02:02

Not confused. I think myself and others see you quite clearly now.

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 02:20

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 02:02
Not confused. I think myself and others see you quite clearly now.
Good. No need to thank me.
Polish Panther (16)sm.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 02:44

This is called telling not showing, showing is posting a picture or excerpt in this case.
Somehow I do not think you were very fun as child during “show and tell” time. :lol:
LOL! :D
Hmm I didn’t bring this or any book up the “Zetterling” book as already being discussed I was only curious about the discrepancies you mentioned & wanted a scan or pic to corroborate your claims. I think I am in danger of derailing this thread so I’m going to lurk for a while.
Is that possible? :lol: He made this thread a 'wreck'...

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 03:31

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 02:44
He made this thread a 'wreck'...
The thread died a while back. Nothing of substance has been posted for a while and I am now just using it to showcase my wrecked -panzer pics-or as some would say 'short-term repair Panzers! No one is really interested in pointless repetitive arguments over insignificant mind-numbing details so it needs the photos to give it any value. There are over 900 photos in my wrecked Panthers folder so I reckon I can keep it going for some time.
Polish Panther wreck .. (1)f.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 03:37

I almost pity you. Maybe take your own 'advice'?

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=241805&p=2202095#p2202095
You have to learn to accept the fact others may disagree with you and that some members may even take a particular dislike to you and 'stalk' you across a number of threads. It is not a a boxing match where you can deliver a knockout blow and be declared the undisputed winner. If you stick to getting your point across without too much repetition then you will do well. The trick is to recognise when an argument has reached the 'your-wrong/no its-you-that -is-wrong' level and is pointlessly circling the drain. That is the time to bow out gracefully. If you find yourself arguing the same points over (for example) 30 pages then you clearly have lost perspective.

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Michael Kenny » 10 Oct 2019 03:57

Yoozername wrote:
10 Oct 2019 03:37
I almost pity you. Maybe take your own 'advice'?
Thank you for your visit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0XKqiNLlLk


Now can you, as the thread title says, help me classify this wreck?
Polish Panther wreck .. (2)b.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Yoozername
Member
Posts: 2115
Joined: 25 Apr 2006 15:58
Location: Colorado

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Yoozername » 10 Oct 2019 05:18

I think the thread has exposed you, and your intentions when starting these agenda threads. Maybe get some of your buddies to help you out? I don't know. You see wrecks everywhere. Some people see Tommy's jumping out of tanks everywhere. Even if not hit.

Edit: I see some other people have reported your posts. Too bad a good discussion on the Homeland Repair could not evolve from this awful thread. Maybe I will start a new thread.

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

Re: Classification of a wreck

Post by Stiltzkin » 10 Oct 2019 08:05

Germans kept heavily damaged vehicles with their divisional repair units, in vacuum. Lets forget about 20 factors influencing this. So what?
I think the theory behind this is that the Germans had to keep up a "Tiger myth" for propaganda purposes and thus losses must have been significanty greater.
That was already discussed about 17 years ago.
http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/ubb/Forum ... 00050.html
to which Dr. Zetterling responded:
Furthermore, I have not seen any evidence suggesting that the Germans were haveing significant number of tanks in repair that were never repaired, but just kept there to bolster numbers. Rather, a panzer commander would be tempted to get them classified as destroyed, so as to motivate a shipment of new tanks.
I think the question here is not whether the reports are faulty, as this is self evident that they can inherit errors, but rather by how much they deviate. Photomaterial can be useful, but has its limitations, unless you could draw upon an extensive collection of snapshots of all wrecks that were ever encountered or recorded.
As for the classification: If there was a greater tendency in the Allied system relative to the German system, I see no reason as to why that would be the case, considering the circumstances.

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”