stg 44 wrote: ↑
01 Nov 2021 16:07
Though it is funny how you keep saying this, but still keep responding. Seems like you can't quit me.
No, no, obviously its me that is so lucky, plus I can never resist pointing out bafflegab.
Oh look cherrypicked stats without a source.
Seriously? RG242, T78, R145, F5886-et.seq., which contains the two Anlagen to "Ubersichten über einsatzbereite Panzer u, Stu,Gesch. Ost in %", Der Generalinspekturder Panzertruppen Abt. Org. Nr. 3266/44 g.Kdos." dated 15/11/44 and revised 10/12/44, as well as Ungepanzert losses and shortfalls for the period 1 December 1943 through 1 September 1944 as reported in Anlagen to OKH.Gen.Stab d. H./Gen Qu I/06535/44 g.Kdos., originally dated 5 August, 5 September, and 5 October 1944. I see he gives his figures for March and April as derived from T78, Roll 168, which might be the missing report of c. 5 July covering March-May. I have never run across it, but it is certainly possible given the thousands of rolls and hundreds of thousands of frames of microfilm there are. Next time I can get to NARA, assuming they ever open up, I'll try to remember to check Roll 168.
How about you read the screen shots I posted from the article? That would answer your questions. 103,571 motor vehicles (not counting combat vehicles like SPWs and AFVs) were lost in March and April 1944, mostly on the Eastern Front, mostly in Ukraine. 33,000 replacements were sent East in April-May 1944.
The loss of all Ungapanzert vehicles for the Gesamt Heer in April was given as 44,191, not including 1,289 trailers. He has 41,839, but since he does not break down by type according to the report I do not see where his error is. The figure of 61,732 is possible for March, but the detail is missing. For example, 33,345 replacements for the Ostfront April/May should be 33,346, minor perhaps, but why is the error there? June's 11,921 should be 12,254. For Ob.West, he has April/May as 12,472, but it should be 12,404 and his figure for June of 7,657 should be 7,544.
However, over and above the problem with the odd errors, are the conclusions drawn by him.
Why Ob. West needed equipment was to get units up to strength to repel the invasion that could have been coming as early as May per intelligence reports of the time.
Sure, and why the Ostheer needed equipment was to get units up to strength to replace over a hundred thousand losses that had actually occurred in the previous few months.
I offered you a free copy and you ignored it. I've posted the relevant screenshots after Michael posted a bunch of parts that were not relevant to the issue under discussion.
Oh, so the snippets you choose to post are relevant, but the rest of the article is not?
Again none of that was relevant to what we were talking about, I posted the relevant screenshots. In this thread the part that prompted your original reply was the diversion of equipment from preparing the divisions in the west for the invasion to replacing some of the equipment lost in Ukraine in March-April 1944; the screen shots I posted after you wrote all this actually addresses that rather than the irrelevant parts that Michael posted and you've jumped on to shift the topic to something you'd rather argue about rather than what was actually being talked about.
Yeah, the only problem with that is the screen shots you decided was relevant actually say nothing about diverting "equipment from preparing the divisions in the west for the invasion to replacing some of the equipment lost in Ukraine in March-April 1944", which I already pointed out the data doesn't support either.