Faust in Battle of Berlin-45

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1118
Joined: 25 Jan 2006 15:40
Location: REPUBLIC OF SIBERIA

Faust in Battle of Berlin-45

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 09 Jul 2006 20:12

Hello all! :)

New info for B of B.

Losses in the Battle of Berlin from Panzerfaust and FaustPatron were small

The Soviet research.

CAMO Russian Federation. fund 299.

T-34

It is examined the destroyed tanks: 65

It is destroyed:

ATG and Artillery - 58
aviation - 2
faust - 5

IS-2

It is examined: 7

It is destroyed:

ATG and artillery - 7
aviation - 0
faust-0

JSU--122/152

It is examined: 3

It is destroyed:

ATG and aviation - 2
aviation - 0
faust-1

In total in streets of Berlin from faust was lost about 50 Soviet tanks. Nearby 120-130 have been damaged.


Best regards!

User avatar
Kurt Volkmar
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 07 Jul 2006 20:51
Location: Leicestershire, England.

Post by Kurt Volkmar » 09 Jul 2006 21:08

Humm....I read that a lot more tanks were lost by the Russians whilst taking Berlin, what figures do you have on the total tank losses by the Red Army for that period?

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1118
Joined: 25 Jan 2006 15:40
Location: REPUBLIC OF SIBERIA

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 10 Jul 2006 07:28

Kurt Volkmar wrote:Humm....I read that a lot more tanks were lost by the Russians whilst taking Berlin, what figures do you have on the total tank losses by the Red Army for that period?
According to data of Krivosheyev, the Red army has lost during operation on capture of Berlin 1997 tanks and SPG. But these data are not correct! The destroyed and damaged tanks have entered into this figure. One tank could be lined in fights of 4-5 times and is again restored by line fault services. Irrevocable losses of 3 Soviet Guards tank armies here http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=104100

Best regards

User avatar
Qvist
Member
Posts: 7836
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 16:59
Location: Europe

Post by Qvist » 10 Jul 2006 08:29

Kurt: Most tank losses figures you encounter is for the Berlin operation, of which the fighting in the city itself was only a limited part.

Alex: It seems very clear that Krivosheev's general tank losses figures at least do not include tanks that were damaged and repaired by field services. The figures for losses, deliveries and stock are coherent, and deliveries clearly do not encompass tanks repaired in the field, as the figures here are practically similar to production figures. Is there something special about the Berlin figure that gives reason for scepticism?

Oh, and thanks for the data - very interesting. I seem to remember similar investigations of destroyed German tanks on the Western Front similarly indicating that AT guns (or tank guns) accounted for the great majority of combat losses.

cheers

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1118
Joined: 25 Jan 2006 15:40
Location: REPUBLIC OF SIBERIA

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 10 Jul 2006 10:08

Qvist wrote:Kurt: Most tank losses figures you encounter is for the Berlin operation, of which the fighting in the city itself was only a limited part.

Alex: It seems very clear that Krivosheev's general tank losses figures at least do not include tanks that were damaged and repaired by field services. The figures for losses, deliveries and stock are coherent, and deliveries clearly do not encompass tanks repaired in the field, as the figures here are practically similar to production figures. Is there something special about the Berlin figure that gives reason for scepticism?

Oh, and thanks for the data - very interesting. I seem to remember similar investigations of destroyed German tanks on the Western Front similarly indicating that AT guns (or tank guns) accounted for the great majority of combat losses.

cheers
Research of Krivosheyev - good. But there are data who contradict it. Also it is very authoritative researches. As Igumenov P. « Research of the destroyed Soviet tanks ».

Krivosheyev writes, that only in Vyborg-Petrozavodsk operation (Karelia) in 1944 the Soviet losses have made 297 tanks and SPG. According to Igumenov, for all 1944 the Red army has lost 415 tanks in Kareliya. From them 94 irrevocable losses - the destroyed tanks which could not be restored. Igumenov cites data about the reasons of their losses. On 65 % is artillery fire.

I have data and about the reasons of losses of 1 Guards tank army in the Berlin operation. Also the information of Igumenov.

Sorry my bad english

Best regards

Alex

User avatar
Qvist
Member
Posts: 7836
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 16:59
Location: Europe

Post by Qvist » 10 Jul 2006 11:05

Hi Alex

No problem with the English, I understand you just fine.

Thanks for that. My point wasn't so much that Krivosheev's tank loss figures can't possily be wrong - that is a question that can only be answered by investigating his and other relevant sources, which I am in no position to do. I note with interest that other researchers seem to draw different conclusions, to put it like that.

My point was more that if Krivosheev's figures are inaccurate generally, the reason can't be that he has been including vehicles subsequently repaired by field shops - at least not intentionally.

I don't have the book in front of me right now, but in his overall tables for equipment losses he provides figures for the number of tanks held at the beginning of each year, and deliveries and losses duringthe intervening periods. These figures correspond - ie, stock at the beginning of 1942 minus losses suffered in 42 plus deliveries in 42 is equal to stock on 0101 43.

Unfortunately he does not clarify the precise content of the terms, at least not in the English edition. However - if "deliveries" included field-repaired vehicles but losses only destroyed tanks, or "deliveries" only factory-delivered vehicles but losses both damaged and destroyed tanks, then the totality of deliveries and losses would not equal the development in stock, which they do. Hence, the figures must neccessarily reflect:

either
a) the number of tanks delivered from factory and the number of tanks irrevocably lost
or
b) the number of tanks delivered from factory and field shops and the number of tanks lost or damaged.

Since the delivery figures are almost identical to the production figures cited in f.e. Zaloga/Ness it seems clear that they cannot include vehicles repaired and delivered from field shops. Hence, the losses figure must refer to permanently disabled tanks - otherwise the RKKA inventory of tanks would in reality be much, much higher than Krivosheev cites.

Now, it is of course possible that the tank loss figures Krivosheev cites for operations are generally nonetheless on a different basis, and include damaged vehicles also. If so however, if you add together the losses in all the major operations of a year, you should get a very high figure compared to the stated overall tank losses for that year, since the number of damaged vehicles is normally much higher than the number of write-off losses. In 1945, the losses given for the major operations (Budapest op., Vistula-Oder op., Western Carpathian str off op, East Prussian str off op, East Pomeranian str off op, Vienna str off op, Berlin str off op, Prague str off op) amount to a combined 10,917. The total for the year is 13,700 (of whom 5,000 is SPGs, it must be recalled). As the Budapest losses were substantially incurred in 1944, this would leave 3-4000 machines lost in the fighting beyond the major operations as listed above, which seems plausible. This does not appear to me to allow for the possibility that Kriovsheev's tank loss figures for the operations includes a large number of damaged and subesequently repaired tanks and SPGs. And due to the consistency of different figures, if that is the case, then the delivery figures must be correspondingly too high, or the strength figures correspondingly too low.

That is of course is on the general level, and does not in itself rule out anything regarding a specific figure for a specific operation. But it would be strange if Krivosheev's figure for the Berlin operation was on a different footing from what he uses generally, and at least I do not think it can be assumed without strong proof.

An alternative explanation, if other research can strongly source a lower loss figure for the Berlin operation specifically, might perhaps be delayed reporting (ie, that some of these losses were in fact suffered in earlier fighting)? I have seen comments to his equipment loss figures for operations in late 41 that suggest this, but that would of course be much less likely in 1945 than in that chaotic year.

cheers

Michate
Member
Posts: 1429
Joined: 02 Feb 2004 10:50
Location: Germany

Post by Michate » 10 Jul 2006 14:41

Do not forget that many tanks/SPGs were not within the tank armies but within smaller tank/SPG units.

The linked thread shows irrecoverable losses of the tank armies as roughly 30% of their initial strength, soemthing not too much different from the overall loss rate, if you divide his overall loss figure with his overall strength figure (though I would have to look up the exact figures).

A few figures on Soviet tank evacuation/repair can be found here (messages by Gary Dickson near the bottom of the page):

http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/ubb/Forum ... 025-6.html

User avatar
Alex Yeliseenko
Member
Posts: 1118
Joined: 25 Jan 2006 15:40
Location: REPUBLIC OF SIBERIA

Post by Alex Yeliseenko » 13 Jul 2006 07:37

I think, that in some operations of Red army Krivosheyev has mixed losses in tanks destroyed and lined. However it has not answered on this question. I consider, that it demands still many researches.

I shall cite still given of book which have recently left in Russia of Alexey Isaev.

So...

1 Ukrainian front from April, 1st till May, 9th, 1945 has lost destroyed and domaged 935 tanks T-34/85.

625 from them - from artillery (289 - destroyed, it it is impossible to restore)

37 - from Faust (12 - destroyed)

62 - from aircraft (27 - destroyed), and a part of tanks - from friendly fire Il-2

It has been lost destroyed and domaged also 89 JS-2 (from Faust - 2), 56 JSU--122/152 (18 - Faust), 231 Su-76 (Faust - 9).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Ukrainian front from January, 12th till April, 5th, 1945 has lost destroyed and lined-

- From artillery 1072 Т-34/85

- From Faust - 115 Т-34/85


-------------------------------------


Best regards

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”