21 st Panzer, Normandy
21 st Panzer, Normandy
I know they had a lot of French equipment that was reconfigured but what I don’t know off the top of my head and I can’t seem to put my finger on is what they had in the way of actual panzers, what was were they operating during Normandy ?
-
- Member
- Posts: 601
- Joined: 23 Aug 2006, 21:07
- Location: UK
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
Hi,
During the actual battle of Normandy they had eight companies of PzIV, a very few were the short barrel early versions.
In the months before Normandy there were French tanks in some of the companies, but most if not all had gone by the 6th June 44.
cheers PAUL
During the actual battle of Normandy they had eight companies of PzIV, a very few were the short barrel early versions.
In the months before Normandy there were French tanks in some of the companies, but most if not all had gone by the 6th June 44.
cheers PAUL
-
- Member
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: 21 Nov 2018, 22:30
- Location: Germany
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
Hi Brady
here the make up of 21.PzDiv in June 1944.
Source of this chart is Jentz: Panzertruppen 2.
Regards
Armin
here the make up of 21.PzDiv in June 1944.
Source of this chart is Jentz: Panzertruppen 2.
Regards
Armin
- Attachments
-
- 21.PzDiv June 44.jpg (39.42 KiB) Viewed 9007 times
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
Great Thanks, Looks like Stug's and Panzer IV's
Presumably Stug III's ?
Presumably Stug III's ?
-
- Member
- Posts: 3370
- Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 14:44
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
21 PD didn't have any StuG IIIs, the Funklenk Company was withdrawn before D Day to become 2./Pz Abt (Fkl) 302.
Alan
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
Do you know what they were equipped with?
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
I had a look at the 1 June 1944 unit report, which has a greater than average amount of detail. I started writing it as a post, but it quickly became messy, so I created this page instead:
https://panzerworld.com/21-panzer-division-june-1944
The summary in the report does not seem to match the Kriegsgliederung, so do use advisedly.
https://panzerworld.com/21-panzer-division-june-1944
The summary in the report does not seem to match the Kriegsgliederung, so do use advisedly.
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
I have cribbed into one of my books that the division's 200th Sturmgeschutz Battalion had 30 x 10.5 cm leFH18 (SF) auf geschutzwagen 39H (f) and 20 x 7.5cm PaK40 (sf) auf geschutzwagen 39H (f). They were supposed to have been organized into five mixed batteries, each consisting of 4 75mm and 6 105mm self-propelled guns. There's a Deutsche Wochenschau episode showing Rommel reviewing the unit, which shows these vehicles. They were built by Baucommando Becker and were self-propelled conversions of French Hotchkiss tanks.
Remain yourself, in spite of all the mighty do.
Goethe
Goethe
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
There is a discussion elsewhere on this forum about the organisation of this division. I have a suspicion that the details reported by the division may not match reality. After all this was the only formation that had its own factory turning out AFVs and was commanded by a deceitful character.Christian Ankerstjerne wrote: ↑02 Apr 2021, 23:44I had a look at the 1 June 1944 unit report, which has a greater than average amount of detail. I started writing it as a post, but it quickly became messy, so I created this page instead:
https://panzerworld.com/21-panzer-division-june-1944
The summary in the report does not seem to match the Kriegsgliederung, so do use advisedly.
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
I found a couple of old discussions using the search engine but nothing recent. Do you happen to have a link?Sheldrake wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 01:02There is a discussion elsewhere on this forum about the organisation of this division. I have a suspicion that the details reported by the division may not match reality. After all this was the only formation that had its own factory turning out AFVs and was commanded by a deceitful character.
I'm curious about your suspicion. It is certainly possible that the numbers are not correct but I can't think of a reason to believe that they were not reported in good faith. After all, 21. Panzer-Division was authorized to have a special table of organization and equipment, and it seems unlikely that they would have been asked to hand over some of their converted French equipment to other units.
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
It’s interesting that they were almost entirely equipped with the PIV
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
There are two discrepancies.Christian Ankerstjerne wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 01:22I found a couple of old discussions using the search engine but nothing recent. Do you happen to have a link?Sheldrake wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 01:02There is a discussion elsewhere on this forum about the organisation of this division. I have a suspicion that the details reported by the division may not match reality. After all this was the only formation that had its own factory turning out AFVs and was commanded by a deceitful character.
I'm curious about your suspicion. It is certainly possible that the numbers are not correct but I can't think of a reason to believe that they were not reported in good faith. After all, 21. Panzer-Division was authorized to have a special table of organization and equipment, and it seems unlikely that they would have been asked to hand over some of their converted French equipment to other units.
1. The reports for 1st June all report the presence of some SOMUA. There is a consensus among historians that these were not used in combat and an assumption that more Pz IV were received by 6th June. This is an assumption not supported by documentary evidence. I accept and understand the logic, but just want to note that we all know documents don't always tell the whole picture.
2. There is a discrepancy about the size and composition of StuG Bn 200.
Zetterling quotes the status report to Inspector General of Panzer Troops dated 1st June as having four batteries each of four 7.5 cm auf Ho and six 10.5cm auf Ho. This may differ from the KFSTN which IRRC has the proportion of 7.5 cm and 10.5 cm reversed. ASlthough the same status report is given in the annex to Kortenhaus' divisional history, in the text he says the formation had five batteries with a further battery forming and goes on to give names and deployment locations for each battery. i.e. there were 50% more SP guns than reported.
One main reason for accurate reporting of equipment states is that commanders are responsible for the military equipment issued to them by the state. In this case this the equipment has been locally manufactured by Becker, who also is the commander of the unit which will use it. G Panzer Forces had no means of cross referencing the numbers reported by 21 Pz Div. 21 Panzer Div could give whatever numbers they liked, as long as they could show that number of vehicles if Rommel paid a visit.
I don't think we can dismiss concerns that 21st Panzer Division might be told to hand over anti tank guns surplus to its establishment. Half of the original batch of Becker conversions were handed over to be SP batteries for static infantry divisions in 1943. One of the unofficial parts of the military code is to never declare buckshee items Twenty SP Guns in excess of the divisions establishment would provide higher command with opportunity to find a creative use e.g. as additional batteries to reinforce some other formation needing mobile anti tank weapons - perhaps 716 or 352 infantry?
-
- Member
- Posts: 6350
- Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
- Location: Bremerton, Washington
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
It is a mess. Zetterling, using the 1 June report to the IG Panzertruppen,gives the organization as:Christian Ankerstjerne wrote: ↑02 Apr 2021, 23:44I had a look at the 1 June 1944 unit report, which has a greater than average amount of detail. I started writing it as a post, but it quickly became messy, so I created this page instead:
https://panzerworld.com/21-panzer-division-june-1944
The summary in the report does not seem to match the Kriegsgliederung, so do use advisedly.
Pz.-Regt. 22
Gefechtsstand – Aubigny
Kdr: Oberst Hermann von Oppeln-Bronikowski
Stabs-Kp. (three Pz.-III (k), five Pz.-IV (l), one Befl.Pz.-III)
Flak-Pz.-Kp (twelve Flak-Pz.-38)
I./Pz.Regt. 22
Gefechtsstand – Jort
Kdr: Major Wilhelm von Gottberg
Stabs-Kp. (one Pz.-III (k), five Pz.-IV (l), one Befl.Pz.-III)
1.-4. Kp. (17 Pz.-IV (l) each)
II./Pz.Regt. 22
Gefechtsstand – Fresné-la-Mère
Kdr: Major Martin Vierzig
Stabs-Kp. (five Pz.-IV (l), three Befhl.Pz.-S35 (f) (Somua))
5. Kp. (five Pz.-IV (l), nine Pz.-S35 (f) (Somua)
6. Kp. (five Pz.-IV (l), thirteen Pz.-S35 (f) (Somua), two Pz.-H38 (f)
(Hotchkiss))
7. Kp. (five Pz.-IV (l), thirteen Pz.-S35 (f) (Somua))
8. Kp. (six Pz.-IV (k))
However, as you note, the divisional report counted nine fewer Somua. I think the answer is that on or about 1 June, 5. Kompanie probably dropped its nine in preparation for exchanging them for nine new Panzer IV from the 14 dispatched 24 May. However, when the 14 arrived and how they were distributed remains unknown to me. I would guess nine would have gone to 6. Kompanie and the remaining five to 8. Kompanie, but that is only a guess.
I also doubt that any of the Somua were used in action, since they were apparently only intended for training and local security. Ditto the two Hotchkiss. The question then is where did the discarded Somua and Hotchkiss go? To Becker for additional conversions? To Mailly as training vehicles? Or to Pz.-Abtl. 100., 205., or 206.?
Richard C. Anderson Jr.
American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell
American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
They definitely received more Pz Kpfw IVs after 1 June. On 10 June, 21. Panzer-Division reported having 112 Pz Kpfw IVs, so they would have received at least 12. They also didn't report any captured tanks other than 33 self-propelled anti-tank guns:Sheldrake wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 11:271. The reports for 1st June all report the presence of some SOMUA. There is a consensus among historians that these were not used in combat and an assumption that more Pz IV were received by 6th June. This is an assumption not supported by documentary evidence. I accept and understand the logic, but just want to note that we all know documents don't always tell the whole picture.
https://panzerworld.com/normandy-1944
21. Panzer-Division were allocated 14 Pz Kpfw IVs in May 1944:
https://panzerworld.com/german-armor-al ... n-may-1944
In the original delivery report, the vehicles are listed as having been dispatched on 24 May. It does not seem completely implausible that these vehicles did not arrive until after 1 June.
I agree that it is possible that they could have fudged the numbers. They might also have had the motivation to do so, though I would still argue that any allocation of vehicles to other units would most likely only be done if the number of vehicles allocated was of a certain size. Allocating one or two vehicles with which the mechanics of those units were not familiar would not have made much sense. Of course that said, logic was not always the deciding factor when it comes to German armored history.Sheldrake wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 11:272. There is a discrepancy about the size and composition of StuG Bn 200.
Zetterling quotes the status report to Inspector General of Panzer Troops dated 1st June as having four batteries each of four 7.5 cm auf Ho and six 10.5cm auf Ho. This may differ from the KFSTN which IRRC has the proportion of 7.5 cm and 10.5 cm reversed. ASlthough the same status report is given in the annex to Kortenhaus' divisional history, in the text he says the formation had five batteries with a further battery forming and goes on to give names and deployment locations for each battery. i.e. there were 50% more SP guns than reported.
One main reason for accurate reporting of equipment states is that commanders are responsible for the military equipment issued to them by the state. In this case this the equipment has been locally manufactured by Becker, who also is the commander of the unit which will use it. G Panzer Forces had no means of cross referencing the numbers reported by 21 Pz Div. 21 Panzer Div could give whatever numbers they liked, as long as they could show that number of vehicles if Rommel paid a visit.
I don't think we can dismiss concerns that 21st Panzer Division might be told to hand over anti tank guns surplus to its establishment. Half of the original batch of Becker conversions were handed over to be SP batteries for static infantry divisions in 1943. One of the unofficial parts of the military code is to never declare buckshee items Twenty SP Guns in excess of the divisions establishment would provide higher command with opportunity to find a creative use e.g. as additional batteries to reinforce some other formation needing mobile anti tank weapons - perhaps 716 or 352 infantry?
In either case, it seems that the argument isn't so much that they didn't have the vehicles stated, but rather that they possibly had more? This would not be the first time that this was the case, especially for older equipment that was no longer considered important enough to be reported upon.
- Christian Ankerstjerne
- Forum Staff
- Posts: 14028
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
- Location: Denmark
- Contact:
Re: 21 st Panzer, Normandy
I see that you posted while I was writing.
http://www.spearhead1944.com/gerpg/21ger_rec.htm
If I can find the original, this should at least be able to confirm whether the 14 Pz IV arrived before or after 1 June.
Thank you for the additional detail. It does seem like a plausible explanation, especially considering that some of the French tanks appear to have been used as placeholders. I found a site that claims the 1 May 1944 Kriegsgliederung is available in the AOK 7 KTB, though it is not legible on the site:Richard Anderson wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 17:59It is a mess. Zetterling, using the 1 June report to the IG Panzertruppen,gives the organization as:
[...]
However, as you note, the divisional report counted nine fewer Somua. I think the answer is that on or about 1 June, 5. Kompanie probably dropped its nine in preparation for exchanging them for nine new Panzer IV from the 14 dispatched 24 May. However, when the 14 arrived and how they were distributed remains unknown to me. I would guess nine would have gone to 6. Kompanie and the remaining five to 8. Kompanie, but that is only a guess.
http://www.spearhead1944.com/gerpg/21ger_rec.htm
If I can find the original, this should at least be able to confirm whether the 14 Pz IV arrived before or after 1 June.
Agreed, at least not as part of regular armored operations. They would still have been just as useful against infantry as they were in 1940, so it doesn't seem entirely implausible that they would have been used as fire support vehicles.Richard Anderson wrote: ↑03 Apr 2021, 17:59I also doubt that any of the Somua were used in action, since they were apparently only intended for training and local security. Ditto the two Hotchkiss. The question then is where did the discarded Somua and Hotchkiss go? To Becker for additional conversions? To Mailly as training vehicles? Or to Pz.-Abtl. 100., 205., or 206.?