Questions about StG44 Ktsn

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Freikorps, Reichswehr, Austrian Bundesheer, Heer, Waffen-SS, Volkssturm and Fallschirmjäger and the other Luftwaffe ground forces. Hosted by Christoph Awender.
User avatar
Vegemite/jordan
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:34
Location: New Zealand

Questions about StG44 Ktsn

Post by Vegemite/jordan » 01 Sep 2005 07:03

hello, im trying to find documents about a german company(if one existed) that dropped all or most of their Kar98's for StG44's but still rataining the standard amounts of Mp40's and MG34's and MG42's. If you have any documents or pictures of german infantry using large amounts of StG44's, PLEASE TELL ME!!!!

Thanks

Jordan

User avatar
Christoph Awender
Forum Staff
Posts: 6761
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 17:22
Location: Austria

Post by Christoph Awender » 01 Sep 2005 07:07

Well there was never a sufficient supply with Stg.44 to fit all planed KStN. but on my site you will find some KStN which show the introduced Sturmzüge.
Here two examples

http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/ks ... 1aug44.htm
http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/ks ... 1nov44.htm

\Christoph

User avatar
Vegemite/jordan
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:34
Location: New Zealand

Thanks!

Post by Vegemite/jordan » 01 Sep 2005 07:18

Thanks for that ill have something to work on now! If you find anymore please send to me!

thanks
jordan

gjkennedy
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Oct 2003 20:06

Post by gjkennedy » 11 Sep 2005 19:45

This may also be of interest, it was a variation of the Grenadier Kompanie dated 01/11/44 -

Gruppe Fuhrer

Kompanie Fuhrer (K) Stg44
Kompanietruppfuhrer (G) Stg44
Hauptfeldwebel (O) MP40
Rechnungsfuhrer (G) (auf Rad) Gewehr
Sanitasunteroffizier (G) (auf Rad) Pistole
3 Melder (1 auf Rad) 3 Stg44
6 Scharfschutzen 6 Gewehr (Zielfernrohr)
4 Funker (zugl. Melder) 4 Gewehr
Pferdfuhrer Gewehr
einspg.Infanteriekarren (Jf8), leichte Zugpferde, Infanteriekarren (Jf8)

1 (Sturm) Zug

Zugfuhrer (Z) Stg44
2 Melder 2 Stg44
Schutzen fur Gewhergranategerate 3 Gewehr
Kragentrager Pistole
Fahrer vom Bock Gewehr
Pferdefuhrer fur Jf8 Gewehr

leichte Maschinengewher als Waffen reserve, einspg.Infanteriekarren (Jf8), leichte Zugpferde, zweispg.Gefectswagen, (Hf 1 oder Hf 6) fur Munition und Gepack, Infanteriekarren (Jf8)

1 und 2 (Sturm) Gruppe

2 Gruppen fuhrer 2 Stg44
14 Schutzen 14 Stg 44

3 Gruppe

Gruppenfuhrer Stg44
7 Schutzen und MG-Schutzen 5 Stg44, 2 Pistole, 2 leichte Maschinengewehr

2 (Sturm) Zug – wie 1 (jedoch Zugfuhrer St.Gr. “O”)

3 Zug

Zugfuhrer (O) MP40
2 Melder 2 MP40
Schutzen fur Gewhergranategerate 3 Gewehr
Kragentrager Pistole
Fahrer vom Bock Gewehr
Pferdefuhrer fur Jf8 Gewehr

leichte Maschinengewher als Waffen reserve, einspg.Infanteriekarren (Jf8), leichte Zugpferde, zweispg.Gefectswagen, (Hf 1 oder Hf 6) fur Munition und Gepack, Infanteriekarren (Jf8)
3 Gruppen

3 Gruppenfuhrer 3 MP40
21 Schutzen und MG-Schutzen 15 Gewehr, 3 MP40, 3 Pistole, 3 leichte Maschinengewehr

Gesamtstarke – 37 gewehr, 55 Stg44, 6 Selbstladegewehre mit zielfernrohr 4-fach, 11 pistole, 10 MP40, 9 lMG

Gary

User avatar
Vegemite/jordan
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:34
Location: New Zealand

Ohhh sounds promising...

Post by Vegemite/jordan » 12 Sep 2005 11:12

Hey thanks for that! Looking at that i can see roughly whats its about and looks very interesting. Ive just put it through a computer translater but it doesnt ever work with military terms! I guess Ill have to find someone who speaks german and german military terms! lol this could take a while but looks definatley worth the time. If you have any more information about this particular unit(or translations) please send them to me.

Thanks alot

Jordan

gjkennedy
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Oct 2003 20:06

Post by gjkennedy » 12 Sep 2005 19:29

Sorry Jordan, I'd have been quicker typing them up in English than German but a lot of people like to have them in the original language!

Company HQ group -

Company Leader
Company Troop Leader (approx to CSM or 1st Sgt)
Hauptfeldwebel (approx to CQMS)
Company Clerk
Medical NCO
3 Messengers
6 Sharpshooters
4 Radio operators
Horse leader, with horse, cart and trailer

1 (Assault) Platoon -

Platoon Leader
2 Messengers
3 Riflemen with rifle grenade launcher equipment
Stretcher bearer
Horse leader, with horse, cart and trailer
Driver from saddle, with two horses, equipment wagon and trailer
Light machine gun as reserve weapon

2 Assault Groups with 2 Group Leaders and 14 riflemen

3rd Group with Group Leader and 7 riflemen and LMG numbers

2 (Assault) Platoon - like 1, but Platoon Leader senior NCO instead of commissioned officer

3 Platoon -

Platoon Leader
2 Messengers
3 Riflemen with rifle grenade launcher equipment
Stretcher bearer
Horse leader, with horse, cart and trailer
Driver from saddle, with two horses, equipment wagon and trailer

3 Squads with 3 Group Leaders and 21 riflemen and LMG numbers

Gewehr = Kar98
Stg44 = Strumgewehr
Pistole = Pistol
MP40 = MP40 (!)
leichte maschinengewehr = LMG (MG34 or MG42)
Selbstladegewehre mit zielfernrohr 4-fach = self-loading rifle with x4 optical sight (G43)

(K) = Company officer
(Z) = Platoon officer
(O) = Senior NCO rank (approx to Warrant officer)
(G) = NCO
(M) = Private (I didn't put all those in, but any with a reference were Private rank, except I just realised I forgot to put all the Group Leaders as (G), because they were.

Hope that makes more sense,

Gary

User avatar
Vegemite/jordan
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:34
Location: New Zealand

Man that helped a heap!

Post by Vegemite/jordan » 15 Sep 2005 11:43

Thanks that really helped alot! The computer never understands german milatary terms! Ohwell thats a very interesting organisation!

Thanks a bunch

Jordan

marcoferliga
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 21 Jan 2005 02:43
Location: Italy

Post by marcoferliga » 18 Sep 2005 21:01

I have a question regarding the M.P. Zug and the Sturm Zug:
were the LMGs in "Waffen reserve" (1 or 2) used only to replace the LMG in the third gruppe? or were they used "for necessity"; eventually detached to the M.P. (or Sturm) Gruppe (-en)?

For "gjkennedy": what is the 'KStN number' of the Grenadier Kompanie that you have posted?

Kind regards
Marco Ferliga

V. Andries
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 17 Oct 2003 21:26
Location: Belgium

MPi.44 / Sturmgewehre & Volksgrenadier-Kompanien

Post by V. Andries » 19 Sep 2005 12:48

Hi everybody,

Since I'm doing a little research into this and it were both Christoph's and Garry's excellent sites which inspired me to, I'll add my two cents.

were the LMGs in "Waffen reserve" (1 or 2) used only to replace the LMG in the third gruppe? or were they used "for necessity"; eventually detached to the M.P. (or Sturm) Gruppe (-en)?
The 15.11.44 Merkblatt 'Der Sturmzug der Grenadier-Kompanie' stipulates that the third le. MG of the Sturm-Zug was to be brought forward to the HKL once the platoon went over to the defence on a broad front. It was then to be operated by two of the 3. Gruppe's Munitions-Schützen and placed at a suitable spot among the platoon's assault-riflemen. It could also be used for Anti-Aircraft defence ('Flugzielbeschuß'), as pointed out by 'Hinweise für die Führung des Grenadier-Regiments einer Volks-Grenadier-Division'.
what is the 'KStN number' of the Grenadier Kompanie that you have posted?
The KStN which Gary J. Kennedy kindly posted can be found on Christoph Awender's site too:

KStN 131V 1.11.44 - Grenadierkompanie

Also be sure to check KStN 131V 1.9.44 - Grenadierkompanie on Christoph's site.

The fact that this last K.St.N., created for the Grenadier-Kompanien of the Volksgrenadier-Divisionen, does not make the distinction between the MP. 40 and MP. 44 has led to the wrong idea that these MP.-Züge were once to have been equipped with MP. 40. Firstly, the MP. 44 was only reclassified from 'Maschinenpistole' to 'Sturmgewehr' in October 1944, i.e. after the publication of this K.St.N.. Secondly, there are documents dating back to September 1944 or the previous months, which indicate that the MP.-Züge were to be equipped with the MP. 44, not the MP.40:

1. The Vorlaüfiges Merkblatt 'Der MP.-Zug der Grenadier-Kompanie' dated 1.2.1944. It details the experimental tactical procedures for the MP.-Züge equipped with MP. 43. Troops were asked to turn in reports on their tactical experiences.

2. The OKH documents 'Führung und Kampf der Volks-Grenadier-Division-Division' and 'Hinweise für die Führung des Grenadier-Regiments einer Volks-Grenadier-Division'. For example, this last one, dated 5.9.44, has as its first sentence: "Die Hauptunterschiede zwischen dem Grenadier-Regiment einer Volks-Gren.-Division und dem Regiment der Inf. Div. 44 sind: Eingliederung von 2 MP.- Zügen in jede Gren. Kp. (MP. 44), Neugliederung der schw. Inf. Waffen." Further on it goes on into more detail on the MP. 44, its advantages and tactical usage.

3. The Grundgliederung of the Volks-Grenadier-Division. It shows a Soll of 35 MP.44 with the Feldersatz-Bataillon. Since it was uncommon for Grundgliederungen to point out the Soll of small arms for the FEB -normally only the heavy weapons with which the Feldersatz was to train were portrayed-, this points to the important position the MP.44 has in the VG-Div.

No doubt there are more official documents pointing to all this, but then I'm not that long into this and still gathering things.

Also note that before the creation of the Volksgrenadier-Divisionen of the 32. Welle, the Grenadier-Kompanien of the Sperr-Divisionen (29. Welle, created July 1944, later renamed to Grenadier-Divisionen, still later to Volks-Grenadier) were already to be equipped with 1 MP-Zug (KStN 131 Sp. 8.7.1944).

In November 1944, the new K.St.N. 131 1.11.44 was published to:

1. incorporate the name change of MP.44 into StG.44, and hence the name change of MP-Zug into Sturm-Zug.

2. point out who was to receive a StG. 44 and who was still to have a 'classic' MP, which could not be made out of the previous K.St.N. 131V 1.9.44.

3. incorporate the latest tactical developments which were also put forward in the Merkblatt 'Der Sturmzug der Grenadier-Kompanie vom 15.11.44' (these developments were the split-up of the 3. Gruppe into a separate Granattrupp and a Feuer-Gruppe with two le.MG instead of one). This Merkblatt replaced the 1.2.44 one.

The "Handbook on German Military Forces", published in March 1945 by the US War Department, gives a total of 64 'sub-machineguns' for a 1.9.44 Volksgrenadier company, which is the correct sum of both MP.40 and MP.44. No doubt this was a great piece of intelligence work, probably based upon an obtained copy of KStN 131V 1.9.44. But as this K.St.N. did not make the distinction between MP.40 and MP.44, the Handbook concluded: "From an organizational point of view, the significance of the Volks Grenadier Division lies in its decrease of personell and increase of small automatic weapons, in particular sub-machine guns."

This is most likely how the misconception about MP.40-equipped MP.-Züge came to be: later works were based on the Handbook, which speaks only of 'sub-machine guns', or directly on the single KStN 131V 1.9.44 only, without further consulting accompanying German documents. Then other publications simply copied what others wrote previously. Sadly this misconception is still being repeated in some publications up till now: Osprey's 2004 title on WWII infantry tactics repeats the error.

However, there can be no doubt that the MP.-Züge of the Volksgrenadier-Divisions were supposed to be equipped with MP.44 right from their creation. Whether they always received them in sufficient quantities is another story...

Hope this helps; any comments / additional information welcome.

Andries

marcoferliga
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 21 Jan 2005 02:43
Location: Italy

Post by marcoferliga » 20 Sep 2005 16:42

Andries,

thank you for the exhaustive reply.
The 15.11.44 Merkblatt 'Der Sturmzug der Grenadier-Kompanie' stipulates that the third le. MG of the Sturm-Zug was to be brought forward to the HKL once the platoon went over to the defence on a broad front.
So were the LMGs considered NOT indispensable in the attack? had the STG44 enough Firepower to sustain the attack?
or was this organization created only to face the shortage of LMGs?

Thanks again
Marco Ferliga

V. Andries
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 17 Oct 2003 21:26
Location: Belgium

Post by V. Andries » 20 Sep 2005 22:41

Marco,

The Sturmzug would always go into the attack as one entity. The 3. Gruppe, known as the Feuergruppe, would provide the 'base of fire' with its two le.MG, while the 1. and 2. Gruppe were the manoeuvre elements for flanking and closing in. The three rifle-grenade men, known as the Granattrupp, were now under direct orders of the Zugführer and provided the Zug with a limited form of concentrated indirect fire support.
Once on the defensive, the two le.MG of the Feuergruppe, together with the third le.MG from the Gerätereserve, were to be placed along the platoon's front in so-called 'MG-nests', so at this point the 3. Gruppe was 'de facto' dissolved.

When I started getting interested in this, I had also read and believed the story that the le.MG-shortage was another reason for the creation of MP.-Züge. But it isn't so -at best the slightly lower number of le.MG was a beneficial side-effect-, since the Sturmzug of the Grenadier-Kompanie was still to have three le.MG in its final version, i.e. in theory enough to equip every single Gruppe with one le.MG, like it had always been before. The extra le.MG in the previous versions of KStN 131 were simply also there as Waffenreserve.

Tactical factors were of greater influence in this development: the Sturmzug (or at the time still known as MP.-Zug) tried to remedy some disadvantages of the le.MG-based tactical doctrine. The le.MG had always been the Gruppe's main weapon, while the riflemen were there to protect it (not vice-versa as e.g. in the Brittish army) and to carry its ammo. The firepower was not evenly distributed among the Gruppe: for all of the le.MG's firepower, the Kar98 with its bolt action was quite the reverse. And while the MG.34 and later the MG.42 sported formidable rates of fire, the weapons were not that practical in the attack, being heavy and slow in bearing the firepower on spotted targets. Ad-hoc remedies by field units were copied from the Soviet army -whose PPSh-equipped 'Avtomatchiki' proved very succesfull in close quarter fire-, by concentrating MP.40's and captured PPSh's, but once back in open terrain the range of these weapons was too short.
When the weapon that eventually became the StG.44 was being developed, at one moment it must have been seen as a possible replacement for MP, Kar and le.MG. all together, combining respectively fast bearing, effective range and high firepower: the Vorläufiges Merkblatt 'Der MP.-Zug' from February 1944 -like I previously wrote originally meant as a guideline for troop trials-, showed a Zug with three identical Gruppen: 7 MP.43, a Kar.ZF and a Kar./Gew.Gr. per Gruppe. The adaptations to the MP.43 for the fitting of the scope and grenade-launcher devices were still in development, so the Gruppe temporarily still had to rely on the old Karabiner for these functions (eventually StG.44 fitted with scope and grenade launching device never went into mass production). As you see there were no le.MG with the Zug.
Apparently this complete lack of le.MG with the MP.Zug was reported by the troops as a handicap, since the three le.MG were later reinserted into the MP.Zug. The fact that the German army was almost constantly on the defensive by this stage of the war meant that the advantages of the le.MG in the defense were more important than its disadvantages on the attack, which are stated above. However, in order to keep the obvious advantages of the StG. on the (counter)-attack, a compromise was found: two (from November '44 on only one, to augment the 3. Gruppe's supportive firepower during attack) were placed in the Zug's Gerätereserve, only to be brought forward once the platoon was in secured defensive positions.

At this point we have to take a look at the MP.-Zug in the larger context of the Grenadier-Kompanie, which it was to be a part of. At first there was to be only one MP.-Zug per Kompanie: as the Kompanie's 3. Zug, it was to be used for breaking into the enemy positions, in close terrain or at night, for cooperation with armoured vehicles, or as a company reserve for counter-attacks, combat-patrols and rear-guard duty. Obviously for these aggressive tasks the le.MG were deemed to be too much of a burden.
When the Volksgrenadier-Divisions were created, its Grenadier-Kompanien were given two Sturmzüge. Their 3. Zug was probably in fact to be nothing more than a company-reserve to fill the ranks of the Sturmzüge, and its men were preferably to be kept in an inofficial reserve-company at batalion-level, where they received further training from experienced officers (from 'Führung und Kampf der Volks-Grenadier-Division-Division'): when the Grenadier-Kompanie went into the attack, it was not to bring along more than 60 to 80 men in order to reduce casualties among the ill-trained young recruits: by this stage of the war, even company commanders were still relatively green and it was felt better to have small and effectively led companies, with readily available reserves, than large shambles.
By now, the Grenadier-Kompanie was also stripped of its schw.MG-Gruppe. These weapons were now concentrated in the ataillon's 4. schwere Kompanie for reasons of command & control. No doubt these two developments, i.e. firstly an increase to two Sturmzüge which now formed the company's core and secondly the removal of the company's s.MG, were also a further secondary insentive to reintroduce le.MG into the Sturmzug.

The fact that offensive vs. defensive postures and branch of service doctrines played a role in the lay-out of the MP./Sturmzug is also reflected by the following: till now I have been writing about the Grenadier-Kompanien of infantry divisions, which were, logically, depending from the Infantry Inspectatorate. The doctrines of the Panzergrenadier-Kompanien on the other hand would have been developed by the Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen. The Panzerwaffe is by its very nature an offensive arm and had tried earlier to remedy the offensive shortcommings of the le.MG-centered doctrine by giving its Gruppen two le.MG instead of one: instead of advancing as one entity, one halb-Gruppe would cover the advance of the other halb-Gruppe, which could then cover the catching up of the first Halb-Gruppe. The burden of carrying the necessary extra MG-ammo would be met to a certain degree by the fact that these Gruppen were truck or halftrack-bourne.
Now KStN 1114a of 1.11.44, although developed in the same period as the Volksgrenadier-Sturmzüge, does not assign any le.MG to its single Sturmzug: as the Panzergrenadier-company's 1. Zug, here the Sturmzug would have been used as originally intended, i.e. in the attack as a spearhead, in the defense for swift counter-attacks, for combat-patrols, as a rear-guard, or in close cooperation with tanks. Hence no le.MG were considered necessary in the Sturmzug. The twelve le.MG remaining with the other Züge were considered enough.

All this is of course doctrine; battlefield conditions would have been another thing...

marcoferliga
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: 21 Jan 2005 02:43
Location: Italy

Post by marcoferliga » 21 Sep 2005 01:26

Thanks again Andries,

The Sturmzug would always go into the attack as one entity. The 3. Gruppe, known as the Feuergruppe, would provide the 'base of fire' with its two le.MG, while the 1. and 2. Gruppe were the manoeuvre elements for flanking and closing in. The three rifle-grenade men, known as the Granattrupp, were now under direct orders of the Zugführer and provided the Zug with a limited form of concentrated indirect fire support.
(Something like the Italian Rifle platoon: it was based on three fictitious group: one rifle group and two MG groups.)

So we could conclude that:
at distance beyond 500m a Sturmzug as the same effectiveness of a Schutzenzug pre-1941;
at distance up to 500m the STG44 make the Sturmzug better than the Schutzenzug.
(Ok! I am reasoning as a wargamer!)
..of course we have to take consideration of the drastic reduction of training.

Kind regards
Marco Ferliga

gjkennedy
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Oct 2003 20:06

Post by gjkennedy » 28 Sep 2005 19:01

The point on whether the Volks Grenadiers had MP40 or MP44(Stg44) for their MP Zug prompted me to take a look back at the KStN tables for the Grenadier Kompanie.

The Sep 1944 table does just refer to 64 machine pistols in the column on weapons. In the Nov 1944 table the Stg44 is now listed specifically under the rifle column. So from that it is as mentioned open to interpretation as to whether the weapons under the machine pistol heading are MP40s or MP44s.

But checking back to the earlier Panzer Grenadier tables for Jul and Aug 1944, the proposed numbers of MP44s are shown under the machine pistol column, but with an identifying symbol to separate them from the pistols and the MP40s also shown. The Jul 1944 Sperr tables just annotate the 3rd Zug as having 20 MP44s instead of 20 rifles.

Given the earlier tables do make an effort to separate the MP40 and the MP44, it would suggest, to me at least, that the MP40 is the weapon referred to in the Volks Grenadier MP Zug, rather than the MP44(later Stg44).

Just a thought anyway

Gary

V. Andries
Member
Posts: 62
Joined: 17 Oct 2003 21:26
Location: Belgium

Post by V. Andries » 29 Sep 2005 13:21

Hi Gary,

Thanks for joining in.

Next to the above mentioned documents from OKH, which really don't leave any doubt, there are additional secondary clues pointing to the MP44:

1. the 1944 production figures for the MP40 and the MP44. By this year of the war, MP40 production had dropped significantly so that equipping a whole new wave of infantry divisions with this weapon is highly unlikely. It seems production was shifted to favor the MP44. The resulting shortage in MP40 is also reflected in the fact that the amount of MP40 was well below establishment in many units (e.g. the figures in Dugdale's series on the refitting of the Panzer and Panzergrenadier-Divisions in the West).

2. Pictures of Volks-Grenadier units, though scarce, often show them equipped with considerate quantities of MP44 (e.g. the series on 352. VGD in Roland Gaul's "Battle of the Bulge in Luxemburg"). I haven't seen a single late '44 picture showing groups of Grenadiere largely equipped with MP40.

3. Personal accounts of Volksgrenadiere in the Ardennes (e.g. again in Roland Gaul's "Battle of the Bulge in Luxemburg", mostly on 352. VGD) often refer to the StG44.

4. Actual unit returns on weapon strengths: e.g. On 1.12.44, 26. VGD reported 1395 StG44 against only 108 MP40 and 166 MP(i).

If originally meant to have been exclusively equipped with MP40, like commonly stated, then it is unlikely that after a period of two months in which men and material were assembling and at times already being committed, the then forming divisions of the 32. Welle shifted from MP40 to MP44 as the main weapon in their Grenadier Companies.

Leaves us with one question: why was their no distinct mentioning of the MP44 in the 1.9.44 KStN?

At one point I thought the developers were still reluctant to explicitly mention the MP44, because of Hitler's long time opposition against the weapon. Against this can be brought in that earlier on Hitler had already let go of his prejudices over the new weapon and also, like Gary remarked in a valid point, that the weapon had already been mentioned separately in two earlier KStN, namely KStN 131 Sp. 8.7.44 and KStN 1114a 1.8.44. (However, one thing particular about these KStN is that they were both developed for use within units -respectively being the Sperr-Divisionen and the Panzer-Brigaden-, which were hastily created as stop-gaps, after Hitler had commented the collapse of Heeresgruppe Mitte in early July 1944. Hitler had given his personal guidelines on how these counter-measure units were to be organised and equipped. Maybe he explicitly mentioned the MP44 in this context.)

So could it have been just a mistake by the office people who composed the actual documents? Were they themselves confused by the weapon's denominations and classifications (MP vs MKb vs StG...)? Or maybe they didn't know yet whether MP44-production was meeting up with the requirements? Could it be that they hadn't decided on the exact partition among the classic MP and the new MP44 or were all MP originally to be MP44?

Who is to say...?

Please note that I myself haven't seen the original KStN being discussed here, but only the interpretations on Christoph Awender's site and Piet Duits's transcription of KStN 131 Sp. 8.7.44, kindly provided by him. However, I do have copies of the other original OKH documents I mentioned above and I'm still trying to obtain more documental proof.

One thing: my aim is not to defend the MP44/StG44 as some 'cool weapon' of any kind, with which 'hordes of Volksgrenadiere' were supposedly to be equipped. I'm just trying to put things right, especially in the light of the Ardennes Offensive, which I'm most interested in. Bear in mind that during the Ardennes offensive and elsewhere, when the StG44 was largely available to a unit, its special ammo type posed big supply problems and that recruits, who had received the weapon, often didn't get enough training to get used to it - some even had never fired it, before going into action.

Any additional information welcome,

kind regards,

Andries
Last edited by V. Andries on 30 Sep 2005 13:32, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vegemite/jordan
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 01 Sep 2005 06:34
Location: New Zealand

to andire and all concerned

Post by Vegemite/jordan » 30 Sep 2005 10:53

I am a war gamer and modler and im also (trying) to be a historian of the frontline aspects of WW2 especially in normandy. The reason I want to find a unit with many MP44s-(if possible as many as the Kar98) is because I my standard german armys are getting wipped out by russian PPsh's and by the terrain conditions, i cant tacticly beat them. This is my first year using a german army and i went very well using standard american GI's and Shermans. But these competitions keep getting more built up making it perfect for SMG battles.

If you do have any organistaions involving overly huge amounts of MP40's or MP44's please send to me or if you dont ill keep getting stamped on and forced to use americans!

Thank you

Jordan

Return to “Heer, Waffen-SS & Fallschirmjäger”