tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post2630614881647205162..comments2024-02-20T08:31:57.362-08:00Comments on WWII and other Book Reviews: Zitadelle: The German Offensive Against the Kursk Salient 4-17 July 1943 by Mark HealyT. Kunikovhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03243004853811191350noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-35996828356977261172010-01-17T04:19:13.450-08:002010-01-17T04:19:13.450-08:00Hi again, BTW, I see where he Healy does state LAH...Hi again, BTW, I see where he Healy does state LAH had 70 pz. & Ag's and then he states that its strength fell to 70!!, as you stated. I wear bifocals & my eyeballs are somewhat burned-out (28-inch monitor). Sorry about that. Glantz gives more accurate figs. for the Germans since the actual German unit reports have been available since the end of WWII (except for most detailed 9th Army records that the Soviets captured in their entirety). Point is though that the German & Soviet tank strength fluctuated on a daily basis due to hurridley repaired tanks being rushed back into combat. German recaords are quite good at recording this, but there still are gaps & errors in those orignal records/reports. Every war's records & accounts & subsequent interpretations are not 100% accurate. They all are a big, usually to some degree confusing & conflicting mess.christof139https://www.blogger.com/profile/09975864414054474425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-32415901906257131902010-01-17T04:05:09.072-08:002010-01-17T04:05:09.072-08:00Hi, First Healy said LAH had 54 pz. & 20 AG...Hi, First Healy said LAH had 54 pz. & 20 AG's, than he said that on 12JUL43 LAH had 50 Pz. & 20 AG's, so that is a drop of 4 pz. as 54 does not + 50 & Healy is correct in that LAH's strength dropped. Later it rose because of the repaired tanks that were returned to LAH (the Germans had an excellent field repair system, and the percentage of tanks etc. actually destoyed in comparison to those temporarily knocked out is rather low in most battles). In Tunisia, ~130,000 Germans & ~120,000 Italians surrendered, and some German sources place the number of Germans that surrendered as high as 160,000. So, more Germans surrendered in Tunisia than Italians. In Sicily the opposite was true.christof139https://www.blogger.com/profile/09975864414054474425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-12568260549200222262010-01-17T04:04:13.737-08:002010-01-17T04:04:13.737-08:00Hi Again, I also noticed you point out Healy's...Hi Again, I also noticed you point out Healy's huge error about the tank brigade strenth etc. (Whew. That's a bad one.) <br /><br />However, you tstaed that TO&E for Soviet Tank & Mech. Corps was 3 tank brigades but the Tank Corps also had a Motroized Rifle Brigade and the TC commonly had additional seperate tank &/or SPG (SU) regiments &/or battalions attached to it. The Mech. Corps had 3 Mech. Inf. Bdes. each with an organic tank regiment and 1 Tank Bde. plus additonal units as in the Tank Corps. The Motorized Inf. Bde. of the Tank Corps I don't believe had an organic tank regt. or battalion.<br />However, some Tank Corps only had 2 Tank Bdes. due to tank shortages but most usually they had 3 Tank Bdes. At the time of Kursk, there were 2 official establishments for Tank Bdes: 1) With ~ 50 - 54 tanks or so, 2) with 60 - 65 tanks. makes things more confusing. The USA's 1st & 2nd Armd. Divs. each kept their own original, eperimental, & different TO&E's, and subsequnet Armd. Divs. were mainly termed light or heavy with two more different TO&E's. The Germans had differnt TO&E's for many of their Pz. & Pz. Grnd. Divs. thoughout the war, & the Brits were also somewhat just as confusing at times.<br /><br />Two other things that lead to conusion etc. about the East Front: 1) Soviets included sick as well as wounded in the same category, medical casualties but basically what the West termed wounded, whereas the USA did not include sick in the number of wounded. Sometimes Soviet commanders would clearly state the number of wounded & sick & not just combine both figures into medical casualties. So, due to the frequent inclusion of the number of sick troops with the wounded troops, the number of Soviet wounded is frequently stated as being higher than it actually was. 2) The Soviets would also include the number of mortars in the total number of Arty. pieces whereas the Western Aliies didn't include mortars in their tally of Arty. pieces. A big mess when trying to somewaht accurately sort things out. <br /><br />Happy New Year & Russian/Orthodox Christmas.christof139https://www.blogger.com/profile/09975864414054474425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-89819071769023308552010-01-17T03:27:51.306-08:002010-01-17T03:27:51.306-08:00Hi, First Healy said LAH had 54 pz. & 20 AG...Hi, First Healy said LAH had 54 pz. & 20 AG's, than he said that on 12JUL43 LAH had 50 Pz. & 20 AG's, so that is a drop of 4 tanks as 54 does not = 50 & Healy is correct in that LAH's strength dropped. Later it rose because of the repaired tanks that were returned to LAH (the Germans had an excellent field repair system, and the percentage of tanks etc. actually destoyed in comparison to those temporarily knocked out is rather low in most battles). <br /><br />In Tunisia, Allied sources state that ~130,000 Germans & ~120,000 Italians surrendered, and some German sources place the number of Germans that surrendered as high as 160,000. So, more Germans surrendered in Tunisia than Italians. In Sicily the opposite was true to a much greater difference. Glantz' book on Kursk is more accurate as are German military unit records & some official & until recently undisclosed Soviet accounts written by USSR commanders of the units at Kursk. Many of the actual Soviet reports are quite honest but they were not published for the general public due to the Cold War Era etc., just as many published Western Allied accounts written during WWII & the Cold War of fighting in the Med., NW Europe & the Pacific, the CBI, etc. tended to underplay Allied mistakes, casualties, material losses, setbacks. etc. & over exagerate Axis losses to some degree or other. It's the same with fighter pilot kill/victory claims during WWII, in that everyone undeliberately & deliberately exagerated their victories & the enemy's losses. Another point about the Eastern Front is the fact that even at the time of Kursk ~30% give - or take a little - of the Soviet tanks were light T-70s & even some T-60's were still in use & perhaps some BT-7's since Bt-7's were produced up into early 1943. So, Soviet tank losses would almost always be higher than German losses because of these light armored & armed light tanks being more easily knocked out, & the Soviets still unfortunately suffered from a lack of radios in all their tanks (as well as in their aircraft). Back to the Med.: the Italians also had some very good units, both ground, air, & sea contrary to the stereotype of their troops not fighting & just surrendering, but it was unfortuante for them that they didn't have better tanks & small arms & leadership (their arty. was good, their pilots were good & planes OK & some good but not enough of them, their navy was actually good but poor leadership helped destroy it,). The Italian navy was also not too fond of Mussolini.christof139https://www.blogger.com/profile/09975864414054474425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-62110142111759809292009-08-02T09:25:07.139-07:002009-08-02T09:25:07.139-07:00Sadly, nothing off the top of my head. The latter...Sadly, nothing off the top of my head. The latter period of the war I have not concentrated on as much as I should have, sadly. Operations in the Baltics are also seen as secondary fronts to what was going on in the Polish/German direction.T.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13527323602685501975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383897115500989335.post-12013178635958742992009-08-02T08:58:25.683-07:002009-08-02T08:58:25.683-07:00It sounds like you have been reading some books th...It sounds like you have been reading some books that have been a bit lacking.<br /><br />Any recomendations on the Baltic area? Especially the period from 1944 to 1945?<br /><br />stcampnovahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02324749633489670413noreply@blogger.com