Dandelion
-
Posts
952 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dandelion
-
-
36 still, though not for long.
-
Hi there Andreas
Unfortunately, he has ceased answering any attempts of mine to contact him as well.
This happens regularly. He disapperars.
He's usually back in a year or two.
I've gotten more or less used to it.
All the best
Dandelion
-
Hey there
I'll give it a whirl, with a specifically German perspective. As has been mentioned, the short answer to the issue of difference between paras and airlanding infantry is weight and mode of deployment.
Operational context
In German airborne operations the seizing of an airhead was pivotal (as in any nation) and to them, airheads meant airfields. They did not develop any skills in the improvised building of airfields, nor indeed did they become very skilled at paradropping supplies. Focus was on airfields and in the territories of the foreseen enemies, there were plenty of airfields to steal anyway. The ultralight paras were capable of seizing these airfields but not, it was argued, to hold them against regular enemy forces for any meaningful period of time. Enter the airlanding infantry. Being airmobile and using transport planes, they could carry along the heavy equipment of the infantry division.
The role of airlanding infantry - the LL
Airlanding infantry was light infantry trained to rapidly deploy from transport planes, and in some cases but not normally from gliders too. Their training focused on securing perimeters, specifically airfield perimeters, and doing so under extreme conditions (darkness, hostile fire, deploying at great speed in spite of total confusion etc). Thus, airlanding infantry needed an airstrip to deploy, unlike the paras who could drop just about wherever they wanted (well...). Apart from that training, they were ordinary light infantry.
LL Sturm Rgt
An exception here was the Luftlande Sturm Regiment, which was a paratroop formation organised and equipped for glider insertion. It took part in all major German airborne operations. In spite of the unit designation it was not an airlanding unit (in the German sense of the word), it was a gliderborne air assault unit. Like the paras and unlike airlanding infantry, it belonged to the airforce.
LL organisation and equipment
Airlanding divisions (22nd, 91st) were organised and equipped very similar to other light infantry, such as the Gebirgsjäger and Jäger. All artillery formations used mountain organisation and equipment. Similarly, regimental assets (regimental companies) were permanently distributed to company level, and the divisions used two regiments of three battallions (instead of three rgts with 3 bns, as was initially the infantry norm). The battallions, however, had five companies instead of the normal four, and these were all identical and equal strength companies (thus not the three rifle plus support company pattern of regular infantry). The airlanding divisions were thus organised (and indeed trained) for sustained fighting in smaller formations.
22 I.D. LL
The 22nd was designated Airlanding division but initially had only parts of it trained and equipped for the role. The rest was regular infantry (not light infantry), e.g. the division had three regiments and not two. The airlanding elements participated in the airborne operations of 1940. Mainly by landing in transport planes on Dutch airfields. The division, howerer, never took to the skies again, as they were tied down guarding oilfields during the operations in the Balkans in 41. The elements trained and equipped for the airlanding role were assembled in a battlegroup (KG Buhse) and sent to Africa, where it was destroyed in 1943. The rest of 22nd went East and laboured on, and retained the name Luftlande until it too was destroyed in 1945.
91 I.D. LL
On the contrary, the 91st was a fully equipped, trained and organised airlanding division from her creation in january 1944. About a third of the personnel were veteran paratroopers. Rather than air assault, she was intended for the strategic reserve role as a rapid intervention force. The division never participated in anything airborne however, she didn't even have to airlift to any threatened front. The threat came to her instead, and she was destroyed in august 1944.
Apart from these, mountain troops were used in the very same role on more than one occasion.
As for airborne armour, the soviets came a few steps along that path I think, much later.
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Not adressing the guilt issue in this post, I think the men present in the camps might deserve some introducing.Originally posted by Bigduke6:6. I believe the number of "innocent" persons capable of being present in an official capacity at Dachau, when the Americans broke in, is so perishingly small so as to be insignificant. Yes I can imagine some poor guy coming off medical leave, seeing the concentration camp and hating it with every fiber of his body, placed on guard, and unable to desert before the Americans captured him.
As for the Waffen SS, more than 60 000 members of the Waffen SS - in the sense of frontline divisions - rotated through camp guard duty during the war. The number of recovering wounded also doing such service is unknown to me. At any rate - at any given time several thousands of them would have been serving.
So, we can assume members of the SS-Totenkopfverbände and Waffen SS were present at any liberated camp fro mwhich they had not had time to flee.
Who were these men?
As for the KZ Wach units, they were by 1945 reduced to contain about 33% Germans, mainly but not only NCOs and officers.
The original (well, from 1935 at least) guard units were recruited as such, thus men who were not only volunteers but actually volunteering for this specific duty. The war had however assured that almost all of them were sent to the frontline units, or to Einsatzkommandos. They were initially replaced by SS Reserve men (SS members aged 35-45), but this did not suffice.
Starting in 1942, involuntary transfers to KZ duty starts. It begins with reserve policemen, but continues with other reserves, including transfers of ordinary army reserve (largest transfer was 10 000 in a stroke in the summer of 1944 - but closely rivalling are the 7500 Luftwaffe reservists transferred the autumn of that year).
Still weak in manpower, the using of convalescing troops for guard duty was systematic, camps could calculate with a constant extra handful of such men. So the group of Germans to be found in 1945 will have been to a majority men who did not apply for the duty, and again as for the Germans, hardly anyone younger than 40.
But in spite of this and in spite of a constant presence of Waffen SS units to reinforce them, the manpower still was not enough. Hence the foreign nationals. Unlike the actual deathcamps, were German guards (privates) were intentionally excluded, the choice of foreign nationals in KZs was not a matter of policy but predicament.
By 1945 two thirds of the men were Russian, Lithuanian, Ukrainian, Polish, Slovak, Romanian - from all over Eastern Europe. Not all were considered foreigners even though foreign nationals, a great many (almost half the number) were so called Volksdeutsche. Those were normally drafted. The origins of all the other men was heterogenous. There was for example a large contingent of Romanians who were put on guard duty recovering from wounds suffered in the Stalingrad debacle, who were simply kept as guards to VE day. Resettled Volksdeutsche unable to speak German and thus not fit for military service could end up there. Some who were volunteers had not volunteered for guard duty, but for frontline duty in the SS.
But as Andreas said, the SS was one organisation and the postwar distinction of the various arms did not impress the contemporary commanders. If you joined the SS, you could end up anywhere in that organisation.
The also present Waffen SS and the composition of the units has been debated in many threads. Of the 901 000 members reached at peak in 1944, a third were Germans and a third were Volksdeutsche. The rest was not. Suffice it perhaps to say that there was no division in the roster of the Waffen SS that did not contain contingents of drafted men. Most had a majority of such men, like 5th, 9th, 10th, 17th etc. Some were based practically exclusively on drafted men, such as the 7th and 13th. A few saw comparably tiny contingents of draftees, such as the 1st and 12th.
So. There is actually a vey high probability of the guards at Dachau - reasonably grouped around the Standarte 1 - not being volunteers for that particular duty, or indeed is it very likely that very many of them had been there for very long before the enemy arrived.
I'm not saying it matters - well it doesn't, to me, since I'm against the shooting anyway. I'm not saying that makes anyone very much more or less guilty than anyone else.
Just illustrating further that we're not talking blood crazed indians slaughtering monsters. It was a bunch of guys, who shot another bunch of guys.
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Your dad? So you're born in the thirties or forties then are you? Just curious.Originally posted by Tagwyn:My Dad was there immeidatly after the camp was liberated ... all German camp personnel were killed. The ones shot were lucky. Tag
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Aherm. Not wishing to lend the impression that I failed to identify the actual point of your post, I still feel the term Sturm und Drang is given no justice in this use, thus warranting the rewarding of this minute detail with a trifle further attention.Originally posted by LongLeftFlank:[snips]In 1941, Germany and Japan were convinced that Sturm und Drang[---][snips]
That term, taken from classical German literature as it is, is a liberal term not at all in very much favour in Germany of 1941, in spite of it's martial ring. The "Sturm" does not mean assault, but storm. And the "Drang" has another meaning (namely stress) than the same word in "Drang nach Osten" (inner drive, or perhaps urge or longing, to and for the East).
It refers to a movement among authors of the 18th century, characterised by youthful rebellion against accepted standards, and rather vehement rejection of convention and authority. Although the movement included such German lionised icons as Goethe and Schiller - and the Nazis revered all national icons as a matter of principle - the notion of rebellion and uproar was viewed upon with notorious suspicion by the Nazis once they had obtained power.
In colloquial language, refering to a persons Sturm und Drang would normally mean somebodys youthful and unruly years, when he or she acted against convention and norm, intentionally or not. Most middle aged people, in Germany at least, flatter themselves by stating they have had such a period of their lives. Perhaps since the alternative might too much resemble the Untertan - another excellent piece of German literature.
Sincerely
Dandelion
-
All this is quite on the spot but interestingly, the German army abbreviation [and acronym] for Selbstfahrlafette was "Sfl", not "sf".
Yours
Dandelion
-
1. and 2.
The assault on Stalingrad began at 0415 hours on the morning of the 23rd. The starting line was 60 km from city limits, depending of course on how you prefer to define Stalingrad city limits. By the fall of darkness, Pz.Gren.Rgt 79 had reached point 722 - it had already taken Gumrak by then. At 1835 hours the same regiment reached the Volga. So did an assault detachment of PzGren.Rgt.64, and indeed the armoured element of Pz-Pi-Btl.16. The later managed to reach the railway station with the 27 abandoned waggons before midnight.
So, pick your choice, where you would have city limits.
In the official announcement, the unit mentioned as first into Stalingrad is "Kampfgruppe Pz.Gen.Rgt.79".
(All units mentioned were part of PD16)
3. All this from
"Stalingrad, bis zur letzten patrone"
Osnabrück 1954
written by Heinz Schröter, chief of the Kriegsberichterstaffel AOK6, in cooperation with General a.D. Fr. Joachim Fangohr (cheif of staff 4 PzAOK), General der Flieger a.D. Koller (Chief of staff Luftwaffe), General a.D. Schulz (chief of staff Heeresgruppe Don), Oberst a.D. Selle (Pifü of AOK6), Oberstl.i.G.a.D. Toepke (Qu.I AOK6).
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Ah yes. Yes of course, I might have anticipated that. Italian wife, job in France, taxes in space. Regrettably, the next time we invade France and reach Paris, we will have to punish you. You can't feast on your pudding like this before you've finished your meat.Speak for yourself.
All the best
Andreas
Yours truly
Dandelion
-
Goscinny and Uderzo were very wise men. France and Italy arguably have the best cousines in Europe, and just look where that brought them in the last war. Germans and Britons on the other hand are both globally notorious for their excentric abnormities in terms of cousine and ferocious absence of taste, and they fought like hell, almost exterminating eachother.Originally posted by John D Salt:What on earth is the point of being stationed on occupation duty in a nice place like Normandy if you are going to eat issue rations for breakfast? Wehrmacht issue at that, and it is a well-known principle that the stronger the army, the worse its food (Source: Asterix Legionnaire).
Right. Now you've got me hungry and thirsty. And all I have is a sip of gin.If they were real soldiers, they would be eating fresh croissants, a baguette jambon-beurre and a bit of Camembert or Livarot, with maybe a small glass of Calvados to accompany their coffee.
You realise of course that I'd be chewing Livarot and sipping calvados right now in some stone cottage in Bretagne, with one of those stunnig French women right beside me, had it not been for you Anglosaxons? You could have just left us there you know. But nooooo. Here comes the broken heirlooms of Henry V to reclaim all that is good in this world, kicking us all the way to Berlin. Result? American sitcoms, Sri Lanka produced clothes and hotdogs for us all is what we got out of that adventure. Now only the French eat like kings and have beautiful women, while we huddle in our rainy, dreary, grey, godforsaken homelands, snivelling over our wurst and steak and kidney puddings, with less beauty in sight than staring down an abandoned Welsh colemine. Ye Gods what a fate, what a world.
[deep sigh, deep sip of gin]
And all the best to you John, most sincerely.All the best,
John.
Dandelion
-
Assuming he was married, and his wife corresponded to his preferences, that might actually be possible. The man would have been somewhere between 19 and 30, meaning he will have married some time between 1933 and 1943, which means his marriage certificate will contain the colour of hair of his wife, her maiden name, his place of birth and so on. Of course you'd need to find the man himself first, but 1943 that's not really impossible at all. Shoesize might become a problem though. But you'd have his height, and would be able to make a very educated guess from there.Originally posted by Kingfish:Why do I get the feeling that if I was to ask who the loader was in Pz #327 on August 23, 1943 you would tell me not only his name, but age, rank, where he was born, mother's maiden name, his shoe size, favorite color and whether he preferred blondes or brunettes?
I have a sinking feeling you will.I will stump you! Don't know how, but I will!!!
The forest is not mentioned as a deployment area for any German unit. It is repreatedly mentioned as an assault objective (never taken). However, that's one very large forest, and reputedly snary and thick. It would take quite quite a lot of manpower to actually secure the entirity of it. From what I am able to ascertain, mentions of combat are along the edges of the forest. Perhaps not able to squeeze in a battallion, I feel convinced the Germans would have deployed roving patrols, snipers and mortars as they always would if they could.BTW, did 6th AB hold the entire Bois de Bavant?
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Breakfast with the 21st and 352nd is no problem at all. All German troops were issued with 750g of bread per day, which was to be used mainly but not only for breakfast. 20g of ersatz coffee was also obligatory, although under auspicious circumstances you could get the same amount of chocolate(drinking version) or tea instead. With any luck, they would have had the 150g of fat (margarine, if lucky) and perhaps even a spot (200g) of marmalade or artificial honey. If they wanted to, they could down their daily 150g of sausage with their breakfast too.
This assuming they did not resort to iron rations, which they weren't supposed to.
Breakfast with the 6th Airborne? Er, well, I don't know. Ham and jam?
Chups
Dandelion
-
King
I suppose you know it was allied troops holding the Bois de Bavent, elements of 6th Airborne (scattered gropups from 3rd and 5th brigades, and French commandos, according to German intel - Canadians according to a homepage with the history ofthe 6th). The forest is described in my sources as part of the Luftlandekopf, i.e. Airhead. The forest marking the left flank of 21st Pz. You're interested in a detailed breakdown of the Airborne units or the German units assaulting them?
Cheerio
Dandelion
[ February 16, 2006, 09:39 AM: Message edited by: Dandelion ]
-
Actually I was writing about Darci, she works at the Atlantis Rising company. Of course, she also never attached Russia. As far as I know that is. But I never knew much of anything.
-
Goodnight Darci, wherever you are.
Sic
Dandelion
-
So, what are you doing in England Shmavis. Work or love got you there?
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Hm. I miss a few points.Originally posted by Zarquon:Just trying to sum up the arguments here:
Blackjack says that
a) Anybody belonging to a highly criminal organization (like the SS) is guilty of all crimes perpetrated by the organization and can be shot on sight.
It is the individual soldier's right to decide what a criminal organization is, whether this organization's crimes justify killing all its members and therefore, who can be shot on sight.c) The state should not interfere with that process because an individual's sense of ethics is sufficient to justify killing somebody.
BigDuke does not go quite so far and argues that
a) putting people on trial has its merits, except when it's impractical to do so. In such cases, BlackJack's version of justice is appropriate and justified.
being a prisoner of the US Army in 1945 does not qualify for a), i.e. by all practical means, the army wasn't capable of putting them on trial. Otherwise it would have been wrong to kill them.Am I getting this right so far? [/QB]
Both identify strongly with the GIs, and have put a lot of weight on emotional pressure created by the morbid situation at Dachau. Indicating as I understand them, that the unit cracked.
Both have also pointed out the fact that the inmates took an active role, although in different ways.
Both place great emphasis on the importance of justice being done and that this justice must reflect the horror of the crimescene. Both also believe in the DP, I conclude (they have not stated this), which enables them to support the justioce meeted out by the GIs.
Both have low faith and trust in courts, and fear that courts would fail to do justice, lending legitimacy to the executions as an alternative.
Duke regards KZ camps as extraordinary elements of reality and explains his exception from his norm with this. This is by no means an unsupported view, many lawyers have argued that it - deathcamps and KZs - cannot be incorporated into the normal web of justice. Ultimately however, it was.
Well, that on them until they comment. How would you surmise the arguments on the other side?
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Duke
Very difficult subject.
Basically I still sincerely feel that the GIs at Dachau let their friends down, the men buried from Omaha Beach to Leipzig deserved a lot better performance than that, and so did the good cause. Easy to joke about now, with Iraq controversy and all, but the project was to introduce democracy in Germany, to make friends out of enemies, and it succeeded. It needed no murders, this great project.
And I am a former soldier. Sense of profession and pride lingers strong. You don't shame the corps, or the constitution you represent in a uniform. It's not patriotism really I just feel strongly about accepting representational tasks. I aim the same edge at politicians and all other representatives. Trust is precious. In fact trust is love.
But your feelings run deeper than that and I can relate to them. Let me try and present my sentiment on death, justice and vengeance, though it isn't very easy at all and I begin to regret I got into this difficult debate.
I don't think that courts can deal with what happened during the war in it's entire horror. They are ill equipped to deal with such issues. Courts can only focus on individual acts, not entire popular movements or complex chains of events. Any court can produce a mere snapshot of reality. I appreciate that all surviving leaders were trialled, and that many of the individual perpetrators were trialled for their actions too, but like you write, we're talking millions of perpetrators. Courts cannot successfully combat society.
Although it might disaffect you, I am not particularly interested in singular guards. If they are punished or escape justice does not mean very much to me. They are mere dust, blowing in the wind, and it is the wind that interest me. I do not mean their commanders either, in particular. I want society.
I do not feel that gunning people down really deals with anything. Remember that a great many of the worst perpetrators chose death themselves. To not have to deal with anything.
I believe the only way to deal with what happened is to talk about it. Let everyone understand what they were part of, how they were part of it, and what the consequences of their actions were. Break the cycle of reprisal and counterreprisal. Adopt institutions in society capable of dealing with the intolerance, narrow mindedness, hatred and fear that all societies are afflicted with, and who were the main reasons for what happened. After all, the Western allied nations were also heavily afflicted by the racism of the day, had strong groups of intolerance. Still do. But they were capable of sustaining their societies even so heavily assaulted from within. And they needed no deathcamps to do that. Nor did modern Germany. Miserable as it might seem a dreary day, the Western societies are still the only successful constructions when it comes to dealing with diversity and ideological conflict.
QED, I hope.
Unless you are severely mentally ill, you cannot be cruel against another human. I say that even recognising the streak of sadism in Man. The only reason all of these people could do what they did was that they stopped seeing eachother as humans. Because of existing states of conflict, bilateral or domestic. But you cannot dehumanise a person you have a continuing dialogue with. So there is a need to talk. Dead people can't talk. I didn't like Göring getting away like that, I wanted him sitting in a cell confronted by a society questioning him, and him explaining, perhaps even realising, for the rest of his life.
To quote 2Pac
; "How can the Devil take a brother if he's close to me?" And with the devil I do not mean death, I mean the risk of him becoming a KZ guard, guarding me.Killing the guards to ensure justice, by vengeance as it was. Well. Vengeance no longer means anything. So many millions of people have already been murdered, and then they have been avenged with new millions of murders. It is a path in itself, leading to new murders, and if you don't like it, you need to leave it. You cannot murder your way to a peaceful future, however justified you feel. You create enemies feeling equally justified in murdering you.
I'll tell you what I mean. I hope. You know as I watched Der Untergang - I'm sure you've heard of it and probably even seen it - I got really, really angry. It grew on me as the film played and got so big my chest almost exploded. I don't see a lot of quality film with people speaking my language, it hits you straight in the heart, feels very real. But I didn't at all get angry at the people I presumed would anger me. The Nazi leadership struck me as authentic and, well, rather uninteresting. But out on the streets, when there was only fire and death everywhere, kids being gunned down, my helpless people being overrun, and then just smoking ruins with dancing Soviets, I was shocked by my anger being directed at those Soviets, the mere sound of Russian being spoken infuriated me and I blush at the hateful thoughts that tortured me for an hour after that. Vengeance seemed extremely important.
The whole emotion was idiotic, the director had gone to some length to explain that the burning ruins and dead children were all because of the government, and actually I really don't need anyone explaining that, but it just went on, I went on being angry about it. I went for a beer, alone, until it had raged out, and it did after an hour or so and I was me again.
And so it struck me, like a sudden blinding light. That's all it takes.
It never ends. The active choice of not continuing, not being part of it, in heart or action, never ends.
Yes. Long post about a lot of things but no summary and no structure. Normally very arduous to read. Hope you'll make it through anyway Duke.
And if I wrote anything that appear offensive to you, that's not how I meant it.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Ah, I see now.He posted that as a joke look at my profile under occupation, because he is a lawyer.That was actually quite funny.
LOL!
Who would have known that Mr Pershing has Teutonic humour. I'm still petrified by his brutal view upon justice though.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Originally posted by zmoney:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Black Jack Pershing II:
zmoney -- I see from your profile that you are a lawyer too
</font>
-
You might want to check my profile for spelling.Originally posted by zmoney:Dadelion, your crazy.
I understand that you must feel that way. I am more accustomed to meeting your values, than you are meeting mine. But in this particular forum, one might have hoped you would have familiarised yourself with, er, crazy people.
I don't understand. How am I to understand that Zmoney? You are attempting to influence colloquial English? Is this part of the domestic US debate on methods in the war? What?Further more I think the word slippery slope is way over used these days.
Why ask me? Read the papers. Or just stick around, news will eventually reach you.What in the papers today said anything about soldiers killing prisoners?
That confuses me. Why aren't you? You are certain about wanting all the people you call SS scum to be killed unarmed and unheard. But all German and other Axis armed forces ultimately fought to protect and serve the central European totalitarian régimes, all of whom engaged in ethnic cleansing in one scale or other, against one group or other. It wasn't the SS but ordinary German infantry who took Warsaw and thereby enabled the ultimate extermination of the Jewish community there. The men who fought in Normandy were guarding the outer gates of Dachau. Why do you feel they are less guilty than a soldier guarding the inner gate of Dachau? And if they are not less guilty, why would they be spared your death sentences?Now if they just captured other soldiers else where and executed them on the spot that would definitely be a full blown war crime, and I’m not trying to defend that behavior.
It's "Dandelion". You might want to check my profile again.So again Dandy how does this Dachu case in any way reflect on other events involving prisoner abuse today?
Common components are
1. A group of individuals who either crack under pressure or go rogue.
2. Said group commit acts in direct conflict with the code of conduct, objectives and war efforts of their nation and service.
3. The act mirrors the behaviour of the enemy and draws unwelcome paralel between their own cause and that of the enemy.
4. Their nation and the service they belong to must carry the ill repute of this misconduct and the shame that goes with it, and the war effort is correspondingly sabotaged.
This pattern seems not very elusive to me, nor very difficult to see in any modern conflict.
Your use of "soldier" there confuses the issue however. The whole problem is that the individuals acting in this manner prove thereby to be inadequate as soldiers. They could be rogues, traitors or merely unfit to wear uniform and carry arms - whichever, they are not soldiers.
Well apparently there are quite a few of you, in our time. In fact you might say you are en vogue. So don't hope, frolic.I hope there will be more people like me that will not stand for people like you who want to defend people who murder others just because they are of another race or religion.Capital, carry on
Dandelion
-
It did happend yesterday, don't you read the papers? And it happends all the time, to all nations in armed conflict. How would this discussion ever be obsolete? It happends and will keep happening because far too many people carry personal values such as... well, yours.Originally posted by zmoney:Now if this happened yesterday then it would be a slippery slope because you would defenitly want to draw the line so the GI's wouldn't go around killing prisoners. But that wasn't the case anyway.
Dandelion
-
Duke
What the...? What is this now? I am severely disappointed. You are really the last person on this forum I had expected lynch-mob justice from.
Honourcodes? Difficult for pilots and artillerymen - very easy for infantrymen. Shooting armed men is combat. Shooting unarmed men is murder. Never gets more complicated than that.
Dandelion
-
Ah, Jon at large again, and he beat me to it, again.
I remember this question, we had this at the Axis History Forum too and there Timo beat me to it, writing an answer I could not hope to excel. I paste it in here, but the research as thus not mine but Timos.
There, everything anyone ever wanted to know about Fkl units. Pictures were posted too at the forum1st Question: Was the Tiger fitted out differently, and if so in what way?
...Part of the ammo storage was replaced with a Funklenk radio set;
2nd Question: What is/are BIV Sprengstofftraeger
...A Borgward BIV (SdKfz.301). A tankette stuffed with explosives;
3rd Question: What does Funklenk & Sprengstofftraeger stand for in English.
...Funklenk = Radio Controlled. Sprengstoffträger = Explosives Carrier.
Directly after the Polish campaign, the German Army recognized the need for remotely controlled vehicles to clear gaps in minefields. Borgward was given a contract on 21 Nov/39 to develop their "B1", a fully tracked, radio controlled vehicle weighing 1.5 tons with a 4 cyl engine that could be used to tow mine detonating rollers. A total of 50 of these Minenraumwage(SdKfz 300) were produced between Jan. and May 1940.
Borgward was issued a second contract on 3 Apr/40 to develop the "B2", a slightly larger vehicle of 2.3 tons with a 49hp engine. The first unit to be issued the B2 was Minenraum Abteilung 1, formed in 1940 with 2 companies. However, it does not appear that it saw action in France or in the East. In Oct./41 Borgward got another contract to design a radio controlled vehicle that could carry an explosive charge of 500 kg. Known as the B IV, it was officially designated by the Waffen amt as the Sprengladungstrager (SdKfz 301). It weighed 3.5 tons and was powered by a 6 cyl, 49hp engine. Twelve trial vehicles were completed by Apr./42 and full production began in May/42. Minenraum Abt. 1 was reorganized and designated Pz.Abt. (Funklenk) 300.
The unit now consisted of 3 companies with an official organization published in KStN 1171f, dated Jan.1/43 as follows:
LEICHTE PANZER KOMPANIE f
Kompanie Trupp: 2 PzKpfw III (5cm) (SdKfz 141).
1. Zug: 4 PzKpfw III (5cm) (SdKfz 141) and 12 Spengstofftrager (SdKfz 301).
2. Zug: 4 PzKpfw III (5cm) (SdKfz 141) and 12 Spengstofftrager (SdKfz 301) Pz.Abt. (Funklenk) 300 was was shipped to the Eastern Front and assigned to Heeres Gruppe Sud in late May/42. On June 7/42 it had 27 PzKpfw III and still had 20 operational Pz.III by July 11/42. Before being transferred to Heeres Gruppe Nord in early Sept/42 the active field unit was renumbered from 300 to 301, and an experienced cadre returned to Neuruppin, the home base for the Panzer Versuchs and Ersatz Abt(Funklenk) 300. Pz. Abt. (FKL) 301 with an operational strength of 25 PzKpfw III on Sept 17/42 remained with H-G Nord until Dec./42, when it returned to Neuruppin to rest and refit.
The next major employment of the Funklenk units was at Kursk, when the HQ of pz.Abt.(FKL) 301 was assigned to H-G Mitte with 3 new companie(312, 313, and 314) under its command. These independent companies were formed in Jan./43 and ordered to be operational by May/43. Instead
of PzKpfw III, StuG III were issued to the units for control and command.
Pz.Kp (FKL) 312 had 7 StuG, 313 had 7 and 314 had 9 on July 5/43.
The only detailed action account from 5th to 8th July comes from 312, attached to sPz.Abt. 505 (with 31 Tigers and 15 Pz.III), is as follows:
One B IV was sent 800 meters against a PaK Nest of 2 or 3 anti-tank guns and detonated, destroying the guns along with their accompanying infantry. A second B IV was sent 400 meters against a T34, which was destroyed when it rammed the B IV. Three B IVs were sent 400 to 600 meters against three concrete bunkers and destroyed them. Two B IVs were sent 800 meters against an anti-tank gun position and an infantry gun position, destroying both of them. One B IV reached a Russian position and was set on fire by a Molotov Cocktail. It exploded and eliminated the position. Pz.Kp.(FKL) 313 was attached to the II.Abt./sPz.Jag. Rgt. 656 (sPz.Jag.Abt. 654 with 44 Elefants). Its initial role was to clear a gap thru the enemy minefield. Before reaching the minefield 4 B IVs were lost in German minefields, and 4 made it thru to blow a gap thru which the Elefants passed. Later, 3 B IVs destroyed two PaK Nests and a bunker. Pz.Kp. (FKL) 314, attached to the I. Abt./sPz.Jag.Rgt. 656 (sPz.Jag.Abt. 653 with 45 Elefants), used 12 BIVs to blow a gap thru deep enemy minefields. The StuGs used as control vehicles moved thru, but the Pioniers could not mark the gaps since they were pinned down by heavy artillery fire. The Elefants lost track of the gap and some were disabled on the mines, delaying the attack considerably. Later that day, two BIVs were sent into a woodline held by enemy infantry. After detonating, enemy resistance ceased to exist. The companies under command of Pz.Abt. (FKL) 301 had lost 20 BIVs in 4 days. Only 4 BIVs didn't reach their assigned targets due to being hit by A/T and artillery fire. Two of these were burnt out and two were recovered. Those BIVs that did not have the spring detonators set, did not explode but burned when hit. Overall, the unit was pleased with the performance, but the radio control proved to be effective for a range of 800 - 1000 meters instead of the desired 2000 meters.
The unit commander requested that Tigers replace the StuGs as a much more effective control tank, due to the thicker armor and higher profile to view the BIV's progress. All 3 companies were quickly decimated in the heavy fighting in H-G Mitte during July and August, and returned to rebuild in Germany in late 1943. A fourth company, 311, was not was not ready for Kursk and was later sent to H-G Sud in mid-August, outfitted with 10 StuGs, and remained on the East Front until May 18/44, when it was ordered back for refit with Pz.Versuchs und Ausbildung Abt. 300 in Eisenbach. The HQ of Pz.Abt. (FKL) 301 returned to Neuruppin and again took over command of its original 3 companies. In Sept./43 the unit was outfitted with 32 StuG. In addition, two new companies, Pz.Kp. (FKL) 315 and 316 were formed and each was issued 10 StuGs in Aug./43.
At the close of 1943, all of the Funklenk units except 311 were in training centers in the West, with the following strength as of Dec. 31/43:
301 had 31 StuG; 311 had 7 StuG; 312 had 2 StuG; 313 had 10 Pz.III/N;
314 had 4 StuG;
315 and 316 each had 10 StuG.
In response to the Allied landings at Anzio, in Jan./44 Pz.Abt.(FKL) 301 was sent to help reinforce the front, remaining in action there until Mar./44.
A new phase in the deployment of Funklenk units occurred in Dec./43 when 313 was assigned to sPz.Abt. 508 as its 3. Kompanie. 314 was sent to sPz.Abt. 504 as its 3. Kompanie in Jan./44, and 316 was assigned to the Pz.Lehr Abt.
All 3 of these units were to receive Tigers as control tanks, as dictated by KStN 1176f dated Feb. 1/44:
SCHWERE PANZER KOMPANIE "TIGER" (F.K.L.)
Kompanie Trupp: 2 PzKpfw Tiger (SdKfz 181 or 182)
1. Zug: 4 PzKpfw Tiger (SdKfz 181 or 182) and 9 Sprengstofftrager (SdKfz 301), plus 1 mSPW (251/1)
2. and 3. Zug: Same as 1. Zug. Sondergerat Reserve of 9 SdKfz. 301.
The 3. Kp of sPz.Abt 508 with 14 Tiger I was sent to Italy to the Anzio beachead in Feb./44, and the 3. Kp of sPz.Abt 504 with 14 Tigers was sent to Italy in June/44. Both of them remained in Italy until October, when their personnel were sent back to Germany for further employment with other units.
Pz.Kp. (FKL) 316 under the Panzer Lehr Rgt.received the first 5 production Tiger IIs to replace their StuGs in Feb./44. When the Allied landed in Normandy the Tiger IIs were mechanically unsound and it was decided to ship them back to Germany. However, transport could not be arranged and the 5 Tiger IIs remained in France at Chateaudun where they were subsequently destroyed to prevent capture.
The Funklenk company fought in Normandy with the Pz.Lehr Rgt., starting with an operational strength of 9 StuG and 3 Tiger Is. They still had 7 operational StuG on July 1/44 and were pulled out of the front later in July to join the newly formed Pz.Abt (FKL) 302.
301 was built up to 4 companies by the addition of 312 as the 1. Kompanie. When the Allies landed at Normandy 301 was attached to 2. Pz.Div. with an operational strength of two Pz.III, 32 StuG, and 146 B IVs. The organization had been updated by KStN 1171f dated 1/Jun/44 as follows:
LEICHTE PANZER KOMPANIE f
Kompanie Trupp: 2 StuG (SdKfz 142/1)
1. Zug: 4 StuG (SdKfz 142/1) and 12 Sprengstofftrager (SdKfz 301), plus
1 mSPW (SdKfz 251/1)
2. Zug: (Same as above 1. Zug). Sondergerat Reserve of 12 Sprengstofftrager (SdKfz 301) The unit was quickly decimated in June and July 1944 and pulled out to rebuild.
Pz.Abt (FKL) 302 was formed in June 1944 and by the time of its employment consisted of 4 Kompanies. Pz.Kp. (FKL) 316 became the 1. Kompanie, 315 the 2. Kp., 317 the 3. Kp., and 311 the 4. Kp. It was sent to Heeres Gruppe Mitte in the East in Aug./44 with 3 PzKpfw IV, 40 StuG and 144 B IVs. It remained there and reported having 38 StuG on Dec. 5/44, and 28 StuG on Jan. 15/45, but was down to 3 StuG by Mar. 15/45. The unit ended its days in East Prussia.
The last independent company, Pz.Kp. (FKL) 319, was formed and sent west in Sept./44. It had been outfitted with 10 StuG and 36 B IVs. the 319 took part in the Ardennes Offensive in Heeres Gruppe B and reported an operational strength of 10 StuG on Jan. 15/45. It was pulled out of the front to help form the battalion sized Funklenk unit in Feb./45.
After leaving France, 301 was ordered on Aug. 19/44 to reorganize and re-equip as sPz.Abt (Tiger/FKL) 301. Each of the 3 companies were to have 10 Tiger Is and the Abteilung HQ was to have 2 Tiger Is. Since the Tiger I had gone out of production the unit was issued a total of 31 Tiger Is that had been rebuilt, of which 10 were acquired from an SS sPz.Abt. The new 301 also took part in the Ardennes Offensive under Heeres Gruppe B.
Late in the war a third Abteilung, the Pz.Abt (FKL) 303 was organized by pulling together the remains of 319, 301 and 302. On Feb. 17/45 it was ordered to be formed as a normal Panzer Abteilung without Funklenk equipment. Issued 31 Pz. IV, it was renamed Pz.Abt. "Schlesien" and sent to face the Russians during the closing months of the war.
The last unit to be formed was Panther Zug (FKL) 303. It consisted of the remnants of personnel and vehicles from Pz.Abt. (FKL) 303 and Pz.Versuchs and Ausbildung Abt. 301. On Feb. 18/45 this platoon was ordered to be quickly organized, issued 4 StuG and 12 B IV, and shipped to the Eastern Front and attached to 35. Pz.Gren.Div. under H-G Mitte. The overall worth and effectiveness of these Funklenk units in the closing months of the war was minimal.
Cheers,
Timo
Cheers
Dandelion
PS. Jon. I'll get you next time. Next time.
It is the individual soldier's right to decide what a criminal organization is, whether this organization's crimes justify killing all its members and therefore, who can be shot on sight.
historical question
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
Er... Might you please disclose how any of the links you provide conflict with anything I wrote?
First link tells us of Rgt 16, and how parts of it was trained and used for airlanding duties. Right.
Second link tells us that the companies of 47nd regiment were equal in strength and organisation. Ok.
Third link tells us the 65th was partially trained and equipped for airlanding tasks (III Batl to be more specific than this source). Mhm.
Fourth link is a link telling us not much of anything at all.
Fifth link leads to a frontal page of a... what? Pictoral history of the Bremen guys and some guys of the Oldenburg Regiment. That's some nice googling there. Great pics.
And I wrote what above? That the regiments were not partially trained and equipped for airlanding duties? That the companies were not equal in strength and organisation?
You mentioned the German name of the divisional history of the 22nd infantry. Presumably evoking you own it, as I do. I am interested to read of the ways I contradicted it above. Since you own it, might you be so kind as to extend the courtesy of explaining the ways in which I erred these Hanseatic Germans in my misguided comment? And while you are at it - I do not own any volume on the 22nd artillery, didn't even know there was one, but seeing as you seem to do - would it be too much to ask that you elucidate the manners in which I erred them as wll in my comment above?
Or is this just another case of mistaking the artillery of 1 Fallschirm-Jäger-Division with I. Fallschirm Korps?
Yours Sincerely
Dandelion