Dandelion
-
Posts
952 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dandelion
-
-
Err? I rather got the impression that the Duke struggled with the classical problem of conflict between emotions of justice through vengeance and that old saying we endeavour to teach our kids in the percevering hope of a better future - two wrongs do not make a right
When fighting a beast, you must not only be victorious, but endeavour to not become one yourself.
This rather plain and simple biblical statement must reasoably be, IMHAnalysis, why Western allied bad behaviour is so painful that it attracts interest even in the light of the mass atrocities committed by their opponents. And why Western Allies are the subjects of criticism even when they did not commit crimes, but displayed behaviour less than chivalric in general.
The KZ guards were part of a criminal organisation, committing henious act of devilry. The American servicemen were part of an honourable corps fighting for a just cause. I fear the Dachau conquerors behaviour lent neither any credit at all, but rather mirrored that of the KZ guards. If not corrected it would have cast a shadow upon their betters, wearing the same uniforms, doing their duty and not committing any crimes, regardless of personal sentiment or individual needs.
Rest assured that emotions 60 years afterwards are far, far more bitter if you are the offspring of men who could not or would not distinguish right from wrong, or felt perfectly comfortable playing god and wanton executioners, with nobody around them reacting at all, but feeling it was perfectly normal behaviour.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
I think not, but the truth is I don't know. The 107th was a problem for me, I was never able to locate the Ersatz Abteilung. By default I concluded that the HJ Bann must be the same unit, but in fact it might just be that I can't identify the correct unit.Was this a different formation than the Ersatz Abteilung of Infantry Regiment 107?Infantry regiments did not normally have replacement battallions of their own, such battallions would normally be feeding the entire division with replacements. A division would normally have two of them, grouped in a regiment (plus the Feldersatz battallion which accompanied the division in campaigns), but most had shrunk to battallion size by mid 44.
So first I checked all units numbered 107 belonging to the replacement army. There is one obvious suspect. The Ersatz Btl numbered 107 (formally "Grenadier-Ers.u.Ausb.Btl.107") belonged to 172nd infantry division and Wehrkreis XII (which was in the Southwest of Germany - Leipzig was in WK IV, i.e. East). Under normal conditions the Ersatz bataillon would be training in the WK. Gren.Ers-.u.Ausb.Btl.107 last listed location is Germersheim, which is in Südpfalz, i.e. in the home WK. The listing is not very confidence inspiring, it simply says "1945?" (it normally pinpoints dates).
Among the units numbered 107, there are no other suspects that still exist in april 1945 (except the Res.Gren.Btl.107, which however changed name to II./Gren.Rgt.880 and changed from replacement to field army).
Looking at Gren.Rgt.107 herself, she was in Italy with all battallions. Also a unit from WKXXII.
There were some dozen units wearing the number 107 other than these in the field army, but tracking them all down, none were in Leipzig as far as records can reveal.
The origin, composition, strength and equipment of HJ Bann 107 are unknown to me. The unit is mentioned in two contexts, which makes it possible for me to pinpoint them with good certainty as participating in the battle. First and most obvious, it scored the sole registered enemy AFV kill listed in the KTB of that battle (the KTB is little more than a log). Secondly, it appears in trial records. One officer and three NCOs were summarily shot for allowing kids from this unit to desert posts and run away into the night. Their executioners were trialled by the DDR for this, and records are rather good from this trial.
So at the end of the day I had only the HJ Bann with the number 107, and no Ersatz, and thought "well, they're probably one and the same". But this thought does create a problem, as I am sure you realise. If there was no army Ersatz batallion, then who were the 1148 combat soldiers of the regular army as reported by Poncet? They cannot all have been truckdrivers and anti aircraft gunners.
I'll leave you pondering
Always a pleasure by the way, nobody could ever quite match the obscurity of your questions
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Hi there King
I see you remain adamantly productive.
And you're right, this was by no means your easist question so far. Everything is complete confusion in the records that late in the war.
1. The Volksturm battallions
Volkssturm units present were;
- Volksst.Btle. "Leipzig", there were three of them as there were three remaining party districts in the Leipzig area.
- Volksst.Btl.336
- Volkssturm "Wurzen" (elts)
- Volkssturm "Torgau" (elts)
- Volksst.Ers.Btl. "Halle"
Notes:
- Command of these was held by Kreisleiter Strobel. The other two Kreisletern in Leipzig, Wiederroth and Dönicke, both commanded Leipzig VS battallions.
- "Halle" is a trifle confusing since it is actually a police reserve unit (it had the liquidation of Lidice on its track record) but for the battle it sorted under the VS, not the police.
- All units are listed as below 50% of establishment strength.
- Two Leipzig battallions had boosted numbers by so called Jungsturm, i.e. drafted children with Panzerfausts.
- Equipment listed as issued to the three Leipzig battallions shows only rifles, pistols and large amounts of Panzerfausts. No input on the others.
In addition, there was the
- Hitlerjugend Standarte 107
Notes:
- I believe this must be the 8th VS unit, since they served under VS command.
2. The Kraftfahr-Ersatz unit
- Kraftfahr-Ers-Abt 4
Notes:
- Leipzig contained elements of Wehrkreis IV, among others the Kdr. der Kraftfahrparktruppe IV. The unit beloinged to him (actually not a he but a whole staff) and had been stationed in the northern Leipzig barracks since 1943.
3. Flak units
Present was
- Flak-Regiment 90
Notes:
- The unit was at the disposal of the city commander, Gen.Maj. Hans von Ziegesar and was thus supposed to participate in the ground battle (if it actually did, I don't know).
- It contained battallions (Abteilungen) 121 (heavy), 568 (heavy), 729 (light) and Heimat-Flak-Abt.43/IV (using captured guns). There were also two railborne detachments.
- Personnel situation was unsatisfying in the regiment. Understaffed and principally containing a core of cripples and low quality conscripts, around which were large groups of children (Flakherlfer/in), including quite a few female such.
- Leipzig was under incessant heavy air attack until the US troops actually entered the suburbs. I gather they will have been kept busy and might not have had opportunity or possibility to shift to ground battle.
4. Deutsche Polizei and SS troops
Not all policemen gave themselves up with the surrender of SS-Brigadeführer (Pol.Präs.) Grolmann. And many of those who surrendered with him were VS men. In his policeforce there were elements of SS, including Totenkopf units from the Abtnaundorf KZ. There were other security services present as well. Elements of these fought to the end by the monument or the railway station, or City Hall. Other elements went amok, murdering prisoners in jails and in Abtnaundorf (mixed groups of SS men and VS men). There were several such massacres in the last three days.
---
Finally - yes other units participated. Leipzig is a huge city and contained a bewildering mass of staffs and administrative units from all branches of service. However, colonel von Poncet, the tactical commander in the battle, reported having only 1148 combat soldiers belonging to the regular armed forces. So the mass of staffs and administration will probably have mattered very little in the actual battle.
Phew...
Very depressing to research the Stunde Null
So when do we see your Leipzig CM map?
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Eight legs plus two pulps, plus two jaws, all controlled simultaneously. I am fascinated by spiders. Such superior designs.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:Now now, you knew what I meant! No doubt their intentions were impure, but the fight that resulted was certainly started by them, and was certainly not "unfair" in the sense that the Allies did anything particularly illegal or unprovoked.
Although I rather liked the spider story. You've been absent these parts far too long. Once CMC is out and if you are still dabbling with the actual playing of CM, perhaps we might cross swords. It would be an honour to be figuratively garotted by you some bleak autumn night.
PS - I am sure some uncouth soul will be along to tell you that you should have used "web" instead of "net", but I knew perectly well what you meant. I am now picturing Hitler with eight legs balancing precariously on such a web with an eight legged Stalin scrambling down to gobble him up. [/QB]
No not unprovoked. One of very few conflicts where one side (allies and neutrals, including Soviets) can actually truthfully claim to have done all that could be done to deflect armed conflict ("Half a mo'"). Regrettably, the disinclination to go to war is in our time more often used as insult or ridicule ("Peace in our time") than as a compliment and display of uncommon quality. Which wounds me.
I haven't really been absent. Been wandering the threads, looking for any need of me, but none have had any, and so I have remained silent. Curiosity about the German armed forces have ventured very little beyond the big cats and big guns as of late. And I am the sage of little things and detail, not big cats. I'm not much into the Syrian campaign either I must say, and so I wait.
I'll be honoured and privileged to take you on, but you must play the Canadians, and I the Germans, in Normandy. I'll even play the 12th crack babies fighting the 3rd, giving us a chance to make better history than what was. No defenceless Canadian kids gunned down behind churches.
Web, net - only Anglosaxons ever notice such subtle differences, and as they are so very rarely uncouth I believe I might have escaped the challenge. Even if I hadn't, I know now from Rune that you drink beer with soda pops in them. This has donated a hitherto unknown nuance to the Anglosaxon profile, and I dare say it does not speak to your advantage among civilised nations. Kofi Anan will be most upset.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
That's a neat site there John.
Problem - modder point of view now - is that one cannot really trust the colours of photos. Meaning the shade they display is not necessarily the shades your eyes would have detected if you were on the spot.
Sepp Dietrichs uniform is a telling example. That series of photos from his birthday (samples of the series are present on the site) prompted an artist to make paintings of Dietrich with that glowing, radiant jade-green uniform. But in fact it is merely a light effect and a less-than-super lens. So it's tricky.
One thing that is very well displayed is the mass use of foreign uniforms in the German army. I see Polish and Czech re-cuts in many photos here.
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Ahem...
Come now Michael. The Nazis never started any fair fights. That wasn't the way they went about business. I believe you are glorifying them, you SS apologist you
There is a cannibal spider (spider mimic really), in German "Loche" (lat. Opiliones), has very long legs and small body, and tiny head. A number of them eat only other spiders. Method is to walk up to a net (it cannot make nets itself, as it is not a real spider), and tap the net with a leg. Out rushes the happy netowning spider to subdue a supposedly caught prey, alas ending up as a meal for the Loche lying in ambush. Real neat idea. Problem is the tiny head. It cannot separate the various types of nets. So sooner or later, the Loche taps a net it shouldn't have, and out rushes a spider twice it's size, and the Loche becomes the meal.
That about sums Nazi strategy up I think
Cheerio
Dandelion
PS. OK so it wasn't CM relevant. Kill me.
-
I thought Rune was joking.
Queer lot, the British.
-
Jason
Indeed, I separated that sentence to point out that only about ten percent of the Volksdeutsche that served are known to have been volounteers, thus presumably sharing ethnic concepts with the Third Reich (or motivated by other factors). The others were drafted and we'll never have any figures of their opinions. Quite a few will have been quite surprised to find themselves "German", particularly those that did not speak a word German and had never been in Germany, nor had any relation to or in it of any kind.
Though the Third Reich ideologists did not invent the concept of Volksdeutsche. Such ideas had been circulating since the early 19th century and will have had some following here and there. Expanding ideas of German ethniticity, it was a conscious effort to redefine people made by the Third Reich. Such efforts have both failed and succeeded before. Hungary failed miserably in magyarising croats, but the turks very successfully turkisised anatolia. Same people but new ethnicity, new language, new history. Given time, the Nazis would have probably succeeded in making people accept the concept of Volksdeutsche. Indeed, after the war we have seen many East European states picking up this concept and using it, such as the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia (while it lasted) and Hungary. And so in a way the Nazis scored some success.
Actually to me nations are as entirely imaginary as ethniticities. I find it impossible to define culture and language is too confusingly transforming to me to be used for definition. Indeed states, IMHO, while being actual organisations with actual assets and geographically defined, are mere manifestations of abstract ideas and agreements as well. No more or less real than companies, organised religion or ideology etc.
Cheerio
Dandelion
-
Well one real difference was that very few men in the Ost Bataillone were actually Russians, and quite a few of the Hiwis were.Originally posted by the_enigma:speaking of ost battalions and russians ...
Was there a real differance between the Russians in the Ost Battalions on the western front and the 'Hiwi's' on the eastern front?
Another difference was that Hiwis were not to have any combat duties (initially they werent allowed at all, then only in unarmed services), but of course they soon appeared in such functions as well. Though not in large formations, but embedded in German such.
Finally, the Hiwis got to fight the force they conceived as their enemy and usually displayed high levels of motiovation, whereas the Ost Bataillone were faced with forces who they could not bring themselves to regard as enemies, leading to frequent collapse of combat morale.
Just a few points, the subject is vast and very interesting actually.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
... I realise I overlooked one aspect of your question there Alsatian - speaking strictly in terms of nationals, just short of a quarter million Polish nationals served in the various services of the German armed forces overall during the stretch of the war.
But here we must recall Jasons note above on "Volksdeutsche", the vast majority of these considered themselves, or were regarded by the Third Reich, as ethnic Germans (Volksdeutsche).
That's an official figure. Of course a unknown number of unofficial HiWis will have to be added.
This just to give you a figure on nationals, but not really revealing much about concepts of ethniticity. Meaning these Polish nationals were hardly more likely to have identified themselves as Poles than many German nationals were.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
I believe Ironbar is hitting the nail in terms of numbers.
Ethniticity as such is a very confusing and blurred concept. Prussian regions of Germany have always contained very large bilingual or trilingual groups, with a very heavy representation of slavic such. To call them Poles is dubious, they might just as well have been Ruthenians, Ukrainians etc, and in fact many of these have never lived within the borders of a predominantly slavic realm, but have always been Germans. Some again were jewish groups.
Names ending with "-ski" were and are so common in eastern Germany as to not at all provoke any immediate thoughts of Poland. People carrying them might be recently immigrated Poles, or people that have lived in Prussia for centuries, bilingual or not. The ending "-itz", stemming from slavic "-ic", is equally common.
Just having a glance at the rolls of the 12th SS Panzer "HJ", squad after squad present names such as Geruschka, Jaskulski, Kaschka, Menschik, Machow, Stiwitz, Jablonski, Bielsky et cetera, I cannot here see a single presented squad containing 100% names of germannic languague origin.
So, hundreds of thousands of people with origins in slavic speaking cultures, close or distant in history, with linguistic and cultural ties maintained or abandoned, fought and died as any other ordinary Germans in the ranks of quite ordinary units. As they had in all of Germanys and Prussias many wars. They were not considered or treated as Poles, wether or not they spoke slavic languages at home. Prussia was always multicultural.
The ethnic ideologies spread in the 30s and 40s might (will probably) have incensed any number of these, provoking them to redefine their identities and feeling Polish regardless of wether or not they had ever really lived in Poland or had their origins from within the borders of modern Poland, in a quite justified feeling of being rejected by their own nation, Germany.
So, in any given moment of the war, quite a few German ordinary divisions could have spawned men who defected to the allies in the sincere feeling of fighting for the wrong side.
In addition come the Silesians as mentioned, referring to slavic speaking such (the region was divided), some of whom had never defined themselves as Germans and were much in the same situation as the - Alsatians
)Cheers
Dandelion
-
-
-
Very interesting site, thanks.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
I am not arguing the importance of industrial power. I am wondering what difference it made in the Polish campaign. You claim it made the whole affaire a forgone conclusion. It is this I cannot understand. I feel you are shooting from the hip really, and I cannot for the life of me understand why you are in such a rage to dismiss sources conflicting with your personal views.Originally posted by JasonC:False. In manpower, as I already stated, Germany outnumbered Poland by 2 to 1. But personnel numbers were Poland's only long suit. Germany had 10 times the economy of Poland, more than 10 times the industrial potential, more than 10 times the capital invested in major military equipment, etc. Military power is not a head count. Which was more powerful in WW II, the US or China? Hint, one got its tail kicked by Japan and the other kicked Japan's tail - with one arm.
Industrial power has no bearing in a one-month campaign I am sure you agree. Neither side added to their initial Ordre de Bataille. So any such advantages must have had been brought to bear before the conflict broke out.
What was brought to bear before that date? Your stating of "ten times" and "more than ten times" I take as a figures of speech. Unless you are speaking modern day GNP and military spending of course, but we weren't. Here is how it actually went between the wars:
German armament spending was around a percent of Polands in 1926. In 1933, Germany began her rapid rearmament programme, but it took her until 1937-38 to reach European levels of investment. By then she had expanded her investments 184 times as compared to 1933, illustrating just how vast the gap to close was for her. Using 1928 as index year (100), investments dropped to 75 in 1932, up to 87,1 in 1933, 399 in 1934, 622,7 in 1935, 1088,30 in 36, 1312 in 1937 to reach 1874,20 in 1938. In terms of billions of marks, between 1936 and 1937 she thus outmatch Polish investments, and between 1937 and 1938 she passed France in military spending. (And she spended almost twice as much as Britain did, but Britain has always spent very little in peacetime).
Of course, in 1938, Poland (and France) had maintained a fairly steady level of investment for two decades, reached by Germany only that year. In figures, Poland spent around 800 million zloty, plus the 2.6 billion French Francs loaned to her.
The summed total volumes from 1930 to 1939 invested in defence are not to Germanys advantage. And quite a way away from ten times Polish investments.
The question of Germany's national economic superiority speaking GNP (almost six times the Polish) stands uncorrected. But as the vast US economy showed in the first year of war against the retarded and crippled economy of Japan, economic and industrial potential is quite useless in any war until realised in military power. By 1939, Germany had almost realised a third of her potential.
Leaving us with the two armies as they actually were at the outbreak of hostilities.
As I understand you, you claim that Germany's modern arms (aircraft and armour) and her modern doctrine aided her very little in the campaign. Your words exactly were "If there hadn't a single tank or a single plane on either side, the outcome would have been the same. Germany was ten times as strong as Poland." Your "ten times" you explained had nothing to do with numbers but investments. I have shown that you cannot mean the size of investments as such, since these were not ten times superior. Regardless of size of investments, Germany's investments were focused on new systems and doctrine. Poland made a brave effort at the same, spending the majority of her immediate investements on her new Air Force, but the rest of it went to WWI units. But this, as I read you, matters naught anyway, since even in the absence of these investments, Germany would have won.
Leaving us with the comparing of infantry and artillery then. More precisely, the units actually taking part in the fighting, since they remained the same throughout the campaign.
German infantry divisions were not significantly better equipped than their Polish counterparts in 1939 (I leave this open for your disagreement of course). Except perhaps fo the minute amount of motorisation, which you write had no significance anyway. I fail to see how the industrial advantage of Germany is brought to bear here. Please elucidate.
Polish infantry had the benefit of a successful war in their recent history, and the experience of a not so successful low intensity war as well. It was Polands estimate that she would be able to move the war to German soil within five days. Polish intelligence services were arguably better than the German counterpart in the interwar years. Obviously they missed entirely the forgone conclusion of their imminent demise, and so I might add did the intelligence services of France and the UK.
My studying the 37 German infantry divisions (two Slovak), equipped by German arms investments, versus the 23+1 Polish does not lend me the ability to immediately draw the conclusion that Poland will fall within a matter of days. If I am to exclude the presence of modern doctrine and weapons, that is.
So, back to you. How do you mean, "forgone conclusion"? In what way do you feel Germany was so vastly superior to Poland - being quite concrete about it I mean. How did the tenfold superiority manifest itself in the field?
If you will, the second phase of the campaign in France lasted only a week longer than Poland, and the same argument of German industrial superiority can be tried on that campaign.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
This statement would entail a campaign of some 250 German divisions in case White.Originally posted by JasonC:Germany was ten times as strong as Poland. [/QB]
-
Ah well, ninetynine of a hundred...
-
No problem Paul, designing something exciting?
The source is the K.St.N. 12 table. If unfamiliar, the K.St.N tables are the War Establishment tables of the German Army. Must be read with the K.A.N. tables (of same number), displaying equipment in detail. Shows authorised strength. If you're researching a particular unit, you have to look their strength returns up at the relevant dates, in which they will always report the "Soll" (the K.St.N.) as compared to "Ist" (actual strength). Easy to get the hang of once you've seen a few.
Here goes, the authorised Corps Hq:
Corps Command
- Commanding General (armed with pistol)
- Chief of the General Staff (armed with pistol)
- 2 personal aides (ordonnanzen), both armed with carbines (i.e. the standard 98K).
Command detachment (Führungsabteilung)
Detachment Ia:
- Ia (operations officer, or first officer of the General Staff), armeed with pistol
- O1 (Aide, or Ordonnanzoffizier 1), armed with pistol.
- NCO as Clerk (Schreiber), armed with pistol.
- Two enlisted men as clerks, one armed with pistol the other with carbine.
Detachment Ic:
- Ic (or Intel officer, or third officer of the General Staff), armed with pistol.
- O3 and O4 (as above, number 3 and 4), both armed with pistol.
- Interpreter, a Beamte rank, armed with pistol.
- NCO as clerk, armed with carbine.
- Enlisted man as clerk, armed with carbine.
Quartermaster detachment (Q-Abt or Quartiermeisterabteilung)
Command detachment:
- Ib (aka Qu), (Logistics officer or second officer of the General Staff) armed with pistol.
- O2, as above, number two, armed with pistol.
- Specialist in munitions and Gas (Fachbearbeiter für Munition und Gaswesen), officer rank, armed with pistol.
- Equipment Specialist (Fachbearbeiter für Gerät), officer rank, armed with pistol.
- 2 NCOs as clerks, carbines.
- 2 Enlisted men as clerks, carbines both. 1 bicycle issued to these two.
- Either a Corps Supply Officer, or a Motor Vehicle Specialist with clerk, depending on the size of the Corps. Pistol, clerk with carbine.
Corps Logistics (Korpsintendant), aka "IVa":
- Corps Logistics Officer (Korpsintendant), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- Assistant (Mitarbeiter), Beamte rank, pistol.
- NCO as clerk, carbine.
- Enlisted man as clerk, carbine.
- Personal aide (Ordonnanz) of the Korspintendant, carbine
Corps Medical Officer (Korpsarzt), aka "IVb":
- Corps Medical Officer (Korpsarzt, pistol
- Aide and Medical Officer, pistol.
- Specialist in Pharmacy (Sachbearbeiter Apotheker), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- Medical NCOs, two of them, pistols.
- Enlisted man as clerk, pistol.
- Personal aide of the Corps Medical Officer, pistol.
Corps Veterinary Officer (Korpsveterinär), aka "IVc":
- Corps Veterinary Officer (Korpsveterinär), pistol.
- Aide, Veterinary Officer, pistol.
- NCO as clerk, carbine.
- Enlisted man as clerk, carbine, and a bicycle.
- Personal aide for the Corps Veterinary Officer, carbine.
Adjutantur (unsure of how to translate, maybe Andreas can help)
Adjutant:
- Adjutant (liter. "Aide" or ADC, but this is an administrative officer, and nobody's aide), aka "IIa", pistol.
- Chief of Registry (Registrator), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- NCO as clerk, carbine.
Corps Judicial Officer:
- Judge (Richter), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- Court Martial Documentations Officer (Urkundsbeamter der Geschäftstelle des Militärgerichts), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- Enlisted man as clerk, carbine.
Headquarters (of the Adjutantur), aka H.Qu.:
- Commander (Kommandant), pistol.
- Paymaster (Zahlmeister), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- Documentations Officer (Registrator), a Beamte rank, pistol.
- NCO (Oberfeldwebel), pistol.
- Aide squad (Ordonnanzkommando) with squadleader (also Gas protection NCO) and eight aides, all with carbines.
- Enlisted man as clerk, carbine and bicycle.
- 2 cooks, both with carbine.
Rations Train (Verpflegungstross):
- Rations NCO (Verpflegungsunteroffizier), carbine.
- Enlisted man, carbine.
Luggage Train (Gepäcktross)
- Leader (NCO), carbine.
- Shoemaker, carbine.
- Tailor, carbine.
Motor Park (Kraftwagenstaffel):
- NCO, carbine.
- 13 enlisted men as drivers, carbines.
Sporting:
:1 Light Bus for Officers and Beamte
:2 Light Cars (think Kübelwagen)
:2 Medium Cars (think SAS Chevy)
:1 Heavy Car (Er, can't think of any generally known version here).
:1 Medium Bus for NCOs and enlisted men.
:6 Light trucks (Rations, 2 for luggage and equipment, fieldkitchen, gasoline and one for the Close Protection team (see below)).
Close Protection Team (Stabswache):
- Leader (NCO), pistol
- 2 HMG teams each of 6 men, a HMG and carbines for the men.
- Rangefinder, pistol.
- Weapons Specialist (Mechanic), pistol.
All in all:
17 Officers
9 Beamte
17 NCOs
53 Other ranks
That's excluding the Arko of course, not all Corps had one. In addition, the Medical organisation could have a Corps level group.
The pattern of organisation - division into detachments, the nicknames of the officers etc - were the same from battallion and up, in all Hqs. Of course, numbers of men varied, but did not progress with echelon. E.g. a divisional staff was considerably larger than a Corps staff. The The German Army considered Regiment, Division and Army as Units, whereas Battallion, Brigade and Corps were subdivisions of units. In a unit Staff, the number of tasks increased. The Germans tried to keep the size of staffs down. Even the OKW itself counted no more than 220 men, plus 50 civilian employees.
Organisation of staffs changed extremely little during the war (as opposed to most other military organisations in Germany). Infantry divisions, and Corps, never changed. Panzerdivisions changed only once (in 41).
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Zalgris you are misquoting Buchner. He states that the Pak 35/36 has a 5mm shield.
Then again Buchner also states that the Pak 38 and 40 used a 24mm doubleshield as you write. That's wrong, should be 4mm plates.
From these pictures, containing humans for relative sizes of things, you clearly see that the space between the shields are not equal to the thickness of the shields (the 24mm shields with 25mm gap claim would entail that). Human proportions also display, IMHO, the 4mm thickness of the shields.
So, those were the German shields. How about the rest of them?
Cheers
Dandelion
-
AgentOriginally posted by Agentorange:Not sure if this should be on the CMBO forum ( mods feel free to move )I was reading a couple of accounts of the Dragoon landings and the general impression I got was that German troops in that theatre were second line troops ie: lots of foreign troops ( Ukrainians etc ) with in some cases a rather ragbag assortment of equipment.
For example the Czech ZB lmg's seem to have been fairly common, I've seen pictures of what appear to be old Austrian Schwarlose mmg's and even what looks like a Madsen lmg. Artillery also seems to have been hodge podge.
Basically can someone point me in the direction of a good book/site that goes into the whole equipment issue in some depth, or perhaps offer some thoughts on the subject themselves ?
I think Harry adressed the issue of equipment and importance of the same in the scope of the Dragoon operation.
Generally speaking, the field army did not make use of captured weapons (we know of notable exceptions, such as the Soviet 76mm etc). The Waffen SS did, police units did, and the Ersatzheer did. The Ersatzheer provided the rear area troops (among many other tasks). They also trained units for the field army. You'll thus find tonnes of captured equipment in any static unit, security unit, fortress unit, training units and similar. But typically nothing such in field army divisions.
An exception to this rule, relevant here, was the MG26(t), which was the German name for the Czech Kolumet vz 26 (in the West often called ZB26 after the Zbrojovka Brno production facility). This was issued in large numbers and in the early war it did reach field units. As the war progressed, it successively became the main weapon of the Feldgendarmerie and police units instead, as well as the lmg of several SS divisions. The Germans liked it. Later models, 27, 28 and 30, were all issued to the Feldgendarmerie and Polizei units. A variant of the 30 was used by the Navy and coastal artillery as AA mg. Captured "Bren" guns were issued the same way.
Several types of Madsens were used by the German army. The MG157(f) were actually the Madsens captured from the French (FM Madsen Mle 22). The MG158(d) and 159(d) were the M1903/24 and M1924 Madsen models as captured from the Danes and also produced in Denmark for the Germans until 1942. Mostly issued to troops in Denmark and Dane Schupos. The MG Madsen was the specially designed model that Dansk Rekyt-Riffel Syndikat A/S Madsen made for the Germans (the model was never used by tha Danes). It was used as a Bordwaffe by the Germans, i.e. aircraft machinegun.
There were Madsen submachineguns too. The MPi746(d) was actually the Soumi M42, built for the Danish army and used by German rear area troops in Denmark.
There are at least seven models of machineguns looking highly similar to the Schwarzlose serving in German units in WWII, Andreas mentions one above. They used the Schwarzlose too, it was called MG241(h) (or 242(h), 243(h)) in WWII parlance. These were taken from Dutch stocks. They were issued to rear services, occupational (security) troops and to the Volkssturm. There was also the smaller model K-MG244(h) which was mounted on captured UK tripods and issued to security units in Europe.
And so on - but sticking to the main rule of German troops holding captured weapons on photo's generally meaning they are either Waffen SS or rear area Security forces of one kind or other - rather than Field units - will get you on track in 99 cases out of 100.
As for artillery, stationary artillery was practically exclusively captured stock. Anything defending any coast or fortress is highly likely to be captured barrels.
Hope that adds a piece to the puzzle.
Cheers
Dandelion
-
As you wrote that I was in Bacharach, astride the Rhein, looting vineyards.Originally posted by aragorn2002:Dandelion, where are you?
Of course, couldn't help inspecting the US crossing points at St Goar and Boppard nearby
Cheers
Dandelion
-
Not really. Compare pronounciation of the town of "Soeft" (Sou-eh-ft).Originally posted by Sergei:In German, ö and oe are pronounced the same way
It is only the limitations of international communities that force the use of oe instead of ö. It has done so for some time now, so some names - particularly people names - use oe though they mean ö.
Same goes for ue and ü. Compare pron. of the name "Lueger" (Lou-eh-ger).
We actually need the oe for quite another sound than ö, and ue for another sound than ü, so it is nice that Microsoft provides everyone with umlauts these days.
In the case of Goebbels of course, it's an ö sound.
Dandelion
-
RawOriginally posted by RawRecruit:Does anyone know what would be attached to a corps HQ for both the Russians and the Germans in 1943, like AA sections or tanks etc?
Apart from the Divisions, A German Corps was not suppose to have any other attachments than the Corps signal battallion (Korps-Nachr.-Abt. XX), the Corps supply unit which varied in size (Korps-Nachsch.Truppen XX), and the Corps Artillery command (Arko XX).
This was because the Corps command was a bit like the Battallion command, i.e. it was sort of a coordinating level between Division and Army with the latter two being "units" as such.
The Corps Hq unit itself wasn't all that big, it contained 17 officers, 9 Beamte and 70 other ranks. Could give you a breakdown if you want.
Flak and Arty were supposed to be Army level units, supplementing those such found at divisional level.
Of course, as the war progressed there were all kinds of ad-hoc solutions, and in some instances we see Corps Hqs acting divisional command in effect, having attached no divisions but a huge number of small units and KGs.
Hope that helps some
Dandelion
-
I'm interested David.
Cheers
Dandelion
Honour in Combat
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
Jason
On the Dachau executioners, we agree on the issues of professionalism, legality and due process. On the issue of justice, I dare think Michael might have meant _ probably because I mean - that the tribunal, introducing an impartial party to the conflict and lending defence to the accused, might have stood a better chance at finding a concept of justice stretching beyond reptile reaction and the satisfying of immediate personal urges. And perhaps even execute such justice in a manner not defouling the vastness of the sacrifice made.
Cheerio
Dandelion