Tigers from HELL

[winkelried]

The division in question was SS Das Reich, delayed however by around 2 weeks, not just overnight, and the heaviest losses were to allied air power hitting some trains with the division's equip. on them iirc.

Just found some info in the old Zetterling website. He cites OB West Ia Nr. 4739/44 g.Kdos, 19.6.44, T311, R25, F7029652. "The major problem with moving the division to Normandy was not allied air power or the French resistance. Those elements that moved by wheel marched quickly to the assembly area. Movements by rail caused greater problems. But the greatest problem was lack of vehicles and spare parts. Quite simply, a large part of the division did not move at all from its original area in southern France. It was not until the last days of June that the following components of the division began moving:

...."

Seems that significant elements of the division moved only in mid-July

On June 1 the division had 44/11 Pz IV, 25/12 Pz V, 33/9 StuG III (Total 134) (operation/short term repair) in Normandy

On July 1 50/23 Pz IV, 26/46 Pz V 36/1 StuG (Total 182)

[LongLeftFlank]

It is notable that as the Germans start to lose the war, these tales of teutonic daring do rapidly increase, wonder what the correlation is there?

Playing defence plus personnel shortage plus totalitarian regime collectively increase the chance for "heroic" outliers (although you also have mass surrenders which didn't occur much for the Allies after 1942). Superior German equipment also plays a role in the case of tank "aces", though secondary IMHO. The USAAF could afford to pull their top ace, Dick Bong, out of combat and make him a test pilot. In contrast, there's a reason Adolf Galland's memoir is titled "The First and the Last"

[Steiner14]

in addition they left a trail of war crimes against civilians on their march northward (Rouffillac, Carsac-Aillac, Tulle, Argenton-sur-Creuse, Marsoulas, Oradour-sur-Glane, Trébons, Bagnères - just to name a few of the villages hit).

http://www.militaria-archiv.com/showpost.php?p=1765010&postcount=102

http://www.nexusboard.net/sitemap/6365/die-wahrheit-uber-oradour-was-geschah-am-10644-t296511/

[LongLeftFlank]

Steiner14, I don't intend to click these links in light of your past record on this board, but they wouldn't by any chance happen to be yet another attempt to deny, justify or whitewash brutal Nazi crimes, would they?

[abneo3sierra]

Often as Reynolds has pointed out, claims were duplicated because tanks shot up already bailed out or KO'd tanks. The Western Allies refused to designate official tank aces, just for this reason and that often a tank kill was a partnership between other arms (artillery suppress, infantry harass etc). It is notable that as the Germans start to lose the war, these tales of teutonic daring do rapidly increase, wonder what the correlation is there?

A lot of the "tales of teutonic daring do" you mention were in fact caused by the allies openly stating that they would accept only unconditional surrender. Remove any chance for your opponent to end things peacefully, and you create a determined defense, whose equipment was better, whose training, generally was better, and who basically had nothing to lose. Combine that with the fact that against advice of officers like Guderian, Hitler pressed for his secret weapons, the V-rockets, the King Tigers mentioned here, etc, when really, probably, he would have been better off as Guderian was telling him, in making a lot more IVs and Vs, and not trying to dabble in jets for an air force that already lost control of the sky, in rockets which were basically a weapon of terror, but had no operational nor tactical military value, and on the few Pz VI that the Reich at that time was able to put out. So here you have some great officers in a few great vehicles, hence the "daring do" you mention, but an overall errant war strategy, hence the fact they also began to lose it.

[abneo3sierra]

Steiner14, I don't intend to click these links in light of your past record on this board, but they wouldn't by any chance happen to be yet another attempt to deny, justify or whitewash brutal Nazi crimes, would they?

I think the war crimes went in both directions, especially in the east, less so in the west. The east was a war of total hatred, on both sides, the west had its moments, but there was much more respect between enemy armies there, until you get to almost the very end.

[sand digger]

Often as Reynolds has pointed out, claims were duplicated because tanks shot up already bailed out or KO'd tanks. The Western Allies refused to designate official tank aces, just for this reason and that often a tank kill was a partnership between other arms (artillery suppress, infantry harass etc). It is notable that as the Germans start to lose the war, these tales of teutonic daring do rapidly increase, wonder what the correlation is there?

Perhaps the real reason was that few potential Western tank aces survived long enough to realise their potential. After all, there was no problem with recognising Allied air aces even though teamwork in the air was just as important as that on the ground.

Then you have German tank aces able to successfully carry out solo missions simply because they had a single piece of equipment suitable to do it. No Western all arms nonsense necessary.

[Steiner14]

Steiner14, I don't intend to click these links in light of your past record on this board, but they wouldn't by any chance happen to be yet another attempt to deny, justify or whitewash brutal Nazi crimes, would they?

Ofcourse. The links are not for people, who think to know everything. They are only for people that know, that during, but even more after every war a lot of lies are spread about the defeated ones and therefore are open minded for unknown arguments to build a more profound and objective personal opinion about certain topics.

This has nothing to do with political views or parties, this is simply a matter of character, curiosity and the capability to make conclusions on his own - for example just like the 9/11-topic, to name an actual one.

[Vark]

It could also be the simple fact that as you are loosing you start to seek out heroes more, tactical tales of bravery hiding operational stagnation and strategic reverses. Don't remember many Western Desert tank aces, when they also held a qualatative advantage, or in Russian when the long 75mm Pz IV's began to dominate the armour battles of 42.

It was not issues of survivability that Wester tankers were not accorded 'ace status', just a realisation that aerial victories were easier to award to individual crews. If it were just casualties that disenfranchised tanks how come the Russians had them? Course, the Soviet tales of multiple kills were just propaganda, whereas the Nazi's told the truth, ummm?

[tuhhodge]

Own-side claims are worthless. In every case where German claims have been compared to reported losses, the claims have been found to be wildly inaccurate

I agree, hence my decision to use the word 'claimed'. Even if some claims are dubious, if you read the book you might, however, agree that the Tigers were very robust and could take masses of punishment.

[Vark]

I think the term ace though had a different connotation for the Germans, it seemed to be the logical embodiment of a world view, whose main features have distinct cultural echoes.

To the Germans they were Teutons fighting the hordes, brave warriors crushed by the sub-humans and capitalists, what better way to represent that truth, than to elevate selected individuals and focus on their exploits. These modern day Siegfrieds were to be found in practically every arm of the forces, allowing the superiority of the German fighting man to be undiminished by the defeats he was suffering, of both increased severity and frequency. Paradoxically this veneration of the ace cost the Germans dear as, for example, in the Battle of Britain, aces had priority for kills and often their squadron mates just provided protection as they tried to increase their scores. After the war the Western Allies found themselves facing the same Soviet 'horde' and enthusiatically propagated the myths, developed by the Nazis, for similar reasons, morale.

Were their above average tank crews on both sides? Of course. Did these crews account for more kills? Absolutely. Did having a qualitative advantage in firepower and protection help? You bet, though one has to ask is a real ace someone who exploits their tactical skill or is just given a hard to kill tank? My main problem with the German ace status is that is was used, is still used by some, to justify a belief in one individual races inherent, genetic superiority over another. The Germans were out fought and critically out thought, throughout the war, fatally overestimating their own power and underestimating their opponents. No amount of Whittmans and Bolters can alter that salient fact.

[abneo3sierra]

It could also be the simple fact that as you are loosing you start to seek out heroes more, tactical tales of bravery hiding operational stagnation and strategic reverses. Don't remember many Western Desert tank aces, when they also held a qualatative advantage, or in Russian when the long 75mm Pz IV's began to dominate the armour battles of 42.

It was not issues of survivability that Wester tankers were not accorded 'ace status', just a realisation that aerial victories were easier to award to individual crews. If it were just casualties that disenfranchised tanks how come the Russians had them? Course, the Soviet tales of multiple kills were just propaganda, whereas the Nazi's told the truth, ummm?

In the western desert a British force that had heavy advantage in number, and quality, and with the abillity because of "enigma" to read their enemies mail,was beaten for some years very soundly by a German Italian force with no advantage save leadership and tactical ability...not much chance for a western "hero" there, until Monty finally turned it.

As for Soviet claims, they kept records which even at best could be described as "shoddy", and kept even these classified for many years, while the Germans penchant for recordkeeping led them to even document things which put them in a bad light, such as war crimes, etc..yes, I would definitely say their records were probably better than the Soviets, though I would probably trust the Western Allies records the most of all.

[Vark]

In the western desert a British force that had heavy advantage in number, and quality

I think you should talk to more Desert Rat veterans (those that are still alive, bless them) about the superiority of their equipment, you might be treated to a good dose of British sarcasm! There are plenty of accounts of bravery from British tankers, but individuals are not normally singled out, unless it involves gallantry and a unit/medal citation.

You still have not answered my question, where are the names of the German tank aces in the desert, why are their exploits not as well known as the later war aces? Could it be that the Germans were celebrating strategic and operational success and had no need of individual tank aces, to cover up the decline?

Genuine question. Where are the German tank aces from the early war? Air aces do not count all nations seem to venerate and accord special status for the flyboys!

[abneo3sierra]

I think you should talk to more Desert Rat veterans (those that are still alive, bless them) about the superiority of their equipment, you might be treated to a good dose of British sarcasm! There are plenty of accounts of bravery from British tankers, but individuals are not normally singled out, unless it involves gallantry and a unit/medal citation.

You still have not answered my question, where are the names of the German tank aces in the desert, why are their exploits not as well known as the later war aces? Could it be that the Germans were celebrating strategic and operational success and had no need of individual tank aces, to cover up the decline?

Genuine question. Where are the German tank aces from the early war? Air aces do not count all nations seem to venerate and accord special status for the flyboys!

Oh I misread your question, sorry about that! and it is a good one. But of course at that point the Germans still did not have the VI, and really had very few of the V (not sure if ANY in the desert?).. I still think sitting inside of a nearly impossible to kill beast (VI) with desperation, with nowhere left to retreat to in some instances, created a GUARANTEE that you will do two things..1--kill ALOT of them, and 2--finally be killed yourself.

[Guest]

I would venture that German armor, for the bulk of the desert war, did not have a primary anti-armor task.

Dedicated anti-tank guns, 88s, artillery, and the desert were probably responsible for a great deal more attrition than German tanks, especially since until very late in that theater the bulk of them were Mk III and early IV's (or worse, Italian models) which were better suited operationally for getting into softer British rear areas and causing havoc. British tanks at that time, while not "superior", definitely had better armor vice the Germans' tank guns and a slugging match would normally have been counterproductive. Rommel wasn't running around with a bunch of Panthers when he was beating Auchinleck (which was probably for the best for a number of other reasons), let alone very many late model (for the time) IVs.

[Sublime]

Though it may not account for not hearing about them, but I'd venture that most early war tank aces probably were dead in Russia by 1942. Which is when you start hearing about later war aces getting involved in tanking. IIRC Wittman was driving around in a StuG in 1942... The Luftwaffe aces are a different story - a lot of them survived from beginning to the end. A huge reason for the high number of kills for German soldiers Id venture is because if someone becomes very skilled they become very deadly and obviously more and more deadly through time. Of course they had a 'fly till you die' policy for every branch. America for example rotated troops often to spread around experience, at least as far as air crew were concerned. Unfortunately Im not how sure that applied to Army personnel. Though I do remember hearing about Sgt. Basilone of Guadalcanal fame being sent to the 'States to train American personnel before getting in on and killed in the battle for Iwo.

[winkelried]

http://www.militaria-archiv.com/showpost.php?p=1765010&postcount=102

http://www.nexusboard.net/sitemap/6365/die-wahrheit-uber-oradour-was-geschah-am-10644-t296511/

thank you for your input - well known revisionist sites and works we don't need to discuss here i believe. if your french is good enough i propose you read the french wikipedia entry where e.g you will see that the papers of the process of 1953 are accessible after 50 years like all other such papers in france. maybe you should consult them personally. i assure you they are very interesting to read.

[Vark]

Phil, there are plenty of accounts of British tanks in the desert being KO'd by tank fire, most veterans bitterly remembering the accuracy of the German shooting. My contention though is not to say that the German tankers were not good, but to point out that the tank aces we all know start being heavily promoted by the Nazis at the same time they start to suffer severe strategic reverses. I would have thought that you could have wracked up kills in a Pz IV F2 in the Kharkov fighting.

Taken from the Axis history forum

TANK KILLERS

Contributors; Ron Klages, David C. Clarke, Erich Brown, Steve Eckardt, John S.

1.Kurt Knispel –168 Kills (sPzAbt. 503)

2.Otto Carius – 150+ Kills (sPzAbt. 502)–Tiger I--Knight's Cross 5/4/44, Oak Leaves 7/27/44.

3.Johannes (Hans) Bolter-- 139 Kills (possibly 144) (sPzAbt. 502) Tigers– Knight's Cross 4/16/44, Oak Leaves 9/10/44.

4.Michael Wittman – 138 Kills (sS.S.PzAbt. 101 Liebstandarte)–Tiger I–Knight's Cross 1/14/44, Oak Leaves 1/14/44 with Swords, 6/25/44.

5.Hans Sandrock – 123 Kills (assorted AFV last unit HJ )

6.Paul Egger – 113 Kills (s SS Pz. Abt. 102)–Tigers– Knight's cross 4/28/45

7.Fritz Lang– 113 Kills (StuG. Abt. 232)

8.Arno Giesen – 111 Kills (Das Reich)

9.Oberfahnrich Rondorf—106 kills (sPzAbt. 503)–Tigers

10.Feldwebel Gaetner ( Gartner?)– 103 Kills (sPzAbt. 503)–Tigers

11.Karl Koener – 100+ Kills (sS.S.PzAbt. 503)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 4/29/44.

12.Albert Kerscher – 100+ Kills (sPzAbt. 502)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 10/23/44.

13.Balthazar (Bobby) Woll–100+ Kills, 81 as Gunner (sSS Pz. Abt. 101)–Knight's Cross–1/16/44.

14.Helmut Wendorff—84 Kills (sS.S.Pz Abt.101)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 2/12/44.

15.Ernst Barkmann—82+ Kills (Das Reich)—Panther–Knight's Cross 8/27/44.

16.Eric Litztke—76 Kills (sPzAbt. 509)--Tigers– Knight's Cross 10/20/44

17.Hermann Bix – 75+ Kills (4th Panzer Division)–Knight's Cross 3/22/45.

18.Hans Strippel – 70 Kills (4. / II/ PzAbt. 1, 1st Pz. Division)–Pz. IV–Knight's Cross 6/4/44.

19.Emil Seibold – 69 Kills (Das Reich)–Pz IV+ Captured T-34s

20.Wilhelm Knauth—68 Kills (sPzAbt. 505)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 11/14/43.

21.Hugo Primozic– 68 Kills (StuG Abt. 667)–Knight's Cross 9/25/42, Oak Leaves 1/25/43.

22.Karl Bromann – 66 Kills (sS.S.PzAbt. 503)–Tigers.

23.Josef William (Sepp) Brandner – 61 Kills (StuG Brigade 912)–Knight's Cross 1/17/45, Oak Leaves 4/30/45.

24.Hans-Bobo von Rohr – 58 Kills (25 Pz. Abt., 7th Pz. Division)–Knight's Cross 11/15/44, Oak leaves 4/8/45 (Posthumously).

25.Karl Heinz Warmbrunn-- 57 Kills, 44 as gunner (s SS Pz. Abt. 101)–Tigers

26.Albert Ernst–55 Kills–(s.Pz. Jgr. Abt. 519)--Nashorn–Knight's Cross–2/7/44.

27.Richard Engelmann—54 Kills (StuG Abt. 912)–Knight's Cross 7/22/44.

28.Heinz Kling–51 Kills (s SS Pz. Abt. 101)--Tigers.

29.Johann Muller–50 Kills ((sPz. Abt. 502)--Tigers–Knight's Cross 10/23/44.

30.Josef Dallmeier—50 Kills (Fhr. PzJager Kp.1183)–Hetzer–Knight's Cross 4/3/45(?).

31.Walter Feibig—50+ Kills (StuG Brigade 301)

32.Heinz Kramer – 50+ Kills (sPzAbt. 502)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 10/6/44.

33.Alfredo Carpaneto – 50+ Kills (sPzAbt. 502)–Tigers–Knight's Cross 3/28/45.

34.Oberleutnant Mausberg – 50+ Kills (s.Pz. Abt. 505)–Tigers.

35.Wolfgang Hans Heimer Paul von Bostell–48 Kills–( Pz. Jgr. Kp. 1023, Pz. Jgr. Abt. 205)–Knight's Cross 9/2/44, Oak Leaves 4/30/45.

36.Jurgen Brandt—47 Kills (sS.S.Abt. 101)–Tigers.

37.Heinz Deutsch – 44 Kills (Fsch. StuG Brigade 12) Knight's Cross 4/28/45.

38.Fritz Amling—42+ Kills (in 48 Hrs. with StuG Brigade 202) Knight's Cross 12/5/42.

39.Heinz Scharf—40+ Kills (StuG Brigade 202) Knight's Cross 9/5/44.

40.Walter Oberloskamp – 40+ Kills (StuG Brigade 667) Knight's Cross 5/15/43.

41.Fredrich Tadje—39 Kills (StuG Abt. 190) Knight's Cross 10/24/42.

42.Rudolf Roy—36 Kills (12 S.S. PanzerJager Abt. HJ)–JP IV–Knight's Cross 10/16/44.

43.Gottwald Stier—30+ Kills (StuG Brigade 667) Knight's Cross (date unknown).

44.Josef Trager – 30+ Kills (StuG Brigade 667) Knight's Cross (date unknown).

45.Richard Schram—30 Kills (StuG Brigade 202) Knight's Cross 12/12/42.

46.Karl Pfreundtner—30 Kills (StuG Abt. 244) Knight's Cross 9/18/42.

47.Karl Heinrich Banze – 24 Kills (13 on one day StuG Abt. 244) Knight's Cross 5/27/42.

48.Felix Adamowitsch –23 Kills (in an 8 day period, StuG Abt. 244) Knight's Cross 10/20/44.

49.Eugen Metzger—23 Kills (StuG Abt. 203) Knight's Cross 9/29/41.

50.Hauptmann Rade –23 Kills (StuG Abt. 244)

51.Heinrich Teriete – 22 Kills (in one engagement, sPzJgAbt. 653) Knight's Cross 7/22/43.

52.Franz Staudegger—22+ Kills (sS.S.Pz Abt. 101) Knight's Cross 7/10/43.

53.Franz Kretshmer – 21 Kills (sPzJgAbt. 653) Knight's Cross 12/17/43

54.Horst Naumann—21 Kills (StuG Abt. 184) Knight's Cross 1/4/43

55.Klaus Wagner – 18 Kills (in two days, StuG Abt. 667)

56.Hermann Feldheim—16 Kills (sPzJgAbt. 654)

57.Heinrich Engel –15 Kills (StuG Abt. 259) Knight's Cross 11/7/43

58. Rudolf von Ribbentrop– 14 Kills (LSSAH+ HJ) Knight's Cross 7/20/43.

59. Wachtmeister Moj–12 Kills (StuG Abt. 190)

60. Siegfried Freyer– 11 Kills in one engagement (Pz. Abt. 24) Knight's Cross 7/23/43.

61. Alfred Reginitor–10 Kills (StuG Abt. 279) Knight's Cross (date unknown).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, assuming these figure bare any relation to reality, and that is a big IF, it does seem to suggest that the real reason for being tank ace was no inherent skill but possession of a weapon system that could normally kill and not be killed. It also backs up the theories of target rich environments, in which these vehicles operated. If Allies crews had Centurions in 1944, or the US M-48's, versus hordes of Pz IV's would they have had similar kill rates? Superior SA and handling of a plane made an ace, not flying a machine that was technically superior, after all the Finnish pilots made the impossible possible, by having Brewster Buffalo aces!!!

[Steiner14]

@winkelried

"Works we don't need to discuss here"?! Who determines that? You? Do you really think, that only mainstream papers should be allowed in a discussion? Then you can't be concerned that the US-senate just passed with 93% approval a legislation, that from occupy-wallstreet protesters to bloggers, everyone can be imprisoned as long as wished and even be killed without any court being involved. Why? Because this scandal is not openly discussed in the mainstream media but only from "conspiracy-theorists"...

Too bad i can't read French but i used Google to translate the page:

I couldn't find any infos regarding the locked papers of the process. Could you please show it to me?

I also cann't find any infos, how the author of Le Massacre d’Oradour, Vincent Renouard, was persecuted because of writing a historical book about that topic (the article don't even reference the book), what happened to him and that the huge and precious amount of the collected papers were "confiscated" and not given back to him, and that he was put on trial because of "approving of the massacre", although in his book he comes to the conclusion that the claimed massacre did NOT happen that way.

I ask you: can you explain to me, how can you, me or anyone be "guilty of approving something", if the person in fact argues that the crime did NOT happen?!

That's the same like saying: "You don't believe in the official version of 9/11 therefore you are approving it!"

I don't know how about you, but if state prosecutors and courts turn laws of 180 degree around and rape logic that way, then i become very sceptical. And i become even more sceptical, if the mainstream, like Wikipedia, is not capable to deal honestly with the arguments of both sides but instead work the usual way: using ad hominem arguments, denouncing the critical voices as "conspiracy theorists" or "revisionists" instead of presenting the arguments of both "sides" objectively and let the reader decide.

I also can't find any explanations on this page, why the claimed "mass murderers" of Oradour were freed after a few years. Do you have an explanation for that?

And what do you say to the affirmation in lieu of oath from Obstlt. Matthes and why he was silenced without giving him the chance to proove his affirmation in lieu? Is it really satisfiying for you, to use words like "well known revisionist sites" instead of dealing with the arguments?

[winkelried]

@winkelried

I couldn't find any infos regarding the locked papers of the process. Could you please show it to me?

From the article "Cinquante ans après les faits, les archives s'ouvrent et paraissent les premiers ouvrages scientifiques sur le sujet comme ceux ..." says 50 years after the facts the archives were opened etc.

I also cann't find any infos, how the author of Le Massacre d’Oradour, Vincent Renouard, was persecuted because of writing a historical book about that topic (the article don't even reference the book), what happened to him and that the huge and precious amount of the collected papers were "confiscated" and not given back to him, and that he was put on trial because of "approving of the massacre", although in his book he comes to the conclusion that the claimed massacre did NOT happen that way.

I ask you: can you explain to me, how can you, me or anyone be "guilty of approving something", if the person in fact argues that the crime did NOT happen?!

Vincent Reynouard was tried but not convicted for this book, since "la Cour de cassation a cassé cet arrêt, les faits reprochés ne constituant pas une apologie de crimes de guerre, mais une contestation de crimes de guerre, laquelle n'est pas réprimée par la loi" the court decided that he did not endorse the war crimes (which is a crime in france), but that he refuted them (which is not a crime). But he was convicted for the denial of the holocaust in 2007 - a judgement he contests currently.

I also can't find any explanations on this page, why the claimed "mass murderers" of Oradour were freed after a few years. Do you have an explanation for that?

The page explains, that

1. that the main suspect Sturmbannführer Adolf Diekmann CO of the I./SS PzGren Rgt "Der Führer" could not be tried since he was KIA 29 June 1944 in Normandy.
   
2. In a first process some of the suspects were given the death penalty in 1946 but this process was declared void since the most of the suspects were underage and wore German uniforms and so were subject to military law.
   
3. 14 of the 22 supects came from the French region of Alsace. This created a big uproar in the region when they were convicted. So the French parliament passed an amnesty shortly after the process and the Alsatians were liberated almost immediately.
   
4. For the remaining the death penalties were then converted to prison terms. They were then liberated a few years later like many other people convicted for collaboration and war crimes.
   
5. One of the remaining main responsibles Obersturmführer Heinz Barth (3./SS PzGren Rgt "Der Führer") was tried in 1983 in the GDR where he had lived after the war. He was liberated in 1997 for humanitarian reasons.
   

BTW Standartenführer Sylvester Stadler CO of SS PzGren Rgt "Der Führer" seems to have ordered a court martial for Diekmann.

[Guest]

Phil, there are plenty of accounts of British tanks in the desert being KO'd by tank fire, most veterans bitterly remembering the accuracy of the German shooting.

I'm not saying the German tanks didn't occasionally use their main armaments for AT purposes. Just that they were better off doing otherwise, especially with the wide-scale introduction of much heavier tanks by the British, and when Rommel's hands weren't tied maneuver-wise they were less likely to be used as such. They could do far more damage surprising soft targets, turning flanks, and luring British armor into AT gun kill sacks.

I also take first-hand accounts of what KO'd armored vehicles with a grain of salt.

My contention though is not to say that the German tankers were not good, but to point out that the tank aces we all know start being heavily promoted by the Nazis at the same time they start to suffer severe strategic reverses.

Yes, I absolutely think this last is true. And I'm not contending that the Germans were or were not good. I'm just saying there probably were fewer tank "aces" than one might guess from Rommel's early campaigns in North Africa.

I would have thought that you could have wracked up kills in a Pz IV F2 in the Kharkov fighting.

Agreed.

[winkelried]

TANK KILLERS

Thank's for your list. Any idea on the split Eastern/Western Front?

[Vark]

Winkelreid, sorry, cannot help you. The original list of panzer aces was posted by David C Clarke over in the Feldgrau forum who then had it cross posted on the Axis History forum. The top 'aces' seem to have done most of their time on the Eastern Front, but I'm sure some BF grogs could help you.

Phil, agree, I just find the topic of the German WII fascinating from a socio-military perspective. It seem Russian tank aces were very prevalent in the dark days but seem to diminish when the Red Army starts crushing facists on a regular basis. Again mention of particular actions (Sandomierz bridgehead, Dnieper etc) but no focusing on individual efforts. Still, the German focus on aces, needs a book written about it, as it appears to delve deep into countries psyche.

Perhaps though the chronology regarding the appearance of the German and Soviet aces this is the key to the phenomena. When you are winning, the effort of the team is stressed, when you are losing and morale is getting knocked, individual exploits are accentuated, or perhaps made up, (cf the debate over Barkmann's corner) to stiffen resolve.

[DavidFields]

Taken from the Axis history forum

TANK KILLERS

Contributors; Ron Klages, David C. Clarke, Erich Brown, Steve Eckardt, John S.

Wow, an interesting list. A nice window into the realities of WW2 warfare.

Almost all of the aces were in either StuG or a Tiger. This validates a lot of what I/we saw in CM1 with regard to the unsexy StuG (let's not get into the armor simulation issue)--it was quite an important weapon for the germans.

I am actually surprised by all the Tiger aces. Since so few, relatively, were made, I thought their terror was over represented in our scenarios--with Allied accounts of "everything is a Tiger" something like the "every gun is an 88" mentality of soldier's stories. The list gives credence to the idea of Tiger platoons being stuck like a boulder in a stream of attacking Allied tanks.

And so few Panther aces. I know the MkIV was really an infantry support tank (superb, I think), but I would have thought Panthers would have been more anti-armor.

Or is the tank listed in the list just the last tank the ace used, and some of those Tiger listings were former Panther commanders? Is that possible?

And anyone want to speculate on how high the numbers would be for 88 AT gun aces? I have no idea, but it is just when I looked at the list, that weapon just seemed to be the obvious companion for those type of numbers.

[winkelried]

Or is the tank listed in the list just the last tank the ace used, and some of those Tiger listings were former Panther commanders? Is that possible?

Wittmann had quite some kills on a StuG.