altipueri Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Some interesting bits from a few talks on Normandy here including an attack on a bus shelter mistaken for a pillbox. - http://www.bcmh.org.uk/archive/reports/2011NormandyInMemoriamIanDaglish.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackcat Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Mr. Altipueri, thanks for giving us a link to that fascinating paper. Lots and lots of interesting stuff. Dr Pieter Lieb's comparative analysis of SS and Heer divisions in Normandy ouht to ruffle the feathers of a few on this site - myth busters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 What I can say for sure is that 11 Germans will defeat 11 Brits - especially on their turf. Vs the Americans there was a nasty surprise this year but I chalk this up to low supply. The Soviets I haven't seen for a long time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Chuck Norris = 100 Germans, 110 Yanks, 120 Tommies and a partridge in a pear tree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenris Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Interesting reading, thanks for sharing. -F 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BletchleyGeek Posted November 20, 2013 Share Posted November 20, 2013 Mr. Altipueri, thanks for giving us a link to that fascinating paper. Lots and lots of interesting stuff. Dr Pieter Lieb's comparative analysis of SS and Heer divisions in Normandy ouht to ruffle the feathers of a few on this site - myth busters. The observation regarding staff work and middle-level officers is very interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waycool Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Thanks for posting the pdf as I found it an interesting read. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 11 dutch lions going to tear apart overwhelming numbers in the planned overseas conflict next year. At least, that's what I'll write up in the history books if I get to write any :-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 Well as the Germans were in the main defending in Normandy I would say that sounds about right. When the Germans were attacking I assume it was reversed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kensal Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 11 dutch lions going to tear apart overwhelming numbers in the planned overseas conflict next year. At least, that's what I'll write up in the history books if I get to write any :-) Ah yes, but will they be playing football or that funny Dutch martial art they invented for the last one 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted November 21, 2013 Share Posted November 21, 2013 altipueri, Thanks much for sharing this fascinating, meaty, yet readable set of analyses. I also thought the link to the Perth Regiment was most useful. More on carriers than I'd ever seen. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 I just noticed that the discussion was dedicated to the memory of Ian Daglish who died in an air crash. He was the author of those great Over the Battlefield series and his death is a great loss to military history. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altipueri Posted November 22, 2013 Author Share Posted November 22, 2013 Ian Daglish was also a wargamer and contributed scenarios to Advanced Squad Leader. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Someone thought those essays "meaty"? I saw a mass of prejudice all true to national stereotypes circa 1946. The German speakers notably presented no evidence whatever for anything they said. The most substantive comments were about a failed division commander for the 51st Infantry, and reported tension between Polish officers and their Allied corps commander. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DasMorbo Posted November 22, 2013 Share Posted November 22, 2013 Hi guys! Haven't been writing here for a while. This '100 Germans beat 110 Brits' thing is heavily biased because the Germans were on the defense about 90% of the time in perfect terrain for such action. The times they were on the assault (first week of the landings and end of July most notably) they got clubbed just as much as the allies. My view is that Germans and western Allies were more or less equal in fighting capabilities in 1944, each side with individual strenghts and weaknesses. The Russians were a completely different story: poor leadership, poor training and poor (in comparison) equipment througout the war. Just some numbers: the Brits lost an estimated 100-150 tanks in capturing my home province of Lower-Saxony as long as Hamburg in early 1945. In the same time frame the Battle of Berlin and its preceding battles over the Oder River cost the Soviets about 2000-3000 tanks (battle of Berlin alone 1000 KIA tanks). They usually just poured massive artillery firepower and stormed in afterwards. Flexible leadership whipped them at every opportunity. Best regards Olf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuirassier Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 I just noticed that the discussion was dedicated to the memory of Ian Daglish who died in an air crash. He was the author of those great Over the Battlefield series and his death is a great loss to military history. Michael Very unfortunate. His book on Epsom was excellent. His battlefield photos really helped one understand the terrain and how it influenced that tactics involved. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocal Posted November 23, 2013 Share Posted November 23, 2013 Flexible leadership whipped them at every opportunity. Fortunately for the Soviets, the Germans had a flexibility problem after 1943. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 His book on Epsom was excellent. My own favorite was the book on Bluecoat. I was previously unaware of this operation, yet it was one of the best run on the British sector of Normandy. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 So when do we get them Wasps and Crocodiles? As for the Brits needing two sections to match the firepower of one German section, I can believe that. Luckily the Brits tended not to go into battle minus lots of artillery and tanks so the difference was made up with supporting arms to a degree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seedorf81 Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Hi guys! Haven't been writing here for a while. (..) The Russians were a completely different story: poor leadership, poor training and poor (in comparison) equipment througout the war. Just some numbers: the Brits lost an estimated 100-150 tanks in capturing my home province of Lower-Saxony as long as Hamburg in early 1945. In the same time frame the Battle of Berlin and its preceding battles over the Oder River cost the Soviets about 2000-3000 tanks (battle of Berlin alone 1000 KIA tanks). They usually just poured massive artillery firepower and stormed in afterwards. Flexible leadership whipped them at every opportunity. Best regards Olf Hmm, you're seem to forget that in early '45 most German soldiers in the West weren't nearly as determined to fight the UK/US forces, as the Germans in the East were in fighting the Russians. Certainly in the last two or three months of the war, the British and American forces had hardly any serious opposition left, while the Russians had to fight against very fanatical (sometimes literally suicidal) soldiers. Therefore you're comparison isn't entirely just. And I think that the Germans, in for instance Heeresgruppe Mitte in the second half of 1944, realized that the Russian Army by that time was pretty well trained, very well led and rather well equipped. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Seedorf - the Russians took over 400,000 casualties in the last 2-3 weeks of the war, just in the fight for Berlin and Prague. From a position of total operational superiority, against a defeated and disorganized enemy with rear area services and command systems in complete collapse. Tactical aces they were not... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saferight Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 On the difference of the casualties in the end of the war. Was it the tactical differences between the Russians an Western Allies, or was it the Germans willingness to fight one tooth an nail more than the other? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Saferight - the Allies didn't take losses that high in the battle of the Bulge. It was not a matter of the Germans not trying, it was a matter of the Russians "spending" men like crazy. The western Allies were simply vastly more competent tactically, man for man, than the Russians were. The Russians had fine military equipment, a solid doctrine, good operational direction at the higher levels from midwar on. But their tactical ability and the fine-scale intelligence and command skill showed by their lower level officers and bottom field grade officers, were simply far below the level of the other major combatants. All war. The Russians took 3:2 losses in their greatest operational victory of the whole war - Bagration. They spent manpower recklessly, and did things the hard way, over and over. There was no such major discrepancy on the other fronts against the Germans. The only other major combatant that showed similar tactical ineptitude in land combat was Japan, and that was in large measure due to the far superior odds and major weapon system "capital" edge they faced from midwar on. In their best defensive performances late war, they managed to trade one KIA of theirs for one WIA of their opponents; more often and whenever they tried to attack after early 1942, they were outscored 10 to 1 - an even higher attrition ratio than the Russians suffered against the Germans. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Some interesting bits from a few talks on Normandy here including an attack on a bus shelter mistaken for a pillbox. - http://www.bcmh.org.uk/archive/reports/2011NormandyInMemoriamIanDaglish.pdf Thanks for this only now just looked at thread as title put me off.. This was one talk I could not go to as was out of the country and aware of the day. I had not realised notes had been published so at least I get an inkling of what I missed. Sad that the day had to be held, but a good day in Ian's memory. His books I have found very readable and give some great insights to the reality of WW2 operations. Thank you... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saferight Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Saferight - the Allies didn't take losses that high in the battle of the Bulge. It was not a matter of the Germans not trying, it was a matter of the Russians "spending" men like crazy. Good points JasonC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.