Operation Deadstick designer's dilemma.

[WimO]

After already spending over 600 hours creating maps and scenarios (currently nine) for a D-Day campaign about the capture and holding of the bridge over the Canal de Caen, I have been turned on my head. I have been guided by a number of respectable Engish accounts (Barber, Bernage, Crookenden, Fowler, and Kilvert-Jones. All these refer to the presence of German tanks (Pz IV) in the attempt to pass through Le Port and in the attack on Benouville as related by veteran's accounts..

Then ...

Today I recieved the English translation of Werner Kortenhaus' "The Combat History of the 21.Panzer Division". At the age of 18 Kortenhaus was a member of 4.Kompanie, Panzerregiment 22 of the 21.Panzer Division. His two volume history written in German in the 1950s is the definitieve go to work about his division in Nomandy. The 21.Panzer Division was the nearest to the Caen Canal and Orne River bridges so it would have been the one to provide the armour in the English accounts.

However...

Kortenhaus never mentions any armour being sent to Benouville or Le Port. Indeed, he is specific to mention its elements going elsewhere. He nevertheless does mention exactly which units were sent to deal with the British airborne on the bridges and approximate times. None of these included tanks or armoured cars, only self-propelled guns and half-tracks.

His units and times mess up my scenarios as well as English accounts.

Don't know what to do now. Don't much feel like starting over .. nor finishing.

 

 

[kohlenklau]

My Dad was 18 in 1944. He was USN armed guard on Liberty ship convoys. 3" guns. 40mm ack ack. Could he be the brain behind a 1950 detailed recount of his convoy actions? 

I would stick with what you have and maybe just revise your designer notes. Maybe

[Aragorn2002]

I agree with Phil.

[PEB14]

You've worked for ages on other projects dealing with the Normandy campaign, so you know for long that all accounts are based on Western sources as the German sources are generally lacking (remember how little we know regarding the 91 Luftlande Division's actions West of the Merderet river).

So it should be no surprise that the Western accounts for this battle differ from the German ones. The latter are certainly more accurate regarding the involvement of their own units, but there is no reason to believe German sources more than British ones regarding timing. And Kortenhaus' account is NO primary source.

@Aragorn2002 and @kohlenklau advice is sound. You have created one view of the battle. But if you think you really should do something, perhaps revise the German units OOB and replace the tanks and AC by the SPG and SPW. As long as it doesn't alter significantly the balance of the scenarios, that's fine !… Otherwise, it's not worth the effort IMHO.

But I insist: Kortenhaus' account is just another view of the same battle. It may be accurate on some points and less on others. And good luck to get the final word.

Edited September 16, 2023 by PEB14

[WimO]

@kohlenklau@Aragorn2002@PEB14Thank you all for the feedback and helpful suggestions. I need to think on this for a while.

[MOS:96B2P]

12 hours ago, WimO said:

At the age of 18 Kortenhaus was a member of 4.Kompanie, Panzerregiment 22 of the 21.Panzer Division. His two volume history written in German in the 1950s

I'm sure Kortenhaus offers some valuable first hand memories and a German perspective on these events (I should probably get this book).  It might be useful to consider how he came across all the information he used to write two entire volumes on the 21st Panzer Division.  He probably could not have personally experienced all two volumes worth of information. As an 18 year old in a combat zone I would suspect his personal experience was confined to a small sliver of the big picture.  Probably he was mostly consumed and focused on surviving the combat his platoon was involved in. So, unless he was an 18 year old that worked in the Tactical Operations Center (TOC) of the 21st Panzer and was privy to the conversations and decisions of the senior command staff I wouldn't think he would have much personal knowledge on the events outside his platoon/company.

Then later (probably about 10 years later) after the war he wrote the books. He must have relied on other sources to fill in all the information outside his platoon and company experience. It would be useful to know the reliability of the sources he used that contradicts multiple other sources. Maybe the other sources he used are right or partially right but I would not automatically assume they are.

There are several other forum members that know about German units.  Off the top of my head @George MC and @RockinHarry come to mind. They might have some insight into your dilemma. 

You do good work. Your final product will be a great contribution to the CM community.