Cavalry in WW2 questions

[Steve Clark]

In my general readings about WW2, I was reminded of the use of mounted horsemen in some WW2 battles. During Hitler's invasion of Poland, some cavalry units attacked the mechanized divisions and were annihilated. But in the Russian Front, massive Russian cavalry units were able to overwhelm the attackers. I'm wondering with the Poles, what in the world were they thinking?!? I don't understand how you would even contemplate going up against mechanized units with riflemen on horseback? What was it that made the Russians more successful at this? What is the weather, terrain, or sheer numbers? What were the tactics?

[IntelWeenie]

Using horses is fine, as long as you don't fight mounted. This was the mistake the Poles made. IIRC, the Russians used their cavalry as highly mobile infantry and generally fought dismounted.

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

"Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

[JoePrivate]

IIRC in Panzer Commander there was a reference to a Polish Cavalry Regiment attacking German tanks but they were doing so because they had been told the tanks were wooden dummies. Not sure how reliable that is, takes a bit away from the romanticism!

[dumbo]

Russian Cavalry experience was mixed, their use was in part due to Stalins insistence (at the prompting of Budenny and old cavalry commander from the Russian civil war and long time Stalin associate) that they were not being used enough.

Most of the Soviet generals at the start of the war thought cavalry was useless (and even went so far as to say so in written dispatches which when you consider Stalins liking for them was a dangerous thing to do).

However it proved useful for several reasons.

1.) Terrain - One of the more prevalent myths of the Russian war is the notion of tanks sweeping across the open country. This is somewhat misleading, armoured thrusts almost always stuck near or on roads due to maintanence and supply considerations but also even the best cross country tanks could and did bog down often (CM is rather kind in its bog down percentages rather than too harsh IMHO).

Cavalry did not suffer from this problem as badly and a Cavalry division could move rapidly in deep country without requiring gasoline resupply.

2.) Weather. The russian steppe ponies could operate in temperatures where tanks had frozen solid. This gave the cavalry units extra mobility during bad weather AND gave a morale boost thanks to the "free' heat provided by horses (this might sound daft but as anyone who has been in extreme cold will tell you a nice warm animal nearby makes a LOT of difference.)

3.) Organization. Unlike the germans the Red Army didnt just group together all of thier cavalry in single formations they were also given out in penny packets to regular infantry units. This gave the infantry commander a "mobile" arm which he could use to great effect to block escape routes or cover his own retreat or flanks.

4.) Russia as ocean. Although Russian cavalry units took horrible losses if used in a mounted charge they excelled in the vast open terrain of the eastern front which often employed naval like tactics rather than army ones. For large parts of the eastern front the "line" was simple empty space between formations with units being directed to each other like battleships at sea. This was an ideal scenario for cavalry units which could penetrate deep behind enemy lines AND conceal themselves when needed (unlike tanks).

5.) However the primary reason they were used was , they were simply there. Not wanting to waste what was probably a fairly silly unit to have in the first place the soviets made the best of the situation and tried to find a role for them. In this they were successful their most notable acheivement was the role they played in the Stalingrad encirclement.

Hope this helps

_dumbo

[This message has been edited by dumbo (edited 08-23-2000).]

[TrixxTango]

An example of what happened to cavalry when it charged during WWII can be seen in the movie "The Battle of Neretva", a story about Yugoslav partisans who fought the Germans and other partisans in Bosnia, defending the bridge at Neretva. The Chetnic partisans charges the Yugoslavs on horseback, and were torn to pieces. Best part of the movie!

(Excerpt from "Black Adder goes fourth"):

Lt. George: Well, according to the map, we are in this field, surrounded by all these tiny mushroom symbols.

Capt. Black Adder: Look in the table and find out what the symbols represent.

Lt. George: It says "Mine".

Capt. Black Adder: So, what does that tell you?

Lt. George: That whoever the fellow was that created the map owns these mushrooms?

Capt. Black Adder: No! It indicates that we have walked into a minefield!

Lt. George: Oh. So the chap owns the field as well.

[Leclerc]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dumbo:

5.) However the primary reason they were used was , they were simply there. Not wanting to waste what was probably a fairly silly unit to have in the first place the soviets made the best of the situation and tried to find a role for them. In this they were successful their most notable acheivement was the role they played in the Stalingrad encirclement.

Hope this helps

_dumbo

[This message has been edited by dumbo (edited 08-23-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

One more reason at the beginning of the war cavalry units remained the primary mobile units for Soviet after the massive loss in tanks and trucks.

[Guest Michael emrys]

Imagining Soviet cavalry divisions as simply a mass of horsed riders is a mistake. They were heavily armed with MGs, mortars, and even towed artillery. They also usually had at least a battalion of light tanks. In other words, they were well-balanced, all-arms formations.

Michael

[Gen. Sosaboski]

OK, listen up. I'm here once and for all to shut up all the rumors about the Polish cavalry. So please all of you listen.

(angry mode on)

The Polish cavalry did NOT, I say again, did NOT charge tanks in 1939. The incident with the dummy tanks MAY HAVE happened. In fact, a Polish cavalry unit is credited, with air support, for nearly wiping out a Panzer unit. Some have said that the Polish cavalry was probably one of the finest units the Germans stumbled across.

So please, don't ever make the mistake again.

(angry mode off)

[von Lucke]

Yah, Sosi! You tell 'em!

Actually, he's quite right --- here's the poop:

Seems a mounted Polish Cav unit took a horse drawn German supply column by suprise and was laying about destruction in a good old-fashioned Cav-raider-like manner, when they, in turn, where suprised by an advance element of a German Panzer Rgt (most likely PzII's). Said Polish Cav took some casualties and then proceeded to ride off into the sunset (as any out-gunned force would/should do).

Well, some hours later an Italian war correspondent arrives on the scene, sees all these dead horses lying around (some Polish, mostly German), a few Polish prisoners, and a platoon of panzers on security... Seniore Reporter evidently didn't sprechen all that much Deutch, and prolly no Polish, so he basically invented the whole "gallant but mislead Polish Lancers charge German Panzers" story from the aftermath of what was, in all truth, a successful Polish cavalry action.

And through such lies are legends born...

[This message has been edited by von Lucke (edited 08-26-2000).]

[Guest Michael emrys]

Never mind. Somebody beat me to it.

Michael

[This message has been edited by Michael emrys (edited 08-26-2000).]

[Formerly Babra]

The tale of Polish cavalry "charging" German tanks is false. However, there were many combats between German armoured forces and Polish cavalry brigades, particularly in Silesia.

The Wolynska Cavalry Bde significantly delayed 4th Pz Div between 1st and 3rd September. 4th Pz lost 28% of its tanks during these battles, about 80 tanks.

The Krakowska Cav Bde, at first successful against the German 4th Inf. Div at Koszecin, was pushed back by the German 2nd Light Division. Krakowska Bde was hit again by the 3rd Light Division and finally broken with heavy losses.

Interestingly, the first tank battle of the war, at Piotrkow, ended with the loss of seventeen German tanks, two self propelled guns and fourteen armoured cars. Two Polish tanks were knocked out.

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

Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me.

[PzKpfw 1]

A further note on Soviet Cavalry use, one key factor in their success was that the Cavalry arm officers were generaly very competent leaders, as the Cavalry was the least affected formation in the Soviet forces by the purges, so they reatained most of their highly trained officer pool compared to the rest of the Soviet forces.

Although mobile and especialy effective when harrassing rear echelon forces, Soviet Cavalry was not able to stand toe to toe with regular German forces this includes Inf, Mot, etc, basicly if they stood & fought they were decimated, as they lacked the firepower to be used as offensive or realy even a defensive force.

What they excelled at was self sufficent mobile harrasement tasks, Soviet Cavalry operated for long periods of time with very little logistical support or ties.

Their were actualy Soviet Cavalry sabre charges into early 1943 against German rear area personell or even their security forces, in the right terrain it was said to be as effective as an armored thrust.

An classic example of Soviet Cavalry use was the 5th Guards Cavalry Corps employment in the 1944 Korsun - Shevchenkovskii operation (Tscherkassy Pocket in German terms)where the 5th GCC ran a mobile battle that was reminicent of the original cavalry doctrine of the 1800's as the 5th GCC would stay mounted until contact then fight dismounted then remount & pursue, constantly harrassing the German forces throught the operation.

Regards, John Waters

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

People who can smile when things go wrong

have found someone else to blame.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 08-26-2000).]

[Gen. Sosaboski]

Thanks for the backup guys...