Russians in action!

[Runyan99]

Thought this was interesting. Although a miniatures setup, it clearly shows the Russian tank section commander using flags to communicate orders. That is going to be a must for CM2, I think.

[Skipper]

Nice picture, but looking a bit closer...

If they use those flags and TCOs are unbuttoned the way they are, it is a march.

If infantry is disembarked and runs with tanks, it is an attack, less than 400 m to the 1st enemy trencheline, iirc. They should be wearing helmets then.

Combat formation for infantry with AFVs is not "bunch of guys hiding behind the AFV. AFVs are not there to cover the infantry with their armor. On the contrary, grunts are there to cover AFVs with their fire.

Some of them are in winter uniform, others - in summer uniform.

[Michael Dorosh]

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

If infantry is disembarked and runs with tanks, it is an attack, less than 400 m to the 1st enemy trencheline, iirc. They should be wearing helmets then..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting facts on the Soviet Army's combat methods - very enlightening. Not to cast dispute on anything you said - but I do take exception with your statement that the troops "should" be wearing helmets then.

This is correct - they "should" but frequently didn't. I was of the understanding that many Russian soldiers felt helmets were "unmanly" and did not wear them, even in the firing line.

I met a German vet who got in a lot of trouble when he was a machinegunner early in the war - he hated his helmet and wore it as little as possible - including in action. He showed me a photo (taken on a training exercise, no doubt) of him firing the MG34 while bareheaded.

Armies have all kinds of "should've"s and soldiers usually break most of them at some time or another.

Just the uniform grog picking more nits. Neat picture, too!

[ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Skipper]

I didnt say "they must" wear helmets. Only that they "should". Most did. Especially, in attack where you can find yourself an artillery target without any advanced warning.

OTOH, if it was a march in winter time, then they would not wear helmets, of course.

OTOH, it is hardly possible for some squad members to wear fur hats, caps and steel helmets simultaneously. I am not a uniform grog, I just wore the same uniform.

[Runyan99]

Well okay, here is an actual photograph for comparison.

Everybody has the same uniform and are wearing helmets, but notice the infantry is still alongside and/or behind the tanks...not out front.

Also, the tanks are all buttoned up for the final advance, as Skipper said they should be.

This raises the question: With no radios how did the tank platoon leaders command the platoon when buttoned up? Did command and control end when contact was made with the enemy?

[ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Runyan99 ]

[Pvt. Ryan]

It probably went something like this:

Before the battle, the commander said to his subordinates: "Kill everything in front of you. Try not to die."

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Runyan99:

This raises the question: With no radios how did the tank platoon leaders command the platoon when buttoned up? Did command and control end when contact was made with the enemy?

[ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Runyan99 ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would imagine with common sense - by setting out platoon objectives fairly close to the start line, and frequent pauses to 'reorg' - ie, all tanks gathering together on the objective, pausing for an orders group, marking out another platoon objective, and continuing on? Just a wild guess, but how would you do it?

Of course, if the Russians' experience was anything like the Canadians', they would quickly learn that German mortars usually preregistered their own infantry positions, so that when an objective was taken by the enemy, it could instantly be brought under

fire. You quickly learned not to reorg on the enemy's positions, but beyond them...

[civdiv]

Canada has an army?!?!?!

[Stalin's Organ]

By the middle of the war, say the end of 43, every Russian tank had a radio, so command and control problems were not as bad as at thestart of hte war.

Western perceptions of Russian tactics as unsophisticated are mostly myth. The Russians were no more eager to die than anyone else.

[Commissar]

From the military forum at The Russian Battlefield :

Interview with T-34 platoon commander. Notice what he says concerning radios:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I didn't manage to ask all the questions since I had around 100 So we fix our next appointment on Wensday. So here I post some short answers.

1. Did he ever encounter Germans using former Soviet tanks?

Never

Could you ask this person what were the main reliability problems of the T-34?

- Short life span. He told me that after 20 days of operation they have 10% of initial tank strength. 99% of them were shot up. He told me that after 1.5 h march the column must stop for 30 min for routine checking (oil level, tracks, swithching of gasoline tanks) He NEVER experienced any mechanical problems during his 5 operations (Kursk, L’vov, Kamenets-Podol’ski, Sandomierz, Vistla-Oder).

- Did the tank get more mechanically reliable as the war progress, or less reliable?

More reliable.

- What kind of radio did his tank have (if at all)? How common were radios in tanks?

All tanks were equipped with radios both transmitters and receivers. About tank radios ask Valera he has a link on the proper web-page.

- Does he consider visibility to be a problem with the T-34? T-34/85?

Imagine: you zigzagging on the car at 50 km/h on rough terrain and instead of your windshield you have a embrasure. What kind of visibility you will have? So he fought with open hatch.

- Was the transmission really a problem?

No

In a similar vein how often did he have additional troops under his command - say tank riders.

Everytime.

could you please ask him how common artillery support was buring the exploitation phase of the battle ie after the breakthrough.

Never. He told that there is no need for support in exploitation phase since there is no resistance.

Was he more concerned about attacks from other tanks, Anti-tank guns, Infantry assaults, Mines, etc.

Tanks and AT guns.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

--You can see the full link here: Some more answers from T-34 platoon commander

[Skipper]

We were taught to run alongside BMPs, tanks following. And I am sure that this formation was developed in WWII. Maybe it was later than the photo. I'll ask around.

By the way, tank riding squads were introduced in RKKA during WWII, and for all I know, Germans did not use it.

[Commissar]

The tactic you describe emerged from the Arab-Israeli wars I believe. Before, tanks/BMPs went ahead first with the infanry following behind them. They taught their Arab client state armies to do the same. This tactic proved to be inadequate when the Arabs used it during the various wars with Israel. This forced the Soviets to revise the tactic to having the infanry go first with the BMPs behind them giving them support. As far as I know, the Russians haven't changed this configuration.

[ 05-26-2001: Message edited by: Commissar ]

[Skipper]

Here is from 1940 soviet "Armor tactics" book. Apparently, infantry was supposed to FOLLOW tanks.

On the other hand, formation density in your photo looked odd. The above scheme confirms that. Tanks should maintain 150-200 m separation. Morale: the photo must be staged (most likely) and/or it shows the moment of dismounting / changing from marching to combat formation.

Which is what the original miniature could be representing as well.

[ 05-26-2001: Message edited by: Skipper ]

[The Commissar]

Skipper,

You said that the manual you got your illustration from was dated 1940. Do you think it is possible that the Soviets changed their doctrine by then? During 5 years and much experience fighting Germans, I am sure it was possible.

Of course, Im just trying to be practical about it. Dont really know when doctrines were introduced or why.

[Commissar]

The intial tactic of tanks/BMPs before infantry did not change until after the war. You can find photos of Soviet units on manuevers well after the war in which the tank/bmp-before-infantry tactic remains the same. The Soviets did not change the tactic until after observing some of their client-state armies (the Arabs) use this tactic and fail miserably with it.

[Micheal Wittman]

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

Canada has an army?!?!?!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, they even fought and died by the 1000's

before the Americans even joined the war effort. Neat AY