Grisha Posted February 13, 2001 Share Posted February 13, 2001 machineman, First, thanks for the discussion. Regarding carelessness or linearity in tactical maneuvering, that sort of thing did occur throughout the war, but was not so common from 1944, on. But you are right, it did not ever go away. I should point out that the Soviets were very adamant about keeping casualties down almost from the beginning of the war, it's just that it took a while for experience to settle in with all those inexperienced or unskilled officers. By 1944, such wanton usage could have severe consequences. Even the hero of Prokhorovka, General Rotmistrov, was relieved of command in 1944 for his excessive losses during campaigning(he wasn't shot,or anything, just reassigned to a noncombat post). Incidently, guess who was in command of the assault of Seelow Heights? Zhukov There is a story that Zhukov never let minefields stop his advance. He would just order his lower echelon commanders to continue the advance - threaten them into submission, really. His reasoning was that the time it would take them to halt the advance to clear them would result in the same number of casualties as just flat out running through them. He may have been right, but what a man! My god Herr Oberst I agree Werth's War in Russia is an excellent book for getting a feel for what it was like to be Russian during that time. It is one of my favorite books. ------------------ Best regards, Greg Leon Guerrero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machineman Posted February 13, 2001 Share Posted February 13, 2001 Hey Grisha, it's been a really interesting thread with all the info and opinions. Makes that Eastern front shelf at the bookstore a lot more interesting all of a sudden. I suspect there will be many more threads debating said Eastern front as CM2 approaches. And then the desert war, etc, etc....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted February 13, 2001 Share Posted February 13, 2001 One thing i can't stress eneough concerning the Soviet's in 1944 - 1945 is that they concentrated on a qualitive superiority over the Germans. Soviet Rifle Div's suffered very heavy losses, BUT their low manpower stats were not due to a lack of replacements or manpower resources, it was due to an decision to refit Rifle Divs only after sown to 10 - 20% effectiveness because the Soviets drcided to use manpower resources in forming new Tank, Mechanized & Artillery Divs rather then rebuilding the Rifle Divs. A 1945 Soviet Rifle Co was the most heavily supported organization to fight in WW2 Ie, an Soviet Rifle Company in 1945 was roughly 100men attacking on a frontage of only 100m, (an Bn attacked on a 700m frontage)the Co had direct support of 3 - 5 tanks or SU's & 2 - 4 DF Artillery guns. The Soviets clearly chose qualitiy over quantity in 44 & 45 despite the fact thay had more then ample manpower available to totaly replace Rifle losses 3 times over. The Soviet force returns show 11 - 14 milliion personel, in Military service on VE day depending on what source you wish to use, compared to over 5 miliion serving in the Fronts most of this number was in the training establishments. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts