Russian Armour in Autumn 1943...

[JasonC]

"e. All figures include both operational vehicles and those in workshops".

Not a lot of tank for so much front...

[Wartgamer]

So the Panther+Tiger population is about 1/4 the number of panzers on the eastern front during late 43. The Germans had roughly 2100-2200 panzers 'on hand' during this time (around 800-1000 operational). I assume this stat is only turreted panzers but it may include stug in panzer division. This data is taken from a source that shows about 2600 panzers available and 2287 operational around June 30 (pre Kursk) and charts the whole year of 43.

The Germans are losing 200-300 Panzer IV a month (all fronts) during this time.

I am beginning to wonder how much new material the Germans held back.

[JasonC]

That would have to be turreted tanks. I have 2400 on June 30, without exhausting all possible types for turreted tanks (e.g. captured T-34s). With an additional 1130 full topped assault guns (StuG, StuH, Elephant, Brummbar), some Nashorns and a fair number of Marders etc. Rounds out to more like 4000 than 2000.

Here are the June 30 numbers Z&F have -

IIs- 116

38s- 13

III, 50L42s - 142

III, 50L60s - 538

III, 75L24s - 173

IV, 75L24s - 46

IV, 75L43&48 - 862

Panther - 204

Tiger - 147

Flamm - 41

BefWg - 116

StuG - 916

StuH - 68

Brummbar - 52

Elephant - 89 (not list in their table - they give the figure elsewhere)

Captured T-34s aren't listed, Nashorns aren't listed but were at least 90, Marders aren't listed but there were 300 to 500 according to other sources.

It is also possible losses are being understated by the TWO accounting standard. If a tank goes into long term repair it isn't always carried on strength with the unit - short term repair is, but long can pass to rear area units or just hang around with the unit as a source of spares, without becoming a TWO "officially".

In the summer they record 2140 TWOs, 1841 of them eastern front. 1227 are recorded as sent east in the same months (July, August, and September). That gives a drawdown of 600 from the end of July to the end of September. In runners, I've seen charts that show a larger fall than in overall tanks on strength, in the same period.

Production was 2500, suggesting no "need" for a decline at all. But the total tank strength only recovers in the 4th quarter. Production regularly runs 1000 tanks a quarter above recorded TWOs plus the recorded east front fleet size change. So either the replacement army is burgeoning while the front is collapsing - which seems somewhat implausible - or effectively dead tanks are being understated by TWOs, as some go into "long term repair" but in practice never come out again.

[Wartgamer]

Interesting data from an old thread

In 1943 the Soviet's lost 23,500 AFVs losses by type were 22,400 tanks & 1,100 SU. Tank losses equaled 51.4% of all production while SU lossess totaled only 25% of 1943 production. Ie, Soviet production in 1943 was 23,977 AFV's Ie,:

15,712 - T-34-76

100 - T-34-85

452 - KV1-S

130 - KV-85

102 - IS-2

3,343 - T-70

120 - T-80

1,928 - SU-76

635 - SU-122

750 - SU-85

670 - SU-152

35 - ISU-152

Soviet AFV strengh as of July 1, 1943 stood at 15,476 Tanks & SU's deployed such as:

Army - 10,199 - tanks & SU's.

STAVKA - 2,688 - tanks & SU's.

Far East - 2,589 - tank's.

Note the above does not include AFVs being used in the trainimng establishments. As of July 1, 1943 the Germans had a total of 2,088 tanks & SP's, deployed on the Eastren Front, whick left the Soviet's with an 6:1 advantage in armor as of July 1 1943.

[ May 02, 2005, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[JasonC]

Clearly it was not 6 to 1. If the Stavka and army are compared German reported strength, it was 3.2 to 1. If the Stavka total is considered more like German tanks in Germany (since their total fleet was certainly bigger than their east front total), then just army compared to German east front was more like 2.5 to 1.

Other sources put the total number of German AFVs as high as 6,000 before Kursk - see e.g.

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/avenue/vy75/str.htm

And puts the local ratio around 3:2 in the Kursk sector. He does say he doesn't really trust his German figures though, and that they come from multiple sources.

I suppose one can add in things like SPA, make sure one counts every Marder correctly, there is fudging room for things like ACs. But I'm inclined to believe Z&Fs figure, and think 3:1 locally is about right, and regard the 2k number as a turreted tank only count, that missed some minor types (command tanks, flame tanks, the most obsolete models, etc).

[Wartgamer]

That old thread was not counting anything but German turreted afv.

[JasonC]

"As of July 1, 1943 the Germans had a total of 2,088 tanks ***& SP's***, deployed on the Eastren Front"

Wasn't trying to be. It was just wrong.

[Wartgamer]

Yes. He was just counting turreted German AFV but counting that as total. IOW, he was wrong. I forget the author but I believe you were also in that old thread contributing.

Anyway, An interesting stat would be ratio of turreted to turreted AFV from Kursk onward in 43.

[JasonC]

Unturreted certainly goes up, as the III chassis fleet transitions to StuGs. In 1944, a portion of the IV chassis fleet also goes turretless (Jadgs, StuG IVs). The turreted portion is at its peak down to mid 1942, about, before the Marders come out. All the light chassis transition to upgunned turretless types, starting at the low end (IIs and 38s chassis) in 1942, passing through the IIIs in 1943, and getting a large portion of the IVs in 1944. Overall production ramps too, but III and IV chassis remain the main ones throughout.

[undead reindeer cavalry]

Originally posted by CousinPablo:

I recently played an armour v armour quick battle as Russian infantry (1 company) supporting armour (3 T-34-85s and 2 IS-2s).

Terrain settings were huge map, farmland, flat and no trees.

Germans had some infantry, a number of Stug III late models, and a Panther. I gave the computer a +2 bonus.

i haven't played any long range IS-2 vs Panther duels in CM, but i remember reading that by summer 1944 Panthers had real lousy armor quality & that the 122mm shell could open up Panthers like tin cans at 2500+ meters without actually penetrating the armor. and bit later you should get the flat nose 122mm round, which was a real Panther killer, able to penetrate Panther's armor at those same 2500+ ranges. 122mm rounds should do a lot better against Panthers than what it seems like on paper, so don't be let pure numbers fool you. i haven't tried it in CM, but i think IS-2 should do fine if you keep 1000-2000 meter distance to the Panthers. no doubt accuracy will be a problem, but you should be able to force the Panthers to withdraw from their king of the hill positions, thus making it a lot easier for the T-34s to close in.

[YankeeDog]

Hard to say how it was IRL, but in CMBB, you'll find that straight-up, 1-on-1 long range frontal IS-2 v. Panther is a losing propostion for the IS-2 at any date.

Even very late war, when the IS-2's AP ammo has very good sloped armor performance, and the Panther can have armor flaws, the Panther's advantage in accuracy and ROF is too big.

Basically, the Panther gets the range and begins consistently dinging rounds off of the IS-2 long before it IS-2 gets a hit in. Even if the Panther's hits don't actually cause damage, they degrade crew morale, and this further reduces the IS-2's ROF and accuracy, which means the Panther gets more "free shots" in, etc.

Usually, the Panther gets a lucky shot in, KOing or damaging the IS-2, or the IS-2 crew panics and backs out of the engagement (or both!), before the IS-2 gets lucky and hits the Panther.

Of course, IS-2 are cheaper than Panthers, so if you play things right, you should be able to get a local numerical advantage. In this case, engaging frontally at long range can make sense.

Cheers,

YD

[Wartgamer]

German tank strength Kursk

PzII 108

PzIIIkz 121

PzIIIlg 532

PzIII75 169

PzIV

kz 60

PzIV

lg 756

PzV

Panther 200

PzVI

Tiger 270

PzBef

Cmd 126

Total 2,342

* Actually Pz38t (some PII are actually Pz38t)

** Plus 13 Flammpanzer

*** Plus 25 T-34

**** Plus 14 Flammpanzer

MINE AND COUNTERMINE OPERATIONS

IN THE

BATTLE OF KURSK

FINAL REPORT

A similar pattern was evident in military equipment. In 1943 the Soviets were outproducing the Germans in most categories of military equipment. In addition, they were receiving considerable quantities of equipment from Great Britain and the U. S. The table below shows the numbers of tanks and self-propelled artillery pieces the Red Army and the German Army received per quarter in 1943, including those the Soviets received through lend-lease.

Military Equipment Received in 1943

Type of Equipment

Soviet

(Average per Quarter)

German

(Second Quarter 1943)

Heavy Tanks

225

156

Medium Tanks

4,100

1,315

Light Tanks

1,400

100

Self-Propelled Guns

1,100

1,325

TOTAL

6,825

2,896

[ May 03, 2005, 09:50 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[MikeyD]

"...but i remember reading that by summer 1944 Panthers had real lousy armor quality"

I believe one 'feature' of the game's late Panther G is the increased tendency for flaking from non-penetrating hits, due to overly hard armor. I haven't heard this mentioned on the board for years but one supposes its still there! The thing is, the Panther usually so overmatches an opponent that a little extra spalling goes practically unnoticed. I havent' checked but I believe armor quality for the late G drops in the specs.

Its hard to figure out how to best o utilitze the IS-2. The turret protection barely exceeds German 'medium tank' specs, and the big 122mm gun is primarily for infantry support and rarely gets a first round hit against an enemy tank. A good tank to have if you need to knock down a large buiding, though.

[Wartgamer]

On the eastern front, the Panther does not assume its parity with the Panzer IV till summer 44 (even thoughproduction of each vehcile has been roughly the same since fall43).

May 31 44 shows that the number of PanzerIV is equal to the number of Panther+Tiger (actually greater than 50% operationally). Replacements by June31 are only 123 Panzer IV but 265 Panther and 32 Tiger. This would appear to be the actual start of Panzer Divisions meeting the 1944 criteria. June and July show many 'First' battalions of Panzer Regts arriving with new panthers. Unfortunately, July, August and September are the worst months for Panther losses! They losses are meeting or exceeding production. From Sept44 to early45, Panther and Panzer IV on the eastern front are about equal (600-700). Tigers still are in the 200-300 range.

The Soviets are fielding T34/85 and JS2 tanks as well as better SU tank killers. They are maintaining better production and now fielding better tanks.

The Germans have dragged thier feet and now need to rely on LATW (which are becoming available in greater numbers) and improved jagdpanzer (Hetzer/jagdpanzerIV). StuG vehicles are starting to become second line AT weapons.

The Soviet and US 'policy' of sticking with a MBT design and improving it seems to be winning out over the German attempt to change horses in mid-stream.

[ May 03, 2005, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]

[Wartgamer]

Getting back to what the Soviets did in Fall43 to thier armored formations...

After Kursk, the Soviets made one more major refinement to their order of battle; although no more overarching changes were necessary as in 1941-1942, the tank and mechanized forces received their final organzation at the end of 1943. As mentioned above, the Soviets then sought to improve their existing formations rather than create new ones, primarily through the use of specialist units and improved equipment. By August 1943, the tank corps structure was allotted two regiments of self-propelled guns, to add to its already not inconsiderable organic firepower.53 The 1944 tank brigade included 65 of the capable T-34 medium tanks, increasing the mobility and combat power of these units relative to the smaller, mixed tank brigade of 1941-43.54

August 1943

ADD:

Heavy SU Regiment (SU-152s)

SU Regiment (SU-85s)

REMOVE:

(Separate) Antitank Battalion - to be replaced by the SU Regiment

Antitank Regiment - to be replaced by the SU Regiment

So the SU85 and the SU152 were the cat killers during this time. A game like CM with its microscopic view does not always appreciate the bigger picture.

[JasonC]

Note, the previous AT equipage of a tank corps was a regiment of towed 76mm guns - 24 pieces -and a battalion of 85mm AA - 12 pieces. Motorized, in either case. This is around the Kursk era.

SUs were out but quite rare - there were only a handful of the big SU-152s at Kursk, for instance. Most SU formations at that date were being used as SPA, not SPAT - mixed 122mm and 76mm chucking HE.

This changed in the fall with the SU-85, which was purpose built as an anti tank weapon. I don't think every tank corps got both them and SU-152s, though, not on the ground. A fair portion of the SU formations were still just 76mm, the main advantage just being SP rather than towed.

Also, remember that SU regiments were modest formations in size terms, 16 vehicles being typical. That is artillery nomenclature on the unit size, with 4 guns considered a "battery" (a company sized unit in manpower terms, with towed guns) rather than a "platoon".

In raw numbers, there were a lot more 57mm towed ATGs than either type of SU. Independent towed AT formations were mostly 76mm, but some had 57mm components and some had 85mm AA.

[Akula2]

I grow weary of all these insufferable windbags.

[JasonC]

Prefer the sufferable ones? lol. So send me a set up, something fall of 1943-like where I am the Russians. Or the other way if you prefer (I'll use Pz IVs). Last I looked, there were 650,000 posts on these forums just about CM, 450,000 in the archives and 200,000 in the current ones. Obviously that makes us a windy lot. If you don't enjoy it, why not take up knitting instead of hanging out here?

[Akula2]

I"m not trying to associate with you.

I'm trying to erradicate you and all like you.

Your rude, condescending and everything else that makes humanity insufferable.

you sad sad windbag who likes the look of his own posts. You make me sad for you.

Some think your bright, but I really think your deficient in some way because you can't see the value of treating other people civilly.

Your email to me was condescending at best.

Im unacostomed to being spoken to that way unless I'm being compensated monetarily.

Are you willing to pay me to be your friend ... you ****ing condescending windbag?!

[JasonC]

Joining my Kursk campaign is a curious way of avoiding me. But I take it I became insufferable when I asked you to send AARs in plain text a second time, after it didn't register the first. Seems rather silly to me.

[JasonC]

In that way? Not, repeat not, an acceptable format? That is how people speak over crackly radios when they are afraid the first instance of a word might have been missed or garbled. As a result, it has passed through military usage into common speech, as a way of making sure anything is clear. The first occasion was "plain text only, please, or better yet just pasted into the body of an email". I'm sure you noticed and understood the second time, so apparently the emphasis worked. How you can find anything offensive in it is utterly beyond me.

[Wartgamer]

I think the 57mm may also have been somewhat rare during this time. This website says it was just starting to be delivered around Kursk.

The soviets did manage to produce SU 85 and SU152 in roughly equal amounts and in numbers comparable to the number of Tiger/Panthers showing up.

http://www.battlefield.ru/guns/atg_4.html

[Wartgamer]

Originally posted by Akula2:

Im unacostomed to being spoken to that way unless I'm being compensated monetarily.

Are you willing to pay me to be your friend ... you ****ing condescending windbag?!

How much does it cost to treat you like Jersey scum? I am willing to pay.

[DesertMouse]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Akula2:

Im unacostomed to being spoken to that way unless I'm being compensated monetarily.

Are you willing to pay me to be your friend ... you ****ing condescending windbag?!

How much does it cost to treat you like Jersey scum? I am willing to pay. </font>

[Bigduke6]

Some comments on Stalin tactics in CMBB.

IS-2 is in CMBB the classic shoot-and-scoot weapon, since it needs somewhere to hide while the crew reloads that big round. The shell has an excellent velocity, meaning it is fairly accurate if the crew can see what it's shooting at, meaning 750 meters to a kilometer is a pretty good range. On the other hand the tank is not fast so it's not your first choice for flanking and sneaking.

The idea is to get a pair or even better four Stalins playing "spin-the-turret" with a single Panther or Tiger at that distance. The Stalins pop up over a rise, launch a round, and duck back under cover. The hit prob stinks, but you can't afford to give the German more than 2 shots at a Stalin, and ideally one. At above 500meters even Germans with their CMBB ueber-optics miss their first shot on a moving target.

If you stagger the time your tanks pop over the rise you can force the Panther/Tiger to repeatedly switch targets as one Stalin appears and another disappers. The German player can defeat this tactic to some extent by setting a cover arc at a particular point you are popping your Stalins up - the counter-tactic of course is to shift laterally a bit while reloading and pop up a little bit to the right or left.

What you are betting is that your Stalin(s) will eventually get lucky and connect with shoot-and-scoot shot faster than the German can obtain a first round hit on tanks you are exposing for about 20 seconds at a time.

It is not easy but provided the German sits still and you eventually will score. In my experience it takes 4-5 turns and you can burn through about half of your Stalins' AP ammo.

This technique has been referred to in other threads as whack-a-mole. It usually works.

Of course RL Stalins apparently resisted most Tiger/Panther hits out to 750 meters or so (von Mellenthin on Targul Frumos), so in RL Stalin was an excellent tank for slugging it out with the German big tanks. The 122mm could do a serious number on whatever it hit. I have read Soviet accounts where ISU-II commander claim the Germans AVOIDED contact with ISU-II if they could manage it.

Not the case in CMBB when a boring 75mm long will penetrate an ISU-II turret regularly. As a result, Josef Stalin II tactics in CMBB resemble modern tactics for light-skinned vehicles armed with anti-tank missles fighting against proper tanks. Kind of sad, emasculating a great tank like that.