Success of Ferdinand/Elefant tank destroyer...

[Redwolf]

What I find interesting comparing the real-life experience with CM battles is that the Ferdinands could sustain their advance with an "invulnerabily" attitude for a full day.

In CM they would be killed by gun damage or immobilization after about 10-20 minutes when driving into Pak walls or facing numerous enemy tanks.

The reason for the difference is not insufficient modeling of gun damage or immobilization in CM. It is that the 76mm guns did not even try to fire back, according to the report they got off single shots were then abanonded. There was no massive shower of non-penetrating hits like we see in CM. Futhermore, absolute spotting comes into play as everybody in the area engages a target quickly, even buttoned up early T-34.

As I said, I wouldn't blame the primary models in CM but I wonder whether one could counter some of the unrealism with additional tweaks. For example, real-world tanks and AT guns had orders to open fire at certain enemy tanks models not above a certain distance (e.g. see the current rexford thread). A refusal to shoot could be one computer model.

Another possible game mechanism would be not to fire voluntarily and if the player gives a target order to shoot at a too thick tank you give a huge morale hit to the firing unit if the target doesn't suffer damage soon. That way tanks gamely ordered to fire this way would likely retreat and guns would be subject to easy supression and abanondation.

In a way an order to fire at a too thick tank would be like the withdrawl order, a desperate thing to do with huge tradeoffs. I think we could lighten the shower of non-penetrating hits this way.

[MikeyD]

Before condemning the Ferdi's operational debut at Kursk we should recall that the other 'hot' new tank at Kursk - the Panther - had an equally ignominious introduction. I'm calling it a 'hot' new tank mostly because of the number of spontaneous catastrophic engine fires that occurred on the march to the jump-off point!

As to the Elefant at Aberdeen, that was part of the 1st Co. 653rd heavy TD that had been quickly moved south in response to the Anzio landings. Considering the small no. of vehicles in Italy and the quality of the records kept for that unit, with a bit of research we could probably be able find out the number of fillings in the teeth of that particular vehicle's tank commander!

Check out this MOST impressive book on the 653rd:

http://www.jjfpub.mb.ca/products.htm#653

[Mr. Tittles]

Originally posted by redwolf:

The reason for the difference is not insufficient modeling of gun damage or immobilization in CM. It is that the 76mm guns did not even try to fire back, according to the report they got off single shots were then abanonded. There was no massive shower of non-penetrating hits like we see in CM. Futhermore, absolute spotting comes into play as everybody in the area engages a target quickly, even buttoned up early T-34.

As I said, I wouldn't blame the primary models in CM but I wonder whether one could counter some of the unrealism with additional tweaks. For example, real-world tanks and AT guns had orders to open fire at certain enemy tanks models not above a certain distance (e.g. see the current rexford thread). A refusal to shoot could be one computer model.

Another possible game mechanism would be not to fire voluntarily and if the player gives a target order to shoot at a too thick tank you give a huge morale hit to the firing unit if the target doesn't suffer damage soon. That way tanks gamely ordered to fire this way would likely retreat and guns would be subject to easy supression and abanondation.

In a way an order to fire at a too thick tank would be like the withdrawl order, a desperate thing to do with huge tradeoffs. I think we could lighten the shower of non-penetrating hits this way.

The game does this with tanks already. If they believe they cant fight, they back away.

It would be cool if ATG would self-hide if they felt they were asked the impossible. They could perhaps set a covered arc they feel comfortable with.

[JasonC]

Redwolf - there were 89 of the things, plus a couple dozen turreted Tigers. With about 200-250 StuGs as little brothers, and 50 Brummbars. You don't get a blizzard against that many thick front AFVs on a 12 km frontage.

The leading panzer corps up north had 4 panzer divisions - with the above as additional, higher than division level armor for the attack - and hit all of 2 rifle regiments in the first line. ATGs at the start line were not the problem. Up front mines were, and after that reserves.

Russian ATG density in the first line was on the order of 8-12 ATGs per km. (The much higher total gun figures count all the layers, which were not faced all at once). The ATGs were outnumbered 2-3 to 1 by ubertanks alone, not counting their vanilla supports.

Then there was also the suppressing arty fire. The northern prongs fire support included -

Heavy HE from -

2 battalions 210 howitzer

5 battalions 210, 280, 300 nebelwerfer

Counterbattery from

1 battalion (equivalent) 170 kannon

1 battalion 150 kannon

1 battalions 122 gun (Russian)

3 battalions 100 kannon

6 battalions 150mm howitzer on top of the divisional guns, making around 15 battalions all told for the attacking corps, plus 5 more of 150mm nebelwerfer

9 battalions 105mm above division level, making around 20 battalions all told for the attacking corps.

That's a boatload of prep fire. Drop a serious HE barrage on a 1 km square of Russian defenders with maybe 12 ATGs (8x45 and 4x76), then run over them with 8 Elephants and 10-20 StuGs, and see if the gun crews get off lots of rounds each. Enough to make a "blizzard" and KO more than a quarter of the Elephants. You'll be lucky to get one by hail fire, and if another (plus a StuG or three) hits mines, you are making par.

They penetrated 6 miles in the first 48 hours, blowing through the front line regiments (but with heavy losses to mines, not ATGs), the reserve line of the front line divisions (where modest numbers of T-34s and SU-122s tried to help but got clobbered). Then they got into a brawl with all available Russian reserves on the line of the second line of divisions in the first line corps - including the local armor reserves of T-34s.

Which they basically chewed to heck by nightfall of the second day. After which the Russians put in the bulk of 4 rifle divisions and an entire tank army on the third day alone, and stopped them. Each day the Russian laid 8,000 new AT mines, by day 3 the ATG density was easily twice what it was at the outset, and there were something like 500 fresh T-34s in their path.

[ November 18, 2003, 05:45 AM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[JasonC]

I did a test prep fire at a Russian battalion, dug in on Kursk like terrain. The Russians were regulars, 1943 battalion, plus 6 45mm ATGs making 8 all told, 4 76mm ZIS-3s, and 3 76mm FOs (that weren't hit, as it happens) in addition to the battalion's organic 82mm FO. I set them up on a 1200x1040m map, 1040 the width, with 100m for the German set up zone and 100m for no man's land. So the Russians were on a 1 km square, basically.

They set up in 4 company positions and a battalion reserve. Left side had a 2x45mm nest with heavy weapons and 2 platoons, center the same with the infantry well ahead as an OP screen, plus the 82mm FO (but no 50mm mtrs there), right side had another similar nest with its infantry split between right flank and behind. The last "company" was behind the center-left, with a platoon screening in front and another right-rear, and a 2x76mm nest to their right. In the left rear, the battalion HQ with another 2x76mm nest, the last rifle platoon, and a few ATRs and MGs. The 76mm FOs were well spread and far back. All dug in.

The German prep was meant to be a representative slice of northern Kursk schwerpunk prep fire. For their heavy HE they had 1 300mm Nebelwerfer module, firing middle of the map on turn 1. That is their share, as Nebels could hit half the frontage that way, 210s could hit another portion with more sustained fire, and the last bits on flanks could be drenched with 150 Nebels in quantity - or something similar.

The long range guns would be going deep so I left those out entirely. I figured half of the 150s would be as well, hitting the second line Russian positions. That left 2 batteries of 150s as the share of this "grid". I gave them each a target wide order on the right and left side, centered on some trees that looked reasonable. These were set to start on turn 2, so their end would coincide with the 2nd Nebel salvo at the start of turn 6, when the Germans would advance.

Then 105s share would be 5 batteries. I figured 2 would be radio FOs used for reactive fire on targets that lived through the barrage and made trouble, while 3 would fire a single massed battalion scale shoot in the middle and front. In reality these might have been rolling barrage. To fit the rest of the prep schedule they should have fired on turn 2, but I muffed it and fired on turn 1. Also they should have used narrow sheafs on 3 aim points, or wide all at the same one, since they are low caliber. I used wide on 3 different aim points which scattered their effect and wasted much of it.

The aim point for the Nebels was a poor one, as it happened, and most of them missed completely. One 150 aim point was good, another so-so. It was a reasonable sampling, by no means good aim at known targets. With a whole battalion on 1 km and trying to maintain coverage, with not all that much concealment or good slope available, it is not hard to hit something with at least some of it.

So what was the result? The prep fire hit 80 men. 1x76mm, 4x45mm ATGs were KOed. 3x50mm and 4xMMG also. One man was hit in the 82mm FO but the other held. 3 ATR men were hit and 2 rattled. Several HQs were down and a couple of rifle platoons ragged out. The left side heavy weapons nest was particularly hard hit - it drew accurate 150s - losing both 45 ATGs, both mortars, and 1 MMG.

The result for AT coverage was the front line light stuff was gone on the left, OK in the center, weakened on the right. The second line heavy stuff was fine on the left, weakened on the right. The infantry coverage was not seriously effected, but was weakened in spots (right front, notably, and the center reserve was cut in half by a few "best Nebels").

I don't think 30-50 AFVs launched over what remains after that kind of prep, on forces that thin on the ground, would have any problem with hail fire from ATGs. The ATGs would indeed be lucky to get a few shots off apiece. If one 76 got a flank shot it'd be doing well. 45s might try firing at range hoping for damage, but in minutes the attackers would be close enough to ID them.

Mines obviously mattered in this sort of attack because firepower can successful overwhelm the active defenders, effectively just using local odds. But mines multiply their impact the higher the attackers "stack". The Germans were going incredible heavy on an incredibly narrow front. Only the mines mattered before the Russians could counter-concentrate. The rest could delay and maybe get a few, at best.

The second line wouldn't be as hard hit by prep, but was initially thinner (2 up 1 back). It had AFVs but not many - they were outnumbered up to 6 to 1 in the critical sector. Enough to make them worry about flanking angles as they advanced, not much more than that.

What makes a difference by the 3rd day is the several hundred ATGs - especially 76s - all the reserve formations bring with them to the narrow front, and the mass of reserve T-34s. The front echelons are no more than remnants by then. But the Germans have lost tanks to mines and artillery fire at range into the breech area, and to breakdowns - perhaps a third of their strength (not TWO, but out of the "combat ready" column). So in our scaled down version, maybe there are 4 Elephants left, half a dozen StuGs, a few platoons of IIIs and IVs.

Then you have to imagine the Russians with 12-16x76mm on the same km, still behind AT mines, with 10 T-34s and a fresh infantry battalion, and 4 FOs worth of support. Just defending. 1-2 km behind them are another 30 T-34s massed, with another battalion or two of infantry, and another 3-6 heavier FOs. To be fed in as needed, to backstop and do it again, or to counterattack if the Germans lighten up that km of front.

Then you have to worry about hail. All those defenders can throw 100-150 rounds of 76mm direct fire at you in a single minute. But not in the intial break in.

[88mm]

The big difference at Kursk were the reserves, not only in tanks but more importantly in men. The sovjets had a convenient "backup" of rougly 1 milljon men. The germans on the other hand had virtualy nothing in reserve. After 3/4 days hard fighting, germans troops casualties became the primary factor Hitler (and his staff) called this operation to a halt. The clash at povorovka (wrong spelled) was the moment that the germans felt the rusians had more "up it's sleeves" then they could handle. With less then 50% of their armor availible for action, there was no other sensible option.

[c3k]

Nice test, JasonC.

Ken