Typical Russian Force Makeup

[Der Alte Fritz]

I am putting together a standard force taken from a Soviet Tank Corps of up to 5000 points built around a Tank Bn but am a bit stuck with the TOE.

Based on Nov 1943 Tank Bde (10/500-506)heart of the unit is a Tank Bn of 21 T-34.

Infantry - The SMG Bn provides a company of tank riders split between 3 tank Bns so our one gets 1 platoon of 3 sections. Seems a bit light as it is 6 half a sections plus HQ spread over 21 tanks. Does another Company come along in trucks?

Corps units would provide 1 battery of 6 120mm mortars (out of 6 available)and some SUs 12 SU152 21 SU76 and 16 SU122 available so allowing most of the SU76 and 122 to the MR Bde that would give our Tank Bn 2 SU152 (12 spread over 9 Tank Bns)

Rocket support for an attacking force.

What do you think is the correct level of support for a Tank Bn?

[Andreas]

I think you are making a mistake if you divide things across the Brigade, as you have done with the SUs. The first question is whether this is the main effort, or the secondary effort. If the main, you can just add most of the support to this battalion.

If not, you don't.

All the best

Andreas

[JasonC]

Also, those are alternate forms of SU regiments, not complementary. That is, an SU regiment does not have all 3 types in those numbers, but just one type. 12 SU-152s are a whole regiment. Or 16 SU-122. Or 20 SU-76 (plus a command vehicle, typically). SUs are thought of as artillery formations, and are organized as firing batteries of 4 pieces - which are not thought of as platoons but as batteries. A battery in the artillery is a company sized formation (because it needs ammo detail, fire planners etc).

As for the riders, an independent tank brigade has an infantry battalion, thus a rider company for each of the 21 tank battalions. If actually an independent brigade, they would support a rifle formation which would supply any additional infantry.

A tank corps - mech arm proper, rather than a brigade supporting the rifle army - has those riders and in addition, a motor rifle brigade of 3 more infantry battalions - enough to assign one battalion to each tank brigade. So to 21 T-34s, the available infantry is a company of riders plus a second company trucked.

The mortar rifle battalion had 6 or 9 82mm mortars, so the trucked company would have 2-3 82mm as on map weapons. There would be a single 120mm FO. A tank corps also had a motorized ATG regiment with 76mm guns, which acted as its artillery (along with the mortars). You would see either 2 ZIS-3 towed with the trucked rifle company, for direct fire use, or a 76mm FO if they were being used indirect. There might or might not be a 132mm rocket FO for prep fire - the corps had enough for it but those were typically used as a few salvos then away to resupply.

Note that the motor rifle also had the other standard infantry heavy weapons - Maxims and ATRs - so you would see 2-4 or each of those. You might also see an AA section of 2 37mm AA (the tank corps had 16), and some AA MGs or a quad 50 halftrack.

Each tank corps also had a motorcycle recon battalion and a pioneer battalion. They would often have their own missions elsewhere, but they rounded out the infantry support. That means a platoon of recon C in jeeps, and a platoon of pioneers in trucks, are also realistic additions.

The recon C could have a handful of BA armored cars as well.

Some forces would double one of these subcomponents while dropping another, rather than everyone having a proportional slice - obviously. Also, some tank brigades had one battalion equipped with T-70s rather than all T-34s. T-70s were up to 40% of the fleet in 1942 and a solid 25-30% or so in 1943, varying with date etc.

So, a typical "march order" -

Recon element

3 BA-64 MG armed armored cars

7 jeeps carrying 1 Recon C platoon

3 T-34s (advanced guard, with motorcycles)

conscript 132mm rocket FO if prep fire used.

(delay)

main body

tank

10 T-34s carrying Co HQ + 2 SMG platoons, 120mm radio FO (includes 1st company command tank)

4 T-34s carrying 3rd SMG platoon (includes tank battalion command tank)

motor rifle

Motor Rifle platoon with ATR in 4 trucks

Motor Rifle platoon with ATR in 4 trucks

Co HQ, 2 or 4 Maxim MG, 2 or 3 82mm in 4-6 trucks

(could have 76mm radio FO riding with Co HQ).

Pioneer platoon in 4 trucks (3xflamethrower optional)

artillery and AA

2 SU-122 (say - could be 2 or 4 of any one type)

2 76mm ZIS-3 towed by jeep (unless 76mm FO used)

1-2 quad 50 cal halftrack -or- 1-2 standard MG halftrack each carrying 2 AA HMG

1-2 37mm AA towed by halftrack or truck

rear guard and reserve

4 T-34s (includes 2nd company command tank)

3rd Motor Rifle platoon with ATR in 4 trucks

Each of the motor rifle and the pioneer platoon could be carried by 1 jeep and 3 trucks, optional. (A bit more realistic - the vehicles were fairly mixed). The motor rifle company HQ might be in a halftrack instead of a truck.

The rockets prepare the area, then the motorcycle guys run up and make contact, supported by a few T-34s who help them pull back if they hit too much, and help them blow through tiny outposts.

As soon as the recon is checked by something, the main body picks a direction to hit that something from, and launches a tank company with SMG riders at the target on a single axis. They get heavy mortar support as soon as it can be arranged.

The motor rifle company typically "fixes" or provides a base of fire, using its heavy weapons and the supporting artillery. Some of the T-34s may also stay with them until called on to support the main attack, or lead them in a secondary one.

I hope this helps.

[JasonC]

Oh one other thing - I typically round out the rider platoons by added a tank hunter to the T-34 each SMG platoon HQ is riding. That puts 6 "tommy gunners" on each of those tanks, like the 7 on the others, and gives some RPG AT grenades to the force. Note also that the SMG company commander can go in a T-34 platoon with 2 squads of SMG attached to him, rather than to their organic platoon HQs. The 120mm FO can ride on the Co HQ's vehicle (bit crowded but fits in CM) or on the company command tank, solo.

[JasonC]

Turning that into a 5000 point force in CM, July 1943 era. All regulars unless noted -

armor

3 independent T-34, 1943 model

6 platoons T-34, same model

total 21 T-34s

2 platoons SU-122, 4 total

vehicles

3 BA-64B armored car

1 quad 50 cal halftrack

3 M5 halftrack

11 jeeps

17 trucks

fire support

IL-2 type 3 Sturmovik

conscript 132mm M-13 rocket FO

regular 120mm radio FO

regular 76mm radio FO

infantry

regular recon C platoon

veteran SMG company

regular motor rifle company

veteran pioneer platoon

guns and teams

+2 Maxim MG (makes 4 total with company's)

3 82mm mortars

2 37mm AA

3 veteran tank hunter (with SMG riders)

3 regular flamethrower (with pioneers)

As an option, one could drop the flamethrowers and take a 2nd quad 50 cal halftrack if you prefer.

50% of the point total is armor, 10% is fire support. The infantry manpower is about 250 men, plus 50 more manning slow MGs and mortars. In combined arms balance terms, there is an infantry squad per AFV.

Against anything but Tiger style uber-armor, they should fight just fine, no need to "game" the force mix. Would be underpowered against StuGs though, due to game model accuracy issues. But they have the complete mech toolkit, basically, and can use the right weapon for any sort of enemy encountered.

[coe]

whoa so how would you defeat this force in real life plus I'm wondering what might happen if lets say the tanks got hit hard and at the end there wasn't enough tanks to carry the tank riders...what happens to those without any tanks to ride...?

[JasonC]

They ran out of riders long before they ran out of tanks.

And the Russians were producing 1500 T-34s a month. They didn't have to avoid losing them, to have them.

If any extra infantry needed lift, they could ride with the motor rifle. But it was not typically necessary.

This was a bog-standard Russian tank column, nothing special or high powered about it. (Well, they wouldn't *always* have air support, or SU-122s along, but that is what you get for 5000 rather than 4500 or what have you).

How do you try to stop it? Infantry force type or the front line Panzergrenadier forces use towed PAK from hiding to try to stop the tanks, and heavy weapons nests built around HMGs and a few 81s, plus 105mm FOs, to try to strip the infantry and force all the truck mounted guys to stop well away from the defenders.

Then infantry well dug in or on reverse slopes hides patiently and hopes the heavy weapons stuff never lets the enemy riders and infantry get near, while skulking out of direct fire from all the tanks and guns. If the T-34s come close without those, they try for them with panzerschrecks and fausts and AT mines and grenade bundles. If they stand off, call it holding.

If an AFV platoon can arrive to help, great. It tries to ambush the foremost T-34s without exposing itself to all of their friends. In the infantry forces those might be Marders or they might be StuGs. In the panzer forces they would usually be Panzer IVs, while the lucky ones later in the war might see Panthers.

If the Russians dismantle the PAK net rapidly and keep all arms up with the tanks, the defense will crumble. They can usually trade through modest numbers of arriving AFVs and keep right on going. But a "hot" PAK might run through a whole platoon, or the arriving armor might dominate a narrow approach showing frontal armor only and get lopsided kills, or the HMGs and 105s might strip the tanks of their riders and support.

[JasonC]

Here is a typical Russian mech defense at the 2000 point level. Assume a hasty defense of ground recently taken against counterattack, with foxholes but no engineered defenses. The motor rifle dominate in this work, with tons of "support" category in CM terms.

tank support -

4 T-34s 1943 model, 1 independent 3 platooned.

infantry -

2 motor rifle companies

1 veteran SMG platoon plus vet TH

1 veteran Pioneer platoon plus AT detail (see below)

+4 Maxim MG, makes 8 all told

2 82mm on map

1 veteran sharpshooter

pioneer AT detail gets 2 flamethrower, 2 tank hunter, 2 PTRS ATR. All but 1 can be veteran.

4 ZIS-3 76mm guns, dug in

120mm mortar FO

either

veteran 122mm howitzer FO plus 1 TRP -or-

1 SU-122 on map (I prefer the indirect).

AA section

2 37mm AA plus

2 12.7mm DshK HMG

If you expect heavy tanks, you might replace the AA with 2 85mm (the corps had 12 as a separate heavy anti-tank battalion, to be used direct against tanks). Adjust 10 point difference by dropping a team or what have you.

The SMGs ride the 4 T-34s and form the reserve, acting as a body

The 4 ZIS-3s form the main anti-tank defense, split up to cover the frontage and in hiding. They are supplimented against light armor by the 2 37mm, the AA MGs, and 8 ATRs, again spread wide for coverage.

The anti-infantry defense at range comes from a dozen automatic weapons - 8 Maxims, 2 12.7mm (those are low ammo, though), 2 37mm AA. Those are interspersed with two layers (4 front line, 2 back line) of staggered infantry platoon positions, as separate strongpoints rather than one continuous line. The mortars and FOs deal with broad covered routes.

The pioneers form an infantry anti-tank detail using their demo charges, tank hunters, PTRS fired from under 100m rather than harassing at range, and flamethrowers. They set an ambush area initially but are also prepared to move to the point of actually enemy tank attack.

The tanks and their riders wait until the attackers are well mired in the infantry defense and the ATGs have already engaged and reduced enemy armor numbers. Then they pick a modest area and put in a small flanking counterattack, with the motor rifle guys in the area acting as the fixing force. If it succeeds the tanks then withdrawal into reserve again.

Dead ATGs that leave holes in the AT net are replaced by a single T-34 in a local "lair", out of LOS but able to achieve it with a short move.

I offer this to supplement the previous posts because the 5000 point force shows how the tank portion of the mech arm attacks. Once it takes something, this is how the motor rifle portion keeps it, and frees up the rest of the tank force to take something more. Note that both force types might fight ~3000 points of Germans.

[Der Alte Fritz]

Thanks for all that detail. Great Stuff!

Just to clarify, I am talking about a Tank Bde as part of a Tank Corps and not an independent one.

A couple of questions.

(1) I have been looking over at the RKKA site at maps of Tank Corps operating at the Battle of Kursk and they show Tank Corps operating each Brigade as a separate entity and as the standard element of manoeuvre. So the Motor Rifle Bde is not spread out over the 3 Tank Brigades but functions on its own. Likewise Glantz mentions an incident when a Tank Corps leaves its MR Bde behind and just sends the 3 Tank Bdes off to meet a new threat. Does the MR Bde get spread out over Tank Bdes or is this later on in the war?

(2)Given this the Tank Bde would have to rely on its own organic infantry - 1 Battalion of 2 companies Motor Rifle troops and 1 company SMG troops? Also the "Red Army Handbook" says that both the Tank Bde organisations of July 1942 10/270 and November 1943 10/500 have 1 battalion of infantry for a tank brigade with one company of SMG tank riders and two of Motor Rifle (1942) and two of SMG (1943) both these having 9 LMG 2 Maxims and 3 AT Rifles. So a Tank Bn ends up with a single company in support?

(3) July 1943 How many tanks in a Bde? Using 10/270 July 1942 I have one medium Bn of T-34 with 3 companies for a total of 31 T-34 and a light bn of 2 companies of T-70 for a total of 21. This changes in November 1943 to 10/500 which has a Bde of three Medium battalions each of two companies of T-34 total 21 with a brigade strength of 65 T-34. Were other organisatiosn being used alongside these?

(4) When Corps assets were sent to support a Tank Bde did they tends to send sections, batteries, battalions or the whole regiment? I know that Army level units tended to be committed as a whole unit presumably so that the Army could recall them quickly to redeploy elsewhere. So was it more common for all 12 SU-152 in the regt to be sent or were they sent section by section?

cheers

[JasonC]

The brigades of a Russian mech or tank corps are their analog of combat commands or KGs. They are not slaves to TOE. Tasking was done by cross attachment below corps, with each of the brigade HQs given some mission and the mix of forces considered appropriate for that mission. Glantz essentially never records cross attachments, they are beneath the level his sources deal with - although occasionally the presence of a unit type not on TOE reveals them. When there is a TC motor rifle brigade on one of his maps it does not mean there is no tank within km, any more than on a German side map the Panzer regiment being at location X means every tank in that division is there, etc.

There was no formulaic even division of assets either, that was not the point of my examples. It would be perfectly normal for one component to be missing and another doubled etc. That is what tasking is for. The reason all organizations get specialist subformations a echelon size smaller than the maneuver elements is so they can decide where and when they need how much of them, not to restrict them to one such item within their operational area. (Recon, engineers, AA, AT, etc all follow that rule).

On tank establishments at TOE, yes the standard types were 53 with 32 T-34 and 21 T-70, or 65 all T-34. The bits above 10 are in all cases command vehicles. There were other types for KVs and LL, but those were in independent regiments for the most part. (Some brigades had Shermans though). Mech rather than tank used regiments of around 40. Not everyone was at establishment. But those are quibbles, basically those 2 are the main brigade structures. The 1942 fleet had around 40% T-70 as the 53 tank establishment reflects. As the portion of T-34s rose, it did so by fielding pure T-34 brigades. Those were still relatively new around the time of Kursk and only a portion of newer units had that form. It became more common in the fall etc.

On SUs, the higher ups and dedicated SU officers were always demanding that they be kept together, and the lower downs and brigade commanders were always splitting them up to have some in each spot they wanted them. The Germans had similar fights over Tigers and Jadgpanthers etc. The same was true of the ATG formations. A typical way those actually ended up was spread over a third of the frontage, thus compromising - enough to have some effect but without needing to be exactly correct as to where.

[Der Alte Fritz]

That is very helpful because none of my sources go much below Corps level. Have a few memoirs on order from Amazon such as "Tank Rider" which may give examples of how these units operated.

Wanted to understand how the TOE related to reality on the ground so that I can pick forces from other eras such as Spring '44.

Tried putting the 5000 force onto a map last night but it was way too small. What size of map am I looking at?

[JasonC]

Sorry, missed the frontage question first time reading it.

In CM you might use a map 2 km wide for such forces. Typically deeper than wide, and you'd want an adequate set up zone or staged entry of the column (I prefer the latter actually). I say "in CM", because in the real deal the force to space could get considerably higher than it easily handles.

By that I mean it was entirely normal (I am thinking of exploitation phases it is true) for a full tank brigade to attack along a single road. Only deploying off of it as it made contact - or a few outriders for security and intel. A tank corps might attack along 2 parallel roads with a brigade leading on each, with the third in reserve along with the motor rifle group.

But I don't think that scale works in CM. You can't drive the number of units commanded too high or the influence of perfect coordination and borg spotting becomes hopelessly unrealistic. Frankly it is pushing the CM-specific realism envelope with a battalion with all its attachments.

In my own scenarios I prefer to cut the step size again, with reinforced company sized forces that mirror the overall composition of a brigade - or occasionally battalion sized for the infantry in particular. Then I put that kind of force on a map 1 km wide or sometimes less. I know that results in lower force to space than was literally the case where mech fought, but it simply plays better in CM. There are some issues with the realism of edges and flanking fire stuff when you go that narrow, though. (E.g. it gets much harder to "turn" a platoon of StuGs than it was in reality).

[Bigduke6]

Some more suggested tweaks/observations on the Nov '43 Tank Brigade:

T-34 type - The most common vehicle would be the M43 version, but don't forget the Soviets threw nothing out and if it survived it stayed in the ranks. There were isolated cases of M43 T-34s remaining in service right through the Manchuria campaign.

So, I would say your November '43 brigade could be about 90 per cent M43, and the remainder earlier types. Naturally if the brigade was recently raised it could be entirely the newest type. But then there are cases where old obliterated units got folded into newly-raised ones.

Most (say 80 per cent) of the "non-43" models I would say would be the 42 version. But you might find some 41 versions and maybe even a funky 40 model.

A particularly interesting vehicle was the T-34/57. Originally the Soviets planned to issue this vehicle as a dedicated tank-destroyer in each company (or maybe platoon, I've seen different versions of the plan). Kind of like Firefly in Commonwealth forces.

Thing is, before production really got rolling they decided the way to improve the fleet was T-34/85, so T-34/57 got cancelled. Only about 300 got made AIR.

As a result, there was no systematic issue of T-34/57. Therefore, if you are setting up a November '43 brigade it might have one of those vehicles, in a very rare case a pair, but three or more no.

You might even see a KV or two - they were not TOE at this time but they had been before, and Soviet tank brigade commanders were not above hanging on to useful weapons supposedly no longer authorized. Captured German vehicles fall into this category as well. But that would be a rarity.

Bottom line: Most of the tanks M43, but probably not all. And if you mix a few earlier models in the force looks a lot more ragged, which of course is pure Red Army.

Crew quality: This is a place where many scenario designers err. No hordes of greens here. A November '43 Soviet tank brigade would in most cases be a veteran force, with a smattering of regular and crack crews as well. In a single brigade you might even find one or two crews that rated elite skill.

The logic here is that in November '43 a Soviet tank formation is a band of survivors. Not only are the Kursk salient battles recent history, but also the Autumn counter-offensives. The winter offensives haven't really kicked off, the tank crew training system has functioned without distraction for more than a year, and the armor officer schools not only are getting priority pick on recruits second only to reconnaissance, but they are applying lessons learned in the war. More critically, the days of throwing untrained soldiers into the fray are long gone. As result the average tank brigade has plenty of successful combat experience.

It's a judgement call for the designer of course, if the brigade got gutted recently and then recrewed wholesale then you could justify a goodly percentage of green crews. But I would say, all other things being average, the members of a November '43 tank brigade are pros that know their weapons and know what and what doesn't work against the Germans. Overall I would expect them to be of equal quality to an average German mechanized force of the day.

"Cross-attachment" - Was not illegal in the Soviet system, but it was alot rarer than in Western forces. Therefore, all other things being equal, I would expect a tank brigade from a tank corps NOT to have elements of a mech brigade from the same tank corps attached to it.

As Andreas noted, Corps-level assets might well get attached to the brigade if the Corps commander saw fit, particularly self-propelled artillery.

Infantry - In terms of quality, slightly less than the tankers but still good to excellent. Mech forces were the elite of the Red Army and with the summer capaign under their belts you're talking a regular-veteran force. The standard mech recruit was an ethnic Slav or Balt, speaking fluent Russian and having completed high school. These are not Central Asian primitives but the best soldiers - in mass - the Soviet Union can field.

Thus, decent to strong leadership bonuses for commanders in these units is arguable, to what degree and extent again up to the scenario designer.

In terms of equipment, like any experienced infantry unit infantry traveling along with a '43 tank brigade would be expected to have more automatic weapons than TOE, i.e., SMGs and Maxims.

The recon forces infantry would be even more, in terms of extra automatic weapons, better leaders, and overall infantry quality. By mid-war the Soviet recon assumed whatever infantry it came up against, S.S. and Finns excepted, would be worse at standard infantry tasks than Red recon. Infiltration, night operations, and camoflage were the Soviet recon trump cards; thus arguing for high stealth bonuses for the recon commanders.

The big limitation on the infantry side, especially for November '43, is numbers. Active campaigning gutted formations, and replacements were limited (although the mech got priority over rifle and artillery).

On average I would expect infantry units assigned to a Tank Brigade at that time to be at 1/3 strength. Of course, the tanks actually in the field could also be that low at any given time, depending on the intensity of the prior fighting.

Still, a November '43 tank brigade typically is going to be a bit thin on the infantry side.

Indirect artillery support - This is another weak link, at least from a CM POV. A tank brigade by doctrine was an offensively-oriented smashing element. Its first job was to destabilize a battle sector, followed by driving like hell into the German rear. Fighting panzers, at least by doctrine, was not the tank brigade's job - that was what AT was for.

As a result, our notional tank brigade would usually not have a lot of indirect behind it. A Tank Corps at that time TOE had about 48 x 82mm to split up between the four maneuver brigades; you would expect a tank brigade to get something less than 20 per cent, and also the mortar numbers would be somewhat attrited from authorized, although obviously not as much as tanks and infantry. So maybe 10-12 tubes, or roughly 3 x FO.

Besides that, in terms of pure indirect precious little. If there needed to be more firepower the solution in November '43 was Katushas pushed down from Corps or maybe even army, but it had to be important, and I expect it would be a rare tank brigade commander indeed that controlled the strike. Although, his telling higher "I need the Katushas to hit that" was possible in a fluid battle. Unlike towed artillery rocket artillery was considered relatively flexible, which it was in an operational sense as it could shift locations quickly.

Howitzers for practical purposes would never be under the control of a Tank Brigade commander, but in a breakthrough situation you would expect they would be around. In a deliberate assault watched by army or front you might even get 203mm. By doctrine of course tank brigades weren't supposed to create breakthroughs but exploit them; but the Soviets recognized commitment of armor required artful timing.

Towed and crew-served - Towed "bi-purpose" guns might or not get attached to the tank brigade from higher as well, once again depending on what higher thought the brigade needed to do. More likely not, as the standard reinforcement element was the regiment, and regiments as a rule got attached to Corps not Brigades. The common weapon was the 76mm gun, a/k/a ZiS-3.

Ditto for Air Defence, and indeed for SP artillery. Common air defence weapons at this time of the war were 37mm towed and .50 caliber MG and/or Maxim guns.

[Der Alte Fritz]

Right, so what does that give us in game terms?

By my calculations our lead Tank Bn of the Brigade gets:

19 x T34 M43

1 x T34 M43/57

1 x T34 M42

1 x Company SMG Infantry (at 30-50% strength)

2 x Maxim

3 x ATR

4 x 82mm mortars

3 x trucks

and from Corps HQ as we are the lead Bde of the Corps extra recce, pioneers and artillery forces like:

2 x Recce Pl

3 x BA64 ac

2 x pioneers pl

6 x 120mm mortar FO

12 x SU152

or other combinations of rockets, 76mm artillery or SUs

Does that look about right for your force?

cheers

[ September 09, 2006, 08:49 AM: Message edited by: Der Alte Fritz ]

[Der Alte Fritz]

Allowing for the infantry to be the heavier SMG type with DPs that would give 9 sections 3 platoon HQ and 1 Co HQ with about 5/6 men per section. So about half the tanks have someone to carry?

If we look about 6 months later in April 1944 how many T34/85 have we got and has any of the above changed all that much?

[Andreas]

My guess is that you either have only T34/85, or pretty much none. Soviet policy seems to have been to run down formations to the last man standing, and then to withdraw it from action and to rebuild it from the remains. So the remaining cadres would go into an interior district, leaving the remaining tanks (if there are any) behind, receive returning wounded and freshly trained reinforcements, as well as new equipment, and create what would amount to a new formation.

All the best

Andreas

[JasonC]

You would practically never see a T-34/57 mixed in like that.

You need at least 5 trucks just to carry that many heavy weapons. An 82mm mortar needs a full truck, not half of one (7 men means it is a full squad unlike the 6 man German 81s).

You would not see 6 120mm FOs. You'd see one or maybe two.

The DP and SMG squad type is broken and a mistake. They can't actually fire the DP at range because the ammo points are mixed with the SMGs, which use a full shot without contributing any firepower. Thus if the DP fires for 3 minutes at 200m, all the SMGs go dry. Which is nonsense.

If you want to simulate them having a few DP LMGs, add a few separate DP LMG teams. Then they have segregated ammo and 9 minutes of fire each, without dipping into the SMG ammo.

And in fact, CMBB systematically overrepresents the LMGs in the Russian infantry. If you look at totals of weapons in various fronts in the staff studies, the number of SMGs is very high but the number of LMGs is quite low. The makers apparently confused some lines on the data sheets, or went by theoretical TOEs never seen in practice. (This is particularly "off" for the mid 1943 line infantry, given 18 LMGs per company. Um, they had more like 4-6).

We can't correct all of CMBBs mistakes but we can avoid making them worse by using unrealistic and broken squad types.

You'd also rarely see a full SU regiment at full strength leading a TC drive.

[Bigduke6]

Alte Fritz,

If I were designing the scenario I would stick in a single T-34/57 and a KV, as I like oddness and departure from TOE. The is the Red Army we're talking about, Commies never obey all their rules all the time.

Another question is whether this is a brigade that is at paper full strength, or one that actually might have been found on the Russian front in November 1943. Since you seem to be designing for full-strength on paper, that ought to carry across to the infantry.

If you are designing for an actual field strength, then no way the Soviets could put all 21 of those medium tanks of a single battalion into action at one time.

Thus my take on your numbers would look like this:

15 x T-34 M43

3 x T-34 M42

2 x T-34 M41

1 x T-34 M43/57*

3 - 5 x T-70*

1 x KV-1*

1 x SMG Company w/o LMGs

6 - 12 x LMG**

4 - 8 x Maxim

6 x ATR

2 x 82mm FO

From Brigade or Corps, under most circumstances:

2 x Recce Pl

Halftracks and White armored cars to carry them.***

2 x pioneers Pl

Trucks to carry them

3 x 12.7mm

Trucks to carry them

4 x 45mm

Trucks to haul them

Maybe from Corps depending on mission:

12 x SU-152

12 x SU-76

12 x SU-85

20 x ZiS-3

1 x Katusha FO (8 lanchers, 132mm)

The tricky bit here is that Corps is extremely unlikely to commit a battery of any of this to a single tank brigade. It is all or nothing; either the tank brigade needs the full support regiment of whatever, or it doesn't.

Also bear in mind if this tank brigade actually goes somewhere, bits and pieces will get cut away to an advanced guard.

In defence, the Soviets tried to keep between 1/3 and 1/2 of the force in reserve.

* These no doubt were present in tank brigades somewhere in November 1943, but they were so rare as to be statistically non-existent. However I would include them as they are historically possible, and make the scenario cooler to play.

** Jason makes an excellent point, a squad of Soviet SMGs with a single LMG is a unit built to waste ammunition.

***Actually the Soviet recon rode White armored cars period, imported halftracks were used either as command vehicles or heavy artillery prime movers. However, in actuality the Soviets figured a White armored car could carry 10 men in a pinch, CM only allows 6. Therefore mix in halftracks to increase lift, and dont' forget to increase MGs for the ones you will lose by substituting halftracks for Whites.

For added coolness use airborne for recon units as Andrew's uniform mods put the airborne in camoflage smocks, as we all know the Red recon wore camoflage smocks.

And don't forget to vary the unit quality! Basically this is a veteran force, but there should be regulars and even a few crack as well - at least I think so!

On the T-34/85 question -

I fear that my esteemed Teutonic colleague Andreas is a bit off the mark. (I bet that never makes it into his sig line! :mad: )

When the first ones became available in early Spring 1944 they went straight to the top-priority units, to wit, the tank armies. No full re-equipment by brigade. Katukov's memoirs (1st Guards Tank Army) are quite specific on this, there is a pretty well-known passage on how when the T-34/85s came in they were thrown straight into combat, crewed by veterans who had had their T-34/76s shot out from under them. No extra training, no range testing, just get in the tank and join your unit. Katukov writes this was not how he would have preferred to do things, but the situation made it necessary.

I would add that the switchover was probably not as complicated as it would seem at first look, as the tankers were pros, automotively it was the same tank, and from a gunnery POV what's the difference if you always try and engage at 500 meters or less?

So in answer to your question, if it were six months later how many T-34/85 would there be, I would waffle and ask you what kind of tank brigade are we talking about; one of the favored guards in one of the six Guards Tank Armies, a brigade supporting infantry on the Baltic Front, or a brigade watching the Japanese from the Gobi desert?

In the first case the Soviets were doing everything possible to prep for the summer offensives, and the Tank Armies had top priority for the T-34/85. So by May '44 your brigade could be somewhere between 10 and 80 per cent T-34/85, depending on how close the unit was to the railheads. Maybe more if the unit had more pull in the supply system than First Guards Tank Army.

In the Gobi, they might not have seen a live T-34/85 until after the war in Germany ended and it was time to conquer Manchuria.

The tank armies, according to Katukov and others, were overall about 80 per cent T-34/85 by the time of the Summer 1944 offensives. The goal was to re-equip by brigade, but due to vehicles cycling back into the unit from maintenance even the ritziest tank brigades in the Guards tank armies sometimes had M43s that fought all the way to Berlin or Prague. By that same token a vehicle like that was of course a big exception; by January '45 the medium tank fleet was fully T-34/85; except for the Shermans of course.

Of course, the Soviets also changed the TOE for Tank Corps in January '44, and even worse for your scenario-building the changes were certainly well-implemented by May. The primary bump-ups were dedicated assault gun regiments in each Corps (76,85, and 152mm), and the addition of a 120mm mortar regiment, and a 57mm AT gun regiment. (All this from Zladoga and Ness)

Which of course does a real number on what Corps might give your brigade, dont' you love designing historical scenarios?

[Der Alte Fritz]

So we have two quite different interpretations of the force types given to the lead Tank Bn of a Tank Bde. Even within the Tank Brigade itself which I believe is a self contained unit and so should be close to the TOE with losses. I am fairly sure that the MR Bde operated on its own and was not split up, so I would go with 1 company of SMG troops per Tank Bn and not the 2 proposed.

There can be more differences about what Corps troops would be given out as this would vary from mission to mission but I think that troops such as recce forces, pioneers and 120mm mortar support are likely to have been split over the 3 Tank Bde while the MR Bde was pretty self sufficient in this respect. Not clear as to what the recce forces were. From Zladoga I have the Recce Co of the MR Bde in Scout Cars but I have the Corps Recce Bn mounted on motorcycles so I think the latter are more likely and depicted in jeeps in the absence of m/c.

I think that the Tank Destroyer (either guns or later SUs) were probably committed as full units like they were at Kursk but I am really confused about how SUs were committed. I take JasonC's point about them being committed as batteries (ie in groups of 4) and that they were assigned for particular operations so I would imagine 4 SU 152 being assigned to support the Tank Bde when needed. In Nov 1943 a Tank Corps has one SU Regt of 12 SU152s with Two Tank Destroyer Regts one of 21 SU76 and the other of 16 SU-122 (formerly 45mm and 76mm AT guns and later replaced by SU85 and SU100?) Is this right?

So from Tank Bde Nov 1943 10/500 type:

21 T-34

1 SMG Co

4 DP LMG

2 Maxims

2 82mm mortars

0-2 45mm AT guns

1 ATR pl

2-3 AA HMG HT

from Corps level usually attached:

3 BA64

1 m/c recce pl (in jeeps)

1 pioneer pl

1-2 120mm 6 tubes FO

from Corps level attached for specific ops:

4 SU152

1 Rocket FO

[John Kettler]

I'd like to recommend that those of you interested in this topic find Milsom's RUSSIAN TANKS 1900-1970 and read Chapter 6, The Great Patriotic War. There, you'll find considerable discussion of the changing unit organizations, tactical and operational failures and triumphs, operation of NPP (direct support) tanks and SUs in battle, and much more.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Grisha]

If you want to get an idea of how Soviet foward detachments were typically comprised, see Glantz' Soviet Conduct of Tactical Maneuver: Spearhead of the Offensive. He has them depicted below brigade level in a few examples. Of course, you could just consider a reasonable assembly of units, based on the needs of the mission, and you probably wouldn't be far off. The Soviets were quite sensible in that regard, understanding fully the need for a self-reliant formation tasked with operational exploitation. Just bear in mind that a forward detachment was meant to clear the path for, or expedite the advancement of, the main forces, and you should likely come up with something credible. Missions often centered around securing a bridgehead, or attacking a town hastily defended. Later in the war it wasn't unusual for major forward detachments to be 50-100kms ahead of their parent tank corps.

[Der Alte Fritz]

Just been experimenting with the Tank Bn forces discussed above. Used the map from Tankyoi Desant as it is 2km by 2.5km as the column is quite long when formed up and used the version of the November 43 Tank Bn. Costs around 4,500 points so put as defenders 2 Co German Infantry with 2x75mm and 1x50mm AT guns 2x Marder 2 pl PzIVH and a Panther and around 2,800 points.

Soviet force seemed to operate very well, all the infantry types found room on the tanks with the FO, leaving the support weapons to travel in the lorries. The recce forces spread out across the map to find the way and the enemy, main body moved up and did tank assaults on any defended position with the support units ready to come forward to help with any tough opposition.

Engaged enemy armour in sufficient numbers that the Soviets prevailed in the end.

So it looks like a very well balanced force.

cheers

[JasonC]

DAF - I realize you may have wanted to try a force that would show all kinds of match ups, but you do realize that the Germans would not actually have that kitchen sink mix of weapons, right? One kind of ATG, one kind of AFV and at most one other in minor numbers usually a vehicle screen item etc.

[Der Alte Fritz]

Hi

Yes it was just a test force with three different positions on the map that were engaged in succession. But the force worked well against them all. The recce forces were very good on a large map as the jeeps could rush off in all directions to find the way forward.

Am playing through the Op Uranus series again and am posting reports on TPG for the ones I have not done before.

Have almost finished the Russian Training scenario notes - just want to add a section that you wrote on JS-2s and I will email it to you.

cheers

[Der Alte Fritz]

JasonC It would be a big help if you could give me the typical German forces to match our Soviet ones above. 3000 points with Infantry, PzGr and Panzer parent divisions for 1942 and 1943 and typical lines units rather than SS. Thank you.

I have got from other threads '44 Panzer 5000, 3000, 2000 and '44 infantry 3000 and 2000 point forces. Also Arm Recce force and PzGr (Mech) and (Armoured) 1500 point forces

Operation Uranus continues but I realised after playing 22nd Pz vs 5 TA that it must be an old version and have now downloaded the new one which looks winnable. Have posted results of OLD version on TPG.

cheers

[ September 16, 2006, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: Der Alte Fritz ]