Mines. Why'd it have to be mines ?

[Spears]

Yeah. but not a tiger a truck or 2 would do..... not my tiger (wittmen rolls in his grave).

[Arthur Krupp]

wittmann was killed by an aircraft rocket strike...

Well the SS obviously didn't have any trucks on hand and they were known to waste a lot of equipment (not to mention manpower) in the persuit of their goals.

[Spears]

so u would roll a tiger over mines then, what i mean is anything ie a car, a tractor, anything on hand, MAYBE a panzer, but a tiger? the germans used there brains i belive thats why they lasted so long?

or did they prctise hittin mines and bugging out

[Arthur Krupp]

well the germans certainly had the brians for warfare (just about the only tactic that could ever be used to beat them on the battlefield was to outnumber them at least 2:1 and even then you'd lose a lot of men) its just that despeirate circumstances required despirate thinking.

[v42below]

Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

just about the only tactic that could ever be used to beat them on the battlefield was to outnumber them at least 2:1 and even then you'd lose a lot of men

I wave my hand at your inaccurate generalisation.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Spears:

so u would roll a tiger over mines then, what i mean is anything ie a car, a tractor, anything on hand, MAYBE a panzer, but a tiger? the germans used there brains i belive thats why they lasted so long?

or did they prctise hittin mines and bugging out

No the Germans in N Africa used Tigers when they could. The PzVI may (or may not) have lost its track if it hit a mine, but the crew would be fine, and the tank could be recovered and repaired later. Using anything less increased both the chances of a total loss, and more importantly the chance the crew would suffer cas.

Also, minefields tend to be covered by fire, making a truck a less than optimal choice.

Now, if I could just recall where I read that bit about using Tiggers as mineplows ... it was recently. I'll let you know when I find it.

[ June 24, 2004, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[JonS]

Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

wittmann was killed by an aircraft rocket strike

Your preferred username wouldn't be P-51D by any chance, would it?

[ June 24, 2004, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[JonS]

Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

well the germans certainly had the brians for warfare

I thought Australian had all the brians.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

wittmann was killed by an aircraft rocket strike...

As is well known these days, there is zero evidence for, and a lot against the air strike theory.

Wittmann was killed by a Sherman Firefly of the Northants Yeo, gunner Trooper Ekins. Ekins also knocked out two more Tigers that were lost with Wittmann's. All in a very short time - his tank then was knocked out, and he was reassigned as a driver.

Mr. Ekins is still very much alive, and recounted the story at the 2004 Bovington Tankfest. Very nice man.

Of course, the airstrike theory is often recounted by those who simply can not accept that Signal posterboy Michael Wittmann, Destroyer of Tanks™, fell victim to another tank. Especially one crewed by comparative amateurs.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Of course, the airstrike theory is often recounted by those who simply can not accept that Signal posterboy Michael Wittmann, Destroyer of Tanks™, fell victim to another tank. Especially one crewed by comparative amateurs.

And worse yet, a Sherman!

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by v42below:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

just about the only tactic that could ever be used to beat them on the battlefield was to outnumber them at least 2:1 and even then you'd lose a lot of men

I wave my hand at your inaccurate generalisation. </font>

[rleete]

You're up early.

[JonS]

Originally posted by JonS:

Now, if I could just recall where I read that bit about using Tiggers as mineplows ... it was recently. I'll let you know when I find it.

Found it. From here;

[snips] Tiger operations in Tunisia where Heavy Tank Battalion 501 campaigned, later joined by a company of Heavy Tank Battalion 504 (which in March took possession of the 501st's remaining assets). The 501st arrived piecemeal and entered the battle in dribs and drabs, but the Allies had little with which to combat even limited quantities of heavies. Especially in the early operations in Tunisia, Allied light tanks (the Lee [JonS: sic, but 'Stuart', surely?], aka Honey) suffered horribly one-sided losses when they attempted to engage even very small numbers of Tigers. In most instances, minefields covered by artillery represented the best defense for British and American forces. The Germans in turn used Tigers to lead their columns as oversized mine detectors in order to protect lighter, more vulnerable AFVs. Although mines could damage treads and temporarily immobilize them while AT and artillery fire might ding them, the Tigers could almost always be repaired and returned to combat. [snips]

Regards

JonS

[ June 24, 2004, 07:26 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by rleete:

You're up early.

True. Want to make something of it, you, you — you expectant father you?!

[Spears]

ok im wrong but then i never read **** like that its all too much for me, im 24 im supposed to be out shagging, not debating the facts of german armour

In fact i might go wake the miss up now. What a idea....... urmmm ..... later

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Spears:

ok im wrong but then i never read **** like that its all too much for me, im 24 im supposed to be out shagging, not debating the facts of german armour

Yes, but it's never too late, or too soon, to learn punctuation, capitalization, and proper English.

Eventually your pecker will fall off, or at least become completely meaningless other than for waste elimination (and, as you get older, even that will be a challenge), but the ability to write, discuss and dazzle others with your erudition might see you through the dark years after your completely uninteresting 'Mr. Floppy' has gone to that great rubbish bin in the sky (almost invariably, long before you do).

All studies show that those who use their minds daily, thoroughly, and intricately stave off senile dementia and Alzheimer's better than those who simply phone it in.

[Arthur Krupp]

Whats all this? I raise the point that the germans had the "brains for warfare" and I get shouted down as being some sort of neo-nazi?

And as for the wittmann getting blown up by a rocket strike, I was not aware that it was the case-the last time I read up on wittmann that was a generally accepted theory and I apologise if that is now outdated-such is the nature of history that the details can change from year to year as new evidence comes to light.

I'm afriad the only username I've ever used on this forum is Arthur Krupp, I can certainly say I'm not a neo-nazi and give my apologies once again for my historical error on the case of wittmann.

[GoofyStance]

Originally posted by v42below:

I wave my hand at your inaccurate generalisation.

and say "Bah!" like Dogbert?

[Kobal2]

OUT ! OUT ! YOU DEMONS OF STUPIDITY !

[Spears]

doesnt matter how i write it, you understand the general idea, so sean, is life that bad ey? dont take it to heart, its bad for you, that may fail also

[bbaker]

Arthur, I don't think you were being accused of being a neo-nazi. You have, however, stumbled upon a board where there is a gaggle, a profusion, a veritable cornucopia of hard-core "grogs," nearly all of whom will take offense to your overbroad generalization of the relative merits of the german soldier, which I assume is based on video games or the like where "leet" German uber-weapons (and by association uber-leet-infantruppen) rule the battlefield.

What I think you meant to say was probably more along the lines of "Man, those Mk VI's are hard to kill when all you have is a lone Sherman" or "some high-quality formations of German infantry were able to defeat larger numbers of less well-trained allied infantry formations."

[Boo Radley]

Originally posted by Seanachai:

Eventually your pecker will fall off, or at least become completely meaningless other than for waste elimination (and, as you get older, even that will be a challenge), but the ability to write, discuss and dazzle others with your erudition might see you through the dark years after your completely uninteresting 'Mr. Floppy' has gone to that great rubbish bin in the sky (almost invariably, long before you do).

Welcome to: Seanachai; a Day in the Life of a Gnome."

Brought to you by the makers of Viaga and Cialis along with a matching grant by the Chubb Group of insurance agents.

[Arthur Krupp]

bbaker-While I am not a major "grog" neither am I a kiddie with experiences in medal of honour for my history lessons. It was a broad generalisation I grant it, but better than sitting down to compare the sherman to the panzer IV in detail. If I have gotton people going over this then I apologise, but sometimes you just have to take broad statements in the spirit rather than the letter. I am well aware of the strenghts and weaknesses of the german "leet" infantry soldier and so on but did not feel the need to go into it in that post-I was simply referring back the the allied high command statement that whenever allied forces met german forces on anywhere near equal terms the germans usually prevailed-this was true more so on a tactical level as the war progressed moreso than a strategic level (as it was put in one history, "German units were like isolated rocks in a vast torrent of water").

Again I apologise to those who tend to take their history so seriously at all times.

[v42below]

Originally posted by v42below:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

just about the only tactic that could ever be used to beat them [German soldiers - v42below] on the battlefield was to outnumber them at least 2:1 and even then you'd lose a lot of men

I wave my hand at your inaccurate generalisation. </font>

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Arthur Krupp:

Whats all this? I raise the point that the germans had the "brains for warfare" and I get shouted down as being some sort of neo-nazi?

And as for the wittmann getting blown up by a rocket strike, I was not aware that it was the case-the last time I read up on wittmann that was a generally accepted theory and I apologise if that is now outdated-such is the nature of history that the details can change from year to year as new evidence comes to light.

I'm afriad the only username I've ever used on this forum is Arthur Krupp, I can certainly say I'm not a neo-nazi and give my apologies once again for my historical error on the case of wittmann.

Did I call him a Neo-Nazi? I did not! Didn't sound remotely like a Neo-Nazi. I called him a bloody German-cuddler, all the time cozying up to that Teutonic warriour cult thingy, Millenium hand and shrimp, buggrit!

But look! He's apologized! Everyone rush forward to put the boot in!

Then someone help him up and give him a bloody beer, eh?