Pz Gdrs not SPW hotrodders - US MTO experience

[winkelried]

I think we need to make a clear difference here between a Armored Personell Carrier APC intended to be a "Battle Taxi" and a Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle AIFV. Both vehicles are the answer to specific needs.

The APC is used to carry personell and weapons under light armor protection and with a mobility which allows to follow the tanks. The halftracks we talk about would fall in this category. Today: BTR and M113.

The AIFV is supposed to be able to fight using his main gun (20mm or better) and often ATGMs. Today we see here the Marder, BMP and Bradley

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

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

in an attack the haltracks drove with high speed in the enemy with all men firing from the car, when reaching the enemy positions, the men jumped off and the bloody melee started.

I hope you have some references to support that?

In all the reading that I've done, I can't recall a single incidence of halftracks being driven directly into the enemy MLR with the infantry dismounting to continue combat on foot.

I'm not saying that it didn't happen, but if it did I would expect it to be in exceptional circumstances. I don't believe that it was standard practise.

And there's an important point to make about your example above. Infantry in halftracks travelling at speed would simply not be capable of aimed fire. Even a mounted MG must have been of little use. </font>

[winkelried]

In addition the soldiers firing would have been quite exposed. Only modern AIFV allow real fight from the vehicle without dismounting.

Looking at my database and the pictures I have of destroyed HT or HT in action I don't have any evidence of HTs being used loaded with infantry except maybe for recon purposes.

[fridericus]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

I hope you have some references to support that?

of little use.

i will look for it. btw, the fire was for surpressing, nothing else.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The actual manual did specify fighting from the vehicle; I think Hofbaeur had posted about these previously. I seem to recall the suggestion it was rarely done.

I've seen a picture of grenadiers firing from a stationary halftrack, so it was certainly done, and that does make sense. But I can't imagine infantry firing bolt action rifles from a speeding halftrack going over uneven ground.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by fridericus:

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

I hope you have some references to support that?

of little use.

i will look for it. btw, the fire was for surpressing, nothing else. </font>

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The actual manual did specify fighting from the vehicle; I think Hofbaeur had posted about these previously. I seem to recall the suggestion it was rarely done.

I've seen a picture of grenadiers firing from a stationary halftrack, so it was certainly done, and that does make sense. But I can't imagine infantry firing bolt action rifles from a speeding halftrack going over uneven ground. </font>

[fridericus]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

I look forward to seeing it.

the KG Peiper, KG SS-PzGrenRgt1(+)/1.SS-PzD. LAH in the attack in the Ardennes. the grenadiers fired on us soldiers in houses while the halftracks speeded through the towns. i have german language books here, but still looking for english text. perhaps someone can help.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The actual manual did specify fighting from the vehicle; I think Hofbaeur had posted about these previously. I seem to recall the suggestion it was rarely done.

I've seen a picture of grenadiers firing from a stationary halftrack, so it was certainly done, and that does make sense. But I can't imagine infantry firing bolt action rifles from a speeding halftrack going over uneven ground. </font>

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by fridericus:

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

I look forward to seeing it.

the KG Peiper, KG SS-PzGrenRgt1(+)/1.SS-PzD. LAH in the attack in the Ardennes. the grenadiers fired on us soldiers in houses while the halftracks speeded through the towns. i have german language books here, but still looking for english text. perhaps someone can help. </font>

[fridericus]

they dismounted.

[fridericus]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

You realize the majority of so called "combat photographs" in WW II were staged, yes?

in this simple way its wrong for the german army. Even Doctors and PK-men got "Deutsches Kreuz in Gold". this decoration you get only for bravity. so i dont think, that most of the pics were staged.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by fridericus:

they dismounted.

What was the exact location?

[Jim Boggs]

So would using the unloaded halftracks to support the attack with machine gun fire be considered non-historical as well?

[fridericus]

Lanzerath, Honsfeld

[fridericus]

Originally posted by Jim Boggs:

So would using the unloaded halftracks to support the attack with machine gun fire be considered non-historical as well?

???

they transported the inf with much suppressing fire to the enemy, the inf jumped off, and the halftracks supported as hMGs and with 75L24-cannons.

[Jim Boggs]

Originally posted by fridericus:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jim Boggs:

So would using the unloaded halftracks to support the attack with machine gun fire be considered non-historical as well?

???

they transported the inf with much suppressing fire to the enemy, the inf jumped off, and the halftracks supported as hMGs and with 75L24-cannons. </font>

[fridericus]

they have/had the taxi-doctrine, as i described above.

[Sirocco]

According to Men Of Steel, 1 SS Panzer Corps by Michael Reynolds, the 9th Parachute Regiment captured Lanzerath, rather than KG Peiper. The US forces in Honsfeld were literally caught napping. There was no assault as such.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by fridericus:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

You realize the majority of so called "combat photographs" in WW II were staged, yes?

in this simple way its wrong for the german army. Even Doctors and PK-men got "Deutsches Kreuz in Gold". this decoration you get only for bravity. so i dont think, that most of the pics were staged. </font>

[YankeeDog]

There is a big difference between speeding through a town with scattered enemy infantry holdouts in buildings and using suppressive fire to keep said scattered enemy infantry inside the buildings, and actually riding HTs into a prepared, well-manned line of defense.

IOW, you may both be right -- Panzergrenadiers probably trained for close-in dismount, and fighting from HTs as a way of mopping up areas where organized enemy resistance was largely broken, but not completely obliterated. In fact, this is one of the major jobs for infantry accompanying tank formations on the attack. Tanks break the back of the enemy line. Infantry mops up and prevents the enemy from reforming, securing rear areas so the logistical tail can move forward behind the armored spearhead.

Conversely, I have never read any evidence, either as doctrine or practice, that the Germans used HTs to drive panzergrenadiers right up to well-manned enemy defensive positions. If they did, I strongly suspect losses would be very high, both among the HTs and the Pz. Gren.

In CM terms, put some scattered sharpshooters, LMG teams and half-squads in a town, then drive a HT-mounted Pz Gren Coy up, and then see how many turns it takes you to completely eliminate enemy resistance and how many losses you take. Then try the same thing with an equivalent amount of completely dismounted infantry. In this situation, I think you'll find the HTs help you get the job done quicker and with fewer losses, and the risk to the HTs is very small.

Then put a couple of good-order enemy platoons in the town, accompanied by a few modest support weapons (MGs & light mortars, mostly). Try the same thing and count how many losses you take to the HTs and accompanying infantry.

So close-assaulting with HTs *can* make sense, in the right situation. You don't use them to assault well-manned prepared positions. You use them to quickly mop-up scattered resistance, and-or by pass scattered resistance in order to continue the advance.

Regards,

YD

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

You don't think a regime like Nazi Germany - founded on lies - would give medals to men for lying?

Look at his sig. The PK men were soldiers. Of course they did not lie.

[fridericus]

@ yankee dog:

sure; i would never attack an unbroken line of defense with halftracks - you would nearly lose them all to ATGs; thatswhy the german invented the combined arms.

@ sirocco:

according to Will Fey, "Panzerkampf im Bild", Lanzerath was captured by Parachuts AND Engineers of 3. Pionierkompanie/1.SS.PzD.LAH

@ Michael:

You don't think a regime like Nazi Germany - founded on lies - would give medals to men for lying?

the reason for decorated PK-men and doctors is quit simplier. they were officers, the PK-men as "Sonderfuehrer", and when the unit lost all regular officers, the btns were lead by them. in this way problems in getting decorations for bravity were erased. when you read Martin van Crefelds "Kampfkraft" (i dont know the english title, perhaps armypower or such), you will see, that german decorations were the only in the whole war, which were given only for good reasons, but not, as in other armies, for the rank or such.

when a system lies, the men stay as they would be without the system.

[ February 24, 2004, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: fridericus ]

[fridericus]

Originally posted by Andreas:

PK men were soldiers. Of course they did not lie.

Nase.

Das habe ich nie behauptet. Meine Signatur bezieht sich ausschliesslich auf die in unserem Lande vorherrschende Verunglimpfung unserer Soldaten, obwohl sie ihrem Lande dienten. Sie könnten nichtmal das damalige Unrechtsregime gewählt haben.

[Michael Dorosh]

The German system of awards was unique among the major combatants in that awards like the Deutsches Kreuz were routinely given for leadership, in addition to/in place of battlefield bravery. Many ritterkreuzträger wore the decoration because of the bravery of their men and their own leadership, not necessarily or specifically because of their own personal acts of bravado.

Not sure the point you were trying to make - seems you are referring to PK officers taking over infantry units when their leaders were lost. That's nice, but it supports my comments about the verisimilitude of wartime photographs rather than supporting your own position (ie you tried to say the fact that because PK officers were decorated it proved the veracity of their photos, now you are saying their decorations had nothing to do with them).

If I am reading you correctly.