Couple of questions about Stalingrad battles . . .

[Panzer Leader]

I picked up a couple books at the library yesterday. I'm reading "In Deadly Combat" by B.H.Bidermann, pretty cool so far as a personal account of the East Front from an infantryman's point of view, but the book I wanted to mention is "199 Days: The Battle for Stalingrad" by E.P.Hoyt. Haven't cracked the cover yet, but is does seem to have a bunch of maps 'n things. Any opinions?

Also, Skipper, do you have any suggestions for a good book on Stalingrad for us "English-as-an-ONLY-Language" people??

P.S. The other two books were "Devil's Adjutant" by M. Reynolds about Peiper, and "Skorzeny's Special Missions" by the man himself. My library, though small, seems to have a pretty good WW2 section! Last month I found Glantz' book on Operation Mars there, and it was excellent. I own "When Titans Clashed" but now I think I want to get all his WW2 studies.

[ May 05, 2002, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Panzer Leader ]

[Skipper]

> Skip, unless I'm very much mistaken Beevor got

> access to a huge amount of Soviet AARs

Well, as I said - it doesn't seem to show through.

> Also, Skipper, do you have any suggestions for

> a good book on Stalingrad for us "English-as-an-

> ONLY-Language" people??

Alas, no.

[Grey Hunter]

> the Russian records tend to overestimate

> casulties on the German side

Usual story. German combat reports were not exemplary in that respect, either. I remember reading in some german memoir that OKW was dividing all divisional kill claims by some factor to estimate more accurately actual conditions of soviet combat formations.

good point, but the kills of all sides are vastly inflated, mainly by people claiming the same thing more than once (no -I killed that one! ect)

2. Ever seen "Tiger?" on the CM battlefield?

3. There is a difference between knocked out and destroyed/captured. German armor formations had outstanding recovery/repair service.

2) yep, mainly before I put a Bazooka or PIAT into its rear. i have a habit of doing that

again, good point.

3) the germans did hold the field at kursk. but then your into the main question - how long did the battle last? the germans claim a much shorter time than the russians, by the german timetable there would of been little time to repair the lost tanks, then agian, russian casulties will run to the german timetable.

so thats three for three i've had to concede.

Did i say that one was better than the other? i just think Beevors book is more like reading a Journal entry. I prefer the stories of what actually happened. Beevors book does give a better view of the battle, but misses on the individual dramas of a city that rapidly became the Sixth armies grave.