Der Alte Fritz Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Does anyone have any info from the Russian side of the fighting around Melechowo on the 7th July between the 92nd and 94th Guards Rifle Division and 6th and 7th Panzer? This is the area north east of Belgorod and the line of advance of III Pz Corps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 4, 2009 Author Share Posted January 4, 2009 I have the account in Jentz and Glantz and two maps from the rkka site so I have a good picture of the battle and losses on the German side but need an account of the fighting from the Russian side. thanks 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Modest info on attachments and strength in this period - 92nd Guards, 114th Antitank Artillery Regiment attached Starts the fight with 9558 men on strength. Loses 5600 men through the 17th. 94th Guards, first day engaged with only 288th Rifle Regiment, with 31st Antitank Artillery Brigade attached. Thereafter, also had 161st Guards Artillery Regiment, 148th Tank Regiment, and 97th Guards Mortar Regiment attached. Starts the fight with 9385 men on strength. Dropped to 7078 by July 13. Not much, FWIW, etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 4, 2009 Author Share Posted January 4, 2009 Thank you No that is really useful. Only comment though, on the map the 148th is shown in the lead of the 280th RR (92nd GRD). The battle in essence, is the 92/94th GRD move forward from the 3rd Belt into the 2nd Belt defences. 6th Pz advances along a hilltop between two river valleys, runs into a anti tank ditch, then a minefield - clears that with Pioneres but then runs into the 280th GRR. The Russians meet the Germans with AT fire which pushes them back initially, but the Germans try again, break into the defences but Russian counter attack with more guns moved up and the tanks attacking. Germans halted and fall back a little. Jentz has operational strength falling from 100 to 50 odd. Germans hampered by the 94th on the other side of the river valley getting flank shots with their AT guns. the 6th has to wait two days before the 7th and 19th can come up to clear the flanks and it can push the Russians out the back of their defences. cheers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 161st Guards Artillery cited elsewhere for its tactical responsiveness and flexibility. It helped against the 19th Panzer, too, for example. Used direct over open sights vs tanks as well as indirect barrage fire. I believe this was the army level 152mm gun-howitzer formation, and from performance quality was good (veteran?). Russian higher level reports on arty use (by artillery staff, mind, not this specific engagement) report the AT regiments in this army were motorized with American trucks, both jeeps and "pick ups", aiding responsiveness. They also report that 132mm MRLs were used direct on tank concentrations - that would be the 97th Guards Mortar Regiment in this case. So... the first RR engaged is the infantry buttress for a large ATG formation (up to 60 guns) with many motorized 76mm ATGs moved into position ahead of the German attack. Behind them comes twice as much infantry again, with the div arty, heavy stuff 152mm and 132mm rocket, and the supporting tank regiment, with all told another 60 heavy AT systems, split roughly evenly between towed 76mm (div arty), towed 152mm, and tanks. The soft fire portion of the defense is considerably stronger than the AT portion, but the latter is still quite strong against standard Panzers. Against the supporting 503rd Tiger battalion, there are fewer effective weapons, but there are a handful of 152mm capable of firing direct if need be, so the Tigers cannot pretend they are invulnerable, tactically speaking. (The 503rd also lost quite a few vehicles to mines early in the offensive, and would only have the portion brought back into service available etc). Glantz covers the period right before this fight in considerably greater detail, in his Russian Defensive Tactics at Kursk essay, rather than the book. But he breaks off after the 6th and 7th PDs have broken through the front line RD in the first 48 hours, right before the fight you care about. My read on it, FWIW... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 On other item is the 96th Tank Brigade. It was in line just to the right (Russian perspective, south) of the 92nd, opposite the 19th Panzer and on the left flank (German perspective) of the 6th Panzer spearhead. The 96th started the battle with a manpower strength of 1146 men. It had 6 T70s and 46 T34s. It reports loss of 8 T-34s on the 8th, when a single battalion attacked a collective farm. On the start of the 10th it was down to 20 T34s, 5 T70s, and had picked up 2 T60s. It reports being penetrated to its HQ along its left side on the 4th day it was engaged (that would be the seam between it and the 92nd GRD). It was down to 14 T34s and 3 T70s by the 12th, including a few returned to service. FWIW... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 KOSAVE data: Kursk operation simulation and verification exercise. Lots of data. http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/town/avenue/vy75/data.htm Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 Yep, that is a fine source and one I am using above. It has a lot more detail on the German side in the unit and location files, than the Russian, however. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 What a superb resource. Thanks Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Thanks JasonC for this information, we are staring to build up a nice picture about this battle. I have a topo map of the area and am in the process of marking on the various units, taken from the Glantz article that you cite. It will make it a bit easier to see the effect of the flanking fire from across the river. Will post the Jentz information a bit later on when it has been added to the map. Also the Axis History forum is translating an article for me about this action from the Russian side. cheers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtcm Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Just to help me visualize: Katyushas used to break up / stop tank concentrations viz advances: what are we talking about in terms of CMBB ? A typical case, what would it be ? I assume it's just behind the jump off point for assault-- by what ? (Panzer Division ? The sharp end thereof ? Meaning a battn strong force of tanks ? Moving off in armoured wedges ?) How many tanks ? Stuff along with tanks ? E.g. HTs ? HTs with mortars ? Towed guns in the assault ? Fuel, etc ? Technical staff, command elements ? Infantry ? What rains down on them, in CM terms ? One 132 FO ? Several ? Sorry for these elementary questions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtcm Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Then, of course: what does Katyusha fire, concentrated, ("sea of fire", etc), do to the tanks ? Kill crewmen ? Jam communications stuff, throw tracks ? Hit at the "soft" parts of the armoured fist ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Jentz numbers as follows: Schw Pz Abt 503: 5/7 39 Tigers 6/7 another 5 join total 45 between 5th and 8th: 34 fell out: 2 destroyed, 7 hit by enemy, 16 mine damage(13 on the first day), 9 breakdowns, for a total of 34 leaving 11 operational. 22 repaired so that by 1200 on the 8th there were 33 operational. 6th Pz Div: 4/7 105 tanks (actual types given) 8/7 72 9/7 70 10/7 22 This is rather strange as according to the text, there was no fighting on the 5th and 6th as the division followed in the tracks of the 7th Pz Div, the main days of fighting was the 7th and 8th and during the 9th and 10th the division rested in a wood albeit under artillery fire and "a number of panzers were hit and caught fire". Anyway the fighting around Melechowo had cost the 6th - 83 non operational panzers and its strength would not recover before the end of the battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 DAF - Tigers operational dropped very rapidly on minefield losses. I think it is fair to expect a single company actually running each day, with another cycling out of the shops. As for the numbers reported for the main Panzer regiment, the drop right at the start of the offensive undoubtedly reflects a portion instantly going back into short term repair, from an unsustainable "all runners" situation for the start of the offensive, that only ever happens when there has been no action for an extended period. Simply put, you can't actually drive 100 tanks across country and expect all of them to remain operational. They are only ever *all* operational, because "operational" is reduced to "can drive out of the assembly area", at specific offensive-start points. The remainder strikes me as a report timing issue. The big drop to 22 runners undoubtedly happens due to the fight, and not a day after it during rest and refit. Instead, that is merely when the clerks keeping the books catch up to the reality in the field, and reports reflect the actual current strength. So very likely the runner strength was on the order of 70 at the start of the engagement, and 20 after it. Plus Tigers with 30 ready but only 15 being used, and a different 15 ready after etc. This basically corresponds to the Russian side reports of a grouping of 100 tanks at the start of the fight, and its reduction by half in the course of it. I'll address jtcm's rocket question next. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 jtcm - an independent Guards Mortar battalion means a dozen trucks each mounting 16 launch rails, or 3 CMBB 132mm rocket FOs. They would fire together in a salvo from a range of 5 km or more, and then decamp. 192 rockets would arrive within about 30 seconds, basically saturating the area in soft HE terms, with sparse coverage against anything armored. Against a massed target of 50 or more vehicles, however, the expectation for a direct hit is non-zero, and one can expect a few near misses close enough to cause material damage. The target is intended to be at least a panzer regiment, in other words. Tens of vehicles all under the beaten zone. The shoot might strip them of supporting combined arms, frag off antennas and damage optics, immobilize the odd tank with a near miss, etc. Suppose the beaten zone is half a grid square, 500 meters on a side, then the total area is 250000 square meters. The surface area of a single tank is on the order of 18 square meters (6 long by 3 wide). A tank regiment might present a total surface for direct hit purposes of 900 square meters or 0.36% of the total impact zone. Toss in 192 rockets and the chance of any direct hit is 50% (1 - .9964^192). You'd also expect 2-3 near misses within 2 meters of the nearest tank (4 times the area from 10 long by 7 wide), probably close enough to cause immobilizing damage. The direct armor-killing effect is small, therefore, but it isn't zero. A lot more would be done in terms of shrapnel damage to exposed crew, to optics, antennae, to guns and running gear, etc. And naturally also to any softer accompanying arms, infantry, trucks, etc. Which however would make a better target, if available. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 JasonC With regard to the Tigers strength, each Pz Div was given a Tiger Kompanie of 15. The one attached to the 7th (or maybe the 19th?) had 13 out of their 14 Tigers non operational by the end of the first two days fighting, mainly due to mines. So i suspect the one with the 6th was largely intact with a few non-runners along their advance. After all the only fighting that they had done in the first two days was to over-run an exposed battalion on the very flank of the Rifle Division that the 7th was fighting. I think the biggest remaining question is confirmation of the idea I have gained from map study, that the 92nd was occupying prepared defences in the 2nd Belt. The 6th's after action report in Jentz mentions a lot of mines and an AT ditch 4km in front of Mellechowo. Later they report another lot of mines on the far side of the road - the road along which the 92nd deploys. This could be that the defensive line ran along the south side of the road and the field to the north was one of those flanking fields to guard the side of the position. If they were occupying fixed defences it would have given them an advantage rather than just trying to dig new trenchs in a field. I think the flanking fire of the 94th RD was crucial as the 6th is only able to get forward once the 7th Pz has cleared them away. Then they have a relatively easy advance, followed by a nice drive cross country until they meet retreating Russian forces at Rhevez where Dr Baake does his "Ghost Column" feat. At this point the German advance is parallel to the defensive lines and so they never meet the Third Belt which is to the NW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 9, 2009 Author Share Posted January 9, 2009 There are accounts by Breith and a couple of other German officers that I would like to get hold of, any ideas? Russian military topographic maps at 100,000 available here: http://maps.poehali.org/en/formatted/100k--m37-038--(1981).html?type=100k&zoom=6 cheers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 I've just set up test, based on Jasons figures, and wonder whether the results reflect a realistic simulation of the Katyusha's effectiveness on a regimental armoured target. 100 Veteran Pz IVG's versus 3x Green 132mm M-20 spotters (representing an IGM battalion) Terrain: flat open step with the nominal panzer regiment taking up a roughly 900 square metre footprint The tank crews are unbuttoned and are travelling approx 50m apart with 80-100 metres between each platoon. The FO's are delayed by one minute to allow the panzers to get moving, though the AI moves in overwatch mode, so roughly 50% of the tanks are moving when the rockets strike. Each FO targets the middle one third of the regiment facing it to allow maximum coverage. Initially they had all targeted one aim point but the results were similar, a higher concentration of damage to the centre but flanking units getting unscathed. After 20 tests the results are as follows Tanks KO'd: 3-5, interestingly if I hit them immediately, when they were stationary, then 1 tank would be lost. I was wondering if the higher figure is due to poor AI movement doctrine allowing a higher target density. Crew casualties: 28-41 Gun damaged: 4-6 Immobolised: 2-4 I tried the test previously with 100 tanks made up of 10 tank units, ranging from Pz II's through to Elephants and noticed a 20% increase in damage to the lighter units (PzII's suffered 40-50% damage loss ratios and a 10 increase in mobility hits to the elephants (vulnerable engine grill?) My question, is this realistic, or is the weapon undermodelled? I do wish CMBB could model smoke from HE strikes, as the tank crews would be blinded by the dust generated, adding to the confusion. I know the BM-21 is a more modern system with 40 rockets, but look at the results of a 4 battery strike in this clip! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ElZif0KOFKI 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Alte Fritz Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 They are mentioned in other books such as Jentz Panzer Truppen and Lodieu III Pz Korps at Kursk. They are probably not published as books except in German but may appear as part of those US Intelligence reports from the interrogation of German officers after the war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 http://www.nachlassdatenbank.de/viewresult.php?sid=23f06f73496a37f547957 http://www.nachlassdatenbank.de/viewsingle.php?category=B&person_id=1817&asset_id=1981&sid=23f06f73496a37f547957#condition Nachlass = inheritance Datenbank = database The "inheritance database" is published oline by the German federal archive in Freiburg. Breith's inheritance is listed as available in the archive in Freiburg (SW Germany). It consists of papers including diaries from Russia, Hungary and the western front. Part of the inheritance is in private hands - no notes online whether these parts are in the archive or not. Volume is 0,2metres - ie 20cm on a shelf. Index only available on paper Guess Jentz et al read those papers in Freiburg. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Wow - I'd forgotten that - rebookmarked with added smphasis to help me not forget about it again!! Thanks1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.