Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

German tank production plans 1945 and tank destroyers in tank units

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NagaSadow
    replied
    Originally posted by Emtos View Post
    I have two questions.

    2. Did German used tank destroyers/assault guns in tank companies instead of tanks ? Not in panzerjager role but in tank units. How much units did this ?

    Thnak you.
    StuG III
    The Pz.Div. lost at Stalingrad (14., 16., 24.,) were reformed in early 1943 as "heavy divisions" with a three battalion Pz.Rgt. including a third Panzer-Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung with StuG III's instead of Panzerjäger-Abteilung. The Hermann Göring Division was organized in a similiar fashion. 9. SS, 10. SS and Pz.Gren.Div. Feldherrnhalle had two Pz. IV companies replaced with StuGs basically from the get go in late 1943. Other divisions had a single company or even less StuGs within the Panzer-Regiment (26. Pz.Div., 5. SS) as early as late 1943. The 5. and 12. Pz.Div. only began to employ StuGs within the Panzer-Regiments in late 1944/early 1945. Until then both divisions followed the Pz.Div. 43/44 standard organization with one battalion Panther and one battalion Pz. IV. Although 12. Pz.Div. retained some III lg among its Pz.Kpfw. IV throughout 1944.


    StuG IV
    Partially or fully: 4. SS, 5. SS, 17. SS, 20. Pz.Gren.Div., 90. Pz.Gren.Div.
    In smaller numbers towards the end of the war also used by:
    Pz.Div.: 1., 3., 4., 5., 16., 20., 23., Führer-Grenadier-Div., Führer-Begleit-Div.
    Pz.Gren.Div.: 10.,

    Jagdpanzer IV
    Pz.Div.: 4., Hermann Göring 1, Hermann Göring 2, Müncheberg, Großdeutschland

    Panzer IV/70(A)
    Pz.Div.: 3., 7., 13., 17., 23., 24., 25., Führer-Begleit-Div., Müncheberg
    Pz.Gren.Div.: 20., 25., Kurmark

    Panzer IV/70(V)
    Pz.Gren.Div.: 10., 15., 17. SS, 18., 20., 25.,
    Pz.Div.: 2. SS, 7., 9., 9. SS, 13., 16., 17., 20., 21., 25., Feldherrnhalle, Jüterbog, Müncheberg, Schlesien, Großdeutschland

    Jagdpanzer 38(t)
    Pz.Div.: Feldherrnhalle 2, Müncheberg

    However in many cases the number of tank destroyers/assault guns was very small as the were often obtained by incorporating the remains of destroyed units.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    Originally posted by Artyom_A View Post
    One of the points invoked in the discussion regarding tanks/assault guns was that assault guns suffered proportionally less losses. To which Guderian replied that the difference in losses was due to different tactical employment. He also stated that turretless vehicles were were not suitable for a kind of country in Normandy with many hedges limiting mobility and blocking the line of fire. See the entire case for tanks presented here:
    http://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/r...inspect/zoom/4
    i think I read a reprint of this report in Anderson's Stug books.

    Notable is that he doesn't differentiate between whether the Stug was serving in Stug or PzJ units and if this made a difference. Certainly a greater portion of the Stug was in the Artillery branch at the time of the commentary. So it looks to me that his defense of the tank was based on countering the high reputation of the Stug battalions/brigades of the Eastern Front at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Artyom_A View Post
    One of the points invoked in the discussion regarding tanks/assault guns was that assault guns suffered proportionally less losses. To which Guderian replied that the difference in losses was due to different tactical employment. He also stated that turretless vehicles were were not suitable for a kind of country in Normandy with many hedges limiting mobility and blocking the line of fire. See the entire case for tanks presented here:
    http://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/r...inspect/zoom/4
    The point about hedges is true to a point but Normandy is not all bocage. The area infront od Caen contained much rolling downland that geave the defending German AFVs very good lines of sight - much like the glacis of a huge fort.

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    One of the points invoked in the discussion regarding tanks/assault guns was that assault guns suffered proportionally less losses. To which Guderian replied that the difference in losses was due to different tactical employment. He also stated that turretless vehicles were were not suitable for a kind of country in Normandy with many hedges limiting mobility and blocking the line of fire. See the entire case for tanks presented here:
    http://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/r...inspect/zoom/4

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    It's striking to me that they respected the SPG-type so much at the end that so much of the venerable Pz IV production facilities were converted to producing Jadpanzer IV. I haven't found evidence that the PzJ or replacement tank units in the Wehrmacht were particularly effective. It was Artillery's Stug units that were.

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    Originally posted by Cult Icon View Post
    I can see that the Pz IV production shifted heavily to the Jadpanzer IV.
    The story is explained in the Guderian's files. It seems that Hitler in June 44 wanted to abandon production of PzIV altogether in favor of turretless assault guns. After Guderian protested stating in particular that turretless vehicles had tactical limitations a compromise decision was made to produce 300 Pz-IV monthly and install a 70-caliber gun on Pz-IV chassis produced above that number:
    http://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/r...inspect/zoom/5

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    Originally posted by Emtos View Post
    Thank you. Did you found it on forum ?
    That's from a NARA folder with captured German documents which can be downloaded from the web:
    https://forum.axishistory.com/viewto...33498#p2033498

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    I have read of several reports/accounts where the L/48 punched through IS-2 in normal combat ranges (flank hits). The frontal armor was of course proof.

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Originally posted by Cult Icon View Post
    I can see that the Pz IV production shifted heavily to the Jadpanzer IV.

    The L/48 could also knock out the IS-2.
    From the front it was very weak.

    25325_original.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Originally posted by Artyom_A View Post
    I don't think that planning into 1946 could be of any practical value.
    AFV production expected by Herreswaffenamt on 1 March 1945:
    Thank you. Did you found it on forum ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    I can see that the Pz IV production shifted heavily to the Jadpanzer IV.

    The memoir "Panzer Gunner" (7th PzD, PzIV, Jadpanzer IV) has a few chapters on the Jadpanzer IV (1945 fighting, East Prussia). The author isn't particularly impressed with the Jadpanzer IV due to its lack of turret and the weak gun mounting (a significant casual factor of non-combat losses). It was probably more of demotion for him. Given the tanks that his vehicle platoon knocked out (and the relegation of the SPG vehicle in the 7th PzD to mainly a defensive/ambush role), (mostly T-34, 1 SU-85, 2 x IS-2) it's questionable that the sacrifices to mount the L/70 were justified. The L/48 could also knock out the IS-2.

    "Every Jagdpanzer IV would fight its best from an ambush, which meant that its crew had to have a suitable place at which to hide it. However, because we didn't want the ultralong barrels of our Jagdpanzer IVs close to the destructive walls of any of the buildings at that godforsaken extremity of the city"

    The Jadpanzer IV was only 1.85 meters tall. All combat accounts in the book are of ambush sniping 1-2 platoon sized groups of Soviet tanks with a platoon of Jadpanzer IV (3-4 vehicles)
    Last edited by Cult Icon; 16 Aug 19, 06:59.

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    I don't think that planning into 1946 could be of any practical value.
    AFV production expected by Herreswaffenamt on 1 March 1945:

    Auflklärer 38D:
    5.45 - 5
    6.45 - 5
    7.45 - 10
    8.45 - 20

    Panzer IV/43/48
    3.45 - 180
    4.45 - 200
    5.45 - 100

    Panzer IV/70 (V)
    3.45 - 180
    4.45 - 200
    5.45 - 200
    6.45 - 200
    7.45 - 150
    8.45 - 150

    Flakpanzer IV/3.7cm
    3.45 - 37
    4.45 - 30
    5.45 -30

    Flakpanzer IV/3cm Zw.
    3.45 - 8
    4.45 - 10
    5.45 - 30
    6.45 - 30
    7.45 - 30
    8.45 - 30

    Mun.Fzg. IV
    3.45 - 10
    4.45 - 10
    5.45 - 10
    6.45 - 9
    7.45 - 9

    Panther
    3.45 - 175
    4.45 - 200
    5.45 - 200
    6.45 - 200
    7.45 - 200

    Bergepanther
    3.45 - 25
    4.45 - 25
    5.45 - 25
    6.45 - 25

    Tiger II
    3.45 - 45
    4.45 - 50
    5.45 - 65
    6.45 - 70
    7.45 - 80
    8.45 - 80

    Stug.III
    3.45 - 170
    4.45 - 220
    5.45 - 220
    6.45 - 300
    7.45 - 130

    Stug.IV
    3.45 - 50
    4.45 - 60
    5.45 - 60
    6.45 - 68

    Stu.H. 42
    3.45 - 80
    4.45 - 90
    5.45 - 80

    Strum-Panzer
    3.45 - 25
    4.45 - 20

    Jagdpanzer 38
    3.45 - 350
    4.45 - 350
    5.45 - 350
    6.45 - 350
    7.45 - 300
    8.45 - 50

    Jagdpanther
    3.45 - 60
    4.45 - 80
    5.45 - 80
    6.45 - 80
    7.45 - 80
    8.45 - 80
    9.45 - 30

    Jagdtiger
    3.45 - 20
    4.45 - 25
    5.45 - 25
    6.45 - 7

    le.Pz.H. 18/40 IV(Sf.)
    3.45 - 20
    4.45 - 30
    5.45 - 30
    6.45 - 30
    7.45 - 40
    8.45 - 40

    s.Pz.H. 18/1
    3.45 - 20
    4.45 - 10
    5.45 - 10
    6.45 - 10

    From NARA T78 R413

    Leave a comment:


  • Cult Icon
    replied
    Jagdpanzer IV and Hetzer took over the AFV market right?

    Leave a comment:


  • Emtos
    replied
    Thank you very much. Didn't they planned the production up to 1946 ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Artyom_A
    replied
    "Sturm" program from January 45:
    http://panzer-elmito.org/panzertrupp...01-1945_D.html

    Emergency program from files of the General Inspector of tank troops:
    http://wwii.germandocsinrussia.org/r...inspect/zoom/8

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X