CMBB v CMAK

[Mad Russian]

And you guys thought POS and I never agree on anything....sheesh....:smg:

We're cool.....:cool2:

Good Hunting.

MR

[Mad Russian]

Nikita,

Part of your comments have included the formation of the 4th Tank Brigade by Katukov. You stated that the Brigade only had 16 T-34's. Did you mean that it was formed originally with 16 T-34's or that it went into combat with only 16 T-34's?

I think it had considerably more than 16 T-34's when it went into combat. These guys were well trained, most in fact were armor school instructors IIRC, and showed just what the tank was capable of in capable hands.

I have a scenario that pits the 4th Tank Brigade against the 4th Armored Division. It's a tough fight.

Good Hunting.

MR

[PoorOldSpike]

Pre-war American AT doctrine assumed that to stop an armoured attack you need simply throw loads of AT guns in its path.
This was fine provided you knew exactly where the attack was coming in, and provided you had ample notice to tow your guns into position, not always possible against a mobile attacking force which might strike in an unexpected sector.
Only tanks are mobile enough and well-protected enough to be able to quickly switch to the threatened sector to block an enemy armoured attack, so it naturally follows that the defending tanks must have a gun capable of stopping the enemy tanks.

Same applies when it's your armour that's attacking, the defender will move his armour to block you, so again it follows that your tanks should have a gun capable of taking them on..

[Nikita]

Panther prototype was developed, but it was intended to be lighter, than actual panther. After Germans inspected Russian tanks (KVs, T-34s, T-28s), they understood, that more heavily armored tanks may come and reviewed initial specifications towards increase of armor and upgunning the prototype to meet current, and, most important, future soviet designs. Of course this immediately resulted in re-drawin of different parts due to increased armor weight and necessity to fit bigger gun. As for threat of T-34 and KV, present in 1941-42, upgrading of armor and guns of existing models was viewed as an acceptable sollution by Guderian among others, until pre-planned substitution of PzIIIs and IVs. And, surely, as it was correctly noted, Hitler personally demanded to speed up development of Panther, since better armored and gunned Soviet tanks were expected to show up by mid 1943.

So, Panther as such was not German reply to T-34s, or tank inspired by T-34s, as sometimes is overstated in literature. Simply pre-war planning, the "pre-T-34" panther idea was updated to meet future threats, whch were forecasted on basis of T-34s and KVs.

4th TBR was formed up with 16 x T-34s out of total 49 tanks of different models. By 16th of October (battle of Mtzensk started on 11th) it had operational 3 x KVs, 7 x T-34s and 23 x light tanks (mainly BTs of different models). In reality Germans were neglecting very basics of war marches: they were moving in march column formation without recce and flanking protection in the enemy territory and, surely, were bitterly punished. In order to hide their incompetence, Langemann and Guderian reported about Russian monsters (enjoy the proportions above:)), which were "unbeatable" and were "flying around" (using usual 10-13km/h off-road speed:)) panzers, which, in their turn, were stuck in the mud. In reality, people, who drove T-34/42 and PzIVF2 told, that the later was easier to drive in mud. They went even further, claiming that PzIV was able to get out of bigger mud, than T-34 (I can buy the argument, that it is subjective, but gearbox of early-mid war T-34 was infamous). Similar problems had Nering with 16th Panzer near Borisov, when he suffered at hands of another competent Soviet tank commander - Kreyzer. However, after initial battles with T-34s during border battles, when T-34s were present in greater numbers and had meeting engagements with German panzer division battlegrups, Germans employed combined arms and tackled the problem without any reports about technological inferiority. BTW, this is proved by letter from post-war PR specialist and liar Guderian: the letter was read and minuted during meeting in Hitler's headquarters in October 21, 1941 (letter was actually dated one month earlier). In this letter, Guderian was evaluating T-34 as "typical example of outdated Russian technology. This tank can not be compared to best of our tanks, produced by loyal sons of the Reich and that have proved their supremacy on numerous occasions". During this meeting, heads of German tank forces were discussing specifications for proto-Panther

However, after defeat of his subordinate - Langemann, he immediately requested commission to come and started to praise Russian tanks, which, as evil undefeatable ghosts, have serioously depleted Langemann's tank units.

[PoorOldSpike]

The Germans thought highly of the KV-1's thick armour but they didn't like its average 76mm gun, so they tried fitting a more powerful 75mm L/43 gun to a captured KV-1 -

[Copper]

Too funny :)

I am 90% finished my 1/72 scale model of the PzKpfw.753® mit7.5 Kwk40

[McIvan]

[Mad Russian]

4th TBR was formed up with 16 x T-34s out of total 49 tanks of different models. By 16th of October (battle of Mtzensk started on 11th) it had operational 3 x KVs, 7 x T-34s and 23 x light tanks (mainly BTs of different models). In reality Germans were neglecting very basics of war marches: they were moving in march column formation without recce and flanking protection in the enemy territory and, surely, were bitterly punished. In order to hide their incompetence, Langemann and Guderian reported about Russian monsters (enjoy the proportions above:)), which were "unbeatable" and were "flying around" (using usual 10-13km/h off-road speed:)) panzers, which, in their turn, were stuck in the mud. In reality, people, who drove T-34/42 and PzIVF2 told, that the later was easier to drive in mud. They went even further, claiming that PzIV was able to get out of bigger mud, than T-34 (I can buy the argument, that it is subjective, but gearbox of early-mid war T-34 was infamous). Similar problems had Nering with 16th Panzer near Borisov, when he suffered at hands of another competent Soviet tank commander - Kreyzer.

I have two widely differing accounts of the battle. The one I'm most interested in is the one on 6 October. Losses for that battle are listed as ten tanks, two 88mm Flak, one 100mm gun and one 105mm howitzer for the Germans. The Soviets were shown as having lost eighteen tanks but they do not say what types they were. They do say that the attack was in two waves and that one group of Soviet tanks had twenty-five tanks in it.

It would be good to get the Soviet perspective, on the first ever battle involving the first tank brigade(4th) to be formed, with the intention of using the T-34 as it was intended. With seasoned crew members and a seasoned commander.

I have one source that states that the brigade was fully equipped with T-34's and I know that's incorrect because they at least had KV-1's as well.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Nikita]

The only facts I know are actions of brigade recce (2 tank groups with up to a company of infantry) and, possibly, 1btn, which arrived first. Maybe during those initial engagements Germans saw "all-T-34" units, but definitely not of brigade strength. As far as I know, the 4th TBR has arrived completely during night of 6th and full scale engagement was on October 6, 1941, when 4TBR lost 6 tanks exchanged for reported 43 German tanks. The very first contact by Katukov's troops (he was not alone, you will see later) was on 5th, when one of German columns drove in front of one of the Russian forward recce detachments (mixed force, tanks and infantry) and fell victim to fire ambush at close range. Russians reported 10 tanks, 2 guns together with trucks (towed) and 5 trucks with infantry shot up. I can buy argument, that this specific detachment was all-T-34.

During 6th, Katukov claimed positioning his tanks in ambushes on the flanks, with infantry and artillery acting as a roadblock. Germans tried to scout, but rather unsuccesfully, because only infantry position received artillery and air bombardment. When Germans attacked (I am not sure, which units and in what numbers were attacking) the roadblock infantry, it met Germans with arty and small arms fire, knocked out several german tanks, while Soviet tanks were using scoot and shoot tactics and short local counterattacks on German flanks and repelled attacks. I think it was engagement with the German forward detachment. It should be noted, that Katukov was not commanding only his unit. 34th NKVD regiment (comprised of individually well-trained border guard) with its ATGs and regimental guns (batteries of 45mm and 76.2mm) was attached to him and participated in the engagement as infantry. Katukov was also supported by Katiysha's, firing at least one salvo.

Germans were not active on 7-8in front of Katukov, trying to look for weaker spots and took Mtzesk on 10th by outflanking maneuvre). Katukov's brigade was in rather difficult situation and in danger to being cut-off on the 9th and the only remaining bridge saved the day, allowing brigade to retreat.

Germans were not fighting Katukov alone, but entire corp of Leliysheko. langemann was facing units from 4th TBR., 11TBR, 34th NKVD regiment, battalion of kursants, and about 2 airborne brigades acting as infantry. 11th TBR was acting NW from positions of Katukov on the highway and may have been noted by Germans as part of the same force.

This is all I know about this engagement from Russian side. As you see, it was a competent combined arms effort. BTW, I saw reports on shortages of AP ammo under Mtzensk.

Both Katukov in his memoirs and figures from archives confirm the total number of tanks in his brigade. Katukov in his memoirs stated, that one of battalions was fully equipped with BTs. This is also in line with overall stats on the composition of other brigades. Only in very best cases new tanks formed only about a half of total tank strength.

[Mad Russian]

This is the reason that you look for combat reports from BOTH sides when you can get them.

One side sees the fight only from their perspective...obviously. Unless tanks are left on the battlefield destroyed they have only a best guess estimate of how much damage they did to the other side.

I'll post some more comments on this fight from the German side later tonight.

Good Hunting.

MR