Battle of ardennes.

German campaigns and battles 1919-1945.

Moderator: sniper1shot

Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Ever thought about that this was just an impression of one allied officer ( who surely knew perfectly the personal structure of entire LAH :shock: ) ??

Sorry , if no I wil not disturb your phantasies anymore ...

By the way , think about the employments of LAH in 1944 before December .... :roll:

Jan-Hendrik
Hans Weber
Enthusiast
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:48 am

Post by Hans Weber »

Hello

McCown only stated what he had seen as a captive with KG Peiper. His judgement was shared by other American officers conducting POW interrogations and analyzing captured documents and is reflected in various G-2 reports, IPW reports etc, all sharing the same view. Both 82nd AB Div and 30th Inf Div had gained a pretty accurate picture of what they were facing with LAH from these procedures and today, without this material, we would not be able to get very much beyond the basic structure represented in one or two Gliederungen or a few other German primary source material that has survived, so I would be very carefull to underestimate their value. Manpower was actually not a big problem for the SS Divisions in 6. Panzer Armee. Also the men were generally of good quality within I. SS Pz Korps, most of them beeing very young, not so good in II. SS Pz Korps which had some influx of forced Volksdeutsche prone to desertion. What was lacking was combat and specialist training as there was hardly any fuel or ammo to push this much beyond the level of basic training. Most of these youngsters already had their first training withing HJ or RAD. Especially with LAH, a substantial part never left the field replacement unit during the offensive. Add the terrible road conditions and the mechanical troubles of vhc driven by novices and you wonder that actually that many made it that far.

Still, Wacht am Rhein never had the slightest chance to succeed.
Cheers
Hans
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Sorry , dears Hans , but having spoken with officers of the units involved in "Wacht am Rhein" their general statement was that their overhasted replacements for this offensive were :

a ) not the best quality

b) and suffered a severe lack of training ( which could not effetivly get improved before the offensive launched )

So , for myself , those G2-reports are reflecting something else .

The deeper I am studying german units the more those exaggerations are sounding foolish to me .

And after that some children still dream of their SS-super-soldiers :D

Nix für ungut ,

Jan-Hendrik
Hans Weber
Enthusiast
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:48 am

Post by Hans Weber »

Hello Jan Hendrik

Beeing a complete failure, I doubt you will find an officer "of units participating" in the Ardennes exagerating the qualities of their troops.

Facts are however, that the units I mentioned above didn't have a manpower problem. I base this on original German reports and and sofar I have seen nothing to make me think they were falsified. Do you have anything to prove me wrong here?

Speaking of quality, the term used by the German was "Menschenmaterial" and here also the qualification given by German officers of the I.SS Pz. Korps interrogated shortly after the war was that it was in general good. A lot of young men with no experience that could be motivated to belive in the Endsieg.

Training was insufficient as I already have pointed out, especially if it comes to Verbandsausbildung and the use of special equipment, but from the original "Übungsanlagen" of exercises conducted in late autumn by LAH I think any army would be happy to achieve this level in such a short time. Of course it was nowhere near what your officers were used during earlier reffitting periods.

That the Americans didn't have the impression they were facing an untrained mob corroborates the evidence.

Again, the American reports do paint a pretty good picture. Have you read them or ar you of the opinion that the memories of old men are all that you need to get it right?

Cheers
Hans
User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Post by von_noobie »

Ok, The allies would have destroyed there supplies at Antwerp, The only way they could have captured them would be by launching an airborne assault which would need no less than 9,000 troops,
The Germans had at best the ability to drop 1,800, no more.
the breakthrough would be small at first, yes but once they breakthrough the allies have no more reserves as they through in all there reserve div in france into the Battle of the Bulge, The breakthrough would quickly increase in size,
The infantry could easily clear out Belguim while the AT guns and arti dug in around the incircled troops,
The Germans would have a 75% chance at holding back the Russians in the East on the Vistula,
Due to the large gap in the west the remaining allied armys would have no choice but to retreat or risk incirclment, I could see them pulling back to either Normandy or Calais,
I would probaly sujest slow down armour production as it was of no use know until the Hungarian oil fields were captured, Even then they could only supply so many tanks effectivly,
I would switch much production towards AT guns and especially ammunition production, Since much German arti was down to just 2 shells a day,
I would aim to increase production to atleast 30 shells per a gun per a day,
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Dear Hans , I did not pointed out that the were "completly wrong" , that was for sure not my intention .

But , regarding that some of those men I was able to talk with were later instructors at the Panzertrueppenschule in Munster , I think they were able to judge about the quality of those replacements .

Yes , most of them were young and very motivated , but especially the lack of Verbandsausbildung was heavy criticezed ( for example referring to the commitment of Panzerlehr in the Ardennes I was not only able to talk with former officers but with men who joined PanzerLehr short before the offensive as "fresh material" , too ) .

I just try to get a picture for myself including as much perspectives I may collect :wink:

Best regards ,

Jan-Hendrik
Hans Weber
Enthusiast
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:48 am

Post by Hans Weber »

Hello Jan-Hendrik

Maybe my remark was too specific and yours too general.

There were some differences between let's say PLD and LAH in the BoB as we both know. That there was eg a manpower shortage with PLD and not with LAH is one of them. I reacted on behalf your statement that implied that US officers had no idea what the other side was about, which is not true as I see it.

We have no difference in the what we consider the training defficencies. Regarding PLD, here too the permature committment prior to the offensive in the Lorraine has to be taken into account. I have a rather lenghty Intel report on this unit based on info gathered then and distributed just before the offensive started. Maybe I will put up some excerpts if you are interested. They do confirm what we see from German sources today.

Specific question on your contacts: I don't want names of course, but I'm interested in which Funktionsträger of which units you have had the opportunity to talk too.

Cheers
Hans
Helmut Von Moltke

Post by Helmut Von Moltke »

I was not only able to talk with former officers but with men who joined PanzerLehr short before the offensive as "fresh material" , too
but we were mostly talking about LAH, not Pz- Lehr.... :?
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Dear Hans , I would be very pleased if you do so , for sure !

As for my contacts , for example an AbtKdr. of PzLhrRgt. :wink:

Jan-Hendrik
Helmut Von Moltke

Post by Helmut Von Moltke »

but anywway, even Jan has a point about inexpereinced personel in Panzer Divisions, a victory in the Ardennes would give more time to train them and make them good soldiers.
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Could you stop spamming , just in this Thread ?? With which fuel the battle should have been won ???


And which time to train the men if Stalin was already preparing his bing bang at the Weichsel ? :?: :evil:

Jan-Hendrik
Hans Weber
Enthusiast
Posts: 457
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2002 11:48 am

Post by Hans Weber »

Hello Jan-Henrik

Ok I see whom you mean.

Anybody else from 5. Pz. Armee, anybody from 6. Pz. Armee?

I will post the PLD info tonight.

Cheers
Hans
Jan-Hendrik
Patron
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 8:42 am
Location: Wienhausen
Contact:

Post by Jan-Hendrik »

Two Abt Adj , some Kp. leaders of other units ...

Thanks in advance for your input 8)

Jan-Hendrik
Helmut Von Moltke

Post by Helmut Von Moltke »

With which fuel the battle should have been won ???
Well, there would probably be enough fuel, as German forces could still operate in real life history until May. A lot of fuel could not reach the Panzers, as there were huge supply traffic jams behind the Panzer advance. But, the battle could have been won, for example if the 6.Panzerarmee was fighting in the same sector as the 5. Panzerarmee, would probably have ensured Bastogne's fall, and the capture and crossing of the Meuse.
And which time to train the men if Stalin was already preparing his bing bang at the Weichsel ?
If this battle was won, then the forces could be diverted to halt the Soviet advance, allowing the neccesary training time.
Rich
Associate
Posts: 622
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:36 am
Location: Somewhere Else Now

Post by Rich »

Helmut Von Moltke wrote:
With which fuel the battle should have been won ???
Well, there would probably be enough fuel, as German forces could still operate in real life history until May. A lot of fuel could not reach the Panzers, as there were huge supply traffic jams behind the Panzer advance. But, the battle could have been won, for example if the 6.Panzerarmee was fighting in the same sector as the 5. Panzerarmee, would probably have ensured Bastogne's fall, and the capture and crossing of the Meuse.
No, in "real life history" Germany did not surrender until 8 May 1945, that is not the same as saying that "German forces could still operate." Insufficent fuel had been accumulated to even ensure that the available forces could reach the Meuse, let alone Antwerp. Nor were the advance routes such that more than a few of the Allied fuel depots might have been captured - intact or otherwise. But, even assuming that somehow the fuel could have been stretched to Antwerp - what then? Antwerp was a convenience for the Allies, it relieved many of the supply problems that had existed during the summer and fall, but it was not absolutely neccessary for supply maintenance.

And how exactly is 6. Panzerarmee supposed to fight in the same sector as 5. Panzerarmee? There was barely enough roadspace to deploy the existing forces, let alone more than doubling them. Oh, and of course there is the minor problem that deploying 6. Panzerarmee further south takes the Schwerpunkt even further away from Antwerp.... :down:

Of course if you narrow the sector even further then of course the entire US V Corps is not threatened and would be immediately available to counterattack the shoulders of the penetration and relieve the 106th Division, likely ensuring the defense of St. Vith....and so on and so on.

Pie-in-the-sky fantasy - you guys need to stop reading what if fantasy novels, it's eating away at your brain cells.
Post Reply