Induction and Basic Training

Jagdtiger · Post by **Jagdtiger** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 12:18 am

Chris,

do you know where I can find any field manuals or other stuff about the tactical training of the Wehrmacht?

Thanks in advance!

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 3:47 pm

Jagdtiger wrote:Chris,

do you know where I can find any field manuals or other stuff about the tactical training of the Wehrmacht?

Thanks in advance!

Hello!

If your location in your profile is correct the only recommendation from me is ebay. I don´t think that you will find a antique book shop, a fleamarket with german items or a clear out company near you? :-)
On ebay you can sometimes find Reibert books or original Ausbildungsvorschriften.

\Christoph

Jagdtiger · Post by **Jagdtiger** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:48 pm

Hi Chris,

thanks for the info. I´ll take a look!

Grunt · Post by **Grunt** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:04 am

There is a difference between Truppenuebungsplaetze (large training areas scattered all over Germany) and Standortuebungsplaetze (local training areas attached to every barracks for training purposes).

Most daily training took place at the Standortuebungsplatz, while large exercises and final training before frontline action took place at the Truppenuebungsplatz.

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:12 am

Servus,
Thank you all for your rsponses. The more I learn about this subject, the more intrigued I am and the more I realize I don't know.

When a young man was inducted and became a recruit, I assume he did his training , in general, in his home Wehrkreiss. What type of unit would he be assigned to? I mean was it a ______AuE unit or a Rekruten Kp, what would be the general nomenclature of the unit?

Thanks again for all help

Helmut

Grunt · Post by **Grunt** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 12:19 am

Helmut,

the German reserve systems wanted every Regiment to have a ErsatzBtl (reinforcments and training btl) left at home in the Wehrkreis while the regiment faced frontline action. New recruits were called into those ErsatzBtl and recieved there basic training there before being transfered to "their" regiment.

Depending on the theater to go to, the recruits got further "special training". For example the Wehrmacht had standardized "Ostfront-training" to adapt their soldiers to the circumstances faced in Russia. This training was extraordinary hard, and 1-2% died (!) during this training because it was done with live ammunition etc...

As you can guess, training was much more "relaxed" when seeing occupation service in quiet areas e.g. in the west...

Helmut · Post by **Helmut** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:54 am

Hi Grunt

Thanks for the info. Is the Ersatzbtl and the Feldersatzbtl the same thing. I know every Division had a FEB but that it was in the Division Rear area in the field. I guess the Ersatz Btl was a home station that remained in garrison. True or not?

Thanks again

Helmut

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:13 am

....Depending on the theater to go to, the recruits got further "special training". For example the Wehrmacht had standardized "Ostfront-training" to adapt their soldiers to the circumstances faced in Russia. This training was extraordinary hard, and 1-2% died (!) during this training because it was done with live ammunition etc...

Grunt, where exactly did you get these informations from????

And how did this mysterious live ammo training look like in your oppinion? Did they fire on each other? I guess they had so much reserves that they didn´t care? tssss

\Christoph

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 7:27 am

Helmut wrote:Hi Grunt

Thanks for the info. Is the Ersatzbtl and the Feldersatzbtl the same thing. I know every Division had a FEB but that it was in the Division Rear area in the field. I guess the Ersatz Btl was a home station that remained in garrison. True or not?

Thanks again

Helmut

Hello Helmut!

NOT every regiment had a Ersatzbattalion. This was just at the beginning of the war and up to divisions of the 4th wave.
From late 1941 on Ersatzbtle. were responsible to train the reserves for entire divisions or even more formations.
The Feldersatzbtl. was also not present at all divisions. In miost divisions they were disbanded during the war.
Just the infantry divisions of the 1st wave some few additional and Panzerdivisionen (few exception during the war) had a Feldersatzbtl.

\Christoph

Grunt · Post by **Grunt** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:24 pm

Christoph Awender wrote:Grunt, where exactly did you get these informations from????

From the books "Die Wehrmacht - der zweite Weltkrieg" (author is English, I will post his name tomorrow) and "Der zweite Weltkrieg - Schriftenreihe PolBil & InFü Bw", published by the research institute of the Bundeswehr. There are more sources for this, but I can not recall all of them.

And how did this mysterious live ammo training look like in your oppinion? Did they fire on each other?

No. Did you never attend a training with live ammunition against "virtual" enemy? Then let me explain: you advance against dummy positions, using live ammo. Now it depends on the security rules how many accidents occur. The Wehrmacht abandoned security to get more reality...

I guess they had so much reserves that they didn´t care?

Not at all, but they believed that this extreme training lowered the combat casualities by several percent, making 1-2% losses (in training) a good deal...

Grunt · Post by **Grunt** » Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:37 pm

Here it is:

"Der zweite Weltkrieg - Die Wehrmacht 1939-1945"
Author is Tom Ripley.
Found it at Amazon.de...

BTW, during the Cold War the training losses of the Red Army during exercises with live ammo also were reported at about 1%.

Imagine a division of 15.000 men conducting such a training - that would mean 150 dead!!!

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » Thu Aug 19, 2004 1:18 am

Hmmm... Much sources for this? I will definately check the two you gave me because I don´t believe a word. Of course I know how training with live ammo looked like in the Wehrmacht but I wanted to hear your version.
Of course there were accidents with grenades, mortar fire etc... They are frequently reported in the various diaries. ALL of the accidents I have documentation of happened when grenades exploded because of wrong handling, misguided fire etc. Not a single one of hundreds of training accidents was a accident in a training like you describe it.

From all the sources I have (veterans, books from veterans, H.Dv. etc..) such a Gefechtstraining like you describe it was not done with live ammo. Simply because it would be too dangerous!
Why should they care for extremely high security measures during range firing (documented in various H.Dv.) where they have security officers etc.. and then dropping these security measures during such a Gefechtsübung?
Lots of veterans I interviewed said they didn´t even see a live round until they got to their unit. Ammo was NOT wasted for useless firing around on a training ground. It was desperately needed at the front.

\Christoph

Gebirgsjaeger · Post by **Gebirgsjaeger** » Thu Aug 19, 2004 5:26 am

Christoph Awender wrote:Hmmm... Much sources for this? I will definately check the two you gave me because I don´t believe a word. Of course I know how training with live ammo looked like in the Wehrmacht but I wanted to hear your version.\Christoph

Grunt,

here we go again. You can present him with sources but if it doesn´t fit in his view of the world it´s simply not true...

Christoph Awender · Post by **Christoph Awender** » Thu Aug 19, 2004 6:19 am

Gebirgsjaeger wrote:
Christoph Awender wrote:Hmmm... Much sources for this? I will definately check the two you gave me because I don´t believe a word. Of course I know how training with live ammo looked like in the Wehrmacht but I wanted to hear your version.\Christoph
Grunt,

here we go again. You can present him with sources but if it doesn´t fit in his view of the world it´s simply not true...

Gebirgsjäger I said I will check these sources and said I don´t believe them. I didn´t say Grunt is wrong so don´t try to start a fire. What I know is based on many other different sources which don´t give the information that many soldiers were killed during "Gefechtsübungen" with live ammo. Not all sources which are available are correct so it is my good right to doubt them. When I doubt sources does not mean that I "attack" the person who quoted them or believe in them it just means that I have different informations. I hope Grunt understands that!(?)
When I participate in a discussion I know what I am speaking of because it is backed up by facts. If someone provides different facts I want to check their reliability. When the sources Grunt gives base their assumption (1-2% dead) on official documents I will change my oppinion. If they cannot proof that this figure is for accidents during this so called live ammo training they are simply wrong because than this number is for the "normal" live ammo acidents which occur during normal duty (still too high in my op.)

1939/40 the german Heer had 3 754 104 men. This would mean that about 75 000 soldiers would have died in this mysterious live ammo training. In one year this would mean about 205 killed soldiers a day. This means that every day the Heer lost 1 1/2 company in the training progress. Does this sound correct?

\Christoph

PS: Gebirgsjäger please just leave me alone. Just ignore me when I am such an jerk you think.

Grunt · Post by **Grunt** » Thu Aug 19, 2004 6:53 am

Of course Christoph has the right to doubt this information. And I admit that this:

This means that every day the Heer lost 1 1/2 company in the training progress. Does this sound correct?

really sounds strange.

However, by checking this source he will see I did not "create" this number on my own, and if this information is incorrect and has to be changed, I am willing to get some education