General World War 2 Discussion Thread

Just my opinion from time doing op. history and primary document readings (these are from the soldiers to each other). With the soviets, literally the numbers I just have to ignore and focus on the orders. All the general staff studies I have contain soviet estimates of german losses and forces that are inane.

With the Germans, I have rules of thumb- like divide their tank 'kill' claim by two-three and ignore how many tank were recovered or total loss (war is random). Their intel. tends to be closer to the mark-although not close enough- this is just a hunch from observation and confirmation.

US is somewhere between the Germans and Soviets, but closer to the Germans.

You are totally correct with the different measurements thing. Ultimately with war I like getting the numbers but consider having a basic knowledge of what they went to battle with, and their reinforcements ultimately more useful. Also, logistics. The rest- the losses, and whatever are sadly only guesswork.



Overall, I think people sometimes get too wrapped up in numbers

True people get to wrapped up in numbers. Altough they are an indication it is hard to avoid nitpicking.

I almost never read the numbers of enemy losses estimated by the other side, regardless of country. Too many divisions have been "annihilated" without being told so or the annihilation having noticeable effect on their advance.
Or they simply suffered well over 100% casualties.
It is alot more fun to simply try to find corresponding reports from both sides of the same engagement and try to figure out the performance.
Sometimes you find engagements described as huge clashes from one side and as skirmish form the other.

Own losses are often much better recorded because the need for reinforcement and other factors. Those are often accurate no matter the country. (Of course barring wartime public publications.)

And guys you should really try to see differently on the old Soviet archives. Even Mr Glantz ranks their recordkeeping in par or over the German ones. I remember seeing some lecture with him on youtube where he did comment on it. But as always what is recorded and what is show in as important as what isn't.

yep, the only loss and strength figures that really matter are those reported by the forces themselves- about their own losses.

Speaking of statistics, there's a new study on Kursk coming into print over the early summer (over 1,100 pages long..). It will eventually see wide release in english. It is extreme in the 'numbers game' with extensive research from both Soviet and german archives.

I was lucky enough to be in discussion with a president of the think-tank, who headed a research team with econometric/statistical training who did the work. Their product is selling combat modeling to military analysts, and after over a decade of interest in the subject they finally got a contract to do the work seriously. Of interest- is one of the conclusion that 48.PzK outperformed the SS PzK by 30-40% during the battle. This is the opposite of most non-data driven histories. There are also a lot of conclusions about the nature of soviet war fighting doctrine.

True people get to wrapped up in numbers. Altough they are an indication it is hard to avoid nitpicking.

At the end of the day all the stats were hyper-inflated/deflated including their own casualty list. Even toward the end of the war the Americans themselves miscalculated their causalities so as to keep the soviets from knowing their total strengths because by 1945 the cold war had already begun with Stalin disaloing elections in conquered German Territory.

BTW coh2player, the conclusion that the 48.PzK outperformed the SSPzK is a correct assumption/opinion (IMHO) because Waffen-SS/SS units often fought on impulse and took objectives without any regard to future movements and often were willing to die for almost no strategic gain. Its sad that fanaticism on the battlefield often blinded those in command and those fighting.

That is what I have been seeing in regarding the SS PzK deployment in Feb-March 1943 and the Battle of the Bulge. However, at Kursk the operational reserve all received pretty similar pre-citadel training (3-month breakthrough).

The book, which is not yet named, will have combat models for many soviet and german formations involved, which should prove to be at least food for thought (if one is not convinced about this or that)

BTW coh2player, the conclusion that the 48.PzK outperformed the SSPzK is a correct assumption/opinion (IMHO) because Waffen-SS/SS units often fought on impulse and took objectives without any regard to future movements and often were willing to die for almost no strategic gain. Its sad that fanaticism on the battlefield often blinded those in command and those fighting.

That is what I have been seeing in regarding the SS PzK deployment in Feb-March 1943 and the Battle of the Bulge. However, at Kursk the operational reserve all received pretty similar pre-citadel training (3-month breakthrough).

The book, which is not yet named, will have combat models for many soviet and german formations involved, which should prove to be at least food for thought (if one is not convinced about this or that)

That study sounds really interesting! Even if a title haven't been given do you have any details that could help me find it when it comes out?

I'll post something here when I get a word from the institute. He thinks a June 2015 release is likely (internet retailers like Amazon.com, etc.) but these things can get delayed due to various reasons. Basically, search "Kursk" on amazon or other retailers this summer and it will eventually pop up.

Im excited to read this then, thanks for the info coh2player. It will go great with my hundreds of German Military books that line my office

As I promised:

Kursk, The Battle of Prokhorovka by Chris Lawrence

1,600 pages long. It was delayed again, and is coming out this fall. Pricing will be over $100 USD from what I've last heard. The book is more in-depth, has greater coverage of infantry combat (rather than the tank-centric prior works) and should supercede all prior accounts in english. A lot of Russian/German archival work went into this and it was a team effort.





The subtitle is actually wrong; the largest tank battle in History was at Brody-Dubno 1941 with its 3,800 tanks.

Having read much of it, I highly recommend this new release. The text alone is 430 pages and is the most detailed soviet armored unit history in english. Helion will also be releasing 1st Guards Tank Army set and volume 2 of 2GTA in the future:

From the book Munro, Manstein (biography):

Getting to it late but thanks for that, I appreciate it.

Having read much of it, I highly recommend this new release. The text alone is 430 pages and is the most detailed soviet armored unit history in english. Helion will also be releasing 1st Guards Tank Army set and volume 2 of 2GTA in the future:

Saw this in a store, now cursing myself that I didn't get it given the recommendation, it looked pretty good even then.

As I promised:


The subtitle is actually wrong; the largest tank battle in History was at Brody-Dubno 1941 with its 3,800 tanks.

Can't wait to get my mits on this book either, but a quick check of the highly reliable source that is wikipedia (ha) says that Kursk was greater and lists the tanks the Soviets had by themselves as 5000. What gives?

Can't wait to get my mits on this book either, but a quick check of the highly reliable source that is wikipedia (ha) says that Kursk was greater and lists the tanks the Soviets had by themselves as 5000. What gives?

The difference is where you put the "dividers" so the speak with the different battles, operations, campagins and so forth. Kursk was a huge operation spanning several battles. Not your idea of field A with X number of tanks charging over a field vs Y number of tanks.
The big tank v. tank battle of Kursk was the battle of Prokhorovka. Whilst Brody-Dubno was a singular battle. (Or Battle of Brody as it is called. )

^

Yeah, you guys are both correct (Kursk is obviously bigger than Brody). I was thinking about Prokhorovka.

The Stalin's Favorite book is excellent, and a must read. It shows the nuts and bolts of how a tank army operates.

Something basic that is often confused is illustrated in the battle of Orel (1943). The 2TA had around 500 tanks throughout the battle. But they had 1,000 tanks disabled. (most surely reported by the Germans as tank kills). They recovered and put back into action half of their disabled tanks.

The first print run of the new kursk book is open for reservations.

Estimated retail: $195 USD, 1700 pages long.

http://www.aberdeenbookstore.com/BookingRetrieve.aspx?ID=253516

Kursk: The Battle of Prokhorovka is the first definitive account of the largest tank battle in history. This book is unique in that it draws upon in-depth research in both the German and Russian archival records. This was research that was begun in the 1990s, after the Soviet Union had fallen, when The Dupuy Institute was able to gain access to the Russian military archives. The book is built from the actual unit records from both sides, as opposed to the sometimes distorted narratives and legends that have grown up over the battle. It then compares and contrasts those records with the stories and interviews collected from veterans. It is an attempt to cover the entire range of fighting, from the strategic decisions, the operational art, to the tactics and the personal stories. It is a detailed description of the battle, a quantitative analysis of the battle and personal description of the battle as seen through the eyes of the participants. Over hundred German and Russian participants on both sides were interviewed exclusively for this book. It is a unique body of research that will not be replicated.

This is a large book. This is because the amount of unique material collected on the battle was unparalleled, first as part of a U.S. Army funded research project and then as an extended book project. The book includes 29 fold-out maps, 94 maps in the text, 41 charts, graphs and diagrams, 166 tables, 194 statistical sheets covering each engagement, 100 separate sidebars of discussion, 66 German and Soviet commander biographies, and four photo sections with 289 photos. They are drawn from both German and Soviet sources.

Haha, I remember Chris Lawrence on TDI commenting on that years ago. Props to him for getting it done, Herculean task if there ever was one.

The first run is going to be this ridiculously large book. Hopefully future runs will split them up in more manageable chunks (eg. a 3 tome series sounds good).

The first print run of the new kursk book is open for reservations.

Estimated retail: $195 USD, 1700 pages long.

http://www.aberdeenbookstore.com/BookingRetrieve.aspx?ID=253516

And my payday is tomorrow.. fuck. I guess have have to buy a new couch later

^^
Hopefully the later runs will be priced lower and in multiple volumes. This "Cadillac" run is the collector's edition.

The current best books on Kursk are "Demolishing the Myth" and "Blood Steel Myth".

And my payday is tomorrow.. fuck. I guess have have to buy a new couch later

Come now... what do YOU think will get you more tail, a new couch or a nerdy tome on the details of the Battle of Kursk?

(Actually, the truth is that if you have gotten to the point the girl is in sight of the couch, that game is already won, and just yours to lose.)