The " Demodernisation of Wehrmacht" (1 Viewer)

[Poppo]

People usually believe that Wehrmacht was one of the most, or the most "mechanized" and "armoured" army during WW2, considering it had some of the best tanks. This is not really true.

If we consider the "operation Barbarossa",the invasion of Soviet Union( 85 per cent of wehrmacht was on the eastern front), most of german divisions were neither armored nor mechanized and almost all were under organic.Most of artillery and full divisions were ippomobile ( carried by horses) , and most of soldiers were obliged to long ,exhausting marches for hundreds Km.

Moreover,the awful weather conditions, the long distances in lands without roads and the hard fightings used very quickly the materials( tanks, trucks, cars..). Already during winter 41 the Wehrmacht was almost left without tanks and trucks, and german soldiers were obliged to dig trenches and just try to resist where they were. Afterwards, some supplying arrived (always in very, very small quantities), but inspite of this, germans arrived to the heart of Russia ( Stalingrad).

 

[trooper]

People usually believe that Wehrmacht was one of the most, or the most "mechanized" and "armoured" army during WW2, considering it had some of the best tanks. This is not really true.

If we consider the "operation Barbarossa",the invasion of Soviet Union( 85 per cent of wehrmacht was on the eastern front), most of german divisions were neither armored nor mechanized and almost all were under organic.Most of artillery and full divisions were ippomobile ( carried by horses) , and most of soldiers were obliged to long ,exhausting marches for hundreds Km.

Moreover,the awful weather conditions, the long distances in lands without roads and the hard fightings used very quickly the materials( tanks, trucks, cars..). Already during winter 41 the Wehrmacht was almost left without tanks and trucks, and german soldiers were obliged to dig trenches and just try to resist where they were. Afterwards, some supplying arrived (always in very, very small quantities), but inspite of this, germans arrived to the heart of Russia ( Stalingrad).

Very true, only one third of the German army was fully mechanised at any one time. For the full figures see "German Infantry Carts, Army field Wagons and army sleds" by Kopenhagen published by Schiffer Press. The German army was the most reliant on horse power of all the combatant nations of WW2. Something the manufacturers with their obsession for Tigers and Panthers seem to overlook. Trooper

 

[waynepoo]

I think those with a interest in the war in Europe during WW2 will know that the Wehrmacht was mostly horsedrawn as they will also be aware that the most mechanized army in history at that time was the U.S Army.
Wayne.

 

[Martin Tabony]

I think those with a interest in the war in Europe during WW2 will know that the Wehrmacht was mostly horsedrawn as they will also be aware that the most mechanized army in history at that time was the U.S Army.
Wayne.

I thought even the U.S army had mounted cavalry at the begining of WW2?

Martin

 

[Mitch]

Russians used the most horses in WWII followed by the germans using about 7 million possibly more. The main german armoured units were ones who were fully mechanised but, the ethos was that the horse was a cheap way to move men and materials about. These were helpful in Russia in bad weather conditions and, with poor road networks but, a horse could only last a few weeks in such conditions. There is also the need for correct feeding of the horses good stabling and welfare which, was more and more problematic as the war progressed in russia and, as a result, trucks and air movement were used for priority supplies. The germans adopted many half tracked trucks as a result of the experiences in russia. Things like the maultier and schlepper to deal with the wet seasons mud. Mind, both sides had massive problems in these wet seasons dealing with the mud

Not sure I would agree that in the winter of 41 the germans lost so much equipment that they had or were forced to ''dig in''. They dug in as a result of the weather probably the worst on record and, the fact that at the main front they were blunted by russian counter attacks from large unexpected forces arriving from the far east of russia. There was little else to do that winter than either dig in until and hold until the better weather or, retreat all the way back to the starting point of the polish border???

The germans were on the offensive again as soon as the weather improved. One campaign where very little supply came by horse and, showed the germans had learned a lot from Stalingrad and the leasons of warfare in russia was Kharkov. the Luftwaffe supplied very well their troops in the field during their successes against the russians in that sector.

Not sure what the conclusion is to be drawn from the thread as Wayne mentioned everyone who knows about WWII realises that the word mechanised meant only a small part of the available forces to some of the main combatants!!
Mitch

 

[larso]

"I thought even the U.S army had mounted cavalry at the begining of WW2?
Martin"

Yep, I think they still had two cavalry divisions. There was another style of division where trucks took horses to battles and then they served in the usual roles. One memoir I read, by Bennett, was instructive. He had seen the newsreels of the German success in 1939-40, yet he was put in command of horse drawn artillery and knew it would be suicide against a fully mechanised army. Fortunately for him, his unit is one of the first to receive the Priests.

 

[PanzerAce1944]

Good thread for conversation. How true the Germans in WWII had some of the most high tech equipment of the period, yet many slogged it out on foot and relied
on horses to sustain operations.

 

[Currahee Chris]

While I think the Germans may have not been able to field 100% fully mechanized units, without a doubt they pioneered the mechanized warfare role. Production and implementation was a problem but they were light years ahead of their contemporaries in thought and design. It's probably better, especially for the Russians, that they weren't able to go fully mechanized.

 

[binder001]

The US Army DID have horse cavalry in combat in WW2 - the 26th Cavalry Reg't, the Phillipine Scouts, were part of the US Army's Phillipine Division and conducted several mounted actions during the 1942 combat on Luzon.

The US Army was quite aware of the tremendous logistical burden of horses - they constantly need to be fed, watered, and have proper veterinary care. Early on it was decided that it would be easier on shipping space to send only fuel for motor vehicles and not add fodder to the supply chain. The US had the greatest auto industry in the world at that time and they rose to the challenge. Few German families owned a private car before WW2 while many Americans did. The "secret" to German strategic mobility wasn't the truck, it was the train. Germany was a continental power and could use a very integrated network of rail transport to move their horse-drawn units over distances. They could also "shop" all over Europe for horses and fodder. The British had the first fully mechanized army to fight in Europe, although the press about "blitzkrieg" made it sound like the Germans were also. I remember reading that German motorization peaked about 1943 or early 44. After that the air campaign against factories and the shortage of fuel put the horse back to the forefront. The Germans also suffered from an amazing lack of standardization. Where the Allies used their production to create a few models within a few classes, the Germans were always short of transport so they used every model of truck that they could build or steal. One book mentioed that the Wehrmacht started Opn Barbarossa with almost 1500 different models of trucks (German, French, Czech, Austrian, British, Hungarian, etc, etc). Think of trying to keep that mess running! Tanks might win a few battles, but trucks win wars.

 

[fmethorst]

Die Zusammenarbeit "Combined Arms Operations" (literally "Work together").

This was the paradigm shifting thinking that made the Wehrmacht so effective, particularly early on when its opponents hadn't yet adjusted their tactics or brought their logistical superiority to bear.

German tactics such as "Blitzkrieg" required mechanized highly mobile forces in order to be successful. On the defensive as well the Germans placed great importance on maintaining mobile reserves. This requirement was met by the tank and motorized infantry divisions.

So I think we can't make any blanket statements about the Wehrmacht. It consisted of a core of mechanized highly mobile forces augmented by a large number of low mobility infantry.

In regards to the insane variety of vehicles employed by the forces that were mobile one only has to browse this website for awhile. This leads to a couple conclusions. The Wehrmacht wasn't yet fully ready at the outbreak of hostilities. The Wehrmacht was not designed for a protracted war.

http://www.kfzderwehrmacht.de/Homepage_english/Motor_Vehicles/motor_vehicles.html

 

[Poppo]

Die Zusammenarbeit "Combined Arms Operations" (literally "Work together").

This was the paradigm shifting thinking that made the Wehrmacht so effective, particularly early on when its opponents hadn't yet adjusted their tactics or brought their logistical superiority to bear.

German tactics such as "Blitzkrieg" required mechanized highly mobile forces in order to be successful. On the defensive as well the Germans placed great importance on maintaining mobile reserves. This requirement was met by the tank and motorized infantry divisions.

So I think we can't make any blanket statements about the Wehrmacht. It consisted of a core of mechanized highly mobile forces augmented by a large number of low mobility infantry.

In regards to the insane variety of vehicles employed by the forces that were mobile one only has to browse this website for awhile. This leads to a couple conclusions. The Wehrmacht wasn't yet fully ready at the outbreak of hostilities. The Wehrmacht was not designed for a protracted war.

http://www.kfzderwehrmacht.de/Homepage_english/Motor_Vehicles/motor_vehicles.html

I agree with you post, but you forget maybe the main element of "blitzkrieg": the "luftwaffe". The "panzers attack" had a perfect coordination with the planes . Actually, the main reason why in Soviet Union Wehrmacht won is that the luftwaffe arrived at the right moment to help when panzers were in big troubles with the more powerful russian tanks...

 

[Mitch]

Would that actually then not support the modernisation of the german armed forces and not the ''demodernisation'' you raised?

The germans quickly realised what the russian tanks could do but, the tank tactics used by the germans overwhelmed the small numbers of russian tanks used. where the tanks were beaten by the soviet armour the units quickly realised that the 88mm flak was again, (as in France against the Matilda's) the best weapon. Look at some of the units spearheading the attacks after the initial encounters with these tanks they were all supported by 88MM guns pulled by a variety of driven vehicles. The Luftwaffe played its part in the overall attack but, german tactics were superior to the russians for a long time even with early inferior AFV's.
Mitch

I agree with you post, but you forget maybe the main element of "blitzkrieg": the "luftwaffe". The "panzers attack" had a perfect coordination with the planes . Actually, the main reason why in Soviet Union Wehrmacht won is that the luftwaffe arrived at the right moment to help when panzers were in big troubles with the more powerful russian tanks...