Soviet 746th Tank Regiment

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

There are references to several companies using a captured Panther or Tiger but again, this was during a period when there were no replacement Shermans and as soon as Shermans arrived, the German tank was disabled.

Lee,

Do you have something more to go on? I'd like to follow up on. Using captured artillery wasn't all that uncommon for the western allies, but I'm unable to find reference anywhere captured tanks were used. (Motorcycles, trucks, even half-tracks, but not tanks.) In a way, it wasn't worth it. The western allies were never short of equipment and vehicles could be replaced within days or a week at most.

Unlike the Russians, who trained crews and support personnel on German equipment and organised a logistical chain, Americans/Commonwealth/etc. crews climbing into a Panther would be confronted by a completely unfamiliar and overly complicated machine with no spares and little chance of repair or resupply. Tactically it would seem like only in the most dire situation would a crew bother to man a captured German tank, but not out of the question.

There's also the danger of attack from the "American Luftwaffe". That is, the USAAF. Fratricide from ground-attack aircraft against marked Shermans were common enough, I can just imagine how a captured tank would fare!

At any rate, doing some research I see that that the British did use captured Italian tanks in North Africa and the Australians used both German and Italian tanks, but can't find any references in Europe after Normandy of the western allies or specifically Americans using captured German tanks.

Unrelated but fascinating: the "German Tank Problem". How statistical analysis of the serial numbers on captured tanks allowed for really accurate estimates of German tank production in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem

Tony

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Lee,

Do you have something more to go on? I'd like to follow up on. Using captured artillery wasn't all that uncommon for the western allies, but I'm unable to find reference anywhere captured tanks were used. (Motorcycles, trucks, even half-tracks, but not tanks.) In a way, it wasn't worth it. The western allies were never short of equipment and vehicles could be replaced within days or a week at most.

Unlike the Russians, who trained crews and support personnel on German equipment and organised a logistical chain, Americans/Commonwealth/etc. crews climbing into a Panther would be confronted by a completely unfamiliar and overly complicated machine with no spares and little chance of repair or resupply. Tactically it would seem like only in the most dire situation would a crew bother to man a captured German tank, but not out of the question.

There's also the danger of attack from the "American Luftwaffe". That is, the USAAF. Fratricide from ground-attack aircraft against marked Shermans were common enough, I can just imagine how a captured tank would fare!

At any rate, doing some research I see that that the British did use captured Italian tanks in North Africa and the Australians used both German and Italian tanks, but can't find any references in Europe after Normandy of the western allies or specifically Americans using captured German tanks.

Unrelated but fascinating: the "German Tank Problem". How statistical analysis of the serial numbers on captured tanks allowed for really accurate estimates of German tank production in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem

Tony

Somewhere I have a photo of a British Panther crew in the winter of 44/45 in Europe. I seem to remember the vehicle was abandoned when it broke down.

Statistics can however be misleading, I seem to remember different factories were allocated different runs of numbers which weren't always used leaving gaps in the series.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by James Langham

Somewhere I have a photo of a British Panther crew in the winter of 44/45 in Europe. I seem to remember the vehicle was abandoned when it broke down.

Statistics can however be misleading, I seem to remember different factories were allocated different runs of numbers which weren't always used leaving gaps in the series.

James,

That would be a cool photo! I'll keep looking.

Using the above formula on the serial numbers of captured German tanks, (both serviceable and destroyed) the number was calculated to be 256 a month. After the war captured German production figures from the ministry of Albert Speer show the actual number to be 255.

Only 1 off in a run of 255... not too shabby.

Shortly before D-Day, following rumors of large Panther tank production collected by conventional intelligence, analysis of road wheels from two tanks (consisting of 48 wheels each, for 96 wheels total) yielded an estimate of 270 Panthers produced in February 1944, substantially more than had previously been suspected; German records after the war showed production for that month was 276.[9] Specifically, analysis of the wheels yielded an estimate for the number of wheel molds; discussion with British road wheel makers then estimated the number of wheels that could be produced from this many molds.

Off by 6 out of an estimated 276. That's, like a 1% error? Still pretty good!

Reading further in the article, I see it depended on where they got the serial. Some are more reliable than others.

Tony

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by helbent4

James,

That would be a cool photo! I'll keep looking.



Only 1 off in a run of 255... not too shabby.



Off by 6 out of an estimated 276. That's, like a 1% error? Still pretty good!

Reading further in the article, I see it depended on where they got the serial. Some are more reliable than others.

Tony

Have a look at this link it shows a photo of a 6th Coldstream Guards Panther. Not the pic I'm thinking of but some useful bits. The detail on Soviet use is interesting and may provide some trivia for TW2000.

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerk...sd-kfz-171.htm

I'm impressed at the accuracy of the statistics. Shame that pre-D Day we didn't even know that the Panther wasn't just being used in smaller heavy tank battalions like the Tiger.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Lee,

Do you have something more to go on? I'd like to follow up on. Using captured artillery wasn't all that uncommon for the western allies, but I'm unable to find reference anywhere captured tanks were used. (Motorcycles, trucks, even half-tracks, but not tanks.) In a way, it wasn't worth it. The western allies were never short of equipment and vehicles could be replaced within days or a week at most.

Official records are really skimpy on this, the best source would be the Signal Corps photo collection, where there are several photos of Panthers with the Allied star painted on. There is a pitfall to watch for, Panzer Brigade 150, the outfit that tried to pass itself off as American armor during the Battle of the Bulge. This is sort of an ongoing research for me, if only because the SC collection is impressive to look over; I've only found three photos that show allied tankers using Panthers, the captions on the photos, however, indicate that this was being done as a training aid for inbound personnel, "know your enemy" sort of thing. The second source is the oral records of the Eisenhower Collection at the National D-Day Museum in New Orleans. There are two soldiers who talk about manning a captured German tank in Italy. Those are the only "official" records that I have seen.

Unlike the Russians, who trained crews and support personnel on German equipment and organised a logistical chain, Americans/Commonwealth/etc. crews climbing into a Panther would be confronted by a completely unfamiliar and overly complicated machine with no spares and little chance of repair or resupply. Tactically it would seem like only in the most dire situation would a crew bother to man a captured German tank, but not out of the question.

That's the problem in a nut shell.

There's also the danger of attack from the "American Luftwaffe". That is, the USAAF. Fratricide from ground-attack aircraft against marked Shermans were common enough, I can just imagine how a captured tank would fare!

At any rate, doing some research I see that that the British did use captured Italian tanks in North Africa and the Australians used both German and Italian tanks, but can't find any references in Europe after Normandy of the western allies or specifically Americans using captured German tanks.

The only references that I can find are for the late 1940/early 1941 fighting, as things moved into the Crusader battles, the Commonwealth use of captured armor seems to have ended. Records for the Germans do show the use of captured Crusaders (turrets removed and used to move fuel/ammo to front line units) and Stuarts (Rommel's HQ escort unit appears to have used over a dozen).

[Abbott Shaull]

I think during WWII especially 1944 on, things moved too fast for pilots to know where there front was on the western front. Especially since both sides various vehicles that looked similar. One of the things that you think the guy on the ground has hard time telling various vehicles with night vision devices.

Think about someone flying at tree top or higher where they have less time to debate what they have seen on the ground...

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

I think during WWII especially 1944 on, things moved too fast for pilots to know where there front was on the western front. Especially since both sides various vehicles that looked similar. One of the things that you think the guy on the ground has hard time telling various vehicles with night vision devices.

Think about someone flying at tree top or higher where they have less time to debate what they have seen on the ground...

Don't forget that the Air Forces training at that time was concerned with aircraft ID NOT vehicle ID.

This was often taken advantage of, especially in the Western Desert. The British Long Range Desert Group used a specialized item of equipment to fool enemy aircraft, taking advantage of the lack of knowledge about ground vehicles that the average airdale had, they issued a plywood "roundal" that would be strapped in place on the hoods of their vehicles when they entered enemy territory. One side had the Italian facist insignia, the other the nazi twisteed cross insignia. If they saw an aircraft heading toward and could ID as italian, then the nazi emblem was flipped upwards and every body waved at the "friendly" aircraft. How effective was it? Not a lot of hard data behind oral/written accounts of the troopers who believed that it worked most of the time. And taking into account the tendency of people to "see" what they want to see....

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Official records are really skimpy on this, the best source would be the Signal Corps photo collection, where there are several photos of Panthers with the Allied star painted on.

Records for the Germans do show the use of captured Crusaders (turrets removed and used to move fuel/ammo to front line units) and Stuarts (Rommel's HQ escort unit appears to have used over a dozen).

Lee,

I can see the use of captured armour in recognition and training roles. Regarding the conversion of Panthers to allied tanks, several were made to look like M10 tank destroyers with wood applique and allies paint schemes.

As an anecdote, the Germans used captured Shermans as reccee tanks on the East Front (captured from the Russians who were supplied them via lend-lease). I saw a picture of a captured M5 Stuart, clearly painted to show the Austrian cross.

Tony

[Abbott Shaull]

Ah the lend-lease program was sure source of many of Germans capture vehicles on the Eastern Front. If there a country more stubborn about if-it-not-invented-here attitude it would be the Russians/Soviets.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull

Ah the lend-lease program was sure source of many of Germans capture vehicles on the Eastern Front. If there a country more stubborn about if-it-not-invented-here attitude it would be the Russians/Soviets.

Abbott,

I would tend to disagree, the Soviets were desperate for any equipment and pretty much used it all if they could. Including M4 Shermans, M3A1 scout cars, M5 halftracks, Cromwells, Valentines, Bren/Universal carriers, M10 TDs, Aircobras, many, many trucks, etc.

Perhaps if they had better industrial production they would have been more picky, but the Soviets used pretty much anything they could get their hands on! Maybe they didn't like a lot of non-Russian equipment at least partly due to Chauvinism, but they used it all. They were so needy, units of the Karelian front salvaged 12x lend-lease M3 Stuarts from the deck of a sunken cargo ship and pushed them into service.

http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/w...ral1.htm#Start

The Germans then captured some of these vehicles and used them for the same reason. Not specifically because the Russians didn't like lend-lease equipment and therefore abandoned or otherwise gave them to the Germans!

Tony

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Lee,

I can see the use of captured armour in recognition and training roles. Regarding the conversion of Panthers to allied tanks, several were made to look like M10 tank destroyers with wood applique and allies paint schemes.

As an anecdote, the Germans used captured Shermans as reccee tanks on the East Front (captured from the Russians who were supplied them via lend-lease). I saw a picture of a captured M5 Stuart, clearly painted to show the Austrian cross.

Tony

The photos of Panthers made to look like M-10 tank destroyers are photos of the attempt by Panzer Brigade 150 to infiltrate the American lines. As Skorzeny said about the attempt, "it would have confused green American soldiers in the night, from a distance...."

The original question was about Allied use of captured German vehicles. The Germans used anything and everything they captured, there are numerous pics of captured Allied equipment, as well as mentions of German battalions equippede with captured T-34s. Like all captured equipment, it was used until it broke down and then was abandoned.

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

The photos of Panthers made to look like M-10 tank destroyers are photos of the attempt by Panzer Brigade 150 to infiltrate the American lines. As Skorzeny said about the attempt, "it would have confused green American soldiers in the night, from a distance...."

Lee,

I guess that's not that unrealistic for the situation, considering they could well encounter green American troops in less-than perfect visibility. While Skorzeny was of course an impressive soldier in his own right, I wonder how regular American soldiers would have done?

Tony

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Lee,

I guess that's not that unrealistic for the situation, considering they could well encounter green American troops in less-than perfect visibility. While Skorzeny was of course an impressive soldier in his own right, I wonder how regular American soldiers would have done?

Tony

If memory serves correctly, Panzer Brigade 150 was committed into the fighting on the northern shoulder and ran into elements of 1st Infantry and 3rd Armored Divisions and was promptly shot to pieces by bazooka teams and the most formidable weapon on the Western Front, US Artillery. These was part of the attack on Eisenborn Ridge that you hear descriptions of "artillery pieces standing virtually hub to hub." A lot of people don't realize just how much effect regular artillery had played in stopping the German advance.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

A lot of people don't realize just how much effect regular artillery had played in stopping the German advance.

The Soviets/Russians have understood this. It one of the points they seemed to love making that no matter if it is at Division level on up. That there seemed to be way more 'Batteries' of various type of field artillery, multi-missile, and heavy mortars than there were Rifle Companies in MRD or Tank Companies in Tank Division. This before you add the various other Batteries that would populate a Division such as Air Defense and Anti-Tank and so on...

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

If memory serves correctly, Panzer Brigade 150 was committed into the fighting on the northern shoulder and ran into elements of 1st Infantry and 3rd Armored Divisions and was promptly shot to pieces by bazooka teams and the most formidable weapon on the Western Front, US Artillery. These was part of the attack on Eisenborn Ridge that you hear descriptions of "artillery pieces standing virtually hub to hub." A lot of people don't realize just how much effect regular artillery had played in stopping the German advance.

Bear in mind the Brigade was committed to fight as "normal" armour after the failure of Operation Greif. How it would have fared if used as plans is open to conjecture.

My belief is that used correctly they may well have achieved at least a partial success. If you are in a US position and stragglers are coming through you will not take the time to check the next batch of clearly US marked vehicles. Even if you do and they look odd are they just a variation on a vehicle you haven't seen before? Even if you have doubts you will be unlikely to fire until they are MUCH closer than normal.