German tanks vs Allied tanks

[magnus]

They actually did the same sort of thing in WWI.

They slaughtered most of their livestock in 1914 and early 1915 for food, without thinking of tomorrow.

We tend to think that the Germans in both wars were this gigantic war winning structure that had it's best interests in mind.

When actually in both wars it was very dysfunctional.

You guys are quite correct. What the Germans needed at Kusrk, and everywhere else, was veteran infantry and lots of it.

It didn't help that 30-40 divisions were sitting in Norway and other places.

[FarAway Sooner]

I've always felt personally that the Germans biggest weakness going forward through the war was their decline in quality infantry. Without this solid foundation the panzers just drove around killing the enemy but could never hold territory they won. Especially so in Russia. Von Mellithin's book, "Panzer Battles" illustrates this very well. Just look at the crap units to defend Normandy-- only one veteran division out of what 12, in the 7th Army? Just my feelings.

I suspect that this is painting with too broad a brush, but I always had the sense that German tactical capabilities were quite strong while their strategic capabilities weren't.  Some of that was Hitler's meddling, some of that was just the nature of politics at that level, some of that was the difference between fighting the Americans/Brits in the West and the Russians in the East.

It's not a flawless book, but former SS Lt. Col Paul Karl Schmidt (aka Paul Carell) talks in his book, Invasion: They're Coming about how badly Rommel wanted veteran units close to the beaches, while the rest of the German High Command wanted the reserves massed further back.  Rommel had learned from North Africa just what it meant to fight in the face of Allied air superiority, and he knew that expecting reserves to cover hundreds of kilometers quickly was unrealistic.  The rest of the German High Command didn't agree with that assessment. 

And whatever air superiority the Germans faced in North Africa paled besides what they faced in France, 1944.

But I think that the bigger reason the Germans lost the war was that they were fighting the Americans, and the Americans had a secure base of operations from which to operate.  We've all seen the various stats about US wartime production, but every time I look at them again, I'm astonished all over.

[sandman2575]

But I think that the bigger reason the Germans lost the war was that they were fighting the Americans, and the Americans had a secure base of operations from which to operate.  We've all seen the various stats about US wartime production, but every time I look at them again, I'm astonished all over.

Well, they were fighting the Americans while at the same time taking on the British and the Russians. Only in the fever dreams of the most blindly fanatical Nazi was that a formula for success..   ;)

[mikeck]

Along the lines of the above post, I think Germany's biggest "problem" was that it wasn't prepared for a long war. The economy wasn't shifted to a "wartime" economy until 1943. After that point, the Germans had more than enough production capabilities to produce what they needed, but factories were producing multiple variations of tanks of multiple chassis. Each one an upgrade. A long term plan would produce single types. Germany failed to design and produce trucks in quantity to supply and carry fuel. They failed to timely design new fighters and strike aircraft...determined that the war would end before the Me-109 and Stuka were obsolete. They failed to produce enough spare parts.

Basically, German failed to build up a proper logistics network. They believed that their tactics would force enemies to quickly capitulate. They were satisfied with the weapon systems they had in 1939 and saw no need to improve. By the time 1943 hit and obselecense became an issue, any new designs couldn't come out until 1945 or so. So in 1939, they had the best fighter (Me-109), the best attack craft (Stuka) a good rifle and tanks that- they wrongly believed- were superior to what anyone else had (Pz-38 and Pz-3). Great if the war lasts 2-3 years. So by 1944 they had a Stuka that was a slow target, the Me-109 a short ranged and under gunned antique, a bolt action rifle which lacked firepower and Tanks which were designed and fielded waaaay too quickly and were unreliable.

Germany planned for a short and violent war. They failed to consider that the war would last for years. I think their economy, on a war footing, Could produce adequate amounts of everything had it been ordered to do so. By 1943, outside of armor, their weapon systems were outdated, factories couldn't produce enough tanks because they were producing 5 variants of every chassis as well as overly complex tanks and they lacked logistics vehicles to properly supply those units even if they did have the equipment.

4 years into a war is simply too late to shift to a wartime economy and adopt a mindset that the war will last. It is too late to build supply trucks and fuel trucks. It is too late to increase refining capability and stockpile fuel.

Probably most importantly, the German concept of warfare was similar to US/UK doctrine now: orders tell unit commanders what is to be done and why. The "how" is left to the commander. A sergeant might make a decision that changes the attack of a whole battalion. That type of system is in opposition to, and much more complex than, a centralized Soviet model where little discretion is allowed to the junior office or NCO. The German system then, as now, required highly trained NCO's and junior officers who were capable of making these decisions. Replacing a body is easy but replacing the years worth of training that takes is not. They simply lost a lot of combat effectiveness even though the Army numbers remained the same. Russians and Americans could replace a 3 year veteran Sgt with a 6 month Sgt and the squad doesn't miss a beat. They simply do what the Platoon commander orders.

[Michael Dorosh]

They actually did the same sort of thing in WWI.

They slaughtered most of their livestock in 1914 and early 1915 for food, without thinking of tomorrow.

We tend to think that the Germans in both wars were this gigantic war winning structure that had it's best interests in mind.

When actually in both wars it was very dysfunctional.

They invaded Poland, then Russia, with major deficiencies in such things as spare parts, ammunition and fuel (not to mention winter clothing in the latter case) and in 1943 more women were employed as hairdressers, so it is told, than as war workers. I couldn't agree with you more.

[Michael Dorosh]

Along the lines of the above post, I think Germany's biggest "problem" was that it wasn't prepared for a long war.

Perhaps as telling as the examples you cite is the fact they apparently avoided use of the very term Krieg for as long as they could. They were in a state of "national emergency" until Goebbels had to give in and appeal for Total War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportpalast_speech

[mikeck]

They actually did the same sort of thing in WWI.

They slaughtered most of their livestock in 1914 and early 1915 for food, without thinking of tomorrow.

We tend to think that the Germans in both wars were this gigantic war winning structure that had it's best interests in mind.

When actually in both wars it was very dysfunctional.

They invaded Poland, then Russia, with major deficiencies in such things as spare parts, ammunition and fuel (not to mention winter clothing in the latter case)

Absolutely right. These deficiencies weren't problems in short conflicts. Don't need spare parts if you don't need to replace tanks!

[WallysWorld]

I've always found the Wikipedia entry for the Luftwaffe to be interesting and especially the section on what went wrong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe#Omissions_and_failures

[MengJiao]

Along the lines of the above post, I think Germany's biggest "problem" was that it wasn't prepared for a long war. The economy wasn't shifted to a "wartime" economy until 1943.

  After Tooze's the Wages of Destruction (2006), it seems the Germans shifted to a wartime economy far too early and with a base that could not even sustain a non-war economy.
If they had built up rationally as late as 1936 or 7 they would have been better off.  Going to full war footing early gave them a brief early advantage that was fading fast even by 1941.
Germany wasn't prepared for any kind of war at all, long or short.  Once Britain didn't give up in 1940, Germany was doomed.

[Pete Dero]

Just found this in my Amazon recommendations : SS Panzer: Sherman Killers (Eyewitness Tank Combat)

http://www.amazon.com/SS-Panzer-Sherman-Killers-Eyewitness-ebook/dp/B00T7R0XIG?ie=UTF8&redirect=true&ref_=pe_820440_191835090_em_1p_3_ti

Might get it for only $ 3.