Tiger phobia and Rommell's Trump card the "88"

[Sodanjumala 589]

Panzer III was the main tank of Deutches Afrika Korps right until the end.

 

 

They might have had a few additional encounters with Tigers in Italy, though I'm not very well-informed about that campaign.

 

Americans did encounter Tiger multiple times in Europe. In Italy there was 1 Heavy tank battalion that was quite all over the place (like in Anzio) until returning to Germany in early 1945.

[Abgeschossene 10,084]

Actually, majority of German tanks during the Battle of the Kasserine Pass were PzIIIJs or Ls. Even PzIVF2s were quite scarce there.

 

Yeah the Eastern Front took priority.

 

Also:

 

According to this, the US encountered the Tiger I 3 times only during Normandy 1944 --> Germany 1945.

Edited January 28, 2015 by Abgeschossene

[PEW_WHOLE 221]

There was 6 Tigers at the Kasserine pass battle and they absolutely stomped the US forces there .

The OP is right on all but the Spanish civil war thing , read the original post and learn something , that's why it's there.
It's all correct from Jane's references.

Edited January 29, 2015 by BADNESS

[xx_CoolHand_xx 511]

...

 

The OP is right on all but the Spanish civil war thing , read the original post and learn something , that's why it's there.
It's all correct from Jane's references.

Especially that about Rommel and Spanish Civil War is completely and utterly wrong. Rommel was never there and the idea of using 88s as AT-weapons is not his. Period.

 

EDIT: Oh, and regarding 'Jane's references': as somebody who used to work with them, I know how they work (nowadays), and why I ceased working with them. Enough said.

Edited January 29, 2015 by xx_CoolHand_xx

[PEW_WHOLE 221]

...

 

 

EDIT: Oh, and regarding 'Jane's references': as somebody who used to work with them, I know how they work (nowadays), and why I ceased working with them. Enough said.

What a load of garbage , I've contracted/worked for them for 30 years champ , it's the only source I will use other than the 3 rooms full of stuff I have at home..

Keep handing out your Zaloga and other utter tripe.

What a xxxx joke you are.

Edited January 29, 2015 by BADNESS

[xx_CoolHand_xx 511]

So, you would like to say something like, 'Rommel participated in the Spanish Civil War and it was his idea to use 88s as AT-tanks - because Jane's said so'?

 

Fine with me.

 

And regarding the rest: what they did about 30 years ago, even 20 years ago, was 'fine for those times'. But, what they're doing since the mid-1990s, is usually not. Especially so in regards of 'little known/obscure' affairs.

 

On the contrary, they are meanwhile famous for twisting and misinforming as they like. See the example of 'Marconi S-600 radar' turning into 'Serbs have S-300 (SA-20)' from 1999, or 'Iranians have mated R-33/AA-9 to their F-4s' (while actually the missile in quesiton was an indigenous air-to-ground design).

 

But then, I'm a xxxx joke because I'm in disagreement with such working practices, so why should my 'opinion' matter...

[Armoredbeercan 2,808]

What a load of garbage , I've contracted/worked for them for 30 years champ , it's the only source I will use other than the 3 rooms full of stuff I have at home..

Keep handing out your Zaloga and other utter tripe.

What a xxxx joke you are.

where are your sources though?

[xx_CoolHand_xx 511]

where are your sources though?

For what?

[Armoredbeercan 2,808]

For what?

his library and all his sources proving zaloga wrong

[xx_CoolHand_xx 511]

'Jane's', obviously... :facepalm:

[Armoredbeercan 2,808]

'Jane's', obviously... :facepalm:

usually pictures or links are good sources, not just writing stuff 

[Freddy31621 133]

Tigers never fared too well facing the British in North Africa - a few falling foul of the humble 6pdr firing APCBC - the first two by towed guns with penetrations starting at 800yds to the turret. Next few to Churchill equipped units and more to medium artillery disabling them forcing the Germans to destroy some as they could not recover them and the British to blow some up to prevent their recovery. 

 

Funny how all allied tank losses in North Africa are attributed to the 88mm instead of the much more common Italian 47mm AT guns and 90mm AA/AT guns, or the German 50mm, 75mm, 76.2mm, guns which formed the majority of the anti tank screens and caused the majority of the losses. 

 

Never mind the minefields, artillery and aircraft. 

 

Kasserine pass tank battles were not just the good old 'Sherman', US units had large numbers of 'Stuart' light tanks which were lost - not really surprising many were lost. 

[StasRaskolbas 8,397]

First term of the war especially. But they got a hold of what tactics to use in the end.

 

Considering they were able to get to North Africa at all when the Germans could not even cross the English Channel...

[StasRaskolbas 8,397]

What a load of garbage , I've contracted/worked for them for 30 years champ , it's the only source I will use other than the 3 rooms full of stuff I have at home..

Keep handing out your Zaloga and other utter tripe.

What a xxxx joke you are.

 

Do those 3 rooms house your massive ego, or do you actually put books in them?

[_Iluminas_ 3,769]

88 op even aliens will tremble

Edited February 16, 2015 by JG27_Iluminas

[thedab 737]

Considering they were able to get to North Africa at all when the Germans could not even cross the English Channel...

 

lol nice one love it

[PEW_WHOLE 221]

It was a few batteries of 88's that nearly finished the Omaha beach plans too.

[wulfhound 1,244]

You mean those guns that were actually mainly leFH 18 105mm's, with some sFH 18 150mm's as well? The only 88mm guns in the Omaha Beach area were part of a flak group (3 batteries of 4 guns each) and did not take part in the bombardment of the beachhead

[Sodanjumala 589]

You mean those guns that were actually mainly leFH 18 105mm's, with some sFH 18 150mm's as well? The only 88mm guns in the Omaha Beach area were part of a flak group (3 batteries of 4 guns each) and did not take part in the bombardment of the beachhead

 

Well, if I remember correctly most of the guns Germans used were captured French guns.

[wulfhound 1,244]

Well, if I remember correctly most of the guns Germans used were captured French guns.

Correct

[Ulatersk 8,959]

 

 

Correct

 

Nope.

 

Artillerie abteilung 456 had 4 x 122mm and 8 x 152mm guns (russian)

 

Artillerie abteilung 457 had 4 x 122mm and 8 x 152mm guns (russian)

 

Artillerie abteilung 460 had 4 x 122mm and 8 x 152mm guns (russian)

 

Artillerie abteilung 555 had 12 x 122 mm howitzers (russian)

 

Artillerie abteilung 1151 had 12 x 122mm howitzers (russian)

 

16 Luftwaffe field division had four batteries of 76.2 mm guns ( 2,3,4 and 6 batteries) and 3 batteries of 122mm howitzers (7, 8 and 9 batteries) in its artillery regiment.Total 16 x 76.2mm guns and 12 x 122mm howitzers All Russian equipped artillery regiment.

 

77. infantry division had Russian 76.2mm infantry guns in 13/infantry regiment 1049 and 13/infantry regiment 1050 ( six and two respectively), purely russian.

 

243 infantry division had was fully Russian gun equipped ( six batteries of 76.2mm guns in I and II abteilung, three batteries of 122mm howitzers in 7-9 batteries, and one batteries of 122mm gun in 10. battery. Whole complement was russian.

 

265 infantry division had 6 batteries of 76.2mm guns ( 1-6/artilerie regiment 265) and three batteries of 122mm howitzers ( 7-9 batteries) and one battery of 122mm guns ( 10th battery) Total : 24 x 76.2mm gun, 12 x 122mm howitzers and four 122mm gun. All Russian gun equipped regiment

 

266. infantry division had three batteries of 76.2 mm guns ( 1,2,7/Artillerie regiment 266) and three batteris of 122mm howitzers (5,6 and 9 batteries) However she had three batteries of French 155mm howitzer in 3, 4 and 8 batteries. .

 

326 infantry division had three batteries of Russian 122mm howitzers (1,2,4 batteries) and three batteries of Russian 122mm guns (9-12 batteries)

 

 

343 infantry division had three batteries of 76.2mm gun ( 7-9 batteries) but she also had five batteries of French 155mm howizers (1-5 batteres) and 6th battery had French 105mm guns. Rusian/French.

 

708. infantry division had three batteries of four 76.2mm guns ( 5-7 batteries) and two batteries of 122 mm howizers ( 8, 9 batteries) but she also had four batteries of French 105mm howitzers in 1-4 batteries. Russian/French..

 

709. infantry division had three batteries of 76.2mm guns (9-11 batteries) but she only had two batteries of Czech 105mm howitzers in 1 and 2 battery. three batteries of French 105mm guns (3-5 batteries) and three batteries of French 155mm howitzers (6-8 batteries)

 

711 infantry division 's artillery regiment was equipped with Russian 76.2 mm guns. But its second battalion had French 155 mm howitzers. Russian/French.

 

21. Panzer division had two batteries of 122mm howitzer in 1 and 2 batteries. French/German.

 

Panzer Lehr division had three batteries of Russian 152 mm howitzers. Russian/German.

 

Only 275th, 352nd and 353rd divisions had full batteries of german made guns, 716th was mainly czech 105 mm, and there wer efour artillery battalions armed with italian 149 mm howitzers.

Edited February 28, 2015 by Ulatersk

[Sodanjumala 589]

I meant at the Normandy, not in the whole damn France!

[Ulatersk 8,959]

 

 

I meant at the Normandy, not in the whole damn France!

 

Purely formations in Normandy. There were 22 infantry/panzer divisions in Normandy + more separate units, at various point of campaign. Also, the 30.5 cm guns positioned on Guernsey were russian. If I remember it correctly.

 

So there is a much bigger chance that guns used to fire on the beaches were russian, german, or in rare cases czech, than french.

 

 

But directly aimed at the beaches, there were 32 french 155 mm K 420/418 guns, 4x german LeFH 18/40, 4x german 75 mm F K 16 n. A., 8x 15 cm german naval guns, 38 positions with wurfgerat rocket-launchers on Utah and Omaha and a battery of 4x russian 122 mm K390 guns.... thats about all I know

Edited February 28, 2015 by Ulatersk

[PEW_WHOLE 221]

Garbage again.

There were batteries of 88's defending Omaha beach , they even shot up the old battleship Arkansas.I have the order of battle for the beach defences and hours of footage of them at Omaha FFS

One of you idiots also suggested that there were only 4 or 5 fights with Tiger 1's in the ETO FFS all the SS units in the ETO had them.

And they racked up huge numbers of Ronson kills.

Actually read some after battle reports from all sides please you will learn much more than the little you know now .

Edited March 1, 2015 by BADNESS

[wulfhound 1,244]

There were two 88mm guns that could shoot down on the beach as part of the AT defences. The rest of the 88's were used in flak batteries and did not take part in bombarding the beachhead.

 

One of you idiots also suggested that there were only 4 or 5 fights with Tiger 1's in the ETO FFS all the SS units in the ETO had them.

Yes, there were about 3-5 encounters with Tigers by US units. It happens that the British encountered the majority of the German tank forces.

 

 

And they racked up huge numbers of Ronson kills.

Please, show evidence that the Sherman was called the "Ronson" anywhere, without using Death Traps (which I guess you got your sig from).