18-10-2002 11:33									#241
	Got spare money?

Katyushka launchers were very often mounted on US Studebaker trucks.

Further, those US trucks were able to slog through the mud of Western Russia, which is more than one can say for most Soviet vehicles (outside of the T-34 anyway).

	18-10-2002 11:39									#242
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Well, AFVs were never carried by trucks. Arty pulled? Yes. Most especially supplies carried. The ability of trucks to enable an offensive is quite clear, unless you want to trust to old Bessie and the hope that your enemy doesn't move faster than you.

Again I am amazed at the ignorance of posters on this thread. Far less than 20% of the German army was motorised in 1941. The figure never got close to 20% for the entire war. Most of the German army relied on horse drawn transport. Horse drawn transport actually increased during the war in Russia due to the condition of the roads. The Russian army had even less motorisation and was still fielding cavalry armies (really mounted infantry) right through war. The Germans started doing this too, they were still raising new cavalry units in 1944.

So trucks were pretty irrelevant to both sides.

	18-10-2002 11:47									#243
	Inflate your Upload Space

And I am surprised by the trolling in this thread.

BTW Horse. Do you think they used wagons to supply the Panzers on an advance, or trucks?

The fact that neither the Sovs nor the Germans could fully motorise does not diminish the usefullness of the truck. Except maybe to a propagandist...

	18-10-2002 11:49									#244
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Well, AFVs were never carried by trucks.

In World War II? Oh really?

	18-10-2002 11:50									#245
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse The Germans started doing this too, they were still raising new cavalry units in 1944.

The Germans never stopped doing it, so I guess your comment about beginning is kind of moot.

They were also arming 14 year olds. Does that make 14 year olds a better idea for combat on a 20th century battlefield?

	18-10-2002 11:54									#246
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither The Germans never stopped doing it, so I guess your comment about beginning is kind of moot. They were also arming 14 year olds. Does that make 14 year olds a better idea for combat on a 20th century battlefield?

I wish you'd stop talking crap. The cavalry units were raised to meet the fighting conditions. The horse and the train were the major transport means on the Eastern Front.

Can a horse drawn cart keep up with a panzer unit in the field? Yes it can. How fast do you think they move?

What a dumb ass

	18-10-2002 11:54									#247
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse In World War II? Oh really?

Yeah. how many trucks did the Germans have that could carry a 10 ton Mk IV around?

And how many of them advanced into combat with the tank on the deck?

	18-10-2002 11:58									#248
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse I wish you'd stop talking crap. The cavalry units were raised to meet the fighting conditions. The horse and the train were the major transport means on the Eastern Front. Can a horse drawn cart keep up with a panzer unit in the field? Yes it can. How fast do you think they move? What a dumb ass

My wish also Horsie.

The Germans used Cav because they didn't have enough AFVs and never could have.

How many Cav units did the much better equipped Commonwealth and Americans have? Hmmm? As you said, stop talking crap.

Can horses easily fill the needs of an armoured formation? Of course they can't. Idiot.

	18-10-2002 12:03									#249
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Yeah. how many trucks did the Germans have that could carry a 10 ton Mk IV around? And how many of them advanced into combat with the tank on the deck?

We aren't talking about combat use, we're talking about transport. What part of this sentence don't you understand?

But hey, keep digging. You're as bad as Floyd on basic knowledge of the campaign.

	18-10-2002 12:06									#250
	Suffering from ads?

quote: So trucks were pretty irrelevant to both sides.

I'll let that stand as a testament to ignorance.

	18-10-2002 12:09									#251
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse We aren't talking about combat use, we're talking about transport. What part of this sentence don't you understand? But hey, keep digging. You're as bad as Floyd on basic knowledge of the campaign.

Yes, and we're talking about the efficiency of the truck vs the horse in moving goods.

Why are no horses used these days, Horse? Oh sorry, I may have just discovered the bug up your ass.

	18-10-2002 12:17									#252
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Yes, and we're talking about the efficiency of the truck vs the horse in moving goods.

Horses are much more efficient on unpaved roads prone to dust, mud and ice, impassable to trucks for at least half the year.

quote: Why are no horses used these days, Horse?

Because we have paved roads. Russia didn't.

quote: Oh sorry, I may have just discovered the bug up your ass.

I just wish you'd go away and do some basic research on the campaign instead of spouting nonsense.

	18-10-2002 12:24									#253
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse Horses are much more efficient on unpaved roads prone to dust, mud and ice, impassable to trucks for at least half the year. Because we have paved roads. Russia didn't. I just wish you'd go away and do some basic research on the campaign instead of spouting nonsense.

Sorry Horse, no horse is ever faster on any dry, dirt road than a truck is.

Furthermore, we are talking about moving supplies not 5 miles but maybe 50 or 100 or 200 miles beyond a rail head.

Anyone who would say that horses are better for all conditions on the steppes of Russia, or the Canadian prairies has a few problems. I believe.

Especially when it means hauling an engine or a transmission for a 10 or 15 ton tank for a hundred miles. Quite simply put, no horse drawn transport known to man is up to it quite the way that large trucks are. Thank you very much.

	18-10-2002 12:28									#254
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Do you know anything about the Russian campaign at all?

Your points just aren't even worth answering - go and read the history - we're not talking here about your worthless opinion but about what happened and horse and rail transport was used

	18-10-2002 12:31									#255
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Waiting for some citations here Horse.

Who exactly, other than you, has proclaimed the superiority of the horse on the Eastern front? Come back soon.

	18-10-2002 12:47									#256
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

f*ckwit.

For a start, why don't you try this?

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/milimprov/fm.htm

It is a debrief of German staff officers who served on the Eastern Front published by the US military in 1951.

It is called

MILITARY IMPROVISATIONS During the RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN

And to save you time I will quote:

quote: Chapter 5 Indispensable Expedients I. The Panje Column In Russia, motorized transportation was useless many months of the year. During winter and muddy periods the entire supply and transportation system would have been completely paralyzed if supply columns of Panje wagons or Panje sleighs had not come to the rescue. These vehicles were in use throughout the Russian campaign and were looked upon as vital for the prosecution of the war. When the German armored and motorized units swept across the dusty plains of Russia during the summer of 1941, nobody paid much attention to the insignificant little peasant horses of the Russian steppe. The tankers and truck drivers could not fail to notice the industrious little animals pulling heavily loaded peasant wagons cross-country whenever they were pushed off the road by the modern mechanical giants. They were looked upon sympathetically, but what was their performance compared to that of the steel colossi and multiton carriers? Any comparison obviously was out of the question. Many a man dismissed them with a disdainful gesture and the words, "A undred years behind the times." Even next to the heavy cold-blooded draft horses and the tall mounts of the infantry divisions their dwarfish cousins seemed slightly ridiculous and insignificant. A few months later the Panje horse was judged quite differently. It came into sudden demand during the muddy season when no motor vehicle could operate and any number of cold-blooded horses could not move the heavy guns and ammunition. How were the advance elements to be supplied when they were stranded without provisions? By Panje columns. Who brought the urgently needed ammunition to the front when the organic divisional supply columns were stuck in the mud as far as fifty miles to the rear of the advance elements? Again the Panje column. Who was capable of moving gasoline from the railheads to the mechanical colossi even through the deepest mud? The Panje horse. By what means of transportation were the badly wounded to be transported when the most modern ambulances could no longer advance in the mud? The answer was always the Panje horse and wagon. From then on they became faithful, indispensable companions of the field forces. In winter the Panje horse proved even more essential. The Panje sleigh became the universal means of transportation when motor vehicles were incapacitated and roads were snowbound or nonexistent. During the first months of 1942 some panzer divisions had as many as 2,000 Panje horses but hardly a single serviceable motor vehicle. For that reason they received the nickname "Panje divisions." This unexpected turn of events made the veterinarian the busiest man in any panzer division.

Oh! and here is the cover photo of this study

	18-10-2002 12:53									#257
	Put an end to popups!

Yeah, and the Panzers didn't do too much during those extreme conditions did they?

Neither did the Russians, during mud.

Eating is one thing. Replacing engines is another. Fukwhit.

	18-10-2002 12:58									#258
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

So how many more references do you want? Are you incapable of basic research? How much more stupid would you like me to make you look?

	18-10-2002 13:00									#259
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Much more than you have made yourself to look so far Horsie.

Now lets talk effective fighting forces. Not those cowering before the elements and not doing much fighting at all, on either side.

That would mostly be during the summer. How about that Horsie?

	18-10-2002 13:02									#260
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Well I would but I think you're already done like a dinner, so what's the point?

	18-10-2002 13:03									#261
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The point? Well...

There is the one on your head.

	18-10-2002 13:05									#262
	Suffering from ads?

Sorry , you'll need to back your statements up with primary sources. You can't of course because you are pig ignorant on the whole subject.

	18-10-2002 13:07									#263
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Frack off Horsie. The crap you posted has nothing to do with conquest. It is only about eating.

Try again. How fast are horses compared to trucks in the summer? How much can they carry?

And how much ground was taken during mud, compared to summer?

Try again.

	18-10-2002 16:22									#264
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Are you still banging on? I thought you'd be off reading the views of German staff officers and generals who actually served in the campaign and might know something about it

	18-10-2002 17:19									#265
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ned Serb, I suspect there is a duality of feelings toward Russia in Germany. The war generation probably still harbors a lot of anti-Russian feelings just as they also have anti- American feelings.

1) I guess you are wrong about this (At least I hope).
2) You miss my point.
Let me explain myself.
There are no anti-Germans feelings in Russia. No one hates German people here, even considering what type of suffering and misery German invasion brings to Russians (just try to imagine this, if you could: 27 millions people died, 6 millions were moved to nazi death camps, 1710 Soviet cities and towns were destroyed, more the 70 000 villages were destroyed, more then 98 000 kolkhozes were destroyed, 32 000 industrial facilities were destroyed, 6 000 hospitals were destroyed, 82 000 schools were destroyed, 334 universities, institution and colleges were destroyed, 43 000 libraries were destroyed, 442 museums were destroyed. The SU lost 30% of its national wealth, material harm in prices of 1941 was 679 billions rubles, overall war expenses were 1890 billions rubles.)
Even consider this, there is no hatred toward German people. Never, NEVER in my lifetime I heard that my grandfather (the man who went through entire war, who was injured several times and whose two BROTHERS were KILLED on front) said something anti-German, NEVER I saw a hatred toward German people in his eyes. As well as I never heard any other veteran of Red army saying something anti-German. Never in my lifetime I heard as some of my teachers said something anti-German. N E VE R. German people it’s not the same as nazism. As well, as Russian people it’s not the same as communism. “The Hitlers become and gone, but German people and German state remains” Do you know who said this? Stalin said this, right after beginning of war. Even this terrible man was able to separate German people and nazism, because those thing has nothing common.

The annexation of Baltic States by SU in 1940, as for me, it is not an excuse for blind hatred toward all Russian people we could see today in Baltic States.
The amount of harm done by nazis to Russian people is incomparable to harm done by communists to Baltic states. However Russians do not hate modern Germans. Why people of Baltic States have right to hate modern Russians? Why they have right to treat big part of their population who has Russian roots as crap, as second-rate humans without civil rights and citizenship? Why they have right to throw people who fought vs. nazism into jails? Why they have right to treat their nazi as heroes, not just simple nazi, but SS veterans, a members of “punishing teams”, a “people” whose main goal was killing, torture and extermination of civilian population? Why they have right to create monuments dedicated to those “people”? Why they teach their children how to hate Russians properly? WHY?

quote: The Luthuanians, in contrast, were reoccupied by the Soviets.

This I can understand. They have independent and powerful state few centuries ago. But f.e., such country as Estonia never existed on World map until collapse of Russian Empire. The period of their sovereignty lasts since 1918 until 1940. Why they are not anti-Sweden for example, who occupied Estonia until Peter the Great attached it to Russian Empire in 1721? Why only Russians?

quote: Lithuanians grew to resent the USSR and probably looked back the period of German occupation as a period of liberty.

Don’t you see that this sentence is in conflict with itself?
How period of OCCUPATION could be a period of LIBERTY?
All what it means, is that they prefer nazism over communism. No matter what do you think about communism, support of nazism is a CRIME, a crime judged by Nuremberg’s tribunal, because nazism is inhuman ideology and everyone who support it, is criminal.

P.S. Saras, esli ti eto chitaesh, skoree vsego ti menya uzhe nenavidish. Ty klassnyi muzhik, I mne bi ne hotelos oskarblyat tvoi patrioticheskie chustva, no proshu ponyat menya pravilno, mne ochen ne nravitsya kak pravitelstva Pribaltiiskih stran otnositsya k russko-yazichnomu naseleniyu prozhivayushemu v Pribaltike. Ya dumayu, chto esli-by pravitelstvo Rossii tak-zhe otnosilos k pribaltam zhivushim zdes, to ty by tozhe bil ne v vostorge ot etogo. Ya ne ponimayu zachem nashim narodam nado vrajdebno otnositsa drug k drugu. Neuzheli v nashei sovmestnoi istorii vse bilo tak hrenovo?

P.P.S. Naverno ya slegka pogorichilsya, kak obichno Vse chto ya tut nakotal k Litve otnositsa menshe vsego. Po krainei mere pamitnikov esesovzam, kak v Taline, v Vilnuse net. (naskolko ya znayu). Izviniay esli-chto ne tak.
P.P.P.S. Blin o chem ya govoru? 100% ti teper menya kozlom schitaesh. Kstati tvoi poslednii e-mail pro zarplatu ya prochitat ne smog, ne ponimaet moi browser takoi kodirovki, blin.

	18-10-2002 17:26									#266
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by David Floyd Katyushka launchers were very often mounted on US Studebaker trucks.

Oh really? Why I never saw a picture of Katusha based on Studebaker truck? On all pictures of Katusha I ever saw, they based on "polutorka" a Soviet "GAZ" truck.
Perhaps you could help me and post a SINGLE picture of Katusha which mounted on Studebaker?

	18-10-2002 17:56									#267
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Ned Serb, I suspect there is a duality of feelings toward Russia in Germany. The war generation probably still harbors a lot of anti-Russian feelings just as they also have anti- American feelings. The generations that grew up since were educated by the Allies to reject their Nazi past and see the errors of Hitler. The new generation hardly has any emotional, nationalist connection to the Nazi period. Further, they probably viewed the continued occupation of their country by the allies for decades as necessary given the cold war.

There are practically no hard feelings towards Russians in Germany, except probably that small amount of ultra right wingers (maybe 2-3%), that is generally unable to learn and is hostile towards all foreigners, and some people in Eastern Germany, but not much.

But there is a certain anti-American feeling here. Unlike your suspection it concerns rather the younger generation than the older. The war generation is 80 and older today and statistically already dead, so there's not much left anymore to be of importance. And the younger generation is just sick of the American domination of the western world. It's not actively hostile, it's more a feeling of indifference. Call it the "You are American? So what!" feeling, no less and no more.

	18-10-2002 17:57									#268
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

NTY,
For anybody who lives in Russia or was in Russia and saw Russian roads your statements sounds very funny. You have no idea about Russian roads.
AH is absolutely correct both about use of horses and your ignorance about Russian campaign. He gave you 100% proof that you are wrong, why you can’t accept that you were wrong and read a couple memoirs of German generals who participated in war on Russian front, to gain proper picture of events?

	18-10-2002 18:00									#269
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph There are practically no hard feelings towards Russians in Germany, except probably that small amount of ultra right wingers (maybe 2-3%), that is generally unable to learn and is hostile towards all foreigners, and some people in Eastern Germany, but not much.

I knew that he was wrong about this

	18-10-2002 20:45									#270
	Normandy vs Stalingrad Got spare money?

"The Germans lost more divisions in Normandy than at Stalingrad..."

Hmmm,... let's look at some stats on this one.
(A long post,... apologies)

Geoffrey Jukes in "Stalingrad: The Turning Point" states the follwing:


"The miltary importance of the victory can be expressed partly in figures. Almost the whole of 5 Axis Armies had been wiped out by the time the thaw came - all of VI Army, most of IV Panzer Army, five of seven divisions of III Rumanian Army, almost the whole of IV Rumanian and VIII Italian Armies. Some 32 divisions and 3 brigades were completely shattered and a further sixteen divisions lost more than half their personnel, while many more had to abandon much of their heavy equipment to get away. Total axis killed, wounded, missing or captured...were in the neighborhood of one million five hundred thousand between August 1942 and February 1943..."

Jukes goes on to quote equipment loses (I paraphrase)

"... 3500 tanks (7 months production), about 12,000 guns and mortars (1 years production), 3000 aircraft (4 month production) ... Altogether the equipment lost between August and February would have equipped approximately 75 divisions..."

(Sources: "Enemy at the Gates" William Craig
"From the Don to the Dnepr", David Glantz
"Stalingrad:The Turning Point", Geoffrey Jukes

The production numbers lost refer to 1942 values and not the higher output of later war years. While Jukes speaks of "Axis" loses, when the order-of-battle is examined the vast mafority of destroyed divisions are German,... 22 division in the Stalingrad pocket alone. With the exception of a few hundred wounded who were flown out, these divisions (3 of them panzer) were completely lost. If one really wants to add bodies to the pile you could also write off the II Hungarian Army as well, as it was over run and destroyed during early '43 - another 6 divisions or so. Effectively, everything south of Army Group Centre was elimanted or reduced to cadre with the exception of 17th Army, which withdrew into the Kuban (east of the Crimea)

In Normandy, between June 6 and August 25, the Germans lost (again, I paraphrase):

"...not far short of 500,000; 210,000 were prisoners in our hands...figures for killed and wounded were estimated at 240,000. Material loses were equally severe; 3500 guns and 1,500 tanks and assault guns were captured or destroyed, together with vast amounts of mechanical transport, horse transport and equipment of all kinds... A total of 43 divisions had been eliminated or severely mauled..."

(Sources: "Breakout: Drive to the Seine", David Mason
"Crusade in Europe", Dwight D Eisenhower
"Six Armies in Normandy", John Keegan
"The Duel for France", Martin Blumenson
"Decision in Normandy", Carlo D'este)

One can judge for themselves which campaign cost the Germans more. But from my readings, the western allies did not match or exceed Stalingrad until 1945 with the encirclement of Ruhr (although Tunisia in May '43 is also a good match).

In both cases the Germans recovered, rebuilt and launched counterattacks (Kursk and the Ardennes)... in both cases Germany would have done better to stay on the defense and husband resources.

But that is history.