soc.history.war.world-war-ii

"Rich" schrieb :
> On Mar 4, 7:47 pm, "Michael Kuettner" wrote:
>> "Rich" schrieb:
>>
>> > On Feb 21, 8:27 am, Louis C wrote:
>> (snip)

>>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Sorry for the confusing shorthand, GD was **with** XXXXVIII Pz.-K., I
> was not trying to say that GD and XXXXVIII Pz.-K. were one and the
> same.
>
Ah, thanks ! You got me really confused there.

>> "Grossdeutschland" was the Panzergrenadier-Division in 1943.
>> It consisted of Panzer-Regiment "Grossdeutschland", Grenadier-
>> Regiment "Grossdeutschland" and (note a theme ;-)) Fuesilier-Regiment
>> "Grossdeutschland".
>> GD gained division status in 1942.

Thanks.

>> Could you and Louis please tell me whether the numbers for GD are for the
>> division or just some of its components ?
>
> I'm not sure which numbers you mean? But if they include Panthers,
> then it is for GD plus the attached battalions. :)
>
No, I mean you and Lou have some divergence at numbers of vehicles.
Bear with me for a moment :
Division GD consists of 3 regiments.
So there would be daily divisional reports of tanks ( & cie) on a regimental
level and daily reports on a divisional level.
If one adds the numbers from the regiments, he gets number for vehicles
in the division.
But : The divisional level also includes the staff and supply units - eg., the
workshop for fixing the vehicles.
So, let's say GD overruns some Russian formations and comes into possession
of spme Russian tanks, those would go directly to the worshop for fixing /
seeing if they are fit for use and wouldn't be attached to any of the regiments
of GD until they come out of the workshop again.
So the divisional count of vehicles would be higher than the sum of the vehicles
in the regiments.
Might that explain some divergences of your numbers ?

Cheers,

Michael Kuettner

PS : Thank (mostly) you and Louis for a very interesting thread.