Small Scale Military Headquarters

Swinging The Sledgehammer: the combat effectiveness of German heavy tank battalions during World War II.... Found this at the US Army's Command and General Staff College digital library (CARL), written by Major Christopher Wilbeck as a thesis towards a Masters Degree in Military Arts and Science. This is not "light reading" by any stretch of the imagination, but it's worth a look to anyone who has a serious interest in the development, history, and combat performance of Germany's Tiger I and Tiger II Heavy Tank Battalions in WWII.

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm4/item_viewe ... =304&REC=2

When the page opens in your browser, click the "access this item" link near the top of the page to download the PDF file.

* Thanks for sharing this Scott. Very interesting indeed. "I'm a tank freak anyway". *


Mitch v MG

MG-42 wrote:* Thanks for sharing this Scott. Very interesting indeed. "I'm a tank freak anyway". *


Mitch v MG

Good read

I am becoming a tank freak HELP ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad you guys found it interesting. At a 150 pages plus or minus it's not the kind of thing you would read on your coffee break, but if you really want to delve into the technical, operational, and tactical details of German heavy tank battalions in WWII it's worth taking the time to read. One thing that makes these kinds of papers worth a look is that they are written by Army officers to be presented to the faculty of the Army Staff College, and as such they are VERY thoroughly researched from multiple, verifiable resources, so the information contained in them is highly accurate.

The one thing that boggled me about this article, is when it tries to define what exactly is a "knocked out" tank.

I've read several articles about this, when it concern the Tiger tank. I guess this is their way of "minimizing" Tiger losses due to combat.

What I would like to know is if this applies to other tanks as well. Like the T-34 and the Sherman.

I know that a lot of "knocked out" Shermans have been recovered in the field and has either been fully repaired and sent back out to the fight, or was simply cannibalized for parts.

Does this mean that those Shermans were not knocked out as well?

The one thing that boggled me about this article, is when it tries to define what exactly is a "knocked out" tank.

I've read several articles about this, when it concern the Tiger tank. I guess this is their way of "minimizing" Tiger losses due to combat.

What I would like to know is if this applies to other tanks as well. Like the T-34 and the Sherman.

I'm not sure, but I do know that recovery of disabled or "knocked out" Tiger's was often very difficult or impossible due to lack of sufficient recovery vehicles that were capable of pulling the Tigers enormous weight. In many cases the only vehicle that could manage it was another Tiger, and this placed enormous strain on the drivetrain and powerplant of the towing Tiger. Recovery of T-34's and Sherman's was undoubtedly a far easier task in this regard because of the comparitively lighter weight involved, and the relative abundance of vehicles in the allied armies that were capable of doing the job. The Soviets were very efficient at putting disabled/knocked out tanks back into service, even tanks with penetrations through the hull and turret armor had patches welded over the holes etc., and then went back into the line. As for the US army, I'm really not certain what the policies and procedures were. It's worth mentioning that someone thought highly enough of Major Wilbeck's thesis to publish it as a book, albeit in a somewhat re-packaged form with a prologue by Otto Carius (the famous German panzer commander), and an epilogue by "Tiger Killers" Viktor Iskrov and Ray Holt. The book is available at Amazon for anyone who might be interested... http://www.amazon.com/Sledgehammers-Str ... 446&sr=1-1