World War 2 US and German infantry tactics

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use	How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
Return to Topic Page

Subject: World War 2 US and German infantry tactics
bravoss 6/13/2007 5:36:04 PM

how many men did each fireteam consisted of ? who carried which weapons and what were the roles of each soldiers ? any info on infantry tactics will be appreciated.

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

AlbanyRifles Sabre CSS Unit Size 1/29/2008 1:48:07 PM

Sabre

The size of those transportation and maintenace units was so large because their mission is so large. In a transportation unit with a 128 trucks (be they HETS, MTV or LMTV) you have a driver and asst driver. Why is that? Because drivers have to sleep. With an Asst Driver tehy can switch off. Also someone can provide security. Thise folks are all needed.

As for maintenance units it is the same thing...they have a huge mission. And it is not a one for one relationship with the maneuver units. In an expeditionary support command (the old COSCOM) there is only 2 general support maintenance companies...this to support an entire corps. And thsoe corps support units have 2 missions; 1 to provide direct support to all of the corps units which do not have organic support (AVN, FA, MI., SIG, etc) but also to provide back up support to the divisions and BCTs.

Quote Reply

REG_33 Check out this Site 3/14/2008 5:27:08 PM

http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/Tactics/Formations/rifle_squad.htm

Quote Reply

HMKuperus Question? 11/7/2009 3:36:42 PM

What exactly is the question?

It's an old topic......is it still active?

Quote Reply

jardarius 1/20/2010 12:24:53 PM

Reading up a litle, it seems to me that the german artilery was of equal quality in men and equiptment as the others, although they had slightly less of it. However it seems that they used it far less, especialy in later years. I wonder, was that because of tactics (the element of surprice, mobility, reliance on airpower), or because logistical shortcommings (amunition). The reason i ask is that it seems the germans were able to put up devestating artillery at some times, but hardly any at others.

Thanks for many interesting facts to read, but remember guys, dont get personal. :-)

Quote Reply

JFKY German Artillery 1/21/2010 11:10:14 AM

Was not very numerous, relatively speaking, because in the Offensive Style of War emphasized by the Wehrmacht, the LUFTWAFFE substituted for tube artillery. After 1943 this was no longer possible, but by then it was too late to build up an effective and modern artillery park. Most German artillery in the Second World War were designs from 1918....updated.

Further the Germans lacked the communications equipment that the US and to a lesser extent the British had, limiting the effectiveness of German artillery....

Lastly, the US led the world in fire control techniques. US artillery was fast, lethal and accurate....

German artillery was in smaller numbers, with less ammunition, less responsive, and less quick...it was as accurate, but overall it was far less effective than US artillery.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 1/21/2010 10:33:11 PM

As in every other Army at the time, and for much longer than for the German Army this was true for US Artillery.

I'm taking this a bit out of context (since you will counter with your argument that this was due to it being late in the war for Germany) but it illustrates your logical fallacy quite well:

What you're saying:

It's taken all foreign armies time to develop a modern and effective artillery park, and it's taken the US a lot longer therefore German deficiencies do not count.

This does not make sense. Clearly you are bringing national feeling in subconciously, for in order to make this argument one must be defending one's pride.

The simple fact is the American army had not only a technological and logistical advantage but also a highly effective artillery command system which was at the time without compare. This due to different circumstances and an altered developmental path. Could Germany have evolved such a system if it had chosen not to rely on CAS as much or had more resources? Definitely, but is it likely? Possibly, but it depends a lot on individual people argueing over doctrines in the different camps. What's important is that Germany and America made the choices they did at the time they did. Each camp had its constraints, but I would say everything considered they were near-peers. Germany was under a momentous siege but it'd had initiative whilst the Americans had a very long supply line, lack of experience and a short training period and not even a full draft.

Does German artillery have records of effective engagements? Yes, but not as consistently as American artillery, for the simple reason that American artillery would respond sooner.

The hasty communication between the forward elements of the American army and their artillery is a well-documented fact of WWII and I challenge you to find any such German (or any other nation) system as efficient.

That this is a doctrinal rather than technological advantage is probably what upsets you because you know that given a few more years of clones of those people who invented the American artillery system, peace, land, resources out of nowhere Germany would have created it for it itself. I for myself do not see the difference between quantity and quality as clearly. Quantity just means quality somewhere else in the nation.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 1/21/2010 10:47:44 PM

I'm saying that you think it's ok if the Americans had more guns but not better doctrine, because numbers do not offend your idea of the qualitative superiority of the Wehrmacht.

My point is that basing one's arguments on that underlying emotion is intellectually flawed and does not make sense as quantity more often that not reflect quality of a more vague kind. Therein lies the key... quantitative superiority is more easily masked behind numerous large numbers and thus more palatable to the self-image.

Why I am so convinced I am right about your thinking:

A) It is clear the Americans had a highly responsive system from 1944-45 that the Germans did not have between 1939-1945, yet you claim this is because the German army was mostly destroyed by 1944 when they never had it in the first place.

B) (and if you agree on the above, though it is true anyway:) The Germans could have developed such a system, so you argue that if the German army hadn't been mostly destroyed it would have at least if it'd had the same resources. This is quite possible, but not necessarily probable, but most of all it is idiotic, the argument is whether German artillery was as efficient, not whether Germans are as capable at artillery as Americans given completely equal (and hypothetical) circumstances.

Quote Reply

cwDeici 1/21/2010 10:52:53 PM

Furthermore your foray into 'little American viewpoint' is quite revealing as he had not exhibited American jingoism, but merely mentioned some late-war examples which you assumed meant jingoism.

Anyway, these posts were about the psychology and logic of the mentioned arguments, not about politics. I'm accusing of normal prideful bias of the major details of one's country's military history... not politics.

Quote Reply

JFKY NGI 1/22/2010 1:16:37 PM

German artillery had model numbers like the 18/40, why because it was feldt haubitz 1918, UPDATED to a 1940 standard, not a new piece....the US M-1 105mm howitzer, the m-1 155mm howitzer, the m-1 155mm GUN, WERE new designs, developed in the 1920's, not simply re-treaded WWI ordnance...

AND as cwDeici points out, it is INDISPUTABLE that they US led the world in fire control technology and doctrine...the Fire Coordinating Centre and the like allowed A SINGLE OBSERVER to bring to bear EVERY gun in range! Within minutes....every gun, not just the guns to which the FO was attached...revolutionary.

Also note I did not say the Germans had NO radio, they simply lacked the radio communications the US fielded....the result was a far more responsive and mobile fire plan...the Wehrmacht had nothing like the handie-talkie, much less other radios...and towards the end counter-battery radar (SCR-584).

The result was that the US had a far superior artillery park, and not just in numbers....it was more numerous, more responsive, more quick, and more lethal (thru the use of massive TOT barrages, and by 1944 the use of VT fuses). The final result was a very lethal artillery park, pound-for-pound, not just because it was bigger....

Quote Reply

ker Question 1/22/2010 3:16:40 PM

I have heard that German morters caused the most causualtys. Is this true? How were they employed by infantry?

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT