quote:

---

Originally posted by petros:
....Of great importance to me and for the future of this project, is to locate very detailed German accounts of this battle. The German units which fought at Ponyri include:
- 9th and 18th Pz. Divisions
- 292 Infantry Division
- 86th Infantry Division
- 78th Sturm Division
- 10th PzGr. Division
Can anyone direct me to detailed unit histories of these units?....

---

I would recommend the following:

1. Obtain copies of the division daily reports for the division/corps/army files from the National Archives. This will require several days in the DC area.

2. Obtain a copy of the 1942 1:50,000 scale topo map.

I have found the German unit histories to be uneven and recommend going to the unit records first.

Soviet narratives are a little more difficult. The best source is the Soviet archives, but that is always difficult. Don't know enough about this specific engagement to evaluate the quality of Soviet secondary sources, but based upon my experience with the fighting in the south, this is not a very reliable source.

Mainly, I’m responsible for designing and painting the battlefield maps for this game and was given a green light to help develop and design a Kursk theme Historical Series release. A challenge for us in terms of designing a tactical/company/squad level game for a battle the size of Kursk as you may guess is to choose representative smaller battles which can, to the greatest extent possible within the constraints of a tactical game system, give the players a sense of the larger conflict. One such battle has been already chosen; that being the battle in and around Ponyri. Others must also be chosen. It’s possible that there will be two separate Historical Studies releases; one focusing on the northern salient and one on the southern.

The map of Ponyri is close to being finished (it takes me about a year to complete these maps), and its design was based on highly accurate Luftwaffe recon photos circa 4/43 obtained from NatArchive in DC. The associated historical narrative and detailed orders of battle, specific company-level battles required to design the battle scenarios and to finish this piece of the Study unfortunately have not fleshed out. It’s my great hope that information of this sort does exist and that some of you may be able to direct me to that information.

I’ve also painted 3 other more generic Kursk mapboards for this Historical Study release (ridge, open ground, village) which can be reconfigured with other existing mapboards to produce a variety of battlefields, albeit not with the same historical accuracy of the Ponyri section. With these more generic maps I hope to prepare other northern salient battles of significance and have them included in the larger Study release. I’ve thought of some such battles but would be very glad to hear your opinions on which specific battles would best represent the larger conflict at Kursk – especially the northern battles.

Any and everything you may have in terms of information, referrals, etc. is greatly appreciated gentlemen. If you’d like to know more about this project or ASL, just ask and I’d be glad to tell you more.
Don Petros

quote:

---

Originally posted by petros:
Thank you for the quick reply. And yes thanks, I've examined D.Glantz's paper (#11), and although very helpful, I'm looking for more detail than this provides.

---

The only way you are going to get more details is through the German unit records and some unit histories.

This kind of detail is harder with the Soviet material, for their unit records do not have the daily detailed description of fighting in them that regularly shows up in the German records.

quote:

---

Chris, thank you for informing me that the information I'm looking for may be in DC.

---

National Archives, Captured German Records (RG-242). Its on microfilm, so it is possible to order up roles and read them at your local library microfilm reader.

quote:

---

Like Parcival, I think I’ve stumbled unknowingly into the Grail Castle of Kursk...detailed information about the Kursk battle – Ponyri and the northern salient especially.

---

There is more detail available on the south, and it is the more interesting and dynamic series of battles.

quote:

---

One such battle has been already chosen; that being the battle in and around Ponyri. Others must also be chosen.

---

Again, head south, lots of good stuff including a number of dramatic regimental size envelopments.

quote:

---

It’s possible that there will be two separate Historical Studies releases; one focusing on the northern salient and one on the southern.

---

There is certianly enough fighting to support that.

quote:

---

The map of Ponyri is close to being finished (it takes me about a year to complete these maps), and its design was based on highly accurate Luftwaffe recon photos circa 4/43 obtained from NatArchive in DC.

---

My bias would be towards a topo map, although I've never looked at the photos.

quote:

---

It’s my great hope that information of this sort does exist and that some of you may be able to direct me to that information.

---

It does to some extent, but certainly not in any published book. I have not seen a good detailed battle description of Ponyri.

quote:

---

I’ve thought of some such battles but would be very glad to hear your opinions on which specific battles would best represent the larger conflict at Kursk – especially the northern battles.

---

Sorry, but my expertise is really limited to only the south.

I've considered designing a series of related scenarios having to do with the GD Division. However, that would need to wait and when/if I do go there, I think I would need to treat those battle scenarios using more generic and interchangable boards.

quote:

---

Originally posted by petros:
You've confirmed what I suspected. That the best information would be found within German history as opposed to Russian.

---

Let me clarify....any serious study of a battle really needs to look at the data from both sides, especially the unit records.

That said, having seen some of the unit records of the Soviet Army, for the purpose of identifying tactical game scenarios (as I assume with ASL you are looking for basically battalion-size engagements), the detail descriptions of the action you desire is more likely found in the German records.

quote:

---

...and also because this area seems less attended to or glamorized in comparison to the southern salient.

---

And less documented.

quote:

---

This northern 'forgotten front' so to speak I imagine could yield some interesting gaming situations.

---

For a large number of reasons, I have a bias for the south.

quote:

---

I cannot think of any place in the southern salient that was fought over for an extended period of time. (I would like to be shown otherwise really)

---

Hill 254.5 (Tolstoye woods, etc.) or Gremyachii-Batratskaya Dacha or Gostishchevo or area of Belenikhino-Komsomolets Sovkhoz, etc.

How big of an area (kilometers width and depth) and how many days of engagement are you looking for?

quote:

---

I've considered designing a series of related scenarios having to do with the GD Division.

---

Lots of good post-war interviews and books on GD. Also many of the engagements included elements of the 3rd PzD and 332nd ID. Therefore, multiple sources to draw from (this becomes an issue with certain incidents). Lots of well known names (Strachwitz, Remer, Mellenthin).

quote:

---

I think I would need to treat those battle scenarios using more generic and interchangable boards.

---

Actually, depending on the area of coverage, you can pick up several days of action covering the area from Verkhopenye to Tolstoye Woods.

quote:

---

Originally posted by petros:
You mention the area from Verkhopenye to Tolstoye Woods. Is that the woods where GD and 3rd. Pz. fought?

---

Yes, they, along with the 332nd ID, were tangled up there from the afternoon of the 9th until the 15th (although they didn't want to be).

This allows you to do a lot of battles while using the same maps.

quote:

---

Perhaps GD Division’s challenge at Cherkasskoe (and again also I will try to get some data on the battles you specify),

---

That was pretty one sided. Not a lot of armor on the part of the Soviets.

quote:

---

...as for the SS divisions...Their battles seem to have been very fluid.

---

Actually, Totenkopf was fighting around and across the Psel from the 10th through the 13th. DR was in the area southwest and south of Prokhorovka from the 10th - 14th (or so...I'm pulling these dates off the top of my head).

The real question is how many kilometers in each direction do you want to cover with your game board.

quote:

---

...and/or perhaps finally a more realistic representation of the larger tank battle at Prokhorovka.

---

It would hard to do a Kursk game without Prokhorovka.

By the way, the Battle of Kursk went to 23 August.

quote:

---

It appears that these divisions were mainly on the move as a opposed to being engaged in set-piece battles.

---

That is not really the case.

quote:

---

Can you recommend published sources?

---

There is not a source out there that has the detail you need. My book will once it is complete (which will be later this year) but it only covers the southern German offensive (4-18 July).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Lawrence:
There is not a source out there that has the detail you need. My book will once it is complete (which will be later this year) but it only covers the southern German offensive (4-18 July).

---

Chris, one more question about your book. Does it, in anyway shape or forum, talk about how Manstein wanted to continue the offensive against the weakening Soviet forces, specifically to destroy 1st tank and 5th guards tank?

Seaton, though whom I have found incorrect on several occasions related to his Kursk section, says in one paragraph that Manstein may have been correct in his views, and that Kursk could have been more saved by the Fürher's decision to quit rather than by Soviet defenses.

quote:

---

Originally posted by WWII=interest:
Does it, in anyway shape or forum, talk about how Manstein wanted to continue the offensive against the weakening Soviet forces....

---

Yes, in some depth.

quote:

---

...says in one paragraph that Manstein may have been correct in his views, and that Kursk could have been more saved by the Fürher's decision to quit rather than by Soviet defenses.

---

This is not what Manstein said. Manstein wanted to continue the offensive in the south after the 17th. The offensive in the north had ended with the Soviet counteroffensive on Orel and there was no intention after the 13th to try to continue pinching off the salient.

Manstein had organized a new attack to start the 17th or 18th (I forget which day as I am writing off the top of my head) that was to push NW. This is what was cancelled by Hitler's decision to withdraw the SS divisions from the battle. It was an operation to run up the body count, not win the Battle of Kursk (which as this point, without a northern pincher was not "winable").

There has been a lot of confusion over what Manstein said because most people are not aware of what Operation Roland was, therefore do not understand what was being cancelled.

quote:

---

....specifically to destroy 1st tank and 5th guards tank?

---

Operation Roland would not have targeted the 5th Guards Tank Army.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Lawrence:
Operation Roland would not have targeted the 5th Guards Tank Army.

---

So basically, Manstein knew that the Germans could never pinch off the Kursk salient once the Soviets started the Orel offensive, so he just would have tried to cause as much damage to the Soviets in the south as possible, weakening the coming Soviet drive to the Dnepr?

One of my buddies who has talked to several Soviet veterans from the Kursk battle, and who has read Zetterling and others acocunts of Kursk(who also is awaiting your book) told me Operation Roland was not going to be done just to roll up the Soviet formations, but was to increase the southern breakthrough for a further push north. Any truth in this?