quote:

---

Originally posted by vkun:
In January 1944 sPzRgt Baeke was formed, consisting of sPzAbt 503 with 34 Tigers (20 operational), II./PzRgt 11 (6.PzDiv) with 46 Panthers (25 operational), 1 sp ArtyBn, 1 Engineer bn, 1 mtn rgt.
From 25 Jan - 30 Jan 1944 sPzRgt Baeke fought at the socalled Balabanowka Pocket and destroyed 5 Soviet Tank Corps. Soviet losses amounted to 267 tanks, German losses were one Tiger and three Panthers.
This is the story according to the "Combat History of sPzAbt 503" (Fedorowicz Pub.). The "History of 6. PzDiv" has no additional info on the battle.

My questions:
1. Do Russian sources confirm the number of destroyed Russian and German Tanks ?
2. Are there any detailed records of the battle, i.e. an AAR by LtCol Baeke or any other infos ?

---

No direct answers to your questions but to try to contribute some general thoughts.

1. No number of claimed tanks des by anybody was accurate. The ger in general during 43 on the east front needed to reduce thier claims by almost 50% to match current rus des tank numbers.

2. des 5 tank corps would mean around 1000 tanks des but the claim was only 267 des in your quote. But as I said above the actual number of rus tanks des may have been around 135 tanks assuming your 267 lost was actually des and did not also include damaged.

3. At kursk during the ger off over less than 2 weeks the germans lost 10 tigers out of about 150 commited in total. Or less than 1% a day. For 34 tigers commited to start over 5 or less days you might expect only 1 des at this rate which is what you got.

4. The panthers at kursk were 200 commited and 44 des during the first two weeks or less than 2% a day. But less than 50 were op at anyone time after the first day. Out of the 46 panthers committed over less than 5 days you might expect around 4 des which is what you got.

5. These are just two large scale examples and are not going to be 100% accurate. Esp for the panther which was first commited at kursk with many problems that did get ironed out over time expect change of some sort to occur. Also if these forces were fighting from the inside of the pocket after losing supply for a time I would expect more differences.

6. One potential error in these figurs of 1 tiger and 3 panther des was they might be incuding claims of all rus tanks des but only counting ger tanks des by rus tanks not counting those that ended up destroyed due to ATGs, mech failure, blown up, irrecoverable etc...

7. At kursk the panthers claimed almost 300 des rus during the first two weeks. If the 50% figure discussed earlier was accurate we might see 150 rus tanks des for the 44 panther or 3 des rus tanks for each des panther.

8. 3 des panther might indicate at this rate 9 dead rus tanks. But again this is one part of the panther performance that might have been drastically changed over time. To give an example the avg ger tank on the east front during the last 6 months of 43 killed roughly 4.5 rus tanks. At that rate the 1 dead tiger and 3 dead panthers would generate around 18 dead rus tanks. But the tiger and panther were not the avg ger tanks but were the best they had.

9. Still no matter how you stretch it does 4 dead ger tanks become 135 actual des rus tanks unless some exceptional circumstances arise. One possibility is the book you mention or even the ger records could be wrong about this.

10. Perhaps the sp arty bn includes some stug type ass guns or tank des type unit. Or the eng bn includes some of those remote control tank bombs and even tanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by vkun:
I agree with your basic statement, just a few thoughts:

- to destroy 5 tk corps doesn't necessarily mean to destroy 100 % of their overall number, for what I know a unit with 50% losses is rated "destroyed" (current Bundeswehr definition)
- why should the tk corps have 100% TOE strength at the start of Baeke's attack? Perhaps it was much lower.
-statistics are good for long time assessments, but I would be careful to apply them for single actions. Perhaps Baeke's action was the exception from the rule...
If the average rate was 4.5 des rus tks for every ger tank, there obviously were Tigers and Panthers with much higher relations - let's say 25:1 - and PzIV with 1:1 or even no kill at all.

---

Yes agree with all the above.

For each tank des thier were probably an equal number that was knocked out of op temp. Maybe 267 claimed kills and 267 probable damaged would equal 500+ des and dam tanks over 50% of the claimed 5 tank corps. But the damaged did not all happen on the same day and would not have remained unrepaired at the end of a 5 day long operation. Not to mention new replacments which might have been funelled in. In reality the numbers were proably half of this and the and it wasn´t 5 TC des but 5 TC engaged which may be what the original ger reports might have said.

The avg real ratio for the last 6 months of 43 was 4.5 rus tanks des for each ger one. The avg real ratio for all of 43 was closer to 3 rus tanks des for each ger one. I know nothing about jan and feb of 44 specifically. For 44 in general this number did certainly go down. The number of rus tanks des definatly went down and the number of ger tanks des on the eastern front went up. And that is compared to the 3 to 1 ratio for all of 43 and not just the 4.5 to 1 ratio for the last 6 months. Although to be fair most of this decline in ratio probably did not happen until after Dday.

Same stipulation about the reduce by half number of claims to get kills. For all of 43 it was close to 55% after comparing actual des numbers and the ger used reduce to half. For the part of war in rus before this the ger used reduce by 30%. I don´t have any figures to compare this to. It could also be that the ratio deterirated further at the end of the war in 44 and 45 although again I don´t know.

As I said in my past post at kursk the ger probably killed 3 rus tanks for each lost panther. Although the op relaibility was very poor out of 200 committed less than 50 were op at any one time during this first battle. It seems by jan 44 the op reliability may have doubled. With twice as many tanks op you would expect twice the number of claims and dead rus tanks. It might have been closer to 6:1 at this time. Except that if the twice as many tanks were op you would also expect twice as many tanks to be killed as well but we will forget this point and hope other improvments prevented it.

Overall there seems to be little evidence to suggest the panther would be able to get as good a ratio as the tigers. The tigers got the best crews and had MUCH better all around protection. I actually read one post by someone based on jentz panzer tracts data on another forum. The total TI and TII des on all fronts and all units SS and army was about 6 claims to each tank des. Again if half these claims were false then it would be only 3:1. Now obviouusly I would expect much higher numbers in jan 44 on the eastern front but maybe not the 25:1 you suggest.

The ger made 6000+ panthers during the last two years of war about 30% of production during this time. At least 4000 were deployed and lost in the east. During this time the rus lost about 50,000 tanks. Now if each panther in the east des 10 rus tank not the 25 you suggest for this one battle 40,000 rus tanks would be des. In other wards 80% of all rus tanks des by just 30% of ger tanks seems highly unlikly since we haven´t even started to account for all those tigers.

Also while the ratio of 4.5 des rus tanks for each dead ger tank was true. The ger tanks and thier kills were proably not destributed like you suggest. At kursk to start with there were 150 TIs, 200 Panther , 650 PzIII, 700 panzer IVs and and 450 STUG IIIs. Plus smaller number of other spATGs such as fredinads, STUH, brummbar etc.... In terms of numbers and performance the panzer IV would proably have mattched the avg of 4.5 not the 1:1 low side of avg you discussed.

The reason the ger regt may have done so well compared to the avg situation in 43 and 44 may have partly to do with having the better tanks. But it may have also been do to the ger attacking during this part of the 2 years which was exceptional. Allowing them to maintain control of the groud with damaged or broken down tanks. Which both the panther and tiger suffered from compared to the other ger tanks reliability even in jan 44. Also the sovs may have been in one of those over extended unready for a couter attack period.

-II/PzRgt 23 (of 23rd Panzer Division) with 46 Panthers

-sPzAbt 503 with 34 Tigers

-II/PzRgt 11 (of 6th Panzer Division-Panzer Regiment 11 was Bake's normal command) with PzKpfw IV's. This regiment only had the II Abteilung with PzKpfw IV's as the I Abteilung was being equipped with Panthers and would not be sent to the front until March 1944. When the I Abteilung did arrive it served with the 8th Panzer Division and did not return to 6th Panzer Division until December 1944.

I hope this helps!

quote:

---

Originally posted by vkun:
My questions:
1. Do Russian sources confirm the number of destroyed Russian and German Tanks ?

---

No they don't. Quite on the contrary.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=1063601

All the best

1-10 January 1944: 314 tanks, 65 assault guns
11-20 January 1944: 294 tanks, 88 assault guns
21-31 January 1944: 513 tanks, 146 assault guns
1-10 February 1944: 243 tanks, 95 assault guns
11-20 February 1944: 193 tanks, 38 assault guns

Source: Tsamo RF, Fond 236, opis 2673, delo 311, list 12, 39, 64, 85

These losses were of course attributable to many more German units than the schwere Panzer-Regiment Bäke, but perhaps they can be of interest anyway.

By the way, the II./Pz.Rgt. 11 remained with the 6th Pz.Div., while Bäke and his regimental HQ were detached to lead the II./Pz.Rgt. andn s.Pz.Abt. 503.

vkun, I have a copy of the war diary of the Bäke-Regiment.

Do these Soviet lost tanks/SP guns figures refer to irrecoverable losses only or are repairable damages included?

BTW, are there any chances to see an English language edition of Mr. Zetterling's Korsun book?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michate:
Wow, very interesting data.

Do these Soviet lost tanks/SP guns figures refer to irrecoverable losses only or are repairable damages included?

---

THey shold refer to irrevocable losses.

quote:

---

BTW, are there any chances to see an English language edition of Mr. Zetterling's Korsun book?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by vkun:
Thanks for the statistics. Well, the significantly higher losses at the end of January (513 tanks) may be a hint, that Bäke's account might be correct.

---

I can only suggest that you actually read the link provided, which you appear not to have done.

Of course, you are free to believe whatever you feel like, but to claim that a number of destroyed tanks is an indication that this account is correct (BTW - is it really 'Bäke's account', or an account about Bäke's regiment's actionss?) is stretching it considerably.

Some questions that would need to be answered:

What other actions was 1st UF involved in, and against whom?

Were all these 1st UF losses combat losses, and if not what was the ratio to combat- to non-combat losses?

Were there really 5 Tank Corps in the pocket? It appears not from the link I provided. While Kamen did not source his information, he is a reliable researcher with access to usually good data, so I would not dismiss it out of hand.

All the best

Keep in mind that the 1 UF losses, as given by the report, pertain to a period twice as long as the action fought by Bäkes regiment. Also, Vatutins front had many more German units to fight against, for example 1. SS-Pz.Div., 16. Pz.Div., 17. Pz.Div., 6. Pz.Div., just to name a few.
One way to get an impression of the German overclaiming would be to add the claims of the German units in the period. If I recall correctly, it was claimed that operation Watutin resulted in the destruction of 701 Soviet tanks. Furthermore, on 26 January the German VII Corps claimed to have destroyed 82 Soviet tanks on this day alone. Hence, we have 783 Soviet tanks claimed to be destroyed and still many actions fought in the period are not included. Compare this to the overall 1st Ukrainian Front losses of 659 tanks and assault guns over a longer period.