No Kursk in FH 0.7? -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Natty Wallo

FH2 LevelDesigner

50 XP

16th December 2005

0 Uploads

1,652 Posts

0 Threads

#11 12 years ago

I have been thinking many times to release Kursk and vanilla Omaha beach for Fh... just dont have time to do it... they can be made better, bigger and more FH...




General_Henry

Veteran Tanker

50 XP

29th April 2006

0 Uploads

1,699 Posts

0 Threads

#12 12 years ago

they are remade by FHSW team




J_Fin

GF is my bext friend *hugs GF*

50 XP

15th March 2007

0 Uploads

868 Posts

0 Threads

#13 12 years ago

Coca-Cola;3676977I think it's also kind of sad that the FH team included some of the historical inconsistencies perpetuated by the slow fall of communism. For example, there are Panthers on the Prochkorovka map when in reality, the SS panzer battalions equipped with the panthers were training back in Germany. Also, there isn't enough fighting for the north bridgehead over the Psel river to make the map very accurate. Another thing is that...

*Caution*Soviet tank fanboys may not want to read this*Caution*

Spoiler: Show
The number of SS tanks actually involved in the battle has been variously reported as high as 700 by some authorities, while others have estimated between 300 to 600. Even before the Battle of Kursk began, however, the II SS Panzer Corps never had 500 tanks, much less 700. On July 4, the day before Operation Citadel was launched, Hausser's three divisions possessed a total of 327 tanks between them, plus a number of command tanks. By July 11, the II SS Panzer Corps had a total of 211 operational tanks--Totenkopf had 94 tanks, Leibstandarte had only 56 and Das Reich possessed just 61. Damaged tanks or tanks undergoing repairs are not listed. Only 15 Tiger tanks were still in action at Prochorovka, and there were no SS Panthers available. The battalions that were equipped with Panthers were still training in Germany in July 1943. On July 13, the day after the Battle of Prochorovka, Fourth Panzer Army reports declared that the II SS Panzer Corps had 163 operational tanks, a net loss of only 48 tanks. Actual losses were somewhat heavier, the discrepancy due to the gain of repaired tanks returned to action. Closer study of the losses of each type of tank reveals that the corps lost about 70 tanks on July 12. In contrast, Soviet tank losses, long assumed to be moderate, were actually catastrophic. In 1984, a history of the Fifth Guards Tank Army written by Rotmistrov himself revealed that on July 13 the army lost 400 tanks to repairable damage. He gave no figure for tanks that were destroyed or not available for salvage. Evidence suggests that there were hundreds of additional Soviet tanks lost. Several German accounts mention that Hausser had to use chalk to mark and count the huge jumble of 93 knocked-out Soviet tanks in the Leibstandarte sector alone. Other Soviet sources say the tank strength of the army on July 13 was 150 to 200, a loss of about 650 tanks. Those losses brought a caustic rebuke from Josef Stalin. Subsequently, the depleted Fifth Guards Tank Army did not resume offensive action, and Rotmistrov ordered his remaining tanks to dig in among the infantry positions west of the town.

So there needs to be more KOed T-34s in the map...not more tigers.

Battle of Prokhorovka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The links are from the bottom of wikepedia so research the authors if you're really doubtful of this alternate reality of the battle of Prochkorovka. TheHistoryNet | Historical Conflicts | Battle of Kursk: Germany's Lost Victory in World War II Second World War Books: Review some other links which came up...

Ok, so this gives me something new to think... Germany would have lost even without Kursk? Because many says that it was because the heavy casualties of Kursk...




jumjum

Write heavy; write hard.

50 XP

11th April 2005

0 Uploads

6,827 Posts

0 Threads

#14 12 years ago

I don't think there is any doubt that just about any factual information provided or influenced by the Soviets about Prokhorovka/Kursk or Zitadelle in general must be viewed with a jaundiced eye. The Soviets IMO grossly exaggerated both the number and quality of German armored vehicles, as well as losses of those vehicles. They also minimized Soviet losses, just as they did in the Berlin offesnsive.

That being said, I'm not sure whether there is a current historical consensus of what the actual facts are. As I've said several times before, while Wikipedia is a quick place to start, I wouldn't base any factual assertions on something found there.

But it's hard to find reliable sources online. Is anyone familiar with David Glantz, author of several books about the Soviet military in WWII? What does he say about the actual order of battle and true losses for both sides?




  • 1
  • 2