Battle of Kursk

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Battle of Kursk Background: The Battle of Kursk lasted from July 4th to July 13th 1943, between the Soviet Union and Germany. The Battle of Kursk is not only a turning point in the Eastern front, but is known for being the largest tank battle in history. After the Russians rounded the Germans at the Battle of Stalingrad, they pushed further west. However, when the Russians captured the city of Kursk, they left a bulge in the German lines. The Germans saw this as an opportunity to offset the stalemate on the Eastern Front. Tanks: The German army had superior tanks entering the conflict, however, in 1941, the Soviets developed a rank called the T-34. This tank was the simplest yet most advanced in terms of its defense. It had sloped armor which could easily repel the tank shells fired by the Germans and it had a wide track which made it the most maneuverable tank in the war. Then in late 1942, Hitler put forth a plan for 2 new tanks. First was the Panther IV which was equipped with a 75 mm capable of knocking out the T-34. But the main tank was the Tiger tank which was equipped with a larger 88 mm cannon which also was capable of destroying the T-34s. Battle: On July 4th, 1943, 2,700 German tanks were up against 3,600 Soviet tanks. However, the Tiger tanks managed to destroy T-34s because of their superior turret range. To combat this, a Soviet commander named Nicholai Vatutin literally dug in his tanks. Literally. He ordered his soldiers to dig trenches so that the tanks could roll into the trench, so that all but the turret would be sticking out. This nullified the Tiger’s biggest advantage, which was their range. Soviet tanks fired at Tigers at point- blank range. Eventually however, the German army broke. Whether, if it was due to Hitler not supplying troops or his constant meddling, the Germans decided to retreat. Effect on World War II: The Battle of Kursk was the largest armored battle in history. However, more significantly, this battle was another turning point in the war. After this battle, the Germans would never launch a counterattack on the Eastern front. The battle also forced the Germans to divert many of their already strained resources on the Eastern front, which made the Allied landing in Normandy easier .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Week Beginning 1St June Title: Why Did Operation Barbarossa Fail?
Lesson 1 – week beginning 1st June Title: Why did Operation Barbarossa fail? WHY DID OPERATION BARBAROSSA FAIL? ‘When Barbarossa commences, the world will hold its breath,’ Hitler said of his bold plan to invade the Soviet Union. The scale of the campaign was certainly huge. Hitler assembled 3 million troops, 3500 tanks and 2700 aircraft for ‘Operation Barbarossa’ - the German code name for the attack on Russia. Why did Hitler break the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact? Hitler invaded the Soviet Union on the 22nd June 1941, ordering his troops to ‘flatten Russia like a hailstorm’. The reasons for the invasion were a mixture of the military and the political. Hitler needed Russia's plentiful raw materials to support his army and population. There was oil in the Caucasus (southern Russia) and wheat in the Ukraine. He was also obsessed by racial ideas. The Russians, he believed, were an inferior ‘Slav’ race which would offer no real resistance (i.e. they wouldn’t be able to fight back) to ‘racially superior’ Germans. Russia's fertile plains could provide even more Lebensraum (living space) than Poland. Russia was also at the heart of world communism, and Hitler detested communists. The Russian Red Army had done very badly during its brief war with Finland in the winter of 1939 – 40. This convinced Hitler the Soviet Union and its Red Army could be beaten in four months. His confidence was also boosted by the fact that in the late 1930s, Stalin, the Soviet dictator, had shot 35,000 officers (43% of all his officers) in ‘purges’ of the Red (Russian) Army.
[Show full text]
Soviet Blitzkrieg: the Battle for White Russia, 1944
EXCERPTED FROM Soviet Blitzkrieg: The Battle for White Russia, 1944 Walter S. Dunn, Jr. Copyright © 2000 ISBNs: 978-1-55587-880-1 hc 978-1-62637-976-3 pb 1800 30th Street, Suite 314 Boulder, CO 80301 USA telephone 303.444.6684 fax 303.444.0824 This excerpt was downloaded from the Lynne Rienner Publishers website www.rienner.com D-FM 11/29/06 5:06 PM Page vii CONTENTS List of Illustrations ix Preface xi Introduction 1 1 The Strategic Position 17 2 Comparison of German and Soviet Units 35 3 Rebuilding the Red Army and the German Army 53 4 The Production Battle 71 5 The Northern Shoulder 83 6 Vitebsk 95 7 Bogushevsk 117 8 Orsha 139 9 Mogilev 163 10 Bobruysk 181 11 The Southern Shoulder 207 12 Conclusion 221 Appendix: Red Army Reserves 233 Bibliography 237 Index 241 About the Book 249 vii D-Intro 11/29/06 5:08 PM Page 1 INTRODUCTION he Battle for White Russia erupted south of Vitebsk on the T morning of 22 June 1944, when Russian artillery began a thun- dering barrage of over a thousand guns, mortars, and rockets that blasted away for 2 hours and 20 minutes in an 18-kilometer-long sec- tor. At the same time a Soviet fighter corps, two bomber divisions, and a ground attack division pummeled the bunkers of General Pfeiffer’s VI Corps with bombs and strafed any foolhardy German troops in the trenches with machine gun fire. The sheer weight of explosives that rained down on the German dugouts and bunkers paralyzed the defenders, especially the new replacements who had arrived during the previous few months.
[Show full text]
The 11Th Panzers in the Defense, 1944
The 11 th Panzers in the Defense, 1944 by A. Harding Ganz frauleins,fu~e~!of the~si~ma'm'selles~fl;;~I;~ii~~:~~~~~~~~:i~~F~~~~~~~I;1 of sunny southern France, tan talized the weary Landsers troopers - of the 11 th Panzer Division. The rumors were true: it was the spring of 1944, and the battered division was to be redeployed from the Russian Front to southern France for recuperation and re building. On the Ostfront, the brutal struggle continued un abated.· The Gennan defense of the Dnieper had been costly, as massive Russian of fensives resulted in huge en circlement battles at Korsun Cherkassy and Kamenets-Po dolsky. Fierce winter blizzards had alternated with the raspu titsa, the sudden spring thaws, that sank vehicles into the Ukrainian mud, and then froze them in solid again, as in con crete. The elated troopers boarded their trains near Kishinev, bound for Bordeaux. The rest of the division followed in May, by road and rail, via Bu dapest and Vienna. But even if the home of the 11 th was in Silesia, safely beyond the fighting fronts, Allied bomb ing of the homeland and talk of the expected invasion of ~,.~ Festung Europa by the British and Americans was sobering. Long gone were the dramatic days of the blitzkrieg through the Balkans and the drives on Kiev and Moscow. These had made the reputation of the Gespenster Panzer would wage a fighting with Even if Gennany were ultimately de Division - the "Ghost" Division, its drawal up the Rhone valley of south feated, the lith PD would generally emblem an eerie sword-wielding spec ern France against the advancing accomplish the difficult missions tre on a halftrack.
[Show full text]
Annual Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives Lecture
King's College London Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives Annual Liddell Hart Centre for Military Archives Lecture How the cold war froze the history of World War Two Professor David Reynolds, FBA given Tuesday, 15 November 2005 © 2005 Copyright in all or part of this text rests with David Reynolds, FBA, and save by prior consent of Professor David Reynolds, no part of parts of this text shall be reproduced in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, now known or to be devised. ‘Anyone who delves deeply into the history of wars comes to realise that the difference between written history and historical truth is more marked in that field than in any other.’ Basil Liddell Hart struck this warning note at the beginning of a 1947 survey of historical literature about the Second World War. In fact, he felt that overall this writing was superior to the instant histories of the Great War a quarter-century or so earlier, mainly because ‘war correspondents were allowed more scope, and more inside information’ in 1939-45 than in 1914-18 and therefore presented a much less varnished portrait of warfare. Since their view was ‘better balanced’, he predicted ‘there is less likely to be such a violent swing from illusion to disillusion as took place in the decade after 1918.’ 1 Despite this generally positive assessment of the emerging historiography of the Second World War, Liddell Hart did note ‘some less favourable factors.’ Above all, he said, ‘there is no sign yet of any adequate contribution to history from the Russian side, which played so large a part’ in the struggle.
[Show full text]
Masterarbeit
MASTERARBEIT Titel der Masterarbeit Western aid for the Soviet Union during World War II Verfasser Denis Havlat, BA angestrebter akademischer Grad Master of Arts (MA) Wien, 2015 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt: A 066 689 Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt: Masterstudium Zeitgeschichte UG 2002 Betreut von: Univ. Prof. Dr. Carsten Burhop 2 Contents Introduction 4 1 The Origins of Lend-Lease: Cash and Carry and aid for Britain 9 Aid for Britain 11 2 The Eastern Front and Western aid 1941 14 The state of the Red Army at the start of the war 18 Lend-Lease 21 The air war 24 The Mediterranean 25 3 The Eastern Front and Western aid 1942 27 Lend-Lease 30 The air war 32 The Mediterranean 35 4 The Eastern Front and Western aid 1943 37 Lend-Lease 39 The air war 42 The Mediterranean 46 5 The Eastern Front and Western aid 1944-45 48 Lend-Lease 50 The air war 52 Italy 56 Western Europe 57 6 The impact of Western aid 60 German military effort used against the Soviet Union and the Western Allies 60 Disruption of German economy 64 Lend-Lease deliveries 66 7 The Russo-German war without Western intervention 71 8 Conclusion 76 Bibliography 79 Abstract 85 3 Introduction It has been seventy years since the end of the Second World War. In the decades following this conflict, thousands of books and articles have been published, examining almost every aspect of the events which took place during this time period. Soldiers, politicians and ordinary civilians alike have composed countless accounts and memoirs, while historians have extensively studied the people, decisions and campaigns which were crucial to World War II.
[Show full text]
The Red Army's Offensive Operations in Poland
2017-053 18 July 2017 Prelude to Berlin: The Red Army’s Offensive Operations in Poland and Eastern Germany, 1945 ed. and trans. Richard W. Harrison. Solihull, UK: Helion, 2016. Pp. xiii, 635. ISBN 978–0–910777–16–9. Review by Timothy Heck, King’s College London ([email protected]). Soviet military operations during World War II remain an understudied subject among Western histo- rians. Standard histories of the war, often written with the assistance of captured German generals in the 1950s, “routinely tended to describe warfare against a faceless and formless enemy, an enemy whose sole attributes were its army’s immense size and its limitlessness supply of expendable human resources.”1 Symposia at the US Army War College’s Center for Land Warfare in the mid-1980s pro- duced excellent Cold War-era histories of Red Army operations in 1942–45. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, more nuanced and better informed studies have appeared, thanks to the release of doc- uments by the Russian Federation’s military archives and the publication of memoirs by Soviet partici- pants in the war. Other works, written for both scholarly and popular audiences, have explored the campaigns on the Eastern Front with greater depth and insight than earlier histories based chiefly on German memoirs. Helion and Company has now published a number of English translations 2 of formerly secret Sovi- et General Staff studies of wartime operations that have filled gaps in Western knowledge of both So- viet operations and the postwar Soviet understanding and exploitation of them. In Prelude to Berlin, historian Richard Harrison (formerly of the US Military Academy) has edited and translated seven So- viet sources concerning operations in Winter 1945 that brought the Red Army within striking distance of Berlin.
[Show full text]
ARMOR March-April 2003
Once More Unto the Breach As we go to print, diplomatic efforts to resolve Iraqi disarma- fect or incomplete information, but the friction generated in the ment issues have almost reached the terminal stage. Unless a commander’s mind by uncertainty, exhaustion, and fear. Captain significant breakthrough occurs, U.S. Armed Forces will once Scott Thomson advises that heavy cavalry is designed to fight again act as the hammer. I know we are up to the task, but we for information. However, the distances over which the troop cannot become overconfident in our equipment, tactics, and operates, combined with the uncertain enemy situation inherent soldiers. Our leaders must stay focused on the basics and main- in being the first force to cross the battlefield, presents the com- tain our high standards. Good luck to all. mander with the most difficult situation in which to concentrate his firepower. This is what makes the cavalry mission a danger- The Battle of Kursk is considered one of the most epic tank ous and frustrating one. battles of all time. To the Germans, it was an opportunity to repeat their 1941 and 1942 successes, encircling vast Soviet Transforming the armor cavalry force remains a topic of consid- armies and destroying them in the process. The German losses erable discussion. Captain Ryan Seagreaves provides insight on are put at over 3,500 armored vehicles, with the true number how to effectively transform the Task Force Scout Platoon. Sea- unknown. To both sides, the salient around Kursk — 200 kilo- greaves proposes the critical limitations of the Task Force (TF) meters wide and 150 deep — was the single most obvious tar- HMMWV Scout Platoon can be corrected by a transformation to get for the Germans to attack.
[Show full text]
Grier on Frieser, 'Die Ostfront 1943/44: Der Krieg Im Osten Und an Den Nebenfronten'
H-German Grier on Frieser, 'Die Ostfront 1943/44: Der Krieg im Osten und an den Nebenfronten' Review published on Thursday, January 22, 2009 Karl-Heinz Frieser. Die Ostfront 1943/44: Der Krieg im Osten und an den Nebenfronten. München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2007. XVI, 1319 S. ISBN 978-3-421-06235-2. Reviewed by Howard D. Grier (Department of History, Erskine College)Published on H-German (January, 2009) Commissioned by Susan R. Boettcher Defeat in the East In June 2008 the Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt completed its ten-volume history,Germany and the Second World War, which began appearing in 1979. Led by Karl-Heinz Frieser (author of The Blitzkrieg Legend: The 1940 Campaign in the West [2005]), who describes most military operations on the eastern front, the team also included Bernd Wegner, who discusses the general strategic context and Scandinavia; Krisztian Ungvary, who treats Hungary; Klaus Schmider, who describes the course of the war in Yugoslavia; Klaus Schönherr, who explains developments in Romania and the southern Balkans; and Gerhard Schreiber, who discusses the end in North Africa and the campaigns in Sicily and Italy. The volume of the series under review here is a superb work of scholarship. It consists of over twelve hundred pages of text, with more than five thousand footnotes, ten pages of archival sources, and sixty pages of bibliography. There are nearly a hundred informative maps, most in color, and dozens of charts and tables providing statistical information, orders of battle, and production figures. The authors have mined existing scholarship and effectively utilized archives in Germany, Russia, Great Britain, the United States, Hungary, Romania, Italy, and Finland.
[Show full text]
Modefied-Ijhr-Blitzkrieg Operations in World
International Journal of History and Research (IJHR) ISSN (Print): 2249-6963; ISSN (Online): 2249-8079 Vol. 10, Issue 1, Jun 2020, 63–74 © TJPRC Pvt. Ltd. BLITZKRIEG OPERATIONS IN WORLD WAR – 2: A PERSPECTIVE ON BATTLE STRATEGIES AND OUTCOMES AMITABH SAH Indian Revenue Service (IRS) Officer Posted in Delhi, India ABSTRACT The ‘blitzkrieg’ refers to the warfare theories of mobile tactics and holistic armed conflicts which evolved in Germany throughout the interwar period and the Second World War. The basic idea of the blitzkrieg strategy was to speedily inflict defeat on an adversary in a decisive and short war fought by a lean but well trained army while restricting the loss of soldiers and weaponry. In order to achieve these objective, separate independent groups of tanks and mobile infantry, along with coordinating artillery, engineering assets and sufficient air support were required to work in tandem. These tactics gave sudden dazzling victories to the German armies in the early part of the World war-2. The key elements of surprise and audacity employed in blitzkrieg tactics stunned its opponents as they were not prepared for it. However after the initial surprise wore down and also Original Article Article Original faced with opponents who were better prepared and with more strategic depth, the blitzkrieg offences repeatedly failed to give the desired results. It nevertheless left enough influences to impact the military thinking all over the world. KEYWORDS: Lightening War, Speedy Maneuvers, Small-Sized, Compact and Harmonized Troops Armoured Forces and their Deployment Received: Mar 27, 2020; Accepted: Apr 17, 2020; Published: Jun 05, 2020; Paper Id.: IJHRJUN20207 INTRODUCTION The word Blitzkrieg is formed out of two German words; blitz for 'lightning’ and Krieg meaning ‘war.' This word has mostly been used to portray a technique of a focused and attacking combat intended to hit the enemy with a quick and calculated blow using active and mobile forces, particularly armour and air support.
[Show full text]
COUNTERPOINT to STALINGRAD, Operation Mars (November-December 1942): Marshal Zhukov's Greatest Defeat
WARNING! The views expressed in FMSO publications and reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. COUNTERPOINT TO STALINGRAD, Operation Mars (November-December 1942): Marshal Zhukov's Greatest Defeat by COL David M. Glantz Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS. Introduction After enduring months of bitter and costly defensive combat at Stalingrad, on 19 November 1942, Red Army forces struck a massive blow against the hitherto triumphant German Army. To the Germans' utter consternation, within one week Soviet forces encircled German Sixth Army in the deadly Stalingrad cauldron. Ten weeks later, the army's tattered remnants surrendered, ending the most famous battle of the German- Soviet War. History states the titanic Battle of Stalingrad altered the course of war on the German Eastern Front and set the Wehrmacht and German Reich on its path toward utter and humiliating defeat. History accorded enduring fame to the victors of Stalingrad. The victorious Red Army seemingly never again suffered strategic or significant operational defeat.1 The architects of the Stalingrad victory entered the annals of military history as unvanquished heroes who led the subsequent Soviet march to victory. Foremost among them was Marshal of the Soviet Union Georgi Konstantinovich Zhukov, the hero of Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, and Berlin. History, however, has misinformed U.S.. The muses of history are fickle. They record only what was reported and ignore what was not. The adage, "To the victors belong the spoils," applies to history as well as war.
[Show full text]
The German Blitzkrieg Against the USSR, 1941
BELFER CENTER PAPER The German Blitzkrieg Against the USSR, 1941 Andrei A. Kokoshin PAPER JUNE 2016 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org Design & Layout by Andrew Facini Cover image: A German map showing the operation of the German “Einsatzgruppen” of the SS in the Soviet Union in 1941. (“Memnon335bc” / CC BY-SA 3.0) Statements and views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Copyright 2016, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America BELFER CENTER PAPER The German Blitzkrieg Against the USSR, 1941 Andrei A. Kokoshin PAPER JUNE 2016 About the Author Andrei Kokoshin is a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences and dean of Moscow State University’s Faculty of World Politics. He has served as Russia’s first deputy defense minister, secretary of the Defense Council and secretary of the Security Council. Dr. Kokoshin has also served as chairman of the State Duma’s Committee on the CIS and as first deputy chairman of the Duma’s Committee on Science and High Technology. Table of Contents Abstract ....................................................................................vi Introduction .............................................................................. 1 Ideology, Political Goals and Military Strategy of Blitzkrieg in 1941 ..................................................................3
[Show full text]
Fitting Firepower Score Models to the Battle of Kursk Data
Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2000-09 Fitting firepower score models to the battle of Kursk data Gozel, Ramazan Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/26550 IARY OSTG TE SCHOOL RE\ J943-5101 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS FITTING FIREPOWER SCORE MODELS TO THE BATTLE OF KURSK DATA By Ramazan Gozel ' September 2000 Thesis Advisor: Thomas W. Lucas Second Reader: Jeffrey Appleget Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. REPORT PAGE DOCUMENTATION Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED September 2000 Master's Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: Fitting Firepower Score Models To The Battle 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Of Kursk Data 6. AUTHOR(S) Gozel, Ramazan 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING / MONTTORTNG N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11.
[Show full text]