In the early war period, from 1939 to around 1942, the German Army seems to be much better
on the tactical level compared to the Allies and Soviets. Why?
Well, this has to do with tank and anti-tank tactics. And it’s very much related to a
question one of my Patreons asked, Jim Land, asked. He asked me how do infantry, tank and anti-tank
tactics work on the tactical scale. But the reason I’m showing you this is because of
this sentence. “It seems like [tanks] are sometimes portrayed as these unbeatable machines
and sometimes portrayed as useless.” This is actually how the German panzers are portrayed
throughout the period too - in the late war, you’ve got the Tigers as these unbeatable
machines. In the early war with France, you’ve got the German panzer divisions as a whole
just wrecking balls. So, what’s the deal?
Well, let’s take a look at the situation in North Africa. Let’s imagine you have
a group of German Panzer II light tanks riding around the desert. Then a bunch of British
infantry hiding behind cover ambush them. British infantry have anti-tank rifles, mines,
grenades, anti-tank ditches, and even normal grenades - which would be used if the hatches
of the tank were open (which they might be in the desert). If they get close enough to the Panzers
(and it doesn’t matter which type of panzer either - it could be a Tiger) they will do some damage, and be
able to take them out.
And there’s a few ways they could do this. They could disable the tracks and hide, wait
for the panzer crew to run out of food, water and ammunition, and then accept their surrender.
They could hit it with petrol bombs (assuming they had any) or pour petrol on it and set
it alight. They could blow the hatches open or even disable the turret by placing explosives
between it and the hull. They could use anti-tank mines and anti-tank rifles - and later in
the war, PIATs and bazookas (if American) to take them out too.
And this is just assuming that the British infantry are on their own. If they have their
standard 2-pounder anti-tank guns with them, then they have even more anti-tank capability.
From this range, they’ll take out any German tank in 1941.
But notice the problem, even light tanks like the panzer II, can take out both British infantry
and British anti-tank guns. So yes, light tanks are useful. And in this scenario, to beat
the British, all they need is sheer weight of numbers. More tanks, infantry and air-power
- and this is where the concentration point, or “schwerpunkt” comes into it. Put all
your tanks and effort in one place, breakthrough the enemy’s infantry lines, encircle etc and win. And
this is the situation in France in 1940 - and explains why even light German tanks were
very useful in the early war period.
And this is also where tanks like the Sherman, and even light tanks like the M3 Light or
T-26 tanks, are also useful in combat. You just need to use them correctly. In the case of
the Sherman, the Allies used them very effectively against German infantry units (since the vast
majority of German units were infantry units, not panzer units). They even used the M3 Light
Tanks up until the end of the war, and very effectively as well. And this is why the odd Tiger
or two is vulnerable, because you don’t actually need to knock it out. Just cut it
off from its friends. Blow its tracks off. Then wait for the crew to run out of ammunition and foot etc. Hit
them with mines and grenades and so on.
But of course, if you used tanks wrong, like in the case of the T-26, which just drove
off without infantry, artillery, or any other support, they’re going to get chewed up
very easily. And this is what happens at (arguably) the biggest tank battle of the war, the Battle
of Dubno 1941. Soviet tanks went off on their own, because their infantry and artillery
didn’t have trucks, because the Soviets weren’t prepared for war, and because Preemptive
strike was not on the cards. And they get annihilated. And it wasn’t just T-26’s,
it was T-34s and KV1s as well. So it had nothing to do with the type of tank, it was because
the Soviet and Germans were playing rock paper scissors, but the Soviets only had rocks.
The point is, this isn’t a tank vs tank war. Tank on tank action did happen, and it
certainly helps if you’ve got tanks that can take out enemy tanks. But the Germans
realise earlier than the Allies and the Soviets that the purpose of a tank is not to take
on enemy tanks. And straight tank on tank fights are actually very wasteful on resources.
Let’s give an example. Here we have some British tanks driving forwards across the
desert in 1941. Then they come across a bunch of German Panzer 3s. Regardless of the capabilities
of each of the individual tanks or their crews, this is a pretty even fight. Maybe the Germans
have an advantage in guns and experience, but maybe they’ve got a new squadron with
inexperienced crews and the British happen to have the advantage in experience for some reason. Clearly,
regardless who wins, both sides are going to take a lot of losses. Therefore, German
generals like Rommel (and specifically men like Colonel von Herff), realised that this
sort of action should be avoided.
Remember when we saw infantry and anti-tank guns could take out enemy tanks? Well, if
you lose an anti-tank gun, you’ve had a bad day. But it’s not as expensive as losing
a tank. There are more anti-tank guns on the field of battle (generally) than tanks, so
losing an anti-tank gun is actually better than losing a tank. Therefore, if you can
get the enemy to engage your infantry and anti-tank guns, you’ll whittle down their
strength, and fatigue their crews, whilst keeping your own tanks and crews alive.
So Rommel and crew came up with an advanced strategy that could defeat enemy armour. It’s
called “More Guns”. Sorry, Combined Arms Warfare. Aka More Guns. What the Germans would
do is say ‘hey, look here British, here’s some German tanks’. The British would race
forwards to engage, and the Germans pull back their tanks to the infantry lines. Yes, they
would lure the British tanks forwards into their infantry and anti-tank gun screens.
Then use everything they had (tanks, infantry, anti-tank, air power - harsh words) to pummel
the British tanks. More guns basically means more chance of winning.
Now, you might be wondering - why would the British just advance with tanks? That’s
unrealistic! Actually it’s not. Percy Hobart (the guy who invented the Funnies tanks later in the war) was
an influential figure for the British in North Africa and between the wars as well. He believed tanks
could win the war on their own. Yeah. And it’s surprising because Soviet tanks also went
into action on their own too at the Battle of Dubno 1941, so there seems a common perception
at this stage that tanks can beat everything. So the British, in battles like Battleaxe
and Crusader, did sent their tanks forwards without any infantry and artillery support,
which is just as their tank-guy said they could do. This obviously lead to a lot of burning British
tanks. Soviet tanks of all calibres (T-26’s, T-34’s, KV1’s, KV2’s) all ride off alone
towards the German lines at Dubno and get chewed up by German infantry formations, tanks
and air strikes.
Now, while some junior officers and men realise that using infantry and guns with their tanks
is the best way to win, it’s not really until late 1942 that the Allies and Soviets
learn this lesson. And, to make matters worse, they’re outgunned. And this is why the Germans
had the advantage. They figured out earlier than the Allies and the Soviets on the tactical
level - that tanks needed support.
So how do you actually break through such a defence like this? Well, you use
combined arms warfare basically. Generally, a defence is made up of infantry, anti-tank guns and
artillery. So, use your own artillery and airpower to suppress enemy artillery and infantry,
plus knock out anti-tank guns, and any tanks that may be there. This means there will be
less guns to take on, plus the infantry will be suppressed. Your infantry go forwards,
with your tanks behind (so the enemy infantry can’t engage the tanks). Your tanks keep
suppressing the enemy positions, allowing your own infantry to tackle the enemy positions.
And you basically set it up so that your side brings more guns to bare upon the enemy at
any moment in time.
Now, this all sounds great in theory, but there’s another problem that the Allies
have, and this is the second big reason why the Germans have the advantage early
in the war. The Germans had been gearing up for war since the early to mid 1930’s. Most
allied countries had only started mobilizing in the late 1930’s. What does this mean?
This means they had a lot more time to pump money into their weapons designs. By 1940,
the Germans had 50mm Pak 38’s in their units, plus 50mm guns on their Panzer III’s. They
even had short barrelled 75mm guns on their Panzer IV’s.
Contrast this to the British. The British in 1941 are armed with the 40mm 2-Pounder
anti-tank gun. This is inferior to what the Germans have. Yes the Germans also have a
smaller 37mm anti-tank gun, but this was being phased out, and they had reasonable quantities
of the 50mm anti-tank guns. The British on the other hand lost 500 2-Pounders in France,
and so decided that they should continue to produce the 2-Pounders, rather than upgrade
to the 6-Pounder anti-tank guns. This was because it was faster to produce the 2-Pounder,
and they simply needed as many guns on the field of battle as possible, rather than no
guns, or very few good ones like the 6-Pounder. This then put them at a severe disadvantage
on the tactical level.
So, let’s get into the details. Please bear in mind that some of these stats are estimates
because every tank and even every shell is different. So I’m talking very generally
here, but it doesn’t really matter. But anyway - the British 2-Pounder anti-tank gun
can penetrate up to about 42mm’s of armour at a thousand yards (0.9kms). This means,
they cannot penetrate the frontal armour of the Panzer 3’s or Panzer 4’s at that range.
Their effective range is actually within about 500 yards, or 457 meters, where they can tackle
the German tanks.
The Germans on the other hand are now using the 50mm Pak 38’s anti-tank guns, which
can knock out both the latest Crusader and M3 Light Tanks from pretty much any angle
at less than 1,000 yards. The Panzer 3 has a similar but weaker gun, which is roughly
the same capability as the British tanks - so the Panzer 3 also needs to engage within about
500 yards, or 457 meters, just like the British. So the Panzer 3 and British tanks are about
equal in effectiveness. But the short-barrelled 75mm gun on the Panzer 4 can hit and do damage
to the British tanks with High Explosive rounds at longer ranges than the British can with
their tanks. In fact, they can hit the British at ranges of 3,000 yards (2.74 kilometers),
and this is a game-changer, as we’ll see.
Coupled with inferior gun sights compared to the Germans, the British are therefore
at a disadvantage because they’re going to be getting hit by German anti-tank guns
and the Panzer 4’s before the British can even get into effective range. And we’ve
not even mentioned the 88mm Flak guns yet, which can knock out armour more than twice
as thick as that seen on these British tanks, from far longer ranges. So the only hope for
the British at this point is to get as close to the enemy as possible, where the inadequacy
of their guns is not as clear. But that’s obviously not going to be easy.
Now, the British do have the 25-Pounder Field Artillery gun, which has some anti-tank ammunition.
This has a similar calibre to the German 88mm Flak guns, and can actually tackle every German tank
on the field). But there’s two big problems with the British 25 Pounders.
The first is that they didn’t accompany the tanks. Yes, that good old British tank doctrine
again that says tanks can win on the battlefield alone. So if the 25-Pounders were used in
cooperation with the tanks, this only happened by happy accident. And the second, as shown
in Operation Battleaxe especially, even when the 25-Pounders did operate with the British
tanks, they came up against a big problem.
Let’s imagine the 25-Pounders are supporting British tanks. The range of the field artillery
pieces out-range the 2-Pounders of the British tanks. They also outrange the 50mm guns on
the Panzer 3’s, which should give the British the advantage.
However, the Panzer 4’s have a gun that fires High Explosive rounds, and have almost
the same range as the 25-Pounders. And yes, I’m talking about the short barrelled version
of the Panzer 4 here. So what this means is, especially in a mobile scenario where the
British have to off-load and set-up their guns from the trucks, the British only have
time to fire off a handful of rounds before high explosive anti-personnel rounds are hitting
them. These rounds force the British artillery to pack up and retreat. And this then allows
the Germans to enter battle with both their tanks and anti-tank guns. The Germans now
have more guns than the British, which gives the Germans the advantage. This is the exact
scenario that happened in Operation Battleaxe, and similar in Operation Crusader.
So let’s see it in action. The 25 Pounders are firing away for a few minutes before the
German tanks get into range. The Panzer 4’s begin to fire, forcing the 25-Pounders to
pack up and leave. It then takes about 6 minutes or so for the Panzers to come into range of the British
tanks, which means the British are getting hit by High Explosive rounds - which can damage
the British tanks or blow their tracks off etc. Then the tanks get into firing range,
and a melee breaks out. But with British artillery forced to pull out, and with German infantry
and anti-tank guns accompanying the German panzers, the British tanks are at a severe disadvantage.
Even if the British were accompanied by infantry and artillery, they are still at a disadvantage
(although it’s not as severe). But this didn’t happen very often because of British doctrine.
There are, of course, examples where the Germans were attacking and the British ambushed them
and also had artillery support and so on. And in these scenarios the British did pretty well.
But this simply wasn’t the norm.
The same scenario applies on the Axis-Soviet Front as well. The Soviets don’t really
grasp combined arms warfare - or at least, don’t put it into practice effectively - until around about
Operation Uranus in 1942.
So the Germans have the tactical advantage in the early war mainly because they mobilized earlier
- they have better tanks and anti-tank guns. And they also learnt very early on that tanks
on their own can not win battles. This is why they change the composition of their forces
to field a more balanced tank force later in the war - as I’ve discussed in another
video. It’s only in the mid-to-late war period that this scenario changes and the Allies
and the Soviets produce better guns (in the British case, the 6 Pounder and 17-Pounder anti-tank guns).
And they finally realise the importance of combined arms warfare.
Thank you to my Patreons. If you haven't seen Operation Battleaxe - it's one of my best videos.
The link will be on the screen and in the description of the video as well.
Thanks for watching, thanks for subscribing, bye for now.