Hey guys, Nice to be a member of this site. What do u guys think of the tactic called PanzerKeil, do u believe its a soundtactic? :lol:
It isn't as such a tactic in itself, but rather a tactical formation as part of a tactic. Essentially, I do think that the idea of a concentrated attack on the enemy's center of gravity is a sound principle, however it wasn't revolutionary in World War II. Carl von Clauzewitz described this in On War, and the principle had been employed by cavalry for several centuries. The principle will fail if employed isolated, though, since cavalry and tanks alike are very vulnerable to flank- and rear attacks. Thus, the attack must be followed up with infantry.
Principaly what im talking about with the Panzerkeil is the german panzer formations in which the Tiger1 comes first, followed by the Panthers then panzers III and IV. As used in the kursk battles. Some people would argue that such a formation is not sound as tank doctrine dictated that light tanks should spearhead a tankassault because of their greater mobility and their ability to spot enemy strong points before the heavies came into action. Also, the panzerkeil tended to slow down an armoured assault as the assault had to go at the speed of the heavy tigers. Personally, i believe their are advantages to both type of formations. The panzerkeil is ideal for a slow grinding battle as that of Kursk and the other formation is great when used in rapid blitzkreig attacks such as operation blue before the panzers reached stalingrad.
Well, you can't really compare the two. In Fall Blau the Germans simply didn't have any heavy tanks; if they had, who knows what they would have done with them. Christian: the attack at the enemy centre was used most effectively by Alexander the Great agains the Persians. His cavalry wedge attack broke the most formidable Persian armies and made the Persian king flee the field twice.
True, but since classical history isn't my strong side, von Clausewitz was to my mind first. Only proves my point, though (By the way, I'm really looking forward to seing Alexander in the cinema - having opening night tickets and all )
Attacking the center of enemy lines is usually very riskcy as u might get into a bulge and invite flanking counterattacks. Reminds u of something ??
Still, you can't make flank attacks if there are no flanks open to you. Thus the reasoning behind attacking the center of gravity, opening up the front line to allow flanking attacks.
The classic idea of the wedge attack does not provide the enemy with a flank either, for the further the formation breaks through, the wider its base becomes. The enemy line is sliced through and then the two halves are driven apart by the shape of the charging force.
Doesnt sound very intelligent as the further u expand a bulge, the larger the flank.It also sucks in plenty of reserves. So unless ur russian, or have heavy numericall suppuriority, dont leave a bulge hanging.
Then what about Manstein's thrust through Norther France in 1940 - he more or less outran both supplies and infantry, but still succeeded. You will need to make a penetration and exploit this at some point - an attack along a full front, spreading out your force, will lead to disaster.
Im not arguing about that christian! Blitzkreig is an excellent tactic, but what im saying is if u dont exploit that breach, and u dont reach a stalemate like the russians did in Kursk and the germans in the ardennes, then u have achieved ur goals. But if u do reach a stalemate, then ur inviting a counterattack that might encircle ur farthest troops along the bulge. Basically, either u win, or u lose.
That is true - it is a fine thing to break your enemy's line, but if you do not / cannot exploit your breakthrough, then basically you have attacked for little or no reason. See WW1 for a list of examples on this...
Thank you thank you! Eternal wisdom being spilled here. It is of course true that a wedge attack is no longer of much use today, since it is based solely on breaking the enemy lines and driving them apart. It was useful when one line of troops was all the enemy had. Now, you need to widen your point instead of keeping it as a narrow spearhead, in order to catch counterattacks and efficiently destroy the enemy's reseves.
The only problem I have with this tactic is that my precious Tigers are leading the way. Which meant that it would attract most of the enemy anti-tank guns and heavy artillery. As thick as the Tiger's armor was, it was still vulnerable to large caliber guns as well as anti-tank mines. I probably would send a spearhead of obsolete PZ-38 or Panzer-III's ahead of the Tigers to clear (a.k.a detonate) the mines and draw out enemy fires, thus saving the Tigers for more useful tasks. In naval tactics, capital ships were rarely send charging ahead of the fleet without the destroyers and cruisers' protection: clearing enemy mines, provide a screen against enemy subs and aerial threats...
But the point of the Tiger (and any breakthrough tank) is to spearhead the breakthrough, protecting the lighter, faster tanks so they can exploit the breakthrough. Land & sea warfare does not always compare - it is very hard to garrison a wave...
The wedge formation is an excellent formation for movement to contact as it provides a great deal of flexibility, allowing one to protect his flanks by echeloning troops left and right. Those forces can be manuvered as necessary once contact is made. Many of the German commanders (see Manstein, eg) spoke of the schwerepunkt (sp?), which was tanks on the outside of the wedge, infantry, AT and arty in the middle. Screening forward of this formation would be the reconnaissance forces to find and fix the enemy, develop the situation, and find any weak points. Then the schwerepunkt would be manuvered to strike the weak point. Worked like a champ. It also worked pretty well in Desert Storm.
