What Percentage of German Tanks in the Normandy Battle

Here are some more figures from a document collected by John Salts:
==start document==

WO 291/1186 The comparative performance of German anti-tank weapons during WWII
This report is dated 24 May 1950.

The percentage of tank losses, by cause, for different theatres is given as follows:
Theatre (tanks)..Mines.ATk guns Tanks SP guns Bazooka Other Total
NW Europe (1305) 22.1% 22.7%....14.5% 24.4%...14.2%...2.1%..100%
Italy (671)......30%...16%......12%...26%......9%.....7%...100%
N Africa (1734)..19.5% 40.3%....38.2% nil......nil....2%....100%
Mean values......22.3% 29.4%....25.3% 13.5%....6.1%...3%....100%

Caution is advised over the "damaged" figures because of variability in reporting.
It is stated that tanks and SP guns should be considered together, as war diaries often show doubt over what exactly caused a tank loss.

Percentage personnel casualties, by type of tank:

Tank type Mines ATk guns Tanks SP guns Bazooka
Sherman...24.6% 41.4%....60.5% 54.3%...44.7%
Churchill 14.7% 45%......46.7% 30%.....14.7%
Stuart....34.6% 29.8%....51.7% *.......*
Crusader..*.....38.5%....41.7%
[1].......17.4% 34.4%....28.6% *.......*

[1] = Cromwell, Valentine, Matilda, Grant

An asterisk indicates a sample smaller than 30. These are included in the mean values.

The apparently greater effectiveness of mines in Italy is credited to the differing nature of the terrain, with more defiles than found in other theatres. It is estimated that about 2,000 German ATk mines were
planted per tank casualty inflicted.

==end document==

 

Also found this in a John Salts document:

"WO 291/1218 A survey of tank warfare in Europe from D-Day to 12 Aug 44

"This study was undertaken in order to examine the supposition that weight of numbers was the deciding factor in tank battles after 1942."

The report cites the following ratios of numerical superiority required for success in the period under study. The figures in brackets show the average for the whole war.

................................Allied success Enemy success
Allied tank vs. German tank.....2.2 (1.6)......1.5 (1.1)
Allied tank vs. SP and ATk guns 2.5 (1.8)......1.8 (0.6)

The report states that, during major offensives, British numerical superiority was as much as 4 times German strength, though in battle it was possible that this did not exceed 2 or 3 to 1. In the period under study, greater numerical superiority was needed for success than the average for the whole war, and percentage losses were lower for both sides.

The mean ranges of engagement for the period under study are given as 1200 yards in open country, 400 yards in close country. It is stated that percentage losses for both sides are higher in the open."

 

I very much doubt the German kill to death ratio would be anything much higher than 1:1. According to the stats Wilson posted, a 2:1 numerical perponderance was needed for the allies to win tank versus tank engagements.

According to an American report, 2:1 was exactly the average numerical perponderance of American tanks in tactical engagements.

 

Double Post

 

still the tiger was more deadly but the sherman was faster so more able to avoid being targeted

 

Rather than relying on the extracts above the whole of these documents are available from Merrion Press

The Comparative Performance of German Anti-Tank Weapons During World War II by H. G. Gee

Strangely I cant find this current on Ray's site but you can order it through others who will (I presume)get it from Ray!

Amazon.com: A Survey of Tank Warfare in Europe from D-Day to 12 August, 1944: H. G. Gee: Books

A Survey of Tank Warfare in Europe from D-Day to 12 August 1944 by H. G. Gee (Book) in History

Merriam should be supported because they are a very useful source of hard to find documents.

 

Yes it was something like 9 US tanks vs. 5 Panzers I believe? (typical vs. most engagements).

But I think a 2:1 ratio for the Normandy battle seems fair- there were sizable amounts of Panther tanks with a battalion of Panthers in most Panzer divisions in normandy and small amounts of Tiger I's in three or so Tiger Tank battalions. There are many accounts, particularly in the Caen sector, of Tigers and Panthers doing heavy, disproportionate damage to Allied tank formations in the defense.

 

Just some book data on German armor in late Aug 1944...

Here are Max Hastings´"Overlord" figures for Germans:

22/23 Aug 1944 Army Group B reported the state of its eight surviving armoured divisions:

2. Panzer 1 infantry battalion, no tanks, no artillery

21. Panzer 4 weak battalions, 10 tanks, artillery unknown

116. Panzer 1 infantry battalion, 12 tanks, approx. two artillery batteries

1st SS Panzer No tanks, no artillery, weak infantry elements

2nd SS Panzer 450 men, 15 tanks, 6 guns

9th SS Panzer 460 men, 20-25 tanks, 20 guns

10th SS Panzer: 4 weak infantry battalions, no tanks,no artillery

12th SS panzer: 300 men, 10 tanks, no artillery

Meyer´s division alone had driven to Normandy with over 20,000 men and 150 tanks. Panzer Lehr had ceased to exist after Cobra, 9th Panzer was wiped out in the Mortain battle

 

I'm afraid that the only thing that passage revealed was Hasting's profound ignorance of what the Germans were reporting and what the numbers represented.