Captured equipment. German Quatermaster and Maintenance nightmare

Well, I'd like to see it, as it's not very interesting if you're out to "beat" me? I'm obviously here to learn but will naturally hold my ground until disproven. Most of you guys are twenty, thirty years older than me so I've never considered myself or played "the expert".

 

I won't bother replying to your arguments, which are belied by your remarkable liberal use of "opinion". Too much wearing of rosy Zeiss lenses does that to a person.

Returning to this,

as I said you were mixing things up. For the employment of Light Tanks read the new thread by JCFalkenberg elsewhere. As for the misconception I mention, the problem was not with Light Tanks but with Tank Destroyers which are a different animal. Read this document. for a free sampler.

 

Hmmmm...As Jeff and I have mentioned this thread is about the German Military and the huge amount and variety of vehicles that thier Logistic and maintenece people had to deal with. If you want to discuss the use of Light Tanks please go to the thread I created just for that. Not this one. And Wolfy. You should be prepared to back up your statements with facts and sources or otherwise state that it is your OPINION.

http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/28918-doctrine-use-light-tanks-wwii.html

 

Yes, getting back to the "nightmare" for the German Quartermasters corps. Starting with the "panzers". Been looking in my old files and finally found this batch of stuff I had put together in the past. The Panzerkampfwagen V, or "Panther" chassis alone had at least fifteen development models, NOT counting the "Jagdpanther" tank destroyer of which I believe there were at least three other models. All using the same basic "PzKpfw V" chassis.

Of the very first eight "panzers", three were light tanks; the Mark I, Mark II, and the "38-t". The "PzKpfw 38(t)" was a Czech design and was produced only in Czechoslovakia and all 1100+ were known as "panzers" inside and outside of Nazi Germany. The Nazis also "re-named" the French SOMUA-35 (probably the best medium tank pre-WW2) a "panzer" when they put them into their own units as the PzKpfw 35-S 739(f) after the fall of France.

Two other pre-war designs of "panzers" were medium tanks; the Mark III and the Mark IV (the Mark IV was the only model panzer produced through out the war). The three types developed, as well as produced in the course of the war were medium-heavy (PzKpfw V, "Panther") and the two heavy tanks. The heavies were the Tiger I, and (King/Royal) Tiger II. The "Maus" does NOT count as it was never really produced. This not only makes the "good" ones less efficient, it makes the "decent" models weaker in logistics (supply and maintenance). Then let us not ignore that a SINGLE Tiger I or Tiger II took at the very least 300,000 man-hours to produce like watches, while the Sherman and T-34s were rolling off the lines like "sausages". Cheap but functional

Now, to my own mind here is where the "trouble" for German tank production begins. Before 1939 six different German plants, scattered all over Germany, and competing with each other for government "marks", were engaged (clandestinely) in tank manufacture in one way or the other. By the war years themselves, there were at least TEN separate companies building "panzers", if not designing them. They are all in separate areas and not producing a "standard" anything. These included Krupp (Magdeburg), Rhine-Metal (Borsig), Demag (Benrath), Henschel (Kassel), M.N.H. (Hannover), M.A.N. (Nuremberg), M.I.A.G. (Braunschweig), Daimler-Benz (Berlin), Porsche (Stuttgart) and Alkett (Berlin-Borsigwalde). The transmission and steering units were in some cases produced by the larger tank assembly plants, such as Henschel, Krupp and Daimler-Benz. And used on their own units and others. Then again in other cases by a number of subcontracted firms built the stuff for assembly by the others. In the case of suspension and tracks, some of the tank assembly firms produced their own while others were supplied by subcontractors. Few if any of their parts are/were interchangeable.

Contrast that with the plants which built the TWO main models of medium tank built in the US for the US and its Lend-Lease partners, with many (not all) parts interchangeable; both the M3 (Lee/Grant) to some extent, and the M4 (Sherman) were produced in these plants; American Locomotive Co., Baldwin Locomotive Works, Detroit Tank Arsenal (Chrysler), Pressed Steel Car Co., and Pullman Standard Car Manufacturing Co. Lima Locomotive Works, Inc., Pacific Car and Foundry Co., Federal Machine and Welding Co., Fisher Tank Division, General Motors Corp., and even the Ford Motor Co. built them and/or parts for them. During World War II, the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant alone built a quarter of the 89,500+ tanks (all types) produced in the U.S. overall. And as such were NOT unique in and of themselves.

Then here is a partial list of the TRUCKS alone employed in the German/Nazi automotive park, and the years in which they produced them:

Adler, 1900-1945, AEG, 1914-1953, Afa, 1918-1936, Audi, 1909-1945, Bergmann, Bergmann-Metallurgique, 1909-1952, Beuchelt, 1925-1936, Bleichert, 1923-1962, BMW, 1928-present, Bob, 1932-1941, Borgward, 1924-1961, Breuer, 1938, Büssing-NAG, 1931-1950, Butz, 1934, Citroen, 1927-1935, Daimler-Benz (Mercedes-Benz), 1926-present, Demag, 1937-1944, Deuliewag, 1936-1952, Deutz, 1918-1938, Dick, 1925-1939, DKW, 1928-1945, Esslingen (ME), 1926-1966, Famo, 1935-1944, FAUN, 1919-present, Ford (Ford-Köln), 1925-present, Framo, 1927-1943, 1949-1961, Freund (Wendax), 1933-1952, Goliath, 1929-1963, Hagedorn, 1938, Hamor, 1933, Hanomag, 1905-1944, Hanno (Hoffmann), 1935-1950, Hansa-Lloyd, 1913-1938, Henschel, 1925-1973, Hercules, 1908-1933, Horch, 1899-1945, Imperia, 1935, Kaiser, 1935-1936, Klöckner-Deutz (KHD), 1936-1945, Kramer, 1936-?, Kraus-Maffei, 1931-1955, Krupp, 1906-1942, Lanz, 1921-1954, Lanz-Eichhoff, 1937, Luther & Heyer, 1933-1937, Machoy, 1938, MAN, 1915-1956, Manderbach, 1928-1956, Maschinenbau Lüneburg, 1933, Meier, 1936, MIAG, 1936-1954, Müller, 1939, NAG, 1901-1934, NAG-Protos, 1929-1933, Neander, 1934-1939, Normag, 1938-1950, NSU, 1905-1974, Opel, 1907-present, Ostner (OD), 1932-1957, Phänomen, 1907-1945, Primus, 1932-1942, Renger, 1936-1940, Röhr, 1927-1935, Sachsenberg, 1942-1943, Schlüter, 1939-1942, Siemens-Schuckert, 1928-1939, Simson, 1911-1934, Stoewer, 1898-1945, Talbot (former Goosens), 1938-1941, Tempo, 1928-1966, Trippel, 1932-1945, Vögele, 1929-1950, Vomag, 1914-1944, Wanderer, 1905-1944, Weise, 1930-1939, Würdig, 1933-1935, Zettelmeyer, 1936-1954, Zündapp, 1933-1958.

Then contrast those "lorries/trucks" (with literally NO interchangeable parts) with the fact that when Quartermaster Supply of the USA decided to standardize their automobile park, they made this decision; GMC (CCKW/DUKW) would supply the Army, International Harvester (IHC) would supply the Navy (M-5/6) but as there was no client for Studebaker, REO, or Auto-Car in US auto-park they were either changed over to production of their former competitors products (for the duration), or built their own units which were then exported in Lend-Lease to our allies. Chrysler itself was occupied in both the Detroit Tank Arsenal (Lee/Grants/Shermans), and its Dodge/Plymouth divisions providing the 4x4 smaller trucks for ambulance, command car, and covered van work (the first Power Wagons). Ford built "jeeps" on the Willys design (GP-W), which the Willys people had lifted "wholesale" from the poor little American Bantam company. Now, there was some "cross-over" of course, the DUKW being one used by different services, and the line between IHC and Dodge for the USN and Army being blurred as well.

Here is another little "tid-bit" to remember when it comes to "standardization", past on to me by my now deceased uncle Sgt. Blackstone who learned it while in one of the Combat Engineer battalions of the ETO (291st?). It seems that the electrical systems of American built engines were set up to be so interchangeable that the "points, condenser, and plugs" of most non-navy, non-air corps engines used the same sets and were gapped the same.

The "gapping" is the distance between the two electrodes which produce a spark when it jumps from one to the other. A single thickness of cardboard match book cover will "gap" the points on every thing from a single cylinder Briggs and Stratton auxiliary power generator, to a CCKW in the war years to get it running (not perfect, but usable). Fold the cover over to double its thickness and you have a usable "gap" for the spark plugs, which were all either Champion J-8s, or copies of them. That is standardization at its best.

This of course ignores that most if not ALL the production lines for America's aircraft were "non-competitive" in the war years, and produced each others models if asked to do so. The same cannot be said for the many German/Nazi aircraft producers.

The only major "choke point" or confusion point I see in the allied portion is that "non-standard" set of fasteners, spanners (wrenches), and specialty tools for field mechanics. American SAE, British Whitworth, Soviet metrics.

 

Thanks for that Clint !! And just imagine adding to that long list of German trucks,not to mention ALL the other vehicles and AFVs,for example all the others that were captured and/or produced in the occupied countries the list is just ridiculous!!! Trying to keep the parts for all those in stock or in production and to get them out to the maintenance units and then the nightmare of those units having the right part(s) on hand to do the repairs and keep the vehicles in service.

 

Mayhaps that in itself explains the extensive use of animals (horses/mules), and bicyles in the not so highly "mechanized" German military!

 

Exactly!! LOL. And like I have said before you can always eat the horse LOL.

 

Yes Germany logistics were at a disarray since day one. Imagine going to war with six different types of tanks. Not to mention of course the 3,000 different trucks and other logistical vehicles. No wonder the amount of spares the Germans had to carry were stagering... Imagine the time consuming process a mechanic had to go just to get, for instance, the carburator of a truck changed. No wonder Germany manpower was dwindling by 1942... Imagine the ammount of people needed just to keep inventories and to be able to repair anything in a timely fashion...



Cheers...

 

What happened most of the time is ancedotally described in one case in William Folkestad's biographical book Panzerjäger: Tank Hunter. He was in the 95th Infantry Division Pzjr Abt starting in February 1942. At the time he describes the battalion as being equipped with "Dunkurque surplus 4-wheel drive English Bedfords."
Most of these trucks (which he also says were otherwise well suited to the task of towing 37mm AT guns) were lost in the winter in Russia in short order. This is due to an oddity of English design. The fuel pump and filter housings were made partially of glass. In the extreme cold these had a tendency to crack or shatter when removed. The loss of the glass housing meant the loss of the truck as there were no replacements.

 

And as they moved into the countries that they occupied they added more and more to that nightmare in an attempt to make up for their shortcomings.

 

As long as the operator could say: "WHOA" and "Giddy up" in ( insert the name of the couqured nation here) there would have been very few problems.

Brad

 

Being an old "farm boy" (coming up on sixty this year) I'm here to tell ya that nearly ALL engines until post-WW2 had a glass sediment bowl incorporated into their systems as part of the filtering process.

Post-war a "long-life" filter was placed in the tank, and an improved mechanical pump fed a metal (copper) mesh or pumice stone filter at the carburetor float body. Here is a link to a site that shows those "old" sediment bowl filters, which continued to be used on farm tractors well into the sixties:

Restoration Fuel System Parts

The weather in the Soviet Union, and perhaps the uniqueness of a "fuel filter" caused many to be broken, lost, or mis-handled and since many (but not all) glass sediment bowls were tempered glass, they became even more brittle in extreme cold. The cork gasket couldn’t have been an easy item to work with at -40 degrees either!

 

That is true but, if the military were going to issue you the vehicles you'd think they would either have spares or, would make a substitute part available to repair it when the part broke. Something like a fuel filter could have had a "substitute standard" issue German part to replace it and keep the vehicle in action longer.

Come on, I own a 74 Lotus Europa and have worked on lots of British sports cars as well as my 78 model JD 410D backhoe enough to know quite a bit about that sort of thing. I have my eye on an old Allis Chambers crawler tractor (gotta be 40's or 50's vintage) outside a resturant where I'm building my retirement house. Going to see if the owner will give it to me for like $100 as it looks....looks... like junk. Has an old Hercules engine. Should be fun restored as a US WW 2 vintage bulldozer if I can talk him into it.

 

Right, Terry, but if your spare parts supply source is in an unconquered country over the Channel, then you have a small problem After that setting up a manufacture of such small and unimpoertant items in an already strained industry is asking a bit too much.

 

Yes, I agree with that idea of spares being issued for the Bedfords. Of course we don't know they weren't. As per a substitute standard, I dunno if anything like that would be available for a Bedford (Vauxhall/GM wasn't it?) truck which was using a standard sediment bowl. I think the GM corp. made a non-glass (aluminium?) sediment bowl for the CCKW and DUKW, which had to be dumped every morning without looking at it to see if there was either water or "gunk" in the bottom.

Those old AC crawlers are fun, if the Hercules/White engine has an intact block and head, everything else can be fixed. Those old flathead Herc gasoline engines are nearly bullet-proof, but the clutches and finals of the AC weren't so much so.

Find out the model of the crawler, like an M or HD or whatever. The M was pre-war, the HD line showed up after the war I think about '46. I "cut my teeth" in farming with a crawler on an AC HD-7 with the 3 cylinder Detroit two-stroke diesel engine with a GM blower mounted on the side of the engine. The blower was exactly the same length as the engine block, and from the left side you couldn't even see there was an engine there! When I started plowing with it, my Dad would fire it up, and off I would go. I had to brace my feet against the dash and use both hands to pull back the turning lever for which ever way I wanted to turn. It wasn't until about the third year I operated it that I could do it without that "stance" and really do it with just two hands, Look Dad;no feet! Ran that crawler and its friends all my farm life, we even had an older D-5 Cat with a cable dozer for earth moving type work. Loved that old Cat with its gasoline starter engine, you could fire it up in almost any weather.

Unlike the "newer" Cats with their electric starter engines, on this one you could start up the two cylinder gas engine and let it run for hours. It would ciruculate the water and "warm up" the main diesel, and tah-dah the diesel would start to turn over and eventually ker-pop-pop away she would go!

 

My John Deere is that way. It has a little "perculator" on the side of the engine. You plug it into 110 vac and let it warm up the engine on cold days. No glo plugs. Yes, it has electric start but it needs to be somewhat warm to fully turn over. It is also addicted to starting fluid so you have to give it a little squirt to get it going.

 

And this has to do with the subject?? LOL

 

It does now.

 

LOL