Post by Diarist on Apr 2, 2019 5:39:06 GMT 1
The meeting this morning was interesting and I met the senior commanders of the 3rd Panzer Division as well as General Ludwig Beck again. They had been informed that my visit was more private than official so we had a very informal chat. Heinz Guderian and I were often on the same side stressing the importance of not having too many tanks and too little infantry also that towed artillery is useless for a panzer division, it needs to be on tracked vehicles. Generalleutnant Ernst Feßmann, the commander of 3rd Panzer Division, is a cavalry officer and he supported extra armour, mainly light tanks, to create havoc behind enemy lines whereas Heinz and I were emphasizing the need for deep penetration and the encirclement of enemy formations.
That brought us to the design of the Panzer IV which Heinz was working on. I suggested that the Panzer IV should have the same gun as the tank destroyer variant on the Panzer III chassis to simplify logistics. Heinz advocated a short 75mm gun but I was in favour of a long 75mm tank gun. I couldn't mention too much about the design which George Patton and I were working on but I argued that a heavier tank than the Panzer III is a must and the Panzer Regiment should have one Panzer IV battalion and two Panzer III battalions and that these battalions should be core of brigade-sized battlegroups (Kampfgruppen) with motorized battalions and support companies attached.
I gave a brief but detailed report of our FTX from last October and that we had one armour plus three infantry battalions in our battlegroups. Mobility and concentrated firepower were the key to a breakthrough with infiltration also playing an important role, i.e. infantry again. General Beck was already convinced of the need to have separate Armoured/Mechanized Corps and that the air squadrons supporting these corps also need to be motorized in order to keep up with the advancing forces. That also meant greater emphasis on logistics including air resupply.
It was a constructive meeting and I look forward to more when the Defence Council finally meets later this year. We shall be landing in about 10 minutes so that's all for the moment.
That brought us to the design of the Panzer IV which Heinz was working on. I suggested that the Panzer IV should have the same gun as the tank destroyer variant on the Panzer III chassis to simplify logistics. Heinz advocated a short 75mm gun but I was in favour of a long 75mm tank gun. I couldn't mention too much about the design which George Patton and I were working on but I argued that a heavier tank than the Panzer III is a must and the Panzer Regiment should have one Panzer IV battalion and two Panzer III battalions and that these battalions should be core of brigade-sized battlegroups (Kampfgruppen) with motorized battalions and support companies attached.
I gave a brief but detailed report of our FTX from last October and that we had one armour plus three infantry battalions in our battlegroups. Mobility and concentrated firepower were the key to a breakthrough with infiltration also playing an important role, i.e. infantry again. General Beck was already convinced of the need to have separate Armoured/Mechanized Corps and that the air squadrons supporting these corps also need to be motorized in order to keep up with the advancing forces. That also meant greater emphasis on logistics including air resupply.
It was a constructive meeting and I look forward to more when the Defence Council finally meets later this year. We shall be landing in about 10 minutes so that's all for the moment.