German rifleman

[kestak]

Greetings,

I am reading a book and it says the US did hundreds if surveys during WW II.

The most feared German weapon by our GIs was the 88, then the mortar, way down at 6% was the rifle. On the other side, the most feared was the US artillery then the GIs with a rifle.

In the same book, they talk about the British Marines who were very deadly in with their rifle.

Anyone has any idea if the German soldier was a lousy shot with a rifle? Have you ever read something about that?

 

[BaltimoreBoy]

I can't respond directly to the idea that the German soldier was a bad shot.

However, the book "A Genius for War" by T. N. Dupuy showed that German troops were consistently more combat effective in both world wars. That would seem to argue against them being bad shots.

Link if you are interested.

http://www.amazon.com/genius-war-German-general-1807-1945/dp/0133511146

 

[kestak]

They were effective because of superior discipline. I read that quality in many books. Also, in WWII, they had the best equipment and tactics until we begin to liberate Europe.

I read a few months ago a book written about the german side. A german soldier said that his whole unit picked up Garands and the ammo for it from us soldiers (deads or prisonners) and fought with those rifles for a while.

 

[gbeecher]

Think 'Shell Shock'...

I don't think the Germans were any worse marksmen than any other army of the period, but I have read where artillery fire and aerial bombing was some of the most feared attacks from WWII onward. Small arms fire is something you can adjust to and hide from, but large caliber artillery shells and aerial bombs are something else altogether! The stress of a prolonged artillery barrage or aerial bombing attack can cause a person to lose their sanity.

 

[WYOMan]

After WW1, the German High Command decided to phase out military sniping because they observed that marksmanship had improved to the point that it was no longer necessary. Or so they thought at the time. The German infantry was taught marksmanship and awarded in a twelve grade system, the award, after 1935, being a lanyard. The award system itself was begun in 1926. German soldiers, at least pre-war through early war, had a very good level of skill with their rifles. As with other things though, as the war drug on, and turned against them, all levels or training suffered. It should also be noted that the Geman military had awards for marksmanship for artillery, anti-aircraft, mortars, and other weapons.

 

[kestak]

Us artillery was the most precise of the time. Germans feared it a lot.
We had FO on the ground and in airplanes.
We had the best ammo and canons and plenty of them.
Also, we were the only ones with 100% of our artillerie tracted with engines (no horses).

 

[Coop45]

The Germans also had a 120mm heavy mortar (probably the pappy of our 4.2 in mortar which has a ver¥ high pucker factor.

 

[WYOMan]

The Germans also used forward observers and observation aircraft. And 100% of our artillery was NOT self propelled. A higher percentage was towed. I'm also pretty sure that if you asked any WW2 vets, your not going to here them say "The Germans couldn't hit the broad side of a barn", or, "I'm just glad they weren't using our better guns or ammo on us". Every personal account or report that I've seen spoke of the effectiveness of German artillery. The advantage in artillery the Allies had was sheer quantity. Probably the most feared piece by all sides was the 88.

 

[Float Pilot]

1. The German tactics were different, with the riflemen using bolt action KAR-98s to protect the M-42 machine-gunner, Mortar crew or light artillery crew. The rifle was not considered a primary engagement weapon.

2. As the war progresses and German factories were tuned into plies of bricks, their quality control decreased. Their ammunition was not consistent in velocity except for special batches. Thus general accuracy declined. Metallurgy using slave labor was also a problem. Thus development and mass production of any newer rifles was slow or numerically meaningless.

3. The same held true for German artillery shells, which had an increasing number of duds and under-powered explosives as the war progressed.

4. US quality control increased during the war.

5. US Ammunition became more accurate and reliable.

6. US Metallurgy improved dramatically, thus increasing the accuracy and barrel life of machine guns and rifles.

7. The US supply system allowed the massive deployment of food, medical supplies, clothing, fuel, artillery ammunition and rifle ammunition. This increased as the war progressed while the German supply system collapsed.

A Tiger II was a formidable opponent for two or three up-gunned Shermans. But with a 20 to 1 advantage, the Shermans would always come out on top in the long run.
In short, Nazi Germany was buried alive by the American factories.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Us artillery was the most precise of the time. Germans feared it a lot.
We had FO on the ground and in airplanes.
We had the best ammo and canons and plenty of them.
Also, we were the only ones with 100% of our artillerie tracted with engines (no horses).

This. Not having to rely on diesase prone hay bags to move artellery was a huge advantage

Also don't downplay the effect that use of the proximity fuse had on troops unlucky enough to be on the receiving end.

 

[2ndAmFan]

Never read anything that suggests the German soldier was a poor rifle shot. I can't remember the exact quote but US General George Patton said something like, "There's not as many of them but they fight better than us." Pretty high praise I'd say, considering this was during the Battle of France in 1944 and German soldiers were often stuck fighting with few weapons besides small arms against Allied armored units.

 

[kestak]

I dir not mean to say US artillerie was all self-propelled. Most was tracted. We all remember the old war movies with artillerie behind the halftrack or the big truck.

"When asked what the "most feared" weapon was, 48 percent of the troops surveyed said it was the German "88mm artillery gun." When asked what the "most dangerous" weapon was, 62 percent of the GIs named the "88." The Germans very rarely used their 88mm gun as artillery; it was primarily for antiaircraft and antitank work. In these roles, the "88" had acquired a fearsome reputation, and these U.S. troops assumed that anytime they were hit by German shell fire, it had to be the dreaded "88." But the GIs had the percentages right. Artillery was the major cause of casualties among the infantry. The next most dangerous thing mentioned was mortars (17 percent), followed by the deadly German light machine guns (6 percent). Interestingly, none of the troops feared rifle fire, or considered it "dangerous." This was also quite accurate. The most dangerous weapons were actually artillery (including mortars) and these accounted for over two thirds of all casualties.
These surveys were used by many senior officers to set policy."

Source dirty little secrets of world war II.

This is an easy and fun read.

 

[kestak]

On a side subject, in yhat book I learned something odd. The Waffen SS, the armed forces of the German Nazi party, filled the majority of their 38 combat divisions with non-Germans. Over half a million foreigners served in twenty-seven of these Waffen SS divisions.

The largest ethnic group enlisted was Slavic Ukrainians followed by the "Aryan" Dutch. Three divisions were formed from Bosnian Muslims and Croatian Christians.

 

[2ndAmFan]

Yes, they also had French, Flemish, Cossacks, Norwegian...

 

[WYOMan]

I apologize for the confusion on my part, but when you say "tracked", that to me says, "self-propelled", not like most "towed" pieces.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

Our Bombing is what made the German war machine and it's rifleman accuracy to decline.

 

[kestak]

No apologies needed. English is not my first language.

Another side subject: 40% of US airplanes losses were due to malfunctions not related to combat or pilot errors or bad weather. It was worse with Germans and Japanese. If foggy weather showed up while Japanese trainees toward end of the war showed up, 100% would crash on landing...doh!

 

[daytodaze]

I think the fear is less based on the riflemen's ability, and more based on the machine gunners that the riflemen were supporting. I believe the Germans fielded more machine guns than the Americans, British and Russians. When machine guns became more compact and mobile, the Germans changed their tactics to accommodate it.

 

[eastbank]

my uncle was in the south pacific and helped repelled japanese mass attackes and was sure it was the m-1 garands and carbines that broke the attacks and saved their lives,i don,t know if the germans made mass attacks like that, the russians did tho. eastbank.

 

[dfariswheel]

Famed 82nd paratrooper commander General James Gavin wrote about the German combat skills.
He said that the Germans were not as good of shots at longer ranges and didn't do nearly as much longer range shooting as American troops.
American troops had been much better trained at longer range shooting and had practiced it a lot more than Germans did.

He also said that the Germans didn't like to fight at close range and that the American paratroopers did. He said the Germans very often broke and ran when faced with charging paratroopers, and were often heard to be shocked that paratroopers didn't break and run when assaulted by German troops.

During the Battle of the Bulge he was told by a number of captured Germans that they couldn't believe the paratroopers hadn't broken when attacked because the other Americans they'd faced did.
Part of that was that many of the other American were green troops sent to the "quiet" Bulge area to get broken in and seasoned.
Many of the American paratroopers had four combat drops under their belts and were almost certainly the best infantry troops in Europe.

 

[MrDig]

The Italian Campaign of WWII is indicative of the German Soldiers ability to be Soldiers.

"It is estimated that, between September 1943 and April 1945, some 60,000 Allied and 50,000 German soldiers died in Italy. Overall Allied casualties during the campaign totaled about 320,000 and the corresponding Axis figure (excluding those involved in the final surrender) was about 336,650. No campaign in Western Europe cost more than the Italian campaign in terms of lives lost and wounds suffered by infantry forces."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Campaign_(World_War_II)

Any attempt to dissuade you of the German Soldiers ability to shoot the Mausers they were issued can be dispelled from the casualty stats of the Italian Campaign. According to my Dad who was there the Germans were hard tough soldiers and good rifleman.

One reason you don't hear much discussion of the Italian Campaign historically or from the time was that it was too brutal, there was little "good news" from the Italian front. The Military decided to sugar coat it and keep the news upbeat so America would not know, otherwise it would be too disheartening.

I have it from pretty good authority the average German Rifleman could shoot well.

 

[-v-]

An other advantage of US artilery was better command and control. I recall reading what made US artillery exceptionally deadly was that we could bring a much heavier weight of fire on a specific target with fewer guns then the Germans or the Russians could, since our batteries were much better coordinated. (10 guns all firing on the same target vs 8 of 20 guns firing on target)

 

[max popenker]

Well, I believe American forces start their serious encounters with Wehrmach in 1943 (Italy) and 1944 (France).
By that time most of German pre-war elite man-power and plenty of equipment was chewed up, spit out and buried on the Russian front. Just google the Stalingrad battle, siege of Leningrad or Kursk battle.

 

[henschman]

I apologize for the confusion on my part, but when you say "tracked", that to me says, "self-propelled", not like most "towed" pieces.

He said "tracted," as in what something is when it is pulled with a tractor.

 

[Readyrod]

Us artillery was the most precise of the time. Germans feared it a lot.

I heard that it was feared because there was so much of it. Every time the Americans showed up it rained artillery. Just like air bombardment now.

The German tactics were different, with the riflemen using bolt action KAR-98s to protect the M-42 machine-gunner, Mortar crew or light artillery crew. The rifle was not considered a primary engagement weapon.

That's what I read too. The rifle was a defensive weapon.

In short, Nazi Germany was buried alive by the American factories.

Totally. So was Japan.

The Germans very rarely used their 88mm gun as artillery

It was a direct fire weapon, wasn't it?

dirty little secrets of world war II

Is this a good book?

No campaign in Western Europe cost more than the Italian campaign in terms of lives lost and wounds suffered by infantry forces."

My Dad was at Monte Casino as a doctor. It must have been pretty horrific seeing as he refused to speak about it.

The German army did a darn good job, I figure it was Hitler that lost the war. (Didn't the Allies decide to not try to take out Hitler at some point cause that's what they thought?) That and the fact that the rest (specially the U.S.) just outproduced the Germans.