TOEs question

[Hanny]

Ok, so chassis factories is what you model.
1939 And 40, A And B chassis were produced at (5 factories)Hanomag Hanover, Bunsen Nag Berlin, Wumag of Goelitz, Waserhaute of Bad Oeyhause, and Schichau of Ebling.
4600 chassis 1941/2 C chassis were built at another extra 2 factories, for a total producing of 7, in Austria and Chezch.

10602 chassis in 1943 till end of war D Chassis brought the total chassis factories to 8.

[Denniss]

Hansa-Loyd/Goliath and Hanomag produced A/B chassis, Hanomag/MNH made Ausf C chassis with Adler, Auto Union and Skoda joining in 1943 or directly producing Ausf. D chassis
Schichau, Weserhütte, Wumag, Gollnow were assembly factories, Hanomag/MNH both made chassis and had a final assembly line but MNH switched to Panther production in 1943

Büssing-NAG was not involved in Sd.Kfz 251 production, austria had at best an armor supplier for them and czech was Skoda

[Hanny]

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Hanny

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

can I suggest that you wait till for 2 things. First the release of the manual section on the production rules - that might help put your assumptions into context. It is so different to WiTE1. Second, actually having the game to hand?

this is getting rather obscure and you are making some substantial assumptions based on a limited understanding of how the game pulls all this together?

[RedLancer]

ORIGINAL: Hanny

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

Loki100 beat me to it. To clarify the numbers will never match because not all 251 variants and no Sdkfz 11 variants are modelled in the game. A good example is the 251/19 - no communications equipment is specifically modelled and signallers in general are swept into the broad catch all of support squads along with chefs, medics, clerks, medics and military police. We have put every effort in making it as close to historically accurate/workable as the code and abstractions allow.

If you want to get into a detailed examination of the numbers don't rely on screenshots as it is far from the full picture, buy the game and if you still have concerns I promise I'll give you a personal crash course on modding the game so you can improve it further for all of us.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

can I suggest that you wait till for 2 things. First the release of the manual section on the production rules - that might help put your assumptions into context. It is so different to WiTE1. Second, actually having the game to hand?

this is getting rather obscure and you are making some substantial assumptions based on a limited understanding of how the game pulls all this together?

Asking if your using known weekly production numbers is not being obscure or making assumptions, when the in game image shows the import number over a time period which does not match historical numbers for that time period, but yes your right best to wait till I can decompile the Dll and look through the code if I have questions.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: Hanny

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

can I suggest that you wait till for 2 things. First the release of the manual section on the production rules - that might help put your assumptions into context. It is so different to WiTE1. Second, actually having the game to hand?

this is getting rather obscure and you are making some substantial assumptions based on a limited understanding of how the game pulls all this together?

Asking if your using known weekly production numbers is not being obscure or making assumptions, when the in game image shows the import number over a time period which does not match historical numbers for that time period, but yes your right best to wait till I can decompile the Dll and look through the code if I have questions.

the point is you don't know how the game treats these inputs, so after a point this thread gets pretty pointless. You are making assumptions about how it works, some of them are wrong. We've given you some information as to why but really we are not going to publish the manual chapter or the game code?

edit: I presume your comment about decompiling the game code is meant as a joke. Worth remembering that is not public property.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: RedLancer

ORIGINAL: Hanny

Büssing Nag designed and produced both the sdkfz 11 and 251, including production prototypes for others to work from, the chassis in both is the same chassis, hence 25k produced of which 16000 became 251 from the same chassis. Now you want to use 2 only, fine, different sources Doyle appears to be yours, can you tell us how many 251 chassis you have by year? I have posted where the weekly production of 251 is online, does your numbers match?as the images in game suggest they do not.

Loki100 beat me to it. To clarify the numbers will never match because not all 251 variants and no Sdkfz 11 variants are modelled in the game. A good example is the 251/19 - no communications equipment is specifically modelled and signallers in general are swept into the broad catch all of support squads along with chefs, medics, clerks, medics and military police. We have put every effort in making it as close to historically accurate/workable as the code and abstractions allow.

If you want to get into a detailed examination of the numbers don't rely on screenshots as it is far from the full picture, buy the game and if you still have concerns I promise I'll give you a personal crash course on modding the game so you can improve it further for all of us.

I may take you up later on your kind offer, hey we all want the best we can get from it right?.

AH chose production numbers of x y and z, he set economic policy, so one reason why German replacements parts were difficult to get to the front was they existed in small numbers relative to completed assets, this is planning failure, as much as a logistical failure, completed assets in depots meant it was often easier to equip a new formation and deploy it, AH loved more numbers over keeping formations up to strength, fight it to the front as part of its last training requirement before committing to the front, rather than send replacement parts to repair existing ones, or send a full replacement or wait for it to be sent by to workshops in Germany and repaired there as per doctrine.

What I hope to see in 2 from this production chassis methodology is that kind of choice for the payer, replacements of losses will be harder when new formations suck up that asset lowering stocks, and have a similar problem to solve.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: loki100

ORIGINAL: Hanny

ORIGINAL: loki100



can I suggest that you wait till for 2 things. First the release of the manual section on the production rules - that might help put your assumptions into context. It is so different to WiTE1. Second, actually having the game to hand?

this is getting rather obscure and you are making some substantial assumptions based on a limited understanding of how the game pulls all this together?

Asking if your using known weekly production numbers is not being obscure or making assumptions, when the in game image shows the import number over a time period which does not match historical numbers for that time period, but yes your right best to wait till I can decompile the Dll and look through the code if I have questions.

the point is you don't know how the game treats these inputs, so after a point this thread gets pretty pointless. You are making assumptions about how it works, some of them are wrong. We've given you some information as to why but really we are not going to publish the manual chapter or the game code?

edit: I presume your comment about decompiling the game code is meant as a joke. Worth remembering that is not public property.

I asked for raw data numbers and time period.The one making assumptions is you.Fyi I can do whatever I like with the code, what I can’t do is then publish it.

[Light4bettor]

Hanny: so one reason why German replacements parts were difficult to get to the front was they existed in small numbers relative to completed assets, this is planning failure, as much as a logistical failure, completed assets in depots meant it was often easier to equip a new formation and deploy it

This point about spare parts reminds me of one of Liedtke's assertions in "Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo German War 41-43," when he points out that many of the German tanks classified as "damaged but somewhat easily repairable," (the distinction between Ausfalle and Totalausfalle, sure there are degrees of Ausfalle) were stripped of parts to fix other Panzers that were still classified as "runners" or had more potential to be runners. (specifically talking about the Stalingrad campaign but has some application in general). Therefore they would have to wait for tank shipments in order to plus up.

Basically, they had to make the portion of tank losses that were originally non-permanent become permanent in order to keep the steadily dwindling number of runners from dropping too fast.
In order to preserve tank strength, or at least slow the attrition rate, the field/divisional/regimental maintenance teams were forced to accomplish this by robbing peter to pay paul (until a bulk shipment arrives to help bring the unit closer to its TOE). Definitely exacerbated by logistic lines (I think it was a single track line in the Stalingrad campaign.)

And to be clear, those potentially fixable tanks that were cannibalized for parts because of the lack of spare parts, basically became total/permanent losses (Totalausfalle), because they would never accumulate the spare parts to work on them and the active tank pool at the same time, and shipping those tanks back to Germany was not always practicable because of the distances/logistics involved. Major inefficiencies at play here.

However, not withstanding Hanny's assertion about spare-parts production, I suspect that better logistics and a significant slowing in the operational tempo could have positively impacted tank strengths (meaning more non-permanent losses repaired than historically). But, certainly those to conditions were not likely to be met in the Stalingrad campaign at least.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: Light4bettor

Hanny: so one reason why German replacements parts were difficult to get to the front was they existed in small numbers relative to completed assets, this is planning failure, as much as a logistical failure, completed assets in depots meant it was often easier to equip a new formation and deploy it

This reminds me of one of Liedtke's assertions in "Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo German War 41-43," when he points out that many of the German tanks classified as "damaged but somewhat easily repairable," (the distinction between Ausfalle and Totalausfalle). were stripped of parts to fix other Panzers that where still classified as "runners" or had more potential to be runners. (specifically talking about the Stalingrad campaign but has some application in general). Therefore they would have to wait for tank shipments, in order to plus up.
Preserving tank strength by robbing peter to pay paul (until a bulk shipment arrives to help bring closer to TOE). Definitely exacerbated by logistic lines (I think it was a single track line in the Stalingrad campaign.)

And to be clear, those fixable tanks that were cannibalized, basically became total losses. Major inefficiencies at play here.

Indeed, I rather like Liedtke
, not in service for whatever reason means a lowering of combat power, moving x number from one category to another to keep numbers up of in service assets was one way they made do,

When PLUTo came online it started to put 80 octane fuel to Europe, the UK Qm truck companies, them moved it inland, only they could not run on 80 octane, it was to rich, so c1400 3t trucks all went kaput around the same time before anyone spotted the planners adding to the usual fuel had got it wrong, and changed it to 70, planning problem, solved by another planning contingency, they had 1400 and more spare stocks to replace them with and the Qmtruck coy kept on rolling, and the RE repaired them at a rate of 80 a week, because hey we have plenty, and we don’t need to rush, but on paper it looks like in service numbers are poor.

when the OST front in service numbers were poor, cannibalising was the only means left after a while, as planning allowed for little replacement as the plan said it will all be over before you need it.

Shipping back would appear to be easy, after all its free return trip right?, not free after all, by 43 the RR had shipped 6.3 million tons tons of cereals back to the Reich and 3.3 million to the AG to live of the land, along with vast other quantities.

[Denniss]

Sd.Kfz. 11 was actually developed by Hansa-Lloyd/Borgward with Hanomag taking over later on and also developing the 251 from that chassis.
Chassis of 11 and 251 is not 100% identical due to adaptions for using armored components.

Büssing-NAG made and developed the Sd.Kfz. 6 and sWs Halftracks, they were also involved in Sd.Kfz. 10/251 chassis production and limited final assembly

[Light4bettor]

Lolz, again the story (forget the source and context), that because of the rubber shortage, German firms would buy trucks just for their tires and scrap the rest of truck. I may research this further, but incredible if true.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: Light4bettor


However, not withstanding Hanny's assertion about spare-parts production, I suspect that better logistics and a significant slowing in the operational tempo could have positively impacted tank strengths (meaning more non-permanent losses repaired than historically). But, certainly those to conditions were not likely to be met in the Stalingrad campaign at least.

What I mean is your economic model provides1 spare in 10 or 3 in 10 of a finished product, it impacts on logistical ability to maintain in service rates, esp when they fluctuate outside planning estimates.This is a planning failure not a logistical failure.The logistics of getting the 1 or 3 spare to end user is a separate issue.

Example UK 43 Planners want to go to Europe, Qm advise 240 3t truck Coys, planners look and decide they can do it with 160, industry don’t know who is going to be right and starts to build enough for 240, in. Coy are 48 trucks, with 8 expected to be out of service at any point in time.

Uk 21AG had 7.7 MTV to a man and had logistical issues getting from Normandy to the NWE, Germany had 1 for every two men for roughly the same ton miles.


Uk industry builds the trucks the planners want for DDay, QM dept wants 240 at 3t, with 48 trucks with 8 out of service at any point in time, operational planners game it out and say, 240 is more than we need, we think we need 160.

So planning expects 6400 from a 7680 capacity. when the wrong fuel was used capacity dropped by around 27 Truck Coys equivalency, and that’s from the 90 odd that we’re actualy deployed by that date. Because industry built for 240 there was ample stocks to replace them and take time about repairs.

Germany had neither option, Industry could not build enough to motorise the size of the Heer AH said he wanted, about 170k trucks short in 41; when the Pzer force doubles in operational unit numbers, it’s because of looting of Europe’s MTV allows it, but it gives you not standard this is what we want, approved German trucks, it gives you whatever you get, resulting in getting the spares for a French truck, in Russia, from a factory in France that has its workforce mostly moved to Germany to work and it’s machine shops looted, not as easy as Just in time TIK logistics.

Try Ravenhill, influence of logistics on operations in NWEurope if you have nor seen it.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: Light4bettor

Lolz, again the story (forget the source and context), that because of the rubber shortage, German firms would buy trucks just for their tires and scrap the rest of truck. I may research this further, but incredible if true.

Iirc is when it happens that’s the important point, 39 blockade stops rubber imports, so Germany has its synthetics, c70k tons, it imports from Japan via Russia, c20k tons, when War breaks out with SU, that now has to come by submarine from a Japan or through Vichy, so the driver for cost changes is the loss of imports from loss of SU imports.G Thomas warned pre invasion stocks of rubber would run out by Nov 41.

look at spare tyres allocation for Rommel in Africa.

[Hanny]

ORIGINAL: Light4bettor

Lolz, again the story (forget the source and context), that because of the rubber shortage, German firms would buy trucks just for their tires and scrap the rest of truck. I may research this further, but incredible if true.

It’s from the Vampire Economy, Gunter Reiman whichis free online, page 61, TIK used the reference in one of his vids, I guess that’s where you heard it recently, and actually refers to pre war rubber shortages, lack of hard currency to import, not war time shortages, lack of imports from blockade.