Koji su Nemački tenkovi upotrebljavani na našim prostorima....


Koji su Nemački tenkovi upotrebljavani na našim prostorima....

  • Pridružio: 05 Jan 2011
  • Poruke: 1037

"U izvještaju (13. divizije) za 8. novembar (43) navodi se da je neprijatelj pošao cestom Ogulin - Jasenak i na zasjedi kod Bjelskog tenkovi su naišli na mine, gdje je uništen tenk tipa »tiger« sa 6 članova posade. Tenk je sav raznešen minom, posada ubijena, a zaplijenjeno je nešto vojničke spreme i njemačka zastava sa kukastim krstom."

Bogdan Mamula: TREĆA PRIMORSKO-GORANSKA UDARNA BRIGADA (Druga brigada 35. divizije)

Registruj se da bi učestvovao u diskusiji. Registrovanim korisnicima se NE prikazuju reklame unutar poruka.
  • Pridružio: 31 Dec 2011
  • Poruke: 18231

Da je postojalo Tigrova koliko su ih Saveznici unistili nemci bi gospodarili Evropom.

  • Pridružio: 05 Jan 2011
  • Poruke: 1037

U stvari, zainteresovala me napomena o "6 članova posade".
A i mesto (cesta Ogulin-Jasenak) mi izgleda kao dosta nezgodno za velike tenkove.
Doduše, to je tada bila tačka dodira između 2. SS i 3. SS oklopnog korpusa...

  • Pridružio: 21 Maj 2008
  • Poruke: 14329

gorran ::U stvari, zainteresovala me napomena o "6 članova posade".
A i mesto (cesta Ogulin-Jasenak) mi izgleda kao dosta nezgodno za velike tenkove.
Doduše, to je tada bila tačka dodira između 2. SS i 3. SS oklopnog korpusa...

Шест чланова посаде је дефинитивно превише за немачке тенкове кориштене код нас. Тешко и да је ишта теже ишло тим путем. Обзиром на то да је возило потпуно уништено од мине, и на број страдалих, пре ће бити да је у питању неки полугусеничар.

  • Pridružio: 31 Dec 2011
  • Poruke: 18231

Nije bilo neobicno dda se u tenk (pogotovo komandni) natrpa josh jedan covek, na ustrb municije ako je bilo neophodno (evakuacija posade itd). A da Tigar skroz ode od jedne mine, tesko (osim ako nije bila pojacana dodatnim eksplozivom).
Pz-4 je doduse cesto imao katastrofalne gubitke od mina posto mu je dno bilo tanko a municija odmah tu, tako da cenim da ako je u ptanju uopste bio tenk da je to neki od kasnije Pz-4 serije (koji su cesto brkani za tigrove kada su imali dodatni oklop).

  • Pridružio: 20 Mar 2012
  • Poruke: 724

Citat:The Use of Armor in the German Campaign in the Balkans, 1941 to 1945 (see Appendix VII)
A number of observations may be drawn from the German armor experience in the
Partisan insurgency in Yugoslavia and the Balkans during World War II.
1) With few exceptions, the German use of armor against insurgents was a matter of
making use of (and making do with) whatever marginal resources were available to
them. The initial armor commitment consisted of ad hoc units formed locally and equipped
with tanks captured from the defeated army of the nation they occupied. Like the other
occupation units, the tank units were initially conceived to have a dual role, filling both
security and training missions simultaneously. They were never intended to participate in
conventional combat.2
2) The tank losses of the German occupation force were minor, even when the intensity of
the insurgency began to escalate in 1943. Of course, given that the man-portable AT
weapons available to the Partisans were only marginally effective, then this is not surprising.
Significantly, but also unsurprising, the only major loss of armored vehicles known to have
occurred was in the loss of 476 light-armored tracked, wheeled, and half-tracked vehicles
from December 1943 through March 1944. During that same time personnel losses were
1,367 KIA, 3,696 WIA, and 833 MIA. In comparison, only three fully armored, full-tracked
AFVs (assault guns) were lost in the same period. In the following four months, 24 tanks and
assault guns – but only 42 more lightly armored vehicles – were lost, which was 12.94
percent of the previous AFV loss. However, personnel casualties increased dramatically, to
2,384 KIA, 7,582 WIA, and 1,849 MIA, over twice the loss of the previous period.
3) Heavy armored vehicle and personnel losses were not incurred until the Partisan War
escalated beyond insurgency into what was – for all intents and purposes – a
conventional war, beginning in mid 1944. However, most of the armored vehicles lost were
apparently the more lightly armored Italian and French tanks, rather than German vehicles. It
is interesting that the deployment of the Partisans first organized tank unit in late 1944 also
occurred in parallel with the escalation of the conflict into conventional warfare. The
breakdown of the known armor losses is as follows:
A) Prior to December 1943 the available records indicate that possibly as few as ten
tanks – all of them lightly armored French beutepanzer (captured tanks) – were
lost in the Balkans. No German tanks were lost (and it appears that there were none
in the theater to be lost) and there is no record of the loss of other, lightly armored vehicles (but, again it appears that there were few to none available in the theater to
be lost).
B) From December 1943 through June 1944 – the period of the most intense
guerrilla conflict – 27 relatively heavily armored German vehicles were lost.
However, in addition, 516 lightly armored vehicles were lost. There is no
indication that any of the more lightly-armored French and Italian tanks were lost
during this period.
C) From September 1944 to January 1945 – the period when the German forces
were withdrawing from the region – the loss of German tanks was again zero
and the loss of German lightly armored vehicles was only two. However, 200
French and Italian tanks were lost, along with eight Italian armored cars (some of
which were probably lost outside of the theater). However, it is likely that most of the
beutepanzer lost were to abandonment in the German withdrawal from the Balkans.
D) Overall, about 27 well-armored tanks, 210 weaker armored tanks, and 526
lightly armored vehicles were lost in the four year long conflict.
4) It appears from the evidence that German personnel casualties in the Balkans and the
level of intensity of the conflict were a direct function of German decision making
rather than the decisions made by the Partisan command or by the Allied armies in the
Mediterranean.3 The initial German commitment was minimal, and confined mostly to a
small area – Serbia. Early conflict between the Germans and Partisans were more similar to
terrorist attacks than insurgent operations. Likewise, the initial German reactions were more
akin to reprisals (summary executions of villagers) than they were to military actions. Even
the early anti-Partisan offensives of 1942 were small scale, reinforced divisions at most.
Then, through late 1942 and early 1943 the German reaction to the perceived Partisan threat
grew steadily larger. By February-March 1943 the German operations expanded to corpssize,
and became joint and combined operations (Croat and Italian forces, and German and
Italian land, sea, and air forces all participated). Then, in the final phase, in late 1943 and
early 1944 the operations became army-size. Throughout the early period, up to September
of 1943, the Partisans were mostly occupied in surviving against the minimal forces
committed by the Germans, while they simultaneously expanded their strength and
capabilities. By late 1944 they were able to go over to the offensive and fielded what
eventually became a conventional army.


German Use of Armor in Yugoslavia During World War II
During World War II the German Army made extensive use of armor in their attempt to
suppress the Yugoslav Partisan insurgency. However, given the reality that they were
simultaneously engaged in a huge, conventional, mechanized war with the Soviet Union and the
Western Allies, the resources that were allocated to the anti-partisan war were a distinct
hodgepodge. The armor units were no different; for the most part they were comprised of ad hoc
provisional units and second line reserve and training units, equipped with beutepanzer (captured
tanks – the literal translation is ‘booty’ armor).
The first armor forces committed by Germany in Yugoslavia were six provisional tank
platoons formed by the occupation forces in June and July 1941. They were equipped with
antiquated World War I-era designs – approximately 30 French Renault FT-17 light tanks that
had been captured from the Yugoslav Royal Army. Five other platoons were formed in 1941 and
were equipped with French Renault R-35 and Hotchkiss light tanks as well as FT-17 tanks.55 The
other five platoons were initially stationed in Greece, but apparently were employed in
operations in the Balkans as well.56 Other major tank units that fought in the anti-Partisan war in
Yugoslavia included the following:
Panzer Kompanie z.b.V.12 (Armor Company for Special Duties 12) was organized in
June 1941 and was also equipped with captured French tanks (albeit somewhat more modern
designs), initially Hotchkiss light tanks and later a mixture of Renault R-35 light tanks and
Somua S-35 medium tanks.57 In April 1944 the company was reorganized and expanded –
evidently it absorbed most of the independent tank platoons – to a full Abteilung (battalion) with
four companies equipped with a mixture of French and Italian tanks. On 1 February 1945, after it
was withdrawn from the Balkans, it was re-designated as II./Panzer-Regiment Brandenburg and
was assigned to Panzer-Grenadier-Division Brandenburg.
I./Panzer-Regiment 202 was organized with three companies in February 1941 as part of
a two-battalion regiment equipped with French S-35 medium and Hotchkiss light tanks. In
September 1941 it was sent to Yugoslavia (the rest of the regiment remained in France). In
January 1943 it was re-designated as Panzer-Abteilung 202. In February 1944 it was re-equipped
with Italian Fiat M-15 tanks.58
SS-Panzer-Abteilung Prinz Eugen was originally organized in May 1942 as a separate
company equipped with captured French Renault Char B-1 tanks, including some that had been modified to mount flame-throwers.59 In October 1943 it was re-designated as SS-Panzer-
Abteilung 5 and was re-equipped with Italian tanks. In June 1944 it was converted to a selfpropelled
antitank battalion and was again re-designated as SS-Panzerjäger-Abteilung
German Tank Strengths and Losses in Yugoslavia 1941-1945
Data on German tank strength and losses in Yugoslavia vary. On 6 April 1941 the
German Army Group invading Yugoslavia included six panzer divisions with over 2,000 tanks.
However, as the campaign in the Balkans and Greece concluded in late April, the bulk of the
panzer forces were transferred to participate in the invasion of Russia that began on 22 June. By
the end of June 1941 it appears that the only armor available to the German occupation forces in
the Balkans were the 30-odd Renault beutepanzer of the provisional tank platoons that were
On 15 October 1941, the German Twelfth Army reported the armor units and strengths
available in the Balkans. Panzer-Abteilung z.b.V 12 had 45 Hotchkiss tanks and I./Panzer-
Regiment 202 had 18 S-35 and 41 Hotchkiss tanks. An unknown number of these were probably
undergoing repairs. The independent platoons had a total of 31 FT-17, 14 R-35, and 10
Hotchkiss light tanks, with 15 more FT-17 in platoons that were still forming and eight R-35 in
base repair, a total of 78.60 Thus, 182 tanks were available to German forces in the Balkans. On
10 December 1941, it was reported that a total of 78 beutepanzer were available. However, it
appears that this report only included those tanks in the independent platoons. If true, that would
indicate that the independent platoons had not lost any tanks up to December 1941.
However, complete data on tanks lost in the Balkans is scarce. Furthermore, the tanks
reported lost in the Balkans were almost certainly total losses (the German term – totalausfälle –
actually means ‘total loss’) and includes those vehicles destroyed, damaged beyond repair, and
abandoned without subsequent recovery. But, given the German penchant for recovering all
battle-damaged equipment, it is just as certain that the actual armor loss was much higher. Many
vehicles ‘in repair’ were effectively not repairable (or would probably be considered to be ‘not
economically repairable’ by most other nations). In general, it appears that only about 10 percent
of the total German AFV ‘loss’ were counted as ‘destroyed,’ meaning that the total ‘lost’ would
have been ten times higher.61
In 1942, I./Panzer-Regiment 202 reported two Hotchkiss lost to enemy action for the
period 15 May to 15 June 1942. Personnel losses were one WIA and two MIA. It was also
reported that the battalion was short a total of six Hotchkiss (presumably including the two lost)
and two S-35s. Since the battalion had evidently arrived in the Balkans at full strength in
September 1941 and was still at full strength in October 1941, then it appears that six tanks (four Hotchkiss and two S-35) were lost between 15 October 1941 and 15 May 1942. Thus, over a
period of seven months, the battalion lost an average of less than one tank per month.
Reports of SS-Division-Prinz Eugen and Partisan accounts both describe the loss of two
Hotchkiss tanks during Fall Weiss I in February 1943. One was ditched during an unsuccessful
German attack on 5 February and was captured and used by the Partisans, the other was
destroyed in an action a few days later. Both of these were either from the independent platoons
or from I./Panzer-Regiment 202, more likely the former.
On 31 May 1943, OB Southeast reported that I./Panzer-Regiment 202 had eight S-35 and
28 Hotchkiss tanks operational and eight S-35 and 13 Hotchkiss in repair. Panzer-Kompanie
z.b.V. 12 had 21 S-35 and 30 Hotchkiss operational, one S-35 and 6 Hotchkiss in repair and four
Hotchkiss in route as replacements. SS-Division Prinz Eugen had 16 Renault B-2 operational
and two in repair. There was no report of tanks in separate tank platoons and it appears that all of
the separate platoons had been disbanded, absorbed into the panzer battalions, or were utilized as
ad hoc armored train cars. The 1. Panzer-Division was also stationed at this time in the northern
Balkans, reorganizing after combat on the Russian Front. It had a total of 79 tanks operational
with six in repair, but would only play a peripheral role in the anti-Partisan actions of that year.
Thus, a total of 216 tanks were available to German forces in the Balkans.
On 20 November 1943, SS-Division-Prinz Eugen reported eight assault guns operational
and one in repair.62 They had evidently just arrived since, as late as 31 October, they were still
being reported as ‘in route’ (an indication of the parlous state of the supply of German armored
vehicles is that they were first reported as ‘in route’ to the division on 30 June 1943). On 30
November seven were operational and two were in repair. On 10 December six were operational
and three were in repair with Prinz Eugen. In addition, two were reported operational and five in
repair with the 100. Jäger-Division, which apparently had also just recently arrived (although
this was the first report of assault guns with the 100. Jäger-Division, the division itself had
actually arrived in the Balkans in August 1943). These numbers remained unchanged through the
end of the year, when the available reports end. Also on 31 December 1943, Panzer-Kompanie
z.b.V. 12 reported 12 Italian L6/47 assault guns operational and four in repair. Evidently this was
soon after these vehicles were first issued, since they do not appear in earlier reports.
Five months, later, on 31 May 1944, OB Southeast reported the following availability of
German tanks in units under its command.63 Nineteen Pz-II, 12 Pz-III, 25 Pz-IV, and 165 assault
guns were operational, nine Pz-II and 47 assault guns were in repair. Thus, 56 tanks and 165
assault guns were available to German forces in the Balkans. Unfortunately, these reports do not
account for the beutepanzer in the Balkans of which there was probably still a fairly large
On 1 September 1944, Panzer-Abteilung z.b.V. 12 had 94 tanks on hand. The assortment
included 20 Italian M-15 tanks and nine L6/47 assault guns and 11 French R-35 and 21
Hotchkiss operational. Nine M-15, three L6/47, one R-35, and four Hotchkiss were in short-term repair. Five M-15, three L6/47, four R-35, and four Hotchkiss were in long term repair. Panzer-
Abteilung 202 had 36 Italian M-15 tanks operational, six in short-term, and seven in long term
repair. In addition, on 15 September it was reported that there were four Pz-II, three Pz-III, 15
Pz-IV, and 78 assault guns operational in the Balkans, with 11 assault guns in repair. Thus, about
150 tanks and 104 assault guns were available in the Balkans during September 1944.
One month later, on 1 October 1944, Panzer-Abteilung z.b.V. 12 had 82 tanks and assault
guns on hand. Thirty-three M-15, 18 Hotchkiss, six R-35, and four L6/47 were operational, five
M-15, one R-35, and two L6/47 were in short term repair, and five M-15, one Hotchkiss, four R-
35, and 3 L6/47 were in long term repair. Panzer-Abteilung 202 had 28 M-15 tanks operational
and 9 in short-term repair (it was noted that none had been lost, so it must be assumed that five
more had gone into long-term repair). On 30 September it was also reported that four Pz-II, 14
Pz-IV and 37 assault guns were operational in the Balkans, with 10 more assault guns in repair.
Thus, about 133 tanks and 56 assault guns were available in the Balkans during October 1944.
The battalion monthly reports for I./Panzer-Regiment 202 and Panzer-Abteilung z.b.V. 12
for the period after October 1944 have not been found. However, the bimonthly theater reports
for the number of German tanks and assault guns do still exist in part. On 31 October 1944 it was
reported that there were no German tanks available, but 54 assault guns were operational and 14
were in repair. On 15 November 1944, there were 18 Pz-III, 8 Pz-IV and 40 assault guns
operational, and one Pz-IV and 16 assault guns in repair. On 30 November there were only three
Pz-II reported operational and two in repair, with 35 assault guns operational and nine in repair.
On 15 December 1944 there were no tanks available, and 15 assault guns operational and 13 in
repair. On 30 December 1944 there were no tanks available, 16 assault guns operational, and
eight in repair. On 15 January 1945 there were still no tanks available, 17 assault guns
operational and eight in repair. On 15 March 1945, there were five Pz-II, 31 Pz-III, and 9 Pz-IV
operational and seven Pz-III and one Pz-IV in repair and 13 Italian L6/47 and 16 German assault
guns were operational and nine L6/47 were in repair.65 Finally, in the last report available, on 15
April 1945 there were no tanks with OB Southeast, but there were 34 assault guns operational
and 10 in repair.
The losses of German tanks in OB Southeast are better documented for December 1943
to December 1944.66 Unfortunately, the reports only include the losses of German vehicles;
beutepanzer losses are not included. From December 1943 through March 1944 no tanks and
only three assault guns were lost. However, a large number of other lightly armored vehicles
were lost, an indication of the intense anti-Partisan operations that the Second Panzer Army was
engaged in at the time (see below for an analysis of the personnel casualties during this period).
Three full-track, lightly armored, self-propelled antitank guns (Pak 7.62cm auf Pz. 38 (t)), three
machine-gun-armed light armored cars, one 75mm infantry gun-armed light armored car, 84
light armored half-tracks,67 381 medium armored half-tracks,68 and four full-track armored
ammunition carriers were lost. In April 1944 two Pz-III, 20 Pz-IV, and one assault gun were recorded as lost, but the losses of lightly armored vehicles dropped precipitously, to just 14 of all
types (seven SP antitank guns, two light armored cars, four light half-tracks, and one medium
half-track). In May 1944 only one (47mm) SP antitank gun and one light armored car (20mmarmed)
were lost. In June 1944 the numbers climbed again, one assault gun, 14 light armored
cars (nine with 20mm guns), 11 heavy armored cars (five 20mm-armed, nine 75mm-armed, and
three radio vehicles), and one light half-track were lost. The only other losses recorded up to the
end of November 1944 were one 20mm-armed heavy armored car and one light half-track, both
of which were lost in September.
Finally, a few consolidated reports of losses exist for beutepanzer from September 1944
to February 1945. Unfortunately, these reports were for the Wehrmacht as a whole, rather than
just OB Southeast In the reports, 115 French tanks (probably 101 Hotchkiss or FT-17 and 14 S-
35 or B-2) and 55 Italian M-15 tanks or L6/47 assault guns were listed as lost in September.
There was no report of beutepanzer losses for October 1944.
During this period, 30 August to 2 November, the German garrisons in the Aegean and
Greece began to withdraw to Germany, including Panzer-Abteilung 212, one of the last major
users of the French beutepanzer.69 Most of the personnel of the battalion (four officers, four
civilian technicians, 77 NCOs, and 155 men, only five officers – including the battalion
commander and the battalion executive officer – 38 NCOs, and 99 men, remained on Crete with
129 Italian ‘volunteers’) were evacuated by air from Crete by 6 October. However, all of the
German (three Pz-I, 10 Pz-II, six Pz-III, and 10 Pz-IV) and French (five S-35 and 15 Hotchkiss)
tanks were left behind with the remaining garrison of the Greek Islands.70 It appears likely that
many of the beutepanzer ‘lost’ were simply abandoned as the German garrisons also began to
retreat from Bulgaria (which declared war on Germany on 8 September), Serbia, and Macedonia
into western Croatia and Slovenia during October and November 1944.
Twenty-two more French tanks (probably 20 Hotchkiss or FT-17 and two S-35 or B-2)
and one Italian M-15 or L6/47 were lost in November 1944.71 Only one Italian armored car was
lost in December 1944. Seven more Italian armored cars and seven M-15 or L6/47 were lost in
January 1945. No beutepanzer losses were recorded for February 1945 when the records cease.
Some reports of the strength of light armored vehicles (wheeled armored cars and halftrack
armored personnel carriers) in OB Southeast also exist. On 31 May 1944 the light armored
vehicles available included 119 armored cars, 40 light half-tracks, and 12 medium half-tracks
operational and 40 armored cars, 12 light half-tracks, and one medium half-track in repair. On 31
July there were 133 armored cars, 26 light half-tracks, and 13 medium half-tracks operational
and 51 armored cars, 22 light half-tracks, and one medium half-track in repair. On 31 October
there were only 32 armored cars, three light half-tracks, and no medium half-tracks operational
and 11 armored cars and five light half-tracks in repair. On 30 November there were 28 armored
cars and eight light half-tracks operational and eight armored cars and two light half-tracks in repair. On 30 December there were 32 armored cars, seven light half-tracks, and one medium
half-track operational and 13 armored cars and one medium half-track in repair.
Partisan Armored Forces
In late 1944 as the intensity of the fighting in Yugoslavia increased (and assumed more
and more of the characteristics of conventional conflict, rather than an insurgency), the
Yugoslavian Partisans – with the assistance of the Western Allies and Soviets – deployed two
tank brigades against the Germans.
The first was formed in Carovigno Italy in early 1944 as a motorized infantry battalion.
Most of the personnel were Croatian and Slovenes liberated from Italian PW camps. From
March to May 1944 the battalion was moved to Egypt where Canadians of Yugoslav origin
trained it and by British officers. On 16 July 1944 the battalion was expanded to a brigade of
2,003 men and moved back to Italy where they received American-manufactured M-3 Light
Tanks. The brigade was organized with three two-company tank battalions, a mechanized
battalion, and service units. It had 56 M-3 tanks and 24 armored half-tracks and scout cars.
The 1st Tank Brigade was initially deployed to protect Tito’s headquarters on Vis at the
beginning of September 1944. Elements were landed on the mainland during the night of 23/24
November and took part in actions around Knin at the end of the month. The detachment lost
four of 25 tanks and one of 11 armored vehicles deployed in the battle. A second detachment was
also landed at Dubrovnik and participated in battles around Mostar in November and December
1944. In March 1945 the brigade expanded, forming a fourth, independent tank battalion, for a
total of 75 M-3 Light Tanks. At least seven of the tanks were modified as SP antitank vehicles,
mounting captured German 75mm guns, as SP AA vehicles, mounting captured German quad-
20mm AA guns, or carriers for the Soviet supplied 82mm mortar.
From 20 March 1945 the 1st Tank Brigade was part of the Fourth Yugoslav Army. It
participated in the final battles against the Germans in Yugoslavia and participated in the capture
of Trieste at the end of April 1945.
The brigade suffered total losses of 93 KIA and 195 WIA. It lost 33 tanks destroyed and
31 damaged, five other armored vehicles were destroyed and two were damaged.
The 2nd Yugoslav Tank Brigade was organized from the training cadre of the 1st Brigade
(about 600 men) which was transferred to Tula in the USSR in early 1945. The brigade was
formed on 8 March 1945 and was organized as a Soviet Army Tank Brigade with three, twocompany
tank battalions, a support company, workshop company, and an antiaircraft battery. It
had 1,150 men, 65 T-34/85 medium tanks, and 3 BA-64 armored cars.
On 12 April 1945 the 2nd Brigade, as part of the First Yugoslav Army, participated in the
offensive that liberated Vukovar and Vinkovci. Fourteen T-34/85 tanks and one BA-64 were
destroyed and nine tanks were damaged. At the end of the war the 2nd Brigade joined the 1st
Brigade at Trieste.

  • Pridružio: 05 Jan 2011
  • Poruke: 1037

Standartenführer Deutsch iz PE kaže, a Kumm ga citira u knjizi, da su Bugari, kad su se okrenuli protiv njih, raspolagali velikim brojem Pz IV (valjda Oklopna brigada).
Opisuje epizodu kad je borbeno neiskusna posada flakova 8,8 cm, koja je stigla sa položaja oko Ploeštija, iz Kočana na levoj obali J.Morave uništila 5 bugarskih Pz IV na Babičkoj Gori.

  • Nebojša Đokić
  • vojni istoričar
  • Pridružio: 03 Jun 2010
  • Poruke: 4066
  • Gde živiš: Novi Beograd

Zaista nema preciznih podataka o nemačkim gubicima oktobra 1944. godine. Međutim protiv Rusa, partizana i Bugara je angažovano oko stotinjak oklopnih vozila (tenkova, samohotki, OA) i skoro ništa od toga nije se povuklo osim čete koja se iz Kruševca početkom oktobra povukla za Kraljevo. Sve ono što je bilo angažovano u istočnoj Srbiji je izgubljeno (bilo u istočnoj Srbiji, bilo oko Niša bilo oko Beograda). Dok su oko Niša dejstvovali italijanski tenkovi M-15 u Beogradskoj operaciji su to uglavnom bila moderna vozila Pz-IV i StuG-III.

  • Pridružio: 05 Jan 2011
  • Poruke: 1037

Meni se čini da Nemci impliciraju da su oni opremili Bugare Pz IV-ima dok su ovi bili na njihovoj strani.
Tako sa ironijom pričaju kako ih ispred Prokuplja napadaju Pz IV i me-109 sa bugarskim posadama, a tuku ih dobre nemačke poljske haubice 15 cm.

  • Nebojša Đokić
  • vojni istoričar
  • Pridružio: 03 Jun 2010
  • Poruke: 4066
  • Gde živiš: Novi Beograd

Pa dobro nije sporno da su Nemci dali Bugarima Pz IV, StuG-III i Me-109G. Ali Bugari u ovim borbama koriste i starije tenkove. Tek tamo u Sremo koriste manje više isključivo samo nove tenkove.

Ko je trenutno na forumu

Ukupno su 1037 korisnika na forumu :: 32 registrovanih, 6 sakrivenih i 999 gosta   ::   [ Administrator ] [ Supermoderator ] [ Moderator ] :: Detaljnije

Najviše korisnika na forumu ikad bilo je 2918 - dana 22 Nov 2019 07:48

Korisnici koji su trenutno na forumu:
Korisnici trenutno na forumu: aleksmajstor, cvrle312, darkangel, dozorni, Georgius, gonzagbs, ILGromovnik, Ivica1102, Joja, Karla, Kibice, Koridor, Krvava Devetka, Kubovac, kuntalo, kybonacci, loon123, MB120mm, mercedesamg, MrNo, Nikolaa11, ostoja, pein, Profica, Recce, repac, royst33, sap, slonic_tonic, Snorks, Toper, Vlajman1957