The Russian advance on the Western Front

[Alex]

The Red Army begin reorganization of it's cavalry in 1943 with Marshal Budyonny in head of this. As lend lease had going in full strength many of cavalry units become horse-mechanized, just like the US cavalry in the 30's and beginning of WW2.

That's interesting. I wouldn't really have equated Soviet efforts in this period with U.S. Horse Mech, but then I'm not really very familiar with the organization or structure of Soviet cavalry. Interesting topic.

Did what we can under the circumstances. Of course the U.S. had more time and more opportunities to do so and done that so far better. U.S. organization of cavalry of that period was far superior. Wish we had our alike.

[Reiter]

If you take a look on average Corpse size of Wehrmacht in 2nd half of WW2 the Kosaken-Kavallerie-Korps wasn't anything exceptional, even if US-'experts' might claim so. Korps-level support units were normally no integral part of the Korps, but assigned on purpose. So you might be surprised as in Hungary 1945 I.Kav.Korps f.e. had temporarly attached Tiger units

It seems you don't want to acknowledge the total different organisation of Wehrmacht from US- or Red Army formations....

Horrido!

Nicole

[Pat Holscher]

It seems you don't want to acknowledge the total different organisation of Wehrmacht from US- or Red Army formations....

On the contrary. I'm not saying that. They're all quite different from one another. Indeed, I think I've said or implied as much and I think that's been consistently understood in the conversation.

It would seem that this topic is highly sensitive however, and therefore easily misread, or things read into it that aren't there. It's an interesting topic to explore, but let's avoid assuming that that we're trying to provoke and argument, etc., as that won't be instructive in any fashion. Don't assume an error is an attack of any sort and if you disagree, as I see you do, the most effective means of educating would be just to set out the facts and we'll all go from there and be the better educated for it.

[Pat Holscher]

The Red Army begin reorganization of it's cavalry in 1943 with Marshal Budyonny in head of this. As lend lease had going in full strength many of cavalry units become horse-mechanized, just like the US cavalry in the 30's and beginning of WW2.
And to add - the Guards status was good for morale. They've become like an elite of branch of Army. That was like the status of King's or Queen's Own.

I've run into a couple of other references to Soviet "horse mechanized" cavalry units.

Can anyone elaborate on Soviet horse mechanized units? How they were organized, equipped, etc?

[rayarthart]

If I can remeber right, The German Military had a Cossack Cavalry as part of the SS. After the Surrender in Europe, The SS Cossack Regiment surrendered to the Brit's or American rather to the Soviets. USSR was known then to have a hatred of the Cossacks. The Soviets would and did, extreminate whole villages of Cossack or remove them from their homes. In 1945, The Soviets had request the other allies to hand over the SS Cosssacks. They were loaded on a train and never heard from again.

[Pat Holscher]

If I can remeber right, The German Military had a Cossack Cavalry as part of the SS. After the Surrender in Europe, The SS Cossack Regiment surrendered to the Brit's or American rather to the Soviets. USSR was known then to have a hatred of the Cossacks. The Soviets would and did, extreminate whole villages of Cossack or remove them from their homes. In 1945, The Soviets had request the other allies to hand over the SS Cosssacks. They were loaded on a train and never heard from again.

There's some very extensive threads on the topic of Cossacks in German service. I'll bump that up when I have a chance.

[Pat Holscher]

We were having some site time out problems last week or the week before, during which time Alexander attempted to answer my question. HIs very interesting answer was:

[quote="Alexander]

Concerning your question about horse-mechanized units. There were horse-mechanized groups which consisted of cavalry and armor in equal and unequal proportions. Say, two cavalry divisions and one armored division with all of it assets such as engineers, infantry, artillery, AA artillery etc. Such consolidation was intended to add firepower and improve combat abilities of cavalry which were plenty these days. Horse-mechanized groups were used in large operations like Mars in 1942 and operations of 1944 and further.
In the end of WW2, when the Soviet Union entered in war with Japan one horse-mechanized group were made an audacious march through Gobi desert and strikes hard the Japanese Kwantung Army.
There was cavalry divisions which had armor in their TO&E war and those which hadn’t. Latter in the war some division was reformed or disbanded and armor units were removed or added.
Typical organization of division? Hmm. For example let’s take 12th cavalry division organized in may of ’42.
There was 4th, 19th and 23rd cavalry regiments, 108th regiment of horse artillery with their own supply unit, 90th signal squadron, 13th medical squadron, 12th separate chemical squadron, 91st food supply unit, 575th divisional veterinary hospital, 1581st post station and 944th finance unit (about a section-sized).
Other cavalry divisions had AA batteries, armored and repair units, engineers within – the wide varsity of TO&Es of the cavalry divisions throughout war.
To the horse-mechanized groups mentioned earlier and participated in breakthrough during Operation Mars – the group comprised of 2d Guard Cavalry corps (3rd and 4th Guard cavalry divisions, 20 cavalry division and 5th separated horse artillery detachment) and 6th Armored corps.
The group had men strength about 21 011 soldiers and officers, 16 155 horses, 13 906 rifles and carbines, 2667 sub machineguns, 95 mounted machineguns, 33 AA machinegun, 384 AT rifle, 226 mortars – 50mm, 71 mortars – 82mm, 64 mortars – 120mm. Artillery was presented by 48 45mm AT guns, 49 76,2mm artillery pieces, 12 37mm AA guns. The armored component had 120 tanks.
More or less uniformed organization had established in 1943. Then the horse-mechanized groups comes to existence which lasted to the end of war.[/quote]

[Pat Holscher]

We were having some site time out problems last week or the week before, during which time Alexander attempted to answer my question. HIs very interesting answer was:

Concerning your question about horse-mechanized units. There were horse-mechanized groups which consisted of cavalry and armor in equal and unequal proportions. Say, two cavalry divisions and one armored division with all of it assets such as engineers, infantry, artillery, AA artillery etc. Such consolidation was intended to add firepower and improve combat abilities of cavalry which were plenty these days. Horse-mechanized groups were used in large operations like Mars in 1942 and operations of 1944 and further.
In the end of WW2, when the Soviet Union entered in war with Japan one horse-mechanized group were made an audacious march through Gobi desert and strikes hard the Japanese Kwantung Army.
There was cavalry divisions which had armor in their TO&E war and those which hadn’t. Latter in the war some division was reformed or disbanded and armor units were removed or added.
Typical organization of division? Hmm. For example let’s take 12th cavalry division organized in may of ’42.
There was 4th, 19th and 23rd cavalry regiments, 108th regiment of horse artillery with their own supply unit, 90th signal squadron, 13th medical squadron, 12th separate chemical squadron, 91st food supply unit, 575th divisional veterinary hospital, 1581st post station and 944th finance unit (about a section-sized).
Other cavalry divisions had AA batteries, armored and repair units, engineers within – the wide varsity of TO&Es of the cavalry divisions throughout war.
To the horse-mechanized groups mentioned earlier and participated in breakthrough during Operation Mars – the group comprised of 2d Guard Cavalry corps (3rd and 4th Guard cavalry divisions, 20 cavalry division and 5th separated horse artillery detachment) and 6th Armored corps.
The group had men strength about 21 011 soldiers and officers, 16 155 horses, 13 906 rifles and carbines, 2667 sub machineguns, 95 mounted machineguns, 33 AA machinegun, 384 AT rifle, 226 mortars – 50mm, 71 mortars – 82mm, 64 mortars – 120mm. Artillery was presented by 48 45mm AT guns, 49 76,2mm artillery pieces, 12 37mm AA guns. The armored component had 120 tanks.
More or less uniformed organization had established in 1943. Then the horse-mechanized groups comes to existence which lasted to the end of war.

This is really interesting information. It would appear that this concept of horse mechanized differed from the US concept, but still, what this sort of angles towards is that "horse mechanized" is not only not as unique as we in the US might believe, but that it was actually tried successfully. Indeed, this experiment was large scale in the USSR. Much larger than every attempted in the US (but differing in concept). And we've had photos of lorries and what not in use in mounted formations in Africa well post war. Seems like the horse mech may have actually been tried, and basically worked in certain environments.

[Pat Holscher]

Bumped up due to related thread.