Volkssturm and the Battle of Berlin

>>1712184

It all depended on how well armed they were. Germany had universal consciption remember. Most of the old men saw combat in the first world war and the youth were members of the Hitlerjugend which taught rifle training. Deployment was key to their effectiveness. A smart Army officer would take Volkstrum units, break them up and mix them into regular army units. On their own, Volkstrum fought with varying degrees. If fighting the Americans or British, the fight woujld be token before surrender occured. Soviets were a different story. See 3/115 Siemensstadt Battalion for example of a good solo Volksstrum unit.

The standard defense: anti tank ditches, use of debris and wrecks as barriers. The Berlin Flak Tower provided one of the few safe havens and had the capability of hitting targets approaching the Reichstag.

The Reichstag's defense or capture was primarily for morale and propaganda reasons. It was not far from where the Fuhrerbunker was and with Hitler refusing t leave, that was where the defenses were held.

File: 753307_orig.jpg (340KB, 722x582px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 722x582px

>>1712184
>Why was so much effort put into defending the Reichstag?

The zoo flak tower was able to provide anti-tank support over the government district and the bridges around it, which is where the Germans eventually retreated to. The flak guns had direct line of sight on the Moltke Bridge and the open areas approaching the Reichstag. The Soviets never successfully attacked it but eventually arranged its surrender. There are photos of all the Soviet armor destroyed on Moltke Bridge, mostly by those flak guns and the infantry defending it.

I don't know any specifics about the Volkssturm units, other than not all were armed and only those with military experience would be expected to fill such roles, the majority being used in supporting tasks. The civilians themselves were the major hindrance in the city.

File: moltkebridgeo.jpg (331KB, 1600x482px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1600x482px

>>1712362
>photos of all the Soviet armor destroyed on Moltke Bridge

>>1712365

Why does that happen? I remember reading Chuikov's memoirs about the battle of Stalingrad, and he mentions something similar with one of the streets there (although I don't have photos), where dug in anti-tank guns overlooked a broad boulevard, and "two by two, they would go in, and get blasted to pieces".


I mean, how many tanks do you have to go through before you realize this isn't working?

>>1712338

Also, initially the Heer would never accept volksstrum forces being mixed into their unit. That changed when they started seeing the old man rush out into combat as if they were back in the Trenches. Obviously this was a big problem, so that was when mediocre to decent officers chained them up to Heer units and babysat therm, while good officers decided to break the units up and bolster existing forces.

Plus thy were pretty salty as fuck about it, which spawns plenty of Jokes.

>‘Vengeance will come,’ so one went, ‘when you see notices on the old people’s homes: “Closed because of the call-up”

>>1712371

They had more armor and men to spare then the Germans had shells to use.

The capture of Berlin was a huge contest by Soviet Army officers wanting to impress the boss. Their men paid the price of their vanity.

>>1712371
>you see Ivan, is simple plan
>if we are of throwing enough stronk armor at fascist pigdogs, puny baby Fritz will run out of shells before we run out of tonks!

>>1712380

>>1712391


And when it was going the other way around? When it was German tanks running into the guns of dug in Soviets?

>>1712407

Again, it was a bid to impress the boss and the men suffered as a result. It's not a statement of preferring one side over the other, it's an observation of inhumanity of rank and file officers.

>>1712407
>you see Fritz, eez seemple plan
>if ve are of throwing enough stronk armor at communist untermenschen, ze puny baby Ivan vill run out of shells before ve run out of tonks!

it's a joke you autist

>>1712371

From accounts in Berlin the "hurricane fires" created smoke so thick it was hard to see more than a hundred meters and with infantry also defending the bridge it probably wasn't clear what was happening. The Germans tried to blow it eventually but it didn't collapse.

And like >>1712380 said, the Reichstag was seen as a prize and was only 600 meters from the bridge so there was added motivation.

>>1712422

I'm sorry, I thought you were going with the /pol/ style stupid russian zergrush meme, not joking.

mea culpa.

Can anyone recommend a book on the Volkssturm?

>>1712430
no worries famerino, I get where you're coming from on that.

File: 51waAHFq1L._SX323_BO1204203200_.jpg (45KB, 325x499px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 325x499px

>>1712433

Nope but if you want one about the Battle of Berlin;

https://mega.nz/#!URYQEBRZ!HUOfEJ0yOf6cNfrdyWdPJttmTuI8DGWPigSO083rxrk

>>1712446

>Another prominent building heavily bombarded that morning was Göring’s air ministry on the Wilhelmstrasse. Its ferro-concrete construction also resisted well. Because of its solidity and proximity to the Reich Chancellery, it had become an assembly point for uniformed Nazi Party members pretending that they were part of the great battle. The mixture of uniforms was striking. Along with Luftwaffe and Waffen SS, there was an elderly Volkssturm officer in his Wilhelmine uniform from the First World War who appeared ‘to have escaped from a waxworks museum’.

File: anthony_barkley_1.jpg (99KB, 904x602px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 904x602px

>>1712371

Soviet armor in particular was poor in urban fighting. Riflemen would be on upper floors and roofs and Soviet tanks, designed for Eastern Front tank warfare, couldn't elevate their guns enough. Tank riders helped but in built-up urban areas it wasn't enough. It's one area that the Lend-Lease Shermans were praised, as the riders loved the turret-mounted AA machine gun, something considered trivial by American tankers.

>>1712549
I could see how Soviet tanks didn't do well in urban fighting. The IS-2 and T34-85 both have front mounted turrets one rather long guns. That would make it more difficult to maneuver through streets then say a Sherman or even Panther.

>>1712549
>Lend-Lease Shermans
hello amerifat

your shermans were despised
not because it was that bad, but ruski crew had no time to train with them and it had a tall siloutte making it an easy target

ruski armor was great in urban combat, the desant never mounted the armor once the battle began

they simply didnt have to suffer from their inferior optics, which gave them a disadvantage in open combat

if one thing the germans feared, its urban fighting against the soviets

>volkstrum

it wasnt effective, it was scraping the bottom of the barrel in personel
ppl who didnt want to serve or shouldnt need to serve
german military classifises divisions into 5 brackets
>need to be reorganized, refullfilled
>capable for defense, with restrictions
>capable for defense, without restrictions
>capable for offense, with restrictions
>capable for offense, without restrictions

they were never in the latter, even on their fresh out of camp condition
the volksturm is a type of division, in the wehrmact, with different layout of the division
so your question is rather pointless, ofcourse they achieved local victories themselfs

even the strongest holdout points were taken after a few days of fighting

im afraid OP you have a bit of a delusion going on about the volkstrurm and the berlin encirclement

File: Soviet_sherman1.jpg (358KB, 1600x1066px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1600x1066px

>>1713490

Sorry to rile up your insecurities, but they were so bad the 1st Guards Tank Army the 3rd Shock Army had to bring their AA guns up to use against the rooftops.

The Sherman was obviously inferior to late-war Soviet armor in almost every way, but they were still combat effective. That Guards units were still being equipped with them in 44/45 is testament to that. The first Soviet unit in Vienna was a detachment from 1st Tank Battalion, 46th Guards Tank Brigade consisting of 18 Shermans and three SAU-152 guns, and it's Soviet sources that claim the appreciation in urban combat, not just for the turret-mounted machine-gun, but the double clutch and its ability to "crawl like a cat" on one engine, among others.

File: 1432817260171.gif (2MB, 236x224px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 236x224px

>>1713490
Vlad go away. The only times the Shermans weren't enjoyed by Soviet tankers were when Commisars forbade troops from using them because "tank not stronk like Soviet (made with American metals of course) steel!

Volkstrum were pretty awful, as bad as any conscript unit on average. Potentially even worse in many cases because in the cases of Hilter Youth they were led by ideology and not tactics.
Everyone jokes about the Russians using human waves, but Volkstrum literally used human wave tactics. Especially at the Battle of the Bulge. At one point a squad and a half of Americans held up an entire Volkstrum division (which in turn held up a Panzergrenadier division as they wouldn't move up until the tank destroyer battalion [that had retreated 2 days ago] was neutralized by the infantry) until the Americans both ran out of ammo and were flanked through the woods by a Wehrmacht battalion that had been forbidden from doing so for almost an entire day by the SS officer leading the Volkstrum. They employed literal human wave tactics against three machine gun positions, killing only a single American in the entire battle, and losing 100 killed and 200 others wounded.

There are also accounts of Hitler Youth Volkstrum setting up anti tank ambush positions during the day, then proceeding to get buttfucked by said tanks they were supposed to ambush since the tankers saw them digging foxholes.

>>1713954
How about you present a document of Soviets shitting on the Sherman to disprove all those documents recounts and operational usage of the Sherman that show it was used and enjoyed by its crews?

>>1713954
>read a book
like a book mentioning dmitry loza?
who literally celebrated the m4?

>>1712184

>How effective were the Volkssturm in combat?

Not at all, 12 year old kids would strat crying and shitting their trousers when they realised they are going to get hurt

>What kinds of defenses were deployed in Berlin in 1945 and how effective were they?

Hardpoint ambushes, hidden MG's and AT guns waiting for the Russians to come into their field of fire. Its effective at causing some casualties but wont stop an enemy with more manpower, the Germans had none left at this time.

>Why was so much effort put into defending the Reichstag?

Nazi fanatics I guess, the Russians would have done the same for the Kremlin