对此,德军官史卷八对此的观点是: Instead, the ‘greatest tank battle in history’ took a surprisingly small toll of theGerman attacking forces. The losses during the ensuing Soviet counter-offensivealso lowered the curve of the graph only slightly. In the second half of 1943 theGerman armament industry produced a monthly average of 908 tanks andassault guns (some of which were, of course, intended for other fronts), sothat the number of fifighting vehicles on the eastern front in December washigher than at the beginning of July. The percentage increase in modern battletanks like Panthers and Tigers, as well as the improved-performance Panzer IVs,was particularly important. At the end of the year German armour was strongerthan ever before. The thesis of Kursk as a ‘turning point’ can be refuted bystatistics alone. 否认这是一个转折点
数据上看也并非如此 损失上看 德军官宣数据为南北两线合计损失252辆坦克、突击炮、坦歼,但是这没有计算灰熊,时间也没有计算全,依据相同档案(BA-MA RH 10/65和BA-MA RH 10/64)的其它著作给出的数据损失北线22201人,南线33708,坦克、突击炮全损北线87南线190(北线20装的一辆三号坦克的损失有不同描述,故泽特林版为北线88辆),坦克占开战总数11.3%,人数占口粮数7.2%。而官史数据其中死亡失踪人数占三个集团军前线力量(就是我们一般理解的“兵力”,“实际力量”减去8周内可归队人员和暂离休假人员,几个兵力口径我发帖解释过,不赘述)1.67%。 苏军按克氏官方数据为177847人,坦克、自行火炮不可恢复损失1614辆,坦克、自行火炮占31.4%,人数占9.3%。 以上数据不是没有争议,但是双方数据均有更高版本(比如苏军坦克、自行火炮损失有好几个1900+的版本,料也比较硬),基本按官宣对官宣。 怎么看,都不是德军这一波耗亏了。 数据来源:KARL-HEINZ FRIESER:Germany and theSecond World War VOLUME VIIIThe Eastern Front 1943–1944: The Warin the East and onthe Neighbouring Fronts(德方官宣数据) Niklas Zetterling and Anders Frankson:Kursk 1943: a statistical analysis Roman Toeppel:Kursk 1943: The Greatest Battle of the Second World War Krivosheev:Soviet casualties and combat losses in the 20th Century(苏方官宣数据)