knives used by the red army at stalingrad.

[savagesicslayer]

I am a fan of the battle of stalingrad.i find the battle facinating.dispite the lack of decient leadership the average joe lunchpail soviet soldier held the line against the german 6 army.and came out on top 1.5 million lives later.
the question I have is does anybody know what type of knives were used by the red army at this time.knives were used extensivly during the battle the germans called it "rattenkreig" war of the rats.

 

[a223cat]

try this:

http://www.russianwarrior.com/STMMain.htm?1914weapon_index.htm&1

know you will like it!

 

[Ilovetoolsteel]

The Soviets didn't issue their soldiers a lot of kit, At Stalingrad, many weren't even issued rifles. I would suspect that knives mostly were of the kitchen or butchering variety that the soldiers managed to aquire in the field. Or possibly knives they took off of dead Germans.

 

[jh205]

Have a look at www.ostfront.com

The site has original and reproduction Soviet WW2 equipment for sale. Looks quite interesting.

 

[jh205]

Think I found what you're looking for:

http://www.ostfront.com/Merchant2/m...ode=ROEQ-00067&Category_Code=Rus-WW2-FE-Other

 

[nozh2002]

The Soviets didn't issue their soldiers a lot of kit, At Stalingrad, many weren't even issued rifles. I would suspect that knives mostly were of the kitchen or butchering variety that the soldiers managed to aquire in the field.

Righ, they did not have weapons at all... However germans was very scared of hand to hand combat against russian, so at some point there is some trues in this...

This is misconcept, all country works entierly to arm Red Army and it was always very well armed and honestly better armed then germans or american or anybody else. And this is true even now IMHO.

Or possibly knives they took off of dead Germans.

They kill them without rifles and then pick german knives as a souvenir, I guess... Well german officer dagger was a good trophy, as well as parabellum...

In general knives was used by scouts, I am not sure how to translation "razvedchik" - who cross the front line and kidnapp enemy solder - "yazik", to question him about enemy disposition. They had special issued knives -

And I guess it was most widely used knife of WWII. I am not aware of any special Stalingrad knives.

Thanks, Vassili.

P.S. Name - "Nozh Razvedchika - NR-40" scout knife, production start - 1940 (after Finnish campain, Red Army pick up this useful tool from finnish knives - pukkos).

P.P.S. Modern "Nozh Razvedchika" by IzhMash -

Used by SpecNaz, able to make one scielent shot from handle (22).

 

[savagesicslayer]

Thanks for the responces guys.
the red army was very well supplied.indeed.i cringe to think what an army of that size would have done with compitant leadership.At Stalingrad the reds lost 10,000 men in one attack trying and failing to take a hill.such a waist.losses like that would have crippeled the war effort over here.public opponion would fall faster than a 1,000lb bomb.
that's a scary thought,could we have stopped the reds if they kept going after berlin?

 

[Whoever Wherever]

The red army was better equiped than the americans? I think not in terms of what they had to use. Maybe in the sheer number of supplies given to them. The American soildiers were also far away from there country and couldnt easily recieve replacment/new gear. They however were carrying the M1, the best battle rifle ever invented. As far as the red army still bieng better equiped than U.S. soldiers you must be kidding. After the fall of Russia as we knew it in the 80's we found that soviet weapon technology was far behind the U.S.A. outside missles and aircraft. While I am not a fan of the current United States issue battle rifle our technology is second to none. The British are using Acuracy International Rifles wich are among the best in the world. Besides this and our current issue rifle, wich may be changed soon, I would like to see one example of a better equiped strike force than our army.

 

[znapschatz]

Thanks for the responces guys.
the red army was very well supplied.indeed.i cringe to think what an army of that size would have done with compitant leadership.At Stalingrad the reds lost 10,000 men in one attack trying and failing to take a hill.such a waist.losses like that would have crippeled the war effort over here.public opponion would fall faster than a 1,000lb bomb.
that's a scary thought,could we have stopped the reds if they kept going after berlin?

Soviet leadership was a problem in the early months of the war, largely because of Stalin's officer purge, which cost the military thousands of skilled and experienced officers just when they were to be needed most. This decapitation cost the Soviet army dearly up through Stalingrad, but as that battle was the strategic turning point on the eastern front, it also renewed and tempered a much better officer corps. By the summer of 1943, the Soviet army was dishing out as good as it received, and by 1944 its general staff was superior to the Germans. Their tactical skills, however, remained crude, more wasteful of lives than necessary.

By and large, Soviet troops were equipped with excellent weapons, some of them as good or superior to those of Germany or the Western allies. They were also well fed and clothed, although nothing fancy. As for personal items, knives among them, most individuals had to fend for themselves. Since most Soviet soldiers were of peasant stock, well accustomed to scrounging up whatever they needed, they probably did okay.

 

[Whoever Wherever]

Again I am not aware of any soviet rifle form the period wich was "superior to those" of "the western allies". I would love to know what rifle people think was superior to the M1. A rifle that to this day is a constant at shooting competitions ( and is often in the hands of the winer) and is still bieng manufactured to good tolerances (not like some era specific rip off reruns of historic guns and rebuilt mauser rifles) tolerances and is sells for over a thousand dollars.

 

[Recce]

In the floor to floor and hand to hand fighting - the entrenching tool was king. They could be sharpened and were used with deadly effect!!!!!

 

[woodsmoke]

I am also fascinated by the Battle of Stalingrad. Insight into the human potential to endure and prevail and all that. I am guessing that the above issue knives were present but like most wars of masses of populations, any and all forms of edged tools were employed from shovels and axes to butcher knives. Whatever a guy could get his hands on. Also where a soldier came from may influence the knife carried. For example; puukkos from the northern regions of the country. We knife enthusiasts take our knives seriously. Most think gun and the knife is an afterthought.

 

[spyder10]

In the floor to floor and hand to hand fighting - the entrenching tool was king. They could be sharpened and were used with deadly effect!!!!!

IIRC the Spetsnaz always carry a shovel that is sharpened on both edges and can use it to devastating effectiveness in CQB

 

[nozh2002]

Soviet leadership was a problem in the early months of the war, largely because of Stalin's officer purge, which cost the military thousands of skilled and experienced officers just when they were to be needed most. This decapitation cost the Soviet army dearly up through Stalingrad, but as that battle was the strategic turning point on the eastern front, it also renewed and tempered a much better officer corps. By the summer of 1943, the Soviet army was dishing out as good as it received, and by 1944 its general staff was superior to the Germans. Their tactical skills, however, remained crude, more wasteful of lives than necessary.

By and large, Soviet troops were equipped with excellent weapons, some of them as good or superior to those of Germany or the Western allies. They were also well fed and clothed, although nothing fancy. As for personal items, knives among them, most individuals had to fend for themselves. Since most Soviet soldiers were of peasant stock, well accustomed to scrounging up whatever they needed, they probably did okay.

I should correct you - most of them were superior or as good as German or the Western allies weapon, especially near the end of the War, otherwise how Russia was able to win this War?

Situation on the front was stabilized in 1942 winter after Syberian trops (the russian which was sent to Syberia by Stalin during collectivization to die) kick germans out of Moscow - first defeat for nazy ever and first in the modern war history when attacking forces was equal in numbers to defending troops (any study book suggested 3 to 1). But then Stalin stupidity leads to defeat in Kharkow battle when german succesfully contrattac Russian offencive (which later in 1943 was used against German in Kursk-Orel battle) and after this advance to Volga to Stalingrad.

BTW German generals got their military education in Russia general staff academy (remember Germany was demilitarized as result of WWI). Tactic of massive tank offensive was developed by Russian - inventors were sent to jail and their students - germans then used it against Europe and then Russia.

One point I like to make - Russia lost 20millions during the war. Most of this was due to German cruelty and massive killing of civilian population and russin prisoners of war. For example in Kharkov they does not allow to transport food into city and so create hunger - all food should go to Great Germany. Remember nazy claim Russian as nation of slave - cattle to work for their superion masters, and so treat Russians this way. Solder died in combat among Russians was about 7 millions - same as germans lost.

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[znapschatz]

I should correct you - most of them were superior or as good as German or the Western allies weapon, especially near the end of the War, otherwise how Russia was able to win this War?

It is not necessary to have the best weapons in order to win a war. All they need to be is "good enough." An example of this would be the Russian T34 tank, in its day a revolutionary design. It was nasty surprise for the Germans, who basically copied it for their next generation of armor.
In many ways, the later German Panthers and Tigers were improved over the T34, but the Russians upgraded theirs to be roughly comparable. However, the Germans failed to copy one of the most important feature of the T34: by design it was relatively cheap and easier to build, and Soviet factories churned them out by tens of thousands, overwhelming German armor by sheer weight of numbers.

Situation on the front was stabilized in 1942 winter after Syberian trops (the russian which was sent to Syberia by Stalin during collectivization to die) kick germans out of Moscow - first defeat for nazy ever and first in the modern war history when attacking forces was equal in numbers to defending troops (any study book suggested 3 to 1). But then Stalin stupidity leads to defeat in Kharkow battle when german succesfully contrattac Russian offencive (which later in 1943 was used against German in Kursk-Orel battle) and after this advance to Volga to Stalingrad.

The Siberian troops were not political prisoners, but natives of that region. Racially, they were Asians and very tough. Moscow 1942 was, as you say, the first major Nazi defeat. Marshall Zhukov, who organized the defense, never lost a battle. He was probably the best general of WW2.

BTW German generals got their military education in Russia general staff academy (remember Germany was demilitarized as result of WWI). Tactic of massive tank offensive was developed by Russian - inventors were sent to jail and their students - germans then used it against Europe and then Russia.

Well, the Russians didn't invent everything. Another major contributor to armored tactics was Charles DeGaulle, then a French staff officer, who published a book describing what the Germans studied, applied and called Blitzkrieg.

One point I like to make - Russia lost 20millions during the war. Most of this was due to German cruelty and massive killing of civilian population and russin prisoners of war. For example in Kharkov they does not allow to transport food into city and so create hunger - all food should go to Great Germany. Remember nazy claim Russian as nation of slave - cattle to work for their superion masters, and so treat Russians this way. Solder died in combat among Russians was about 7 millions - same as germans lost.

Thanks, Vassili.

The world forever owes a debt of gratitude to the peoples of the Soviet Union for defeating Nazi Germany.

 

[Flux]

I was under the impression that the Russians had plenty of small arms during the war and the idea that only every second man gets a rifle was a misconception from that “enemy at the gates” movie.

As far as the Russians small arms being better then the western allies the SVT is still considered a decent rifle isn’t it? It might not have been as good as the M1 but it was better then the G43. Various PPSH models were considered more reliable then the MP40 by the Germans. I don’t know how the M1 Garand, M1 carbine and Thompson would have held up in the cold climate?

 

[kramska]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the German MG-42, considered one of the best machine guns of WWII, serving as the basis of designs still in use today.

Or the Sturmgewehr 44, the first assault rifle, designed by the germans but not used at Stalingrad of course. Most claim that it served as the model for the AK47, some argue that it did not. Take a look and you decide.

The German standard carbine was antiquated at the beginning of the war.

The Russians had excellent and from most accounts, superior sub machine guns, the PPsh41. They made them in large quantities, they were reliable, and worked better in the cold environment of Russia. The Germans hadn't developed a lubricant to function effectively at cold temperatures.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8512921834081800269&q=russian+war&pl=true

Russian miltiary casualties were much higher than German casualties, around 2:1 (over 5 million on the Axis and 10.6 for the Russians, many in captivity on both sides). The Germans just had no way of sustaining the losses the Russians could.

 

[nozh2002]

It is not necessary to have the best weapons in order to win a war. All they need to be is "good enough." An example of this would be the Russian T34 tank, in its day a revolutionary design. It was nasty surprise for the Germans, who basically copied it for their next generation of armor.
In many ways, the later German Panthers and Tigers were improved over the T34, but the Russians upgraded theirs to be roughly comparable. However, the Germans failed to copy one of the most important feature of the T34: by design it was relatively cheap and easier to build, and Soviet factories churned them out by tens of thousands, overwhelming German armor by sheer weight of numbers.

Well this is one of the most important feature of weapon - easy to produce in big numbers plus be reliable and easy to maintain - like AK.

The Siberian troops were not political prisoners, but natives of that region. Racially, they were Asians and very tough.

Not at all. They were russian peasants who was send to Syberia to live in exile in 1930ths (not prisoners of course - it was shtrafbat, also very deadly for germans) because they did not agree with collectivization policy - not an asian at all - russian, toughest of them (and in general majority of Syberia population are Russians). Natives due to their small numbers were not serve army.

Kazakhs are asian and they are very tough (they are far from what this Barat shows)! They are descendant of Chingis Khan hords. They are former nomads and so best tank drivers - rading on horses or tanks is in their blood.

Moscow 1942 was, as you say, the first major Nazi defeat. Marshall Zhukov, who organized the defense, never lost a battle. He was probably the best general of WW2.

This is well promouted general, however he is not accepted by all historians the same way. There was many brilliant generals less promouted.

The world forever owes a debt of gratitude to the peoples of the Soviet Union for defeating Nazi Germany.

Hitler was not first. Century before it was anoter seakers for world domination Napoleon defeated by Russians and Carl IV (or VI) king of Sweden who keep Europe in fear another century before (after Piter The Great defeat him, Sweden turn neutral and for 300 years it is neutral)...

Thanks, Vassii.

P.S. It is not only T34, but also IL-2 called by German - "Schwarzer Tod" or "Fleischwolf" and Katyusha rockets (based on US made Studebaker) etc...

 

[nozh2002]

Russian miltiary casualties were much higher than German casualties, around 2:1 (over 5 million on the Axis and 10.6 for the Russians, many in captivity on both sides).

If you account prisoners of war killed in consentation camps by Germans as a military loss then it may be correct. At the begining of the war millions were captured because of stupidity of Stalin and Zhukov who were cought by surprize attack (Zhukov who was chief of general staff at that time). Russian treat germans much better the germans russians (they were cattle for germans anyway - what a surprise were for them when thay found out that it was not true...), but battle field casualties were almost even.

The Germans just had no way of sustaining the losses the Russians could.

This Russian cold is pretty silly excuse, face it, Russians are berret warriors then Germans and always were!

Thanks, Vassili.

 

[Sword and Shield]

Or the Sturmgewehr 44, the first assault rifle, designed by the germans but not used at Stalingrad of course. Most claim that it served as the model for the AK47, some argue that it did not. Take a look and you decide.

Well, I've seen interviews with Mr. Kalashnikov himself, and he claims to have designed the AK before even seeing the S44. Given the differences in design, I'd say that's more than just smoke and mirrors.

I'd say that historically, the Russian military is one of the toughest on the planet. The brave men (and women, especially snipers) at Stalingrad proved that beyond all doubt, using weapons that were crude but worked. The world owes a debt of gratitude for their blood.

I've shot the Mosin-Nagant and the M1, and they're both fine pieces. I like the M1, but both are welcome in my stable.