Soviet 746th Tank Regiment

[pmulcahy11b]

Matt,

Seems plausible, and I can buy the use of German transports (trucks/Kubelwagens) and light armour. Despite anecdotes stating the Americans used German tanks, I still can't quite credit it.

Seems like a book I may have of US and British troops using German armor...I'll have to check my library. I know the Germans did it with US, British, and Russian tanks. Back later.

[helbent4]

Seems like a book I may have of US and British troops using German armor...I'll have to check my library. I know the Germans did it with US, British, and Russian tanks. Back later.

Paul,

That would be awesome!

There's no disputing Germans and Russians used each others' captured tanks.

Check out the following page, with pictures of German tanks captured in North Africa in allied service (British, US and Australian). There's no evidence they were used in combat, only maybe in training.

http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/weapons...service-3.html

Tony

[James Langham2]

An update taking a few of the points above into account (still a work in progress):

As the war progressed, large numbers of captured vehicles became available to both sides. The Soviets took advantage of this and created a number of units using captured equipment. The best documented unit is the 746th Independent Tank Regiment formed in early 1998.
The cadre for this unit was made up of staff from the Kubinka Tank Museum. These were familiar with a range of NATO vehicles that were held as exhibits (the museum was the official Soviet Army Tank Museum which was not open to the public and was manned entirely by military staff. These exhibits came from all over the world, known examples were captured and transferred by friendly Arab countries, China prior to the split, Cuba and North Vietnam. Some M113s were also believed to have come from Somalia after it changed allegiance to the Soviet Block.
This unit was made up as follows:

* Regimental headquarters in 2 M1 plus 2 M577

* 1st tank battalion with 21 M1A1 and 10 Leopard 2 (made up of vehicles captured and repaired during the fighting in 1997)

* 2nd tank battalion with 3 M60A3, 2 M60A4 and 6 M60A1, 3 M48A5 (at least one with Blazer armour), 6 Centurions (all 105mm 2 are believed to be South African Oliphants and the remaining 4 were probably ex-IDF although 1 might have been a British model), 7 Leopard 1 (third company only has two platoons) these vehicles were predominantly taken from museum exhibits

* 3rd tank battalion with 21 M1/IMP M1 (only two companies strong) made up primarily of captured vehicles

* Motor rifle battalion with 21 M113s and 10 M2 Bradleys (mortars were towed behind trucks) - one source states that one company was in British FV432s and that the mortars were US M106s. The M113s were a mix of captured and museum exhibits. The M113s include at least one with a German MG3 as the pintel mount.

* Anti-aircraft battery with 2 M163 PIVAD and 2 Gepard

* A combined artillery/ howitzer battery with 8 (as opposed to the normal 6) M109 (assorted models). Sources indicate MLRS was considered as an alternative but not enough ammunition was available.

* A recce company with 3 Panhard AML, 1 South African Eland, 3 M1 and 2 BRDM2 Rkhs.

* No anti-tank battery was included.

* Logistic vehicles were a mix of NATO types.

It is interesting that no Chieftains or Challengers were included in the 746th (these were however seen in the 789th Independent Tank Regiment) it has been suggested that this was to reduce the number of main gun calibres in use as the British used a different (rifled) 120mm gun).

This unit was thrown into the front along the Baltic Coast in where it performed well. Gradually however the lack of spares started to show and one by one the NATO vehicles were abandoned until the few survivors were incorporated into the 20th Tank Division when it was withdrawn to the Ukraine in 1999. It is noticeable that tanks of the Regiment coped much better regarding reliability, probably due to the standards of maintenance taught by the original cadre.

Despite common misconceptions, the unit was never used as a deception unit only as a front line combat unit. Vehicles were usually repainted in standard Soviet colours with larger than usual red stars added.

I plan to add:
* vehicle numbering
* a possible orbat for later war
* personalities
* quotes
* illustrations

[.45cultist]

An update taking a few of the points above into account (still a work in progress):

As the war progressed, large numbers of captured vehicles became available to both sides. The Soviets took advantage of this and created a number of units using captured equipment. The best documented unit is the 746th Independent Tank Regiment formed in early 1998.
The cadre for this unit was made up of staff from the Kubinka Tank Museum. These were familiar with a range of NATO vehicles that were held as exhibits (the museum was the official Soviet Army Tank Museum which was not open to the public and was manned entirely by military staff. These exhibits came from all over the world, known examples were captured and transferred by friendly Arab countries, China prior to the split, Cuba and North Vietnam. Some M113s were also believed to have come from Somalia after it changed allegiance to the Soviet Block.
This unit was made up as follows:

* Regimental headquarters in 2 M1 plus 2 M577

* 1st tank battalion with 21 M1A1 and 10 Leopard 2 (made up of vehicles captured and repaired during the fighting in 1997)

* 2nd tank battalion with 3 M60A3, 2 M60A4 and 6 M60A1, 3 M48A5 (at least one with Blazer armour), 6 Centurions (all 105mm 2 are believed to be South African Oliphants and the remaining 4 were probably ex-IDF although 1 might have been a British model), 7 Leopard 1 (third company only has two platoons) these vehicles were predominantly taken from museum exhibits

* 3rd tank battalion with 21 M1/IMP M1 (only two companies strong) made up primarily of captured vehicles

* Motor rifle battalion with 21 M113s and 10 M2 Bradleys (mortars were towed behind trucks) - one source states that one company was in British FV432s and that the mortars were US M106s. The M113s were a mix of captured and museum exhibits. The M113s include at least one with a German MG3 as the pintel mount.

* Anti-aircraft battery with 2 M163 PIVAD and 2 Gepard

* A combined artillery/ howitzer battery with 8 (as opposed to the normal 6) M109 (assorted models). Sources indicate MLRS was considered as an alternative but not enough ammunition was available.

* A recce company with 3 Panhard AML, 1 South African Eland, 3 M1 and 2 BRDM2 Rkhs.

* No anti-tank battery was included.

* Logistic vehicles were a mix of NATO types.

It is interesting that no Chieftains or Challengers were included in the 746th (these were however seen in the 789th Independent Tank Regiment) it has been suggested that this was to reduce the number of main gun calibres in use as the British used a different (rifled) 120mm gun).

This unit was thrown into the front along the Baltic Coast in where it performed well. Gradually however the lack of spares started to show and one by one the NATO vehicles were abandoned until the few survivors were incorporated into the 20th Tank Division when it was withdrawn to the Ukraine in 1999. It is noticeable that tanks of the Regiment coped much better regarding reliability, probably due to the standards of maintenance taught by the original cadre.

Despite common misconceptions, the unit was never used as a deception unit only as a front line combat unit. Vehicles were usually repainted in standard Soviet colours with larger than usual red stars added.

I plan to add:
* vehicle numbering
* a possible orbat for later war
* personalities
* quotes
* illustrations

How many Russian mechanics can maintain the Western turbines

[James Langham2]

There is at least one Russian tank with one... one of the background quotes I have in mind is one where they have problems, not realising the fuel consumption is the same flat out as at idle.

[.45cultist]

There is at least one Russian tank with one... one of the background quotes I have in mind is one where they have problems, not realising the fuel consumption is the same flat out as at idle.

They'll be angry they can't get drunk from the brake fluid either.

[Olefin]

the US units in Kenya took any useable equipment they could from Tanzania and Somalia - which I based on multiple earlier canon entries about Soviet equipment ending up in US units - you would figure as the war went on it was very common -

[The Dark]

There is at least one Russian tank with one... one of the background quotes I have in mind is one where they have problems, not realising the fuel consumption is the same flat out as at idle.

The T-80 was the only Soviet turbine tank. About 5,000 were in service in the 90s, but some were the T-80UD diesel version. The fuel consumption issue was a problem even for soldiers assigned to the T-80; during the First Chechen War, T-80 tankers ran their fuel tanks dry while idling.

[cawest]

nice updates. I was watching the battle of 73 easting.... they talked about how a Silver bullet went threw a bmp, the crew ran. but some came back later and fired up a Brad. This made me think that you might have repairable APC/IFV's just look out for the 30mm hole in the side. just put you rucksack over it Ivan.

[James Langham2]

The T-80 was the only Soviet turbine tank. About 5,000 were in service in the 90s, but some were the T-80UD diesel version. The fuel consumption issue was a problem even for soldiers assigned to the T-80; during the First Chechen War, T-80 tankers ran their fuel tanks dry while idling.

I could remember reading that at the time, I just didn't have the material handy to check. That was going to be the basis of the quote.

[James Langham2]

Photoshoped image for the article - Leopard I with DShK added for the gunner. Note the Soviet vehicle number and the large number of clues that it is under Soviet control.

[unkated]

How many Russian mechanics can maintain the Western turbines

They may not have practice, but I'll wager that by 1995, they have access to a translated maintenance manual.

IMHO, by late 1997, I would more expect vehicles to be retained for use by the unit that captured it (for either side), rather than turned back to a central authority.

Picture any unit commander - "While I'd rather have a magnificent vehicle (tank, APC, IFV, SPG) produced by my nation to match the others in my battalion, I cannot get any more (I have been told I will receive them later - much later). Meanwhile, this foreign beast is still working (mostly) and shoots, so while it works, it is better than the crews I have running around as leg infantry."

In the middle of a campaign season, I think few commanders would want to waste the troops (crew + escort) or fuel to send a captured vehicle back to some higher command to be accumulated with other captured vehicles.

And yes, this view seems to be carried in the various vehicle guides.

Uncle Ted

[Raellus]

Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible. Later in the war, I see local commanders making use of whatever is at hand- there'd be a lot more mixing than matching. There's historical precedent for this pattern in how the Germans made use of captured war material throughout the course of WWII.

[Rainbow Six]

Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible.

While I don't think it was ever confirmed one way or the other, I believe there were rumours that the East German NVA had a unit equipped with West German vehicles / uniforms etc whose mission in time of War was to operate behind NATO lines a la Otto Skorzeny.

[Adm.Lee]

IMHO, by late 1997, I would more expect vehicles to be retained for use by the unit that captured it (for either side), rather than turned back to a central authority.

Picture any unit commander - "While I'd rather have a magnificent vehicle (tank, APC, IFV, SPG) produced by my nation to match the others in my battalion, I cannot get any more (I have been told I will receive them later - much later). Meanwhile, this foreign beast is still working (mostly) and shoots, so while it works, it is better than the crews I have running around as leg infantry."

In the middle of a campaign season, I think few commanders would want to waste the troops (crew + escort) or fuel to send a captured vehicle back to some higher command to be accumulated with other captured vehicles.

IMO, in '97, it seems more likely that the command & logistical structures would be still be strong enough to push captured vehicles to a few units, rather than leave them with the captors. That is, before the nukes fly, captured equipment would just be removed & stored. By winter, they'd be forming units with that captured gear, probably at the army or front level.

It's in '98 and later that divisions & smaller would be hanging onto vehicles as described above.