I read a short extract from “Panzer Battles: A Study of the Employment of Armor in the Second World War” written by von Mellenthin.
Talking about the fighting in Russia in late 1943 by the 48th Panzer Corps, von Mellenthin describes the failure of the 18th Artillery Division and suggests that the resources put into this formation would have been better utilised in putting together an “Anti tank division” formed partially from captured Russian AT guns – this formation would have been better able in his opinion to counteract Red Army armoured breakthroughs?
I was intrigued from this idea particularly in connection with the suggested use of massed towed AT guns. Surely a formation like this in late 1943 would have been better formed mostly from Stug/Nashorn units with a smaller element of towed weapons? Such a force would have also needed its own panzer grenadiers to help form defensive positions/counter attack? Add to that all the other units i.e. recon and pioneers and basically you get the 18th Panzer Division (which was used to form the 18th Artillery) minus any tanks?
Would the the “Anti tank division” be a useful tactical formation on the Eastern Front in late 1943?