Excellence in Historical Research and Analysis
Excellence in Historical Research and Analysis
A Major Streit commanded the Panzer Lehrgaenge “Panther” in Erlangen. This was working with the Panthers in 1943. He is referenced in Thomas L. Jentz, Panzertruppen II on page 96. Does anyone have his full name and bio?
The person writing the after action report for the Soviet III Mechanized Corps on 23 July 1943 was Major Petukhov. His signature is below. Was wondering if anyone had an information on him, like his full name?
The last of a series of eight presentations on French Air Power 1918 – 1940 by Dr. James Slaughter is this Wednesday, 24 June, 7:00 PM (EST) via Zoom.
The Zoom link is here:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85640643737?pwd=LNPVDrX9gtwOJIGWCDGB1zRq83m7GO.1
We will be posting the entire series to our YouTube channel.
The call for presentations for the Fifth HAAC is here: Call for Presentations for the Fifth HAAC, 20 – 22 October 2026 – The Dupuy Institute
The schedule for the Fifth HAAC is rapidly filling in. Now is a good time to commit: HAAC 2026: Fifth Historical Analysis Annual Conference (HAAC) – The Dupuy Institute
Just email me at LawrenceTDI@aol.com if you want to sign up for a presentation.
The sign-up for Fifth HAAC is here: Fifth Historical Analysis Annual Conference (HAAC) Tickets, Tuesday, October 20 • 8 AM – 6 PM | Eventbrite
Now…. the engagement in the last post was from the Combat Data Subscription Service published in 1975. These were the engagements used to create the QJM (@1977) and validate the QJM. They were later assembled into something called the Land Warfare Data Base (LWDB) which was used as the basis of CBD90. It was also used as the basis for a lot of what became our DuWar series of databases, and this engagement is in the DLEDB (Division-Level Engagement Data Base). It has been reviewed and revised. The current database shows:
Anyhow, there two engagements replaced the original engagement in the QJM validation database and the CBD90. In the DLEDB there are actually 96 fields that describe an engagement. This is an abbreviated list.
Finally here is a picture of all nine of my published books. It includes two copies of The Battle for Kyiv, as one is the hardback and one is the paperback version. The paperback version does have some revisions and an expanded photo section.
We are looking to add two more books to that collection in the next six months. An additional book on the Russo-Ukrainian War should be out in the next 2 to 3 months, and The Battle of Tolstoye Woods should be out hopefully this spring. The editing process on all my books is slow, primarily because the large amount of charts, tables and tabular data in them that are a pain to edit and proof.
I have three books published on the Battle of Kursk and one coming out next year (The Batte of Tolstoye Woods).
The Battle of Kusk was the largest battle of World War II. You would not get that sense from the military history section of most bookstores. Anyhow, there were four parts to the battle. The German offensive in the south from 4 to 24 July 1943, the German offensive in the north for 5 – 12 July 1943, the Soviet counteroffensive around Orel from 12 July to 23 August and the Soviet counteroffensive around Kharkov from 3 August to 23 August. My books are mostly about the German offensive in the south. I have consider doing one or two about the Battle(s) of Kharkov, but I have been distracted by the war that started in that same area in 2022.
I do have a fourth book coming out next year called The Battle of Tolstoye Woods. This one actually covers the Soviet counterattack that actually worked and stopped a German panzer corps. Everyone tends to focus on the Battle of Prokhorovka, but there were three German armored corps attacking in the south, and they all had to be stopped. This book is about the Red Army halting the 48th Panzer Corps, which was as large as the SS Panzer Corps.
Anyhow, not sure if I will get around to a fifth Kursk book. Might.
P.S. I do think my original book is the largest history book ever written: Did I Just Write the Largest History Book Ever? — History News Network
I have not submitted it to the Guinness World Records.
P.P.S. Here is the link to the “Other Battle of Kursk” which has been posted to Amazon.com (UK). It will be The Battle of Tolstoye Woods: The Other Battle of Kursk: Lawrence, Christopher A.: 9780811773737: Amazon.com: Books and The Other Battle of Kursk: Amazon.co.uk: Lawrence, Christopher A.: 9780811773737: Books
Just got my author copies for a few of my books. Decided to post them all up.
1. Hunting Falcon – available U.S. April 3, 2025
2. Aces at Kursk – available U.S. September 30, 2024
3. Battle for Kyiv (paperback) – Hardback available U.S. January 18, 2024 – paperback available UK 4 December 2025. Will be available U.S. February 28, 2026.
4. Siege of Mariupol – Available UK 27 November 2025. Available U.S. January 30, 2026.
Can order directly from the publisher: Pen and Sword Books: The Siege of Mariupol – Hardback
Can order from UK Amazon.com: The Siege of Mariupol: The Azovstal Steel Plant and Ukraine’s Battle for Survival : Christopher A Lawrence, Stefan Korshak: Amazon.co.uk: Books
The piano in the background is an August Foerster. Made in Loebau, Germany since 1859. This one is from East Germany (1949-1990). Country dissolved, but the piano is just fine.
I have decided to turn one of my email discussions I was having with several people into a blog post. As they got into a discussion of friendly fire (I gather based upon one addressee’s personal experience), I ended up making the following statement:
Friendly fire (FF):
1. The original figure that came out of WWII was 2% of the casualties were due to friendly fire (Beebe and Debakey?).
2. This was probably low.
3. Since WWII there has been no definitive studies on FF casualties that I am aware of.
4. It was much higher than 2% in the 1991 Gulf War.
5. In the 1990s Chuck Hawkins (Vietnam company commander) and Gene Visco (DUSA OR) did some preliminary work looking at FF casualties. They were attempting to get a contract to do an actual proper survey of the subject. That did not happen.
6. By default, the preliminary work by Hawkins and Visco (both deceased) is the only significant work on FF casualties that has been done since WWII. I may have a copy somewhere in my files. Not sure anything has been published or is on the internet. I think they presented their findings at ISMOR.
Dermot, you are welcome to discuss what the UK has done.
Dermot Rooney, the author of Slog or Swan (see: Slog or Swan – The Dupuy Institute) came back with the following response:
Here’s the Slog or Swan quote:
Meanwhile, fragile radio communications separated infantry and artillery, contributing to a high rate of fratricide. A Canadian study conducted during Veritable put the number of Allied casualties to friendly artillery at between seven and 21 percent of the total. The actions examined for the current assessment support splitting the difference at around 15 percent.11 This figure is alarmingly close to the 19 percent attributed to German small arms, and considerably greater than the six percent benchmark for friendly fire casualties in a First World War barrage. Artillery fratricide was also a major factor in five of the failed attacks in the current assessment and, considering the tendency to underreport such events, was likely a factor in as many more. The high chance of fratricide very probably undermined the essential trust between infantryman and gunner, the coordination of fire and assault, and therefore the value of suppression.12
[11] This is another of those tantalising glimpses mentioned earlier. The figures are the extremes presented in Brigadier E. C. Plow’s study of munition fragments removed from casualties and could only be found in Appendix L of Copp’s Cinderella Army. Copp and Buckley opt for ‘as high as 19 percent’. Copp, Cinderella Army, pp.291, 338–340; Buckley, Monty’s Men, p.272.
[12] Contrary to the mines and mud narrative, the Canadian wounds study also found 4 percent of casualties were caused by the combination of mines and grenades, way behind German artillery, German small arms, and Allied artillery. J. B. Coates and J. C. Beyer (eds), Wound Ballistics in World War II: Supplemented by experiences in the Korean War (Washington: Office of the Surgeon General, 1962) has mines accounting for 0 to 10 percent of total casualties depending on the sampling method. The battle descriptions for this assessment suggest the effect of mines on advance rates was marginal and appears no greater than in other operations.
If anyone has a copy of any presentations made or write-ups done by Charles Hawkins or Gene Visco on fratricide, please forward them to me (LawrenceTDI@aol.com).
I do note that the links to Cornwallis Group, founded in 1996 by Gene Visco, is no longer connected to the ISMOR site. It does seem like we are losing knowledge. The earliest ISMOR link I can find is ISMOR 39 (with the Eugene Visco prize): ISMOR – ISMOR 39 | ORS. There were links to earlier ISMOR conferences and papers, and links in ISMOR to the Cornwallis Group, but I cannot find these.
Dr. Dermot Rooney was a presenter at the Third HAAC and will be presenting on Measuring Military Effectiveness at the Fourth HAAC. See: The Fourth HAAC is scheduled for 21 – 23 October 2025 – The Dupuy Institute
He has a new book out based upon his work: Slog and Swan: British Army Effectiveness in Operation Veritable: February and March 1945. See: Slog or Swan | Military History Book | Helion & Company
As he describes it:
The book is based on my Corvisier Award-winning PhD thesis so be warned, it’s a bit geeky. It’s got 43 maps, 300 sources, a good handful of graphs and photos, and loads of footnotes.
On the upside it’s about fighting. The maps are mainly those used by the units at the time and they’re marked up to show the detail of how British and a few Canadian troops fought in 1945. It tells the story of how those men defeated the last competent Wehrmacht formation in the west –1. Fallschirm-Armee– despite suffering from a bunch of force design problems that still matter today.
And the book is about a massive operation that’s not been seriously examined before. If you count the Germans, Op Veritable had half a million men fighting for a month in what is close to the biggest named op that Britain ever fought. It started with a (nearly) thousand-bomber raid and the biggest artillery barrage of the war, it’s got one of the few confirmed deployments of the Sturmtiger, dozens of battles where plucky Tommies took on fanatical Fallschirmjäger, and it ended with the German Dunkirk – an orderly withdrawal where they blew up the last bridge behind them.
Yet even hardened WW2 buffs are often unsure where Veritable was fought and hardly anybody knows what it was about.
So, Slog or Swan might not be for you, and it might be a little bit late for the 80th anniversary of Veritable, but it’s the perfect Christmas Easter gift for the war geek in your life.
I will be making a presentation about my book Aces at Kursk on Wednesday, 19 February, 800 PM on Greg McNiff’s World War II Discussion Forum: World War II Discussion Forum | Home. There is a zoom link on that page for that presentation.
Also it is here: Launch Meeting – Zoom
Mr. McNiff’s program is quite good with authors presenting their books each week in a virtual setting. Definitely worth looking at.
The World War II Discussion Forum is supported by entirely by donations, so do what you can to help.
