Military Review

Artillery during the Second World War: significance during Operation Uranus

11

The strategic offensive operation "Uranus", which was successfully carried out by the Soviet troops, forced the Third Reich to plunge into mourning. Still - the loss of an entire army. The surrender of an entire field marshal - by the way, the first in the German stories.


The main task of Operation Uranus, which was designated by the Soviet command, was the task of completely encircling a large enemy grouping at Stalingrad. To accomplish this task, two main directions of advance were chosen - to the south from the South-Western Front and towards the front from the Stalingrad front.

To accomplish this task, the Soviet troops had to go a long way, which in itself complicated this implementation and gave the enemy a chance to regroup and counter-strike.

To prevent the offensive from encountering insurmountable obstacles, powerful "technical support" was required. First of all, it is aviation and artillery.

Striking artillery strikes broke through the enemy's defense lines in several directions, bomber aviation acted to destroy his military equipment and fortified areas and positions.

How exactly the artillery was used during Operation Uranus, the importance of artillery during the Battle of Stalingrad and not only is described in the story of the TK Zvezda in the God of War cycle. History of Russian artillery ".

11 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Proton
    Proton 3 March 2021 04: 47
    +6
    Always, when I watch the footage of the film corps of the times of the Great Patriotic War, I understand that this war was righteous. People fought for their homeland and for their families, that's why they won.
    They really learned to fight only by the beginning of 43.
    1. geniy
      geniy 3 March 2021 20: 38
      -1
      They really learned to fight only by the beginning of 43.

      You are greatly mistaken. In reality, the Soviet troops fought unsuccessfully from the beginning of the war until the age of 43, not at all because of inability, but because of a lack of ammunition - and cartridges and shells. So, for example, guns up to 42 years old were allowed to fire no more than 1-2 shells per day at the enemy, while the Germans did not spare shells. This lack of ammunition is because 90% of the factories producing ammunition ended up in the territory captured by the enemy. But then - when mass production of ammunition was established in the deep rear, the Soviet army went on an almost non-stop offensive. At the same time, they often exhibited a triple barrage of fire from shells fired at the German trenches.
    2. neri73-r
      neri73-r 4 March 2021 09: 50
      +2
      Quote: Proton
      Always, when I watch the footage of the film corps of the times of the Great Patriotic War, I understand that this war was righteous. People fought for their homeland and for their families, that's why they won.
      They really learned to fight only by the beginning of 43.

      Somehow you are categorical. If they did not know how to fight and learned only by the 43rd, then the united army of Europe would have been far beyond the Urals by 1943.
      1. Proton
        Proton 4 March 2021 10: 03
        +2
        About categorical - I disagree a little. Perhaps he did not formulate his idea quite correctly.
        Let me give you an example - what is the difference between a master of his craft and a person who is trying to do something? Both are doing the same thing. But! (the devil is in the details!) The master turns out a little faster, a little better, cheaper, and the result is a much better product.
        So it is here. This does not mean that on December 31, 1942, they did not know how to fight, and after the New Year they learned.
        The previous answer from geniy to my post was about ammunition. Duck, ammunition is only part of the ability to fight. In addition to them, you need tactics, strategy, food support, reconnaissance and much more.
        Therefore, I believe that it was by the beginning of 43 that our country had tightened up all the "gaps" and learned to fight well.
        But by the end of 44, we ourselves could teach military lessons to anyone you want.
        IMHO of course.
        Yours! hi
        1. Grossvater
          Grossvater 4 March 2021 10: 23
          +2
          Towards the middle, Bagration. Such a master class showed that oh!
          Every time, watching the chronicle, I try to imagine the feelings of the drivers of irrigation machines that they washed the pavement after the "Aryans"!
          This was their victory!
          What about Simonov: "Do you think that only those military men who have shoulder straps on their shoulders? The military are all those who have war on their shoulders!"
          So, I think there were two parallel processes. At the front, they learned to fight, in the rear they made weapons and ammunition.
          In any case, in operations 44 - 45 years, the first line of defense of the enemy, as a rule, was carried out by artillery fire at all!
          1. Proton
            Proton 4 March 2021 11: 40
            +2
            Thank you for being able to understand my point.
            It is difficult to imagine the Great Patriotic War without boys and girls at the machines, women and old people in the collective farm field, scouts behind enemy lines, generals and soldiers on the battlefield.
        2. ammunition
          ammunition 4 March 2021 12: 51
          0
          Quote: Proton
          Perhaps he did not formulate his idea quite correctly.
          Let me give you an example - what is the difference between a master of his craft and a person who is trying to do something?

          Let me try to answer? winked
          Football team Zenith (or Real Madrid) will beat the newcomers with a score of 30-0 .. or 40-0 .. all other things being equal. The chess grandmaster .. will remove the queen from his board .. and beat the beginner with 100% confidence. It.d it.d.
          And military science is more complicated than football. From my own soldier's experience. After just 2 years of intensive training .. 1 soldier will certainly shoot (destroy) a platoon of recruits. And this is just an example at 1 soldier level. Because the example at the level of the whole army is too complicated.
          ---------------
          Generals and marshals must be grandmasters in their field. Officers must be experienced craftsmen. Soldiers and sergeants must be experienced and skilled in their field. The weapon must be great ... or good. The tactics of military operations should be worked out for the subject of interaction and coherence .. etc., etc., etc.
          And all this very expensive worth it.
          By experience. Preparation of 1 (one) class RPG-7 grenade launcher requires 1000 (one thousand) shots + 1500 shots from the insert. In addition, the company commander must notice and discard in time a soldier unsuitable for such a task. Etc. etc.
          Yes, you already understand everything.
          --------------
          Further .. The government of the country should work out the optimal cost rates for training the army .. based on the power and resources of the country and the people .. and based on the severity of the threats .........
          --------
          request repeat crying ... aren't we too .. we are "smart"? .ehma!
          "do your job, and there as God willing!" - maybe it's 100500 times smarter? .. here I’m talking to myself .-)).
  2. WHAT IS
    WHAT IS 3 March 2021 05: 50
    +11
    Yes, the importance of artillery in general during the entire war is difficult to overestimate, and not only in the course of individual operations! God of War, that says it all.
  3. rocket757
    rocket757 3 March 2021 11: 32
    +5
    God of War ... and write off cannon artillery, EARLY!
  4. Grossvater
    Grossvater 4 March 2021 10: 14
    0
    And what is the tool on the headline of the article? A very interesting muzzle, the walls are thin even for a mortar.
  5. Konnick
    Konnick 4 March 2021 13: 03
    -1
    Quote: Grossvater
    And what is the tool on the headline of the article? A very interesting muzzle, the walls are thin even for a mortar.


    This is a 152-mm howitzer of the 1938 model (M-10), footage from the chronicle, Timoshenko and Zhukov should be there to the right, the video for this article contains these footage, it says that it was necessary to abandon the production of the M-10 (152mm) and leave only M-30 (122mm)