Most Massive Artillery Bombardment in History

The end of June and early July 1944 saw the largest artillery bombardment in the history of warfare.

For every 100-meter stretch of the large Karelian Isthmus of Finland, the Red Army placed no less than 10 pieces of artillery - in one sector all of 400 per one kilometer. Since the Finns had only 268 cannon, they could mount only 5 for every kilometer. The artillery odds were thus over 20 to 1 in the attacker's favor. Besides, with some 400 bombers and 600 fighters thrown into the fray, the Soviet forces had overwhelming air superiority. Official Russian records reveal that during the summer offensive, aircraft of the 13th Soviet Air Force carried out "more than 9,000 combat missions" against the Finnish forces.

The artillery fire aimed at Finnish targets has been described by many researchers as the most massive in world military history up to date.

At the critical Ihantala sector, however, the Finnish defenders managed to concentrate their fire to the extent of smashing the advancing Soviet spearhead.

In the Russian book Bitva za Leningrad 1941-1944 (The Battle of Leningrad) edited by Lt.-Gen. S.P. Platonov, it is stated: "The repeated offensive attempts by the Soviet Forces failed . . . to gain results. The enemy succeeded in significantly tightening its ranks in this area and repulse all the attacks of our troops . . . During the offensive operations lasting over three weeks, from June 21 to mid-July, the forces of the right flank of the Leningrad front failed to carry out the tasks assigned to them on the orders of the Supreme Command issued on June 21st."

It was then that Stalin ordered the withdrawal from the Finnish front of the decimated elite divisions to join the forces advancing on Berlin.

This Finnish victory against the largest artillery bombardment in history became to be known as the 'Miracle of Ihantala'.

The Finnish victories in the battles of Tali-Ihantala and Vuosalmi halted the massive Soviet offensive of 1944 and won for Finland a negotiated armistice and saved the country from enemy occupation.

"Nobody respects a country with a poor army, but everyone respects a country with a great army. I raise my toast to the Finnish army"; Josef Stalin, 1948.

 

Great post mate, welcome to the forums! I especially like Stalin's taste of humble pie, what a good sport.

I always thought though that the artillery laid down on the SS tank divisions at Hill 112 in June 1944 were the most massive. All my books are on a boat back to Australia at the moment so I can't reference. Any data on this guys?

 

I don't know if I would call it the "most massive in history." There was more than one Pacific Island the relative size of a postage stamp that took as much as a week of bombardment from hundreds of ships and aircraft with everything up to 16" guns.
For instance, at Kwajalein the US Navy fired 7,000 shells (5" to 14" in size) a day for two days onto this island. The US Army had set up 105 and 155 howitzers on adjacent islands (one, Enubuj had 20 guns crammed onto this island 300 yards wide and about 200 long.) and fired 29,000 rounds onto Kwajalein in the same period.
The USAAF then came over the island with several hundred heavy bombers and dropped 2,000 lb bombs on virtually every square inch of it. This was followed by USN carrier aircraft using fragmentation bombs and strafing.
Amazingly, the Japanese still managed to put up a stiff resistance once the landings started. Destroyers and the field artillery were in action continiously until the island was taken firing support. And, that wasn't the heaviest concentration of the Pacific War by any means.

 

I think the most massive artillery bombardment was started by the Russians for their final assault on Berlin.

 

Certainly, one of the heaviest - if not the very heaviest - bombardments of the Pacific War were those against Iwo-Jima. Before the invasion of the island 1.269 aircraft had made 69 raids against the island, along with 8 different naval bombardments by heavy naval artillery.

Before the invasion on February 1945, 160 ships and thousands of planes attacked Iwo-Jima for 15 whole days in a WWI-style.

However, the heaviest bombardment in History was - as Carl said - the opening phases of the last Soviet offensive during the war, when marshals Kóniev, Zhúkov and Rokossovski's Army Fronts attacked from the Baltic to Czechoslovaquia with 5.000 tanks, 9.000 aircraft, 3.000.000 men, 30.000 guns and almost 800 rocket-launchers.

 

Thanks for the replies, Gentlemen. Still, if discussing only one single battle - not entire wars, Tali-Ihantala remains the most massive artillery bombardment in history.

The Karelian Isthmus is large, as you may know, and the Russian chains of canons were huge and tide, and shot without a brake during this final Soviet summer offensive against Finland.

Tali-Ihantala to me stands the highest, even though Finland's 105 days' Winter war of 1939 is famous of course, and the under-equipped and largely unprepared Finnish defense managed to stop the red army and negotiate a truce. (According to Nikita Khrushchev, his memoirs for instance, 1.5 million men were sent to Finland for the 105 days' Winter War (note: according to official Soviet records, this number was well exceeded due to large enforcement troops after heavy losses) - one million of them were killed - 1000 aircraft, 2300 tanks and armored cars and an enormous amount of other war materials were lost.)

However, even though the two Finnish-Soviet wars of WW2 hosted a number of famous single battles which stand out and have received more attention, such as the battle of Raate in Northern Finland (Raatteentie) where in matter of practically only days two soviet divisions and other added enforcement units, in total over 40'000 men, were destroyed and decimated by vastly outnumbered and surprised Finnish defense, the battle of Tali-Ihantala of the very end of the Finnish-Soviet Continuation War (1941-1944) stands out alone, as it concluded the Finnish-Soviet wars in great Finnish victory (together with the battles of Ilomantsi and Vuosalmi), and as the Soviet offensive was so massive over there.

It is no wonder to me, never the less, that this battle up to now has been very little discussed. After all, the Finns themselves have largely kept quiet, as during the Cold War it was the Finnish policy not to irritate the Soviets too much with this sort of 'little' historical facts.

The ignorance of even the best-informed observers in the West about Finland's part in World War II is astounding:

Take British Major-General H.M. Tillotson's book Finland at Peace & War--1918-1993, for example. It was written, in close collaboration with Finland's Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, Defense Staff, Commission of Military History, Military Archives and Military Museum, to mark, in 1993, the 75th anniversary of the armed forces in independent Finland.

Yet, in its 354 pages, the book has room for only one sentence about the single most important battle, perhaps, fought in Finland's Continuation War, Tali-Ihantala, and quite easily the world's largest artillery bombardment in history.

In this battle in the Tali-Ihantala sector over 5500 Soviet canons were 'singing' day and night without a stop. The famous fire-correction technique created by the Finnish General Nenonen largely came in play to help the Finns in this battle in particular. Due to Nenonen's new technique, the Finns were able to concentrate their own, amazingly accurate, artillery fire and to destroy the Soviet spearhead. Though only 20'000 Soviet troops were killed in Ihantala (yet, in matter of only days), and 600 of their tanks and most of their over 1000 aircraft in this sector were destroyed (and massive amount of other war material), it is the very massiveness of the Soviet artillery fire against the Finnish forces in Ihantala which will for now remain a record.

A few important people are now starting to open their mouths about the true course of events regarding Tali-Ihantala. Here are just a few sites where this fortunate development is taking place:

http://www.kaiku.com/notcapitulate.html
http://www.helsinki-hs.net/news.asp?id=20031202IE5
http://www.warlinks.com/pages/hyry.htm

 

For sheer mass I would agree that the Soviets take it. For shells per meter the Pacific Islands win. Kwajalein (my example) literally had multiple shells and bombs landing almost simulaneously in the same location over the entire island. I think it is a matter of perspective. The Soviets lined up more guns but then they too had much more ground to cover with fire.....not to detract anything from the Finns managing a successful come back from this bombardment.

 

Thanks for the response, Mr. Gardner, and thanks for the remainder of the Kwajalein Battle as well. I agree that there is always more than one way to analyze or categorize a battle.

What comes to Finns and their battles, it seems to me, that it is typical for the humble approach of the Finns, and their diplomacy, to downplay their own great victories and successes, or better yet, not to discuss them at all, if possible. That, in part, has made me study more closely the Finnish-Russian battles of WW2.

I have experienced that the numbers of Soviet war losses reported by the Finns, as result of Finnish-Russian battles, are nearly always lower than even the lowest official numbers admitted to by even the Soviets themselves (not that these numbers wouldn't have been staggeringly high by all counts). As after the end of the Cold War more Soviet period archives have been revealed and studied, we are learning that ‘officially’ both parties seem to have downplayed the size of the actual Soviet losses, and for a large part, the size of the participating Soviet forces too, not that they wouldn’t have been described as ‘massive’ by all parties before. Analyzing the reasons for this could be another topic in its own right for WW2 forums like this one. Interestingly, many may remember how the President of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khruschev, was called home by the Soviet Politbyro, after he admitted in Helsinki that the Soviets had lost over a million men dead as result of the 105 days’ Finnish-Russian Winter War. This figure, however, was also revealed in the memoirs of Mr. Khruschev.

While rushing up my earlier message to you, I too seem to have become guilty of downplaying a bit the numbers of the Soviet might, and the Soviet loses too, in this critical Tali-Ihantala sector in question.

Mr. Hyry (one of the three websites in my earlier message) sets the size of the Soviet fleet above the skies of Ihantala at 1500 planes, and the official Russian records seem to surpass even that figure. As I am more interested in the artillery matters, I hope you will excuse my earlier approximated figure of about 1000 planes.

Finnish casualties in this particular fight were about 8,800 soldiers (give or take a few) while Soviet losses were at least 22,000 (my earlier rounded quote was 20,000). The official Soviet period records admitted to "over" 22,000 Soviets killed, and to "over" 19,000 other casualties, which is a bit odd, as usually there are at least three times more wounded than dead as result of this type of fighting. I suspect that non-critically wounded soldiers were often not taken to count in the Soviet time statistics, and that the statistics were often modified to look less astonishing.

Credit ought to be given when it is due. In the case of the battle of Tali-Ihantala, for one, the credit for the miraculous victory of the Finns is way over-due.

It is about time that the truth of these men, their heroic single-handed attacks on tanks, their unfathomable endurance, and the charismatic leadership of one of the century's true military geniuses will be brought to day light to all parties interested, and for history's sake alone.

As somewhat interesting footnote, let it be said that to me it seams, that even though the Finns did not approve Stalin's policies and aggressions, you'd be hard pressed to catch a Finn talking in negative tone about the Russian people themselves.

 

Surely, the battle, code named "Goodwood" must qualify? two thousand USAF and RAF heavy bombers. two thousand fighter bombers. 750 artillery guns, with each having 700 rounds to add to the barrage. I took part in that battle, the ground shook like an earthquake and the dust rose for miles in the air.. I cannot believe there was a greater barrage?

We advanced to take Sannerville. Bannerville and all the villages in that area, it was like a "Moonscape" no wounded were allowed back to keep the advance going. The Germans that had fought on the Eastern front told us that they had never experienced anything so overwhelming as the Allied barrages, far in excess of anything they had seen in Russia,
Brian

 

Even as a Finn... I must agree I have a feeling that the Berlin bombing 1945 probably is the most massive...

Tali-Ihantala is one of the most massive as well!

Then there´s the German bombardment of Kursk in 1943 where the Germans sent more ammo than the Polish and French campaigns altogether...

But all in all the Russians always had their artillery first and bombed every square inch before an attack!

On Goodwood: Indeed a huge display but unfortunately the Germans were not there when the bombs hit the place...that´s why they caused such losses to the allied forces later on.

BTW. Welcome Jaana! Nice cocard!

 

The GErmans that I swa were certainly there,if in bits and pieces. All barrages had names. The greatest possible barrage was named "Pandemonium" to be used it had to have written permission from the Government, it was so massive it affected the National debt.
Brian

 

Greetings Sapper, I have to concur with you on Operation Goodwood being probably the most massive Allied bombardment from the air.

I have seen much footage of the Soviet artillery barrages at the start of the Berlin offensive. These artillery pieces were in line almost hub to hub.

In one snippet of film I have seen which sticks out most in my mind is when you see a long column of dejected and captured German Soldiers marching past a Katusha unit as they are firing a salvo. I wonder what those men were thinking at that time?

 

Thank you, sir. It is a great honor to hear from a Normandy veteran. I salute you, and I wish you the best for the now beginning new year ! I am sure all in this forum will be grateful to hear more from you, much more. I have not yet had the opportunity to research the messages written under the other topics, as I am a newcomer here, but I will especially look for the notes from you, if and when I have the time.

Even though my message(s) were branching out a bit for extra details, I was not by any means trying to claim that the battle of Tali-Ihantala would have been the most significant one in the world history, nor necessarily even in the Finnish history. It may have been one of the deadliest ones for the Finnish forces, even though they came out victorious, but not the deadliest in casualties for Finland's enemy.

In Normandy you had more equipment and man power over all. Yet, many researchers consider Tali-Ihantala the 'most massive artillery bombardment in the history' of warfare. Respectfully, I do too.

I am a qualified fire correction officer for a war time artillery unit of 12 canons. Though I have not experienced war myself yet, my father's infantry platoon was lost nearly entirely under the artillery fire of the enemy. I say ‘nearly’, as miraculously one person was carried back alive a bit later, during continuing heavy enemy’s artillery bombardment and a battle that followed. My badly wounded father had demanded to be left on the battle field, which was under heavy enemy fire at the time (like a captain of a sinking ship – Note: my father was in charge of this platoon). Yet, brave men risked their lives in carrying him to safety. One of two other men, who had lost their unit a day or two earlier and had joined my father’s platoon, was also saved. I called this man some years ago and I am intending to look him up again. My father nearly escaped death here in September of 1941, but became back useful until the end of this war in 1944. He left us from this form of existence in December of 1974. In a twist of events, the very enemy artillery batteries which my fathers unit was ordered to destroy in the above case, caught my father’s unit instead.

I am a Finn, as you may have guessed. My name is not Jaana, which of course is a woman’s name – so, please allow me to call myself ‘Janne’ in possible future messages. My artillery battery (patteristo / 12 canons) won Finland’s mastership in 1979, in which competition I was one of the key fire correction officers. I can assure you, that within only matter of seconds, after my unit’s initial opening shots, the fire was corrected so, that the very next shots, just a quickest moment later, reached the target of less than the size of a single family house (or an enemy tank) more than five miles away (approx. 8 km), accurately, and with all 12 canons, fully destroying and over-destroying the target, of course. This was not a lucky shot, but a well trained procedure, where nothing was left for a chance. We kept training for this over and over again, for 11 months, many of us practicing for only this particular competition, where the famous Finnish General Nenonen’s world renowned techniques ruled the game.

It was during these experiences that I first learned that the Finnish artillery, during their all winter and summer camps (all camps lasting six weeks) shot with more real fire, cannonballs and many shorts of rockets (some very expensive) continuously, during day and night, than any other artillery in the world. How could we afford this ? I became to question the cost of all these rehearsals and the very expensive ammunition that was often utilized for bombardments lasting nearly some three days at a time, without any significant break or sleep (usually two hours at a time). The canons were always pointed towards east, but this fact was never discussed. I soon learned from a few trusted higher-ups that the Finnish army overtook so much Soviet artillery equipment during WW2, that despite melting it continuously, there were still enough captured WW2 Soviet canons alone to arm the entire Finnish artillery for any major battle, and more (similarly to the weapons captured for our infantry) . Also, there was still so much captured Soviet ammunition left in Finland in 1979 as well, that all the Finnish artillery units could practice with it, without any worry, for at least for the next 10 years to come, I was told. A lot of this ammunition was also destroyed every year, as both too old and dangerous to use, or as simply as too much to hold onto. After all, the official Finnish policy was not to get into the nerves of the Soviets too much.

These experiences led me to study more closely the world’s largest artillery bombardments. Tali-Ihantala is the most massive, I assure you !

I salute you too, Kai-Petri !

 

Thanx Janne, Great info!

As a matter of fact I think I have pointed out earlier this but the Tali-Ihantala battle in all was equal or larger than El Alamein so that´s some news probably for some of the Forums members.
Over 600 Russian tanks were destroyed by Finns and by then these were T-34´s and other new tanks, not the old versions that were used in Winter War or early Barbarossa.

On the Russian weapons and ammunition: The Russian politics was that they never lost any equipment to Finland in WW2 so they never wanted anything back.The German weapons etc were required to be given to the Russians however.

 

I still don't think so. The whole final phase of the Spoviet offensive against Germany massed more guns in smaller areas and fired a greater number of shells. And is not such a big front. Of those 30.000 guns, more than half were used against Berlin.

Are these figures for the 'Winter War'? If so, they're completely false. The number of Soviet KIAs must be between 250.000 and 350.000. Not more.

And I'll agree that 'Goodwood' saw the most massive aerial bombardment of the war, with over 2.000 heavy bombers taking part. But for artillery matters it is still too small.

 

Yep,

the million must be casualties altogether. There are several estimates between the figures you mention, Friedrich.

Here´s something I did not know earlier:

Official Soviet estimates show 230000 total casualties, but for example German Wehrmacht studies the following year(41) reckoned 273000 dead and 800000 wounded. This would raise the total casualties 5 times higher, over a million. Even Hrutshev himself has said that "I’d say we lost as many as million lives" when referring to Winter War in his memoirs.

http://www.feldgrau.com/wwar.html



[ 05. January 2004, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: Kai-Petri ]

 

Thank you for the comments, gentlemen. I was merely quoting Nikita Khrushchev in my earlier message. My exact quote was as follows:

"According to Nikita Khrushchev, his memoirs for instance, 1.5 million men were sent to Finland for the 105 days' Winter War (note: according to official Soviet records, this number was well exceeded due to large enforcement troops after heavy losses) - one million of them were killed - 1000 aircraft, 2300 tanks and armored cars and an enormous amount of other war materials were lost."

I was not offering you my personal view of the amounts of lives or material lost. It is my view though, that the Soviets, with the exceptions of Khrushchev and perhaps a few others, typically and systematically downplayed these sort of numbers. In the West it has been commonly seen as a rule of a thumb for the official Soviet policies, strategy and diplomacy during the Cold War to grossly downplay Stalin’s atrocities and mistakes, and for the Soviet citizens not to be allowed to dwell on these kind of topics at all.

The Soviet President Nikita Khrushchev is often quoted in this context, his memoirs and his comments in Helsinki in particular. It has been my view that he clearly discusses "lives lost" and persons killed in his comments, statements and analyses. Others agree. Take for instance 'Kutri’s Corner' articles below (links below). These articles can be conveniently found via the links of Finland's Foreign Ministry's website 'Virtual Finland'. One paragraph there states the following:

"Under the treaty, Russia received Finland's second largest city, Viipuri, the port of Petsamo on the Arctic Ocean, the Hanko area, all of Lake Ladoga’s shores and the entire Karelian Isthmus, the home of 12 per cent of Finland's population. Finland gave up a total of 22,000 square miles. One Russian general remarked, "We have won enough ground to bury our dead." Khrushchev wrote, "Even in these most favorable conditions it was only after great difficulty and enormous losses that we were finally able to win. A victory at such a cost was actually a moral defeat." According to Khrushchev, 1.5 million men were sent to Finland and one million of them were killed. 1000 aircraft, 2300 tanks and armored cars and an enormous amount of other war materials were lost."

One of Khrushchev’s statements regarding the Soviet losses In Winter War can also be found from Kai-Petri’s last message: “I’d say we lost as many as million lives”.

As it is well known, KGB was a master in diluting numbers of this kind and in twisting the truth, for obvious reasons and gains. Repeated lying actually worked to great extend in convincing the Soviet citizens and others to believe that Finland had ‘in fact’ attacked the “Mother Russia”. The existence of the illegal Molotov-Rippentrop agreement also was fully denied until the very end of the Cold War. Sadly, many in the West fell victim to the huge Soviet propaganda machine, as well. That perhaps, in part, explains what Paul Sjoblom discusses in one of the articles provided below:

“Myths die hard”, as Sjoblom puts it, as he goes on to tell about the staggering misconceptions about Finland’s part in WW2 and President Mauno Koivisto’s revelations: “Time and time again, he (President Koivisto) said he has had to correct this misconception in discussion with foreigners (that Finland would have been capitulated)” … “The ignorance of even the best-informed observers in the West about Finland's part in World War II is astounding”.

I have seen the Soviet and German figures from 1940 and 1941, which Kai-Petri provided. Neither numbers can be trusted as they were the alterations and result of the work by the propaganda ministries of the two wartime dictatorships, to reason the political and strategic moves and actions taken by Hitler and Stalin, to the nations they led. These lies have been repeated to the extend that for many they stand for the truth.

Many others would rather lean towards the peace time President Khrushchev’s estimates in this matter, as his known statements certainly cannot be seen giving him any political gains. In contrary, Khrushchev is known to have put himself to a bit of a hot water with his revelations about the Soviet losses in the Winter War. There certainly are factures that support numbers given by Khrushchev.

http://www.kaiku.com/winterwar.html
http://www.kaiku.com/notcapitulate.html

 

Hi guys, sorry for the lapse in response.

Janne,
First of all, Tali-Ihantala, while being the largest battle (or series of battles) fought in the Nordics, it is not the most massive artillery bombardments, not even close.

The intial bombardment preceding the offensive in the Karelian Isthmus (which is not "Tali-Ihantala") has been said to been by then (this was in 1944) the heaviest seen in the Eastern Front. As Friedrich has already mentioned, Berlin was more massive.

If you still insist on this subject, and back it up with 'researchers', please provide some names and/or book titles, and I'll be sure to check them out.

Cheers,
Sami

P.S. The Soviet casualties of the Winter War were far lower than 1 million, no matter how and/or what losses you count.

However, if Hrustshev was thinking of the Finnish involvement in Barbarossa being a result of the Soviet 1939 invasion (as it certainly was to an extent), then the 1 million figure could be close to the truth.

 

I did provide some largely agreed upon figures relating to the amounts and formation of canons in my earlier message. I also included four websites and a Russian book reference to sources with a similar view to that of mine. Those web sources are quite reliable and can be accessed for instance via the pages of Finland’s Foreign Ministry’s ‘Virtual Finland’ website.

Interestingly, I didn’t notice you or anyone else disputing the numbers I’ve offered, nor did anyone exceed the numbers with those of their own, in regard to perhaps a different artillery battle. I’ll be glad to double check the messages just to make sure. If I overlooked any larger figures, please excuse me.

I am familiar with the encirclement of Berlin to some extend. However, I haven’t thought of it as the ‘most massive artillery bombardment in history’. As we do not seem to have much question about the Finnish-Russian amounts of canons and artillery fire used, would it be appropriate at this point for you, Sami, to provide some figures (and the sources) regarding the Soviet artillery equipment and ammunition used in the encirclement of Berlin, larger than that described before.

Paul Sjoblom does not seem to go too terribly wrong by stating the following in one of his articles in the ‘Suomensilta’ magazine operated by the prestigious Finland-USA Association:

“The ignorance of even the best-informed observers in the West about Finland's part in World War II is astounding.
Take British Major-General H.M. Tillotson's book Finland at Peace & War--1918-1993, for example. It was written, in close collaboration with Finland's Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Defense, Defense Staff, Commission of Military History, Military Archives and Military Museum, to mark, in 1993, the 75th anniversary of the armed forces in independent Finland.*)
Yet, in its 354 pages, the book has room for only one sentence about the single most important battle, perhaps, fought in Finland's Continuation War, Tali-Ihantala. There the Finnish concentration of artillery fire was the heaviest in the country's military history. It has been described as even heavier than the Soviet fire in the siege of Berlin.
The Soviet offensive on the Karelian Isthmus was launched just at the time of the Western Allies' landing at Normandy. The several armies hurled against Finnish fences were crack troops, the Soviet "elite." Stalin's plan was obviously to occupy Finland before the Western Allies could advance very far against the German lines.
For every 100-meter stretch of the Isthmus, the Red Army placed no less than 10 pieces of artillery--in one sector all of 400 over a distance of only one kilometer. Since the Finns had only 268 cannon, they could mount only 5 for every kilometer. The artillery odds were thus 20 to 1 in the attacker's favor. Besides, with some 400 bombers and 600 fighters thrown into the fray, the Soviet forces had overwhelming air superiority. Official Russian records reveal that during the summer offensive, aircraft of the 13th Soviet Air Force carried out "more than 9,000 combat missions" against the Finnish forces.
The artillery fire aimed at Finnish targets has been described by some researchers as the most massive in world military history …”

Here’s yet another website that has got it right. It describes ‘Tali-Ihantala’ as the most massive artillery bombardment in history:

http://www.film.prodigybiz.com/Memoraphilia.html

Both, the Soviet and the Finnish artillery bombardments can be described as massive in this final Finnish-Soviet battle. As to what name the most massive artillery bombardment should carry, I’d say ‘Tali-Ihantala’.

Is there even a single website that dares to claim that the encirclement of Berlin would have hosted the ‘most massive artillery bombardment in history’ ?

 

OK, lets get this straight:

1) The numbers you referred to are of the preliminary bombardment that marked the beginning of the Soviet offensive in the Karelian Isthmus 1944.
So these numbers have nothing to do with Tali-Ihantala. OK?

2) Check the timeline:
- 9 Jun 1944 Enemy large scale attack by 21st Army begins on Carelian Isthmus with one of the most intensive artillery bombardments of the Second World War.
- 25 Jun 1944 Largest battle of the Continuation War and the largest battle ever fought in the Nordic countries (Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark) begins in Tali-Ihantala with some local defeats for Finns.

http://personal.inet.fi/private/hovi.pages/sa-int/hist.html


I have a few books at home, which have some numbers on the issue of Tali-Ihantala.

Sorry, couldn't find that phrase from the website.

Nope, none. And still it dwarfs at least Tali-Ihantala easily (wouldn't dare say that it dwarfs the 9-10 June bombarment before checking).

Cheers,
Sami