On enemy tanks – Georg Bose, StuG Ace

An interview with Georg Bose

Which enemy tank types would you class as being the “most dangerous”.

GB: All tanks are dangerous, there is no such thing as a non dangerous tank. But if you mean which enemy tanks we feared most it was probably the KWII and the later Stalin (JS) types. The russian tank crews were not bad. When the first T34s appeared at the front our tanks outclassed them. I know that modern literature tells you a different story. It is true they were better armed and armoured, but the T34s commander also acted as gunner. He had to cope with a terrible quality gunsight and when he had spotted a target he had to switch positions to aim and fire. In the time he needed to do this we could fire 4 or even 5 shots. In my experience the Russians tended to be bad shots up to the end of the war. The russian tanks were also badly made. They had rough welding marks and there were sharp edges everywhere. You could cut yourself to pieces if you were not careful. The only western tanks we faced were Shermans and Lees which were used by the Russians. They were not as dangerous as the russian made tanks and were destroyed more easily. I know that in some instances our shells passed right through a Sherman’s front to back and they burned more easily than the T34. I never faced a british tank.

An enemy tank had to burn if it was to be classed as a kill. Later when I was in command myself I would not accept tank destruction claims in which the enemy did not burn. All of my credited kills exploded or burned after getting hit.

All of our tank kills were made with the 75mm L48 gun. Our Stug IIIs and IVs mounted that type of gun and it was also used in the Jagdpanzer IVs we received in late 1944. The Jagdpanzers with the 75mm L70 mainly went to the Waffen-SS. I would have loved to get one of them. The 75L48 was sufficient to destroy any type of enemy tank. It was accurate and its shell only started dropping after a range of about 1000 meters. That was good as we did not need to calculate trajectory. Up to 1000 meters you only had to point your gun at a target and fire. We had excellent gun sights aswell. When facing the tanks like the KW and the Stalin we used to aim and weak points like the turret ring. In September 1944 we destroyed a moving T34 on a range of about 1400 meters with the first shot. The modelers or history enthusiasts that contact me today always ask me about the “Tiger” some don’t even know that StuGs destroyed more than 35.000 enemy tanks during the war.

Even if the “real” tank crews of the Panzer Regiments looked down on us, they knew how good we were. Like me, most of the gunners of Sturmgeschütz units were former artillerymen. We knew how to handle a gun. The StuG was an excellent weapon.
​

​

StuG Platoon leader, served with Sturmgeschütz-Abteilung 177 andPanzerjäger-Abteilung 69. Credited with 44 enemy tank kills. He served on the eastern front from 1941 to 1945, being awarded the Knights Cross on 21st September 1944 after an action in July 1944 before being captured by the Russians and held captive until 1948. Georg Bose was also awardes with the Panzerkampfabzeichen “50″, Iron Cross 2nd and 1st class, Close Combat Clasp in bronze, General Assault badge “25″, Wound Badge in Black. Georg passed away 26th September 2011.

Source: On enemy tanks – Georg Bose, StuG Ace | 1infanteriedivision

My kind of Guy!!!!!!

 

Do you think he might have been a bit biased though?

Still, interesting that he rated the heavy tanks as most dangerous, probably because they had to get closer to knock them out.

 

Your Stug post got me to looking around PZ. Go Cavaliers. Yes Bose sounds first rate with the destruction to prove it.

 

He never fought the American and British forces on the other side so his bias is based on what he encountered. Since he mostly fought Russians he expressed his experience of shooting more of their homelands tanks then the few Shermans and Lees.

I like how he describes that the Stugs would cut clear through Shermans and Lees, it seem almost unbelievable yet frighteningly so and just for the Stug.

 

very interesting...I will say training is a big factor.....generally, you can have a highly trained force with marginal weapons overcome an ''un''trained force with superior weapons......

 

The KW II? These big, top-heavy monsters with the 150mm artillery gun?
Never heard that they were highly rated. Cumbersome, slow, the turret cannot be moved all the time, a target so big, that you can hardly miss it...

The most numerous lend&lease tanks on the soviet front were Valentines? I wonder, why only the US-Models are mentioned? Maybe he didn't know they were british.

With men like him and weapons like the StuG, the incredible numbers of destroyed soviet tanks by the rather small german armoured forces became believable.

 

I wonder if KWII might just be a typo or an error in translation (was the original interview in German?). It's a bit off at least, should be KV-2. Those were rather rare, and the few that were encountered were early in the campaign - note that Bose says "All of our tank kills were made with the 75mm L48 gun." which only entered service in 1942.

You could be right that he mistook the Valentine for a Soviet design; it's not as distinctive as the Sherman or Lee.

Remarkable story!