Waffen SS comparison to Wehrmacht at the eastern front

High requirements, because the army was drafted out of volunteers. The whole supply chain was fully motorized, true. However smaller compared to wehrmacht ones, which meant the Wehr needed to supply them in addition. The fact that they were that mobile made them ideal for fast movement to push back breaktroughs, not because they were elite. All Panzerdivisions had that role in the end.
Which weapons, vehicles and ammunition did the Waffen SS had advantage of towards the Wehrmacht?
Afaik the TigerII was first delivered to a Wehrmacht unit.

We cannot account for a single piece of clothing or a single type of tank as we are speaking in general terms, of course. The three "classic" SS-divisions Leibstandarte, Totenkopf and Das Reich have played deciding roles on the eastern front. Due to Leibstandarte and Wiking being attached to Army Group A, Das Reich to Army Group B and Totenkopf and Polizei to Army Group C, Waffen-SS played a role on every single part of the front line. When compared to Wehrmacht panzerdivisions, the Waffen-SS had a continuous presence at the front line, which resulted in battle experience, unmatched by any Wehrmacht division. Whether they were elite forces because they were highly motorized or they were highly motorized because they were elite forces, does not change the fact they were given and (mostly) completed heavy tasks.

In particular, after june 1941, the Waffen-SS had build an infamous name for itself, in the eyes of the Wehrmacht. The reasons, of which some are mentioned before, are threefold; 1. Almost all divisions were highly motorized 2. Remarkable combat capabilites 3. Dispersion of forces across the front lines.

Another problem the Waffen-ss had, was the lack of well trained and experienced leaders at the beginning of the war.

The problem with my inital question is, that from the 38 divisions the Waffen SS had, about 28 were involved at the eastern front, but not all the time. Some were withdrawn to other theatres or refit to Germany. I estimate that from all axis forces at the eastern front about 10-15% were waffen SS later in the war. You think this guess is about correct?

A vague answer, I know, but: it depends.

It depends what year you are looking at? And if you aggregate the whole war, does it make sense? Because the initial and end-war were two very different scenarios.

It also depends on the scale you meassure it on. 'A division' could consist of everything ranging from near 10k to a few hundred men. Why - in 1945 som Panzer divisions had no tanks. And some SS divisions had no men either.

Paper will take everything you print on it. Including lies, damn lieas and statistics.

The problem with my inital question is, that from the 38 divisions the Waffen SS had, about 28 were involved at the eastern front, but not all the time. Some were withdrawn to other theatres or refit to Germany. I estimate that from all axis forces at the eastern front about 10-15% were waffen SS later in the war. You think this guess is about correct?

Yea, as mentioned very vague and general question which would get an equal response. Throughout the latter years of the war a division on paper, could be just a couple companies in reality, and many "divisions" were never fully mobilized or filled to begin with. You know the lore of Hitler ordering around vast armies on maps who were nothing but empty vessels in reality.

Also, to answer earlier disputes on whether or not the SS was actually given the best of the best, or meant to be elite, the clear answer is yes, and no. Some "elite" SS units were given the best tanks, but thier heer counterparts also got them, it's not as if say, the SS got Tigers and Panthers, and everyone else made do with Panzer 4s and StuGs...ironically often the exact opposite occurred even with "honortitled" SS divisions.

The equipment issue is one that goes both ways, for a bulk of the war even the most "elite" SS units had to beg, borrow, capture and steal to get much needed equipment. Panzer losses in even some of the most notable units were often replaced by StuGs and P4s as opposed to original Panther losses, for example, and one noted division, the 17th SS, with "elite" Panzer Grenadier designation with honor title, had no tanks at all for over a year, and a couple of it's motorized infantry battalions only had bicycles...and even when somewhat properly outfitted to defend france it was almost entirely StuGs outfitting it's "panzer" battalion, let alone the assault gun battalion...it never had more than literally one or two actual Panzers which irrc were "command" tanks.

So much for getting the best equipment and tanks...and this unit was expected to be one of the cornerstones for pushing the allies back into the sea and is famous for it's fierce fighting in St.Lo, Carantan, and throughout France until it was completely destroyed...and that's just one of several examples.

In reality, the SS indeed had to scrounge around for equipment, and the fact that the SS were issued camouflage uniforms decades ahead of their time is not really evidence of being "elite" either, people forget the regular heer and luftwaffe ground forces were also given rather good camouflage uniforms, for some units in exceptional numbers as well. And of course the 12th SS, 1st SS, and even the luftwaffe "requisitioned" a lot of their camo from italian sources...

In theory, one reasons I consider most SS combat divisions "elite" is simple, actual combat record, the morale and fighting spirit generally found in the SS, and the expectations that were demanded from them. Never underestimate unit morale being a big determining factor of actual combat ability. They all received the same training as their heer counterparts, but the fighting spirit of their volunteer force filled with propaganda about being superhhuman fighting machines actually made them so, in part at least. But, as I stated before, I will state again, many Heer units were just as tough, and just as "elite".

One simple test everyone can do, if you have a grandpa that fought the nazis, ask them what they think about the Waffen SS in general as combat soldiers, irregardless of their criminal actions. The answer won't suprise anyone...

I thought the general consensus was that whilst the SS tended to receive the best and newest equipment for political reasons, they weren't necessarily any better than the Heer. Many of the genuinely elite outfits - such as the Großdeutschland and Panzer Lehr Divisions - were from the Heer.

I thought the general consensus was that whilst the SS tended to receive the best and newest equipment for political reasons, they weren't necessarily any better than the Heer. Many of the genuinely elite outfits - such as the Großdeutschland and Panzer Lehr Divisions - were from the Heer.

Well actually none of both got favoured equipement wise, they were in constant concurrence to eachother. The number of well equipped Waffen-ss divisions was higher because there were less of them.

The early Waffen-SS divisions were formed out of volunteers, thereby those divisions had a extraordinarily high grade of motivation and combat spirit. Although the problem was, that their officers often lacked any military education and experience (for example Theodor Eicke) because they were mostly selected under political criterias, which often lead to very high losses.

Well actually none of both got favoured equipement wise, they were in constant concurrence to eachother. The number of well equipped Waffen-ss divisions was higher because there were less of them.

The early Waffen-SS divisions were formed out of volunteers, thereby those divisions had a extraordinarily high grade of motivation and combat spirit. Although the problem was, that their officers often lacked any military education and experience (for example Theodor Eicke) because they were mostly selected under political criterias, which often lead to very high losses.

Another answer of generalities, of course the exact opposite was the case sometimes (i.e. Paul Hausser, Felix Steiner), and quite often very capable higher level commanders emerged from the ranks of company and field officers who were excellent combat commanders at lower levels. (i.e. Kurt Meyer)

I think it's largely overstated that the SS lacked experienced and educated officers, sure, there were political appointments, but the cadre of small unit officers, NCOs, and up to field and general level officers weren't really any worse off than their counterparts in the Heer, at least in my opinion, and a large bulk of general level officers were in fact experienced, often decorated ww1 officers and involved in the interwar years when the most progress was made with doctrinal and command thought, with the proper military education befitting their positions. I think this is one of the myths of the SS that they were all just political appointments, most of them were in fact usually educated, decorated, and experienced officers who happened to be flaming nazis...though there are examples even in the SS of very good officers turning on Hitler and the party, i.e. Bittrich of market garden fame.

My initial question was not at all vague and in general. You need to know the amount of Waffen SS soldiers serving at the eastern front from 41 to 45. The amount of Wehrmacht army soldiers is known. Then you can do the comparison. I did not find those numbers during my internet research though, thats why i asked.

My initial question was not at all vague and in general. You need to know the amount of Waffen SS soldiers serving at the eastern front from 41 to 45. The amount of Wehrmacht army soldiers is known. Then you can do the comparison. I did not find those numbers during my internet research though, thats why i asked.

I wasn't referring to that question which has been answered...I think van Voort has the best answer we're going to really find to the original question.

If you have Wehrmacht numbers already, you are close. Assuming you have year to year figures, the number of SS divisions is so limited, it wont take long to gather information about year to year division strengths.

Waffen-SS divisions at the Eastern front (roughly):

June 1941 - 1942: Leibstandarte (got decimated in November), Wiking, Das Reich, Totenkopf and Polizei (relatively small division)

1942 - summer 1942: Wiking and Polizei (Leibstandarte, Das Reich and Totenkopf slowly send off to France)

summer 1942 - 1943: Wiking, Polizei and Nord

1943 - 1944: Wiking, Polizei, Nord, Leibstandarte, Das Reich and Totenkopf

1944 - 1945: Wiking, Polizei, Nord, Leibstandarte, Das Reich, Totenkopf, Hohenstauffen (majority of division in western Europe) and Frundsberg (majority of division in western Europe)

Note that all divisions were being split up continuously between fronts, especially during 1944-1945.

I had no idea there was a Hohenstaufen Division.

Another answer of generalities, of course the exact opposite was the case sometimes (i.e. Paul Hausser, Felix Steiner), and quite often very capable higher level commanders emerged from the ranks of company and field officers who were excellent combat commanders at lower levels. (i.e. Kurt Meyer)

I think it's largely overstated that the SS lacked experienced and educated officers, sure, there were political appointments, but the cadre of small unit officers, NCOs, and up to field and general level officers weren't really any worse off than their counterparts in the Heer, at least in my opinion, and a large bulk of general level officers were in fact experienced, often decorated ww1 officers and involved in the interwar years when the most progress was made with doctrinal and command thought, with the proper military education befitting their positions. I think this is one of the myths of the SS that they were all just political appointments, most of them were in fact usually educated, decorated, and experienced officers who happened to be flaming nazis...though there are examples even in the SS of very good officers turning on Hitler and the party, i.e. Bittrich of market garden fame.

Of course there were also some excellent military leaders within the ranks of the Waffen-SS. My statement is to be taken in a more general manner. The Wehrmacht (Reichswehr) already had a long military tradition and their officer training has been perfected throughout several wars. They also had access to a big pool of well trained experienced officers, especially the higher ranked ones.

The Waffen-SS on the other hand, was a very young institution that had been converted from a paramilitary organisation to a military organisation. They had to build a fully functional officercorps pretty much from the scratch. Training subalternofiicers takes a couple of years but training a good Divisionleader takes one maybe even two decades and at least one war.
So their best bet was to headhunt for former reichswehrinstructors and officers to build up their own corps.

So I claim, that the Wehrmachtofficers were generally better trained educated and more experienced than their Waffen-SS counterparts.

Now on topic, I do not know if this helps.

So I claim, that the Wehrmachtofficers were generally better trained educated and more experienced than their Waffen-SS counterparts.

Obviously, prior to the invasion of Russia in June 1941, this statement is correct. However, due to the permanent Waffen-SS presence at the front lines, the experience gained was unmatched by any Wehrmacht formation. The highly motorized divisions allowed for a quick redeployment to help out and fill up any gaps on both the Eastern and Western front lines, mostly on Hitler's own request.

In particular Leibstandarte, Wiking, Das Reich and Totenkopf had disproportionate, as opposed to Wehrmacht formations, front line action, whereas the newer divisions Hohenstauffen, Frundsberg and Hitlerjugend were of a lesser quality due to lower recruitment standards and relatively late war deployment (winter 1943 - 1944). Nonetheless, they were trained by experienced commanders from the Junkerschule and Eastern front veterans.

Your link provides figures on year to year division strengths, so this should give GeneralCH all the tools he needs to calculate the ratio .

Obviously, prior to the invasion of Russia in June 1941, this statement is correct. However, due to the permanent Waffen-SS presence at the front lines, the experience gained was unmatched by any Wehrmacht formation. The highly motorized divisions allowed for a quick redeployment to help out and fill up any gaps on both the Eastern and Western front lines, mostly on Hitler's own request.

Yes, you are absolutely correct. I should have mentioned, that what I said only applies to the early stage of the war.

On the Easternfront the Waffen-SS was somekind of "Frontfeuerwehr" (frontline firedepartement) so wherever shit started to stack up, those guys were called in to turn away the catastrophe. I do not know if they were chosen for this task because of their high mechanization or if they got highly mechanized because of that task.

(frontline firedepartement)

Wut

Wut

They were called like that because they plugged the holes in the line when other units couldn't hold the Soviets any longer. They did their job and departed to another sector at the frontline which needed help.

They were called like that because they plugged the holes in the line when other units couldn't hold the Soviets any longer. They did their job and departed to another sector at the frontline which needed help.

Exactly

They were called like that because they plugged the holes in the line when other units couldn't hold the Soviets any longer. They did their job and departed to another sector at the frontline which needed help.

I think we have an english translation issue though, lol. I understand the meaning, and know how they were often used, but "firedepartment" is pretty funny.

I think we have an english translation issue though, lol. I understand the meaning, and know how they were often used, but "firedepartment" is pretty funny.

I took the 1 on 1 translation Frontline Emergency Troops or Quick Reaction Force might be closer to the actual meaning