Panzer IV vs Char B1 BIS: France 1940: 33

Der vorliegende Band vergleicht, wie in der Serie üblich, zwei gegnerische Panzertypen. In diesem Fall den schweren Char B1 bis mit dem frühen und noch schwach gepanzertem Panzer IV. In kurzen Kapiteln wird auf verschiedene Aspekte (Entwicklung, Bewaffnung, Besatzung, Ziel–Optik) eingegangen, was auch graphisch schön aufbereitet wurde. Ein ca. 12seitiges Kapitel beschreibt die tagelangen Gefechte um den kleinen Ort Stonne , wo beide Panzertypen (u.a. der bekannte Char B1 „Eure“ und Teile des Pz.Rgt.8 der 10. Panzerdivision) am 15. und 16. Mai 1940 aufeinander trafen und danach diverse Wracks die Straßen säumten. Dabei wird klar wie verwundbar der Panzer IV 1940 auf kurze Entfernung sogar durch die französische 2,5 cm Pak war. Der Titel hält jedenfalls was er verspricht und daher die volle Sternenzahl. Für alle Interessierten: im etwas abseits gelegenen Stonne steht auf dem Dorfplatz ein Original Char B1 bis , eine 2,5 cm Pak und etwas vor dem Ort beim Aussichtshügel noch ein modernerer AMX 13 aus den Sechzigern.

Bon livre.. avec une comparaison entre ces deux types de chars... quelques photos (manque un peu d'ailleurs) et quelque schémas ... coupe verticales des tourelles... histoire de l'évolution de ces deux panzers....

本書はospreyの陸戦兵器に関する著作の多いスティーヴン ザロガ氏の本で、共通項を持つライヴァルを取り上げ、両者の戦いを取り上げる本です。 今回は共に75㎜砲を持つ戦車ということでフランス陸軍のシャールB1bisとドイツ陸軍のⅣ号戦車D型の1940年5月17日のストンヌの戦いでの両者の戦いを描いた戦いです。 いつもの様に両戦車の開発の経緯と仕様というハードウェア比較と両戦車の乗員の配置、訓練というソフトウェア、両軍の置かれた戦略状況という前提を述べ、実際の戦闘とその評価を記述しています。 本書は文章に添えられたモノクロ写真は勿論、両戦車の三面図、戦車内の乗員配置、主砲周りの透視図と砲弾、2頁見開きの戦闘シーンが視覚状況を補ってくれます（但し47㎜砲の砲弾は Panzer III vs Somua S 35: Belgium 1940 (Duel) でカバーしているので省略されています）。 同じ75㎜砲装備車ではありますが、シャールB1は重防御の陣地を突破し、遭遇する敵戦車を撃破するタイガー戦車やKV-1、スターリン系重戦車と似た様な思想の戦車で、その重装甲にⅣ号戦車が苦戦したことはわかります。 その反面、実戦経験の無いフランス故、補給問題、乗員の訓練度はドイツ軍に対して見劣りしますが、古典的な配置乍ら重戦車の有用性を明らかにしています。 一方、重防御の戦車に難儀したドイツ陸軍では1年後のソ連侵攻時にも無対策（重戦車のタイガーⅠの開発は行われていましたが）、殆どフランス戦と変わらない（中戦車は増加しましたが）装備で今度はT-34、KV-1で同様のパニックに陥るのは興味深いです。

The Char B1 bis was the main tank of France's armored divisions (DCR), while the Panzer IVD was more of a support tank. It seems an odd match-up, yet the comparison works well. The author conveys direct one-on-one encounters between the two at Stonne, on May 16, 1940. The analysis allows a discerning contrast between French and German armored equipment, training, doctrine and leadership during the fateful spring of 1940. Author Steven Zaloga did his usual thorough research, correcting common myths and simplifications about the fall of France. He shows how each country's political and military situation in the interwar years influenced the development of tanks and armored doctrine. For the Wehrmacht, the Versailles Treaty's prohibition on tank development made the forbidden weapon alluring. Rebuilding their army virtually from nothing, German tank enthusiasts were little hindered by antagonism from the infantry, cavalry and artillery. The Germans also benefited from covert cooperation with the Soviet Union 1929-1933 at the Kazan joint training/testing facility. Experimental tank maneuvers taught much about practical armored operations, including the importance of using a three-man turret crew for maximum efficiency. The French, by comparison, carried forward the World War I doctrine of methodical warfare, with tanks serving an infantry-support role. The Char B's design origins can be traced to the early 1920's, explaining its archaic appearance. The French lacked a clear vision of how battle tanks should function, and had little experience coordinating tanks in action. When the French army considered maneuvers with an experimental division-sized armored formation, the plan was canceled for fear of stoking international tensions in 1938. The French army only authorized formation of four armored divisions after the fall of Poland. These formations never had the training time necessary to work out problems with command control, communication, and refueling that would bedevil French armored forces during the 1940 crisis. The new divisions were weak in motorized infantry simply because the French lacked enough Lorraine infantry carriers to accompany the tanks. There are plentiful informative tables, diagrams, paintings and photos to accompany this thoughtful comparison. In a straight matchup, the Char B had a clear advantage. Its main armament could easily penetrate the Panzer IVD, which was vulnerable at most battle ranges even to the small French 25 mm antitank gun. By comparison, the Char B was nearly impenetrable, even at close range, by the low-velocity 75 mm cannon mounted on the Panzer IV. It took a track hit, mechanical breakdown, heavy artillery, or lack of fuel to stop a Char B. In the end, greater German combat efficiency caused high Char B losses, despite occasional forays in which they seemed as terrifying, and unstoppable, as German King Tigers to the western Allies later in the war. The author points out that "Axis/Allied polarities" reversed as the war dragged on. The Germans began emphasizing tanks that performed well on paper, but which were unwieldy and unreliable in practice, while the western Allies would win with tanks that were mobile, reliable, and supported by well-coordinated combined-arms formations with a strong logistical base. While it only covers a small aspect France's swift defeat in 1940, this title provides some useful answers that will interest casual and professional readers alike.

Excellent read, a bit short for the price but if you shop Osprey then you know what to expect. Well this one delivers what is promised. It gives some valuable insight into the Invasion of France and early development of World War 2 tanks and sets the record straight on a number of myths. It also has a good chapter on the battles around Sedan. The author Zaloga has become a mark of quality of the Osprey series and this is everything a duel book should be.