The Infantry Anti-Aircraft Company
In January of 1945, Information for the Infantry (Nachrichten für die Infanterie) published a guide to the employment of the anti-aircraft companies of infantry divisions that began with the following introduction.
First and foremost, the infantry anti-aircraft company protects infantry and and infantry heavy weapons deployed on the battlefield against attacks by hostile ground attack aircraft. Its use in ground combat must be limited to especially dangerous emergencies.
We frequently fail to obey this primary principle, often to the point of turning inside out, even though enemy superiority in the air makes it a pressing requirement.
A light anti-aircraft gun is no anti-tank gun! It does not belong in the main line of resistance (Hauptkampflinie), where enemy artillery and tanks can see it and fire upon it, before it has accomplished a fraction of what it could have achieved if it had been employed properly.
That does not help the infantry man!
There is no reason to deploy an anti-aircraft company goes in a wood, spread out over a front of two or three kilometers, without the protection of infantry. How could a company in that position defend against an attack by enemy aircraft?
If, as is often the case, the air defense must move into a secondary position, then a suitable employment as a ground weapon, which avoids the needless sacrifice of men and matériel, can provide valuable assistance to hard-pressed infantrymen.
Thus …
No employment in the main line of resistance - but in the depth of the main battle zone (Hauptkampffeldes) in a well-covered fire position! Dig in!
No employment in obstructed ground unless some infantry provides security!
Mobile employment with frequent change of position!
A light anti-aircraft gun is neither assault gun nor tank!
Make a main effort! (Schwerpunkt bilden!) He who tries to defend everywhere, defends nowhere!
Don’t poke with your fingers, punch with your fist. (Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen.)
When the infantry follows these guidelines, it will reap benefits, both today and also tomorrow, from this weapon that our enemies fear so much. Building our anti-aircraft guns and the vehicles that move them takes a lot of work, time, and material. They cannot be replaced each day! Nonetheless, the infantry anti-aircraft company is not so precious that it won’t fight, to the last man and the last gun, to protect infantrymen! But we should take pains to ensure that it never comes to that! After all, you will never see an assault gun employed as an anti-aircraft gun.
Experience tells us that the success achieved by anti-aircraft guns grows in proportion to the mobility of the overall defense. This is why the infantry anti-aircraft company was motorized! Far too few of us know about the success that can be achieved when the anti-aircraft company is employed as a mobile fighter-bomber trap (Jabo Falle)! Whenever it has been employed, the effect has been spectacular. If, however, we take the motor vehicles away from the company, then it must remain in place, suffering damage and unable to achieve decisive effects.
Note: While this article presumes that the typical infantry anti-aircraft company was equipped with towed ordnance, a census of such units conducted in the winter of 1945 indicates that a substantial proportion of such units employed self-propelled weapons.
Source
Nachrichten für die Infanterie, microfilmed at the U.S. National Archives, Captured German Records, Series T-78, Reel 763. (To download, gratis, the full reel, visit this page on the WW2 Archive.)
For more on this subject, see …
I’m making the most of it 🫡
Nice idea, the AAA not being subordinated to the Ground.
To the point: We need a new Iron Mike.
As long as the Infantry are Supreme, all of Western civilization can perish as far as the Military Commanders are concerned. We don’t have to speculate, we can ask
the French. (WW1)
Or the Germans.(WW2)
Or the British. (Both WW1/WW2)
Or the Russians. (WW2)
Or the Ukrainians. (Now)
Indeed all the people above have never been the same since.
DuPuy seemed to be onto something with Infantry as “sensors” but he left us too soon.
As we’re now overwhelmed with sensors and everything favors the defense and conspires against the Infantry, perhaps a good starting point?
I think the Israelis are wise in the Merkava concept of infantry carrier that’s also a tank, or perhaps other way around.
The Infantry must move to being a specialized situational usage if assaulting and EW/Drone or Heavy Weapons platform in general- yes a reversal of role.
Infantry As the main effort and the rest support- this will stop, either from reason at last overpowering Romance or exhaustion.
In Russia prior to the Ukrainian war artillery was considered the main arm with infantry taking the cleared ground. This fell short.
I too began as Infantry, I was 19.
I would have no such romantic excuse now.
The mainstay of the USSR military in WW2 was the Rifle Division, of the USSR class of 1942; 80% were dead by 1945.
In closing the Irish won their Independence because a very unromantic boy from Cork named Michael Collins went to London to learn Banking. He was in all respects a world class banker from retail (British Postal Bank) to Global (Bank of New York London Branch). No romantic he.
We need a new Iron Mike.