Soviet invasion of Norway 1963

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

I've been working on a hypothetical Soviet invasion of northern Norway in Oct 1963, during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Did not the Cuban Missile crisis occur in October of 1962? I do not think Soviet planners having their plates full with Cuba and John Kennedy's naval blockade would go off script to Norway, at least not during the crisis that threaten the world with nuclear war.

[Suhiir]

You're right, 1962 ... no clue where I got 1963.
Thanks!

[shahadi]

No problemo.

[wulfir]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

I keep wondering what I'm missing, I've never thought of the Soviets as stupid, over-centralized and doctrine-bound yes, but not stupid.

The Soviets broke the German defences above the arctic circle in October 1944. The heaviest burdon fell upon 'leg infantry' which essentially was the deciding arm - but a number of problems surfaced - in offensive battle it was especially hard for the Soviets to keep the artillery support going because the artillery lacked the mobility to keep up with the infantry in this particular terrain. It was also hard to keep the artillery supply going - and the Soviets used numbers to make up for accuracy which meant they needed greater quantity of ammo brought forward instead of a limited number of shells for a limited number of guns.

When the infantry out paced the artillery support it lowered their combat power condierably. While mortars were easier to transport and could reach beind slopes etc their effectiveness were limited because of the terrain - supposedly they were too light for really penetrating the rocky soil or exploded more or less harmlessly in the swampy parts.

In October there can be lots of fog, rain and snow, the temperature ranges from between -5 C to +5 C, the Golf Stream keeps the ocean from freezing but the wind is cold and there is basically no way to get out of the wind - the weather conditions, the difficulty of resupplying the 'leg infantry', lack of arty support seriously degarded their combat effectivness over time.


In 1944 the Soviet commander Maretskov requested heavy armour to support his offensive because it thought that the Germans, having no armour of their own would be vulnerable to tank attacks. He wanted both heavy and numbers - he even requested to be given by then obsolete lend lease M3 Lee/Grant type tanks as he thought he would get more if he requested old stuff.

In actual battle the tanks did not play a very important role. They could hardly move outside the very few roads which meant they could fight with one or two tanks up front and all the rest trailing behind. The Soviets did have a fair number of combat and mobility losses to AFVs during these operations but I guess they still kept their faith when it comes to armour in the arctic...

[Suhiir]

Thanks Wulfir, that sounds pretty much like I would expect and I hadn't studied the 1944 campaign in any detail, you saved me some digging/reading.

I was near Tromso in November once, being from South Dakota/Minnesota I didn't find the weather to be much of a problem, of course those that grew up in the southern states did. What I recall most was that it hadn't been cold enough long enough yet for the marshes to fully freeze and we generally avoided low areas because we were all to likely to break thru the ice.

Actually what I recall best was the night ski attack WE made on the Norwegians!
Everyone knows US Marines spend all their time in the south Pacific so obviously we know nothing of snow or skiing. Guess no one considered some of us grew up in Colorado, Montana, Minnesota, Maine, etc. Sure it was only about a platoon size attack but how large does a nighttime raid need to be?

[Suhiir]

Can someone tell me:

Are Norwegian Homeguard Companies "lettered" (Alpha, Bravo, Charlie), "numbered" (1st, 43rd, 9672nd), or "named" (Sjovegan, Tennevoll) ?

[Grant1pa]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Can someone tell me:

Are Norwegian Homeguard Companies "lettered" (Alpha, Bravo, Charlie), "numbered" (1st, 43rd, 9672nd), or "named" (Sjovegan, Tennevoll) ?

It's my understanding that the Army Home Guard units are not under centralized command and are dispersed throughout individual communities in Norway. From what I've read, they are in Regions and districts. The Northernmost is District 17 (Finnmark). They keep their equipment at home so they can rapidly mobilize.

Here's a site that gives some info (TACOPS):

http://www.tacopshq.com/MBX/Globalth...-org-blue.html

I'm not aware that they have unit designators, other than those Home Guard units designated as Rapid Reaction Forces (District 17 I think is simply called the Finnmark RRF).

The Air Force and Navy also Have Home Guard units similarly disposed.

Grant1

[Suhiir]

Looks like a number system:
HV-14104 belongs to HV-141 which in turn belongs to HV-14 the Sør-Hålogaland district.

HV-14 Sør-Hålogaland
HV-141 Vefsn
HV-14102 Vefsn/Grane
HV-14103 Hattfjelldal
HV-14104 Leirfjord
HV-142 Rana
HV-14202 Hemnes
HV-14203 Mo
HV-14204 Nesna
HV-143 Salten
HV-14302 Fauske/Søndre-Sørfold
HV-14303 Saltdal
HV-14304 Beiarn/Skjerstad
HV-14305 Gildeskål
HV-14306 Bodø
HV-144 Kysten
HV-14402 Bindal
HV-14403 Vega/Brønnøy
HV-14404 Alstahaug
HV-14405 Lurøy/Træna
HV-14406 Rødøy/Meløy
HV-145 Nord-Salten
HV-14502 Hamarøy og Tysfjord
HV-14503 Steigen

[shahadi]

Very interesting stuff. Question, the Norwegian army unit designations apply to 1962?

[Suhiir]

Since the Homeguard was established in 1954 (if I recall correctly) and it's basic organization hasn't changed to the present I would assume so.