# STEEL INFERNO



## Cloud Cover (21 Jul 2004)

MICHAEL REYNOLDS, STEEL INFERNO: 1ST SS PANZER CORPS IN NORMANDY, (NEW YORK: DELL/RANDOM HOUSE, 1997). 

THIS BOOK IS WRITTEN BY A RETIRED BRITISH ARMY GENERAL [EH WHAT?]. THE WORK IS FIXED ON THE 1ST SS PANZER CORPS IN NORMADY AND ABOUT 40 PERCENT OF THE WORK DETAILS THE BATTLES FOUGHT BETWEEN THAT CORPS AND THE CANADIAN SOLDIERS WHO HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO ENCOUNTER IT'S PRINCIPLE UNITS: THE  1SS PANZER DIVISION (LAH), 12 AND SS PANZER DIVISION AS WELL AS A COUPLE OF REGULAR GERMAN ARMY UNITS. THIS BOOK OBJECTIVLY DESCRIBES THE VARIOUS BATTLE FROM THE PERIOD OF JUNE 6TH TO AUGUST 25, 1944. IT IS HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ANGLO CANADIAN LEADERSHIP, TACTICS AND EQUIPMENT. PARTS OF THE BOOK ARE DOWN RIGHT DEPRESSING. AT THE SAME TIME, THE BOOK PRAISES THE INDIVIDUAL CANADIAN FIGHTING SOLDIER, AND OPENLY POSITS THAT IF CANADIAN COMMANDERS WERE OF THE SAME CALIBER AS THE GERMAN FIELD COMMANDERS, [KURT MEYER ETC.], THE BATTLE FOR CAEN MIGHT HAVE BEEN A "SHORT SHARP AFFAIR." FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE SOFTCOVER EDITION, GERMAN COUNTER ATTACKS WERE OFTEN STYMIED BY TENACIOUS CANADIAN SOLDIERS. AT PAGE 106, THE AUTHOR DESCRIBES AN ATTEMPT BY THE 12TH SS PANZER PIONEER BATTALION AS " YET AGAIN, A DISASTER." THE AUTHOR THEN GOES ON TO SAY THE FOLLOWING: "THE BATTLE LASTED ALL DAY AND COST THE SS PIONEERS EIGHTY CASUALTIES ... *THE CANADIAN DEFENCE OF NORREY AND BRETTEVILLE OVER THE PERIOD OF 8TH TO 10TH JUNE MUST SURELY GO DOWN AS ONE OF THE FINEST SMALL UNIT ACTIONS OF WWII.*" HIGH PRAISE INDEED FROM AN AUTHOR WHO MAKES NO ATTEMPT TO HIDE HIS DISDAIN FOR CANADIAN LEADERSHIP [WITH A FEW NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS.]   IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED IN THIS BOOK, WHICH IS ABOUT 360PAGES, LET ME KNOW THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATOR AND I'LL SEND [LEND] IT TO YOU.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Jul 2004)

What does the defence of Norrey have to do with Canadian leadership?  The defence in question was the result of the men in the line holding their ground, not any inspired leadership on the part of brigade or divisional commanders.  You're comparing apples and oranges.

I never liked that book, but it has been so long since I tried to read it, I forget why.  It seemed like the British author - a retired general IIRC - was placing too much emphasis on his own understanding of the British Army and trying to relate it unsuccessfully to the experiences, practices and history of the other armies in Normandy, and poorly at that in the case of his examination of the Germans.  I should really reread it, though, to see if my objections still hold merit on those grounds.

It is quite possible, however, to have great disdain for Canadian leadership and still report that the men fought tenaciously, so the dichotomy you feel exists, really doesn't.


----------



## Art Johnson (22 Jul 2004)

Michael if this is the book I think it is the most interesting part to me was when the German tanks ran up against the Matilda in France in 1940 with its 3" armour. If I recall rightly according to the author the German tanks were equipped with 37mm guns and their shot just bounced off the Matilda. Again according to the author this is when the Germans realized they had to upgrade to the 75mm. Mind you I am just working from memory as my copy of the book is in Florida.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (22 Jul 2004)

Art Johnson said:
			
		

> Michael if this is the book I think it is the most interesting part to me was when the German tanks ran up against the Matilda in France in 1940 with its 3" armour. If I recall rightly according to the author the German tanks were equipped with 37mm guns and their shot just bounced off the Matilda. Again according to the author this is when the Germans realized they had to upgrade to the 75mm. Mind you I am just working from memory as my copy of the book is in Florida.



Art - the book in question is about I SS Panzer Corps in Normandy in 1944....I do think the author wrote about armour in France in 1940, but in a different book.

Your recollection seems correct, though- the Matilda was, like the Char B1 bis, a nasty surprise to the Germans who found that only their 88mm anti-aircraft guns could effectively deal with them.  Matilda was undergunned, however, the Matilda 1 only having MGs and the Matilda 2 having no high explosive for its 2-pounder main armament, rendering it impotent against infantry.

Char B1 bis had a large Achilles heel in the form of an engine grille on the left hand side about 4 or 6 feet square, but I have read that the Germans never realized this was a serious weak spot until after the campaign and so didn't capitalize on that as an aiming point.  They won anyway...

Allied armour did provide 1 or 2 scares for the Germans; witness the fighting at Stonne, for example, where the elite Grossdeutschland Regiment got a thorough battle inoculation.


----------

