Tank Hunter Erkennungsmarken, tracking the unit

[Glenn66]

A Stalingrad digger I sometimes buy from has for sale this ID disc.
It reads: Panzer Hunter Replacement Kompanie/267.



Now I'm assuming the '267' is the 267th Infantry Replacement Regiment. Lexicon Der Wehrmacht I often find to be difficult to follow as google translate does only an adequate job of translation but the nearest link to Stalingrad I can find is that the 267th Infantry Replacement Regiment supplied troops to the 267th Infantry Division between September and December 1939 before being reallocated to supply for the 191st Infantry Division.

The 191st spent it's time in France whilst the 267th found itself under Army Group Center in 1942 so i'm having trouble associating this unit with Stalingrad in any way.

Am I reading this wrong and the '267' refers to a different unit of some sort? I can't find any 267th Panzer Jager unit so thats why I keep ending up with the 267th Infantry Replacement Regiment.

Its really bugging me how difficult it is to track the Ersatz units, can anyone shed some light on this unit?

Cheers

Glenn

[Stacez]

Am I reading this wrong and the '267' refers to a different unit of some sort? I can't find any 267th Panzer Jager unit so thats why I keep ending up with the 267th Infantry Replacement Regiment.

Hello,
You're right Glenn66, this EKM belonged to:
Panzer-Jäger-Ersatz-Kompanie/Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 267

[Paul D]

Glenn many tags turn up in Stalingrad that are not directly attributable to the Divisons who fought there i have quite a few myself , once he has left his Ersatz unit it is quite possible he was assigned to another unit or if he had been wounded on his return to fitness he could have been sent to a unit that ended up in Stalingrad.

regards

Paul

[Matt L]

That's an interesting one Glenn- there is an issue with the idea that IER 267 could be the parent unit though: the specialist units that existed as 'Ersatz-Kompanien' associated with 'Infanterie-Ersatz-Regimenter' had the designation 'Infanterie' as part of their title:

Infanterie-Panzerjäger-Ersatz-Kompanie
Infanterie-Pionier-Ersatz-Kompanie
Infanterie-Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie
Infanterie-Geschütz-Ersatz-Kompanie

I have 15 or so myself, with two Infanterie-Panzerjäger discs from Stalingrad, marked: 'Jnf. Pz. Jäg. Ers. Kp. 4' and 'Inf. Pz. Jäg. Ers. Kp. 262', these units being part of Infanterie-Ersatz-Regimenter 4 and 262, respectively.

The trouble in your cases is that when I check the reference list I have, there was indeed an Infanterie-Panzerjäger-Ersatz-Kompanie 267- yours lacks the proper prefix to definitely be that unit.

I have an image of a disc marked 'Pz. Pi. Ers. Kp. 3/80', which certainly isn't associated with IER80 because there wasn't one; and there are many known examples of discs marked 'Pi. Ers. Kp 1., 2., and 3./211' and the IER specialist Kompanien were single units- the only number they ever had was sometimes the standard one (13. for InfanterieGeschütz, 14. for Panzerjäger, etc.).

I have a disc myself marked 'Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213'- that shows that without the 'Infanterie' designation, specialist Ersatz Kompanien could have simply been parts of regular Infanterie-Regimenter. This being the case, I'd wonder if just plain old 'Infanterie-Regiment 267' was a better possibility for yours.

[Stacez]

I have an image of a disc marked 'Pz. Pi. Ers. Kp. 3/80', which certainly isn't associated with IER80 because there wasn't one; and there are many known examples of discs marked 'Pi. Ers. Kp 1., 2., and 3./211' and the IER specialist Kompanien were single units- the only number they ever had was sometimes the standard one (13. for InfanterieGeschütz, 14. for Panzerjäger, etc.).

You will never find an affiliated IER80 because it isn't an appopriate unit to look in. If we take a first example you provided the right parent unit was Panzer-Pionier-Ersatz-Bataillon 80 and this EKM simply belonged to: 3 Kompanie/Panzer-Pionier-Ersatz-Bataillon 80

I have a disc myself marked 'Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213'- that shows that without the 'Infanterie' designation, specialist Ersatz Kompanien could have simply been parts of regular Infanterie-Regimenter. This being the case, I'd wonder if just plain old 'Infanterie-Regiment 267' was a better possibility for yours.

Here we go again... Why do you again keep on trying to create a theories which were never existing in a reality?
Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213 didn't belong to IR213! This company was a part of IER213:
Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 213 - Lexikon der Wehrmacht.

I've told you already in another theme - don't stick replacement unit to a structure of field unit. It had never worked in this way. These two units belonged to completely different structures, different armies (Field Army (Feldheer) or to the Replacement Army (Ersatzheer) accordingly).

Coming back to EKM presented by Glenn66. Like Matt L said it lacks prefiks "Infanterie". It's true but it doesn't mean that it didn't belonged to IER267. There were many ways to stamp this kind of unit - this specific company appears as the 14th company of an infantry replacement regiment and sometimes you won't find any number before it because it was known that this company bears normally a 14th number.
IER267 was affiliated with the following infantry divisions: 96, 131, 267 and 295 and 295 ID was for sure at Stalingrad:
Lexikon der Wehrmacht
It is possible that the soldier who was wearing this EKM belonged to one of the 14th antitank companies of the infantry regiments belonging to this division.

[Matt L]

Here we go again... I've already told you...

Okay first thing is that I'll ask you to be civil- this kind of condescending commentary is not appropriate; you can disagree with people all you like but keep to facts and be polite- an emoticon at the end doesn't make it okay to say whatever you want.

You will never find an affiliated IER80 because it isn't an appopriate unit to look in. If we take a first example you provided the right parent unit was Panzer-Pionier-Ersatz-Bataillon 80 and this EKM simply belonged to: 3 Kompanie/Panzer-Pionier-Ersatz-Bataillon 80

My point was clearly that specialist Ersatz-Kompanien didn't solely belong to Infanterie-Ersatz-Regimenter. Infanterie-Pionier was a standard type that were in IERs, and this example that lacked the 'Infanterie', just as Glenn's does, is demonstrably part of a very different parent unit.

Here we go again... Why do you again keep on trying to create a theories which were never existing in a reality?
Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213 didn't belong to IR213! This company was a part of IER213:
Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 213 - Lexikon der Wehrmacht.

So the disc marking is wrong? What's your evidence? I SEE it reads 'Infanterie-Regiment 213'- there's no 'Ersatz' in there so is the physical evidence here simply wrong?

I've told you already in another theme - don't stick replacement unit to a structure of field unit. It had never worked in this way. These two units belonged to completely different structures, different armies (Field Army (Feldheer) or to the Replacement Army (Ersatzheer) accordingly).

Yes ideally they were separate- but the disc I mentioned and others like it would seem to suggest there were exceptions. You've been relying on exceptions constantly- like the lack of 'Infanterie' here, and the MG Ers. Kp. designation previously- so why is the possibility of this exception, which is rather less outlandish, to your mind impossible? Were it not for these apparent exceptions, I'd never think a unit like this might be associated with anything but another Ersatzheer unit. If you know something I don't, by all means say so! Just saying something's wrong or not what it seems isn't really helpful- the point of this forum is to educate, and short answers without a 'here's why it's true' component don't educate. I love learning new things and certainly appreciate correcting things I have wrong, but the proof has to be clear.

Coming back to EKM presented by Glenn66. Like Matt L said it lacks prefiks "Infanterie". It's true but it doesn't mean that it didn't belonged to IER267. There were many ways to stamp this kind of unit - this specific company appears as the 14th company of an infantry replacement regiment and sometimes you won't find any number before it because it was known that this company bears normally a 14th number.

It's true that once in a while one finds the appropriate Regimental Kompanie number on these 'Infanterie specialist Ersatz Kompanie' discs- 13. for Infanterie-Geschütz, 14. for Panzerjäger, etc.- but what does that have to do with there being the rather important-seeming 'Infanterie' component to the designation? I don't see the few cases where there's an additional marking of the Kompanie number as being variants in the sense that lacking part of the proper unit title is. Have you any examples of discs lacking 'Infanterie' that can't be associated with anything other than an IER? I looked around and couldn't find any.

[Stacez]

Okay first thing is that I'll ask you to be civil- this kind of condescending commentary is not appropriate; you can disagree with people all you like but keep to facts and be polite- an emoticon at the end doesn't make it okay to say whatever you want.

Okay, I've got your point.

So the disc marking is wrong? What's your evidence? I SEE it reads 'Infanterie-Regiment 213'- there's no 'Ersatz' in there so is the physical evidence here simply wrong?

I see that you always would like to have disc markings stamped without any confusion. I know, it's easy then to adjust and find unit to which disc belonged to. If there is any exception, some weird or unusual markings you try to read it directly.

Yes ideally they were separate- but the disc I mentioned and others like it would seem to suggest there were exceptions. You've been relying on exceptions constantly- like the lack of 'Infanterie' here, and the MG Ers. Kp. designation previously- so why is the possibility of this exception, which is rather less outlandish, to your mind impossible? Were it not for these apparent exceptions, I'd never think a unit like this might be associated with anything but another Ersatzheer unit. If you know something I don't, by all means say so! Just saying something's wrong or not what it seems isn't really helpful- the point of this forum is to educate, and short answers without a 'here's why it's true' component don't educate. I love learning new things and certainly appreciate correcting things I have wrong, but the proof has to be clear.

Let's take your example: Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213. As you can see there is Ersatz in this marking. You read it's only related to company but to read it correctly some basic knowledge about German units structures, relations between Replacement and Field Armies is needed... This is simply my evidence.

At infantry regiment level the only signal unit was a signal platoon (Nachrichtenzug) not company. Signal company (Nachrichten-Kompanie) can be found sometimes at infantry division level but it wasn't normal. Typically, at infantry division level was signal detachment (Nachrichten-Abteilung). Please see any infantry regiment structure (even in LdW).

Infanterie-Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie appeared sometimes as the 15th company of an infantry replacement regiment and bore the number of such a regiment, by which it was controlled - in our case IER213.
This company was a replacement unit for the signal platoons in the regimental headquarters companies and the signal sections in battalion headquarters of the infantry regiments belonging to the division of the same number and usually those of one or more additional divisions from the same military district.
What would be a reason to have replacement signal company attached to infantry regiment? To replace a infantry platoon of it? It makes completely no sense.

So, knowing all these "tricky" details it should be read as Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie/Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 213.

It's true that once in a while one finds the appropriate Regimental Kompanie number on these 'Infanterie specialist Ersatz Kompanie' discs- 13. for Infanterie-Geschütz, 14. for Panzerjäger, etc.- but what does that have to do with there being the rather important-seeming 'Infanterie' component to the designation? I don't see the few cases where there's an additional marking of the Kompanie number as being variants in the sense that lacking part of the proper unit title is. Have you any examples of discs lacking 'Infanterie' that can't be associated with anything other than an IER? I looked around and couldn't find any.

Just go to to page you for sure know: emarken.de.
The good example in my opinion is: N. E. Kp. P. Gren 57. How will you read it? I assume like this: Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie Panzer-Grenadier 57 and in this way is also written on this page.
The problem is there was not PG57 at all! As long as there is Ersatz written (again it looks like only related to company) you should go to replacement unit as a parent one. In this case it will be: Panzer-Grenadier-Ersatz-Regiment 57 and this disc should be read as: Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie/Panzer-Grenadier-Ersatz-Regiment 57.

[Matt L]

Okay, I've got your point.

Thankyou. I've had people referring to you as my 'nemesis' because of stuff like that and I'd surely rather be simply someone you debate with from time to time

I see that you always would like to have disc markings stamped without any confusion. I know, it's easy then to adjust and find unit to which disc belonged to. If there is any exception, some weird or unusual markings you try to read it directly.

Well sure- one starts with the obvious and I'll admit it never seemed at all odd to me so I had no reason to question it. Proper Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment units always begin with 'Infanterie', and Infanterie-Erstaz-Regiment is Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment, so there are two missing factors on the disc I mentioned to even suggest its not what it appears. Obviously you noticed something I didn't, which is good.

Let's take your example: Nachr./ Ers. Kp. J.R. 213. As you can see there is Ersatz in this marking. You read it's only related to company but to read it correctly some basic knowledge about German units structures, relations between Replacement and Field Armies is needed... This is simply my evidence.

At infantry regiment level the only signal unit was a signal platoon (Pionierzug) not company. Signal company (Nachrichten-Kompanie) can be found sometimes at infantry division level but it wasn't normal. Typically, at infantry division level was signal detachment (Nachrichten-Abteilung). Please see any infantry regiment structure (even in LdW).

Infanterie-Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie appeared sometimes as the 15th company of an infantry replacement regiment and bore the number of such a regiment, by which it was controlled - in our case IER213.
This company was a replacement unit for the signal platoons in the regimental headquarters companies and the signal sections in battalion headquarters of the infantry regiments belonging to the division of the same number and usually those of one or more additional divisions from the same military district.
What would be a reason to have replacement signal company attached to infantry regiment? To replace a infantry platoon of it? It makes completely no sense.

So, knowing all these "tricky" details it should be read as Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie/Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 213.

Indeed you're quite right- there was only a Nachrichtenzug in a Regiment, so it does seem impossible to have a replacement company for something that only exists in platoon strength. It does suggest the marking isn't what it appears and having to ignore the two significant issues with seeing the unit as Infanterie-Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie/ Infanterie-Ersatz-Regiment 213, it does makes more sense than the alternative (which makes no sense).

Just go to to page you for sure know: emarken.de.
The good example in my opinion is: N. E. Kp. P. Gren 57. How will you read it? I assume like this: Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie Panzer-Grenadier 57 and in this way is also written on this page.
The problem is there was not PG57 at all! As long as there is Ersatz written (again it looks like only related to company) you should go to replacement unit as a parent one. In this case it will be: Panzer-Grenadier-Ersatz-Regiment 57 and this disc should be read as: Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanie/Panzer-Grenadier-Ersatz-Regiment 57.

AHHHH! Now THAT is concrete proof- that's the kind of evidence that is unmistakable and doesn't rely on inferrences, probabilities or anything else that could be questioned- the marking simply can't be as it's written; the only possible unit is Panzergrenadier-Ersatz-Regiment 57. And since the marking is otherwise identical to the one I'd mentioned, clearly, for whatever weird reason, there was a convention to mark some of these Nachrichten-Ersatz-Kompanien differently than the usual. And this is good support for the Panzerjäger-Ersatz-Kompanie discs (there's one on emarken.de too) being from the appropriate IERs as well. Excellent Thanks Stacez.

[Stacez]

Thanks Stacez.

You're very welcome Matt L I'm glad we've had good debate.

[Matt L]

I'm just glad it was cleared up and that I now know I was mistaken and why- I dislike having wrong ideas due to incomplete information.

So Glenn can be confident his disc is from IER267 and trace the possible field units it supplied.