Jump to content


Thunder At Prokhorovka

  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 scj1014



  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,817 posts
  • Location:South Central Pennsylvania...exact location classified
  • Interests:Military history, paleontology, firearms, sci-fi, my wife and kids,sports,hunting,hiking

Posted 05 February 2014 - 1711 PM



I have been scanning through the new book on the Battle of Kursk "Thunder at Prokhorovka" by David Schranck for a few weeks now as time allows.


I didn't expect any great revelations in this new tome, as I have read Zetterling, Zamulin, Nipe, Healy, et al and have a decent understanding of Operation Citadel.


Still, I had hoped that there might be some more in depth coverage of the fighting on the northern axis, especially the fighting around Teploye and Ponyri. Schranck reveals very little new or any great detail about that side of the salient, other than some moderately well done maps.


I guess I am slightly disappointed in this book after waiting since August for its publication (pushed back several times and then enduring a lengthy delay in delivery by Amazon where I had it on pre-order). IMHO, it is nowhere near as good as the Zamulin, Nipe and Zetterling offerings.


The addition of a large number of fold-out supplemental maps and a large full-color map section within the book is a plus.


One glaring omission is the lack of  footnotes, although Schranck does reference source material by a coded reference page to the books' bibliography. Still, without footnotes it is inconvenient to consult multiple references, even though I do have most of them. What a reader without access to those books is to do is beyond my understanding.

In my mind, footnotes are a prerequisite when offering a serious study of a subject of historical significance, especially as regards military operations. There is clearly no dearth of material available on Operation Citadel (other the missing records of 9th Army (German) on the Northern salient) and the lack of footnotes in a work of 518 pages is shortsighted at best and reflects poorly on the author's work, no matter how accurate and/or all-encompassing it may be. 


I wonder if any of the learned members here have availed themselves of this latest work on the Battle of Kursk and what their opinions might be.

  • 0

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users