Landships II

Peter T · General

A7V tank 540

Mark Hansen · Legend

The picture you've linked to won't show. Is it the same as this one?

Peter T · General

Mark,

Thank you for your help. That is the photo! I have a copy from that photo the IWM and seven others more. The picture at Erin (?) I mentioned, was a copy from Werner Strasheim. May be it would help, If I knew whether the soldiers, leaning at the tank, ar British or Canadians. Until today, I have examined the war diaries of the Canadian forces in that region, but without result.

Next week I will spend a few days at Bruxelles, and, of course I will do a trip across the French border.

Peter T

Centurion · Legend

The Mk IV looks as if it might be a recaptured Beute (see the balkan crosses on the side). The Canadians'seem to have had a site for captured heavy weaponry - could the tanks be at this location rather than Erin?

Peter T · General

Thank you for your information about that canadian site for captured heavy weaponry; never heard of this. May be someone knows more?
You are right with the "recaptured Beute Mk IV". Often the right words are missing, as I am living in german speaking part of Switzerland.
The idea with Erin I had , because in the background of the Strasheim-photo I recognized some Mk IV's and something like Philip Johnson's modified Medium A(???).

Centurion · Legend

There is a link on this forum somewhere that connects to a long film clip showing Canadian soldiers examining artillery etc at the dump. No tanks unfortunately.

Mark Hansen · Legend

Peter T wrote:
... Later in the war or in 1919 the same vehicle was photographed again in Erin (as I assume), where it must have been scrapped.Does anybody have additional information, photos on the location or does anybody know more about the fate of this specific tank?Peter T

In the photo posted above the scrapping procedure has already started. The entire front plate of the tank has been removed. Either the other photo was taken shortly after this one or they stopped scrapping 540 for some reason and then resumed later.

Centurion · Legend

Apologies if you've already seen these

Peter T · General

The last days of 540 are obscure. The tank is mentioned for the last time by lieutenant Volckheim, Commander of A7V 560. He and his crew were picked up by tank 540 after the action at Iwuy on October 11th, 1918.

ATD 1 (reinforced) moved later back to Noyelles, Thiant and Trith-St-Leger. Tank 540 never made ist way to the entraining station. It was left back on plain field, after the right track sprang out of the bogies (The rear left guide rail on the roller truck is missing!).

Centurions first photo shows the tank in this condition, when British troops captured it. They tryed to scrap it on the spot, e.g. the front plate of the tank and the turret roof have been removed. We don't know, why they stopped scrapping, but in this damaged condition tank 540 was salved and towed to a railway line nearby. In this condition it is to be seen on Mark Hansens photo.

It may be of interest, that this tank has a very unique camouflage scheme: All four sides were painted in large patches (or better �vertical bands) of the four colours of Red brown, Sand, and Green over the basic Field Gray. The entire upper side was covered by a large white cross for aerial recognition.

The third photo however shows tank 562 Herkules at Erin.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

The Volckheim crew was picked up by 541 - not 540. 540 had already been abandoned and cannibalized on October 3rd.
The Mk.IV seen together with 540 is most probably the one that went out of service and was left behind by Abt.16 when they de-trained for their engagement east of Cambrai.

Peter T · General

Mad zeppelin, thank you very much. You have given my research a new direction. Nevertheless there are some "facts" that won't go together.

October 3rd: 540 had been abandoned and cannibalized on (mad zeppelin)

October 6th: Order to paint crosses on white squares. (Hundleby&Strasheim, p. 208)

October 11th: Tank No.5 took part in the attack at Iwuy (Sturmpanzerwagen A7V/Bernard&Graefe Verlag/p.254)

October 11th:"They were later picked up by tank 540." (Hundleby&Strasheim,p.146)

�

Can someone solve the riddle?

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Hundleby&Strasheim still have 503 and 540 confused. Sturmpanzerwagen has vehicle idenfication on basis of Schneider&Strasheim. Both are obsolete.

Abt.1 in early October 1918:
No.1 - Tank 526, not in use
No.2 - Tank 501 (Sch�ck)
No.3 - Tank 541 (Lommen)
No.4 - Tank 560 (Volckheim)
No.5 - Tank 540 (Asholt)

Abt.2 in early October 1918:
No.I - Tank 504, lost August 31st, not replaced
No.II - Tank 525 (Wagner)
No.III - Tank 563 (Goldmann)
No.IV - Tank 528, lost August 31st, not replaced
No.V - Tank 562, damaged August 30th, possibly repaired again

That means we have two Tanks No.5 - 540 and 562, both later seen in British hands. Volckheim says "our Tank No.5 had to be abandoned". That points to 540.
On de-training, Abt.1(+) had 6 tanks, after October 4th, they still have 5. For Abt.2 the presence of 525 and 563 is documented.

Peter T · General

Whow; that are good news. If I understand right, Tank No.5 (540) had to be abandoned somewhere between Lewarde, Erchin, Villers-au-Tertre and Wasnes-au-Bac. Many thanks for this information.
Mad zeppelin further wrote: ... The Mk.IV seen together with 540 is most probably the one that went out of service and was left behind by Abt.16 when they de-trained for their engagement east of Cambrai.
Do you mean the action on October 8th? If so, the starting position of ATD 16 was, to my knowledge, at Wambaix, about 20km away from Lewarde???

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Not Wambaix. - One of their tanks became unserviceable on de-training and was left behind at the railway station. I'll have to look up where and when this was.

Peter T · General

It would be a great help, if I knew that railway station. I have spent hours an hours in researching the landscape around Cambray on Geoportail (www.geoportail.fr), by the way an excellent site.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Rieux, September 28th, 1918.

Peter T · General

Thanks a lot. I will start at Rieux next week!

Peter T · General

Now, that I am back from nothern France, my knowledge hasn't grown a lot, but it was very inspiring, visitig all those places.

First impression: In most photos A7V 540 lay abandoned on a field, which reaches up to the horizon. That corresponds exact to the real situation between Erchin and Marcq-en-Ostrevent.

Second: The picture of �540 seen together with a Beute-Mk IV has most probably taken at Rieux-en-Cambresis indeed (mad zeppelin mentioned it). All other possible places lying at a railway line don't match the perspective in the photos.

Thank you all for your help.

�

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

We need to re-think: It seems that neither Abt.11, nor 15, nor 16 used chalk zu highlight their national markings. Only Abt. 1 and Abt. 13 did, but the Abt. 13 tanks still carried Iron Crosses and had no Buntfarben paint. Yet, on Sept. 29th, they received a replacement vehicle, Tank 142. This one may have been painted in Buntfarben and carrying Balkenkreuze already. 142 went into action on October 11th under command of Sergeant Merz and was abandoned and set on fire after it broke down.
There's a good chance that the Mk.IV seen together with 540 is 142, abandoned 500 m north of Chateau Avesnes-le-Sec on Oct. 11th.

-- Edited by mad zeppelin at 20:22, 2007-05-16

Peter T · General

What a pity! It seems, that I've been searching at the wrong corner, when I was in France one month ago.
Your last information puts the whole story in a new light indeed. There is one important indication that the Mk.IV tank seen together with 540 had been photographed at Avesnes-le-Sec: The former railway line can be detected very clearly at geoportail (www.geoportail.fr), but not 500 m north of Chateau Avesnes-le-Sec. It runs along the eastern outskirts of the town. That would match with one photo I got from the IWM, which shows 540 with some freight cars in the background.
Nevertheless there remains one "fact" that is difficult to explain: If 540 had to be abandoned before October 4th (and that would mean somewhere between Loffre and the Pr�hele Ferme), there seems to be no logical reason, why it should reappear about 15 kilometers far away at Avesnes-le Sec on October 11th. (?)

�

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

I agree, the whole picture may have to be re-framed. 142 is closely related to the October 11th action. However, I find it difficult to find sense in the glimpses we have.
Thoughts: If 562 is the "No. 5 tank" abandoned on October 3rd, then 540 would be Ernst Volckheim's mount on October 11th (although he himseld stated that he was in 560), abandoned with broken track - and not blown up by Lt. Albert M�ller, as reported.
If so, where is 560? - I've seen no picture of 560 blown up (that should look simular to 561 at Villers-B.).
It would explain the pictures of 562 in British hands. But it would not explain 540, as seen in original place - which is flat county. Between Avesenes and Iwuy there's a soft hill, it's not flat. One would notice.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Abt. 1 received order to use white colour on October 3rd. In the night 3rd/4th they moved southeastwards. And in the morning of October 4th, just north of Wasnes, they found that one tank could no longer continue the march because the crankshaft casing was leaking.
It would therefore be possible that 540 received the white areas around the Balkenkreuze on October 3rd, before being abandoned and cannibalised on October 4th.

Peter T · General

Some thoughts:
I think the puzzle will definitly be solved, if we know the fate of the Beute Mk IV on the picture.

The Mk IV is carrying Balkenkreuze with white squares. If it is right, that the order to highlighten them is dated around October 3th, it can definitely not be the one, that was left behind by Abt.16 on their detraining at Rieux-en-Cambresis.

I also think, that the original photo could be between Villers-au-Tertre and Wasnes, because only there we can find that flat open county. But 540 had the right track sprang out of the bogies, which blocked every further movement of the tank. My theory: In trying to recover (one tow hook is missing or broken away) the vehicle, the right track dug in and made it immobile in a way, that it had to be left behind by its crew. British troops could obviously bring it back in movable conditions and towed the tank to a railway station nearby (But where? Is it Monch�court? There was a line to a factory right between Villers-au-Tertre and Monch�court.???)

If we compare that with Volckheim, there are some correspondences to his tank 560, a broken track and the attempt zu recover the tank. Vockheim mentioned the left track indeed, but he wrote his book in 1925 or so ...

If it is so, as I assume, that the tank we call 540 reappeared later at Erin, then the photo could have been taken at any railway station for entraining captured tanks in the vicinity - or perhaps even at Erin? (The guy with the cigar in his mouth looks much the same om the Hercules picture wink )

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

560 slipped halfway into a sunken road, at least the front part thus covered from enemy fire (the crew could evacuate the tank through the front door). Attempts to tow the tank away were untertaken by 501 but proved unsuccessful. Crew was taken up by 541. - Tank was blown up in the afternoon by a party led by Lt. M�ller. - That's the information Volckheim supplies.
As for 540: Yes, there's some possibility that the Germans tried to tow the vehicle away. But not by Abt.1, Akokraft 17 would have been responsible.

-- Edited by mad zeppelin at 19:33, 2007-05-17

Peter T · General

Mad zeppelin, I hope you will correct me, if I am wrong. I assume that you have a copies of the War Diaries of Abt. 13 and may be of some others too.
You wrote, that neither Abt.11, nor 15, nor 16 used chalk to highlight their national markings. Only Abt. 1 and Abt. 13 did. Do you know something about Abt.14 later in the war? Or is it actually like that: The Mk.VI seen together with A7V 540 on the photo is in your opinion definite of Abt.13?
If so, the war diary should give answers about the fate of each vehicle.
I will try to list, what I have read in the often mentioned books. May be, you can give some additions.

Abt. 13

Sept. 28th 118/127/137/142/209/213 � De-training �� Iwuy

Oct 9th�� 127�� destroyed�� ?

�� 209� left behind�� Saulzoir

�� 213�� left behind�� Saulzoir

0ct 11th�� 118/137/142�� abandoned�� Avesnes-le-Sec

Oct 12th�� 213 � destroyed�� Saulzoir

Oct 15th�� 209�� En-training�� Trith St.Leger

Oct 25th�� 134/149/228/209�� ?

I still hope, that one of these Mk.IVs could bring us to the 540.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

142 arrived only on Sept. 29th. It was a reserve tank, newly issued by BAKP 20. That's why it was clad in Buntfarben and had Balkenkreuze, - while the other Abt.13 tanks still had Iron Crosses and the usual blotch camouflage.
13 is the only Beute-Abteilung that I've found that carried the white markings. Abt.11 didn't, nor 15, nor 16. - Even Abt. 1 did only for a short time, as Wagner states that they moved into combat on October 11th without white markings.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Things get stranger and stranger. - I had another look on Abt.13 and found this:

By mid-August 1918, before they moved to the tank familiarisation course with 17th German Army they had: 123, 127, 118, 209, 213 (only one of these, 209 ex "Wolf", was a surviver of July 15th).

On October 4th, they had: 127, 118, 137, 142, 209, 213.
142 arrived on Sept. 29th. When did 137 arrive? The war diary provides no clue, but there are ommissions rather often. When did 123 leave? Again no answer.
Thus we have two tanks that should be clad in Buntfarben and Balkenkreuze, 137 and 142. (Both were lost on October 11th at about the same place.)

On October 25th, they have: 134, 138, 149, 224 and 228. Thereof, 134 and 138 were handed over from Abt.15 (which had both in action on October 8th).

Peter T · General

Thank you for your research.

Thus we have untill now two possible comrads for 540: Mk.IV 137 and 142. (By the way, when did Buntfarben and Balkenkreuze become standard?)
Both had been lost at the same place: Avesnes-le Sec.

On the other hand there is 540 captured by the British just north of Wasnes, as we must assume. It seems to me, as the two tanks come closer and closer, but how and where can we bring them together?

The fact, that Abt. 1 carried the white markings only for a short time makes the picture not clearer. We do not know if Abt.13 did the same. And if they would have done the same, it would make less sence anyway, as Abt.13 moved around more eastwards the days before Oct. 11th.

What I will do, is to re-examine the war diaries of the Canadian forces in that region. I think, it was the 2nd Canadian Division that crossed the Canal de la Sens�e at Pailencourt. Could someone confirm this? That would help a lot.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

It would seem that Buntfarben was applied since about mid-September. Those Abteilungen setting out from Charleroi at the end of September (1+2, 15, 16) carried Buntfarben. Those sent out for demonstrations and tank familiarisation earlier (3, 11, 12, 13, 14) didn't, except for reserve tanks - which Volckheim states the BAKP sent out at the end of September.
137 is a replacement tank given on ? to Abt.13 and is in the number range of those given to Abt. 15 and 16 and thus most probably Buntfarben. 142 is a reserve tank (as mentioned by Volckheim).
The crew of 540 joined Abt.1 again on October 6th at Pr�h�le-Ferme, they were used as recovery squad and to fill up other crews.
On the same day (Oct. 6th) the order was received to mark the roofs of the A7Vs with a white cross. Now, 540 carried such a cross. - Thus it would appear, that on October 6th, 540 was still in German hands (although not those of the forward elements of Abt.1 - but perhaps was with the rear parts, the Staffel).

-- Edited by mad zeppelin at 12:23, 2007-05-20

Peter T · General

As I wrote before: The two tanks come closer and closer.
That are surprising news! I ask myself, if it would be possible, that 540 had been repaired again and broke down later. Abt.1 moved around in the area, preparing for possible counter-attacks. In "Sturmpanzerwagen" their way ist described as follows: Pr�h�le-Ferme - Thun-L�v�gue - Thun St. Martin - Iwuy - Villers-en-Couchies - Haspres - Avesnes-le-Sec.

Or had the tank been towed over the l'Escault at Thun-L�v�gue. Between Thun and Iwuy is al slight slope. But it can't be the original place, where the British or Canadians found 540 - between Thun and Iwuy is a slight slope, it's not flat.

What irritates me the most: 540 carried a white cross on the roof. In most photos I can se battle damages (bullet impacts) on the white colour of that cross. That would mean ...

�

Centurion · Legend

Just a simple point. Is there not a danger that we are assuming that that photo was taken at or close to where the two tanks broke down/were captured when they could both have been transported there, after capture, from different places?
I have read that the Beutepanzers and the A7Vs involved in the action on 11th Oct became quite widely seperated. If this is the case then they would only have been reunited after capture or indeed the two tanks could have been even captured in different actions! Just a thought.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

An A7V was apparently considered kind of a prize, most captured ones were towed around to a certain extent, 504, 528 and 562 went to Erin. 542 to Paris (via some French testing ground), 506 was also moved around before coming to England and then to Australia. The only one not moved was 527, which was thoroughly stuck at its position. And 529 had to wait until the Americans also found that they wanted an A7V. So, it's reasonable to assume that 540 was moved around by its captors.
But who would care to move around a captured Mk.IV?
When 540 became defunct, it was situated north of Wasenes-au-Bac. A broken tank that can't be repaired in the field is best towed to the next rail station. In this case, the next would be Lieu-St.-Amand via Marquette and Bouchain. This move we could credit to the Germans.
At Lieu-St.-Amand, 540 would have been rather close to Avesnes-le-Sec. And the British/Canadians, who had better means of traction, might have towed 540 some few hundred meters to match it beside 137 or 142.

-- Edited by mad zeppelin at 18:47, 2007-05-20

-- Edited by mad zeppelin at 21:34, 2007-05-20

Peter T · General

Thank you very much, mad zeppelin, for your great research and thank you, Centurion, for your hint, that there could be a danger, when we are assuming, that that photo was taken at or close to where the two tanks broke down/were captured.
In the meanwhile I tryed to look closer at the picture and compared that, what I could see, with the maps at geoportail.fr.
<img src="

http://f7.yahoofs.com/users/464f3de5zdbba5435/e0a2re2/__sr_/3460re2.jpg?phwLKWGB.wpNYBq7">

If you compare my sketch and the real situation at the railway station at Iwuy, you will see, that there are a lot of similarities. In the northwest, you can see the church of Iwuy and between the tanks a prominent house in the southern outskirts (Rue des Martyrs) is visible.
I believe, that we have come as close to te real thing, as it was possible so many years later. We will probably never know the exact location of that photo, but the discussion about it was very interesting.

-- Edited by Peter T at 18:15, 2007-05-26

-- Edited by Peter T at 22:40, 2007-05-26

-- Edited by Peter T at 22:44, 2007-05-26

Mark Hansen · Legend

Your picture isn't showing, Peter, unless it's a sketch of a red "x".

Centurion · Legend

Red x gone but it still don't work

Peter T · General

I don't know, what I am doing wrong. First all was ok, then I edited my posting and ... confused

Now annother try:

Here the two tanks somewhere in France

�

Iwuy sketch

�

Iwuy plan

�

Please compare my sketch with the picture the real situation on the plan and you will see a lot of similarities.

�

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Doesn't work for me.

Roger Todd · Legend

The URLs aren't even recognised as anything. You should try uploading your images to something like Photobucket and then just post the URLs to the images, you don't need to embed them.

Peter T · General

Last try for today�

540_Beute

http://de.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/peter_t1958/detail?.dir=e0a2re2&.dnm=7bdare2.jpg&.src=ph
�
Iwuy sketch

http://de.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/peter_t1958/detail?.dir=e0a2re2&.dnm=3460re2.jpg&.src=ph
�
Iwuy plan

http://de.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/peter_t1958/detail?.dir=e0a2re2&.dnm=1dcfre2.jpg&.src=ph

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Impressive. Looks good to me.