Interesting photo that opens up a few questions...
The fact it is grey should not be a surprise, even in late war photos of mainly MKIV tanks parked up you can often find a mk1 in the background. By then probably just a training tank or camp guard. With the number of breakdowns it would be no surprise that reserve tanks were brought into action, it could be argued by then they already realised that the time spent camouflaging them could be better used on maintenance and training.
What I find especially interesting about this photo is what is going on at the rear of the tank. Annoyingly not clear and cut off, but what is there hints at a possible learning from previous use. The photo hints at the tail wheel assembly being missing. The brackets that hold the bar which in turn supports the springs across the back have been folded round on themselves and it looks like a bar or tube runs through it.
It is also annoyingly unclear if it is the hydraulic ram shield we can see or a box attached to it now the tail assembly is not there.
Is there another image of this tank that could clear things up?
-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Tuesday 21st of August 2018 09:14:41 AM
Here is another photo of the wreck being broken up. The ruins of the Courcelette sucrerie can be seen on the right skyline. Another photo of the wreck, included in Trevor Pidgeon's "Tanks on the Somme" clearly shows that the tank retained its tail wheels at the time it was destroyed.
Aha, they even went to battle with the Russian inscription "Water tanks for Petersburg"
No. The inscription said "With Care to Petrograd." There was a rumour, which the Landships Committee did nothing to discourage, that they were snowploughs. The other rumour was that they were "Water-carriers for Mesopotamia."
__________________
"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.
I don't have a specific ID for the tank, Craig, but the presence of spaced armour bolts suggests that it is somewhere in the 545 - 575 range. It is one of two female MkI's, commanded by Lts. Phillips and Hopkins which were damaged by shellfire while laying up on the Albert-Bapaume road on 23/10/16. The tanks were apparently on loan from B Company to A Company HSMGC when they were destroyed. Documentation about the activities of A Company in the fall of 1916 is fairly limited.
