Landships II

Vilkata · Brigadier

Joseph Vollmer - The mystery behind the man.

Centurion · Legend

Don't forget that he also worked for AB Landsverk

Extracts from �Tanks of the world 1916-1945�.

�The first tank built in Sweden dates from 1921; patterned after a German wartime prototype, the LKII, it was designated Strv m/21 (�Strv� for Stridsvagen or tank� in Swedish). J. Vollmer who had designed the LK tanks, also designed the Swedish machine and supervised its building, in order that despite the Versailles Treaty, he could further tank development outside the jurisdiction of the Allied Control Commission charged with overseeing the German armaments industry.�

�By this date (1921) the AB Landsverk company, whose factory was located at Landskroma in Southern Sweden, had come into being with German assistance. It was not long before they became involved in the armoured vehicle business to the mutuakl advantage of both Germany and Sweden. The Swedish concern acquired a high standard of technical knowledge from and exchange of technicians, industrial know how and design studies whereas Germany, whose domestic tank development was still forbidden by the terms of the Versailles Treaty, could keep alive designs and experiments for her future Panzerwaffen.�

The Czech wheel and track appears to be based on similar Landsverk design and I suspect Vollmer is the link. I suspect that Vollmer went off to the Joint German, Soviet and Swedish facility at Kazan.

I have found no nice easy source for Vollmer I've had to build up info from little snippets here and there. If he was playing a key role in the clandestine development of German tanks any records of this progress would probably have been suppressed.

Kaiser · Lieutenant-Colonel

Centurion,

I don't mean to be rude, but there are two mistakes in what you've written. First, the city is called "Landskrona", and secondly, Sweden never conducted any testing whatsoever at Kazan.

Cheers.

Vilkata · Brigadier

On the swedish (I think it's swedish) Wikipedia there is a short listing on him. However, I can't read Swedish... But it does seem that there is a book about him, if you look at the bottom under the 'Literatur'.

http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Vollmer

There are lots of books going into details about Wilson and Tritton. But, a book about Vollmer would have a great deal of significance. Everyone knows that after having so few tanks in WWI, Germany tried to have a superior tank force in WWII, and their success in a lot of WWII could be partly or heavily due to their use of tanks. And, Vollmer was the man who started that.

---Vil.

eugene · Field Marshal

here is the text, perhaps peter can translate it?

Joseph Vollmer, reservofficer, pionj�r och ingenj�r. Konstruerade i Tyskland A7V, K-Wage, LV-I och LV-II under f�rsta v�rldskriget. Flyttade p� 1920-talet till Sverige n�r tyska intressen (GHH) k�pte aktiemajoriteten i Landskrona Nya Mekaniska Verkstads AB. F�retaget fick d� namnet Landsverk (Landskrona Nya Mekaniska Verkstads AB). H�r konstruerade han bland annat stridsvagn m/21-29 och stridsvagn m/31 (L-10).

Han konstruerade en wheel-on-track stridsvagn KH50 �t Skoda 1925 som tillverkade den tillsammans med Tetra. Under 1928-29 kom sedan KH60 och 1930 kom KH70. Wheel-on-track konstruktionen �vergavs 1934.

Joseph Vollmer designade den f�rsta Lloyden. Namag (Bremen) byggde bilen som hade en 3685cc och en 2311cc fyrcylindrig motor. 1910-11 kom en 5520cc fyrcylindrig 50hkr bil samt en 60hkr version i produktion �ren 1910-11.

I Ortenberg, Tyskland, har han f�tt en gata uppkallad efter sig: Joseph-Vollmer-Strasse.

Centurion · Legend

Kaiser wrote:

Centurion, I don't mean to be rude, but there are two mistakes in what you've written. First, the city is called "Landskrona", and secondly, Sweden never conducted any testing whatsoever at Kazan. Cheers.

Unfortunately I have to disagree. Sweden has (understandably) always been averse to admitting any connection with Kazan but some Swedish tanks were tested there . Bear with me and I'll dig out the details and post.

Kaiser · Lieutenant-Colonel

Here's a translation of the text. Bear in mind though, that the spelling and grammar is wrong in the original text, and I haven't bothered to correct it.

"Joseph Vollmer, reserve officer, pioneer and engineer, constructed in Germany A7V, K-wage, LV-1 and LV-II during the first world war. Moved during the 1920ies to Sweden when german interests (GHH) bought share majority in Landskrona New Mechanical Workshop Share company. The company was then re-named Landsverk. Here he constructed the strv (tank) m/21-29 and m/31 (L-10).

He constructed a wheel-on-track strv (tank) KH50 for Skoda 1925 who produced it together with Tetra. During 1928-29 came KH60 and in 1930 came KH70. The wheel-on-track construction was abadoned in 1934.

Joseph Vollmer designed the first Lloyd. Namag (Bremen) built the car that had a 3685cc and a 2311cc four cylinder engine. 1910-11 came a 5520cc four cylinder 50 hp car and a 60 hp version in production in the years of 1910-11.

In Ortenberg, Germany, a street have been named after him; Joseph-Vollmer-Strasse."

Centurion,
If you indeed have information about Swedish tests conducted at Kazan I would be most interested, and I apologize for my, ah, wrong correction. My fellow Swedish Armour Society members have never mentioned this...why, I don't know.

Cheers.

Centurion · Legend

Over the years I've had a number of Swedish gentlemen vehemently denying any Swedish connection with the German post WW1 tank development programme. Sadly this isn't the case but it seems a sore spot with some.

I enclose a number of references to the above and I can dig out some more. I believe that the Swedish STRV tank of the early 30s (and which was licence built in Hungary as the Toldi) was also tested at Kazan (but I'll have to go look for my references). Its interesting that this vehicle is similar in many ways to the German Pzk II.

References

The Landsverk Wheel - Track tanks were developed from 1929 onward. The first model was Landsverk L-5 which was developed with German financing by German designers. Single prototype was tested in Kazan,

http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/swe/Swedish.htm

Another of early German armored fighting vehicles was R�der-Raupen Kampfwagen M 28 (GFK). The vehicle was designed by Merker in 1928 and was a light tank with a switchable running gear. The vehicle was developed for Swedish Landsverk (partially owned by the Germans) and six prototypes were produced. Single one was tested at Kama in 1930, (Kama was the code word for the Kazan facility)

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/neu.htm

In 1929, Guderian travelled to Sweden, where visited a tank battalion equipped with STRV m/21 and m/21-29 (Swedish built versions of German LK II). He also visited the secret tank testing facility at Kazan, Russia

http://users.pandora.be/dave.depickere/Text/guderian.html

eugene · Field Marshal

Robert, Ive contacted Kjell Svenson about this to see what he has to say,

but right now my humble opinion is quite against the Sweden in Kazan theory, primary reason is lack of Soviet and later Russian documents to collaborate this, infact to my knowledge the first person that published information about German & Swedish tank testing in Kazan was Suvorov that famous dissident, although much of his claims are quite out rageous to put it mildly. But there is lots of evidence that the Germans did test tanks at Kazan, so there is a possibility of Sweden doing as well.

Not meaning to say any one is wrong or anything just my little addition to the discussion.

Centurion · Legend

eugene wrote:

Robert, Ive contacted Kjell Svenson about this to see what he has to say, but right now my humble opinion is quite against the Sweden in Kazan theory, primary reason is lack of Soviet and later Russian documents to collaborate this, infact to my knowledge the first person that published information about German & Swedish tank testing in Kazan was Suvorov that famous dissident, although much of his claims are quite out rageous to put it mildly. But there is lots of evidence that the Germans did test tanks at Kazan, so there is a possibility of Sweden doing as well. Not meaning to say any one is wrong or anything just my little addition to the discussion.

Because of the international ramifications of the project documentation on Kazan will inevitably have been very scarce and its usually alluded to by a code name. There are a number of other references to the Swedish tanks being tested at Kazan. Given that Germany definitely had a presence and Landsverk were partly German financed and developing tanks with the Germans (see quote below) it would not seem too out of the ordinary for Landsverk to be part of the German set up at Kazan

Quote

In 1931, Major-General Oswald Lutz was appointed the "Inspector of Motor Transport" in the German Army (Reichswehr) with Heinz Guderian as his Chief of Staff. Both realized the need for creation of German Armored Forces and light training tank to train future personnel of Panzer Divisions. In 1932, specifications for light (5-ton) tank were made and issued to Rheinmetall, Krupp, Henschel, MAN and Daimler Benz. The designers work was based on experiences from co-operation with Swedish Landsverk Company and previous "secret" projects.

http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz11.htm

Centurion · Legend

Further to my previous post it is worth noting that the USSR also provided Germany with facilities for aircraft production and testing. See the extracts below. There is also a link with Sweden here as well. The more one delves and reveals the degree to which Germany from 1919 onwards created proxy or clandestine companies in 'neutral' countries to allow their experts to continue to develop weapons banned by Versailles the more one finds oneself in an Indian Jones world. The extracts below largely deal with some of the activities of Hugo Junker but Ernst Heinkel and Claude Dornier were also involved in similar activities.

1) The scope of Germany's foreign military, naval, and aeronautical ventures is breathtaking in its audacity, even after almost 80 years. Within months of the Great War's conclusion, major arms manufacturers had established foreign subsidiaries to carry on thinly disguised German research, development, and production. Switzerland, Sweden, Lithuania, and Finland supplied cover for continued gun, tank, and submarine development.

Junkers commenced building a celebrated line of water heaters in his German factories, while setting up aircraft production centers at Limhamn in Sweden and at Fili in the USSR.To fund development, he also set up airlines in Persia, Finland (Aero O.Y.), Sweden (A. B. Aerotransport), the Soviet Union (Deruluft), South America (SCADTA in Columbia and Aero Lloyd Bolivia)

For the more specialized two-seat fighter/attack role (the CL-type aircraft, to use WW1 terminology), the Germans evaluated another, more successful Junkers type, the A.35 "postal aircraft" built at Fili and at Limhamn in Sweden. This was a low-wing monoplane of typical Junkers all-metal construction. It was similar in most respects to the wartime CL-1, but slightly larger all around. It spanned 52 ft 3.5 in, was 26-ft 11.75-in long, and weighed 3,527 lbs fully loaded. With its 350-hp Junkers L-5 six-cylinder engine, the A.35/K.53 could reach 128 mph and 20,000 ft. The Germans at Lipezk were able to convert the "civilian" A.35s to military K.53s simply by arming the aircraft with two synchronized, forward-firing MG.08s and a similar weapon in the rear ****pit, together with racks for light bombs under the fuselage and wings

2) On the other hand Junkers is still looking for alternate production facilities outside Germany, which would allow him to reengage in military aircraft production. Therefore Junkers and Florman founded a Swedish aircraft production facility named AB Flygindustri at Limhamn in Sweden on 25th January 1925. A total of 82% of the 150000 skr shares belonged to Junkers. They were signed by Swedish dummy shareholders due to the fact, that only 50% of a Swedish company could belong to non-Swedish people.

The AB Flygindustri facilities allowed Junkers to transfer civil aircraft from Dessau to Sweden and reregister them as Swedish aircraft. These Swedish aircraft now were reequipped with military equipment and could be sold worldwide as military aircraft. Futhermore Junkers allowed license building of Junkers aircraft at Limhamn.

The R42 got two machine gun towers on the roof of the aircraft and a third tower below the aircraft.
The bombs were placed under the fuselage, but also some bombs were placed under the wing.
The serial production of this military aircraft should be performed at Flygindustri at Limhamn.
By 1926 the complete G24 production was transfered back to Dessau.
The aircraft built there were civil G24 aircraft. They were flown to Limhamn
and were equipped there with military equipment to the K30 standard.
The Limhamn type designator for this military variante was R42 (reversed numbers of the G24!)
The new type designator at Limhamn was created to prevent Junkers from attacks from the Allied Commission.
Most of the R42 were delivered to the USSR and were used there as bomber aircraft.
Some of those Limhamn R42s were again converted at the Fili facility and named Ju G-1.

Kaiser · Lieutenant-Colonel

Centurion,

No doubt Sweden did develop tanks and provided research for Germany, but I still doubt any Swedish presence in Kazan. There where plenty of fitful training grounds here in Sweden, so why bother shipping tanks and men to Kazan?

That Toldi tanks where tested at Kazan doesn't have to mean any Swedish presence, as they where produced under license in Hungary.

I do not have any trouble with my country's involvment in racial biology nor the providing of raw materials to Germany; even the sun have spots, but I want proof of Swedish presence at Kazan.

Cheers.

Centurion · Legend

Kaiser wrote:

Centurion,

No doubt Sweden did develop tanks and provided research for Germany, but I still doubt any Swedish presence in Kazan. There where plenty of fitful training grounds here in Sweden, so why bother shipping tanks and men to Kazan? Security and secrecy for a start (this was the same reason why some Swedish built Junkers were tested in the USSR at the Fili airbase and factory - see my previous posting). A second reason was that the Germans had promised the Soviets access to the same technology. There are certainly enough sources stating that two of the Landswerk wheel and track tank designs were tested at Kazan (I've quoted two in an earlier posting). Its conceivable that the tanks were shipped withoutany staff but it does look a trifle odd to do that. As the Soviets also tested the very similar Czech wheel and track tank (designed by Vollmer, suprise surprise) it would make sense to test both versions at the same place.

That Toldi tanks where tested at Kazan doesn't have to mean any Swedish presence, as they where produced under license in Hungary. afterwards - there would be less reason for the Hungarians to use Kazan as there was no connection. The fact that Landsverk was under some form of German influence (control?) provides a Swedish connection

I do not have any trouble with my country's involvment in racial biology nor the providing of raw materials to Germany; even the sun have spots, but I want proof of Swedish presence at Kazan.

Cheers.

-- Edited by Centurion at 15:57, 2006-07-29

-- Edited by Centurion at 15:59, 2006-07-29

Kjell S · Sergeant

I have read this tread through and there are some things to comment on.

We (the Swedish Armour Historical Society) have no evidence that Vollmer ever vas employed by Landsverk. One Swedish source (not Wikipedia J) says, �He (J. Vollmer) worked briefly in Sweden�.

The ten strv m/21 was not constructed or made in Sweden, they where assembled in Stockholm by the Army, using genuine parts smuggled out from Germany.

The Czech KH50 was constructed by Vollmer, but the Landsverk L-5 was probably not of his work. And he did definitely not construct the m/21-29.

Other sources claim that the German M28 and the L-5 was the same thing, and that it was designed by Merker in 1928. This German engineer Otto Merker became (1930 -1937) the head designer in the military vehicle department of Landsverk, so the construction looks to been made before he came to Landsverk. At least one of the M28/L-5 was tested in Kazan.

The German designed Leichttraktor (Krupp and Rheinmetall) had both Landsverk made turrets, with Bofors 37 mm guns. These vehicles where also tested in Kazan.

Sweden or the Swedish Army never had anything what so ever to do with vehicles being tested in Kazan. And there never was any Swedish Army tanks being tested at Kazan. The reason is that Sweden did not have anything to test. And why should we test there, we have hills and ditches in Sweden.

Landsverk on the other hand, vas a private company owned by Germans and from the end of the 20s run by German engineers, might very well have sent other test vehicles to Kazan as well, we don�t know for sure. But we do know that during the early 30s there were different vehicles sent from Landsverk to Germany and many other countries for testing, and officers from a lot of countries was often visiting Landsverk, there are lots of photos and often also 16mm film taken during visits and different vehicle displays.

Personally I think that the Pz II and the L-60 has very little in common. The L-60 has a modern torsion bar suspension, the Pz II has the old type leaf spring system.

I�m not sure but the L-60 must be the first ever tank being built with a torsion bars suspension.

In 1929, when Guderian visited Sweden, he can�t have seen any strv m/21-29, the first rebuilt m/21-29 tank was not delivered back to the Army until 1930.

http://www.sphf.se

Centurion · Legend

Not that hoary old myth about the shipment of parts to Sweden again! I enclose an answer to this question I posted to another forum

"My answer to your question has a number of strands that I shall describe below together with the details of the books and other publications supporting them. I shall then provide some passages from the more detailed accounts available and follow this with some further circumstantial evidence to support the case.

There was no production of the LKII. Only one prototype was built (completed in mid October 1918) and a test chassis to allow trials using various dummy superstructures made from wood and canvas (I have found photos of both of these versions of the LKII).
The single LKII built was significantly different from the Strv M/21, having an armament of a 57mm gun in a limited traverse barbette mounting in a tall superstructure. These was no machine gun or turret, The crew section was shorter than on the Strv M/21 and the door was also different. The LK II had a rear sloping engine front as opposed to a forward one on the Strv M/21. Even if more than one LKII had been built their components could not have been assembled into the Swedish tank.
All LK models and variants including uncompleted models were destroyed under the supervision of the Allied Control Commission
The Strv M/21 was �patterned after� the LKII under the supervision of J Vollmer the original designer of the LK series (and the A7V, A7VU and K Wagen).

Sources.

�Tanks� by Kruger, pub 1921 Richard Carl Schmidt, Berlin � Supports strands1,2,3

�The fighting tanks� by Jones, Rarey and Icks, pub 1933 National Service Publishing, Washington. Supports strands 1,2,3,4

�Tanks and armored vehicles � by Icks, pub 1946 Philip Andrews, Conn . Supports strands 1,2,3,4

�German tanks and armoured vehicles 1914-1945� by White, pub 1971 Ian Allan, Sheperton. Supports strands 1,2,3,4

�Tanks of the world 1916-1945� by Chamberlain and Ellis, pub 1972 Arms and Armour Press, London. Supports strands 1,2,4.

Extracts from �Tanks and armored vehicles �

�Experience with the LKI led to the design and construction of a second light tank, the LKII, of which two were built�

�In May 1918 the Krupp firm proposed a light tank and on June 23rd 580 LKII and 20 Krupp tanks had been ordered�

�The first Krupp tank was completed on October 2nd 1918,�� and the first LKII tank on October 10th�

�The light tanks and the two K tanks were destroyed under the direction of the Allied Control Commission charged with over seeing the disarmament of Germany�

�Some German writers claim that the LK tanks were sold to Sweden. Actually only the plans were transferred; Herr Vollmer designed and supervised the building of the Swedish M21 tanks after the war and although similar to the LK tanks they were by no means identical�

Extracts from �Tanks of the world 1916-1945�.

�The first tank built in Sweden dates from 1921; patterned after a German wartime prototype, the LKII, it was designated Strv m/21 (�Strv� for Stridsvagen or tank� in Swedish). J. Vollmer who had designed the LK tanks, also designed the Swedish machine and supervised its building, in order that despite the Versailles Treaty, he could further tank development outside the jurisdiction of the Allied Control Commission charged with overseeing the German armaments industry.�

�By this date (1921) the AB Landsverk company, whose factory was located at Landskroma in Southern Sweden, had come into being with German assistance. It was not long before they became involved in the armoured vehicle business to the mutuakl advantage of both Germany and Sweden. The Swedish concern acquired a high standard of technical knowledge from and exchange of technicians, industrial know how and design studies whereas Germany, whose domestic tank development was still forbidden by the terms of the Versailles Treaty, could keep alive designs and experiments for her future Panzerwaffen.�

Further circumstantial evidence.

If parts were available from Germany why did it take over two years to produce a miserable 10 tanks?

The rational for the relationship with Landsverk was identical with that cited for the setting up of a tank design and testing facility at Kazan in the USSR in the mid 1920�s.

That Vollmer was actively involved with Swedish tank development in Sweden in the 1920s can be demonstrated by looking at the Strv Landsverk L-5 wheel and track tank. It is nearly identical to the Czech wheel and track tank KH series designed by Vollmer. It is interesting to note that both tanks were tested at Kazan where Landsverk maintained facilities

The Strv M/21 does bear a close (but not exact) resemblance to one of the three putative machine gun armed LKII versions under consideration at the end of WW1 (I have posted my interpretation of this on an earlier part of this thread),. This would suggest that Vollmer further developed this design in order to produce the Strv M/21.

I rest my case."

Kjell S · Sergeant

You dont give up do you.

I give you the same answer that I published earlier on "Mssing Links".

------- -------- ------- ------- ------

I do agree with you, regarding use of the internet as a reliable source.

My sources are original Photos, protocols and other documents from the Swedish National War Archives.

Then your statements.

-----------------
-----------------
1. There was no production of the LKII. Only one prototype was built (completed in mid October 1918) and a test chassis to allow trials using various dummy superstructures made from wood and canvas (I have found photos of both of these versions of the LKII).
- Answer
I do not agree, yes there was the first prototype built, looked like the LKII but was apparently smaller with narrower track, and the front sprockets placed lover. This prototype is the LKI. Source (Text + photo. World encyclopaedia of the tank, C Chant 1994).
580 of the updated LKII was then ordered. And production was also started. We (Swedish Armour Historical Association) have a copy of a photo taken at the Steffen & Heymanns factory in Berlin, showing several chassis being assembled and piles of parts.
We have also a photo of a LKII chassis without armour, during a test run.
So LKII were definitely in full production.

-----------------
-------------------
2. The single LKII built was significantly different from the Strv M/21, having an armament of a 57mm gun in a limited traverse barbette mounting in a tall superstructure. These was no machine gun or turret, The crew section was shorter than on the Strv M/21 and the door was also different. The LK II had a rear sloping engine front as opposed to a forward one on the Strv M/21.
-
This can�t be correct, there might also have been a prototype or a production vehicle of the model with 57mm gun built, but as I mentioned above the turreted LKII was in production.

-------------------
-------------------
3.Even if more than one LKII had been built their components could not have been assembled into the Swedish tank.
-
Sweden did import parts for ten tanks. We know from which company they where purchased, how much we paid, and who signed the contract. We also know which German port it was shipped from, when and where it arrived in Sweden, and so on.
And there are as a fact Benz engines in the m/21 tanks, how is that possible, if we had not been importing parts.

----------------------
------------------------
4. All LK models and variants including uncompleted models were destroyed under the supervision of the Allied Control Commission.
-
Obviously not correct, this is not an evidence of destruction ever being done. The commission couldn�t be everywhere. And Sweden had very good relations with Germany at that time. And the biggest reason why the whole affair is not well known is that it was done very secretly. For instance it dos not say �Swedish Government� or the �Swedish Army�, anywhere on the contract.

----------------------
----------------------
5. The Strv M/21 was �patterned after� the LKII under the supervision of J Vollmer the original designer.
-
No, not patterned after, it used original parts. If J Vollmer was in Sweden, maybe he was I don�t know, but a fact is that the German company who sold the parts was contracted to send an engineer to Sweden to help with assembly, so why not the man who knew best.

------------------------
------------------------
6. If parts were available from Germany why did it take over two years to produce a miserable 10 tanks?
-
It did not, the chassis parts arrived in Sweden in August and September 1921, and the last shipment containing armour plates, came in January 1922. The first test run with a complete strv m/21 was done in April 1922.

---------------------
-----------------------
7. The rational for the relationship with Landsverk was identical with that cited for the setting up of a tank design and testing facility at Kazan in the USSR in the mid 1920�s.
-
This is totally irrelevant in this matter.

----------------------
---------------------
8. That Vollmer was actively involved with Swedish tank development in Sweden in the 1920s can be demonstrated by looking at the Strv Landsverk L-5 wheel and track tank. It is nearly identical to the Czech wheel and track tank KH series designed by Vollmer. It is interesting to note that both tanks were tested at Kazan where Landsverk maintained facilities
-
I have not seen any paper putting Vollmer ever being at, or ever being employed by the Landsverk company.
And as far as we know, the L-5 tank was not developed by Landsverk, it was something that the one of the German engineers had already constructed before he arrived in Sweden.

----------------------
-----------------------
9. In fact the A B Landsverk factory was established in Sweden with German assistance (and some clandestine finance) to ensure that engineers like Volmer could develop tanks outside the control of the Allied Control Commission.*
-
This is also not completely correct, The Landsverk company was established in 1860.
German financial interest took over Landsverk 1920. And as late as in 1930 was the new construction department for war material established, with German engineers of cause.

------------------------
------------------------
10. The Strv M/21 does bear a close (but not exact) resemblance to one of the three putative machine gun armed LKII versions under consideration at the end of WW1 (I have posted my interpretation of this on an earlier part of this thread),. This would suggest that Vollmer further developed this design in order to produce the Strv M/21.
-
I don�t know what source you have for your sketches, but it gives no evidence that the developed design couldn�t already have been in production 1918 in Germany.
-
-
It is not so hard to believe that this is not a well known fact, Sweden is a small country and considering that this affair was done long after the war ended, and with the highest possible secrecy.
When the first shipment arrived in Stockholm the customs officer in charge of the port, had a letter from the Swedish MOD telling him to declare the shipment as �agricultural equipment�.
So very little was known even here in Sweden as well.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Kjell is correct. There was LK.II production in Germany. There's a photo that usually published as mirrored image, as to prevent people from reading the inscrpition: "Wasser einf�llen" near the radiator. It shows a row of Lk.IIs. - There are other photos as well, see Schneider&Strasheim.

Centurion · Legend

mad zeppelin wrote:

Kjell is correct. There was LK.II production in Germany. There's a photo that usually published as mirrored image, as to prevent people from reading the inscrpition: "Wasser einf�llen" near the radiator. It shows a row of Lk.IIs. - There are other photos as well, see Schneider&Strasheim.

Can you post one of these photos please?

Centurion · Legend

Kjell S wrote:

You dont give up do you.

I give you the same answer that I published earlier on "Mssing Links".

------- -------- ------- ------- ------

I do agree with you, regarding use of the internet as a reliable source.

My sources are original Photos, protocols and other documents from the Swedish National War Archives. Can we see these please?

Then your statements.

-----------------
-----------------
1. There was no production of the LKII. Only one prototype was built (completed in mid October 1918) and a test chassis to allow trials using various dummy superstructures made from wood and canvas (I have found photos of both of these versions of the LKII).
- Answer
I do not agree, yes there was the first prototype built, looked like the LKII but was apparently smaller with narrower track, and the front sprockets placed lover. This prototype is the LKI. Source (Text + photo. World encyclopaedia of the tank, C Chant 1994). The LKI had a machine gun turret, the photo of the LKII prototype has a fixed 57mm gun position (no turret)
580 of the updated LKII was then ordered. And production was also started. We (Swedish Armour Historical Association) have a copy of a photo taken at the Steffen & Heymanns factory in Berlin, showing several chassis being assembled and piles of parts. Lets see it please
We have also a photo of a LKII chassis without armour, during a test run.
So LKII were definitely in full production.No as I said there was one chasis without armour for testing mock up bodies

-----------------
-------------------
2. The single LKII built was significantly different from the Strv M/21, having an armament of a 57mm gun in a limited traverse barbette mounting in a tall superstructure. These was no machine gun or turret, The crew section was shorter than on the Strv M/21 and the door was also different. The LK II had a rear sloping engine front as opposed to a forward one on the Strv M/21.
-
This can�t be correct, there might also have been a prototype or a production vehicle of the model with 57mm gun built, but as I mentioned above the turreted LKII was in production. I'd like to see some evidence please

-------------------
-------------------
3.Even if more than one LKII had been built their components could not have been assembled into the Swedish tank.
-
Sweden did import parts for ten tanks. We know from which company they where purchased, how much we paid, and who signed the contract. We also know which German port it was shipped from, when and where it arrived in Sweden, and so on. Yes I've seen a report on one internet site that says all this (names company etc) but every time I ask some one for some confirming evidence nothing is ever produced
And there are as a fact Benz engines in the m/21 tanks, how is that possible, if we had not been importing parts. Benz engines were in lots of things

----------------------
------------------------
4. All LK models and variants including uncompleted models were destroyed under the supervision of the Allied Control Commission.
-
Obviously not correct, this is not an evidence of destruction ever being done. The commission couldn�t be everywhere. And Sweden had very good relations with Germany at that time. And the biggest reason why the whole affair is not well known is that it was done very secretly. For instance it dos not say �Swedish Government� or the �Swedish Army�, anywhere on the contract.

----------------------
----------------------
5. The Strv M/21 was �patterned after� the LKII under the supervision of J Vollmer the original designer.
-
No, not patterned after, it used original parts. If J Vollmer was in Sweden, maybe he was I don�t know, but a fact is that the German company who sold the parts was contracted to send an engineer to Sweden to help with assembly, so why not the man who knew best.

------------------------
------------------------
6. If parts were available from Germany why did it take over two years to produce a miserable 10 tanks?
-
It did not, the chassis parts arrived in Sweden in August and September 1921, and the last shipment containing armour plates, came in January 1922. The first test run with a complete strv m/21 was done in April 1922. Given that the LK II was built on the chasis of surplus heavy touring cars this can't be correct

---------------------
-----------------------
7. The rational for the relationship with Landsverk was identical with that cited for the setting up of a tank design and testing facility at Kazan in the USSR in the mid 1920�s.
-
This is totally irrelevant in this matter.Why?

----------------------
---------------------
8. That Vollmer was actively involved with Swedish tank development in Sweden in the 1920s can be demonstrated by looking at the Strv Landsverk L-5 wheel and track tank. It is nearly identical to the Czech wheel and track tank KH series designed by Vollmer. It is interesting to note that both tanks were tested at Kazan where Landsverk maintained facilities
-
I have not seen any paper putting Vollmer ever being at, or ever being employed by the Landsverk company.
And as far as we know, the L-5 tank was not developed by Landsverk, it was something that the one of the German engineers had already constructed before he arrived in Sweden. So who developed it and who were the German engieers and who were they working for?

----------------------
-----------------------
9. In fact the A B Landsverk factory was established in Sweden with German assistance (and some clandestine finance) to ensure that engineers like Volmer could develop tanks outside the control of the Allied Control Commission.*
-
This is also not completely correct, The Landsverk company was established in 1860.
German financial interest took over Landsverk 1920. And as late as in 1930 was the new construction department for war material established, with German engineers of cause. But still German controlled from 1920

------------------------
------------------------
10. The Strv M/21 does bear a close (but not exact) resemblance to one of the three putative machine gun armed LKII versions under consideration at the end of WW1 (I have posted my interpretation of this on an earlier part of this thread),. This would suggest that Vollmer further developed this design in order to produce the Strv M/21.
-
I don�t know what source you have for your sketches, but it gives no evidence that the developed design couldn�t already have been in production 1918 in Germany.
-
-
It is not so hard to believe that this is not a well known fact, Sweden is a small country and considering that this affair was done long after the war ended, and with the highest possible secrecy.
When the first shipment arrived in Stockholm the customs officer in charge of the port, had a letter from the Swedish MOD telling him to declare the shipment as �agricultural equipment�.
So very little was known even here in Sweden as well.

If Germany was using a Swedish factory to develop tanks that they were forbidden to develop in Germany the 'parts smiuggled' story would be a very good cover story to disguise this fact.

Centurion · Legend

To be of further assistance I enclose a photo of the only completed LKII delivered. As one can see it varies significantly from the STRV tank. A drawing is also included as are shots of the LKI

Kjell S · Sergeant

Centurion wrote:

I enclose a photo of the only completed LKII delivered. As one can see it varies significantly from the STRV tank. A drawing is also included as are shots of the LKI

How can you, from one picture in a book state that it is the only LKII ever built?

Centurion · Legend

Some more LK shots - LKI, LK II and the trials Chassis of the LKII

Centurion · Legend

Kjell S wrote:

Centurion wrote:

I enclose a photo of the only completed LKII delivered. As one can see it varies significantly from the STRV tank. A drawing is also included as are shots of the LKI

How can you, from one picture in a book state that it is the only LKII ever built?

My previous postings already quote sources, extracts etc. showing that only one LKII was built

Kjell S · Sergeant

Centurion

My sources are original Photos, protocols and other documents from the Swedish National War Archives.

Can we see these please?

No, I won�t publish hundreds of old documents in Swedish on the internet.

The LKI had a machine gun turret, the photo of the LKII prototype has a fixed 57mm gun position (no turret)
The prototype is called LKI, and the production model is LKII. They were supposed to be built in different versions. One version being armed with a 57mm gun, and another had a small turret with mg or a small gun. There where probably even more variants. All of these types were LKIIs.

No as I said there was one chasis without armour for testing mock up bodies
Where are your evidences of that?

I'd like to see some evidence please
Several photos exist, showing a number of turreted LKIIs being completed.

Yes I've seen a report on one internet site that says all this (names company etc)

Where?

All LK models and variants including uncompleted models were destroyed under the supervision of the Allied Control Commission.
If there where, as you clamed above, only one ever built, why this statement then?

Given that the LK II was built on the chasis of surplus heavy touring cars this can't be correct.
The tank was not built on a touring car chassis, it just used some components from cars in the powertrain.

This is totally irrelevant in this matter.Why?
Test area Kazan has nothing to do with LKII

So who developed it and who were the German engieers and who were they working for?
Read above

If Germany was using a Swedish factory to develop tanks that they were forbidden to develop in Germany the 'parts smiuggled' story would be a very good cover story to disguise this fact.
You are mixing facts up here, Landsverk AB has nothing to do with either LKII, the purchase of parts form Germany, or the assembling of strv 21 in Sweden.

Mark Hansen · Legend

Kjell S wrote:

Centurion

My sources are original Photos, protocols and other documents from the Swedish National War Archives.

Can we see these please?

No, I won�t publish hundreds of old documents in Swedish on the internet.

I don't think that Centurion would expect the entire contents to be posted in their original form. I don't know about his abilities to read Swedish but mine are non-existent. Some translated quotes would be helpful though.

Vilkata · Brigadier

I would like to weigh in on this just in the diplomatic sense.

Every country lies to their citizens. It is entirely possible that Sweden fabricated numerous documents to 'prove' that they had simply bought disassembled LK.IIs from Germany and assembled them in Sweden, and that in fact, they were manufatured under German supervision using the LK.II as nothing more than a springboard.

It's also possible that they were in fact simply disassembled late-model LK.II's, and Swedens story is correct.

Until absolute definitive proof can be found, I expect everyone to remain civil, and accept that eachothers arguments have strong points. I know far too well how a discussion where each thinks they are right can turn into an unpleasant experience, so let's keep it as simply a discussion of two options that clearly have many points going for each.

Thanks folks!

---Vil.

Edit:
Hey guys... My little Russian book I am always talking about has a fairly large section, that seems entirely devoted to the LK.I and LK.II, including a drawing of an LK.II that looks a lot like the Stridsvagn one. I can't read Russian... If anyone is very interested, I just scanned all the relevant pages. The page numbers skip around, as halfway through the section there is the color-drawing section of the book, so don't be alarmed thinking I left out a bunch of pages. All the text is there, and the drawings of the LK.II, and all the stat stuff.

-- Edited by Vilkata at 00:39, 2006-07-31

eugene · Field Marshal

Vilkata I have this book, I will translate the text, it might take time, I will start tumorrow

Kjell S · Sergeant

Vilkata wrote:

I would like to weigh in on this just in the diplomatic sense. Every country lies to their citizens. It is entirely possible that Sweden fabricated numerous documents to 'prove' that they had simply bought disassembled LK.IIs from Germany and assembled them in Sweden, and that in fact, they were manufatured under German supervision using the LK.II as nothing more than a springboard.
Yes, that happens, often when there is something to hide. I don�t understand what the Swedish Army or our government was afraid of, in this matter.

Until absolute definitive proof can be found,
We have copies of the documents covering this whole affair. And there are photos, what do you regard as proof?

My little Russian book
Interesting text, unfortunately I don�t read Russian.
The drawings looks a bit to Swedish to me, the camouflage pattern is exactly as the one that was used on the strv m/21-29.

http://medlem.spray.se/landsverk/21-29-3.jpg

eugene · Field Marshal

to update on the situation its actually faster than I thought (the translating) so I might finish it by today, after all this isnt shakespeare.

Mark Hansen · Legend

Centurion wrote:

mad zeppelin wrote:

Kjell is correct. There was LK.II production in Germany. There's a photo that usually published as mirrored image, as to prevent people from reading the inscrpition: "Wasser einf�llen" near the radiator. It shows a row of Lk.IIs. - There are other photos as well, see Schneider&Strasheim.

Can you post one of these photos please?

Here is the photo. It doesn't show much of the other tanks but at least one other can clearly be seen. I have flipped the photo so that the writing is the right way around.

Desert_Erik · Sergeant

This is a very interesting topic. One that has came up om ML before as Kjell mentioned.The swedish connections with Germany keep getting mentioned and somehow we (swedes) are here being told that "Sweden dont want to know about it". Rubbish!

It is true that a lot of these connections wasent talked about much after the war, Sweden wasent to proud of these things. But today things are very different. In Sweden we are at the moment enjoying a very healthy "historical wave" and History is very "in". A lot of books and papers are being written and one subject that there apparantly cant be written enough about is Swedens role in WW II and its connections with Germany. This is most fascinating since Swedens contribution to Waffen SS fex was a few houndred men only compered to Norway and Denmark who contributed with thousends of men! So YES, we know very well about are armsdeals with Germany, this is no secret! We are well aware of that fex we imported fieldguns, AA guns, AT guns, Halftracks etc not before WW II (the material is normally marked as M39) but DURING WW II! So dont tell us we dont want to know since we do know.

I also find it interesting, actually quite rude and frustrating not to accept that we here in Sweden actually do some very good research, using firsthand sources from military and other archives. This has been done by members of SPHF for some twentyfive-thirty years now. In our magazine we have among other things had discussions between researchers concerning the politics leading up to the decission to buy the Strv 21. One of these very thourough researchers is Kjell Svensson. Also to ask Kjell to publish his evidense on the internet (wich he probably dont have the right to do btw), photos, letter protocols etc I find interesting. Would you ask the same from...Steve Zaloga?

Mr Robertssons sources are only secondary sources, mostly books written by nonswedes a long time ago. Ive checked Chamberlain and Ellis "Tanks of the world 1915-45" from 1973 and while it may have been a good book some thirty years ago I think it shows its age. There are so many faults in the British and Russian sections (I think most of us can see this). If so much info has comed to surface about these things (that to these writers probably were more knowledge about) then how can you belive what these gentlemen write about the swedish vehicles?

If diskussions are to be held on sites like this one has to have an open mind and be prepared to meet peaple that have more knowledge that oneself have. If this isent the case, then diskussions like these are useless.

Yours Sincerely

Erik Ahlstr�m

Sweden

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

Mark, thank you for posting the photo.

As I've recently said on another thread, 14 LKIIs were bought by Hungary (which again Mr. Robertson won't believe because it's not in his sources) from Germany "very cheap". There's a report that talks about some 68 fast tanks being under construction in November 1918. Even if many of those may never have been completed, 10 that eventually went to Sweden, and 14 that went to Hungary were. The number actually used by the Freikrops may be the sum of both. Remember, the restrictions of the Versailles dictate came only to effect by end of June 1919, until then the Germans were well into constructing whatever armour they could get. (The major hindrance was the distrust of the workers who often refused to complete the work because they clearly saw against whom the vehicles would be used.)

Centurion · Legend

Mark Hansen wrote:

Centurion wrote:

mad zeppelin wrote:

Kjell is correct. There was LK.II production in Germany. There's a photo that usually published as mirrored image, as to prevent people from reading the inscrpition: "Wasser einf�llen" near the radiator. It shows a row of Lk.IIs. - There are other photos as well, see Schneider&Strasheim.

Can you post one of these photos please?

Here is the photo. It doesn't show much of the other tanks but at least one other can clearly be seen. I have flipped the photo so that the writing is the right way around.

I've seen this before ascribed to the Landsverk factory! Haveyou anything that proves where it is?

Centurion · Legend

mad zeppelin wrote:

Mark, thank you for posting the photo.

As I've recently said on another thread, 14 LKIIs were bought by Hungary (which again Mr. Robertson won't believe because it's not in his sources) from Germany "very cheap". There's a report that talks about some 68 fast tanks being under construction in November 1918. Even if many of those may never have been completed, 10 that eventually went to Sweden, and 14 that went to Hungary were. The number actually used by the Freikrops may be the sum of both. Remember, the restrictions of the Versailles dictate came only to effect by end of June 1919, until then the Germans were well into constructing whatever armour they could get. (The major hindrance was the distrust of the workers who often refused to complete the work because they clearly saw against whom the vehicles would be used.)

Unfortunately for this story Hungary had NO tanks at all in this period being forbidden by the Allies and the peace treaty to possess them They eventually acquired the licence to build tanks based on a (different) Swedish design in the 1930s. Have you any evidence whatsoever (like a photo) that the Freikorps had LKIIs? When could they have been built in such numbers given that the first LKII was not delivered until Nov 1918?

And could people do me the common courtesy of getting my name right.

Centurion · Legend

Kjell S wrote:

Centurion

My sources are original Photos, protocols and other documents from the Swedish National War Archives.

Can we see these please?

No, I won�t publish hundreds of old documents in Swedish on the internet.

How about some evidence to back up your statements Just some douments/photo please

The LKI had a machine gun turret, the photo of the LKII prototype has a fixed 57mm gun position (no turret)
The prototype is called LKI, and the production model is LKII. They were supposed to be built in different versions. One version being armed with a 57mm gun, and another had a small turret with mg or a small gun. There where probably even more variants. All of these types were LKIIs.

The LKI was not a prototype but a seperate development hence the different number

No as I said there was one chasis without armour for testing mock up bodies
Where are your evidences of that?

I'd like to see some evidence please
Several photos exist, showing a number of turreted LKIIs being completed.

So post some

Yes I've seen a report on one internet site that says all this (names company etc)

Where?

All LK models and variants including uncompleted models were destroyed under the supervision of the Allied Control Commission.
If there where, as you clamed above, only one ever built, why this statement then?

Please read my previous postings where I quote my sources

Given that the LK II was built on the chasis of surplus heavy touring cars this can't be correct.
The tank was not built on a touring car chassis, it just used some components from cars in the powertrain.

This is totally irrelevant in this matter.Why?
Test area Kazan has nothing to do with LKII

So who developed it and who were the German engieers and who were they working for?
Read above

Where?

If Germany was using a Swedish factory to develop tanks that they were forbidden to develop in Germany the 'parts smiuggled' story would be a very good cover story to disguise this fact.
You are mixing facts up here, Landsverk AB has nothing to do with either LKII, the purchase of parts form Germany, or the assembling of strv 21 in Sweden.

So who did? Every single reference I have seen ascribe this tank to Landsverk AB

As before when I ask no one actually posts any actual evidence!

Centurion · Legend

Kjell S wrote:

Vilkata wrote:

I would like to weigh in on this just in the diplomatic sense. Every country lies to their citizens. It is entirely possible that Sweden fabricated numerous documents to 'prove' that they had simply bought disassembled LK.IIs from Germany and assembled them in Sweden, and that in fact, they were manufatured under German supervision using the LK.II as nothing more than a springboard.
Yes, that happens, often when there is something to hide. I don�t understand what the Swedish Army or our government was afraid of, in this matter.

Until absolute definitive proof can be found,
We have copies of the documents covering this whole affair. And there are photos, what do you regard as proof?

Being able to see some of yhese perhaps!

My little Russian book
Interesting text, unfortunately I don�t read Russian.
The drawings looks a bit to Swedish to me, the camouflage pattern is exactly as the one that was used on the strv m/21-29.

http://medlem.spray.se/landsverk/21-29-3.jpg

Centurion · Legend

I thought it might be instructive to see what the Munster Tank museum who have an M/21 on display and presumably have done some research on its provenance say - see enclosed link

http://www.panzermuseum.com/battle-tanks/lk-ii-tank.html

Mark Hansen · Legend

Centurion wrote:

I've seen this before ascribed to the Landsverk factory! Haveyou anything that proves where it is?

I have nothing concrete that proves where it was taken. However, the first word on the front of the tank is definitely "Wasser", not "V�ttnet". If this was in Sweden, why would the Swedish word for water not be used?

Centurion · Legend

Mark Hansen wrote:

Centurion wrote:

I've seen this before ascribed to the Landsverk factory! Haveyou anything that proves where it is?

I have nothing concrete that proves where it was taken. However, the first word on the front of the tank is definitely "Wasser", not "V�ttnet". If this was in Sweden, why would the Swedish word for water not be used?

I've blown the shot up as much as I can and I wouldn't agree with 'definitely Wasser' the first letter is smudged and the rest scrawled - it could just as easily be vatten or the whole thing could be a badly scawled vvattna- lystm�te , especially by a supervising German engineer who didn't write Swedish well but wanted to say fill with water. Of couse a supervising German engineer could indeed use Wasser. To be honest I don't think the writting proves anything either way.

eugene · Field Marshal

small bit on the Hungarian tanks,

the treaty of Trianon, doesnt say Hungary can't have tanks, planes, e.t.

so they could have bought them legally, unlike austria, or germany which had prohibitions

oops, I didnt catch the little part about the tanks, it says manufacture and import of tanks in forbiden, but the treaty was signed in 1920 so the tanks could have come earlier, and hte hungarians largely ignored that rule as the time went by since they had their own tanks by the late thirties.

-- Edited by eugene at 15:22, 2006-07-31