Landships II

Centurion · Legend

RE: Joseph Vollmer - The mystery behind the man.

Centurion · Legend

Two more LK II photos for the pot

eugene · Field Marshal

I finished translating the text that Vilkatta attached, it goes into great detail about the Lk tanks technically but doesnt talk much about their post war use here is the text, I omitted the technical stuff mostly if someone is interested I can post it

Translation from the book: Tanks of WWI
(Pages 158-164)

Experimental German Light tanks:

Soon after the first demonstration of the a7v mockup, the high command gave an order to develop bigger super-tanks. Vollmer thought that it would be wiser to develop smaller tanks, which would be faster and in greater numbers, this was achieved by using parts from the car making business. Various motor parks had about 1000 various automobiles with engines varying from 40 to 60 horsepower; these vehicles were thought to be at the time as unfit for army service. There were about 50 of the same type of vehicle and these groups would be the basis for constructing the light fighting vehicles.
The plan was to use automobile chassis �inside� the tracked chassis, installing the tracked wheels on the chassis. This project was shown in September 1917, it was approved and on Dec.29 1917 there was on order to build the light tanks. Already in Jan.17 1918 the high command cancelled this decision on the basis of the armor being to weak. It turned out that the High Command was discussing a light tank with Krupp, showing the differences between the High command and the War ministry.
Eventually the development of the light tank was approved allowing for 2 prototypes to be constructed (Lk-1). The criteria was: 4 crew members, 1 driver and mechanic and 2 gunners, armament of the 57mm canon or 2 machineguns, armor against armor piercing bullets, and speed of 12-15 Km/h on even ground, a reliable and quiet engine, and the ability of the tank to be moved by regular rail, and enough fuel for 6 hours. A special requirement was to make the tank as safe from fire as possible; in case of a flamethrower attack the tank should be able to seal itself.
The testing of the LK-1 began in March of 1918. They were quite successful, it was decided to increase the armor, improve the running gear and make the tank more fit for mass production. By June 13 1918 the Lk-II and the light krupp tank were approved. After the commencement of the Amiens battle, Krupp got an emergency order for 65 tanks, although a real prototype was not yet finished. After October 2 the Krupp design was cancel in favor of the Lk-II. Due to problems with the 57mm gun, the LK-II was to be armored with the 37mm Krupp gun. One third of the Lk-II�s were to be armed with the cannon while two thirds would have machineguns.

An order for 1000 tanks was placed, the first Lk-II was built in autumn of 1918.By October Vollmer had 2 Lk-II�s, these tanks were much more advantageous to the German army, since they were cheaper to build, faster and much more able to provide close support to the storm troopers . Vollmer additionally constructed a gun carrier with a fully covered body, with a crew of 6, 1 machinegun. This design never left the drawing board.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

In this context it may be of interest to note that one LK.II was sent to the Saarburg (today: Sarrebourg) training ground to be tested and evaluated together with A7V Abteilung 3 in early September 1918.

As to the Hungarian LK.IIs, there's one photo showing a Honved sergeant in front of a LK.II (machine gun version, apparently the only version really built in numbers as the question of which cannon should be used was still pending at the end of the war). The number 14 is given by Hungarian sources (they initially bought one - apparently for testing, then the others in 1920). By 1928, only 7 of the vehicles were still in running order.

As for the factory picture: The inscription is clearly German, not Swedish and says: "Wasser aufgie�en" or "Wasser abgie�en" (<fill up water> or <reduce water>). The trick was to publish it mirror imaged only as to confuse people about the inscription and the place where the photo had been taken.

Centurion · Legend

mad zeppelin wrote:

In this context it may be of interest to note that one LK.II was sent to the Saarburg (today: Sarrebourg) training ground to be tested and evaluated together with A7V Abteilung 3 in early September 1918. What's your source please? Given the date of ordering it seems unlikely that anything could be delivered before October or November - the text Eugene has kindly translated and posted suggests October.

As to the Hungarian LK.IIs, there's one photo showing a Honved sergeant in front of a LK.II (machine gun version, apparently the only version really built in numbers as the question of which cannon should be used was still pending at the end of the war). The number 14 is given by Hungarian sources Ok lets have those sources please ?(they initially bought one - apparently for testing, then the others in 1920). By 1928, only 7 of the vehicles were still in running order.

People keep talking about photos but we never see them! (I'm still wating to see the photos are Swedish friends say they have). Can you post this photo please? Can you also post the photos of LKIIs in production you spoke about earlier?

Given that there are many photos of the prototype LKIIs being tested (which I have already posted) and these have the 57mm gun your comment about the cannon doesn't hold water

As for the factory picture: The inscription is clearly German, not Swedish and says: "Wasser aufgie�en" or "Wasser abgie�en" (<fill up water> or <reduce water>). The trick was to publish it mirror imaged only as to confuse people about the inscription and the place where the photo had been taken.

Oh come on pull the other one. The mirror image wouldn't fool a baby and would only draw attention to the inscription. Its propably a mere printing error. As to the place where the photo was taken you can't tell very much from that photo anyway. It appears in some publications as part of the section on Swedish tanks and all it does is show 2 /M21s outside a factory which could be anywhere. however the Landsverk factory did have windows rather like that at one end (but then so did lots of factories I'm sure) It does not prove in any way that significant numbers of LVIIs were built in Germany.

This whole thing is begining to smack of Polish A7Vs

eugene · Field Marshal

Often times people have seen photos they are talking about, but dont have them, or currently they dont have their files with them, or the photos are un published that would expain the hesitancy of someone posting them, you just have to take their word I doubt anyone would lie.

Centurion · Legend

eugene wrote:

Often times people have seen photos they are talking about, but dont have them, or currently they dont have their files with them, or the photos are un published that would expain the hesitancy of someone posting them, you just have to take their word I doubt anyone would lie.

Which is how Urban myths get started. Our Swedish friends have stated that they have the photos but seem reluctant to share them. It possible for people's memory to mislead them so a photo rather than 'I saw a photo is better' . A book reference would help. What worries me is 'someone told me they saw a photo'. It seems strange that I can dig out a number of photos of the cannon armed LKII and nobody else is able to produce photos of mg armed LKIIs under production in Germany although several people have said they exist.

Kjell S · Sergeant

Centurion wrote:

As to the place where the photo was taken you can't tell very much from that photo anyway. It appears in some publications as part of the section on Swedish tanks and all it does is show 2 /M21s outside a factory which could be anywhere. however the Landsverk factory did have windows rather like that at one end (but then so did lots of factories I'm sure) It does not prove in any way that significant numbers of LVIIs were built in Germany.

Please read my earlier answer.

Landsverk had nothing to do with the assembly of strv m/21. So forget that, it is not taken there.

The photo is in original bigger, and shows 3 or 4 LKIIs in a row.

Where it is taken, I cant say, but in our archive it has always been regarded as a photo taken in Germany.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

As to giving away sources and photos, my answer is simple: No. First of all, I'm currently not in a position to access my files and photo archive - and will be so for several weeks to come. Secondly, I won't give away precious sources or post pictures that belong to other people. Just accept that your sources are a little bit out of date and superseeeded by continous research.

And remember, this is just a discussion forum, you can't expect people to expose things they intend for future publications.

As to the factory photo, I agree, the copy I have shows at least four LK.IIs in row.

Centurion · Legend

mad zeppelin wrote:

As to giving away sources and photos, my answer is simple: No. First of all, I'm currently not in a position to access my files and photo archive - and will be so for several weeks to come. Secondly, I won't give away precious sources or post pictures that belong to other people. Just accept that your sources are a little bit out of date and superseeeded by continous research.

And remember, this is just a discussion forum, you can't expect people to expose things they intend for future publications.

As to the factory photo, I agree, the copy I have shows at least four LK.IIs in row.

You can't have it both ways and say I've got a photo that proves your wrong but I'm not going to show it to anyone so there!

Tim R · Hero

Gentleman

I am not wishing to get into this often heated argument �excuse me� discussion! But I have run across some information pertaining to this �lively discussion�. As far as weather or not Hungary purchased Stridsvagn M21 (LKII) from Sweden. And since your discussions have ran around the subject numerous times, and I have not seen (Or maybe overlooked a resounding answer), I thought I would put my two since worth in. The answer is yes Hungary did purchase Stridsvagn M21 (LKII) from Sweden.(from what I gather in the early 1930�s). I do not no how many, but I do have a few photos, and a drawing from a book on Hungarian Armor. But of course if I understood more Hungarian it would clarify this matter more. If any one can read and translate Hungarian, I would be pleased to send them the relevant material.

Play Nice!!!

All the Best

Tim R

Centurion · Legend

Thanks Tim

The photo makes perfect sense if shows a Landsverk Strv /m21 purchased from Sweden in the 1930s rather than an LKII from Germany in 1919/20, especially as the Hungarians were negotiating the purchase of later model tanks and a manufacturing license with Landsverk at the same time. I'll have to haul out my uniform reference books and check but the uniform also seems to fit the later date.

Mad Zeppelin - is this the photo you have?

Re dates of delivery of LKII prototypes - I need to do some more work but it starts to look as if the sequence may be:

-Sept 1918 delivery of test chassis without body work, armament etc - see photo previoisly posted - as per Mad Zepplin's info
-Oct 1918 delivery of first full prototype with 57 mm cannon in fixed housing - as per the doc Eugene translated
-Early Nov 1918 delivery of second prototype (first production model?) also with 57mm gun in housing. As per the info I have

This is consistent with the photos I have already posted.

Kjell S · Sergeant

Tim R wrote:

As far as weather or not Hungary purchased Stridsvagn M21 (LKII) from Sweden.

They did not. They must have done like we did, bought from Germany.

The answer is yes Hungary did purchase Stridsvagn M21 (LKII) from Sweden. I gather in the early 1930�s).

No quite impossible, you said it your self earlier.

By 1928, only 7 of the vehicles were still in running order.

a drawing from a book on Hungarian Armor.

The drawing is dated 1993.

Again : Landsverk had nothing to do with the strv m/21.

Tim R · Hero

Hello Kjell

While I profess not to be an expert in what Sweden did or did not do, or weather or not Hungary purchased them Sweden or Germany, or if they were called LKII or Stridsvagn M21, is irreverent, I only can tell you what I read. Now I know you are a some what expert in this field, I have seen your drawings, etc., so I respect your opinion. Therefore I will not argue a point, I really no nothing about.

You have to realize that most information outside Sweden, states right the opposite of what you are trying to drill in our heads. It is very hard for a non Swede to get any information on any thing relating to your past involvement militarily speaking that is, except for information concerning the 1700 and 1800�s. No museums seem to want to help, and archives are no better.

So to end this getting no where argument, between you and Centurion, where can we get this information you speak of. To prove or disprove this discussion.

I know you probably don�t want to share your main sources and pictures for future publishing and I respect that, but there has to be some sources you can reveal

All the Best

Tim R.

Centurion · Legend

Without trying to inflame anybody - I've checked the uniform in Tim's photo and its consistent with the early Hungarian tank forces in mid to late 1930s i.e. the post 1922 service tunic with half breeches and boots. Its not circa 1919/20. Of course this doesn't tell us anything about the tank but it does indicate the date of the photo.

I can certainly see that Sweden could not have provided Strv m/21 s in any number but it is possible that during the negotiations over the Strv m/31 perhaps one m/21 was provided (perhaps for training?) or it could even be that the guy in the photo is actually part of the Hungarian unit involved in the deal and is in Sweden. Confusing the purchase of the m/21 and the m/31 could even be a simple typo, major arguments have been built on less.

Kjell S · Sergeant

Tim

We, members of SPHF have been gathering facts on Swedish armour, and publishing the results in our own magazine, for over thirty years now. And when anything turns up on the net that has anything to do with Swedish armour, if it�s serious enough, and there are something needing to be corrected, we try to help straiten out the facts.

It is not a surprise that facts about vehicles from a small country like Sweden often gets a bit mixed up in books. Often perhaps they don�t even bother to check up the facts, nobody knows anyway. And as you say it�s perhaps also hard to get any fact from us.

We are just putting together a compilation of all our previously published articles about this business around the LKII/strv m/21. It will take some time still, we have to translate it also. But it will be published eventually.

mad zeppelin · Commander in Chief

I'm not an expert for Swedisch armour, my field is WW1 German armour. And I've found out several years ago that the LK.IIs were delivered from Germany in complete form to Sweden and that the story of Swedish construction was just a cover-up in order not to provoke unwanted questions from the Interallied Control Commission. I'm glad that Swedish sources do confirm my findings.

I've a translation of that Hungarian book page dealing with LK.II and it says "bought in1920".

These two informations I consider fact. Everything else is theory, I like to speculate about, i.e.: The existence of a German LK.II Abteilung with the Freikorps. It's possible because those LK.IIs delivered must have come from somewhere. But there's no proof. The only hint I have is that Kokampf had 3 Abteilungen, one of which was demobilized in K�nigsberg (the other two in Berlin). We have so far seen pictures from Abteilung 01, but neither from 02 nor from 03 (101, 102, and 103 respectively - after Korps L�ttwitz became RW Gruppenkommando 1). Reason may be that it was not considered wise to have photos published that show tanks that Germany was not expected to have. - But again, this is speculation.

Centurion · Legend

mad zeppelin wrote:

I'm not an expert for Swedisch armour, my field is WW1 German armour. And I've found out several years ago that the LK.IIs were delivered from Germany in complete form to Sweden and that the story of Swedish construction was just a cover-up in order not to provoke unwanted questions from the Interallied Control Commission. I'm glad that Swedish sources do confirm my findings.

I'm sorry but no one you or the Swedes have yet published any proof of this, merely statements and assertions. Given the weight of alternative findings from various eminent tank historians and the Panzer museum Germany (whom one must assume are experts in German armour and have a Strv) one has to retain doubt. I'm willing to be convinced with some real bone fide evidence.

I've a translation of that Hungarian book page dealing with LK.II and it says "bought in1920".

Why does it say 1932 on the picture?

These two informations I consider fact. Well I for one don't see above. Everything else is theory, No there are nice clear photos of the LK II prototypes with 57 mm guns and no turret Fact! I like to speculate about, i.e.: The existence of a German LK.II Abteilung with the Freikorps. It's possible because those LK.IIs delivered must have come from somewhere. But there's no proof that any were delivered. The only hint I have is that Kokampf had 3 Abteilungen, one of which was demobilized in K�nigsberg (the other two in Berlin). We have so far seen pictures from Abteilung 01, but neither from 02 nor from 03 (101, 102, and 103 respectively - after Korps L�ttwitz became RW Gruppenkommando 1). Reason may be that it was not considered wise to have photos published that show tanks that Germany was not expected to have. - But again, this is speculation.

Mark Hansen · Legend

Centurion wrote:

Given the weight of alternative findings from various eminent tank historians and the Panzer museum Germany (whom one must assume are experts in German armour and have a Strv) one has to retain doubt.

Experts they are but human they are also. They can make, and have made, mistakes. For a clear example, check photos of their A7V replica "Wotan". It has features from a variety of A7V's.

I think that until Kjell has published his compilation of articles which would include, I would imagine, all the relevant sources he has at his disposal, the matter will have to rest. Neither you or he look like retreating from your points of view.

Kjell S · Sergeant

Tank you Mark for the support of the truth.

I have to point out on more thing, this is the official homepage of Panzermuseum Munster.

http://www.munster.de/pzm/

And not the one referred to as showing hard historical evidence!!

That page is probably made by someone interested, but not the real thing.

Tim R · Hero

Kjell

I look forward to you publishing your book; I do hope you will have an English version. Hopefully it will clear up allot of this mess.

All the Best

Tim R

Desert_Erik · Sergeant

Robert, (sorry btw for not getting your name corrct before, it has nothing to do with coutesy, just a plain misstake)!

Since your "eminent historians" fex Chamberlain & Ellis (wich I btw also have the highest regard for) made so many errors on a lot of other things, a good example is the mentioning of Fireflys on M4A3 and M4A1 Shermans. How come you regard their info as more or less "untouchable"?

Another interesting note is how you describe the term "urban myth".To me an "urban myth" is when false information get repeeted over and over again until it is regarded as a fact. To me this is exactly what the old info from your sources are. This is EXACTLY why its so important to answer these questions.

I also find it interested that anything here mentioned wich are against the information you consider to be the truth are to be backed up by "evidence" while your so called "evidence" are merely copies from books. If you demand evidence, please came up with something yourself, and btw I for one dont consider looking in books for photos to "dig" up photos!

When a photo with german text on a vehicle id dismissed (why on earth should a german engineer write in german when employed in a factory in Sweden, the average swedish worker could read swedish only, definatly not german) as not evidential I cant help asking myself: what do we need to convince you? I seriously doubt that any translations from any documents from Sweden will help, I have the feeling that you will dismiss them as either "lies and propaganda" or merely "false" or simply "wrong".

Please excuse my english, bear in mind tht its not my native tounge and sometimes the shade of meaning gets wrong.

Yurs Sincerely

Erik Ahlstr�m

Sweden

Centurion · Legend

Desert_Erik wrote:

Robert, (sorry btw for not getting your name corrct before, it has nothing to do with coutesy, just a plain misstake)!

Since your "eminent historians" fex Chamberlain & Ellis (wich I btw also have the highest regard for) made so many errors on a lot of other things, a good example is the mentioning of Fireflys on M4A3 and M4A1 Shermans. How come you regard their info as more or less "untouchable"?

Another interesting note is how you describe the term "urban myth".To me an "urban myth" is when false information get repeeted over and over again until it is regarded as a fact. To me this is exactly what the old info from your sources are. This is EXACTLY why its so important to answer these questions.

I also find it interested that anything here mentioned wich are against the information you consider to be the truth are to be backed up by "evidence" while your so called "evidence" are merely copies from books. If you demand evidence, please came up with something yourself, and btw I for one dont consider looking in books for photos to "dig" up photos! Photos are photos where ever the source and I was only asking, quite reasonably to see some that supported your statements. However I find this tone unhelpful so I don't inted to continue this conversation and will wait until Eric book is published - hopefully it will contain the requisite evidence

Desert_Erik · Sergeant

Dear Robert!

I am sorry that you find the tone "unhelpful", this is not my intetion (thats why I wrote the last couple of words). I just want to know your opinion on some matters that I think is important.

I therefor ask you to please answer my questions.

I am btw NOT writing a book. Kjell and some of the other members are working on an article that if I understand correctly will be published on the internet in both swedish and english to clear these matters out once and for all.

Also Robert, my name is Erik not Eric:

Yors Sincerely

Erik Ahlstr�m

Sweden

Yours Sincerely

eugene · Field Marshal

I think we made quite an honor to Vollmer, to my recollections this is the most prolific thread in landships forum history!

Tim R · Hero

Ok Gentlemen, Lets back into or respective corners, I have tried not to take sides in this on going argument, nor will I now. But come on, I think this has gone far enough, we need to start respecting each other. This thread will soon start some name calling and S*H*I*T* stirring and we do not need that. We are all friends here, Americans, English, Welsh, French, Russian etc, etc and we have a few more Swedish friends, that deserve or respect. Also weather or not we agree with them or see there point or Centurions point, we have to understand and respect that all references no matter how respectable are not always based on fact, and just becouse one does not divuldge all of his information on a particular subject, should also be treated with respect. (I have tons of information, that for one reason or the other I can not share.)

Ok I know it seems I am taking sides, but I understand and respect Centurion for his persistance in finding out the truth, on a subject that is rooted in mystery, that much I respect.

But due to a language barrier some of Kjell and Erik points may have went astray, and Centurions need to no nature may have been missed understood. a unpleasant argument has ensued. So I think it a good idea to back up understand each others points of view, and "RESPECT" each other.

All the best to you all!

Tim R

"PEACE AND RESPECT WILL WIN IN THE END"

JiriTintera · Private

Dear colleagues eugene and Kaiser
of Jul 27, 2006 & Jul 28, 2006

I would like to draw your attention to the wrong data. The vehicle KH50 was built by a Akciova spolecnost Stroj�rny, formerly Breitfeld, Danek et al., which was housed in Prague - Karlin. Development vehicles KH50 then went in company Ceskomoravsk�-Kolben-Danek (CKD).

Vollmer patents purchased the company in Czechoslovakia:
Akciova spolecnost Strojirny, ex Breitfeld, Danek a spol., Praha - Karl�n (1927-1929)
Akciova spolecnost pro stavbu stroju a mostu, Adamov near Brno (1930)