Landships II

Centurion · Legend

Loading beute

Tim R · Hero

Nice photo Centurion, I have since the questions was posted, been working on a large article dealing with the German recovery operations. This is a very good find.

Thanks

ATB

Tim R

Max · Lieutenant

Well, I don't think they loaded the tanks with the jackets.

They have to drive the tank on the railway track,lift it up and drive a railway wagon benaeth the tank and lower it on the wagon........in my way of thinking.

I don't think the railway tracks can hold the weight of the tank.

and they had to turn the tank in the right position(on the railway tracks),so the chance the tracks will break is great.

But the answer is at home in the book "panzerbau wk1".(still on my work at the moment)

In this book is a whole article about beute panzers in Charloi.Also the pcture of the tank on jackets.Maybe this book gives the explanation about loading tanks (or the use of the jackets).

Will let you know what the book says a.s.ap.

Regards max

Centurion · Legend

Max wrote:

Well, I don't think they loaded the tanks with the jackets.

They have to drive the tank on the railway track,lift it up and drive a railway wagon benaeth the tank and lower it on the wagon........in my way of thinking.

I don't think the railway tracks can hold the weight of the tank.

and they had to turn the tank in the right position(on the railway tracks),so the chance the tracks will break is great.

But the answer is at home in the book "panzerbau wk1".(still on my work at the moment)

In this book is a whole article about beute panzers in Charloi.Also the pcture of the tank on jackets.Maybe this book gives the explanation about loading tanks (or the use of the jackets).

Will let you know what the book says a.s.ap.

Regards max

Illogical. If the tracks can take a railway wagon loaded with a tank they can take a tank. The Tank Museum at Bovingdon said
"The tanks were placed on special rollers and hauled by traction engine from the place they were found to the nearest railhead. Here they were lifted on for enourmous jacks while a railway wagon was pushed underneath."
You can see the traction engine on the left of the picture
Can you think of any other reason for lifting the tank on these jacks? To change the oil maybe? I don't think so!

Centurion · Legend

Further to my last post I would assume that the Germans would have followed normal engineering practice and built a loading pad. Basically a solid platform is built, just slightly higher than the rails wirh grooves (slots) left for the rails and wagon wheels. This could be poured concrete or, at a pinch, timber balks spiked together. The tanks could then be pulled into place over the tracks and the jacks positioned. If a lot of tanks were to be loaded this would be alogical approach (possibly with several sidings and pads). I've seen exactly this approach used in refineries for hanling items bigger, heavier and more awkward than tanks.

Max · Lieutenant

Illogical or not,I was thinking what's possible or not.Tracks are very fragile,altough they look not.The weakest point of tracks are turning round the tank.And jackets are and were mostly used for repairing vehicles,so.....But afterwards I can't find a reason why they used them (and that high)

Because you're damn right about the loading function!!!!I took a look at the photograph in the book and saw train wagons (not noticed on the pic you had send) The tracks also seems to have a kind of unditching beam underneath (the rollers?)

Found 2 more pics about loading beute tanks.Attached them for those who are interested. Also more pics from Bakp20 in Charloi

Regards max

-- Edited by Max at 21:32, 2006-10-24

-- Edited by Max at 21:35, 2006-10-24

Centurion · Legend

I think that the tanks on the ramp must be capable of running (they were probably abandoned after ditching) whereas that on the jacks is a non runner. Laying unditching beams lengthways on the sleepers (both inside and outside of the lines0 would make an extemporised loading platform that would protect the rails. However I'm surprised. Given that there was time to build ramps there would have been time to make a proper loading pad.

Max · Lieutenant

Maybe the ramps were built in Charloi and the jackets were used in the field.Although the capture in the book says one of the ramps is in Cambrai.But not all captures are correct,so....

But both ways are not easy.Seems a risky job to me to lift a 20 ton tank with jackets.

max

28juni14 · Hero

Excellent tread, gentlemen. We are learning much.

Max · Lieutenant

I've took another look at the photograph and it seems that the logical about running tanks using ramps and destroyed tanks were jacket is the most correct.

All pics I've seen from loaded tanks and it seems all tanks were able to drive.But the tanks on the jackets (see pic centurion)were not,especcially the second tank on the background,even got no tracks !!The one in front (on the jackets) seems the same tank as the tank wich was loaded on a wagon behind a tractor (will send this pic tonight).This tank was also destroyed in La Fontaine.

So that will explain a lot.

Max

Centurion · Legend

Minor point for clarity max - they are jacks not jackets. A jacket goes round something a jack goes under.

Max · Lieutenant

You're right.

My english is not the best but I try.

I thought it was 1 jack,2jackets,3 jackets and so on.

Max

Roger Todd · Legend

Max wrote:

I thought it was 1 jack,2jackets,3 jackets and so on.

No, you're thinking of 1 potato, 2 potatoes, 3 potatoes 4...

Centurion · Legend

Max wrote:

You're right.

My english is not the best but I try.

I thought it was 1 jack,2jackets,3 jackets and so on.

Max

I wasn't trying to give a language lesson (poor ignorant monoglot that I am). It's just that there is a thing called a lifting jacket that can be used with a crane so there could have been confusion. Your English is fine.

Max · Lieutenant

As promised the tank behind the lokomobil (Tractor) wich in my opinion is the same as the one on the jacks.Can be recognized by the removed sponsons (wich had more tanks,for those who wants to be funny) and the removed cover of the chain-stretcher (correct word ?) The diffuculty is the pics were taken from different sides of the tank.

Both tanks , this one and the one on the jacks were recovered in La Fontaine, nearby Cambrai.

Regards mr. potatoe(s)

Rhomboid · Field Marshal

This photo was posted in the thread "British Tanks after Cambrai 1917", along with several other interesting beute pics, in the Great War Forum at The Long, Long Trail site. The tank appears to be towed on small roller carriages linked by chains - I think they can be seen in the photo of the tank jacked up prior to loading onto a flatcar. The scene would make a nice subject for an ambitious scratch-builder!

eugene · Field Marshal

that towing piece when did the Germans aquire/build that?

Tim R · Hero

Thanks Rhomboid for the pictures.

Eugene, the engine is a Fowler, alot of countries at this time had them, they either purchased them for ploughing, as for wht they were designed for, or for pulling heavy loads i.e. artillery etc..

Attached is a Fowler photo

all the best

Tim R

eugene · Field Marshal

Tim, could the Germans have had one in use for towing around the time of the Battle of Bullecourt?

Centurion · Legend

Tim

I don't think its a Fowler. I attach a photo of a Fowler as used by the German army - its a different machine - the boiler is higher, pistons are in a different position, solid flywheel etc. I think the engine towing the tank might be a Keller which was specifically designed for the German Artillery for towing very heavy artillery.

Tim R · Hero

Gentleman

I have reviewed the photo, and it still seems to be a Fowler engine, the boiler is longer than the Keller model, which to me it seems to make it a Fowler, Of course I could be wrong.

But a close examination of my photo�s, it still looks like a Fowler.

I do no that Fowlers were used extensively by the German Army from very early 1900"s through out WW1, also there were a number of Fowler designs, and I am sure , some German copies. I have attached another Fowler used by the German Army. A different design.

As far as weather or not a Fowler could have been at Bellecourt, the answer is yes, the Germans used them to haul all types of equipment, of course along with dozens of other zugmachines. Now weather they used them to haul Tanks, your guess is as good as mine.

All the best

Tim R

Roger Todd · Legend

I agree with Tim, Rhomboid's photo shows a ploughing engine, most likely Fowler, whereas the Fowler posted by Centurion is a traction engine (Fowler made both types of engine, as well as steam rollers). Ploughing engines are distinguished from traction engines by having longer boilers, giving them a leaner look, presumably to accommodate the large towing cable winding drum fitted beneath.

Attached is a drawing of another Fowler ploughing engine.

Of course, most engine manufacturers built ploughing engines, but most have a very different style from Rhomboid's. Burrell and Mclaren made very similar looking ploughing engines, except that the flywheel and drive to the wheels looks different to Fowler practice (which more closely resembles that of the machine in Rhomboid's photo). Although by no means knowledgeable about such engines, looking at various photos, I tend to suspect that Rhomboid's machine is a Fowler.

-- Edited by Roger Todd at 14:42, 2007-01-16

Centurion · Legend

Yes it does look like an agricultural rather than a road machine but without any winding drums. However there were a number of very similar machines from different manufacturers. The Fowler road machines used a rod and worm gear system for steering whilst the agricultural used a drum and chain system (both because of the greated distance from the steerer to the front wheels and because the rod would get in the way of the winding drum). I can't see this in the photo. Whoever the manufacturer was,the odd thing however is that agricultural machines were not as good for towing heavy loads as were road machines (not surprising given that that's what the latter were specifically designed for). The power take off on a road machine was simpler and more efficient not having to be dual purpose. As far as I can discover the German Army only bought Fowler road machines (after all they wouldn't need to do any ploughing) certainly those photos and drawings that I have found all show road machines. I can think of no reason why an army would buy agricutural tractors.

Of course it could be a locally impressed vehicle but again one wonders why, given that the German army already possesed road machines. However if it was locally impressed then the answer to Eugene's question is probably no that particular machine would not have been available at Bullecourt but the Germans had plenty of other heavy haulers in their inventory both steam and internal combustion.