Tank advice please (1 Viewer)

[Rob]

I wonder if once again i can ask the advice of the many AFV experts here on the forum.I have been looking at my K&C Tanks,Honour Bounds new Tiger and my Osprey book collection.As i understand it heres the deal.German Tank numberiing system was thus; Tank company,Platoon number,and Individual Tank number.So for instance 123 would be 1st Tank company,2nd Platoon,Tank number 3.So how is it that Wittmans Tank number was 007?.I don't understand the 00's?.

Would appreciate any advice here guys.

Also how strange was the final engagement of Michael Wittman?.Three Tiger Tanks attacked by a single Firefly and several ordinary Shermans as they advance in single file.Not only were none of the Shermans involved destroyed but the Tigers did not register one single hit on the enemy Tanks.How unusual was that?.To read how Joe Ekins Tank advanced in and out of the trees to destroy three Tigers in twelve mins is incredible,considering the might of three Tigers on the move.I know the 17pdr was an awsome gun but the skill and bravery of that Firefly crew cannot be underestimated.There surely cannot be many actions where the mighty Tigers were easily destroyed?.

Rob

 

[Wraith]

So how is it that Wittmans Tank number was 007?.I don't understand the 00's?.

Would appreciate any advice here guys.


Rob

Rob,

It's a little known fact, but Wittman was actually a double agent working for the Brits. He was recruited early on in the war by MI6 and due to his skill and ruthlessness, was awarded 'OO' status by M.

Wittmans Tiger was actually specially converted in line with Wittmans status. It could develop oil leaks at will, to throw off pursuing Shermans, had special armour to deflect 75 and 76mm AP rounds and had a (not very well hidden) 88mm secreted about the turret.

I'll do a little more research and see if I can dig any more info up mate.

Simon

 

[Louis Badolato]

I wonder if once again i can ask the advice of the many AFV experts here on the forum.I have been looking at my K&C Tanks,Honour Bounds new Tiger and my Osprey book collection.As i understand it heres the deal.German Tank numberiing system was thus; Tank company,Platoon number,and Individual Tank number.So for instance 123 would be 1st Tank company,2nd Platoon,Tank number 3.So how is it that Wittmans Tank number was 007?.I don't understand the 00's?.

Would appreciate any advice here guys.

Also how strange was the final engagement of Michael Wittman?.Three Tiger Tanks attacked by a single Firefly and several ordinary Shermans as they advance in single file.Not only were none of the Shermans involved destroyed but the Tigers did not register one single hit on the enemy Tanks.How unusual was that?.To read how Joe Ekins Tank advanced in and out of the trees to destroy three Tigers in twelve mins is incredible,considering the might of three Tigers on the move.I know the 17pdr was an awsome gun but the skill and bravery of that Firefly crew cannot be underestimated.There surely cannot be many actions where the mighty Tigers were easily destroyed?.

Rob

The whole story sounds like something out of hollywood (or an aging veteran's imagination) to me. I just don't know whether to believe it, especially as until very recently the cause of Wittman's death was unknown, with Typhoon pilots making a claim for the destruction of the tank (in my opinion a much more credible explanation for his demise). If he did pull it off then he deserves the Victoria Cross, because one firefly against 3 Tigers, one of the commanded by the greatest tank ace of all time, surely warrants it!

 

[Rob]

The whole story sounds like something out of hollywood (or an aging veteran's imagination) to me. I just don't know whether to believe it, especially as until very recently the cause of Wittman's death was unknown, with Typhoon pilots making a claim for the destruction of the tank (in my opinion a much more credible explanation for his demise). If he did pull it off then he deserves the Victoria Cross, because one firefly against 3 Tigers, one of the commanded by the greatest tank ace of all time, surely warrants it!

I think that maybe a little unfair mate,Mr Ekins had no idea until recent years that he had killed Wittman,its not like he came forward shouting i did it! I think investigators tracked him down.The thing is it appears to be well documented and accepted by the Bovington Tank museum as what happened.I also think Osprey publishing would be taking a big risk to publish as fact without evidence. And it seems there is no doubt that Ekins Tank destroyed three Tigers in twelve mins.The final Tiger after being hit many times by ordinary Shermans veered off course seemingly out of control before Ekins despatched it.I think its a great example of the seemingly invincible Tiger being tamed by a brave Tank crew with an extrordinary gun.It appears the that many talents of Wittman were of little use when ambushed by the wonderful 17pdr.And i think this is the salient point.Throughout the very early moements of this engagement the Tigers had no idea the Shermans were there.And this was their downfall.I think hard as it maybe to accept as Wittman was a skilled commander,he and his other commanders walked into a well laid trap and lost their lives.Nice one i sayLouis,if you get chance to read Osprey's Firefly V Tiger (from their Duel series)i'd be interested to hear what you think mate.

Rob

 

[Louis Badolato]

Rob,

Like I said, if it is true (and I will have to take your word for it, as I haven't access to the Bovington Tank Museum at the momment) the man is a major war hero, and deserves recognition from your government in the form of a VC or a Knighthood. Even if he destroyed three tigers, and Wittman's wasn't one of them, that is still way above and beyond the call - the armor on a Sherman was like tissue paper when struck by an 88mm round.

 

[Rob]

Rob,

Like I said, if it is true (and I will have to take your word for it, as I haven't access to the Bovington Tank Museum at the momment) the man is a major war hero, and deserves recognition from your government in the form of a VC or a Knighthood. Even if he destroyed three tigers, and Wittman's wasn't one of them, that is still way above and beyond the call - the armor on a Sherman was like tissue paper when struck by an 88mm round.

Absolutely(and isn't there in fact instances where an 88 round passed clean through a sherman and out the other side?.May possibly be a Matilda i'm thinking of) and i do accept that it goes against everything we know about Tigers V Shermans doesn't it?.And i do of course agree if there was a Typhoon in the area that could be another cause of violent death for Mr Wittman.However leaving Wittman aside for the moement,i still find it incredible that of all the other Shermans (i think around six?) and the Firefly none of them received a single hit from three Tigers?!!!.It sounded like the Driver of the final Tiger panicked by multiple hits from different directions and appeared in the words of an eye witness to be 'Desperate to get away'.Perhaps he was inexperienced,none of his crew survived.

I just find it such an unusually one sided action and very interesting.You can only wonder how much more even things may have been if the allies had the 17pdr earlier in the war and in greater numbers.I hope to return to Normandy next year and visit both the Site of the action and Wittmans grave.

Rob

 

[steel wheels]

I think the three tigers were simply asleep at the wheel, and were caught off guard. There may have had some inital confusion, as they were hit by several Shermans, whose shells usually bounced off. So Why worry? Obviousy, they were not prepared to find out which of these shermans was a Firefly. I call it one of the great tank warfare ambushes ever attempted. As long as the Firefly got off the first round, and avoided being hit in return, she stood a great chance of victory. The Sherman tank commanders out did themselves on this one. What I do know, is that the American tank commanders who piloted those sherman tanks with the 75/76mm gun had to be jealous of their British allies who had the luxury of a 17 pounder that at least gave them a fighting chance.

 

[Rob]

I think the three tigers were simply asleep at the wheel, and were caught off guard. There may have had some inital confusion, as they were hit by several Shermans, whose shells usually bounced off. So Why worry? Obviousy, they were not prepared to find out which of these shermans was a Firefly. I call it one of the great tank warfare ambushes ever attempted. As long as the Firefly got off the first round, and avoided being hit in return, she stood a great chance of victory. The Sherman tank commanders out did themselves on this one. What I do know, is that the American tank commanders who piloted those sherman tanks with the 75/76mm gun had to be jealous of their British allies who had the luxury of a 17 pounder that at least gave them a fighting chance.

Also the Firefly took the proper procedure in that after each shell it fired it reversed back into the orchard,the Tigers fired into the orchard in an attempt to hit the firefly.One shell glancing off the turret hatch knocking it shut and stunning the commander of the Tank,who clambered out and fell to the floor before passing out.

Rob

 

[Rob]

I just looked on the web (flames of war )and it says that some of these numbers such as 007 were designed to confuse the enemy and hide the fact they were a command Tank.Makes sense i gues as the allies soon caught onto the numberibg system and could therefore pick out command Tanks.

Rob

 

[desk11desk12]

Sorry guys,

I can't add anything to the discuss but thanks for fascinating discussion.

Oh yeah Rob:

Thanks for educating me on the Tank numbering scheme. I never knew that. I learn something new everyday on the Forum.

Carlos

 

[Rob]

Sorry guys,

I can't add anything to the discuss but thanks for fascinating discussion.

Oh yeah Rob:

Thanks for educating me on the Tank numbering scheme. I never knew that. I learn something new everyday on the Forum.

Carlos

Me too Carlos!.I've learnt so much from many different people on here,its a great place.

I also find Osprey books great for basic facts about armour etc,they are not indepth studies but are excellant for a brief overview of the subject.Funny thing that after more than thirty years of looking at pictures and models of Tanks,today i learnt what the numbers mean!!!

Rob

 

[jazzeum]

Of the sources I read, Wittman was killed by five Shermans at the Battle of Cintheaux near Falaise. He had attacked two Shermans, destroyed them, and the remaining five destroyed his Tiger at point blank range. This is considered to be the reliable story of how he died. Regarding did it, I have no idea.

 

[binder001]

1) Although nothing is "absolute", it is generally accepted that Herr Wittmann was killed by the actions of gunner Ekins in a Sherman Vc "Firelfy" supported by other Shermans. The Germans have always liked the whole theory about a Typhoon getting a miracle kill with a rocket (WW2 aircraft rockets were not nearly as accurate as the young pilots thought).

2) As pointed out in the excellent description in the Osprey book "Firelfy vs Tiger" in the "Duel" series, the Germans were desperate to hold back the British advance so they broke their own rules on tank deployment. Three Tigers advancing with minimal effective support is asking for trouble from an alerted enemy.

3) Ekins had the right weapon and the basic skills to use it (given that he had only fired six live rounds from the 17-pounder before). The action brings out the importance of teamwork in tank combat. The British tried to support each other, the Germans were an ad hoc group and didn't work together to full effectiveness.

4) The Allies didn't make a big deal about killing Wittmann becuase it took so long for them to realize his importance to the Germans. The Allies weren't big into the "tank ace" thing. One of the reasons that men like Lafayette Pool didn't get more medals and recognition is that the US Army felt that the tank's whole crew were a team and one man couldn't be singled out.

5) The action does emphasize the mistake the US Army made by adopting a Tank Destroyer approach instead of upgunning the M4s as the British did. The armor may not have been great, but the Israelis and British have shown that the Sherman be very effective if you give the crew a chance at getting the bad guy without having to maneuver for a flank or rear shot.

The Osprey book mentioned is good value and certainly worth reading.

Gary

 

[jazzeum]

Gary,

What's the name of the book? I'd like to get it.

 

[Canadian Samurai]

Not to drag this down into a debate over national bragging rights again, but a third highly regarded claim for who killed Wittmann is of course the Fireflys of the Sherbrooke Fusilier Regiment, 2nd Canadian Armored Brigade. The argument for this is that the Canadian Fireflys were apparently much closer to Wittmann than the British ones so were more likely to have delivered the killing shot.

A Canadian also has one of the strongest claims for shooting down the Red Baron (disputed by Australian anti-aircraft gunners) so I guess the Canucks in WW2 felt they had an ace-killing reputation to uphold.

Bottom line is I doubt we'll ever know with certainty who (or what) really killed Wittmann or Richthofen. There were a whole lot of fireflys shooting at the same time.

 

[Combat]

A Canadian also has one of the strongest claims for shooting down the Red Baron (disputed by Australian anti-aircraft gunners) so I guess the Canucks in WW2 felt they had an ace-killing reputation to uphold.

Bottom line is I doubt we'll ever know with certainty who (or what) really killed Wittmann or Richthofen. There were a whole lot of fireflys shooting at the same time.

I don't know much about Wittman, but in the case of von Richthofen it is most likely that he was killed from ground fire from the Australians. Some interesting recent recreations and computer generations make this about as conclusive as we will ever get.

 

[storch]

I am aware of a couple of versions of how Wittman died, and they all sound like the one Brad described. They all coincide that there were between 5 and 8 Shermans, with at least one Firefly. The stories also claim that several Shermans were destroyed before the Wittman's tank caught on fire and with the crew inside and unable to escape. These versions of the story coincide with the results of an assessment made by the US military in 1944 that said that in order to destroy a Tiger, it had to be engaged by at least 4 Shermans simultaneously. Some people were of the opinion that the Americans should produce their own version of the Tiger or the Panther to confront the Germans, but in the end they decided that, given American industrial prowess, it was easier to produce a massive number of inferior Shermans to overwhelm the German aromoured forces with numerical superiority, even if this meant the death of American tankers. The American military analysts deicided that a certain percentage of losses were acceptable.
I think that there is a lot of revisionist history out there, and while some of it is objective, there also seems to be an effort to discredit some of the military accomplishments of German soldiers. For instance, I have read articles and browsed through books that put in doubt Wittman's feats at Villier Bocage. There is a similar effort to question the number of kills of air ace Erich Harttman.

Gil

 

[binder001]

Gary,What's the name of the book? I'd like to get it.

Osprey Publications, "Sherman Firefly vs Tiger, Normandy, 1944" stock number OS8502 at the Squadron website. I got mine via Amazon.com. It's a small book, but a good read.

Gary

 

[Rob]

1) Although nothing is "absolute", it is generally accepted that Herr Wittmann was killed by the actions of gunner Ekins in a Sherman Vc "Firelfy" supported by other Shermans. The Germans have always liked the whole theory about a Typhoon getting a miracle kill with a rocket (WW2 aircraft rockets were not nearly as accurate as the young pilots thought).

2) As pointed out in the excellent description in the Osprey book "Firelfy vs Tiger" in the "Duel" series, the Germans were desperate to hold back the British advance so they broke their own rules on tank deployment. Three Tigers advancing with minimal effective support is asking for trouble from an alerted enemy.

3) Ekins had the right weapon and the basic skills to use it (given that he had only fired six live rounds from the 17-pounder before). The action brings out the importance of teamwork in tank combat. The British tried to support each other, the Germans were an ad hoc group and didn't work together to full effectiveness.

4) The Allies didn't make a big deal about killing Wittmann becuase it took so long for them to realize his importance to the Germans. The Allies weren't big into the "tank ace" thing. One of the reasons that men like Lafayette Pool didn't get more medals and recognition is that the US Army felt that the tank's whole crew were a team and one man couldn't be singled out.

5) The action does emphasize the mistake the US Army made by adopting a Tank Destroyer approach instead of upgunning the M4s as the British did. The armor may not have been great, but the Israelis and British have shown that the Sherman be very effective if you give the crew a chance at getting the bad guy without having to maneuver for a flank or rear shot.

The Osprey book mentioned is good value and certainly worth reading.

Gary

Thanks for that Gary,i was beggining to think i'm the only one who read it!.The book also states that there was a German obsever who watched the whole action and then waited two hours to see if any German survivors emerged from the battlefield,they didn't.I think because some people see Wittman as some sort of hero and for them it might be difficult to accept that a young Guy in the right place at the right time with the right gun 'did the business'.For me the whole thing rings very true.Ekin was well positioned and hidden from the view of the Tigers,he got straight back into the orchard once he had hit his first target.As someone said above he only had to lay his gun on a slow moving target well within the killing range of his gun.Even the mighty Tiger can't hit something if it can't see it,even though a shell passed close enough to clip the turret hatch.

As CS said there were other Shermans in the area.But if i have got this right the book says although it was theoretically possible for them to have hit Wittman it was highly unlikely.Although of course the other ordinary Shermans appear to have been involved in the destruction of the final Tiger.So this action was witnessed by Ekins,the German observer and the crews of the Tanks CS was talking about.

For me this is what happened.Joe Ekins fired a round that ignited Wittmans ammo causing a catastrophic explosion that blew the turret off the tank.The Shermans then surrounded the final Tank and scored enough hits to panic the driver and send him racing off to be destroyed by the Firefly.I think this final act is what maybe people think happened to Wittman.I don't believe if it had been Wittman in the Tank the five or six Shermans could have surrounded him without a single loss.

Face it guys,even Wittman was human (a low form of human i grant you,but human).He made an error and paid with his life.Nice one Mr Ekin.

Rob

 

[OzDigger]

Rob, the number 007 signified tanks used by German Battalion Commanders.

As for Wittman, I guess his luck just ran out.