Ladungsleger I

[Phil Bishop]

Wschneck is right...the vehicles in the picture are Pz II not Pz I...and I can't agree that they are bridge laying tanks...certainly look like demolition laying vehicles to me....anyone any more information?

Were the 85th Div vehicles local conversions? Any other use recorded?

[Phil Bishop]

Sorry...8th Pz div!

[ekke]

Wschneck is right...the vehicles in the picture are Pz II not Pz I...and I can't agree that they are bridge laying tanks...certainly look like demolition laying vehicles to me....anyone any more information?

First one in the row is definitely a Panzer II, but the ones behind thePanzer II are Panzer I (take a close look )
But I agree that none of these are bridgelaying tanks. (Compare "Waffenarsenal Special Band 35, Gepanzerte Raritäten auf Rädern und Ketten bis 1945" by Wolfgang Fleischer)

[Phil Bishop]

ekke is right of course. Only the first vehicle is a Pz I (must stop posting late at night). Fascinating picture though, as is the discription of Pz II explosives layers in action. Why I joined this forum, so much to learn.

[Aleksandr B. (RedHun)]

And who that knows that mounted on Ladungsleger I a flame-thrower?

[Phil Bishop]

Amazing picture Red Hun....any more information available?

[Aleksandr B. (RedHun)]

Amazing picture Red Hun....any more information available?

Unfortunately the information is not present more, I have met this photo on auction eBay.

[fliegerhorst]

Reading this thread is suprising to see the misunderstanding, firstly i aree there are more than 2 Ladungsleger (there are 2 verions but more than 2 vehicles), Jentz work is indeed from direct sources, however, i have his complete series and its obvious that some books are under researched and therefore if you look at what he has forsale now those books are now unavilable. How do i know there is more than 2 Landungsleger, tankogard publishing panzerkampfwagen I page 59 shows a photo of 5 vechiles moving in a column (plus iv seen more photos). secondly i have spoken to jentz via emial as to why he left out the ladungsleger with sliding ramp and he believes in not including modified versions of vehicles but basically when it came down to it the original source information didnt state about the vehicle (so i suspect he left it out), photo evidence indeed shows the sliding version exists, even in the photos of jents panzer tracts 14 - page 3, shows 3 seperate ladungsleger. (i suspect more flawed work by Jentz in that book) The kettenkrad demolition device. Jentz describes this as being completed by borgward (which may be correct but markus jaugitz "German remote control tank units 1940-43 page 16 states that it was designed to fill the operational role of the Borgward. Big difference!!! And goes on to state NSU make the vehicle. I consider Jaugitz the expert on remote controlled tanks and used as refrence is actual NSU records by jaugitz of Jentz own archives. Jentz work is exceptionally but should not be taken as gospel. To correct this idea of 2 ladungsleger only, is incorrect there was at least 5 and i would go as far to say the 10 existed as stated by other members

[sitalkes]

There are now lots of photos of this vehicle available e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/deckarudo ... 877542527/ . What's the difference between a Pz.Kpfw.I (M.G.) (Sd.Kfz.101) mit Abwurfvorrichtung and a Ladungsleger I, and if 10 were given to each panzer division, does that make a total of 100 conversions? How many were available in Autumn 1940?

[john_g_kearney]

Have I have got it right:

The Ladungsleger I was the version that had a ramp above the engine deck, down which the explosive charge was slid. The tank reversed towards the target. Two gun tanks converted to this version.

The PzKpfw I (MG) (SdKfz 101) mit Abwurfvorrichtung was the version that had the swinging arm above the engine deck. The tank drove forwards to the target. Enough gun tanks converted to this version to allocate 10 to each Panzer Division.

John.

[john_g_kearney]

I have changed my mind already - I reckon the tubular arms overhanging the rear do not swing after all...

So both tanks would have had to make their final approach to the target in reverse.

John.

[sitalkes]

Was the Abwurfvorrichtung a field conversion kit that could be applied to both Panzer 1 and Panzer II?

Sounds crazy, the panzer 1 had only 7mm armour on the rear, and it had to reverse onto its target? That arm isn't long enough to be moved over the tank's turret to the front? Maybe the idea was to enable a quick getaway by driving forward rather than reverse while the bomb was ticking!

[john_g_kearney]

Not sure how easy it was to transfer the Abwurfvorrichtung from a Panzer I to a II, but the kit was certainly very simple.

Walter J Spielberger in his 'Panzer I und II und ihre Abarten' published by the Motorbuch Verlag, 2014 describes an arrangement comprising arms that were both pivoting and extendable (up to 2.75 m long), and allowed the charge to be placed to the rear or to the front. He says that this version was built only in small numbers for trials. (Page 65.)

The version that appears in most of the photographs in the link given in Post No 24 is illustrated by Spielberger in his book, and described in a caption as the improved version of the Ladungsleger I with 'an extendable pivoting arm' (einen ausziehbaren Schwenkarm). However, the photographs in the link, which are clearer than those in the book, show that the arms of this version appear to be longer than 2.75 m and that they do not pivot - they are simply fixed to the top of the hull behind the turret.

John.

[sitalkes]

Maybe there was only a single Panzer II version, but you can buy it as a model kit - the pictures of the model kit do indeed show that the arm couldn't be pivoted forward http://www.modelimex.com/1-72-pzkpfw-ii ... al-edition

If you have a 1/35 scale Pz II you can buy your own field conversion here:

http://www.brachmodel.it/index.php?opti ... 0&limit=20

Again, it makes it clear that the vehicle had to reverse onto the target. I don't like the look of the sliding version, looks like it could fail too easily!

[tigre]

Hello to all ; a little complement here.......................

Ladungsleger I in Barbarossa.

In this context, we must remember, as part of the 3rd Armored Engineer Company from the Armored Engineer Battalion 58. From the 7th Panzer Division (3. Panzer Pionier Kompanie aus dem Panzer Pionier-Bataillon 58. Von der 7. Panzer-Division), where two standard destruction Platoons, the first Platoon had 5 light tanks Pz.Kpfw .I Ausf.B and (possibly) Pz.Kpfw.II Ausf.A -C with the sliding frame structure for the laying of explosives with a weight of 75 kg (charge laying I and II), while the second Platoon had five Pz.Kpfw .I Ausf.B with the first embodiment charge Leger I (ersten Ausführungsform Ladungsleger I) - in the form of an inclined chain drive rail (sliding ramp).

Thus, the German had gathered only two units in this direction, that it was a light tank equipped with devices for the laying of explosives with a weight of 50 to 75 kg, and its remote-controlled "colleagues" were equipped as transporter o up to 515 kg explosives.

Sources: http://vif2ne.ru/rkka/forum/archive/106/106213.htm
https://www.flickr.com/photos/deckarudo ... 877542527/

Cheers. Raúl M .