Interesting report this AAR from the book "Panzertruppen" (Thomas Jentz) about a skirmish taking place between Dercy and Crécy-sur-Serre on 17th May 1940 and involving a single B1bis tank :
A. "Slowly but steadily a heavy French B2 tank approached."
B. "The Pz.Kpfw.lll opened fire, scored hits, but without effect."
C."The French tank soon rolled past the first houses where the 7. Kompanie was located. when he was also fired at and hit by Panzers that were in rearward postions."
D. "We observed that our 3.7 cm Panzergreneten were not penetrating."
At this point in the story we know that the B1 BIS has been fired on multiple times.
B. "scored hits" hits being plural meaning more then one hit
C. "fired at and hit by Panzers" "Panzers" being plural meaning more than one panzer fired and "hit" meaning the rounds made contact with the B1 BIS
It is stated that the 3.7 cm was not effective
B. "but without effect"
D. " not penetrating"
E. "The French tank destroyed a light armored car and came to a halt on the road among a small group of houses."
At this point we know the B1 BIS has stopped moving and according to this report it is caused by a single 3.7 cm round that has penetrated the engine compartment.
If the B1 BIS's engine or fuel line has been hit, casuing it to stop it will have been from one of the above rounds.
F. "The Adjutant of the II.Abteilung held back one platoon for defense toward the west, only three Panzers were sent into battle. At a range of 200 to 250 meters directly behind the enemy tank. The company commander's Pz.Kpfw.lll fired round after round at the perpindicular rear plate."
Here we see the descion to send in three PZIII's, we notice here that they give a range and direction of the engagement "200 to 250 meters directly behind the enemy tank" Curoiusly they give a range here, this indicates that the prevoius encounters were farther then 200 - 250 meters.
G. "Completely saturated by hits, none of the 7.5 cm, 3.7 cm, 2 cm, and S.m.K.(H) had been effective in penetrating. Only one hit from a 3.7 cm had cleanly penetrated into the motor compartment and immobilized the tank."
From the statement above nothing fired at this tank has penetrated but one 3.7 cm round.
The problem with the story is this:
We have 3 PZIIIs at 200 to 250 meters directly behind the B1 BIS, one of them fireing round after round at the perpindicular plate and not penetrating it while the round that supposedly penetrates the B1 BIS comes from a 3.7 cm gun fired from a futher distance and at a worse angle and is able to acheive a penetration.
armor protection against british 2 lber and french 47 mm
-
David Lehmann
- Member
- Posts: 2863
- Joined: 01 Apr 2002, 11:50
- Location: France
Hello mdc,
This issue is really old in this thread by now but probably not more than when I posted the previous post recently and where can be seen that a German report shows that the German report of the PaK unit in Stonne is mistaken if reporting having knocked out 3 Renault B1bis ... since only 1 can seemingly be credited to it (at least mainly to them since many things including Panzer IVs where in the area firing at the French tanks).
For this event with the B1bis "Bourrasque" in Mortiers I have already given the testimony of the French crews and we discussed several points including photos of the tank.
We have indeed apparently a B1bis stopping before being fired at by a group of 3 Panzer IIIs direct behind it at 200-250 meters.
The tank is supposed by the German side to have stopped after being hit in the engine. If that is the case and IIRC the story indeed it cannot be a projectile from these Panzer IIIs just behind. It cannot be one of the three Panzer IIIs that they call in to attack at 200-250 meters, because the B1bis has already stopped an never moves again prior to these attacks.
So :
- Either the tank stopped before this attack because an other projectile had hit the tank, not from these Panzer IIIs right behind ... but in that case at which range ? Perhaps point blank when passing by several German tanks ? Nobody can tell. And in that case the report in Jentz's book is unclear. But even with such a successful projectile we should not forget the dozens other non-penetrating shells of various calibers (including 7.5cm) which had already hit the tank without effect (see also my previous post and the Panzer IV firing more than 20 APCBC shells on the B1bis without success before managing to damage a track).
- Or the B1bis tank as stated by the French crew from the beginning ran out of fuel and only then the Panzer IIIs moved to fire on its rear. The tank did not at all stop because of an enemy projectile. And it is indeed one of the Panzer IIIs right behind at 200-250m which penetrates the weakened rear plate after multiple hits on this same plate. But then the report is perhaps not very clear.
Well in this book there are errors like in the characteristics of the French tanks (e.g. the armor of the Renault R35) and unsaid things. I also notice on page 128, a paragraph that was mentioned proudly about German tanks having desytroyed 20+ Renault tanks without loosing a single Panzer.
But if you check the location (Poix-Terron - and not Paix-Terron - as it is written, Montigny etc. located next to La Horgne ) and the date you will see that the Renault tanks are from the 33e BCC and are WW1 vintage Renault FT17 tanks. Of course the book just indicates Renault tanks. They even say a company of 21 Renault tanks ... only the FT companies have 21 tanks (the FT battalion has 63) unlike the other Renault light tank battalions which have 13 tanks in each of the 3 companies + 1 battalion commander tank + 5 reserve tanks (45 tanks). I would say it is not such an achievement to destroy Renault FT17 tanks with at the best a maximum armor of 22mm and moving at 4-5 km/h off-road against 35-40 km/h for the German tanks.
Also note that a Renault FT company includes only 13 tanks (FT17c) with a 37mm SA18 gun, the 8 others are only armed with a MG (FT17m or FT31) ...
110 out of the 132 men of the battalion are KIA on 15th May. It's more a courageous sacrifice mission from the French crews than a spectacular achivement form the German crews.
Note also that only the FT17c have a gun able to engage a Panzer I or a Panzer II but they have to be generally closer than 25m to have a chance to knock out a Panzer III or a Panzer IV ... if they have the appropriate AP shells. The Old 37mm Mle1892/24 APHE can nothing against these tanks, the more modern 37mm Mle1935 AP/API is already better but still weak and if you look carefully at the production number it is a bit rare and was probably not given to FT tank units. Then there is also the 37mm Mle1937 AP shell (again slightly better) but this one seems only listed in German documents and never in French ones. If it was really produced in 1940 it must have been rare among the French units.
Add to that that the French light tanks which were not included in divisions like many Renault R35 and all the FT17 battalions had only a dozen anti-tank shells, all the others being HE shell, you see that they really had little chance. Having to close to really close range where the thicker armor offered not enough protection anymore in the case of the Renault R35, the FT17 was no match at all.
The Renault R35 included in the 4e DCR for example had more AP shells and the Hotchkiss cavalry tanks had 40 AP(C) and 60 HE shells. Heavier tanks like the Somua S35 had a loadout of 40 APC en 78 HE shells.
Regards,
David
This issue is really old in this thread by now but probably not more than when I posted the previous post recently and where can be seen that a German report shows that the German report of the PaK unit in Stonne is mistaken if reporting having knocked out 3 Renault B1bis ... since only 1 can seemingly be credited to it (at least mainly to them since many things including Panzer IVs where in the area firing at the French tanks).
For this event with the B1bis "Bourrasque" in Mortiers I have already given the testimony of the French crews and we discussed several points including photos of the tank.
We have indeed apparently a B1bis stopping before being fired at by a group of 3 Panzer IIIs direct behind it at 200-250 meters.
The tank is supposed by the German side to have stopped after being hit in the engine. If that is the case and IIRC the story indeed it cannot be a projectile from these Panzer IIIs just behind. It cannot be one of the three Panzer IIIs that they call in to attack at 200-250 meters, because the B1bis has already stopped an never moves again prior to these attacks.
So :
- Either the tank stopped before this attack because an other projectile had hit the tank, not from these Panzer IIIs right behind ... but in that case at which range ? Perhaps point blank when passing by several German tanks ? Nobody can tell. And in that case the report in Jentz's book is unclear. But even with such a successful projectile we should not forget the dozens other non-penetrating shells of various calibers (including 7.5cm) which had already hit the tank without effect (see also my previous post and the Panzer IV firing more than 20 APCBC shells on the B1bis without success before managing to damage a track).
- Or the B1bis tank as stated by the French crew from the beginning ran out of fuel and only then the Panzer IIIs moved to fire on its rear. The tank did not at all stop because of an enemy projectile. And it is indeed one of the Panzer IIIs right behind at 200-250m which penetrates the weakened rear plate after multiple hits on this same plate. But then the report is perhaps not very clear.
Well in this book there are errors like in the characteristics of the French tanks (e.g. the armor of the Renault R35) and unsaid things. I also notice on page 128, a paragraph that was mentioned proudly about German tanks having desytroyed 20+ Renault tanks without loosing a single Panzer.
But if you check the location (Poix-Terron - and not Paix-Terron - as it is written, Montigny etc. located next to La Horgne ) and the date you will see that the Renault tanks are from the 33e BCC and are WW1 vintage Renault FT17 tanks. Of course the book just indicates Renault tanks. They even say a company of 21 Renault tanks ... only the FT companies have 21 tanks (the FT battalion has 63) unlike the other Renault light tank battalions which have 13 tanks in each of the 3 companies + 1 battalion commander tank + 5 reserve tanks (45 tanks). I would say it is not such an achievement to destroy Renault FT17 tanks with at the best a maximum armor of 22mm and moving at 4-5 km/h off-road against 35-40 km/h for the German tanks.
Also note that a Renault FT company includes only 13 tanks (FT17c) with a 37mm SA18 gun, the 8 others are only armed with a MG (FT17m or FT31) ...
110 out of the 132 men of the battalion are KIA on 15th May. It's more a courageous sacrifice mission from the French crews than a spectacular achivement form the German crews.
Note also that only the FT17c have a gun able to engage a Panzer I or a Panzer II but they have to be generally closer than 25m to have a chance to knock out a Panzer III or a Panzer IV ... if they have the appropriate AP shells. The Old 37mm Mle1892/24 APHE can nothing against these tanks, the more modern 37mm Mle1935 AP/API is already better but still weak and if you look carefully at the production number it is a bit rare and was probably not given to FT tank units. Then there is also the 37mm Mle1937 AP shell (again slightly better) but this one seems only listed in German documents and never in French ones. If it was really produced in 1940 it must have been rare among the French units.
Add to that that the French light tanks which were not included in divisions like many Renault R35 and all the FT17 battalions had only a dozen anti-tank shells, all the others being HE shell, you see that they really had little chance. Having to close to really close range where the thicker armor offered not enough protection anymore in the case of the Renault R35, the FT17 was no match at all.
The Renault R35 included in the 4e DCR for example had more AP shells and the Hotchkiss cavalry tanks had 40 AP(C) and 60 HE shells. Heavier tanks like the Somua S35 had a loadout of 40 APC en 78 HE shells.
Regards,
David