Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Freikorps, Reichswehr, Austrian Bundesheer, Heer, Waffen-SS, Volkssturm and Fallschirmjäger and the other Luftwaffe ground forces. Hosted by Christoph Awender.
Post Reply
sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#271

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 08:39

Michael Kenny wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:According to Taylor were or were not the lead elements of the Queens in VB by 9.30 ?
The account by him I posted just above is his answer (in 2007) to the claim there were Infantry in Villers Bocage during Wittmann's attack. I can not see which bit you do not understand.
No 6 pdr in Villers whilst Wittmann was fleeing the scene.

No he doesn't any where retract his earlier time schedule. No one is claiming that the Queens were inside VB, in force around that time. Their infantry were footslogging. The carriers and AT contingent were delayed en route .. yes.. But en route means less than 4 Kms! The delay has to be interpreted in terms of the normal speed of these light combat vehicles. Less than 4 Kms for God's sake ! .. And we are talking of all of 30 mins here ! At the same time you claim Wittmann finished off his entire binge in 3 mins flat !

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#272

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 09:20

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
No he doesn't any where retract his earlier time schedule.
Nor has he any need to. He never said what you are are claiming he said .

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:No one is claiming that the Queens were inside VB, in force around that time. Their infantry were footslogging.
No they were 'lorried'. Because of the traffic jam on the road they walked. Walked because it was quicker.
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:The carriers and AT contingent were delayed en route .. yes.. But en route means less than 4 Kms! The delay has to be interpreted in terms of the normal speed of these light combat vehicles. Less than 4 Kms for God's sake ! .. And we are talking of all of 30 mins here ! At the same time you claim Wittmann finished off his entire binge in 3 mins flat !
I know you think you are an expert but given your history of posting 1944 photos as 1945 Berlin pics, not understanding the concept of a circular reference, not knowing the difference between combat damage and recovery work, believing Wittmann went nose-to-nose in a ramming attack etc why should I believe you have the wit to correct assess any new information when all the previous supplied data seems to have gone right over your head. I have come to the conclusion you are wilfully ignorant and have no intention of ending this situation. You have no interest in what really happened and seem so emotionaly attached to the propaganda version of Wittmann's attack that I fear any revelation to the contrary might impact unfavourably upon your psyche.


sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#273

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 09:37

Michael Kenny wrote:


No one but you has a timeline that has Wittmann rattling around Villers for 40 minutes.
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote: 8.55 AM The Tigers went into action................9.35 Wittmann and crew abandon the tank

No one but me? Well folks ( including Taylor) are going by the radio log entry at XXX corps, at 0945..to opine that Sgt Bray immobilised Wittmann. Then between the time Sgt O'Connor (RB) reported spotting Wittmann at 0900 and the time people are saying he got knocked off.. it is 45 min! ( here I am making an allowance of a few min and saying the action started at 0857 since it is fair to assume that O'Connor and co's priority at that moment wouldn't have been to look at the watch the first thing).

The fact that the 4 CLY A sqdrn and RHQ reached VB by 0830 is not in dispute anywhere. A hell of a lot happened since then and the time Hinde left town. There was no news of any Tiger sitings in all this time.

So the 9 - 9.45 window is where this entire episode fits in..

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#274

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 09:41

Michael Kenny wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:
No he doesn't any where retract his earlier time schedule.
Nor has he any need to. He never said what you are are claiming he said .

He didn't say that the lead elements of the Queens were at VB by 0930 hrs?

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#275

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 09:53

Michael Kenny wrote:




I know you think you are an expert but given your history of posting 1944 photos as 1945 Berlin pics, not understanding the concept of a circular reference, not knowing the difference between combat damage and recovery work, believing Wittmann went nose-to-nose in a ramming attack etc why should I believe you have the wit to correct assess any new information when all the previous supplied data seems to have gone right over your head. I have come to the conclusion you are wilfully ignorant and have no intention of ending this situation. You have no interest in what really happened and seem so emotionaly attached to the propaganda version of Wittmann's attack that I fear any revelation to the contrary might impact unfavourably upon your psyche.

I am not an expert.. just a student of WW II (and Indian subcontinental) military history and episodes. One thing I can manage without too much trouble is count straight..So I am just calculating the time span of the engagement based on available information. If the revelations of these calculations disprove some earlier stated theory .. or reinforce some other.... well.. thats just the way it is.

Coming to the issue of my past record on this Forum..Well that line of talk can dig up several other records too. For e.g., that quick one passing off Hauptmn Helmut Ritgen, a Pz KP Fhr, as a tank recovery and repair guy in Normandy... just to prove a point in a debate ! Remember?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#276

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 10:01

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

He didn't say that the lead elements of the Queens were at VB by 0930 hrs?
No he did not. You failed to read the paragraph properly. Or should I say you did read it properly and hope no one else did.

I repeat Dan did not say the Queens (elements or otherwise) were in Villers at 09:30 .

This is (again) what he says

The contention that the Queen’s were in VB for the morning attack runs contrary to one significant primary source. Lt Col D Gordon, OC 1/7 Queen’s on 13/6, wrote a full report during the week after the battle on the action as it concerned the battalion. I believe it is in the 7AD War Diary. In it he states that the unit heard of the attack by Tigers on the head of the column whilst on the road approaching Villers, near Amaye. In response to this information, he sent the AT platoon forward in their carriers to help out and, since the road was snarled up with traffic, the rest of the battalion debussed and marched the remaining couple of miles to the town. The AT platoon complained that due to the traffic of C then B Squadron of the Sharpshooters they were delayed considerably in arriving in Villers. It is, therefore, easy to conclude that they could not have been there in the time frame described.



What bits of the above that state clearly the Queens were not in Villers 'in the time frame described (whilst Wittmann was there) do you not understand? Is it your contention than Dan 'let something slip' in his earlier book that he now wishes to cover up?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#277

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 10:15

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

I am not an expert.. just a student of WW II (and Indian subcontinental) military history and episodes. One thing I can manage without too much trouble is count straight..So I am just calculating the time span of the engagement based on available information. If the revelations of these calculations disprove some earlier stated theory .. or reinforce some other.... well.. thats just the way it is.
There is no 'time span' No record was kept of the start or end time and all such timings are guesses. If you wish to use a fabrication that best suits your ends well thats fine but do not expect everyone else to fall in line with your assumptions or to overturn well establish fact because 'your' timetable does not allow for it.
And pray tell us what 'earlier stated theory' the figures you plucked from thin air disprove?
Instead of standing on the sideline throwing turds I challenge you to give us an account that explains everything.
Put up or shut up.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#278

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 10:30

Michael Kenny wrote:
sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

He didn't say that the lead elements of the Queens were at VB by 0930 hrs?
No he did not. You failed to read the paragraph properly. Or should I say you did read it properly and hope no one else did.

I repeat Dan did not say the Queens (elements or otherwise) were in Villers at 09:30 .

This is (again) what he says

The contention that the Queen’s were in VB for the morning attack runs contrary to one significant primary source. Lt Col D Gordon, OC 1/7 Queen’s on 13/6, wrote a full report during the week after the battle on the action as it concerned the battalion. I believe it is in the 7AD War Diary. In it he states that the unit heard of the attack by Tigers on the head of the column whilst on the road approaching Villers, near Amaye. In response to this information, he sent the AT platoon forward in their carriers to help out and, since the road was snarled up with traffic, the rest of the battalion debussed and marched the remaining couple of miles to the town. The AT platoon complained that due to the traffic of C then B Squadron of the Sharpshooters they were delayed considerably in arriving in Villers. It is, therefore, easy to conclude that they could not have been there in the time frame described.



What bits of the above that state clearly the Queens were not in Villers 'in the time frame described (whilst Wittmann was there) do you not understand? Is it your contention than Dan 'let something slip' in his earlier book that he now wishes to cover up?

You keep quoting the later article and I keep referring to the Book. I have an old copy in no good condition. I am trying to lay my hands on a good clean copy so that I can scan the relevant page.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#279

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 10:31

Michael Kenny wrote:
Put up or shut up.
And.. who exactly is asking me to shut up pl?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#280

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 10:32

Some comments on the events of 12-15 June 1944 by
Charles W. Pearce


The Tiger then came round the bend
and I shot off down the road to B Sqn which I had thought
that I should have found with or just behind the Recce.
However I was wrong, so I concluded that they must be a
little further back.

The long road stretched ahead and I went on and on past
the Mairie,now on my left but I could not see B Sqn. The road
was absolutely empty and silent, no people, no vehicles and I
had a curious feeling of utter loneliness,
thinking that I had
made an appalling mistake. I had kept trying to get on the air
to B Sqn HQ to alert the Squadron Leader about RHQ and the
Tiger but the air was still jammed as A Sqn was continually
under heavy attack.

Arrival at B Sqn
At last I saw a B Sqn tank at the very bottom of the town on
its own and much further back than I ever expected. It was a
Firefly commanded by Sergeant Lockwood who I knew. He
was a very capable senior NCO.
His tank was well sighted and I told him about RHQ and the
Tiger coming towards him. He told me where B Sqn HQ was
and I set off, finding it easily from his directions. This was the
first piece of luck that I had and answered my problem of
finding a Firefly.
After I had left. Sergeant Lockwood moved his tank forward
some 100 yards and engaged the Tiger. He was the first to
tackle the Tiger with a chance of damaging it, and in fact the
Tiger eventually turned round and retreated back towards
what was left of RHQ.
I realised now as I approached B Sqn HQ that, in my view,
there was no adequate Regimental control nor any rear link to
Brigade, also I was completely puzzled that B Sqn did not
appear to be fully deployed. It seemed to me that the Tiger,
apart from Sergeant Lockwood, would have had no
opposition all the way to the bottom of the town.

B. Sqn. HQ
When I arrived at B Sqn HQ I saw Major I.B. (Ibby) Aird (OC
B Sqn) sitting in the tunet of his Cromwell looking quite
complacent so I climbed on his tank and saluted him. I told
him about RHQ, the Tiger tank and that I had seen Sergeant
Lockwood. He did not acknowledge me nor did he say
anything.
I stood there, then I told him about the attack on A Sqn but
he must already have known about that. I then said that he
must alert his Sqn, as there was nothing between him and A
Sqn, some 1.5miles away. I also offered to alert his Sqn for
him on my wireless, but he said absolutely nothing giving me
no response in any way. I was absolutely at my wits' end
Ihen, out of the blue. Major Peter McColl (OC C Sqn)
appeared and wanted to know what the hold up was as the
back of B Sqn and also C Sqn, were blocking the road into
Villers-Bocage so the Queens Battalion could not get through
into the town
. -
I jumped down from Major Aird's tank and told Peter
McColl what I had said to Ibby Aird and explained that I could
get no response from Ibby. Peter, in no uncertain terms, told
Ibby Aird to alert and deploy B Sqn and move them off the
road.
To my surprise, Ibby Aird did take action and then Peter and
1 had a long talk about the situation, discussing such matters
as Regimental control, and setting up a new wireless rear link
to Brigade as the existing rear link in RHQ had been destroyed
by the Tiger tank in the attack on RHQ.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#281

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 11:17

Michael Kenny wrote:

There is no 'time span' No record was kept of the start or end time and all such timings are guesses. If you wish to use a fabrication that best suits your ends well thats fine but do not expect everyone else to fall in line with your assumptions or to overturn well establish fact because 'your' timetable does not allow for it.
And pray tell us what 'earlier stated theory' the figures you plucked from thin air disprove?
Instead of standing on the sideline throwing turds I challenge you to give us an account that explains everything.
Put up or shut up.

1) Time span is there. The start time is recorded i.e., 0900 hrs. The end time ( if the Bray version prevails) is recorded as 0945. Which well established facts have been overturned due to my timetable? Which well established facts have stated that the VB episode was over in a flash...in a few minutes ?

2) The "earlier stated theory" is hypothetical ..what I exactly said was :

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

If the revelations of these calculations disprove some earlier stated theory .. or reinforce some other.... well.. thats just the way it is.
I was, and have been, trying for an objective reconciliation of all known facts to arrive at a probable picture.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#282

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 11:23

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

1) Time span is there. The start time is recorded i.e., 0900 hrs. The end time ( if the Bray version prevails) is recorded as 0945..
Bray was not in Villers. Bray was never in Villers. Bray was a member of the groups stranded outside Villers. Bray had nothing, nothing at all, to do with any action inside Villers Bocage. Bray was , at best, 800 mtrs and round a bend in the road from Wittmann who was knocked out in the centre of Villers Bocage. The fighting between the groups outside Villers and the German went on until c 13:00 hours so that action did not 'end' at 09:45.
The Rifle Brigade in the Second World War 1939-1945 by Major R.H.W.S. Hastings of The Rifle Brigade, published by Gale and Polden Ltd, Aldershot 1950 makes no claim that Bray knocked out a Tiger. It simply says:
Sgt Bray had managed to get one 6pdr into action and he claimed to have hit two half-tracks and one armoured car before a tank had knocked his gun out and then driven down the road machine-gunning the ditches.

It is you who is making a firm connection 6pdr at Tilly Junction = Bray=radio report=Tiger knocked out. There were 2 x 6 pdr guns not one. Where was the second one located?
To reconcile the facts you should first get to know them or should I say be aware of the fact that not all 'facts' are really facts.
Last edited by Michael Kenny on 23 Feb 2015, 12:18, edited 2 times in total.

sandeepmukherjee196
Member
Posts: 1524
Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 06:34

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#283

Post by sandeepmukherjee196 » 23 Feb 2015, 11:41

Michael Kenny wrote:Some comments on the events of 12-15 June 1944 by
Charles W. Pearce





Ihen, out of the blue. Major Peter McColl (OC C Sqn)
appeared and wanted to know what the hold up was as the
back of B Sqn and also C Sqn, were blocking the road into
Villers-Bocage so the Queens Battalion could not get through
into the town
. [/i]

Yah.. so? Of course the Queens were stretched out outside VB ! By the "Queens battalion" ( an infantry unit) he means the rifle companies..One doesn't expect the CO of a different sub- unit ( C sqdn CLY) to be giving an impromptu detailed presentation on the entire ORBAT and the locations of individuals and support platoons of the Queens at that moment ..provided he himself knew the minutiae! The battalion wasn't being able to do what they were supposed to do by arriving at VB ... they were not being able to join the action in support of the CLY and RB. So McColl was justifiably worked up.

Do you expect McColl to weaken his case in his harangue to his peer ..by mentioning ( provided he himself knew) that individual vehicles and ATs from the Queens, were already in the vicinity?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#284

Post by Michael Kenny » 23 Feb 2015, 12:01

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:

Yah.. so? .........
About sums you up.

Tatty bye.

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: Wittmann, Villers Bocage and his kill claims.

#285

Post by Urmel » 23 Feb 2015, 12:40

sandeepmukherjee196 wrote:By the "Queens battalion" ( an infantry unit) he means the rifle companies..
Seriously? Your case now rests on you interpreting what Major McColl meant? You are aware that a battalion consists of more than just rifle coys? The AT platoon had, since 1942, been an integral part.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Post Reply

Return to “Heer, Waffen-SS & Fallschirmjäger”