Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
I'm looking to see what you guys think/know of the turret number of Wittmann's Tiger during the battle of Vilers-Bocage on June 13th 1944?
I've read that he climbed into 222 on the morning of the battle, but he may have actually been in 231 at the time of his historic achievements. Other reports and photo 'evidence' say his turret number was actually 007, although I think this was the number of the tiger he was in at the time of his death?
Your views are eagerly awaited.
I've read that he climbed into 222 on the morning of the battle, but he may have actually been in 231 at the time of his historic achievements. Other reports and photo 'evidence' say his turret number was actually 007, although I think this was the number of the tiger he was in at the time of his death?
Your views are eagerly awaited.
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
All I know comes from the book "Panzerheld" and it says "there is a consensus that Wittmann was killed in Tiger #107 (or 007 as some interpret the photo)......"
- Pax Melmacia
- Member
- Posts: 354
- Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 02:26
- Location: Philippines
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
I saw one item that claimed that Witmann's original tank had been damaged so he 'borrowed' 007, where he was killed. There seems to be some question of his original turret number. AFAIK, it's either SO8, or SO5 or SO3. As you can infer, these guesses are likely based on unclear photos, since the last digits look almost the same.
-
- Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 05 Jul 2008, 00:41
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Everything that I have read indicates that the turret nuber that he died in was 007. I am unaware about which turret number he used during his successes at villers bocage but his first turret number in the Kursk Campaign was 1331
-
- Member
- Posts: 262
- Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:08
- Location: USA
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Michael Wittmann's tank number the day at Villers-Bocage was 222, his tank 205 had broken down on the road before the action.
When the command (2nd company, 101st SS Panzer Battalion) arrived outside Villers-Bocage Michael took command of Uscha. Kurt Sowa's 222.
Belbe's 231 is pictured being towed later after the fight, and a number of persons mix it with the 222.
The 231 isn't burned in the photo, the 222 was burned in Villers-Bocage.
There are a number of photos showing Wittmann's tank burned in Villers-Bocage.
Michael was in the 007 when he was killed, and again by a plane; the person that took the photo of 007 in the field said it had been hit on the engine decking by a rocket and showed no other hit.
When the command (2nd company, 101st SS Panzer Battalion) arrived outside Villers-Bocage Michael took command of Uscha. Kurt Sowa's 222.
Belbe's 231 is pictured being towed later after the fight, and a number of persons mix it with the 222.
The 231 isn't burned in the photo, the 222 was burned in Villers-Bocage.
There are a number of photos showing Wittmann's tank burned in Villers-Bocage.
Michael was in the 007 when he was killed, and again by a plane; the person that took the photo of 007 in the field said it had been hit on the engine decking by a rocket and showed no other hit.
-
- Member
- Posts: 8251
- Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
- Location: Teesside
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
And the tank shown towing '231' is in fact '222' ! This is an old subject and a Forum search wil be very rewardingHomer martin wrote: Belbe's 231 is pictured being towed later after the fight, and a number of persons mix it with the 222.
The person was a local farmer and the photo was taken well after the war. He says he thought the hole he saw was caused by a rocket. He was not basing this speculation on anything other than a guess. Another search here would sort it all out.]Michael was in the 007 when he was killed, and again by a plane; the person that took the photo of 007 in the field said it had been hit on the engine decking by a rocket and showed no other hit.
- The_Enigma
- Member
- Posts: 2270
- Joined: 14 Oct 2007, 15:59
- Location: Cheshire, England
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
The theroy of Wittmann being killed by rocket fire from a plane is fully discussed in No Holding Back by Brain Ried and fully rejected.
If my understanding is correct, tanks within the HQ Coy were numbered 0XX, 1st Company 1XX and so on. So it would make sence for him to be in a "Zero" as he had been promoted from 2nd Company Commander by August.All I know comes from the book "Panzerheld" and it says "there is a consensus that Wittmann was killed in Tiger #107 (or 007 as some interpret the photo)......"
-
- Member
- Posts: 262
- Joined: 13 Mar 2002, 13:08
- Location: USA
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Michael Kenny,
We have debated this before a number of times, that is Georg Hantusch's 221 towing the 231 in the picture.
The 221 commanded at the time of the picture is Hantusch, until otherwise proven I would go with the Order of Battle on the second company over at best quess work.
There are times in the heat of battle, sickness, sr commanders etc did take charge of other commanders tanks, I haven't seen any prove Sowa is out of action after the Battle of Villars-Bocage.
Brain Ried work is much like everyones theory, rebuilding a battle long after the fact is very hard work.
We have the information form the person that took the photo of 007 in the field, as posted he said the tank only showed the one hit on the engine decking, so the hit had to come from above.
Ried and others totally give no credit to both the French locals (closest to the battle at the time), German acounts, and the Photographers account of the the tanks damage.
The question on accounts of the action are these, what weight of evidence do you give accounts?
Should first hand accounts durning the war weight more than 40+ year later?
Should the photographers account of the tank, which was taken until near 40 years after the war have the same weight as the rebuilds?
As a historian I give more weight to earlier accounts, I have seen from rebuilding football games of the 1950-60's stories told to conflex with game film many times.
Also the longer you get from events the wilder the stories get, I have seen this in both WWII history and college football.
Interpreting photographs is hard work and one needs first hand negatives to print good quality prints to see the details that can be easily missed in second hand blow ups.
We have debated this before a number of times, that is Georg Hantusch's 221 towing the 231 in the picture.
The 221 commanded at the time of the picture is Hantusch, until otherwise proven I would go with the Order of Battle on the second company over at best quess work.
There are times in the heat of battle, sickness, sr commanders etc did take charge of other commanders tanks, I haven't seen any prove Sowa is out of action after the Battle of Villars-Bocage.
Brain Ried work is much like everyones theory, rebuilding a battle long after the fact is very hard work.
We have the information form the person that took the photo of 007 in the field, as posted he said the tank only showed the one hit on the engine decking, so the hit had to come from above.
Ried and others totally give no credit to both the French locals (closest to the battle at the time), German acounts, and the Photographers account of the the tanks damage.
The question on accounts of the action are these, what weight of evidence do you give accounts?
Should first hand accounts durning the war weight more than 40+ year later?
Should the photographers account of the tank, which was taken until near 40 years after the war have the same weight as the rebuilds?
As a historian I give more weight to earlier accounts, I have seen from rebuilding football games of the 1950-60's stories told to conflex with game film many times.
Also the longer you get from events the wilder the stories get, I have seen this in both WWII history and college football.
Interpreting photographs is hard work and one needs first hand negatives to print good quality prints to see the details that can be easily missed in second hand blow ups.
- The_Enigma
- Member
- Posts: 2270
- Joined: 14 Oct 2007, 15:59
- Location: Cheshire, England
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Have you actually read his book?Ried and others totally give no credit to both the French locals (closest to the battle at the time), German acounts, and the Photographers account of the the tanks damage.
The question on accounts of the action are these, what weight of evidence do you give accounts?
Should first hand accounts durning the war weight more than 40+ year later?
In the appendix devoted to Wittman he brings up the following facts:
1) 2nd Tactical Air force were not in the area at the time and didn’t claim tank kills, he also provides the relevant WO records to support this position*
2) Polish Division was not in the area
3) British and Canadian eye witnesses claim engaging and destroying Tiger tanks
4) German eye witnesses from the Tigers engaged that day, mention nothing of air attacks and only state they were engaged in tank on tank/ATG combat
5) German eye witnesses from the company but not in tanks do not mention seeing any planes attacking them
*With 2TAC out the way i have seen people propose that it must have been the USSAF. As far as i know the bombers or fighter escorts from the USSAF also do not claim the kill or is evidence to support this position.
----
The only "guesswork" he brings into it all is that the Canadians got the kill based on them being closer to Wittmanns position then the British regiment (who previously had been claimed as the victor from guys within the rgt).
---
What locals would these be? The ones in the villages,towns and farms on the frontline currently occupied by both sides (i.e. Cramesnil, Cintheaux and Gaumesnil)?the French locals (closest to the battle at the time)
The only French account i know of, doesnt come from a local but the photographer. A single man, up to a year after the battle (iirc), should be given more credit then documents which dismiss aerial attacks and eye wittiness accounts which claim tank on tank fighting only?
Regarding the photo, what does it prove? It shows no entry or exit holes so it doesn’t not back up Serges (cant remember his surname, am sure that’s his first though) position on what he thinks may have happened.
On top of that i have seen people on forums discuss the 'alleged' hole in the upper deck was an exit hole and the engine was intact. What there sources are i do not know, but i have seen this mentioned. I have also seen people state how the bin on the back of the turret is intact which dismisses an attack from a rocket - well i can see the bin intact but if a rocket would destroy it i do not know. Then we also have the post campaign survey results which claimed rocket firing planes were inaccurate and there effectiveness a myth.
So wittiness claiming no planes being there, records saying no planes there, documents saying said planes were inaccurate and had low kill probabilities, people questioning the “rocket theory” left right and centre, several historians claiming either the British or Cannuks tankers as Wittmanns killer and one French guy saying a plane must have done it in his opinion....
-
- Member
- Posts: 8251
- Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
- Location: Teesside
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
Sorry but it is definately '222' towing '231' You are the only person saying it is otherwise and every other person has accepted this reality. You should not rely on captions in books.Homer martin wrote:Michael Kenny,
We have debated this before a number of times, that is Georg Hantusch's 221 towing the 231 in the picture.
Try these links
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/th ... rs-Bocage-
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/th ... f+Wittmann
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/th ... ttmann%92s
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/th ... ers+Bocage
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/th ... ger+Number...
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... 027904135/
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... +V-B+again+-
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... +15th+2002
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... ate+or+mid+-
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... creenGrabs
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47207/me ... iger+Q%27s
From ML:
the Tiger of s.SS-PzAbt.101 towing 231 is...222, contrary to what has been stated in all the books so far !
In one of the shots from this well known sequence, you can see the last digit is a '2', though it is partially concealed by the standing officer.
So we have 2...2.
Next, you need to make comparisons to determine its true identity :
2 photos of the actual Tiger 232 happen to exist and they show this vehicle had its emblem ("Crossed Keys") painted in a cut-out patch in the Zim; also 232 had a long-hinged loader's hatch etc...
The "Tiger towing 231" has a LATER type of loader's hatch (short-hinged, off centered handle) and has its emblem painted DIRECTLY onto the Zimmerit !
So the "towing Tiger" CAN'T be 232.
One of the shots showing the SS101/2.Kp Tigers climbing up a hill on the way to Normandy (near Morgny, June 7 1944) shows Tiger 212 almost head on, just behind 211; it's a bit murky as 212 is in the distance but close scrutiny reveals it had a MONOCULAR sight.
Again, it can't possibly be the "towing Tiger" as this vehicle has a BINOCULAR sight...
So, by default, the Tiger towing 231 can be 222 ONLY !
222 was Kurt Sowa's official mount as of June 6 1944.
The photos showing 222 towing 231 were taken just outside Villers-Bocage on June 14, so just one day after Wittmann's attack there.
As for the standing officer in motorcyclist's coat, Agte says it's Georg Hantusch only because he thinks this towing Tiger is 221 (Hantusch's official mount) !
We now know it's not 221, so this officer could well be Sowa instead...
Your evidence is circular. The commander is 'identified' His tank is 221. The tank must be 221. because the tank is '221' then the comander must be.............I think you get the picture.The 221 commanded at the time of the picture is Hantusch, until otherwise proven I would go with the Order of Battle on the second company over at best quess work.
I know someone who is very friendly with the man who took that photo. He took other photos of the wreck but over the years they got lost. The photo was taken after the war (1946/47)His name is Serge and he has provided a lot of information about the tank wrecks all over the area. He saw one penetration of the tank which years ago he ASSUMED was from a rocket. He was a farmer with no inside information. He does not say it was a rocket penetration because he saw it being hit.Brain Ried work is much like everyones theory, rebuilding a battle long after the fact is very hard work.
We have the information form the person that took the photo of 007 in the field, as posted he said the tank only showed the one hit on the engine decking, so the hit had to come from above.
What 'ignored' locals? You are making this up.Ried and others totally give no credit to both the French locals (closest to the battle at the time), German acounts, and the Photographers account of the the tanks damage.
What 'ignored' German accounts? The accounts in Agte's book all confirm Wittmann's demise.
The photographer we have covered so I would like you to post the accounts from 'locals' who say Ried (and everyone else) is wrong.
Unless you have some new previously unknown accounts then you have to accept they ALL confirm that it was an AP penetration that finished Wittmann.
No. Use the accounts from Wittmann's comrades who saw him being hit and who saw his turret fly off. Why do you think they were wrong?The question on accounts of the action are these, what weight of evidence do you give accounts?
Should first hand accounts durning the war weight more than 40+ year later?
As I said earlier thare is but one photo and that is the one Serge took. It has NO INFORMATION WHATSOEVER that could be used to say what hit the Tiger.Should the photographers account of the tank, which was taken until near 40 years after the war have the same weight as the rebuilds?
As a historian I give more weight to earlier accounts, I have seen from rebuilding football games of the 1950-60's stories told to conflex with game film many times.
Also the longer you get from events the wilder the stories get, I have seen this in both WWII history and college football.
Interpreting photographs is hard work and one needs first hand negatives to print good quality prints to see the details that can be easily missed in second hand blow ups.
You are so far wide of the mark on a number of the key facts that it is difficult to know where to begin. Believe what you wish to believe. There is enough here for those with a real interest in the facts to see the obvious.
Photo 1 shows the style of the '1' on '221'. Note that nothing on the digit '1' sticks out behind the vertical middle part of the number. It has a straight vertical back.
Photo 2 is again the real '221'.
Photo 3 is the Tiger '222' that you claim is '221'. Note that the partialy obscured last turret number can only be a '2'. It is impossible for it to be a 1.
- Attachments
-
- SS101 2.Kp. Tiger 221 near Morg.jpg (29.53 KiB) Viewed 20113 times
-
- SS101 2.Kp. Tiger 221.jpg (48.87 KiB) Viewed 20115 times
-
- SS101 - 2.jpg (30.88 KiB) Viewed 20109 times
-
- Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 06 Sep 2017, 17:45
- Location: Canada
Re: Michael Wittmann.....turret number?
My father was a huge WWII History Buff and was always making models of German vehicles, including some pretty popular tanks. He was a master modeller. He did a "replica of Michael Wittmans Tank which I still have in my livingroom. I'm not saying that S03 was Michael's origional Turret number, but that is what my father put. I tried to attach a picture of he tank, but it keeps saying the file is too large :/
-
- Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 06 Sep 2017, 17:45
- Location: Canada