Testing the King Tiger at Kubinka

Discussions on the vehicles used by the Axis forces. Hosted by Christian Ankerstjerne
Locked
Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#136

Post by Darrin » 24 Aug 2002, 19:44

Michael Kenny wrote:I did try to talk sensibly to you in my last post but it seems you will accept no criticism of this book which you constantly use to rubbish practicaly everyone who's post you answer. It seems this book is the Font of all knowledge and you seem unable to understand that it MIGHT not be correct in every little detail it publishes. Well as I am not of sufficient standing for you to take seriously let me now carefully guide you through some facts published by Authors who can't be dismissed as amateurs. Schieder in Tigers In Combat I and II lists the strengh of 503 on 18/07/44 as 32 tanks. A loss of 13 Tigers that only about 5 were Tiger II. This gives a loss of 8 Tiger I. 101 are listed as having 25 Tiger I on 20/7/44. A loss of 20 Tiger I. 102 are listed as having 38 Tiger I on 26/7/44. A loss of 7 Tiger I. This is a total of 35 lost Tiger I by July 27th. As Schneider is using mostly survivors testimony to reconstruct these loses(nearly all paperwork was lost in the retreat) this figure is on the conservative side but let us use them anyway. This is STILL 35 Tiger I NOT 23. Zetterling says the Germans admit to losing 23 Tiger tanks by 27/7/44 but as the Tiger II were also Tigers we shall add them to the total and we now have 40 LOST Tigers. There is still 3 Tiger Is from Pz.Lehr that no one knows how or where they were destroyed but they certainly were destroyed. Now where did I get the Figure of 15 lost by 102? Have you seen a book 'Waffen SS Panzer Units I Normandy 1944' by M.Wood and J. Dugdale?(Books International 2000). The Authors used only the surviving documents FROM GERMAN ARCHIVES to give a full listing of all the Meldungs,ready for action states and Panzer deliveries and allocations for divisional sub-units for all the Units that fought in Normandy. In it on page 187 SS sPzAbt 102 have 30 Tigers for 31/7/44. Nearly all these ORIGINAL documents are published on the right-hand page with a translation on the left page. Unlike Zetterling the Authors didn't give us their opinion on what they meant ,they published the originals so poorly informed non-Swedish Doctors in History and Experts on the German Army and Archives could use our basic maths skills to add up these totals. In doing so it seems we find the Swedish Emperor isn't wearing any clothes! To be fair Zetterling doesn't deserve that last remark. He has done a very good job in his books but he isn't infallible. You do him no favours with your never-ending barrage of statistics and percentages that can be twisted and turned to make black is white in some cases. My research,modest though it is,was into what happened on the Battlefield and it has shown me that all those figures on bits of paper rarely matched what was going on in the field. Try getting your feet dirty in a little practical research and please BUY ANOTHER BOOK! Then you will double your knowledge. As a parting shot Zetterling on page 181 says 102 only had 30 Tigers on 30/7/44. If they only lost 3 where did the other 12 go?. He also states on page 191 that 503 had 23 Tigers written off and on page 177 that 101 had only 25 Tigers on 1/8/44. That is a bigger total loss than my figure!. I think you have shot yourself in the foot here. Don't be too hard on yourself!

You are just proving how inexpert you are I hope schinder was able to do more than you. Comabt stories from a few survivors 50 years after the war vs german archives I wonder what is more reliable.

The 102 had 20 operation tigers on the 22 jul and 5 in short term repir. Your figure of 20 des does not jibe with any probable long term repair or sent to factory numbers.

Neither can panzer lehr lost tigers be added in becqause you have NO PROOF they were lost before the 27 july.

Zetterling list 30 op tanks of the 102 on the 30 jul 44. Even more if you includes all the short term long term and sent to factory numbers which aren't listed. So your second source is also questionable. At least it seems to disagrees with zetterling ger archive number.

Is zetterling the definative souce of tigers in normandy no way. Athough you cerainly prove extremly yourself to be the worst of all sources. Like I said I'll take what zetterling says over the mumbo jumbo you try and feed us any day of the week. You can trust and beileve whatever you want to but don´t go looking for waves of converts.

Starting str sub str does not equal losses. You have to include all tanks not just op but also short long term repair and those evacuated to factories. Plus you need to know reinforment and that op tank etc... str is the actual vehicle you think it is. You seem to have poor knowlege of ger arm reporting and are misintereting eveything you read because of that.

PS Zetterling did post MANY archive matererial already translated in his work. If he had tried to include more then his 462 p book which probably has over 1000 ger archival references would have been usalable and unprintable. If you want to check his work and can´t go to the archives order the microfilm yourself.

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

#137

Post by Michael Kenny » 24 Aug 2002, 19:55

Now Darrin don't be a sore loser. Now that you have been shown cast -iron evidence that Zetterling can have all the raw data in his hand and still get his conclusions wrong I hope you will tone down your youthful exhuberance and channel your obvious energy into doing some proper in-depth research. Read a lot more(that means looking into something that you may not believe to be true) instead of contemptuously dismissing out of hand all oposite views. Now I know you won't believe this but even I, on occasion, have been known to be wrong. Having been shown my errors I have had to grudgingly accept it and use the experience to temper my enthusiasm.Next time I tried harder to make sure I was right and the slow realization that yet again I had got it wrong whilst hard to accept made me in the end a much more balanced 'researcher'( albiet part-time). As yet you have not reached that level of conciousness but when you do you will look back on me with fond memories as one of your first Tutors! As for the wrecks even if I posted 50 and each had a sign saying Caen 5 Km in the background I don't think you are yet in a mood to accept them.
Attachments
304.jpg
304.jpg (28.04 KiB) Viewed 2539 times


Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#138

Post by Darrin » 24 Aug 2002, 20:05

Michael Kenny wrote:Now Darrin don't be a sore loser. Now that you have been shown cast -iron evidence that Zetterling can have all the raw data in his hand and still get his conclusions wrong I hope you will tone down your youthful exhuberance and channel your obvious energy into doing some proper in-depth research. Read a lot more(that means looking into something that you may not believe to be true) instead of contemptuously dismissing out of hand all oposite views. Now I know you won't believe this but even I, on occasion, have been known to be wrong. Having been shown my errors I have had to grudgingly accept it and use the experience to temper my enthusiasm.Next time I tried harder to make sure I was right and the slow realization that yet again I had got it wrong whilst hard to accept made me in the end a much more balanced 'researcher'( albiet part-time). As yet you have not reached that level of conciousness but when you do you will look back on me with fond memories as one of your first Tutors! As for the wrecks even if I posted 50 and each had a sign saying Caen 5 Km in the background I don't think you are yet in a mood to accept them.

The only fond memeories are the continuos gigles you give me every time you put pen to paper. You are an ignorant, biased researcher whose only conclusions have already been drawn before you even begin. At least I don't have to purchase your book. Free research the worst type of all.

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#139

Post by Darrin » 24 Aug 2002, 20:38

b_c_ries wrote:I believe "mr. flippant" is using the pictures to illustrate that alot of Tigers were knocked out by the Allies. I enjoy those pictures and any other pictures of tanks regardless of who posts them or what point of view they are trying to illustrate. I wouldn't be to hasty to discount the tests done by the Soviet Socialists on the Armor of the King-Tiger. Tests like these were not done for propaganda purposes or after the war from the comfort of a University library. The commies conducting these tests were attempting to help their comrades in the field to know how best to fight against King-Tigers. They understood that false test results would result in dead comrades. If some commie researcher distorted the results to support some weird propaganda campaign and troops in the field subsequently attempted to engage King-Tigers at ineffective range Comrade Georgi Zhukov would have ensured that the commie researcher got a 7.62 x 25 bullet in the head. I'm not sure about the comment regarding reliability of the drivetrain but I believe that if the Russians drove it the way they drove BT-7s and T-34s it would certainly break.

If he is going to go around posting pictures from copyrighhted material he should post the soucre of the picture or he could be in violation of the law. We all know many tigers were des that is not in dispute the numbers and location were. Frivous posting with no info or anylysis proves nothing but uses up bandwith and breaks the laws.

I am not saying the info was entrily made up but there were many flaws in the test info as presented on RBF and the conlusions drawn. Although the biases of the rus is also a problem peole were expected to do almost everythoing in a certain manner. If he did it differantly he might at the least not expect promtion etc....

The biggest problem of the firing test itself from RBF is thier is no ammo type except AP used. Not very likly. And only ranges for guns are given no exact distance etc... The other concern is that arm over time will become less res after firing a few piercing or non percing rounds. This is probaly happening and the rus didn't even notice it. The US 76mm guns out performing the rus 85mm guns by sucha wide margin seems to indicate that.

The other and biggesat problems concern one of stats. This is only 1 tank and what it says about all tigers is difficult to show. Also for firing test result you need each gun and ammo to fire at the same peice of arm several times to get anything meaninful. This certainly doesn't seem to have been done from what little info is provided at RBF.

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

#140

Post by Michael Kenny » 24 Aug 2002, 20:41

My poor knowledge of German Tiger Units in Normandy tells me that they all started out with 45 Tigers. To hear 101 had 25 Tigers on such a date means that 20 have vanished. If a tank has to go for factory repair it is a wreck and to the Unit it as a total loss. I never included the 3 Lehr Tigers in my totals. No Tiger I was sent to any Unit in Normandy as a replacement. They started with 45 tanks and whole companies were withdrawn to re-equip with Tiger II. So no re-inforcements at all I'm afraid. All your frantic efforts to include short term /long term replacement and reinforcement Tigers in the equation won't work. I also note you never mention 503. Is that because your hero says they ALONE lost 23 Tigers by 27th July(page 191, line 11). Please note I include no abuse and name calling in this post.
Attachments
fordarrin3.jpg
fordarrin3.jpg (55.09 KiB) Viewed 2518 times

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#141

Post by Darrin » 24 Aug 2002, 21:53

Michael Kenny wrote:My poor knowledge of German Tiger Units in Normandy tells me that they all started out with 45 Tigers. To hear 101 had 25 Tigers on such a date means that 20 have vanished. If a tank has to go for factory repair it is a wreck and to the Unit it as a total loss. I never included the 3 Lehr Tigers in my totals. No Tiger I was sent to any Unit in Normandy as a replacement. They started with 45 tanks and whole companies were withdrawn to re-equip with Tiger II. So no re-inforcements at all I'm afraid. All your frantic efforts to include short term /long term replacement and reinforcement Tigers in the equation won't work. I also note you never mention 503. Is that because your hero says they ALONE lost 23 Tigers by 27th July(page 191, line 11). Please note I include no abuse and name calling in this post.

Acctually it is your reading skills which are at fault he says;

'The exact numbers of tigers lost by the battallion is unclear but it is known that up until 27 July 23 tigers were complete write-offs.'

The ref he uses here is the SAME one he used at the end of chapter 7. It is overall loses for the entire front for all units. After this sentence comes one that discuss overall losses just before goodwood then to clairfy any confusion his last sentance of this paragraph reads. p191.

'Note that these figures refer to ALL tiger units in normandy, not just sch pan-abt 503.'

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

#142

Post by Michael Kenny » 24 Aug 2002, 23:12

I should have known better! I knew the figures I was quoting Zetterling on seemed too high and yes I mis-read the paragraph.The kid landed a punch. After you have savoured the moment can I say yes I MADE A MISTAKE( see it doesn't hurt to say it) I assume you will make many references to this error on my part but I can live with it. Now can I ask you top go back and will you check the post where I list Tiger LOSES(NOTE : not in for repair but total loses) as calculated by Scheider. That is SS101 15 lost by 20/7/44. SS102 7 lost by 26/7/44. Heer 503 14 lost by 18/7/44.( please note Schneider makes a small error in this calculation in that he forgets the Tiger lost on 6/7/44) Using basic maths that gives a total of 36 Tigers lost by 26/7/44. Now I presume you do not have this book so you can't check if my figures are accurate. Can someone else look and post a confirmation so Darrin can see I am not deceiving him. Now Darrin are the 2 standard reference books on Tigers in WWII wrong and is Zetterling right? This is a simple question to answer and if you think Zetterling is right you will deserve the credit for bringing Schneiders mistakes to the fore. Just so there is no mistake about what I am saying here it is again in plain English. By the 27th of July 1944, on the Western Front(Normandy) at least 36 Tigers were destroyed/written off (i.e. written off because they were so badly damaged they could not be repaired)Zetterling quotes figures that say only 23 Tigers were destroyed by this date. Zetterling has been given wrong information. To show this figure of 23 is too low I quote the daily loses as used by Schneider in Tigers In Combat I and II. I am not making the figures up and if you reply with insults direct them at Schneider. If it makes you happy I will say again I mis-read the paragraph on 503 loses in Zetterling. It doesn't change the fact his figures are wrong. For those just watching this struggle I am trying to post up some not so well known pictures of wrecked Tigers. I have some photos of wrecks that I am not allowed to post as they were given to me just for reference purposes. What I can say is I have a lot more than 23! Only one so far is not a Normandy wreck but is from Tunisia.
Attachments
normandy wreck.jpg
normandy wreck.jpg (68.09 KiB) Viewed 2496 times

b_c_ries
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: 27 Mar 2002, 05:25
Location: California USA

#143

Post by b_c_ries » 25 Aug 2002, 00:31

It would have been nice if the Russians had published more information regarding exact ranges that projectiles were fired at and the exact ammunition type and if they were going to get into accuracy variations weather conditions would be helpful. Also when dealing with a 70 ton vehicle ground hardness and moisture present would have a major effect on top speed. But the Russians probally just wanted to find out at which ranges various guns could successfully defeat the Nazis new tank so they got a tank and got some guns and started shooting. (Throw in some Vodka and women and it would be my idea of a great party). Its not very good scientific proceedure but its the best information available. When the information was most needed not that many functional King-Tigers had been captured and after the war the information was not very useful as nobody was likely to have to fight against King-Tigers. btw. I still like the blown up tank pictures but some pictures of functional ones might keep everybody else happy. This test reminds me of the tests that the US conducted on one Zero captured in the Aleutians in 1942. The plane was repaired with US parts fixed by US mechanics who had never touched a Zero and only one Zero was used because they only had one Zero. The results were shared with US combat pilots and Lots of US lives were saved and lots of Zeros were shot down because the US pilots knew more than they did before.
If 70 grains of IMR 4064 in a 7.92x57 case behind a 197 gr. fmj is too much then 85 grains should be just right.

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#144

Post by Darrin » 25 Aug 2002, 04:12

Michael Kenny wrote:I should have known better! I knew the figures I was quoting Zetterling on seemed too high and yes I mis-read the paragraph.The kid landed a punch. After you have savoured the moment can I say yes I MADE A MISTAKE( see it doesn't hurt to say it) I assume you will make many references to this error on my part but I can live with it. Now can I ask you top go back and will you check the post where I list Tiger LOSES(NOTE : not in for repair but total loses) as calculated by Scheider. That is SS101 15 lost by 20/7/44. SS102 7 lost by 26/7/44. Heer 503 14 lost by 18/7/44.( please note Schneider makes a small error in this calculation in that he forgets the Tiger lost on 6/7/44) Using basic maths that gives a total of 36 Tigers lost by 26/7/44. Now I presume you do not have this book so you can't check if my figures are accurate. Can someone else look and post a confirmation so Darrin can see I am not deceiving him. Now Darrin are the 2 standard reference books on Tigers in WWII wrong and is Zetterling right? This is a simple question to answer and if you think Zetterling is right you will deserve the credit for bringing Schneiders mistakes to the fore. Just so there is no mistake about what I am saying here it is again in plain English. By the 27th of July 1944, on the Western Front(Normandy) at least 36 Tigers were destroyed/written off (i.e. written off because they were so badly damaged they could not be repaired)Zetterling quotes figures that say only 23 Tigers were destroyed by this date. Zetterling has been given wrong information. To show this figure of 23 is too low I quote the daily loses as used by Schneider in Tigers In Combat I and II. I am not making the figures up and if you reply with insults direct them at Schneider. If it makes you happy I will say again I mis-read the paragraph on 503 loses in Zetterling. It doesn't change the fact his figures are wrong. For those just watching this struggle I am trying to post up some not so well known pictures of wrecked Tigers. I have some photos of wrecks that I am not allowed to post as they were given to me just for reference purposes. What I can say is I have a lot more than 23! Only one so far is not a Normandy wreck but is from Tunisia.

The number 23 was the ger army group tigers des up to 27 july. The 102 lost 3 total des tigers up to the 31 st of july according to archives from the corps they were att to. The 101st lost 15 by 5 july according to panzer group west archives. It lost no more then 20 by the end of the month acording to the same archives 29th and 1st it had 25 op and short term repair unk rest. In tot accrding to other archives the tigers lost would be somewhere bettween 18 and 23 up until the end of the month. The origianal date the ger army group records applied to was the 27th of july 4-5 days before the end of the month.

The real question is the 503 it had lost no tanks as late as the 17 of july according to panzer group west archives. According to a unit history book the 503 3rd company turned over thier tiger IIs to the 2nd compay on the 20 of july and went to train on tiger IIs partially due to high losses on the 18th of july. It may be part of the reson why the bat had such a low op and short term numbers compare to earlier. The bat switched corps on the 23 jul as well according to panzer group west archives which may have reducced its operational numbers as well. The 503 went from 45 op short and long term repair by the 17th. The bat had 28 op and sort term rep with an unknown for long and rebuilds on the 25th. On the 1st of aug it had 29 op and short term repair with unknowns for the other two cat. All according to panzer group west archive except the 1st it was Inspecort gen panzer troops report. The 503 lost somewhere bettween 0 and 16 tigers and tiger IIs during by the end of the month.

So we have fairly firm numbers of 18-23 tiger Is lost for the 101 and 102 till the end of july. Very unreliable numbers of 0-16 tigers I and IIs lost for the 503 during the same time span. For a total of 18-39 tiger Is and IIS lost lost till the end of aug. This is all according to other archives then the 23 by 27th july army group archive info. Given the unreliable state of knowledge about the 503 tot write offs and that the 27th is 4-5 days before the other end of month figures the 23 des by that date does not seem unreasonable. Esp as according to the OB west reported 19 total tiger write offs on the 15th of july.

The 3 tiger Is from the lehr as well would raise the MAX to 42 but the proven minimum is still 18 till the end of july. 18-42.

I don't have schieder although I may try and get a copy to look at. His 15 on the 15th for the 101 is the same as the ger archives. His 7 by the 26th are double the 3 on the 31st by archives. His 14 for the 503 on the 18 th is not impossible since max losses unitl the end of the month would be 16 according to archives. But since the bat was at full str on the 17th the dab befoire the huge losses are indicated it seems doubtful. Also the 503 would have only been able to lose two more tanks by months end two weeks away just to reach MAXIMUM possible looses. Both this situations togeather from archive info and seem improbable. Also according to archive info the 503 was at full str up to the 17th and COULD not of suffered any losses you mentinoed on the 6th of july.

It wouldn´t surprise me if you had more then 23 pictures of panzer wreaks just in NW europe up to 27 jul. It would seem extremly doubtful that you would have as many as 42 even by the end of that month. By the end of july though the front was claposing and ger tank losses at the front and overruns of repair depots were happening at an accelerated rate. These reports if they got done at all would not have happened till aug. Also ger tank str often did not include ARVs or command tanks. So there is room for more here.

On the the hand it could be likly that one tiger was lost with minor damaged and photgraphed then either fired on by accident or purpose and further quite different pictures taken. Or even photos from different angles I am trying to say there is room for error in your photos as well. There were tigers in scily, Italy, west-cen europe and the EF as well. There is room for a reduction here.

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

#145

Post by Michael Kenny » 25 Aug 2002, 06:52

At least you have calmed down and are sensible again. The main reason you are wrong on the losses,and Zetterling is wrong,is because you are relying on paperwork for your total and I am using actual losses for my totals. First the Tiger lost on 6/7/44 fell through a bridge on the way to the Front and was totaly wrecked. It was recovered but it was beyond repair. It was also photographed wrecked and here we have our first mistake in the 'Archives'. 503 could not be full strenght on ANY date after the 6th of July except on paper!.No replacement or re-inforcing Tigers were issued to ANY Tiger unit in Normandy so no escape route there for you. The 13 Tigers lost on July aren't unreliable figures at all. It is a specific loss that this time shows up in Zetterlings figures caused by Area bombing and combat loses. Notice how 503s total now goes down from a max total of never more than 20 from now on. The inclusion of long-term repair is a red herring.Long term repair tanks were sent back to the factory for rebuild(because they were so badly damaged,i.e. wrecks) and as such were 'lost' to the Unit. Such a tank went into a pool and was NEVER kept to be reissued to that Unit as a replacement. No matter which way you look at it 503 by 27/7/44 had 14 cast-iron lost Tigers. Now SS 101,even Zetterlings figures only give it 13 runners and 11 crocks by the 27th of July. This is a loss of 21 Tigers but I will stick to my original total of 15 to help you a little. Again the long term repairs(IF there were any,which I doubt) dont come into it.The actual Meldung Sheet used to do the Monthly returns has no box to mark long term repairs off in. Only short term is required to be entered. Lastly SS 102. The 'Archives' may say they only lost 3 Tigers by the 27th July but the combat record lists 5 KO'd on 10/7/44. 1 KOd on 11/7/44 and 1 KOd 26/7/44. That is a total of 7. 14+15+7=36. You will have to take this on board Darrin.The 'ARCHIVE' might say SS 102 only 3 lost but the actual Combat record(i.e. real life) says they lost 7, keep reading that sentence till the penny drops. The minimum is not '18 by the end of July'. It is a minimum of 35 by July 27th. You also confuse things by saying German returns did not include Command tanks and ARVs. Yes they did. 101s returns list 1 Berge Pz V and 102s list 5 Berge Pz V and the 3 Command Tigers in each Abteilung are also listed seperately. Each Abteilung had 42 Gun tanks and 3 Bef. Pz. I haven't made any mistake of counting a wrecked recovery tank as a Tiger loss. Believe me I KNOW the difference. I also know all the modifications made to Tiger tanks throughout its service life.I can tell an early from a mid. I know when a late was introduced. Just from the rear view of Wittmanns knocked out 007 I can tell you what type of wheel it has.I can also tell you what Month it was produced. I know all the headlight modifications and when all the tool stowage was changed. And I am aware of all the non-standard Tigers cobbled together at the end of the war when every tank was needed. In short I can tell a Normandy Tiger from an Italian or Russian one and I will never confuse photos of any knocked out Tiger to make one wreck look like two. Sorry Darrin unlike Zetterling I know my Tigers.
Attachments
0013jpg.jpg
0013jpg.jpg (41.01 KiB) Viewed 2468 times

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#146

Post by Darrin » 25 Aug 2002, 14:07

Michael Kenny wrote:At least you have calmed down and are sensible again. The main reason you are wrong on the losses,and Zetterling is wrong,is because you are relying on paperwork for your total and I am using actual losses for my totals. First the Tiger lost on 6/7/44 fell through a bridge on the way to the Front and was totaly wrecked. It was recovered but it was beyond repair. It was also photographed wrecked and here we have our first mistake in the 'Archives'. 503 could not be full strenght on ANY date after the 6th of July except on paper!.No replacement or re-inforcing Tigers were issued to ANY Tiger unit in Normandy so no escape route there for you. The 13 Tigers lost on July aren't unreliable figures at all. It is a specific loss that this time shows up in Zetterlings figures caused by Area bombing and combat loses. Notice how 503s total now goes down from a max total of never more than 20 from now on. The inclusion of long-term repair is a red herring.Long term repair tanks were sent back to the factory for rebuild(because they were so badly damaged,i.e. wrecks) and as such were 'lost' to the Unit. Such a tank went into a pool and was NEVER kept to be reissued to that Unit as a replacement. No matter which way you look at it 503 by 27/7/44 had 14 cast-iron lost Tigers. Now SS 101,even Zetterlings figures only give it 13 runners and 11 crocks by the 27th of July. This is a loss of 21 Tigers but I will stick to my original total of 15 to help you a little. Again the long term repairs(IF there were any,which I doubt) dont come into it.The actual Meldung Sheet used to do the Monthly returns has no box to mark long term repairs off in. Only short term is required to be entered. Lastly SS 102. The 'Archives' may say they only lost 3 Tigers by the 27th July but the combat record lists 5 KO'd on 10/7/44. 1 KOd on 11/7/44 and 1 KOd 26/7/44. That is a total of 7. 14+15+7=36. You will have to take this on board Darrin.The 'ARCHIVE' might say SS 102 only 3 lost but the actual Combat record(i.e. real life) says they lost 7, keep reading that sentence till the penny drops. The minimum is not '18 by the end of July'. It is a minimum of 35 by July 27th. You also confuse things by saying German returns did not include Command tanks and ARVs. Yes they did. 101s returns list 1 Berge Pz V and 102s list 5 Berge Pz V and the 3 Command Tigers in each Abteilung are also listed seperately. Each Abteilung had 42 Gun tanks and 3 Bef. Pz. I haven't made any mistake of counting a wrecked recovery tank as a Tiger loss. Believe me I KNOW the difference. I also know all the modifications made to Tiger tanks throughout its service life.I can tell an early from a mid. I know when a late was introduced. Just from the rear view of Wittmanns knocked out 007 I can tell you what type of wheel it has.I can also tell you what Month it was produced. I know all the headlight modifications and when all the tool stowage was changed. And I am aware of all the non-standard Tigers cobbled together at the end of the war when every tank was needed. In short I can tell a Normandy Tiger from an Italian or Russian one and I will never confuse photos of any knocked out Tiger to make one wreck look like two. Sorry Darrin unlike Zetterling I know my Tigers.

The 503rd reached french ass areas on the 5th of july and was at the front around the 10th of july. This bat was at full str as all tanks were accounted for in operatioanl short and long term repair on the 13th and 17th of july. If you and schieder insist on the 503rd lost a tank on the 6th then you have to prove the records as being wrong. Thier is no reasons the gers would lie or be inaccuat on the 6th. Any loss on this date had plenty of time to be reported.

You and schieder might prefer not to use archives but real historians such as zetterling use arhive information first and formost. Unless you can make substatial proof that the archives in part or whole were inaccurate. You saying you have a picture that proves it for the 6th july specifically doesn´t reach the level of proof required. Publish your pictures somewhere in a book or article and you might make a better point.

If you are going to turn the old area bombing or aircraft in general crank. On p 40 zetterling points out that of 40 des tigers examined by operationalal res teams following the front line forces ONLY 1 was des by air weapons. Thier is a whole section in this chapter of zetterlings pointing out the incredibly low % of aircraft des tanks in general. You and schiender seem to still be stuck in popular history book.

The 503rd as I have said and zetterling points out had at least 29 tanks on the 1st of aug. Just couting op and short term rep including long term and factory it would proably be larger. With one company away requiping on tiger IIs at this time much higher numbers are not expected.

Its pretty obvious you still misundertand ger tank reports and how to get provable losses from them. The 101 youy say 24 op and sh rep on the 27. Even though you have NO PROOF than long term loses and evacuartes to factoy are zero you seem to assume so all the time. The 101st had 25 tanks in op and short term rep on the 1st. One more then on the 27july how did this happen? With no reinforcments your claim and no long term rep your unprovable claim then the tigers must have started multiyplying... Just because the form does not always require long term repairs to be reported by the bat they existed bt were reported though the cahhels where they were getting rep at higher levels.

The long term rep after first hitting battle is show twice for the 101 in zettlings tables. They had 5 one day and 6 the next. The 102 when show always had 1-3 in LR. This unit unlike the 101 went into battle over one month aftr normandy began on the 9th of july. The 503 had 15 tanks, 0 tanks and 5 tanks in long term repair when listed in zetterliungs tables. This bat had an entire company of tiger IIs if they were anything like the tiger IIs described in the RBF that first entered battle in rus in aug in such mechanically unsound conditon. Now its july one month earlier and the TIIs must have had a high rate of mech and write offs because of this. The bat TIIs were shipped on the 12th of june and arrived at least a couple of days latter. Then it spent at least a week on the trains moving from ger to france 28-5. By the 10th the bat was moved fwd and committed to battle leaving very little time for crews and mech to falimareise themselves with the tiger Is let alone tiger IIs.

By 31 st july according to ger records in normandy prensented in zetterlings book 2000 tanks in total. Of these 480 had been des and 470 were in workshops. If we use 20% of des sent to factory that would make 100 tanks by itself. Which left 950 or less than half of them with thier units. It seems everybody but you reliases long term rep and return to factories make up a big chunk of ger non permanent losses. While this tank was lost it was not a total write off and any photos german or allied of the 'wreacks' of these tanks are not tanks that were destroyed.

Each ger tank had a serial number now did your photograpers remeber to get the serial number from these tanks. Each ger tank that was to be destoryed had to have a report including diagram for each des tank. Although I´m sure in aug many of these were not submitted in jun and aug they were. It should be incredibly easy to fgure out just what tank you say fell through the bridge which I don´t doubt. But the tank proably was not des but damaged someway. The 503 was at full str after this date and you said it got no reinforcments. So your story does not jibe something is wrong with your knowledge.

According to the archives zetterling prints out your claim that it lost 5 on the 10th of july alone accorindg to some fuzy 'combat records' is impossible. This unit had 41 tanks accounted as late as 20 jul 44 in the op, SR, LR, and on approach march cat. Exatly which german cobat records show the 102 as losing 5 tanks plesae give full archive reference please. Your claim that six were des by this day is unprovable.

As far as I know which seems a better guess than yours the ger reported the str and losses of spec vehiv like ARVs and command tanks seperatly. In otherwords they did not add them into the overall tank total since they were not tanks. Nor did they record them as des tanks. I'm trying to suggest that some of your precious photos of wrecks may not even be tanks but auxialary vehicles not even counted into the 23 figure that the ger reported.

You say you know your tigers but if you displacy such inability to read elsewhere as you did here... A lack of knowledge about ger tank str reporting systems and definitions that zetterling would find hillarious. I only hope a ´rep historian´ like schieder has a better knowlegde than you.
Last edited by Darrin on 25 Aug 2002, 17:29, edited 1 time in total.

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

#147

Post by Michael Kenny » 25 Aug 2002, 17:18

The picture of the '503' Tiger that fell through the bridge has been published in TICI page 209 (Two photos, one before it fell and one after). Also in Tigers/West/Front page 35 there is a photo of the same tank just before it fell through. Most importantly of all the same photos with confirmation it was the FIRST TOTAL LOSS OF THE COMPANY are on pages 235/261 of 'Combat History Of Schwere Panzer Abteilung 503'. This book is the work of the Veterans from 503 and as such it is the final and most authoritive account of this units actions in WWII. I can see why you have to try and ridicule this loss, it is clear PROOF that all the paperwork from then on is wrong. You have to deny it or you whole claim that Zetterling,and Zetterling alone, is right falls at the first hurdle. If ,as I know you will,say this is not proof enough can you tell me what you would consider 'proof'. You also show your lack of understanding of what happened in Normandy when it seems you have not heard of the two occasions when 101 and 503 were caught by Heavy Bomber raids. On June 15th, near Evrecy SS 101s 3rd Kp. was bombed and 4 Tigers were lost. A very well known photo of a 3rd Kp.Tiger totaly wrecked by bombs is on page 283,TICII. Pages 110/11 of Tiger/west/front and in Agte's book on Wittmann. Later on 18th July '503' was caught by a heavy bomber raid and it lost at least 2 Tigers hit by bombs. One of these Tigers(no.313) was photographed several times and you can see it upside-down on page38/40 in Tigers/West/Front, the other was also torn apart by a bomb. Also on page 40 is a photo of Tiger 213 that fell into a crater and couldn't be recovered. This is also a total loss cased by the bombing. Later on a Tiger II fell into a crater and it couldn't be recovered and had to be blown up. It isn't clear from the survivors testimony exactly how many Tigers were hit by bombs or badly damaged but we KNOW at least 3 were total losses. So Zetterling says only One Tiger destroyed by Aircraft and the photographic record and survivor testimony says AT LEAST 7. To be fair to Zetterling I think he was refering to a destruction caused by Tactical Air power and not Bomber Command. You should also remember that unless the Allied Teams looked at EVERY wrecked German tank a statement that only 1 was destroyed by Aircraft means 1 out of that total examined were lost that way NOT 1 out of ALL the German losses. A Tiger in long term repair was not with the Unit .It had been sent to the rear. It was not available to the Unit. It did not add anything to the Unit. If it had to go for Factory rebuild it was because it was wrecked. It was not of any use to anyone and thus cannot be lumped in with a Units strength. In all sense of the word it was a write off. Let me repeat NOT ONE SINGLE TIGER 1, rebuild, re-inforcement, replacement or anything else was supplied to ANY Tiger 1 Unit in Normandy. I hope you aren't going to rubbish the 503 Veterans and say Zetterling knows more than them,even you can't be that silly.
Attachments
vilersclear0001.jpg
vilersclear0001.jpg (37.95 KiB) Viewed 2511 times

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#148

Post by Darrin » 25 Aug 2002, 18:16

Michael Kenny wrote:The picture of the '503' Tiger that fell through the bridge has been published in TICI page 209 (Two photos, one before it fell and one after). Also in Tigers/West/Front page 35 there is a photo of the same tank just before it fell through. Most importantly of all the same photos with confirmation it was the FIRST TOTAL LOSS OF THE COMPANY are on pages 235/261 of 'Combat History Of Schwere Panzer Abteilung 503'. This book is the work of the Veterans from 503 and as such it is the final and most authoritive account of this units actions in WWII. I can see why you have to try and ridicule this loss, it is clear PROOF that all the paperwork from then on is wrong. You have to deny it or you whole claim that Zetterling,and Zetterling alone, is right falls at the first hurdle. If ,as I know you will,say this is not proof enough can you tell me what you would consider 'proof'. You also show your lack of understanding of what happened in Normandy when it seems you have not heard of the two occasions when 101 and 503 were caught by Heavy Bomber raids. On June 15th, near Evrecy SS 101s 3rd Kp. was bombed and 4 Tigers were lost. A very well known photo of a 3rd Kp.Tiger totaly wrecked by bombs is on page 283,TICII. Pages 110/11 of Tiger/west/front and in Agte's book on Wittmann. Later on 18th July '503' was caught by a heavy bomber raid and it lost at least 2 Tigers hit by bombs. One of these Tigers(no.313) was photographed several times and you can see it upside-down on page38/40 in Tigers/West/Front, the other was also torn apart by a bomb. Also on page 40 is a photo of Tiger 213 that fell into a crater and couldn't be recovered. This is also a total loss cased by the bombing. Later on a Tiger II fell into a crater and it couldn't be recovered and had to be blown up. It isn't clear from the survivors testimony exactly how many Tigers were hit by bombs or badly damaged but we KNOW at least 3 were total losses. So Zetterling says only One Tiger destroyed by Aircraft and the photographic record and survivor testimony says AT LEAST 7. To be fair to Zetterling I think he was refering to a destruction caused by Tactical Air power and not Bomber Command. You should also remember that unless the Allied Teams looked at EVERY wrecked German tank a statement that only 1 was destroyed by Aircraft means 1 out of that total examined were lost that way NOT 1 out of ALL the German losses. A Tiger in long term repair was not with the Unit .It had been sent to the rear. It was not available to the Unit. It did not add anything to the Unit. If it had to go for Factory rebuild it was because it was wrecked. It was not of any use to anyone and thus cannot be lumped in with a Units strength. In all sense of the word it was a write off. Let me repeat NOT ONE SINGLE TIGER 1, rebuild, re-inforcement, replacement or anything else was supplied to ANY Tiger 1 Unit in Normandy. I hope you aren't going to rubbish the 503 Veterans and say Zetterling knows more than them,even you can't be that silly.

Zetterling certainly knows about the 503rd unit history. He recommends a few books towards the end of his book and this is the only small unit history recommended. He also uses this book as reference to help suplant his archive info but no book however informative replaces this info. If the 503rd was at full str on the 13 july then no tanks could have been des. If the unit recieved reinforcment which he and others does not think so then maybe it suffered a loss. No reinforcment means the tiger that fell through the brigde was not a total loss and was somehow repaired.

Heavy bombers again the same old tune. Obviously tigers may have been damaged by aircraft in some why but very few were des. CW op reserch teams attirbute 2.5 % 1 of 40 of all tigers they examined as being des by aircraft. Dream on and on... Which if we extraplote to the 138 we would exept 3 des due to a/c weapons. From a ststs prespective 1 out of 40 is a small sample the 1 part and large errors up and down would be expected. Driving a tiger into a crater even assuming it was caused by bombs and not naval or regular arty is not des by a/c. It is a driver, terrain failure to recover tactical abandomnet problem. Not that someone sometime might have droped bombs creating the creaters.

By the way I pointed out the ref last time on p40 of zetterlings book which deals with this. Failure to read me or zetterling this time what your excuse.

The ger had a certain way of reporting thier arm str including destruction. The number of 23 tigers des acoring to thier acrvie reports and def does NOT include rebuilds, short or long term rep and op tanks. It only includes tanks that had been irrevocably lost at that time or were total write offs. So any pictures of wreaks that exceed this number must be questioned as to what they really means. Like the tank of the 503 that you say was des when it fell though the bridge the archives disagree wiith your interpretation of the picture of this tank. The archives must be accepted as correct.

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

#149

Post by Michael Kenny » 25 Aug 2002, 20:25

Sorry Darrin it is not me who said the 503 Tiger was a write-off.The entry saying it was a wreck was penned by Lt. von Rosen. For your information he was in the 3rd Kp. and thus knew Seidel who commanded 323-the tank that fell about 20 foot straight downwards and landed flat on its belly. The photo in Schneider shows well how the suspension has been destroyed and it sits practicaly on its belly plate. Lt. Rosen(remember he was at the scene) says it was recovered but was beyond repair. You can dodge,squirm,obfuscate and ignore as much as you want. '323' was a total loss on 7/7/44. Zetterlings source for the figures he uses ARE WRONG RIGHT FROM THE BEGINING. I just love how you dismiss this 392 page 'small unit history' as not being of any value as compared to a couple of A4 sheets of paper in some dusty storeroom, priceless, absolutely priceless. 250 former members get together to write their Unit History only for Darrin to tell us THEY ARE WRONG and Zetterling is right. Now Darrin I didn't say Aicraft destroyed lots of tanks in Normandy all I did was point out that although Zetterling asserts only one Tiger was destroyed by planes I can show you that 7 were. To humour you lets leave out the one that fell in the crater. How do you dismiss the 2 '503' Tigers destroyed on July 18th?. Lt. von Rosen(I will again remind you he was caught in this raid) says Westrehausens Tiger had taken a direct hit and no trace was left of its crew. He further states Sach's Tiger lay on its Turret with its running gear in the air(this is confirmed in photos) Is this old mens memory playing tricks on them? I also checked Zetterlings chapter on Air Power and found no mention of the bombing of SS 101 on June 15th. It seems Darrin your Hero didn't know about it(perhaps he couldn't find a bit of paper with it written down ?). Let me again quote you the testimony of a survivor of this raid- The tank of Gunther and one other burn out completly(Gunthers was photographed). The turret of the Company Commanders Tank was blown off. One Tiger attempted to evade the bombs and fell into a deep ravine causing the total loss of all crew. 4 Destroyed Tigers and again I think you will try to wriggle by claiming the ravine loss isn't a loss but just 'driver error'. Even so that still would leave 5 Tigers lost to Aircraft and not only the 1 that Zetterling says. When you sneaked back to edit your post of 12.07 the bits you added only served to show how little you know about German tanks. Your claim that some of my 'wrecks' are auxiliary vehicles would be funny if it wasn't coming from someone who is setting himself up as an 'expert'. The only ARV(your term, mine is Berge.Pz.) was on the Panther chassis and as such,to someone unlike yourself knows something about tanks, is instantly recognisable as such and could never be confused with a Tiger. To start with it doesn't even have a turret.! Now your claim about 'Command ' tanks, these Bef.Pz VIs were included in the normal tank strength because they were 'normal' tanks with an extra radio fit so again it is your ignorance of basic German weaponry and practise leads you to make these totaly bogus claims. You seem obsessed with figures and percentages. Do you play a lot of computer games?. If so please stay in those circles and don't come bothering people with your silly tables and the idea that you actually know anything that would be of interest to those who do know what they are talking about. If you wish to post a response try and use one(have you any others?) reference from a book OTHER THAN ZETTERLING to cast doubt on anything I have posted so far.
Attachments
zxczx2.jpg
zxczx2.jpg (66.73 KiB) Viewed 2488 times

Darrin
Member
Posts: 831
Joined: 17 Apr 2002, 11:44
Location: Canada

#150

Post by Darrin » 25 Aug 2002, 21:10

Michael Kenny wrote:Sorry Darrin it is not me who said the 503 Tiger was a write-off.The entry saying it was a wreck was penned by Lt. von Rosen. For your information he was in the 3rd Kp. and thus knew Seidel who commanded 323-the tank that fell about 20 foot straight downwards and landed flat on its belly. The photo in Schneider shows well how the suspension has been destroyed and it sits practicaly on its belly plate. Lt. Rosen(remember he was at the scene) says it was recovered but was beyond repair. You can dodge,squirm,obfuscate and ignore as much as you want. '323' was a total loss on 7/7/44. Zetterlings source for the figures he uses ARE WRONG RIGHT FROM THE BEGINING. I just love how you dismiss this 392 page 'small unit history' as not being of any value as compared to a couple of A4 sheets of paper in some dusty storeroom, priceless, absolutely priceless. 250 former members get together to write their Unit History only for Darrin to tell us THEY ARE WRONG and Zetterling is right. Now Darrin I didn't say Aicraft destroyed lots of tanks in Normandy all I did was point out that although Zetterling asserts only one Tiger was destroyed by planes I can show you that 7 were. To humour you lets leave out the one that fell in the crater. How do you dismiss the 2 '503' Tigers destroyed on July 18th?. Lt. von Rosen(I will again remind you he was caught in this raid) says Westrehausens Tiger had taken a direct hit and no trace was left of its crew. He further states Sach's Tiger lay on its Turret with its running gear in the air(this is confirmed in photos) Is this old mens memory playing tricks on them? I also checked Zetterlings chapter on Air Power and found no mention of the bombing of SS 101 on June 15th. It seems Darrin your Hero didn't know about it(perhaps he couldn't find a bit of paper with it written down ?). Let me again quote you the testimony of a survivor of this raid- The tank of Gunther and one other burn out completly(Gunthers was photographed). The turret of the Company Commanders Tank was blown off. One Tiger attempted to evade the bombs and fell into a deep ravine causing the total loss of all crew. 4 Destroyed Tigers and again I think you will try to wriggle by claiming the ravine loss isn't a loss but just 'driver error'. Even so that still would leave 5 Tigers lost to Aircraft and not only the 1 that Zetterling says. When you sneaked back to edit your post of 12.07 the bits you added only served to show how little you know about German tanks. Your claim that some of my 'wrecks' are auxiliary vehicles would be funny if it wasn't coming from someone who is setting himself up as an 'expert'. The only ARV(your term, mine is Berge.Pz.) was on the Panther chassis and as such,to someone unlike yourself knows something about tanks, is instantly recognisable as such and could never be confused with a Tiger. To start with it doesn't even have a turret.! Now your claim about 'Command ' tanks, these Bef.Pz VIs were included in the normal tank strength because they were 'normal' tanks with an extra radio fit so again it is your ignorance of basic German weaponry and practise leads you to make these totaly bogus claims. You seem obsessed with figures and percentages. Do you play a lot of computer games?. If so please stay in those circles and don't come bothering people with your silly tables and the idea that you actually know anything that would be of interest to those who do know what they are talking about. If you wish to post a response try and use one(have you any others?) reference from a book OTHER THAN ZETTERLING to cast doubt on anything I have posted so far.

I didn´t back and edit my post I said at the bottom of it I had to take a break for breakfast and came back to finish it after. Failure to read and understand seems to run rampant in your part of the world. For instance quote exactly where zetterling says only one tiger was des by a/c in total. He doesn´t as I´ve been trying to say and you fail to understand me on purpose or are you just that slow...

It is not me who is correct or even zetterling who is correct but the ger archives presented by zetterling which prove that the lose of the tiger of the 503rd could NOT have happened. Your insistance of using this unit history book written by veterns years after the conflict as the definitive source over the ger records is laughable. Maybe that is why schieder never included it in his totals.

Yes I would trust zetterlings impartial doctorat of military hiostory and prof at swedish def academy over some veterns account. Written at least 2 books and numourous academic articles. Anyone can publish and say anthing it is the sources that they use that prove what is written. The records don't lie and the ger vetern claim is cast into doubt. To be fair to this book and others like schieder zetterling book came out with the archive info that they so desperatly lacked afterwrds. It would be interesting if they included this claim in future editions of thier books and how they deal with the the ger archive records.

It seems you can't even read zetterling correctly most of the time. Let alone interprete his info yourself properly. In the future if you post something just assume I disagree and go on agrueing with yourself because I have grown tired of the game.

Locked

Return to “The Ron Klages Panzer & other vehicles Section”