Hey guys!
Let's not be too hasty in immediately not believing this until we have found all the info we can. What about training units? Perhaps this was a training unit with older Panzers? Is there an O.O.B. of Normandy with all training units included?
We have a veteran that remembers being there, I know that some memories can be a little incorrect and maybe some details could be wrong, but let's not dismiss this entirely already. Not everything is documented and a lot of records were destroyed after all.
Cheers,
Wolfkin
Tigers on D-Day...
Thanks Wolfkin for your words,
i hope that in the next few days or 1-2 weeks
i come up with some new informations about it!!!!
But a lot people think that when they hear D-Day and Div. Das Reich...
.... no chance !!!
They are always thinking in divisional- or even companysize!!!!
Im looking forward for any informations....
Regards,
TiKi
i hope that in the next few days or 1-2 weeks
i come up with some new informations about it!!!!
But a lot people think that when they hear D-Day and Div. Das Reich...
.... no chance !!!
They are always thinking in divisional- or even companysize!!!!
Im looking forward for any informations....
Regards,
TiKi
It still seems unlikly that tigers or das reich were at any US beach on the 6th. Das riech with tigers on the 6th also seems likely. Note that although das reich started moving fwd the 12th it was so far away that its tanks and other elements lacking proper transport were sent by train. The wheeled trans was pretty quick to move it was the trains which moved realy slowly due to attacks on the railnet. On the 16th the wheeled trans was assembling at mortain but on the 19th the 5 trains carrying the panzer bat -1 coy were in lemans. Plus elements of the div including 1 coy of PzIVs and 1 coy of Panthers did not start moving until the end of the month at least partly because they were buzy with anti partisn activities in the Limoges - Tulle area. The tanks of das reich were much less likly to be at Dday then the rest of the divs.
According to the info I have it seems unlikly but looking fwd to whatever info you can get. The 2nd SS PD had 1 PReg the 2nd SS PReg. This reg had 2 bat the first one with PzIVs and the second one with Panthers.
According to the info I have it seems unlikly but looking fwd to whatever info you can get. The 2nd SS PD had 1 PReg the 2nd SS PReg. This reg had 2 bat the first one with PzIVs and the second one with Panthers.
Timo wrote:True, he has the Zetterling Bible and anything not described by Zetterling is a lie!!!Darrin wrote:According to the info I have
Very mature Timo turn your computer off and go work on your book if that is all you can contribut to the discussion. I am basing most of my info on zetterlings Normandy 44 book which is an incredibly well reserched book on the ger army in normandy. Based almost entirly on a huge amounts of ger army archive data. If you think the ger archives and zetterling are full of lies then don't bother writting your book.
Darrin, again you bring in arguments that have nothing to do with the discussion.
Zetterling wrote a good book and no, as stated in discussion we had in the past, the archives are not full of lies.
But this story might have been missed by Zetterling because its not archived. The fact that its not mentioned by him does not rule out the possibility. Read TiKi's original message and bring in some real arguments instead of parrotting Zetterling. And if you want to parrot him, at least bring in arguments that have to do with the question. Like I said: he did not mention a complete DR unit and he did not say DR Tigers.
Zetterling wrote a good book and no, as stated in discussion we had in the past, the archives are not full of lies.
But this story might have been missed by Zetterling because its not archived. The fact that its not mentioned by him does not rule out the possibility. Read TiKi's original message and bring in some real arguments instead of parrotting Zetterling. And if you want to parrot him, at least bring in arguments that have to do with the question. Like I said: he did not mention a complete DR unit and he did not say DR Tigers.
-
Michael Kenny
- Member
- Posts: 8272
- Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
- Location: Teesside
Not saying I think these Tigers where there but to stimulate discussion I have been shown a photo of a Tiger with a very early turret that is said to be in Normandy and on http://www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/ in the veterans stories section you will find an account said to be the Diary of a Joachim Scholl from Das Reich that describes combat action and capture in June. Long before SS sPzAbt. 102 reached the front. I also would like to know what became of the 7 'missing' Tiger Is from Fkl. 316. 10 were issued in 1943 but they only had 3 left by April 1944. My view?, the early Tiger photo is a miscaption and the Scholl Diary is an 'error' but as Darrin will tell you I have been wrong before. I really hope I am again but........I doubt it. The site I mentioned earlier is full of photos of Tigers but nearly every Normandy photo on it is wrong or has the wrong caption. Nice to look at but no good as a reference.
Erich wrote:Darrin :
You may want to check your Ss Pz Rgt. 2 OOB for Normandy again.....
1st Abteilung had 4 kompanies of Panthers
2nd Abteilung had 4 kompanies of Pz. IV's
E
Actually you are correct I was wrong. I was just trying to point out to Tiki that his 3 coy/pz reg 2 did not specify which bat it belonged to. 1st bat with panthers or 2nd bat with panzer IVs neither of which had tigers.
Michael Kenny wrote:Not saying I think these Tigers where there but to stimulate discussion I have been shown a photo of a Tiger with a very early turret that is said to be in Normandy and on http://www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/ in the veterans stories section you will find an account said to be the Diary of a Joachim Scholl from Das Reich that describes combat action and capture in June. Long before SS sPzAbt. 102 reached the front. I also would like to know what became of the 7 'missing' Tiger Is from Fkl. 316. 10 were issued in 1943 but they only had 3 left by April 1944. My view?, the early Tiger photo is a miscaption and the Scholl Diary is an 'error' but as Darrin will tell you I have been wrong before. I really hope I am again but........I doubt it. The site I mentioned earlier is full of photos of Tigers but nearly every Normandy photo on it is wrong or has the wrong caption. Nice to look at but no good as a reference.
One possibility IF the div got these tigers and they weren´t des in a year of trainging is they got sent to the east as reinforcments. Remeber this div until 44 was not a div but a training establishment. Keeping 10 tigers to train in mid 44 when tiger production had stopped and most crews were exp and needed replacments tanks not raw crews. Whatever had happened in 43 the div on the 1st of jun 44 had total str of 8 tigers 5 TII prototypes that they had to leave at base due to mech unreliability. And 3 tiger Is on which no other info is avialable.
Michael Kenny wrote:Not saying I think these Tigers where there but to stimulate discussion I have been shown a photo of a Tiger with a very early turret that is said to be in Normandy and on http://www.panzer-vi.fsnet.co.uk/ in the veterans stories section you will find an account said to be the Diary of a Joachim Scholl from Das Reich that describes combat action and capture in June. Long before SS sPzAbt. 102 reached the front. I also would like to know what became of the 7 'missing' Tiger Is from Fkl. 316. 10 were issued in 1943 but they only had 3 left by April 1944. My view?, the early Tiger photo is a miscaption and the Scholl Diary is an 'error' but as Darrin will tell you I have been wrong before. I really hope I am again but........I doubt it. The site I mentioned earlier is full of photos of Tigers but nearly every Normandy photo on it is wrong or has the wrong caption. Nice to look at but no good as a reference.
Even if I was to take this diary as being 100% correct it says tigers first entered combat by the 10th against the CW. It proves nothing about Dday and the US beaches. He also does not mention which unit he belonged to in his diary text. Only the person who translated it and or posted it added it throwing doubt on the DR tiger idea. Esp since the caption referes to the DR battion not DIVISION. The DR came it went into combat with the american sector. But the diary seems to have other erorrs as well. The diary says on the 17th that whitman des many tanks which you might be a delayed account but it also continues with the old ideas of tigers being subjected to PDs. The PD in this case the 1st SS PD was not even to enter combat until the beging of JULY. If this acount is even half true it is proably the SS101 tiger bat.
The site also does not list this under veterns accounts but tiger TALES.
"I was just trying to point out to Tiki that his 3 coy/pz reg 2 did not specify which bat it belonged to. 1st bat with panthers or 2nd bat with panzer IVs neither of which had tigers."
Dude, 3rd Kompanie DOES specify which Abteilung of a Panzer Regiment. The I Abteilung of a Panzer Regiment contained 1st-4th Kompanie, the II Abteilung contained 5th-8th Kompanie. This is usually the way Kompanie are numbered in a Panzer Regiment.
Oh, and by the way TiKi did NOT say they were Tigers of Das Reich, he said that the crews that were training on the Tigers were FROM Das Reich. My guess is that it was a training unit or something. Sometimes Panzer crews were sent to special training units to be instructed, then sent back to their home unit.
Cheers,
Wolfkin
Dude, 3rd Kompanie DOES specify which Abteilung of a Panzer Regiment. The I Abteilung of a Panzer Regiment contained 1st-4th Kompanie, the II Abteilung contained 5th-8th Kompanie. This is usually the way Kompanie are numbered in a Panzer Regiment.
Oh, and by the way TiKi did NOT say they were Tigers of Das Reich, he said that the crews that were training on the Tigers were FROM Das Reich. My guess is that it was a training unit or something. Sometimes Panzer crews were sent to special training units to be instructed, then sent back to their home unit.
Cheers,
Wolfkin
Believe me, i know also the the Regiment had 2 Abteilungen with each 4 companies in 1944!!!!!
But it doesnt mean that if a few members of the 3rd co./Pz.Reg. DR trains with Tigers in a special trainingunit, the hole Div. trains there!!!
Wolfkin understand what ive written!!!
All the crewmembers of the third were trained in Tigers before
and all were attached to the 8.th kompanie in 43 for a few weeks as replacement-personal due to heavy looses of kia crews!!!
My grandfather can remember that the Tigers belong to a Whermachtunit,
aslo panzercrews of the Heer trains in this trainingunit!!
Are there any accounts of ships in the omaha sector that must withdraw
after heavy hits?????
Regards,
TiKi
But it doesnt mean that if a few members of the 3rd co./Pz.Reg. DR trains with Tigers in a special trainingunit, the hole Div. trains there!!!
Wolfkin understand what ive written!!!
All the crewmembers of the third were trained in Tigers before
and all were attached to the 8.th kompanie in 43 for a few weeks as replacement-personal due to heavy looses of kia crews!!!
My grandfather can remember that the Tigers belong to a Whermachtunit,
aslo panzercrews of the Heer trains in this trainingunit!!
Are there any accounts of ships in the omaha sector that must withdraw
after heavy hits?????
Regards,
TiKi
-
Nicklas Fredriksson
- Member
- Posts: 31
- Joined: 09 Aug 2002, 15:48
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Hello!
First of all I agree with Timo's feelings about Zetterling's research. It is very well done but it's based on documents "only". For example there is no hint in his book that II/SSPzRgt 12 actually fielded FIVE kp with PzIV (there are several pictures of vehicles from this kp in the divisional history) because there are no documents about it before D-Day.
Re the PzLD Tigers. There were 3 Tiger IIs, those were the prototypes and blown up outside of Paris in August never having been used in combat. Pz(Fkl)Abt 316 was supossed to be issued with Tiger Is but instead were issued 10 StuGIIIs. No first hand sources but I have read Zetterling, Fey, Jentz and Lefebvre who all touches the subject.
When it comes to the PzVIs they are pretty well accounted for (the discussions on the PzVI in PzLD and Pz(Fkl)Abt 316 have been on and off on the various forums during the last five years) and I personally am satisfied with the conclusions. On the other hand I might well be wrong...
I've haven't heard about others except the members of the Tiger kp training on Tigers. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.
As far as I am aware there are no other interviews with members of SS-DR mentioning this incident. As I said earlier there might well have been individual members of SS-DR along the Normandy coast line at the time. There were NO tank training ground on Normandy (the Ausb units mentioned later were used for security). The Pz Ers-u-Ausb Abt 100 only had French vehicles as did PzAbt 205 and PzAbt 206. The only units issued PzVIs in the West at this point (that I am aware of) were sPzAbt 503, sSSPzAbt 101 and sSSPzAbt 102. The vehicles that belonged to the former PzVI kp in LSSAH (13/SSPzRgt 1) and SS-Dr (8/SS PzRgt 2) were left in the East when they transferred to the West.
There are unsubstantiated claims that JPz Vs from sPzJAbt 653 tried to engage (but had to withdraw) naval vessels along the coast in July but as
far as I'm aware there is no proof of this.
There were indeed naval vessels hit in the vicinity of Omaha but they were hit by coastal artillery belonging to the KM and I am not aware of any that had to withdraw on D-Day. Of course many landing vessels were hit but again I am not aware of any being hit by tank fire. Considering the Allied tendency to claim that every tank encountered was a Tiger it also seems odd that there are absolutely no claims of meeting any around Omaha.
And yes, I am aware that the units sent by SS-HJ were SPW. That why I wrote SPW.
The only explanation I have is that your grand father was indeed in Normandy training with PzVIs but that that was more than year earlier (during the winter of 42-43) and then was observing the landings and mixed the memories up.
Kind rgds
Nick
First of all I agree with Timo's feelings about Zetterling's research. It is very well done but it's based on documents "only". For example there is no hint in his book that II/SSPzRgt 12 actually fielded FIVE kp with PzIV (there are several pictures of vehicles from this kp in the divisional history) because there are no documents about it before D-Day.
Re the PzLD Tigers. There were 3 Tiger IIs, those were the prototypes and blown up outside of Paris in August never having been used in combat. Pz(Fkl)Abt 316 was supossed to be issued with Tiger Is but instead were issued 10 StuGIIIs. No first hand sources but I have read Zetterling, Fey, Jentz and Lefebvre who all touches the subject.
When it comes to the PzVIs they are pretty well accounted for (the discussions on the PzVI in PzLD and Pz(Fkl)Abt 316 have been on and off on the various forums during the last five years) and I personally am satisfied with the conclusions. On the other hand I might well be wrong...
I've haven't heard about others except the members of the Tiger kp training on Tigers. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.
As far as I am aware there are no other interviews with members of SS-DR mentioning this incident. As I said earlier there might well have been individual members of SS-DR along the Normandy coast line at the time. There were NO tank training ground on Normandy (the Ausb units mentioned later were used for security). The Pz Ers-u-Ausb Abt 100 only had French vehicles as did PzAbt 205 and PzAbt 206. The only units issued PzVIs in the West at this point (that I am aware of) were sPzAbt 503, sSSPzAbt 101 and sSSPzAbt 102. The vehicles that belonged to the former PzVI kp in LSSAH (13/SSPzRgt 1) and SS-Dr (8/SS PzRgt 2) were left in the East when they transferred to the West.
There are unsubstantiated claims that JPz Vs from sPzJAbt 653 tried to engage (but had to withdraw) naval vessels along the coast in July but as
far as I'm aware there is no proof of this.
There were indeed naval vessels hit in the vicinity of Omaha but they were hit by coastal artillery belonging to the KM and I am not aware of any that had to withdraw on D-Day. Of course many landing vessels were hit but again I am not aware of any being hit by tank fire. Considering the Allied tendency to claim that every tank encountered was a Tiger it also seems odd that there are absolutely no claims of meeting any around Omaha.
And yes, I am aware that the units sent by SS-HJ were SPW. That why I wrote SPW.
The only explanation I have is that your grand father was indeed in Normandy training with PzVIs but that that was more than year earlier (during the winter of 42-43) and then was observing the landings and mixed the memories up.
Kind rgds
Nick