German Anti-Tank tactics 1918

[WSchneck]

Thanks for the help on the German sources.

I came across an interesting claim in a secondary source and was wondering if it was true.

A US document (Foreign Military Weapons and Equipment (U), Mine-Warfare and Demolition Equipment (U), U.S.S.R. (U), Department of the Army Pamphlet No. 30-17-1, Washington DC, 1958, page 31) claimed that the Germans were the first to employ “dog mines” during the First World War to destroy allied tanks. Is this true?

[Mad Zeppelin]

My main source is "Kampfwagen-Abwehr im Weltkriege 1914-1918" by Erich Petter, compiled 1932 by request of the inspectorate of the motor transport troops. It doesn't mention any dog mines.
Nor have I ever come across any other evidence for this. - I recon, the method is feeding the dogs under tanks for some time, then let them starve some days and release them to find their food under some enemy tanks - which they then will blow up with their satchel charges ignited by a tilt rod.
The German supply of tanks was not very luxurious in 1918. With the German tank detachments, which would have been logical places to do such training, no such activity is noted. - Some assault battalions may have had (immobile) training tanks (Bn Rohr had a Mk.IV and a French Schneider for sure) where something along that lines might have been done.
Those tanks that had been captured at Cambrai and in the Somme area were anxiously guarded by emmissaries of Chefkraft - because if you let German soldiers near those wrecks, all detachable parts would be screwed off or broken off in no time (not for souvenirs, German soldiers were payed "Beutegeld" - booty money - for every item they presented to their local Beute-Sammel-Officier - booty collection officer).

[bob lembke]

Hi, guys!

A few comments. My father was trained for about two weeks to fight tanks, and for the first week they trained firing MGs out of captured tanks while moving across a shell-cratered field. They were not told why they were doing it, and the Landsern assumed that they were going to fight in tanks, not fight tanks. Every day they got 2 or 3 hits per MG belt, as the tank lurched over the fields. Then they were called together by the officers, and told that the training was to convince them that a moving tank was a really bad gun platform. Then they were trained to destroy tanks with geballtne Ladungen, seven stick grenade warheads on one fuze. He never told me anything about dogs; if he had seen that I think he would have told me.

Germans, to generalize, are dog nuts. They might have tried this if it was promising, but, frankly, I doubt it. I think it would have been a hard sell culturally.

When I was a kid, say 5 years old, in New York City, at the end of WW II, I was, amazingly, really indignant about the pro-Soviet Union propaganda that we were fed, including in the school books. (Many of the treachers were Communists. I am not a pro-MaCarthy nut; that simply was the truth. At the same time the teachers would pull me in front of the class and beat me, as a patriotic exercise, as my parents were German, although they had moved to the US 20 years earlier.) This propaganda and my reaction is one of my most vivid memories from the period. The heroic, patriotic, anti-Nazi Red war dogs would rush forward with a bomb, and bang, the Panzer would blow up. Of course, no one mentioned the obvious, that the dog would get blown up, whether or not the trick worked. I was indignant. Every one acted as if the dog cleverly tied the explosive charge to a bogie wheel or something and gleefully scampered off to a big hug and a beef filet from it's handler.

I have never heard of this "technology" actually working.

Bob Lembke

[3.Jäger Rgt.]

While we are on the subject of tanks, I thought I would post the reverse side of a postcard that I have had for some years. On the obverse there is a photo of a very young Bavarian soldier in a late war Kraftfahr uniform, that is, a pioneer style visored cap and a Bluse with the 1915 pattern, light gray Bavarian Kraftfahr straps. I can read the reverse, with the exception of the abbreviation, which I have yet to decipher. Just wondering what you all thought of this and especially, the use of the word "Tankschule".

Thanks,
Chip

[Peter H]

Sturm-Bataillon Nr. 5 and Tank Abteilungen 1 and 2 conducted training exercises together at Beauville in early 1918.The theory was that the tanks crews learnt combined training with the infantry.On the 27th February 1918 a demonstration was given before the Kaiser.

The Bavarian raised Abeitlungen 13 and 16 used Beutepanzerkampfwagen(booty tanks),British Mk IVs.

[bob lembke]

Guys;

Chip's PC is interesting but puzzling. I am going to post from memory, but I have a good source on this that I cannot physically reach at this moment. The tank detachment number does not seem to correspond to the fighting units, but, as stated below, the Bavarians were active in other aspects of the Beute=Panzer program.

Generally, all German tank detachments (there were nine fighting units set up) were sent, after assembly, to Rohr for training before being sent to the front. This may not have done in one or two cases when the unit was needed immediately.

The Panzer Abteilungen each were equipped with five tanks. 1 through 3 were equipped with 5 A7Vs each (I guess that the other 5 were kept for spares and training; 20 in all were built) and 11 through 16 were equipped with Beutepanzer, and as Peter said several were Bavarian. I believe that Sepp Dietrich of WW II fame served in one. (His early career seems a bit mysterious; see the book Hitler's Gladiator.) In addition, the rebuilding of booty tanks seems to have been assigned to a Bavarian detachment; they had a large facility in France and seemingly an assembly line of sorts.

I think that someone had recently posted that the Bavarians had 80 Beutepanzer in storage awaiting rehabilitation and re-arming; I understand that the number mightr be closer to 200. The difference might be due to the definition of what was a tank, possibly a pile of junk useful for parts vs. a captured tank in relatively good order. The Bavarians seemed to be assigned the task to rehab these tanks. I think that the Germans planned to have about 200 tanks in fighting units by the end of 1919. They found it so easy to capture the British tanks that they seemingly did not plan to build more of the A7Vs, due to their limited industrial resources vs. the many demands for weapons, etc.

I have a recent book, an Osprey-type paperback, in German, which has the word "Beute=Panzer" in its title, I believe; I can't get my hand on it at the moment. Lots of info and (mostly poor) photos; a casual inspection seems to indicate that it has merit, but I am not an expert here. I think I got it for $5 on German e-Bay, and it still may be in print.

Bob Lembke

[Mad Zeppelin]

The above postcard has no connection (if 63 isn't a miss-writing of 13) to the fielded German tank units, of which only Abt.13 (where Sepp Dietrich served as a gunnery Unteroffizier) was Bavarian.

It has - if at all - to do with the German Plan 1919 (developed under Colonel Max Bauer's responsibility), which aimed at initially 4 detachments of 100 LKII and several detachments of captured British Mk.IVs to be ready by April 1919. Each Mk.IV detachment would have 3 companies with 5 Mk.IVs each. The projected numbering for these detachments changed several times, howwever, it always was 1xx, like 105, (and 2xx for the LKIIs).
There was a Saxon and a Württemberg detachment under formation by the war's end (old style with 5 Mk.IVs), and the Bavarians were foreseen to form a (new style) detachment of 3 Bavarian companies. In this light, the existence of a (probably very nucleus) immobile Bavarian tank training school cannot be ruled out.

Also, the abbrevation seems to be mis-written: K.B.K.d.K. would make sense: Königlich Baierischer Kommandeur der Kraftfahrttruppen, - B.B.K.d.K. I can't explain.

[3.Jäger Rgt.]

Thanks for your thoughts. I thought that perhaps a Panzerwagen Abt. might be referring to an armoured car unit. To me, that would make more sense for having an affiliation to a army column. What is known about the numbering of armoured car units? Perhaps this immobile Tankschule was also the training school for armoured car drivers. Just throwing out some ideas.

I have attached a photo of a German armoured car travelling down the road with an artillery column. Note the MG protruding from the side of the car. With the wide open spaces, the mixture of Pickelhauben and Stahlhelms, I would guess this to be the Eastern Front. No other information on the photo.

Chip

[Mad Zeppelin]

The armoured car in your photo would - at first glance - seem to be a derelict Russian Poplavko-Jeffery being by-passed by advancing German troops. Pickelhauben were worn on the eastern front well until 1917.
As for German armoured car units, the number 63 wouldn't fit either. There was one Abteilung, Abt.1, and several platoons, but no number higher then 11 was achieved in wartime. - And tanks and armoured cars didn't come from the same sources, ACs belonged to the machine gun branch, tanks belonged to the motor transport branch (with added machine gunners and artillerists). Their training would not be done joint.

[3.Jäger Rgt.]

Thanks Zep,

Just trying to think of some other possible senarios. My knowledge of German armored unit's order of battle is pretty much non-existent. Years ago, I asked one of my correspondents, Major H.R.von Stein about this card. He was somewhat incredulous about the writing on the back. I must say, however, that the card was found in a pile at a militaria show and cost $3.00, so no one was trying to fake a card to make a buck. I suppose that we will just have to chalk it up to a bad memory on the part of the writer. It does seem odd, however, that he would write down all this specific information that was so far off base. Perhaps we will never know the answer. It's interesting all the same.
Chip

[Mad Zeppelin]

The thing that baffles me is that a PzBtl 663 did exist in the German Bundeswehr in the 1970ies and 80ies. It was a reserve unit in the Bavarian Military District. - And it carried a MK.IV in its coat of arms, thus indicating the tradition line that existed to the WW1 Bavarian tankers.
Otherwise, although we apparently can't solve the problem, I'm somewhat shy to say the guy was writing down just silly stuff. He was there. We are 80 years away from events. I've already encountered quite a lot of surprises. One day someone turns up a new photograph - and there it is...

[Peter H]

What's the significance of "507" noted on the postcard.

The A7V 'Cyclops' 507 survived the war,being withdrawn to Wiesbaden before the Armistice.Any connection?

Chip,
Would it please be possible to show us the front of the postcard?Perhaps blur it as much as you can if you want to protect the copyright?

Regards,
Peter

[Peter H]

A failed attempt at Monument Wood April 1918,from the Australian Official History,Volume 4,page 652:

...an enormous Jager--he looked about 8 feet high--raced up to it with a big grenade in his hand.It was the bravest,maddest thing.The tank gun belched as he was within inches of the muzzle,and the gallant German was scattered in pieces.

[Mad Zeppelin]

The 507 in this context refers to Kraftfahrkolonne 507, which I still have to look up. (Do you hold any information on it?)
The Wagen 507 "Cyklop" combination also crossed my mind, but there's absolutely no clue to this.

[Kim Sung]

How many Tankgewehr1918s were distributed to German soldiers?