I'm a gad fly

[Jasper]

My wife calls me a 'Renaissance Man' (she's being kind). What I think I have is a short attention span. So now I'm off on another fascinating tangent in life.

It starts with the question: "How did people outside of a tank communicate to people inside of a tank?". A: I still don't know. BUT what I did find was some really cool stuff about WWII radio's. Who would've thought THAT would be interesting? And I thought Jeff D was a little over the top with his tank periscope / range finding stuff

I'll share the results that I've found so far. The focus is on US equipment, and I'll indicate 'keywords' to other countries (should anyone else on the planet be interested in this crap).

http://www.gordon.army.mil/museum/amc/talk.htm

To quote from the above: "Company commanders would have the SCR-508 (with a transmitter and 2 receivers); battalion and platoon commanders, the SCR-528s (a transmitter and one receiver); all the rest would have SCR-538." Q: Why battalion and platoon commanders issued the same radio? A: I don't know - I'll rejoin the hunt after I post this.

"Real Life Use"

http://www2.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/sua/PdH.htm http://www.gohotline.com/medalofhonor/recipients/audie.html

"Rebuttal"

http://home.att.net/~firstdiv/info.htm

Search for the number 536 to jump to the "walkie talkie" stuff.

For other nations 'patrol radios' look for information around the following.

British: Wireless Set No. 18 and/or Type 38

Soviets: PPC

Japan: Type 94-6

German: Feld Fu (really not sure about this one) more likely "Dorette".

PS - If there's anyone else on the planet interested in this stuff, simply post a reply. I'll be willing to post more information as I find it. The search, up to now, has been hard and so that much more rewarding.

If you're not interested then just don't read this thread anymore.

[dNorwood]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jasper:

I'll share the results that I've found so far. The focus is on US equipment, and I'll indicate 'keywords' to other countries (should anyone else on the planet be interested in this crap).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now this, my friends, is the kind of post we need MORE of (that and maybe the hamster stuff....)

[Guest Germanboy]

Great stuff - and interesting to see the Rangers using signal lamps instead of radios at Pointe du Hoc. Must have developed some interesting swear words trying to get the radios to work there

[Dr. Brian]

Cool stuff Jasper. Thanks for the great info.

------------------

Doc

God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is!

[L.Tankersley]

Regarding your original question (how do you communicate with the guys inside a tank) ... didn't US tanks (at least) have some kind of wired field phone type handset on the outside that people could use to talk to the guys in the buttoned tank? I'm pretty sure I've seen video of this, although it might have been a movie rather than Actual War Footage . But it seems like an odd sort of thing to invent for a movie. Whether this was at all common or not, I don't know.

------------------

Leland J. Tankersley

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by L.Tankersley:

Regarding your original question (how do you communicate with the guys inside a tank) ... didn't US tanks (at least) have some kind of wired field phone type handset on the outside that people could use to talk to the guys in the buttoned tank<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Steve said in the 'Relative spotting' thread (IIRC) that these were field conversions (Dobler states the same, adding it happened in Normandy to overcome Bocage problems), and were not present in large numbers.

[Holman]

Is it true that early Soviet tanks, lacking radios, actually used signal flags to communicate with one another?

[The Commissar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Martyr:

Is it true that early Soviet tanks, lacking radios, actually used signal flags to communicate with one another? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yub. This continued being true for several years into the war. Im pretty sure some Soviet AFV's still used the system at the end of the war.

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[Mace]

Some tanks had phone pieces mounted at the rear of the tanks so that the infantry could hold a discussion with the TC.

I wonder how many crank or obscene phone calls the tank crew recieved?

Mace

[von Schalburg]

The sovjet tank forces still used flags in the late 1980's, when moving under radio-silence.

Just for your information.

------------------

PanzerLeid

Mit donnernden Motoren,

So schnell wie der Blitz,

Dem Deinde entgegen,

Im Panzer geschützt.

Voraus den Kameraden

Im Kampfe ganz allein,

Steh'n wir allein,

So stossen wir tief

In die feindlichen Reihn.

von Schalburg

[Jasper]

Update:

It seems the French didn't put radios in all their tanks. The Germans did. So did everyone else.

It seems only the USA had a 'walkie talkie' type radio. Others has small battery powered radios - but they needed headsets and microphones. The UK used something called a Wireless Set No. 18 MkII.

http://home.wxs.nl/~meuls003/wireless/ws38mkII.jpg

The Germans (in 1944!) the Kleinfunksprecher d (KlFuSpr.d) "Dorette".

I think it's pretty safe to assume the USA had the best radios. Period. But I don't think that radio contact was how infantry communicated with tanks.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

I'm still trying in find out about those cool SPR type hand signals. Was is just a movie thing? Were special forces trained in their use? I don't know.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

However what I now know as an 'infantry phone' does have some leads. Years ago I was looking into the M4 Sherman (the how's and why's it was so ill suited to engage German armor) - I recall reading something to the effect " . . . and another mistake they made on the M4 Sherman is the lack of an infantry phone . . ." Actually I didn't know the name of the thing. Revisionist history.

First I found this:

"Visibility from inside WW II tanks was appalling, so drivers and TCs in particular often rode with their heads exposed, even in combat, to spot threats and maneuver over rough ground. It was a matter of survival. One platoon sergeant I interviewed, describing the circumstances that led to the death of his platoon leader, said - quite eloquently, in my opinion - that "A man has a tendency when he gets in a position like that to fight for sight like a smothering man would for air." I have a photo of this same man, who later became a platoon leader himself, leading his tank into combat on foot and relaying targets to the gunner through the infantry phone on the rear plate. (He was later wounded by machine gun fire in another campaign). He simply could not see targets from inside the tank.

The practice of fighting with the head exposed sometimes led to high casualties among TCs, but was considered a necessary part of the job. Grant Timmerman, one of two TCs who won the Medal of Honor on Saipan, was killed while fighting his tank from an open hatch, as was Robert McCard, the other TC MOH winner on Saipan. TC casualties on Peleliu were particularly severe, about 70%.

The comments are based on material in the book 'Marine Tank Battles In The Pacific', due out this month from Combined Publishing. "

then

From "The operational history of the 3rd NZ Division Tank Squadron"

http://www.kithobbyist.com/AMPSNewZealand/KiwisInArmour/tshist.htm

"When the lst NZ Army Tank Brigade was broken up in December 1942, 2 Tanks Battalion Group was reorganised along the lines of an Armoured Regiment with two squadrons of Stuart Hybrids and one of Valentine Mk II and IIIs. It was designated to provide armoured support for the 3rd Division then moving back to the Pacific, however, in June 1943 the requirement for armoured support for 3rd NZ Division was reduced to a squadron sized unit and so 2 Tanks was broken up the bulk going to provide reinforcements for 2nd NZ Division while the rest were formed into the 3rd NZ Division Special Army Tank Squadron Group.

The Tank Squadron was despatched to the Pacific two echelons. The first, including the Recce troop, left from Auckland for New Caledonia. The balance of the Squadron was sent to Guadalcanal where they were to train with elements of the 8th NZ Brigade. Once in Guadalcanal the Valentine III CS tanks were painted with a type of heat resistant paint and infantry-tank telephones were installed on the rear. They were also issued with a special track grouser. These were supposedly to help improve traction as the Valentines supplied to New Zealand had tracks suitable for sand only, but these grousers were never satisfactory and were not used operationally.

The five troop leader's tanks along with the rest of the tanks in the Squadron's sabre troops, were fitted with an infantry tank telephone box. The jack, headphone and microphone were all contained in a box that was originally fitted to the right rear mudguard in place of the tail smoke discharger. This box was later moved to a position alongside the petrol can rack. The jack was wired through the driver's junction box and the wire carried through a conduit on the right side and out through the tail lead light opening. The close support tanks had 100 yard leads for the microphone/headphone, while the other tanks had 15 foot leads. "

When WILL the UK learn how to spell. Not enough "Z"'s and too many "U"'s. ļ

Swiss Hetzer? http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/dimi_labada/G-13@.html

Seems in 1946 Swiss Army decided to equip itself Jagdpanzer 38(t) Hetzer's. They were equiped with an infantry phone. While not in WWII it's the only picture of the thing I could find.

http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/dimi_labada/G-13phon.jpg

Alas - while there are some places on-line that might bear fruit, I fear I must now take my search off-line and into books for the kind of thing I'm looking for.