rexford Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 Check out the following site address for a very good discussion of the combat in which Michael Wittmann's Tiger was destroyed: http://www.feldgrau.net/forum.html The discussion on Michael Wittmann is down the page. The descriptions of shots fired and missed, and the tactical issues involved (absence of any recon regarding the woods where the British were hiding, even though many Tiger crewman had concerns), touch on many important armor issues. [ 11-03-2001: Message edited by: rexford ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted November 4, 2001 Author Share Posted November 4, 2001 The interesting aspect of the combat in which Wittmann's Tiger was destroyed is the fact that several Tigers appear to have been killed by a single Firefly that fired first and caught the enemy with a flank ambush at about 800 yards. Also note that the Sherman 75mm gun is considered useless against Tiger side armor at 800 yards. The oddest fact is the British tanker who was dazed when an 88mm round struck the half open turret hatch, which closed and hit a tanker in the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amidst_Void Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 "The discussion on Michael Wittmann is down the page" Thanks for being so specific. [There's one for you Communistdoginchina] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amidst_Void Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 For anyone interested, go down the page a bit (about 5%) and you will hit the title "The death of Wittman". (I think that's the title) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJungnitsch Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 This is the gist of it: <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Hans Höflinger now describes the subsequent course of the attack from his experience: 'Then we drove off, Michel (sic) right of the road and I left, four others with Michel and the brother of Heinz Von Westernhagen with me. Approximately 800 meters to Michel's right there was a small wood which struck us as suspicious and which was to prove fateful to us. Unfortunately, we couldn't keep the wood under observation on account of our mission. We drove about one to one-and-a half kilometres, and then I received another radio message from Michel which only confirmed my suspicions about the wood. We began taking heavy fire from anti-tank guns and once again Michel called, but didn't complete the message. When I looked out to the left I saw that Michel's tank wasn't moving. I called him by radio but received no answer. Then my tank received a frightful blow and I had to order my crew to get out as it had already begun to burn fiercely. My crew and I dashed toward the rear and got through. I stopped to look around and to my dismay discovered that five of our tanks had been knocked out. The turret of Michel's tank was displaced to the right and tilted down somewhat. None of his crew had got out. I climbed into Von Westernhagen's tank and, together with Heurich, whose Tiger was undamaged, tried to get to Michel's tank. We could not get through. Dr. Rabe also tried it, but in vain...I can state the exact time of the incident; it was 1255 hours, near the Falaise-Caen road in the vicinity of Cintheaux." Agte then follows up on p.425 with the British account of the incident: "...At 1240 hours Captain Boardman gave Sergeant Gordon's tank the order to fire. The Tigers were seven-hundred meters distant. The Firefly's gunner was Trooper Joe Ekins, who hit the rearmost Tiger of the three Tigers in his sight with two shots. The Tigers had failed to spot the well-camouflaged Shermans, and it was only after the first shots had been fired and a Tiger knocked out that Wittmann transmitted the message referred to by SS-Hauptscharführer Höflinger: 'Move! Attention! Attention! Anti-tank guns to the right! - Back up!...'." ....I believe this was Sgt. Gordon's last action as he was wounded in return fire when one of three rounds from another Tiger struck his half opened hatch which slammed it shut striking him on the head - he climbed out dazed and was then further wounded.<hr></blockquote> Nice find Rexford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 I remember reading in 'A fine night for tanks' that Joe Ekins never fired another shot after that. IIRC, he finished the war as a loader on another 'fly. Talk about waste of talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 For what it's worth, the Firefly version of the death is in the German book "Michael Wittmann und die Tiger der Leibstandarte...", very similar descriptions on the action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>....I believe this was Sgt. Gordon's last action as he was wounded in return fire when one of three rounds from another Tiger struck his half opened hatch which slammed it shut striking him on the head - he climbed out dazed and was then further wounded.<hr></blockquote> The british say that the range was 700 meters, the Germans 800 meters. If the Germans had dialed in their guns to 700 meters, I wonder if the shell would have knocked out the tank rather than just clipping an open hatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PJungnitsch Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>The british say that the range was 700 meters, the Germans 800 meters. If the Germans had dialed in their guns to 700 meters, I wonder if the shell would have knocked out the tank rather than just clipping an open hatch.<hr></blockquote> Good point. They were probably surprised and pleased to be alive afterwards <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>From post-war interviews Tom Boardman and Joe Ekins recount they obviously had no idea that it was Wittmann and Tigers from s.SS.Pz.Abt.101 they had just encountered. Lord Boardman later stated "Had I known who was commanding those Tiger tanks, and his record, I should have been even more concerned than I was - if possible. It was bad enough to know that we only had four tanks in the Squadron with guns capable of penetrating a Tiger's armour and that I had only one of those in my section of the battlefield."<hr></blockquote> Imagine taking on 9 tigers with one Firefly, ambush or not. All the 75mm Shermans would have been good for is distracting the Tigers aim. Brave men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by machineman: Imagine taking on 9 tigers with one Firefly, ambush or not. All the 75mm Shermans would have been good for is distracting the Tigers aim. Brave men.<hr></blockquote> I'm no expert on this... but this history smells bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tanaka: I'm no expert on this... but this history smells bad <hr></blockquote> How so? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted November 4, 2001 Share Posted November 4, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Michael emrys: How so? Michael<hr></blockquote> After reading your signature, I see such action, like taking out 9 tigers with 1 firefly (in how much time ? ), is no problem to you... But to me, it is ! I just can't imagine someone putting 12 APDS (yes 12, they must have missed some, didn't they ?), rounds and receiving 1 sort of well targeted 88L50 round in return... Military reports of action are whatever some guy makes of them...and when they aren't "right", some one puts them right ...but meanwhile...many books about it will be sold, I think some people are missing 2 important points... -Every one has is hour -One way or the other,the guy was put out of commission... (helping the "good" side wining the war.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tanaka: I just can't imagine someone putting 12 APDS (yes 12, they must have missed some, didn't they ?), rounds and receiving 1 sort of well targeted 88L50 round in return... <hr></blockquote> I would say it could very well be with infantryless tanks ambushed, with no absolute spotting. The German book say eyewittness accounts by at least one other German and he just said "Wittman's tiger suddenly exploded". He had no idea where the shots came from. During the whole action, he never saw a Sherman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 I should read the book I guess ...any way just say this to me in advance, I'm curious, what was doing an experimented tank commander with infantryless tanks there ? Trying the 40s tactic or just pushing is luck ? [ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Tanaka ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tanaka: Trying the 40s tactic or just pushing is luck ?<hr></blockquote> The latter He was ordered there, desperate times, desperate measures and all that. The German front had collapsed in the sector, a newly arrived infantry division had routed, and 1st SS Panzerkorps needed to restore the situation, so they scrounged whatever they could get their hands on. Mostly Korps assets, like the escort battalion, and some Panzer IVs from 12th SS, IIRC. The whole affair could be called a sort of success because the British stopped, but whether that was actually due to the counterattack, I can't remember (and my sources are in London). I think it was more because the British sat snugly on their obejctives and needed to clear by-passed strongpoints. Helge (Desertfox) has a scenario at Der Kessel called 'Totalize' where you can try if you would have done better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Maenpaa Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tanaka: I just can't imagine someone putting 12 APDS (yes 12, they must have missed some, didn't they ?), rounds and receiving 1 sort of well targeted 88L50 round in return... <hr></blockquote> Further along that thread, Tom Rodwell states that those couldn't have been APDS-rounds: <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Tom Rodwell: The only other point I would like to add to your excellent post is that the British were using APCBC not APDS, which was only issued later in August. Furthermore at that range 800 to 1800 yards early APDS was notoriously inaccurate (due to uneven discard of the sabot) & at ranges above 800m standing orders were to use APCBC.<hr></blockquote> This seems to feed the theory about 17-pdr APDS's notorious inaccuracy. Ari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted November 5, 2001 Author Share Posted November 5, 2001 I agree with Tom's post, the APDS reference should have been APCBC, which was very accurate in terms of flat trajectory and low dispersion. There is little written about the 75mm armed Shermans in the Wittmann post on the Feldgrau site, they may have fired APCBC at the Tiger sides in hopes of drawing some return fire that otherwise would have gone for the Firefly. In terms of sighting a Firefly, Tom has sent me descriptons of 17 pounder APCBC muzzle flash in the past that noted a horrendous blast, the commander and gunner almost needed goggles to shield their eyes. Firefly muzzle blast and smoke probably would give away the fact that one was being fired at by a 17 pounder and not the puny 75L40. Hitting a target in the woods based on a muzzle blast target (no sight of tank) is not easy, the smoke moves and the blast radius is not small. Correcting for high or low rounds may also be difficult. If some of the Tigers were firing at 75mm Shermans it is possible that a Firefly could knock out several Tigers in succession. At 700m or 800m, there is a small chance that 75mm Sherman APCBC will penetrate 82mm armor unless the side angle is above 10°. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted November 5, 2001 Author Share Posted November 5, 2001 If the British contingent was on ambush duty it is possible that they had scoped out the terrain and knew the ranges to various landmarks or trails. This would greatly improve Firefly accuracy by having a close estimate of possible target ranges. Under those conditions, even a moving Tiger might be hit quickly, especially if they were moving at a constant speed and in one direction, track for a while and hit the last tank. Then, knowing the target speed and lead to use, target the next tank, and so on. Past threads have beat to death the story of the M18 commander who spotted moving panzers at 2000 meters and hit them, one after the other, with single shots. If an M18 can do it at 2000 meters, a Firefly at 700-800 meters would certainly be just as able. The key to it all is keeping one's nerve about them and following training procedures. If they knew Wittmann was there it may have been enough to jiggle their nerves and lead to bad shots and worse decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 Lorrin, Tout is talking about this incident too, in Tank!. I think he mentions that the 75mm Shermans tried to attract the Tigers' attention away from the Firefly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Bellator Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 IIRC from Ken Tout's 'A Fine Night For Tanks' Witmanns Tiger Platoon was moving and looking away at another target from the woods where the Fireflies of the Northamptonshire Yeomanry were watching him. It explains why there was virtually no return fire. He is also charged with suicidal overconfidence, in effect he was aiming to stop a Corps with a handfull of unsupported Tigers. Who knows what state his mind was in by this time, but it seemed odd to me that such a veteran would even think of going off alone into such huge enemy forces. The first part of Totalize was a great sucess, but the second failed as Germanboy mentioned. It got off to an appalling start when 8th USAAF bombers bombed short right onto the troops waiting to go on the start line causing hundreds of casualties and lots of confusion. I'll get the book out from my library again soon, highly recommended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Maenpaa Posted November 5, 2001 Share Posted November 5, 2001 Btw. Referring to Tom's post: Is it already clear what exactly is meant by 'early and inaccurate APDS'? Is supposed "later" (and possibly more accurate) APDS strictly post-war stuff? Ari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts