First British tank captured by Germans

[Tom W.]

I have heard that an AT rifle was also carried instead of the cab mg but I've seen no corroboration of this.

The Hundleby and Strasheim book has a photo of this arrangement on page 161. It was a modification originated by Bayerischer Armee-Kraftwagen-Park 20 at Charleroi.

The other major modification was that male tanks were fitted with the Russian 57mm Nordenfelt cannon on socle mounts (Sockellafette), which arrived at BAKP 20 in early April of 1918. The guns were delivered by the Prussian Artillery Workshop at Spandau.

[phil@basildon]

The header of this forum states "First British tank captured by Germans". We still have not determined what was the first British tank to be captured. There is no evidence that any Mk. I's were captured in September 1916 or afterwards otherwise there would surely be some sort of evaluation report in the German archives.That is not to say there is not one that has been either lost or destroyed. There is evidence to suggest that the Germans had acquired a Mk. II/III as they were aware that they utilised boiler plate instead of armour plate (I am still trying to find the reference to this). What we do know for certain is that a large number of Mk. IV's must have been captured as the Germans had made between 25 and 30 operational for there own units.

The building and operation of tanks seems to have been given a low priority by the Germans, this may be down to material shortages but could also be due to their own propaganda playing down the threat posed by the British tanks.

[centurion]

As has been said earlier in this thread we know that at least one reasonably intact Mk II was in German hands after Arras as there is considerable photographic evidence to this effect. BTW Phil W no MK IIIs were used and all appear to have been assigned training or development roles in the UK. Given the advance of British forces it is unlikely that any Mk I s used on the Somme would have been left behind German lines (at least not for long).

[phil@basildon]

The Mk. II that centurion mentioned appears to be the first tank captured by the Germans. Has this tank been identified? If not is there any evidence to identify it?

My sources unfortunately do not specify were the Mk. II/III were used, just "some were used in training".

[centurion]

My sources unfortunately do not specify were the Mk. II/III were used, just "some were used in training".

The Mk II and III were originally intended as training and development machines - hence the lack of armour plate. Some Mk IIs were used to make up the numbers at Arras and associated actions but were not used in any other battle (except possibly after conversion to supply tanks). Mk IIIs appear never to have feft Britain.

[Jack Sheldon]

I have had a look at the original question again. From the German sources it appears to me that the answer is Bullecourt, 11 April 1917 when seven of the eleven knocked out British tanks were behind the German lines when the battle died down.

Jack

[Jack Sheldon]

First of all here is a 27th Inf Div map showing where the tanks attacked and against which of these Wuerttemberg regiments.

[Jack Sheldon]

This tank was apparently captured by IR 124

[Jack Sheldon]

... and this one was apparently captured by Gren Regt 123. Because it is described as The British tank captured on 11 April 1917, it may have been the only one recovered on that particular regimental front.

Jack

[Jack Sheldon]

More keeps turning up on this as I check through the books. This from Die Wuerttemberger im Weltkrieg, the Official History of the war for that contingent of the German army:

'The tank knocked out by Leutnant Schabel was the very first tank to be destroyed within the German lines. For days it was the objective of officers of all ranks, some of whom had travelled long distances, to be able to cast eyes on this amazing creature. Its possession made it possible for the German commanders to obtain exact information concerning its construction, equipment and armament, as well as ways to attack it...'

Schabel was the commander of 3rd MG Coy Gren Regt 123. Personally manning a machine gun which was located some hundreds of metres forward of the command post of the commander of the forward troops, he brought the tank under fire from a range of 150 metres. He fired 1,200 rounds of S.m.K (hardened core) ammunition at its flank. The tank tried to turn away but was too late and it was knocked out with flames and smoke coming from it about 50 metres inside the German position. Its petrol tank was hit three times, whilst 77 rounds went straight through its side armour. The fuel caught fire and caused stored ammunition to explode in turn. Its position must be as marked on the 27th Div map - between the forward trenches of the German position.

Jack

[phil@basildon]

... and this one was apparently captured by Gren Regt 123. Because it is described as The British tank captured on 11 April 1917, it may have been the only one recovered on that particular regimental front.

Jack

It seems strange that the guns appear to have been removed.

Can anyone recognize the Mk.?

[Gerald Moore]

Jack, many thanks for posting the 27 ID map for 11/4/17 - I had been trying to find a copy. Tank 799 (D26, 2/Lt. Davies, commander), a MkII male (seen in your photo with a group of soldiers nearby), was captured on 11/4/17 by the 123 IR, between the first and second lines of Balcony Trench. Balcony (Balkon) Trench was a forward projection of the Hindenberg Line which encompassed Queant. The tank captured by the 124 IR on 11/4/17 was 586, a MkII female (D28, 2/Lt. Clarkson), and not the MkIV seen lying on its side in the photo above. A number of photos posted in a previous thread show the wreck of 586 lying immediately in front of the first Hindenberg line trench. Interestingly, the 27 ID map seems to locate the wreck of 586 about 400m. to the west of the position seen on a map in the Australian OH.

799 would seem to have been the first tank available to the Germans for extensive examination in a relatively secure location behind their front line.

[Bryn_Hammond]

I have not yet read my copy of Heinz Guderian's "Achtung - Panzer", but suspect that the chapters (in English translation) 'The Genesis of the Tank' and 'The Birth of a New Weapon' will offer an alternative perspective, but perhaps with the benefit of hindsight. Can someone who has read the book tell us whether Guderian's view (or that of others he cites) differed radically from von Marwitz's verdict at the same time? I presume that technically-minded German officers will have pointed to the rapid development of aircraft and the obvious potential of tanks when they worked well. So perhaps the key criterion was the German perception of how much longer the war would/could last. Is there any evidence of the Germans making improvements to Beutepanzer ?

Guderian's views were very much coloured by his reference to English sources especially Fuller's 1920 Tanks in the Great War. There is an edition of Achtung Panzer! translated by Chris Duffy and with a commentary by J P (Paul) Harris that provides plenty of context for his views. Essentially, he's coming from the same place as Fuller in seeking to get the army he belonged to to accept mechanisation.

On the German view of the usefulness of tanks and especially on the question of why the Germans didn't invent the tank, there is some interesting recent work by a German academic called Markus Pöhlmann that examines how the German General Staff was not well geared for the take-up of innovative ideas for warfare prior to the FWW. I am paraphrasing (and mawling badly!) a sophisticated argument but it offers a new insight.

Bryn

[delta]

Interesting comparing the German map agaimst Watson's description - I'll be back

S

[Sidearm]

The tank in post 33 is a I Battalion Mark IV lost on 23 November 1917 near Bourlon, so a bit of a red herring so far as the original question posed is concerned.

Gwyn

[EastLancs]

As a Wargamer I have the game 'Landships' which has a scenario about a clash between British and German 'Captured' Armour.

With the exception of this clash did the Germans use there 30/40 captured tanks, I am thinking in particular of the March 1918 offensive.

Thanks in advance to any who will enlighten my ignorance.

[phil@basildon]

As a Wargamer I have the game 'Landships' which has a scenario about a clash between British and German 'Captured' Armour.

With the exception of this clash did the Germans use there 30/40 captured tanks, I am thinking in particular of the March 1918 offensive.

Thanks in advance to any who will enlighten my ignorance.

The current edition of "Britain at War" has an item on the first ever tank vs. tank battle which was between a German A7V and 3 Mk.IV's (2 females and 1 male).

The Germans did use captured Mk. IV's in action, they actually had more captured Mk. IV's than their own A7V's.

[Jack Sheldon]

Gwyn and Gerald

Thanks for the information about the Post 33 tank. It was printed in amongst an account of the activities of IR 124 at Bullecourt, which is an interesting demonstration that, lacking a suitable photo, the compilers were not averse to slotting any old picture of a captured tank into the text, thus gilding the lily and providing us with yet another timely warning to treat everything published with a suitable degree of scepticism.

Jack

[Sidearm]

I'd like to throw in one of my mystery photos at this point. It shows a Mark I Female in Solomon scheme camouflage, so I'm assuming it dates from around September - December 1916. The mystery stems from the men around it, who look distinctly Germanic to me. Not only that, they are very relaxed, suggesting that this photo was taken away from immediate risk of snipers, artillery etc. So is this a captured Mark I? And if it is, doesn't this wreck the theories that the Germans underestimated the armour of British tanks because they only had access to an unarmoured Mark II? Also when might it have been captured and which tank is it?

Pals observations on this welcomed, as it has baffled me.

Gwyn

[Sidearm]

A more panoramic version

Gwyn

[centurion]

It certainly has a well behind the lines look with the tents and bicycles etc. A long shot but could it be in the area retaken by the Germans in the 1918 offensive with a Mk I that had been sitting there since late 1916?

[Jack Sheldon]

Gwyn

What about the possibility that it is a photograph dating from Spring 1918 when all manner of British equipment, including, perhaps, an abandoned obsolete Mk I Female, was overrun by advancing German troops?

Jack

[Sidearm]

Interesting idea and you might have something there, but wouldn't it mean that this tank had been in No Man's Land or behind British lines before the Germans captured the area? If so, wouldn't it have been shelled to nothingness by 1918 or recovered by British tank salvage companies?

Gwyn

[phil@basildon]

It is definately pre mid 1917 as the tank still retains its steering carriage at the rear. These were found to be of little use and were easily damaged and were removed. Although the tank appears to be little damaged it is possible that it has been damaged as to make it unusable.

Edit- I have just noticed in the foreground what looks like a railway track with sleepers laid on top. This was done to protect the track when loading or unloading tanks, could it be that the tank was being delivered or taken away?

[centurion]

Looking at the photo I don't think that those are sleepers laid on a track. The rail you can see on the right of the photo does not continue all the way along and seems broken. The 'sleepers' on the left appear to be sitting directly on the ground.

I don't think the tank recovery crews were operating until post Arras - the first mention I find is of them salvaging tanks from 3nd Ypres. By this time a Mk I with its thinner armour and obsolete sponsons might just have been left where it stopped. Only its engine would be useful and it might have suffered catastrophic engine failure in the first place. Again as we cannot see the other side of the tank there might be a big shell hole in it. No one would have bothered removing the wheels from a dumped tank. If it was behind the old British line (ie where they where after the Somme but before the German withdrawal to the Hindenburg line) then its unlikely that any one would have shelled it.

That thing on the right foreground of the photo that looks a bit like part of an old fence - could it be the remains of a bomb roof?