First British tank captured by Germans

[delta]

Gwyn - you're right. Clearly one of the original tanks (female Mark one with Vickers removed) and that can only be on the Somme. Pity the crew number is obscured.....

The track put me in mind of what is believed to be D1 at Delville

but of course D1 was a male.

The camouflage paint looks very fresh - not something one would expect by Mar 1918 but then again.....

Stephen

[phil@basildon]

That boarded walkway in the foreground looks familiar. In fact it looks very similar in both this and the photograph of the Mk.I female.

[Gerald Moore]

Gwyn, I've been puzzled by the identity of the tank in posts 44/45 as well. I would concur with those who have suggested that the presence of tail wheels indicates that this MkI female broke down or was damaged on the Somme battlefield in the fall of 1916. The photo must date to the spring/summer of 1918, after the Germans recaptured the area. All of the 1916 wrecks lay close to, or behind British lines at the end of the actions in which they were employed, so in 1916 a large group of German troops, such as those seen in the photo, would not have been able to gather around a wreck.

From entries in tank battalion war diaries, it is evident that parties were detailed in the winter of 1916/17 to return to the Somme battlefield for salvage purposes. Due to a serious lack of replacement parts at this stage of the war (especially track rollers), the salvage parties were likely attempting to recover parts to keep their few running tanks operational. Derelict tanks do not seem to have been cleared from the Somme battlefield until the end of the war, when a number of photos were taken showing German POW's breaking up vehicles damaged in the 1916 fighting, still lying in-situ.

Regarding the specific identity of the tank in the photo, the lack of any remnant of a grenade roof suggests that the tank was used by D Co., or the detachment of C. Co. which operated in the Reserve Army area around Thiepval and Courcellette.

[centurion]

Regarding the specific identity of the tank in the photo, the lack of any remnant of a grenade roof suggests that the tank was used by D Co., or the detachment of C. Co. which operated in the Reserve Army area around Thiepval and Courcellette.

See my query in post 50 re possible remains of a bomb (or grenade) roof

[Gerald Moore]

The framework seen beside the road in the post 45 photo appears different from the grenade roof frame which was sent to France from the factory. The framework seen in the photo is smaller, has narrower beams, and has more cross pieces than the grenade roof. The wrecked tank shows no sign of the steel struts which were bolted to the roof of the tanks to attach the grenade roof.

I can't make out the starboard tail wheel on this wreck. This detail, and the general attitude of the wreck correspond with photos of the wreck of 503/C4 taken in 1916 near Pozieres, but damage to tail wheels was common, and this is a very tentative identification.

[phil@basildon]

The grenade roof is clearly visible on the tank in posts 44/45, but it appears to be damaged. The steering tail also appears to be retouched on the photograph. So perhaps it was a long abandoned tank used for propaganda purposes.

[centurion]

The framework seen beside the road in the post 45 photo appears different from the grenade roof frame which was sent to France from the factory. The framework seen in the photo is smaller, has narrower beams, and has more cross pieces than the grenade roof. The wrecked tank shows no sign of the steel struts which were bolted to the roof of the tanks to attach the grenade roof.

I can't make out the starboard tail wheel on this wreck. This detail, and the general attitude of the wreck correspond with photos of the wreck of 503/C4 taken in 1916 near Pozieres, but damage to tail wheels was common, and this is a very tentative identification.

I think the grenade roofs originally had wooden beams, given the number of tents in the photos (with a concommitant likelyhood of cooking fires) and the lack of trees etc in the vicinity its probable that these would not have survived for long, just leaving the metal components.

According to Jones, Rarey and Icks "After the first battle (Flers) most of the damaged tanks were salvaged and together with those held up by mechanical trouble were repaired and used in small numbers experimentally". If this is correct it would suggest the likelyhood that this tank was left over from one of those minor actions.

[17tankman]

This German postcard shows very clearly an english tank - the postcard is dated July 1917 so they must have had detailed inspection before this date at least.

the back of postcard

[centurion]

Thats a Mk II at Arras April 1917.

[Gerald Moore]

The wreck seen in post 58 is tank 586, captured by the 124 IR on 11/4/17 during the first battle of Bullecourt. The edge of the front Hindenberg line trench (OG1) can be seen in the foreground. The view is towards the Australian line on the railway embankment, about 1000 m. distant.

[delta]

I can't make out the starboard tail wheel on this wreck. This detail, and the general attitude of the wreck correspond with photos of the wreck of 503/C4 taken in 1916 near Pozieres, but damage to tail wheels was common, and this is a very tentative identification.

Gerald - given the shortage of tanks, I am remain surpised that C4 was never recovered.

Was salvage attempted?

S

[Gerald Moore]

That's an interesting question,Stephen. As you are aware, 503/C4 was stopped by a loose track near its start line on 15/9/16. I don't believe the vehicle was ever salvaged and, in fact, the wreck appears in a 1918 painting, apparently still in the location where it broke down, near Pozieres Windmill. A similar example would be D17 "Dinnaken" which suffered from an engine malfunction following its famous walk up the high street of Flers. It was photographed in 1918, being broken up in the same position where it pulled off the Longueval-Flers road. Why were tanks with minor degrees of damage left on the Somme battlefield?

Initially, the tanks were conceived as "one-shot/throw-away" weapons destined for a one-way journey across no-man's-land. I don't know if this idea was still in vogue by the time of their debut on the Somme; certainly replacement parts were in very short supply. Stern maintained that the best replacements for damaged tanks were entirely new vehicles, and virtually no spare parts were manufactured until late in the MkI production run, when an interruption was made for this purpose. Given limited spare parts and repair facilities in the fall of 1916, it may not have been practical to repair the Somme derelicts. The arrival of A Co.in mid-September, along with a number of replacement tanks was more than sufficient for the limited tank actions planned for the latter stages of the Somme/Ancre battle. Following the September battles, most of the operational tanks were relocated north of the Ancre, and thence to the vicinity of Arras in mid- November. About 60 operational tanks were available at that time. These must have suffered a high rate of breakdowns, since accounts from the winter of 1916/17 stress the small number of tanks in running condition available for training. At this time, parties were detailed to return to the Somme to recover spare parts from the wrecks.

[delta]

Thanks Gerald for a most thorough response

Given the weight of a tank , and the condtion of the ground, I understand the difficulty of salvaging the damaged vehicles. As you say, several were left which had been badly damaged (Corunna at Combles; Champagne at Courcellette) but C4 "Chablis" seemed to be relatively damage free and quite accessible.

Stephen

[J Banning]

Having started this thread I left it well alone as it seemed to generate intense debate amongst the 'tankies' on the GWF.

However, after reading through it all (even the bits which had nothing to do with my question!) I just wanted to say thanks for the posts and for answering my original question.

Cheers

Jeremy

[centurion]

Thanks Gerald for a most thorough response

Given the weight of a tank , and the condtion of the ground, I understand the difficulty of salvaging the damaged vehicles. As you say, several were left which had been badly damaged (Corunna at Combles; Champagne at Courcellette) but C4 "Chablis" seemed to be relatively damage free and quite accessible.

Stephen

Some photos of wrecked Mk Is do show some evidence of salvaging of the rollers. At least one shot shows some of these neatly piled by the tank ready to be taken away.

[Borden Battery]

Here is Fuller's book on tanks. Borden Battery

Tanks in the Great War, 1914-1918 (1920) J.F.C Fuller

[Archive.Org][CEF Study Group – Oct 2010]

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924027835168

[TEW]

With regard to the 799 issue, I wonder how if it was captured by the Germans and either experimented with or re-used how is it possible for Ms Letaille to have the turret presumably from one of his dug up remains.

TEW