"More assorted Normandy vehcile related questions???" Topic

A couple of random questions and request for thoughts. All involve the Utah/Cotentin/Carentan area -

Shermans coming off of Utah Beach were M4A3s? I'm looking for a good 1/56 model. Blitzkrieg is my go-to for 1/56, but they don't make M4A3 that I can see.

PzKw IVh – Zimmerit or not? Shirts or not?

I'm also going to get a few random GE and US, so which best suited?

Which version of PzKw III?

Aside from base SdKfz 250/1 and 251/1, which 2 other variants should I get?

M-20 or M-8 for USA?

Others around here would know better than I do, but here goes:

U.S. Shermans for Overlord were most likely M4s and M4A1s; M4A3s came a bit later

Don't know about Pz IVs except that a mix of skirts and not, and zimmerit and not seems likely.

Doubt if there were any Pz IIIs involved, they were obsolete by then.

US used M8 ACs in reconnaissance units, M20s in tank destroyer units.

Off the top of my head, the Pz IIIs were used in the recon platoon of the heavy tank battalions. Probably Pz IIIJ or later models if they were actually there.

According to Jentz, on 10 June the only Pz Divisions in the West to have IIIs are 11th Pz (26) and 116th Pz (13). Neither unit was stationed in Normandy initially. While some of the other divisions could have had the odd few they are not listed.

U.S. Shermans for Overlord were most likely M4s and M4A1s; M4A3s came a bit later

Agree with donlowry on the Shermans. M4, and M4A1. These would have mostly been mid-war versions, with applique armor and M34A1 (widened) gun mantlets.

M4 mid-war Sherman of the 70th Tank Battalion stuck on the beach on D-Day.

A Robert Capca photo of an M4 mid-war Sherman with dozer blade, on Utah beach on D-Day.

M4A1s with DD and deep wading kit on a beach on D-Day.

M4A1 Shermans labelled as coming ashore on a Normandie beach.

This last pic is kind of interesting. To my eye they look like original production M4A1s. No applique armor, original narrow M34 gun mantlets. But it's not a big pic, and there's no attribution of the unit, so it's hard to dig deeper to see if it might be a pic from a training exercise, or from a landing in the MTO.

M4A3s were issued to new units formed and training in the US in late 1943 and 1944. They came into ETO in the new armored divisions that arrived from the States as the second wave of build-up (about September). They were not issued to the armored divisions or GHQ tank battalions that had been gathered in the UK since early 1944 in the build-up for Overlord. These units had all been built and trained with 1942 M4 and M4A1 Shermans, and so received upgraded mid-war production of these (along with upgrade kits for existing vehicles).

Or so I've read. Wasn't there, didn't do any upgrading myself.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

I read somewhere that the 746th Tank Bn had M4A3 at Utah. Can't find it now.

Aside from base SdKfz 250/1 and 251/1, which 2 other variants should I get?

If you are going to put together a platoon, then each one was supposed to have a command halftrack with 37 mm door-knocker on it (250/10 or 251/10), still useful against more lightly armoured vehicles.

However, since enemy aircraft started to be an issue, 251/10 started to get replaced with one of the AA-variants (251/17?), though I am not sure if anybody does one of these in 1/56 scale.

M-20 or M-8 for USA?

Assuming you are talking about armoured cars, then it depends on unit:
- Cavalry platoons would have 3 M8 armoured cars and 6 jeeps
- Tank destroyer platoons (self-propelled) would have 2 M20 armoured cars and 4 tank destroyers

There was also M8 HMC (howitzer motor carriage), which consisted of an open turret with short 75 mm howitzer on M5 light tank chassis. This would be found in armoured infantry assault gun platoons and in cavalry squadrons.

Here it is –

2nd Armored Div (66th Armored Regt) supported at Carentan.

These appear to be M4A3 in the photos noted June 8th, right?

link

Doesn't the M4A1 have the more rounded front, whereas the M4A3 has the sharp angle?

M4A3 does indeed have sharp angles. It has a welded hull, vs. the cast hull of the M4A1.

But it is not the only Sherman to have a welded hull. The M4, M4A2, M4A3, M4A4 and M4A6 all had welded hulls (of these, only the M4 and M4A3 were used in large numbers by the US Army -- the others were predominantly Lend-Lease products for Allies.

The difference between an M4 and M4A3 was not the shape of the hull, but the engine. M4 had a Wright Cyclone radial engine (a derivative of a popular pre-war aircraft engine), while the later M4A3 had a Ford GAA V8 engine (developed specifically for tanks).

It is not hard to mistake one welded-hull Sherman for another. You have to get a look at the engine deck and/or the rear hull (to see engine access doors, air intakes, and exhaust outlets). Although in some cases you can also "judge" by the turret, as the turret bustle was raised in later production to provide more clearance for driver and radio operator hatches to allow escape when the turret was reversed. The low bustle turrets were out of production before the M4A3 came online in large numbers. I have looked through all the pics on the linked site, using these various recognition factors to see if I could find something that is likely to be an M4A3. In prior cases I have also seen shipping docs for US2AD. I have not found any evidence they had M4A3s in Normandie.

This pic shows a tank of the 66th Armored Regiment, of the 2nd Armored Division, having it's engine changed in a French field in July of 1944.

For those who can't distinguish M4 vs. M4A3 by the engine louvres and exhaust, you can at least in this case clearly see that the engine they are pulling out, and the new replacement engine they are preparing to install, are radial engines. This is an M4, not an M4A3.

This pic also gives a clear view of a "low bustle" turret. You can easily see that if this turret were traversed to point the gun over the rear of the tank, it would not be possible to open the front hull roof hatches. This was changed in turrets produced from mid/late 1943 onwards. There is no designation change to the tank depending on this aspect, so "high bustle" vs. "low bustle" is a terminology used mostly by modern Sherman enthusiasts. And there is no hard-cast rule why an earlier ("low bustle") turret could not wind up on a later production Sherman, like an M4A3. But it would be uncommon. And so while not a concrete determinant it is an indicator of an earlier production Sherman.

This pic shows the same tank. The caption indicates it is leaving an LST, but I believe it is in fact being loaded onto an LST prior to landing in Normandie. (I believe that because it appears to be on a concrete ramp, which was not available in France, the track seems to have it's slack along the upper run, which indicates the tank is in reverse, and the TC is looking backwards while speaking into his mic, also indicating he is guiding the driver in backing up.)

Both of these pics are from the linked sight. Other pics show M4A1s of the US2AD in Normandie. US2AD operated both M4s and M4A1s. Many units mixed these, as while they looked different they had the same engine, which meant the logistics and training were not at all strained by the difference. M4A3s, at least the basic 75mm versions, were seldom mixed into units that had M4s or M4A1s due to the strains of having different engines for no substantial increase in combat capabilities (although the M4A3 did have better automotive performance, which is why the US Army settled on it as their standard going forward in early 1944).

US2AD did have some M4A1 76mm Shermans during the Normandie campaign (not on D-Day, but by late June / early July). Later they started to receive M4A3E2 Jumbos (a very different combat capability than a normal Sherman), and eventually M4A3 76s and 76 HVSS tanks (upgrading gunpower and automotive performance when the M4A1 76 and M4A1 76 HVSS tanks were mostly sent to MTO).

Doesn't mean that there weren't any M4A3s in Normandie. Only that I have not yet seen any evidence that there were, and have seen plenty of evidence that there weren't. Could still be something out there to change my mind. But this isn't it. Yet.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

Mark 1 side point on the wading tanks off the LST
first response and in the last picture:
It could be Normandy….see below history

LST-379 was laid down on 12 December 1942 at Quincy, Mass., by the Bethlehem Steel Co.; launched on 6 February 1943; sponsored by Miss Elizabeth Virginia Collins; and commissioned on 12 February 1943, Lt. John T. Salistean in command.

During World War II, LST-379 was assigned to the European theater and participated in the following operations:

Sicilian occupation-July 1943

Salerno landings-September 1943

Anzio-Nettuno advanced landings – January through March 1944

Invasion of Normandy-June 1944

Following the war, LST-379 performed occupation duty in the Far East in September 1945. Upon her return to the United States, she was decommissioned on 28 February 1946 and struck from the Navy list on 20 March 1946. On 12 April 1948, the tank landing ship was sold to the Bethlehem Steel Co., Bethlehem, Pa., and subsequently scrapped.

LST-379 earned four battle stars for World War II service.

BB you could be right. The LST, at least, was at the beaches of Normandie.

But note it was also at the beaches of Sicily and Salerno. The picture isn't high-res enough that I can blow it up and see any clearer than in it's small size, but it really looks to me like the Shermans do not have any applique armor on their hull sides (can't tell about the turret applique), and it at least appears to me that they have the narrow M34 gun mantlet.

As I say the pic is not really clear enough, so I can't say I am confident one way or the other. But it appears to me that these are early production M4A1s, and so it is more likely this pic is from Sicily or Salerno than from the Normandie beaches.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

Great info

The two GHQ Panzer Battalions in Cotentin/Carentan mainly had French tanks (R35, H39, a few FT17 and one or two Somuas and B2) but the 100th Panzer Battalion did have a single Pz III as a command vehicle. Model unspecified but a J or L is a good bet.

I wouldn't bother with Zimmeritt on Normandy Pz IVs, but side skirts were very, very common.

If you are getting some extra German halftracks, get something with a gun on it. Maybe a platoon CO vehicle, but Stummels (SP 75L24) were commonly used as assault guns and it isn't unreasonable to find them in a smaller scale action.

Mark I, thanks for your tutorial on recognising Sherman subtypes (something that has always baffled me). I could, at best tell a welded hull from a cast, a three piece nose from a single casting, or even spot a hybrid or HVSS suspension! I have a much better grasp at a beginner's level now!

Thanks. So, if my Free French M4A2s do ever arrive (beginning to despair after five weeks and no replies to e mails) they were Lease Lend only, like the M5 half track?

So, if my Free French M4A2s do ever arrive … they were Lease Lend only…?

M4A2s were not exclusively Lend Lease. They were the first Shermans to equip USMC medium tank battalions. USMC operated them in the 1943/44 period. After 1944 they received and used M4A3s.

And it may well be that some US Army units received them for initial training in the States. The Army was expanding so quickly, and new units were being formed so frequently, that almost anything was grabbed for initial training. But there was a pretty strong proscription against sending "almost anything" overseas.

The limiting issue was logistics. Having small quantities of a wide variety of vehicles overseas was a no-no from the logistics point of view. So many types of vehicles that were used in the US were never deployed with the US Army to combat zones.

But, all of that said, total quantity used by the US was perhaps a couple hundred out of the several thousands of M4A2s built. The great majority of M4A2s went to Lend Lease. So rather than saying they were Lend Lease only, I might say they were predominantly Lend Lease.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

According to Jentz, on 10 June the only Pz Divisions in the West to have IIIs are 11th Pz (26) and 116th Pz (13). Neither unit was stationed in Normandy initially. While some of the other divisions could have had the odd few they are not listed.

They pop up all over Normandy. This from 21st Pz Div and knocked out July 18th

[URL=https://imageshack.com/i/polTUlUdj]

[/URL]

As we have previously discussed US forces in Northwest Europe did receive a number of M4A2s from British stock, most notably 7th Armored Division.

Here is one discussion here we talked about this:
TMP link

I seem to remember finding a copy of one of the memos showing the transfer but cant seem to find that reference

Interesting find. As I said, wouldnt be surprised if several units didnt have the odd III or so. There is a reason equipment is kept off the official reports :)

Mark I
Found a link with the picture of LST 379 unloading the Shermans. Side shot of unloading is also included on site below.
It says that picture was Salerno 9/9/43
link

Buckeye I think you have solved the mystery!

It appears, from the site on the LST's history, that the pic I had found attributed to D-Day was indeed a pic from the Salerno landings.

Well found.

-Mark
(aka: Mk 1)

By "rounded front" I'm guessing you mean the M4A1, which had a cast hull, more rounded in front. (See Mark 1's picture of M4A1 unloading from a landing craft.) The other models had welded hulls, more angular.

mkenny:

Thanks for posting that pic of a 21.PD Pz.III. This is the first image I've seen of such a beast. I'm slightly sceptical that this is a gun vehicle – the tables for both Bns of 22.Pz Regt are well-known. Neither do I think it likely that it is part of the attached Tiger Bn 503 at this date. But it is more likely a command or OP tank. The date you cite is intriguing, since this is the first day of Op GOODWOOD. Is there any note of where this wreck was photographed?

I'm not good at these things: can anyone suggest which Ausf. of Pz.III is shown in this picture?

Yes, there were Pz IIIs in the HQ platoons of various Panzer battalions and Regiments (iirc in the 43 Medium Panzer KsTN the HQ was supposed to Panzer III Befehlswagens).

That knocked out Pz III looks rather like an artillery observation vehicle. I have one of those for my 21st Panzer chaps.

According to Zetterling 21st Panzer had six Pz III (all in 22 Pz Regt HQ or I/22 HQ, including two Befehslwagen), and 116th Panzer had ten (seven long barrel, three short barrel).

Lots of other divisions were authorised Pz III command tanks but weren't issued any.

So I reckon that makes 17 Pz III in the whole of Normandy, out of 1,700 panzers and Stugs committed to battle.

Always get some good information here !

Thoughts on what turret/gun any FT-17s operating in Cotentin Peninsula would have had?

The Pz III photo is a vehicle at Manneville/Guillerville and it is with the 10 Pz IV & 4 Tigers hit by the heavy bombers.

link

The Tiger shown in photo 5 on the linked site (3rd Tiger photo) is not Manneville though. That is an error and this wreck is further south during the retreat.

Thanks – the numbers recorded suggest that the Pz. III was an HQ tank. Looks to me like II/22. Pz.Rgt, which was down to Coy strength in June following the withdrawal of its old French tanks. It did however keep some antiquated Pz.IVB/C models, one of which is referred to in the list of destroyed targets.

"Thoughts on what turret/gun any FT-17s operating in Cotentin Peninsula would have had?"

There were only five, they were listed as "37mm, kurz". They may not even have been FT17, but the R35 and Hitchkiss were listed separately.

Not sure about any Airfield Defence FT17 in the area though.

Not quite Normandy, but Tunisia and Sicily 1943…perhaps implying that a few IIIs were still around the next year in Tiger bttns. The book review is on the HMGS.org site. Link to all 251 (so far) book reviews:

All HMGS.org Historical Book Reviews

Here's my review:

BOOK REVIEW: Hitler's Heavy Tiger Tank Battalions: 1942-1945 (Images at War series)

By Ian Baxter. Softcover. 126 pages.

Just published in 2020, the 169 photos and two black and white profile illustrations offer an in-depth look at the Tiger tanks in the Schwere Abteilungs. How in-depth? Baxter accounts for each Tiger tank sent to North Africa, including date of arrival and port.

For example, the first battalion sent, Schwere Abteilung 501, landed three Tiger Is on November 23, 1942, one more on Nov 29, two on Dec 1, one on Dec 6, four on Dec 25, five on Jan 8 1943, one on Jan 16, and the last two on Jan 24 (p31). That's 19 in total (plus another 24 Pz IIIs for the battalion), far less than the paper strength of 45 (p37).

By March 1943, Schwere Abteilung 504, 1st Company, arrived with another 11 Tiger Is and 19 Pz IIIs, with 2nd Company staying in Sicily with nine Tigers and six Pz IIIs.

Nuggets like these are scattered among the text and captions. Of note, maintenance companies recovered and repaired a staggering 75% of tanks broken down due to mechanical problem or defect or damaged -- often to tracks and drive wheels due to anti-tank mines (p103).

The photos are of rear-area maintenance and front-line field positions. Of note, many of the photos included in this volume of the Images at War series are also in the Hitler's Heavy Panzers (HHP) volume. For example, p44 here is the same as p33 of HHP, p13 is the same as p15 of HHP, p29 as p25 HHP, p48 as p30, p115 as p103, and p62 as p15. There are likely more overlaps, but that still leaves plenty of photos.

Hitler's Heavy Tiger Tank Battalions also contains appendices with various battalions, TO&Es, and markings. Enjoyed it.

Just so you know my goal in all these questions – .I have painted up FJR, SS and US Airborne platoons and supports for Carentan for Chain of Command using Offensive Minis. Really like Offensive and just ordered their new British Airborne. I expect I'll buy anything they put out in the future.

I've mainly ordered Blitzkrieg 1/56 vehicles. Adding a Somua, FT-17 and R-35. Might get a Warlord Marder III and just got a JTFM StuG IV, both of which appear to be with 17SS. Went ahead and got a Pz IVh and Pz IIIj. As you know, CoC usually doesn't have but 1-2 vehicles on a table. So my goal is to have a lot of options that match the historical weaponry around Utah and Carentan as best I can. Also just ordered a M5A1, M-20 and M-8.

Looking forward to completion and appreciate the help here. The choice of Offensive and 1/56 Blitzkrieg was the right one for sure.

Quite so, Russ. But over a year later, the Tiger Bns were starting to replace their Tiger Is with Tiger IIs.

I'm not saying there wasn't a single Pz. III gun tank in Normandy in summer 1944; as has been said, Pz-Ers-Abt.100 had a couple alongside its little Renaults and Hotchkisses. One of its Pz.IIIs, probably a Coy HQ tank, was knocked out at Cauquigny, at the end of the La Fiere causeway. And these veterans fetched up in training/IS units rushed to plug the gap at Arnhem. But the Panzers' workhorse in Normandy was the Pz.IV-G/H.

There were FT17's with 37mm infantry guns instead of machine guns.

BOOK REVIEW: Hitler's Heavy Tiger Tank Battalions: 1942-1945 (Images at War series)

By Ian Baxter. Softcover………..

Ian Baxter is a terrible author. I consider all his books to be worthless. He is a joke and makes so many errors that I am convinced he is either owns his publishers or has compromising information on them. This Tiger book has that many miscaptioned photos that we would need another book just to correct them all. He simply makes up most of the captions and he is that bad he makes Anthony Tucker-Jones look like an expert!

You aren't going to find any Pz III in a 1944 Tiger Battalion (not that any of the three Tiger Bns in Normandy fought in Cotentin anyway). They were a mix of Tiger 1 models, and being replaced with Tiger II.

Pz III

YouTube link