Landships II

jagjetta · Brigadier

British-operated Renault?

28juni14 · Hero

Interesting photograph.�� A number of things are evident;� the tank is without armament,� and the scene appears to be post armistice.�� Note the casual appearance of everyone,� especially the chap without puttees.�� The presence of a staff officer also suggests a safe zone;� perhaps trial evaluations of some sort.��

Ironsides · Legend

I believe this is a British or Canadian liason tank some unarmed FTs were apparantly used�for this purpose...

Cheers smile

elbavaro · Commander in Chief

I have seen this picture once before. And it was said it is Canadian.

James H · Legend

I knew the�man with the revolver (right of centre) looked familiar. He's�the basis of one of the illustrations in Mollo & Turner's Army Uniforms of World War 1. He's described as "Private, 13th Battalion, The Tank Corps, Arras-Cambrai Road, 2nd September 1918". Very precise, but, unfortunately, M&T aren't infallible. They say, "This battalion was identified by green and black flashes on the shoulder straps." He is wearing 1914 Pattern leather webbing, which should make him British. Those appear to be overalls rather than ordinary trousers.

I've been trying to get a clue from the patch on the man extreme left, but no luck. The man reading the map or whatever it is�seems to have a grenade emblem embossed on the front of his tin hat, which I've not come across before. The officer next to him and the one extreme right also seem to have some sort of badge on the front of their helmet covers. Anyone make them out?

Rhomboid · Field Marshal

The 4th Cdn. Div. was in action on the Arras-Cambrai road on 2/9/18, during the assault on the Drocourt-Queant line. The enlisted man on the left has a shoulder patch resembling that of the 78 Bn.

James H · Legend

Brilliant work, Rhomboid. So it looks as if M&T are partly right - theTank man is British - but they're confusing his Bn with the Canadian Infantry Bn.

This pic is in the WWI Sourcebook, in the Canada section. FT similarly unarmed, perhaps the same one:

Ironsides · Legend

Hi James if you look closely you can just see a square patch with a bar above it in a different colour(the bar, the square looks similar and is almost invisible)�on the shoulder of the officer in front of the corporal(78th bat) I suspect he is from 12th infantry brigade HQ, although in any case he's clearly Canadian too....

Cheers smile

James H · Legend

That all ties in with Rhomboid's info. The FT can't be Canadian, because the Canadian Tank Corps never got there, although they supposedly were issued with some for training. I'm sure I read somewhere that some FTs were attached to the British Army, but I can't remember the source. That is most frustrating.

This is a blow-up of the�Brodie with what seems to be a grenade badge. Does it look like one to you?

Peter T · General

Hello everybody

I am quite sure it is a Canadian FT. While searching Canadian databases months ago I stumbled over that photo The exact caption of the picture I don't know anymore (something like Canadian General ( ) ... and ... Mosquito Tank).

And here is another picture that I found in the same Canadian database:

Cheers, Peter

James H · Legend

I'm not so sure, Peter. Those are clearly the same troops, but as far as I know the Canadians trained at Bovington but were never sent to France. The man who would seem to be the driver has no Canadian markings. In the Profile Publication on Amiens, Maj-Gen N.W. Duncan shows an IWM photo of 3 FTs on rail wagons amongst several Mk Vs. The caption claims they are arriving for repairs at Tank Corps Central Workshops, and says, "A number of Renault F.T.17s (sic) were used by the British as Tank Battalion command vehicles."

My money is on it being a British-operated vehicle attached to the 3rd Tank Brigade in the Canadian sector.

Ironsides · Legend

Hi James , its looks like a grenade to me......

Cheers smile

28juni14 · Hero

I applaud the close scrutiny you gentlemen have given this photograph !� You have gleaned information & clues�that�gives�further color�to the�pic ! �Holmes would be proud! ( It's the 150th anniversary of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's birth you know.)

Tanker · Field Marshal

Bonjour,
Here is some informations about the 10 British Renault

T�l�gramme de Monsieur Loucheur au G�n�ral Foch. Arriv� le 24/5/18 � 20 h 20 (num�ro entr�e : 3556) � l'Etat-Major du G�n�ral Foch

FF Sarcus de Paris 70988 288 24 17/30 = Armement � G�n�ral Foch Etat-Major Sarcus n� 1679 1/M

- Je viens de t�l�graphier ce qui suit au G�n�ral P�tain : J'ai n�goci� avec monsieur Winston Churchill, ministre des munitions britannique, qui serait d'accord pour nous c�der imm�diatement 15 tanks Mark V et pour livrer dans le courant de Juin 35 autres tanks Mark V, soit 50 tanks lourds - stop - Il me promet d'ailleurs une fourniture suppl�mentaire dans le courant de Juillet. J'esp�re quelle pourra atteindre 50, ce qui nous ferait en tout un centaine de tanks Mark V - Stop - En retour monsieur Churchill me demande de lui c�der un certain nombre de petits tanks Renault, dont 10 imm�diatement, et sans doute une centaine en Juin et �ventuellement une centaine en Juillet, si la fourniture des tanks compl�mentaire �tait faite par le Gouvernement anglais comme je l'indique ci-dessus - stop - Je vous demande votre avis qur la combinaison : nous livrerions les 10 petits tanks Renault. Vous pourriez vous charger de livrer ceux que je mettrai � votre disposition en vous mettant d'accord avec le Mar�chal Haig pour qu'il n'en soit pas fait usage autrement que d'accord avec vous - stop - Quant au compl�ment de la fourniture de petits tanks, il ne serait fait par nous qu'apr�s que vous auriez au moins 1000 tanks complets en ordre de bataille - stop - la question sera discut�e mardi � la r�union des tanks - Je vous avise d�s maintenant pour que vous puissiez donner des instructions en cons�quence � votre repr�sentant et j'envoie copie de pr�sente d�p�che au G�n�ral Foch - stop - J'aimerai conna�tre votre opinion - stop - Les d�marches dont je parle ont �t� faites comme suite � notre conversation de dimanche dernier - Loncheur

In Versailles (30 May 1918), during the 2� Allied tank committee meeting, the French Army d�cided to give 10 chars l�gers Renault to the British Army for July. This 10 Renault FT were given to the British Army in July 1918.

In the note "Commandement en chef des Arm�es Alli�es/ Etat-Major G�n�ral/1� section/3� Bureau n� 3893 du 14 Septembre 1918", the Mar�chal Foch give the British tank's number in France in August (18 Ao�t 1918) to the French war Minister.

�� Nature de tanks�� En �tat de rouler�� En r�paration
1 - Lourds : Mark V *�
��M�le�� 52�� 14
�� Femelle�� 14�� 3
�� Mixte�� 56�� 23

��Mark V
�� M�le��105�� 95
�� Femelle�� 72�� 46
�� Mixte�� 65�� 12
�� Mark IV
�� M�le�� 49�� 52
�� Femelle�� 201�� 33

2 - M�dium A :�� 124�� 56��

3 - Tank porte-canons :�� 29�� 17

4 - Tank tenders : (recovery)
�� Mark I - Mark II - Mark III�� 34��15
��Mark IV�� 141�� 4

5 - Renault�� 10�� -
�� ------�� -----
�� Total�� 952�� 350

�

An other report for 8 September 1918 give :

��Nature de tanks��En �tat de rouler��Indisponible en�� Indisponible en
��cours de r�cup�ration�� atelier �

1 - Lourds :
�� Mark V1 * M�le�� 52�� 31�� 2
��Femelle�� 40�� -�� 3
��Mixte��51�� 32�� 4

�� Mark V�� M�le�� 71�� 68�� 41��
�� Femelle�� 53�� 44�� 3
�� Mixte�� 46�� 31�� 13

�� Mark VI�� M�le��38�� 24�� 6
�� Femelle��210�� 33�� 4
�� Mixte�� -�� -��-

2 - M�dium A :�� 72�� 45��53

3 - Tank porte-canons :�� 25�� 10�� 3

4 - Tank tenders :
�� MarkI - MarkII -Mark III�� 48�� -��-
�� Mark IV��124�� 44�� 1

5 - Renault�� 9�� -�� 1

6 - Autoblind�s�� 15�� 1�� -

At the end of�an other�report (Grand Quartier G�n�ral/Arm�e du Nord et du Nord-Est/Artillerie d'Assaut n� 13122 du 14/10/18), G�n�ral Estienne write :

"les masques de mitrailleuses des chars l�gers pr�t�s aux Anglais ont �t� l�g�rement modifi�s pour recevoir la mitrailleuse Hotchkissette anglaise.

These�10 Renault FT were probably only machine-gun models. The Renault FT, without mask, used by canadians was perhaps, waiting for this new mask, and I don't know if the outside of this British mask was different from the French model.

For instance, not other informations on history of these ten tanks after the war.

Michel

James H · Legend

That is brilliant, Michel.

Vous �tes oracle.

jagjetta · Brigadier

Michel:
That is superb documentation! My hat is off to you!

John

Ironsides · Legend

Hi James, well this is perhaps a long shot , the 87th bn were apparantly raised from the Canadian Grenadier Guards a regiment that was given permission by�HRH The Duke of Connaught to use the British Grenadier Guards badges so the man(officer) with the� grenade badge could be from 87th bn...

Cheers smile

James H · Legend

Two minds with but a single thought, Ivor. I have to confess to having sought advice in another place, and�during the course of my musings I�stumbled across the Canadian Grenadier Guards. The same thought�occurred to�me. So far, no one has responded, but one never knows. It does all fit together.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=124022&st=0&gopid=1191534&

I don't know if you have�translated Michel's information above, but the gist of it is that Churchill offered 35 Mk Vs, in instalments, to the French in exchange for Renaults; 10 immediately (May '18), a hundred in June, and a further 100 in July. M Loucheur proposes to deliver the 10 straight away and the rest subject to the French having 1,000 in battle order for their own use. It would appear that only the ten were handed over, in July.

It is absolutely news to me that they were fitted (or intended to be fitted) with the Short Hotchkiss (which is referred to rather charmingly as the Hotchkissette)

Never seen a pic of that, if, indeed, it ever happened.

Ironsides · Legend

Hi James, Something that occured to me regarding the FT's was that the recent find in Afganistan might be two survivors of these 10 tanks, since these are said to have been captured from the British in 1919........

Cheers confuse

elbavaro · Commander in Chief

Hi Ironsides,

this would make sense as the small and fast FTs are more capable for "mountain terrain" than the Marks.

James H · Legend

Well, at one time I wouldn't have dared to suggest it for fear of causing Centurion to have a fit. If you recall, he maintained that confusion was caused by the capture of a town called Tank, which is just over the border from Pakistan, on the road to Kabul.

So far, we don't know what happened to the 10 Renaults at the end of the War. If they were returned to the French or scrapped, fair enough. But if not, the Afghan theory might be a possibility after all.

Ironsides · Legend

RE: British-operated Renault? Canadian Guards pics

Ironsides · Legend

British-operated Renault?

James H · Legend

Blimey, Ivor. You've got sharper eyes than I have.

Ironsides · Legend

Just a very strong pair of reading glasses wink

�

Cheers smile

Ironsides · Legend

Hi all image from "The War�Illustrated Album Delux Vol X", reads "A Canadian brigadier-general giving instructions to a machine-gunner before starting out on a reconnaissance in a Tank on the western front." no date or location given....

Cheers wink

Centurion · Legend

James H wrote:

Well, at one time I wouldn't have dared to suggest it for fear of causing Centurion to have a fit. If you recall, he maintained that confusion was caused by the capture of a town called Tank, which is just over the border from Pakistan, on the road to Kabul.

So far, we don't know what happened to the 10 Renaults at the end of the War. If they were returned to the French or scrapped, fair enough. But if not, the Afghan theory might be a possibility after all.

Britain did not deploy full tracked fighting vehicles anywhere on the sub continent until well after the end of the Afghan war. The best guess is that the Renaults were supplied by Iran during one of Afghanistan's civil wars. Iran did acquire a number of second hand Renaults and did supply arms to one or more sides in Afghanistans various internal political rearrangements.

Centurion · Legend

Having read the thread (which seems to have become part invisible) some points

The ten Renaults supplied to Britain were all used as un armed command tanks

Canada did not get any Renaults for training - they did get some American M1917 Six Ton tanks (which were essentially copies of the Renault) for training in 1940 along with some Mk VIII Internationals. These were sold as scrap to avoid US neutrality laws. The 6 tonners proved unsuitable and soon achieved this status anyway.

James H · Legend

Hello, Centurion. Where have you been?

Anyway, things have moved on since my musings of 2009. Mr. Charles Lemons at Fort Knox, who was in charge of the restoration of the Afghan Renaults, told us the following:

"I think we can state that these did not belong to British forces because of a rather unique modification to the front hatches.� It is my belief that these two vehicles were part of the tank regiment delivered to the Polish Army by the French in 1919.� The Polish apparently modified the hatches/doors to make them more secure and less prone to being penetrated.� I think that these were some of the ones lost to the Soviet Forces during the war of independence for Poland.� By 1923, the Soviets were building their own tanks and these were part of a gift to the Afghan government in exchange for official recognition."

I believe that that should read "as part of official recognition," since it was the USSR that recognised Afghan independence.

Centurion · Legend

James H wrote:

I believe that that should read "as part of official recognition," since it was the USSR that recognised Afghan independence.

No the original text was correct - Afghanistan was one of the first countries to recognise the Soviet Union. Afghanistan had been an idependant country for centuries before the USSR came into existance.

James H · Legend

Amanullah Khan did, indeed, recognise the Bolshevik government in early 1919, and the Bolsheviks reciprocated in May, thus becoming the first nation to recognise Afghanistan's sovereignty. Amanullah had made a declaration of independence, which would seem superfluous if one's nation were already independent. Afghanistan was nominally independent but, rather like Persia, subject to the ambitions of both GB and Tsarist Russia. The events of 1919 put a stop to all of that.

August 19th is Afghan Independence Day, marking the Treaty of Rawalpindi of August 1919 that concluded the Third Afghan War, recognised Afghanistan's permanent borders, declared an end to British ambitions beyond the North-west Frontier, and gave Afghanistan full control of her foreign policy. There followed a number of treaties and agreements of friendship between Afghanistan and Bolshevik Russia (later the USSR). The gift of the Renaults (if Mr. Lemons's theory is correct) must have been a part of one of those accords.

I've missed you.

Centurion · Legend

James H wrote:

Amanullah Khan did, indeed, recognise the Bolshevik government in early 1919, and the Bolsheviks reciprocated in May, thus becoming the first nation to recognise Afghanistan's sovereignty. Amanullah had made a declaration of independence, which would seem superfluous if one's nation were already independent.�

And Persia - Britain fought a war in the 1850s with Persia to preserve Afghanistan's independence (which is why Dost Mohamed helped the British during the Mutiny). In the 18th Century Afghanistan invaded Mogul India (and got fairly close to Dehli) Not something a subject nation would do. If Afghanistan was not independant what was its status ? - it wasn't part of the British or Russian empire nor was it a protectorate

-- Edited by Centurion on Sunday 20th of March 2011 06:02:09 PM

James H · Legend

A bit off-topic now, but I suppose a reasonable way to describe both countries' status is "vassal states". Neither was colonised, but (rather like parts of the later Ottoman Empire) large areas of each country were outside the control of the central government. After the 2nd Afghan War Afghanistan actually was a British protectorate and remained so until 1919. At least, the British declared it so, whether the Afghans agreed or not. Whatever might have been achieved previously, things changed a lot in the late 19th/early 20th century. Competition for spheres of influence coupled with Britain's desire to protect India from Russian ambitons led to the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 which divided Persia into British and Russian zones with a third, nominally independent sector controlled by a government with limited powers and no independent foreign policy. The situation in Afghanistan was not identical but very similar, with a somewhat stronger central government acting largely under British direction. Having received a bloody nose, Britain announced its control over Afghanistan from a safe distance, with the threat of further invasion as a sanction. Russia annexed large parts of northern Afghanistan, but, again, without formal colonisation.

Although it can be argued that independence was not strictly in Britain's gift, it was affirmed by the Treaty of Rawalpindi and the Afghans celebrate Aug 19th as such.