Landships II

thanks for that d_fernetti, here is another dummy:-

�

Here are some nice ones:

Pzkpfw-e, they were decoys; they would be used to fool enemy intelligence on the ground and from the air to make them think an attack on �a part of the line was imminent and make the enemy re-position and strengthen the supposed area of attack, thus weakening the defence of real targets...

Dummies (and decoys) have been discussed many times in these forums - use the forum "search" facility to find some.� Speculation is fun and sometimes produces new insights but please guys, wherever possible, give the sources (and comment on content - external links "die" with depressing regularity) ... anyway those sources often give more information.� Hard these days, I know - so many secondary sources and so many of those omit the simple courtesy of attribution.

The first picture in this topic shows the constructors, Sappers of the 4th Field Company Australian Engineers, 4th Division, AIF. From the source, the photographic collection of the Australian War Memorial: Near Catelet, France. 17 September 1918. Australian soldiers carrying a dummy tank, weighing about a quarter of a ton, which had been completed, with others, by the 4th Field Company of Australian Engineers, at their camp. These tanks were designed to mislead the enemy in the attack which was to be made the following morning on Le Verguier, and the Hindenburg Outpost Line by the 1st and 4th Divisions. - http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/E04934/ and others.

One of those other topics mentions the floating Mk 1 as being used for gunnery training - practicing target acquisition, traversing and aiming off - as given in the source: http://ww-one.airforce.ru/equipment/page_01.htm.� Ingenious really.

Dummy tanks were also "recycled" to assist fund-raising at home in the far-flung dominions where the real things wouldn't be seen for many months and years.

I'd say American. They appear to be wearing the Overseas Cap, and the gumboots are part of the foul weather gear. The man on the extreme right has what looks like the waterproof cap. Can't find a pic of it at the mo, but IIRC there's one in L&F Funcken.

Use search for dummy and you'll find several topics on the subject.

�

I'm not keen of seeing massive signature photos in posts :( �

�

�

Fray Bentos wrote:

---

1) I have removed my large signature.
2) I admit that I didn't search that such a subject hadn't been discussed before, I didn't know it was such an issue, but it won't happen again. But other subjects may have a different title for the same subject so tracing back every idea of a post which could go back ages could be tedious.
3) Re the dummy Renault, it was American troops.
4) I'll read only from now on and will use the search facility as I'm sure I have no new ideas.

---

�Hiya,

1) Thank you, it was confusing, especially when it was appearing amongst other photos that had something to do with the post. We all live and learn, don't take the criticism to heart. xx

2) Also guilty of this at times. Mind it can be interesting to compare the movement in knowledge from the older post to the latest postings. Even using the search button I don't always find the answers I want... it's all about knowing what is the right question to ask in the first place... a chicken and egg scenario at times when your knowledge on a subject either low or narrow like mine.

3) Ummm.... errr..... see my comment above about narrow field of knowledge. :)

4) I'm sure you do. Anyhow, like I say, it as often the not how original a question is, but who answers and the possible new knowledge they bring to the table that matters.

I have... and probably will continue to... put my foot in it many a time. I do though find my embarrassment is worth it for the answers that follow. :)�

The last thing, this or any other site needs, is members to scared to ask a question, it's how our knowledge as a whole grows.

Right I'm off to ask a question without using the search button. :)

Helen x

The original image posted is of a "Dummy" that was actually used along with nine others in an Attack, dummys can be almost anything positions, people, guns, vehicles etc some may have been used in training but I think by far the majority were used to confuse the enemy for deception purposes, in many cases to draw fire from hidden weapons that could then be targeted... or simply to get the enemy to show himself so you can shoot him.

Bizare moments in tank history-Australian decoy dummys:

http://landships.activeboard.com/forum.spark?aBID=63528&p=3&topicID=15938730

http://landships.activeboard.com/t41626763/dummy-tanks-question/

I think its possible the Renault dummy is a captured german example see The�History of the Fifth Division AEF (internet Archive) image in the above thread link

�

Cheers

�

Although both sides used dummy-anything for deception, I thought there was some agreement that the Germans also built well-crafted enemy tanks to train their infantry with, particularly since they got a late start on armor, and what they eventually built wasn't anything close to what the west was using.� I saw one comment that a week of anti-tank training was required�for their infantry.

I thought it was known that the two accurately-constructed wooden FT's are indeed German, and were probably built for training purposes vs. deception.� They're streets ahead of the two crude generic tanks in the Fifth Division AEF photo.� As Rectalgia mentioned in an earlier thread, "those dummies James posted seem extraordinarily detailed to have been simply intended to fool allied aviators".�

The other�thing is the previously raised issue of why would you build highly correct copies of the "enemy's" tanks just for deception?� As demonstrated by the reed dummies, they did create simple rhomboid dummies, but the intent is unclear.� Since they had captured and recycled British tanks, is that what they were hoping to convey with these?� One hopes that the recon pilots knew where their own tanks were supposed to be.

I discovered that the Whippet dummy photo I posted was in an earlier thread that I didn't discover, due to the topic title not containing the word dummy.� However, it is close enough to the genuine article that it seems likely this was also built for infantry training purposes.� There is that one photo of a German squad-sized unit creeping through a field to attack an unsuspecting�rhomboid from the rear.� One can easily imagine the Germans practicing such tactics using the highly accurate dummy tanks they constructed (or captured), and they would be quite hesitant to expose these to enemy fire as deception dummies.

I don't know if the Tankograd books discuss this at all, or if there is any extant commentary from the German side.

�

�

�

�

�

�

Charlie -

I don't know if Herr Strasheim mentions this at all, but I read somewhere (possibly here) that some�individual Germans built dummy wooden tanks as a sort of engineering hobby.� I would tend to think that was more likely an early war activity, but just don't know.� I have no idea to what extent - if any - they went beyond the external shell, although the engineering aspect suggests they might have.

The photo I posted of the wooden FT looks like it is of a newly-completed tank, and might have been built in a general woodworking shop, as there looks to be stored lumber (outside?) on the right.� I can imagine the army contracting this work out, although supplying plans of what was desired.� Does Strasheim discuss who did the actual construction of the dummy tanks used for training?� I wasn't generally interested enough to consider getting these books, but might change my mind about vol. 1.�

Charles

Found another picture of a dummy tank I've never seen here...

That's a very interesting picture, Valeriy!  What's the story there?  Is this post-war or were the Bulgarians afraid of tank attack by the Allies?