Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: I should know the answer to this, but...


Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 808
Date:
I should know the answer to this, but...
Permalink   


Not sure... but wasn't Archibald a female tank?

I will have to do a search, you got me thinking now. confuse

 

 

You're right of course Archibald is male... my bad... but still struggling to find that pic.



-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Sunday 21st of July 2013 11:11:23 PM



-- Edited by MK1 Nut on Sunday 21st of July 2013 11:12:27 PM

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1416
Date:
Permalink   

... I can't remember or find what I'm looking for.cry

Could some kind soul identify this tank for me please?  A Mark I thoroughly out of action at Gaza.  Is it Sir Archibald or is it another one?

All help gratefully received. Thanks

Gwyn

 

 

 



Attachments
__________________


Legend

Status: Online
Posts: 2318
Date:
Permalink   

 

The image is at: http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P03092.002

Caption says it was a Mark IV knocked out during the Second Battle of Gaza 17-19 April 1917.

(I think the ident is wrong - believe it was a Mark I)

The troops standing around the wreck are from the 14th Australian Light Horse.

Regards,

Charlie



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Rectalgia said "Is this the same one?"

Definatly not the pic I enlarged shows the remains of a Male.... probarbly a MKI

If the info is right and its the 2nd battle of Gaza then according to this site:

http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/media/photo/destroyed-british-tank-gaza

Three tanks were destroyed "HMLS Sir Archibald, HMLS War Baby and HMLS Nutty"  so by elimination this should be "Sir Archibald" since the other two are Females....

"landships" seems to confirm it...

https://sites.google.com/site/landships/home/narratives/1917/gaza

There is a fly in the ointment however in that there are pictures of Sir Achibald damaged and abandoned but in a relatively complete condition, but it might be that the date of April 1917 on the AWM pic is implied rather then actual and that this is a much later pic taken long after the battlefield has been abandoned.... presumably after the Third Battle?

Cheerswink

 



-- Edited by Ironsides on Monday 22nd of July 2013 08:35:13 PM

__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3885
Date:
Permalink   

Top of starboard sponson indicates Mk I, I think.



__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Took the liberty of enlarging and enhancing the pic in the link from AVM that Charlie Supplied...

 

Cheerssmile



Attachments
__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 808
Date:
Permalink   

Most definitely a MK1, not just the sponson, next to the men on the right is the cab roof with its two periscope holes and no hatch.

I've not been able to find anything, best I can do is point out that the topography around the tank is flat. Maybe the damage is a result of later shelling and somewhere is a pic of the same tank, broken but more in one piece.

Helen x

 



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

Attributed to 2nd Battle of Gaza, (19 April 1917), per the documentation in Charlie's AWM link, suspect though critical parts of that same detail has turned out to be.  Still, some bits are more likely to be correct than others and location is one of the more likely to be right.

Almost certainly destroyed by British shelling or perhaps bombing. The crews tried to set fire to disabled tanks in an attempt to destroy them if the Turks might reach them but the Turks still used them as sniping redoubts, forcing sterner measures.

Is this the same one?
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P02041.006

Other AWM tank pictures from Gaza, mostly disabled, the story of the "tank redoubts" in Turkish hands emerges.

http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P08401.004
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B02001/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B01784/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B02945/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/A00226/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P05093.027
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/J01045/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B02000/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P05140.016
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B02002/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/B02944/
http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P05572.001



__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1416
Date:
Permalink   

Thank you all for your answers and also for making me feel less bad about asking the question in the first place. BTW, I agree that the damage looks as though it's been caused by an explosion from within the tank, so a demolition charge seems to fit the bill. What a waste - if they'd waited almost 100 years I'd have had it.

Gwyn

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
Date:
Permalink   

Gwyn Evans wrote:

... BTW, I agree that the damage looks as though it's been caused by an explosion from within the tank, so a demolition charge seems to fit the bill. What a waste - if they'd waited almost 100 years I'd have had it.

Gwyn


Been agonising over this aspect - one of the AWM captions seemed to say that a set fire in the tank would ignite fuel and set off any remaining ammunition but it seems reasonably clear that stored supplies would not account for anything like the scale of damage seen in some of those photos (shell fuse and explosive types? likelihood of single explosion low and power probably low), especially your one - nor would shelling (the accuracy and size of shells required ...). 

One of those captions mentions "hundreds of dead" surrounding one of those "redoubt" tanks (again the accounts are not necessarily very reliable).  But, all-in-all, there's something of a story behind all of this I think.  One imagines considerable effort and manpower being expended later in the proceedings in neutralising any stranded but more-or-less intact tank hulks commanding a good field of fire over actual or potential battle lines or lines of communications - perhaps in preparation for the third battle as Ironsides suggests.



-- Edited by Rectalgia on Tuesday 23rd of July 2013 09:02:44 AM

__________________
Facimus et Frangimus


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Rectalgia details of the second battle can be found here:

http://www.awm.gov.au/histories/first_world_war/volume.asp?levelID=67893

Chapter XVIII Second Gaza Engagement - Australian War Memorial 

only Nutty is mentioned by name but two other tanks are also mentioned as being destroyed or put out of action it seems that it was HMLS Nutty that gave the "Tank" Redoubt its name and on which it finally came to rest.... I think P02041.006 shows Nutty but the trench system has long since collapsed...

Edit: Severe thunderstorms ended playwink The two pics below are of HMLS Nutty presumably on the "Tank"redoubt after 2nd Gaza.


Cheerssmile



-- Edited by Ironsides on Tuesday 23rd of July 2013 02:53:52 PM

Attachments
__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Legend

Status: Online
Posts: 2318
Date:
Permalink   

 

If the photo caption of the destroyed Mark I is accurate in the unit ident then the image must have been taken long after

the 3rd Gaza Battle in Nov 1917. The 14th Light Horse was not created until June 1918 from elements of the Imperial Camel Corps (since

camels couldn't cope with the conditions in Palestine). The unit diaries for the 14th LH start in August 1918 suggesting the unit

wasn't formed as a complete entity until August. Initially the 14th LH was based at Saraband (Surafend), east of the modern Tel Aviv. During Sept 1918

the 14th moved north and arrived in Damascus at the end of the month. After the collapse of the Ottoman Army the 14th was based

at Homs in Syria until about March 1919.

At the earliest the image of the destroyed Mark I was taken in June 1918 but more likely in August 1918.

Regards,

Charlie



-- Edited by CharlieC on Tuesday 23rd of July 2013 01:30:36 PM



-- Edited by CharlieC on Tuesday 23rd of July 2013 01:32:43 PM

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1416
Date:
Permalink   

Thank you Charlie, that's a useful insight.

Gwyn

__________________


Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 808
Date:
Permalink   

Not sure if this will help... this MK1 tank has the smooth tensioner wheel in the front horn. A lot of the Gaza MK1s still had the toothed wheels that were quickly abandoned on the tanks in Europe.

Also on the ground on the far right, I think I can see two of the three triangle exhaust baffles. If this is the case, then it may narrow down the options even more, as some of the mk1s had an exhaust fitted like the ones on the MKIVs. It ran along the roof, venting out the bottom of the hydraulic shied at the rear.

Helen x



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

MKI Nut wrote "this MK1 tank has the smooth tensioner wheel in the front horn"

I think that is also true of Nutty looking at the pic it looks like the remains of a smooth idler, there has been some suggestion that the GAZA MKIs were later production tanks perhaps even the last few... see here

https://sites.google.com/site/landships/home/narratives/1917/gaza

I believe the owner of the landships google site is munkeezulu a member of the forum...

Cheerssmile



Attachments
__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 808
Date:
Permalink   

It would be interesting to know if there was some late MK1s amongst the batch sent to Gaza. Personally I find myself wondering if the exhaust pipe system and smooth front wheel is just field modifications using spares for the MKIVs. The fact that some had their original toothed front wheels and triangular baffles, makes me have my doubts.

The good thing about wrecks is they give you a set date for a particular tanks setup, something I used when doing my plans as I never fully rust museum tanks not to be modified in some way.

 



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1626
Date:
Permalink   

Came across this info on GWF posted by "StevenBec" in an old thread

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=16062&hl=tanks&st=0

"The War diary shows Sir Archibald with Nutty procedded into action at 0430 17th April 1917 from Pt 300 on Dumbell Hill and proceded around Sh Abbas rigde at Pt Sq W 32 d were the tank was hit by artillery fire on the left track putting it out of action"

 

Cheerssmile



__________________

"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazggimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul"

 



Field Marshal

Status: Offline
Posts: 433
Date:
Permalink   

I'm fairly sure this tank is Sir Archibald, burnt out after being hit by artillery fire near Sheihk Abbas Ridge on 17/4/17, during the lead up to the Second Battle of Gaza.. It seems likely from the photo above that the wreck was further demolished in the interim between 2nd and 3rd Gaza, either by Turkish artillery or British explosive charges. The "E" Co. war diary does not mention any intentional demolition.



Attachments
__________________


Hero

Status: Offline
Posts: 808
Date:
Permalink   

I would say that is a very strong contender for the wreck above. For a start, it is on flat-ish ground. Also the roof panel on the ground in the initial photo, has the bolts for the never used spaced armour on it. For some reason male MK1s rarely had spacer bolts, or even the holes for them... I can only presume this is down to where they were manufactured. confuse



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1062
Date:
Permalink   

In addition, note that the tank in Rhomboid's pic, presumably Sir Archibald given the content of his post, is missing (much of?) the left track, but has the right track in place - which matches the wrecked vehicle.

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1416
Date:
Permalink   

Many thanks to you all for your superb assistance once again. I am now quite happy with the identification of the wreck as Sir Archibald.

Gwyn

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard