Landships II

Nailcreek · Captain

Mark V Composite - 301st Tank Battalion, AEF Tank Corps

eugene · Field Marshal

great find, is this the first photo showing a composite tank on the western front?

Peter Kempf · Field Marshal

Yes, really nice and rare find!

Tim R · Hero

Very interesting nailcreek, thanks

Tim R

Centurion · Legend

I can possibly throw a little more light on this as I found these photos in the AWM not long ago and checked some records.

The tank is not actually part of the 301st but of the 9th Battalion Tank Corps (hence the 'I'). On the 29th Sept 1918 as part of the Battle of Catelet - Bony the 9th Batt and the 301st together provided support to both Australian and American troops near Bony and at Bellicourt. The American tanks were at Bony and the British at Bellicourt. The British tanks were MkVs (including at least one composite as the photo suggests) and the Americans Mk V*s.

I've not seen the caption re Lt. Rock and Lt. Warden before but other accounts of tank actions at this time do suggest that British tanks sometimes carried Americans. This may have been just as a 'help out' if some regular crew members were ill or wounded (it would be interesting to know if Britsh crew members ever served in American tanks in the same fashion) but having two Lts acting as gunners might sugest that they were on some experience or liason posting. This would make sense given that the 301st was effectively 'embedded' in a British unit.

Interestingly I can find no record of any tank action on the 4th October. Bellicourt had fallen to the Allies on 30th Sept so that this must have been a revisit by the 2 Lts

Mark Hansen · Legend

Centurion wrote:

The tank is not actually part of the 301st but of the 9th Battalion Tank Corps (hence the 'I').

I think the marking on that tank is actually "1.8", not "I.8". The serif is missing from the top of the right side of the digit on both sides of the tank.

Another reason for this is that there is a photo of another Mk V with the number "I.8" which would make it the 9th battalion tank.

EDIT: The attached image shows a dead crewman. PLEASE do not view if images of death offend.

-- Edited by Mark Hansen at 09:26, 2006-08-06

-- Edited by Mark Hansen at 09:27, 2006-08-06

eugene · Field Marshal

Mark Hansen wrote:

Centurion wrote:

The tank is not actually part of the 301st but of the 9th Battalion Tank Corps (hence the 'I').

I think the marking on that tank is actually "1.8", not "I.8". The serif is missing from the top of the right side of the digit on both sides of the tank.

Another reason for this is that there is a photo of another Mk V with the number "I.8" which would make it the 9th battalion tank.

are those rags under the sponson or a burnt human corpse?

Centurion · Legend

Mark Hansen wrote:

Centurion wrote:

The tank is not actually part of the 301st but of the 9th Battalion Tank Corps (hence the 'I').

I think the marking on that tank is actually "1.8", not "I.8". The serif is missing from the top of the right side of the digit on both sides of the tank.

Another reason for this is that there is a photo of another Mk V with the number "I.8" which would make it the 9th battalion tank.

Is it a Mk V and not a Mk IV? In any case call numbers were not peculiar to a specific tank and would be reissued if a tank was lost and then replaced.

The other points are that the tank is at Bellicourt where British tanks operated - the 301st that day were at Bony, the 301st were operating Mk V*s at that point

Mark Hansen · Legend

eugene wrote:

are those rags under the sponson or a burnt human corpse?

Actually, I think it is a corpse with the head resting against the sponson door.

Mark Hansen · Legend

Centurion wrote:

Is it a Mk V and not a Mk IV? In any case call numbers were not peculiar to a specific tank and would be reissued if a tank was lost and then replaced.

The other points are that the tank is at Bellicourt where British tanks operated - the 301st that day were at Bony, the 301st were operating Mk V*s at that point

Definitely a Mk V. The unditching rails are correct for a Mk V, the commanders cupola is just visible, and the plate behind the sponson below the '8' is peculiar to the Mk V due to it having the epicyclic drive.

P.S.: The '8' in the WD number, not the '8' in the call number.

-- Edited by Mark Hansen at 17:41, 2006-08-06

eugene · Field Marshal

Mark Hansen wrote:

eugene wrote:

are those rags under the sponson or a burnt human corpse?

Actually, I think it is a corpse with the head resting against the sponson door.

I find that incredibly gruesome, considering that its real

Nailcreek · Captain

I initially found these photos in the book "A Company, 301st Battalion, Tank Corp", published in 1919; but located these copies at the AWM website. The captions are copied from the book.

Per the "Battlegraph, 301st Battalion US Tank Corps, September 29th 1918, Sector Le Catelet~Bony", the 301st did operate MkVs, in addition to MkV*s.

The 301st drew tanks from the central workshops instead of being issued with vehicles in England.

On September 27th, the tank distributions was as follows, based upon serial number:

A Company

15 Mk.V* (9 Male, 2 Female, 4 Composite)

B Company

9 Mk V* (7 Male, 2 Female)

7 Mk V (3 Male, 1 Female, 3 Composite)

C Company

16 Mk V (7 Male, 9 Composite)

Also, according to the Report on Operations: Sept 27th - Oct 1st, 1918, the 4th Tank Brigade was composed as follows:

1st Tank Battalion, BEF

4th Tank Battalion, BEF

301st Tank Battalion, AEF

4th Tank Supply Co. BEF

On the Oct 17 operations, the 4th Tank Brigade consisted of the following units:

6th Tank Battalion to IX Corps

16th Tank Battalion to IX Corps

301st Tank Battalion, AEF to II American Corps (10 tanks for the 27th DIV and 15 tanks for the 30th DIV)

1st Tank Battalion to XIII Corps

10th Tank Battalion to Fourth Army Reserve.

For operations on Oct 23rd, the 301st was attached to the 2nd British Tank Brigade supporting the 6th DIV and had:

Left Section

3 Mk V* Male

1 Mk V Male

Center Section

3 Mk V* Male

1 Mk V Male

Right Section

2 Mk V* Male

1 Mark V* Composite

1 Mark V Male

I hope you find this information interesting!

-- Edited by Nailcreek at 00:57, 2006-08-06

-- Edited by Nailcreek at 01:11, 2006-08-06

Mark Hansen · Legend

eugene wrote:

I find that incredibly gruesome, considering that its real

Sorry eugene, it was not my intention to horrify. Unfortunately, war and death are inseperable. Peter Kempf has mentioned this on his contact page where there is a link to more photos of dead tank crews amongst other casualties. I will restate his warning that the pictures are graphic. Do not visit the page if images of death are likely to cause offence.

Peter Kempf · Field Marshal

That is definitely a Mk V. No doubt whatsoever. Notice also the grille behind the sponsons as well.

-- Edited by Peter Kempf at 09:49, 2006-08-06

Rhomboid · Field Marshal

Does the "1" of the 1.8 designation denote the 301st Battalion?