Jump to content


Photo

The Jacques Littlefield Collection At The New American Heritage Museum


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#21 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,027 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 23 May 2019 - 1314 PM

Is this the one they had on tank overhaul? Dragged out of a pond in Poland, with a shattered turret?


  • 0

#22 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 23 May 2019 - 1519 PM

A river, so yes. Self destructed with demolitions, The tank tested all Jacques' standing orders for maximum authenticity, as it was apparently a Panther D rebuilt as an A model before it was blown up, or something like that. I can barely keep up. What was most amazing was his ability to find contractors who could deliver rubber rims for road wheels and parts for the transmission and so forth. He hired an assistant to research German radio equipment specifically for this project. I looked at the torn down transmission in 2003 and had to turn away! it was so incredibly complex as to defy reality, including the self ventilating box into which the spent 75mm cartridge cases came to rest. It would be a long time before US/UK tank designers came up with such fastidious features. 


  • 0

#23 Tim the Tank Nut

Tim the Tank Nut

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,666 posts
  • Interests:WW2 Armor (mostly US)

Posted 23 May 2019 - 1545 PM

two thoughts:

One, he was already ill when he came to our facility but it was indistinguishable.  His enthusiasm for what we were doing was super high even though our shoestring couldn't compare to what he was doing.  He wasn't judgemental about how we did things, only the results mattered.  It was nice to be complimented so much by someone far more capable.

 

Second:

The first time I encountered real mud at Fort Knox I thought something was wrong with the tank.  The amount of suction and friction on the hull made it feel like we lost an engine.  It was an eye opening experience.  I vividly remember getting back up on the gravel and being amazed at how much faster we were traveling instantly.

Generals should all be forced to operate in mud at some point just to get the point across.


  • 0

#24 Mk 1

Mk 1

    Difficile est saturam non scribere

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,093 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pleasanton, CA, USA
  • Interests:Military history, collecting and shooting historic firearms, wargaming, a house full of kidlins, life in general.

Posted 23 May 2019 - 1643 PM


I know that Panther... :)  

 

Indeed. 

Mk1_with_Panther_Oct08.jpg

Another pic from that same day ... yes Jacques was a very gracious host, and an active friend to tanknet.  And he was also not shy to recruit volunteers to break track from time-to-time.

 

 

More than a few TankNetters got the opportunity to know that Panther.

 

Both inside...

Pantherenginedeck.jpg

 

and out...

Panthercupolaandmantlet.jpg

 

The Panther was, an is, a fascinating subject for anyone interested in military history.

DiscussingPanther.jpg

The next time I happen to be chatting with Steve Zaloga and Michael Greene I'll be hard-pressed to have a more interesting topic.  Unless it's a Sherman.  And even then, it is almost impossible to discuss the Sherman tank without adding Panther in the conversation somewhere.

 

Yes, I can honestly say that I have stared down the barrel of a Panther from the turret of a Sherman.

M4A1FacingPanther.jpg

Although it was notably less of a "significant emotional event" in my life than in the lives of my father's generation.

 

-Mark

(aka: Mk 1)


  • 0

#25 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,027 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 May 2019 - 0322 AM

A river, so yes. Self destructed with demolitions, The tank tested all Jacques' standing orders for maximum authenticity, as it was apparently a Panther D rebuilt as an A model before it was blown up, or something like that. I can barely keep up. What was most amazing was his ability to find contractors who could deliver rubber rims for road wheels and parts for the transmission and so forth. He hired an assistant to research German radio equipment specifically for this project. I looked at the torn down transmission in 2003 and had to turn away! it was so incredibly complex as to defy reality, including the self ventilating box into which the spent 75mm cartridge cases came to rest. It would be a long time before US/UK tank designers came up with such fastidious features. 

 

Thats unusual. They refitted with the ball type machine gun, instead of the open MG position? I didnt know they did that. There were still Panthers in Normandy in 1944 that were still clearly D models that were not updated. Im guessing it must have been done on the line.

 

I remember on Tank overhaul the restorers saying that they found evidence of cigarettes and swarf put in the oil lines. This seemed to be quite common in German tank construction of this period. Another Panther being restored by Bruce Crompton (Combat dealers) showed evidence of the pistons having been partly cut through. They would function fine for a period of time, then develop fatigue crack and break. Very sophisticated sabotage.

 

Its amazing what skill set there is out there to repair Panzers even now. Supposedly the best place to send Maybachs for rebuilding is the Czech Republic. In the 1940's they were obviously building them for the Germany Army, and were still using the engines in a variety of roles years afterwards.


  • 0

#26 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 24 May 2019 - 0649 AM

A lot of that depended on by whom and where the rebuild was done. As an E Front vehicle, it could have gone to an intermediary field rebuild facility or, in worst case, the Vienna Arsenal Army Vehicle Workshop, which was where the most difficult jobs were sent. We should check Friedli, L., Repairing the Panzers: German Tank Maintenance in World War II, 2 vols (Monroe: Panzerwrecks, 2011). Also, a lot of tank battalions were loath to have their tanks evacuated, for replacements remained scarce. In that case a local repair might have been the case, albeit rare. This is also a reason for German tank battalions reporting more tanks as ready than was the case, i.e. to avoid evac. and instead to scavange/cannibalize for parts.

 

It would not necessarily have been a mandatory update, which the Germans could ill afford. However, when parts for the D models ran out, a full [or partial] rebuild to A standards would have been the resort.


Edited by Ken Estes, 28 May 2019 - 2318 PM.

  • 0

#27 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 24 May 2019 - 0655 AM

My turn, May 2005:

 

Q8TItU.jpg

 

 

 

 

mQHthu.jpg

 

 

Talk about hog heaven: Jacques, Mike Green and an M103A2 in proper USMC colors. 27 June 2004:

 

rjlsWy.jpg


Edited by Ken Estes, 24 May 2019 - 0706 AM.

  • 0

#28 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,027 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 24 May 2019 - 0704 AM

A lot of that depended on by whom and where the rebuild was done. As an E Front vehicle, it could have gone to an intermediary field rebuild facility or, in worst case, the Vienna Arsenal Army Vehicle Workshop, which was where the most difficult jobs were sent. We should check Friedli, L., Repairing the Panzers: German Tank Maintenance in World War II, 2 vols (Monroe: Panzerwrecks, 2011). Also, a lot of tank battalions were loath to have their tanks evacuated, for replacements remained scarce. In that case a local repair might have been the case, albeit rare. This is also a reason for German tank battalions reporting more tanks as ready than was the case, i.e. to avoid evac. and instead to scavange/cannibalize or fparts.

 

It would not necessarily have been a mandatory update, which the Germans could ill afford. However, when parts for the D models ran out, a full [or partial] rebuild to A standards would have been the resort.

 

Sure, I can see that for the drivetrain and other components. But actually swapping out the cupola or changing the mg mount, thats odd. The only explanation is (as happened with many of our early Lancasters) in production you consume old parts, then transition as those parts become available. I noted from the Jentz book on the Tiger they had a strange effect of using up new components first, then going back to cold components that remained stacked up on the line that had not yet been consumed, a result of the fairly cramped nature of the construction. Perhaps a similar thing happened here, but its a curious thing. Id be interested if they ever came to a full explanation is discovered.

 

Thanks, thats an interesting point about sabotage possibly coming up in refurbishment centres. I could see that in Austria, they had a lot of slave labour there. One of my Polish neighbours worked in some capacity in Graz.


  • 0

#29 Paul G.

Paul G.

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,240 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 28 May 2019 - 1348 PM

I plan to be there again this fall. Hope to cross paths with Nick again...we keep missing each other.
  • 0

#30 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,741 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 28 May 2019 - 1707 PM

Why would you rebuild a D into an A?


  • 0

#31 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,365 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 28 May 2019 - 1735 PM

D was actually earlier one.

Germans...  :blink:


  • 0

#32 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,873 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 28 May 2019 - 1858 PM

D was actually earlier one.
Germans...  :blink:


The Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" is the notable exception to the rule. IIRC the A version took longer to complete the design and make production ready than the D.
  • 0

#33 Rich

Rich

    intellectual bully ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,318 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WW II, Current Defense Issues, Military History in General

Posted 28 May 2019 - 2122 PM

 

D was actually earlier one.
Germans...  :blink:


The Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" is the notable exception to the rule. IIRC the A version took longer to complete the design and make production ready than the D.

 

 

I've never heard a good explanation for why the sequence was D, A, G, and then F? Jentz and Doyle established that there never was a B, C, or E. Since the A was actually the D chassis with a redesigned turret, while the G was the A turret with a redesigned chassis, the idea that the A took longer to produce than the D doesn't hold water. Even better, the F was the G chassis with yet another redesigned turret.

 

In fact, it appears the Ausfuehrung designations for the Panther were arbitrary, rather than sequential, as in the Panzer I-IV. Notably, the designation for the Tiger was the same. Tiger I was Ausfuehrung E, while Tiger II was Ausfuehrung B.


  • 0

#34 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,027 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 29 May 2019 - 1134 AM

Even better, you have Panther II which is a contempory of the Ausf A, but looked more like an Ausf G, but was no Ausf at all. Those crazy German's. :D


  • 0

#35 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,741 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 02 June 2019 - 1150 AM

My brain hurts!
  • 0

#36 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,401 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 02 June 2019 - 1401 PM

 

 

D was actually earlier one.
Germans...  :blink:


The Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" is the notable exception to the rule. IIRC the A version took longer to complete the design and make production ready than the D.

 

 

I've never heard a good explanation for why the sequence was D, A, G, and then F? Jentz and Doyle established that there never was a B, C, or E. Since the A was actually the D chassis with a redesigned turret, while the G was the A turret with a redesigned chassis, the idea that the A took longer to produce than the D doesn't hold water. Even better, the F was the G chassis with yet another redesigned turret.

 

In fact, it appears the Ausfuehrung designations for the Panther were arbitrary, rather than sequential, as in the Panzer I-IV. Notably, the designation for the Tiger was the same. Tiger I was Ausfuehrung E, while Tiger II was Ausfuehrung B.

 

 

"Listen to me Hans, if we do it D then A then G, then F, they will speak about us for a century!"

 

igor-young-frankenstein.png?fit=300%2C21


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users