D-Day StuG III

I have attached a copy of a google earth image with the locations on it. The StuG was indeed where you had thought, defending the line of advance at the river crossing. My father in law was referred to by his initials 'CAB' their tank was called 'Blue Peter' after the champion racehorse. They sighted the StuG and fired at it - to no effect, whether they missed or not is an open question. The StuG fired and hit them, killing the driver, CAB and the commander Lt C Charlton were injured and lay in the adjacent cornfield until rescued by Canadian medics. The other two crew were later found wandering the lanes lost.

 

The engagement was at a much closer range than I had imagined.

Did your late Father-in-Law describe any other of his experiences of that day?

Thanks again,

Philip

 

What a fantastic opportunity. Sadly one now no longer possible.

That is a shame as I'm sure they would make fascinating reading.

Philip

 

Here's something about the German side to complete the picture

What is known about the deployment of Kampfgruppe Meyer on June 6:

Airborne landings of two American paratrooper divisions (82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions) took place on the Cotentin Peninsula on the night of June 6 (D-Day). However, many of the paratroopers were not dropped over the designated drop zones because the American pilots of the transport planes, some of whom were inexperienced, were unable to locate the drop zones, some of which were very poorly marked. As a result, several dozen misplaced paratroopers landed in the area south of Carentan beginning at 02:00. The corps reserve Kampfgruppe Meyer (about 2,700 men) was therefore set in motion about 03:10 by General Marcks in the direction of St. Jean-de-Daye, southeast of Carentan, since it was thought that a center of gravity of an impending Allied landing would be located there.

The I Bn/GR 915 was transported on confiscated French. Trucks in the direction of Carentan, the II Bn/GR 915 as well as the Fusilier Battalion, on the other hand, were "motorized" only with bicycles.

At 05:50, when the first reports arrived from the coast that enemy warships were bombarding the coast, the battle group was halted just before reaching St. Jean-de-Daye and was told to wait for new orders. About 07:35 (the American landing at Omaha Beach had been going on for an hour by then), Lieutenant Colonel Meyer was ordered to send the I Bn against the Americans at Omaha Beach; the battalion was to arrive there about 09:30 and report to the command of Colonel Goth, commander of Grenadier Regiment 916 defending this section of the coast.

However, many of the French volunteers driving the trucks were now sabotaging the vehicles, and with American fighter-bombers now appearing in droves in the sky in full daylight, the I Battalion's advance was proving extremely difficult with heavy losses. Many soldiers fell victim to the fighter-bombers on the approach to Omaha Beach, and the battalion did not reach its objective area until early afternoon, when the Americans had already captured the three coastal towns of St. Laurent, Colleville, and Vierville.

The I Battalion was then engaged against the advancing Americans over the next few days, but was unable to halt their advance.

Now to the part that should be of interest to the British side here:

Between 08:30 - 09:00 the two remaining battalions of Kampfgruppe Meyer, namely the II Battalion as well as the Fusilier Battalion were put on the march in the direction of Crepon and thus in the direction of Gold Beach, where the British had landed at 07:35 and, unlike the Americans at Omaha Beach, were able to make rapid gains in terrain and advance into the rear. The two German battalions, motorized only by bicycles, were supported by 10 assault guns from Panzerjäger-Abteilung 1352 and were also subjected to constant attacks by the Jabos on the march. Completely disjointed, individual groups of KG Meyer reached the Bazeville - Villiers le Sec area around 16:00 and assembled for a counterattack in the direction of Crepon. While still preparing, the two battalions were hit by an attack from the British 69 Brigade. The Germans, completely exhausted from a total bicycle ride of over 50 kilometers, provided stiff resistance to the British, but were unable to hold off the well-equipped British, who were advancing with tank support, for long.

The Fusilier battalion, despite the hardest resistance, was pushed back toward evening across the little river Seulles toward the village of Brey and retreated to Ducy-Ste-Marguerite. According to sources, the once 700-man battalion numbered only 40 men at this point. I Bn/GR915, on the other hand, was encircled at Bazenville; in the course of the engagement, Lieutenant Colonel Meyer's command post was overrun by the British, and Meyer himself fell. The battle group was now taken over by a Major Korfes. In the course of June 7, this encirclement was systematically wiped out by the British, more than 200 Germans were taken prisoner, the rest were either dead or wounded.


Finally, some background information on the Panzerjäger Abteilung:

The creation of Pz.Jg.Abt. 352 was ordered by OKH/GenStdH/Org.Abt. Nr. I/15013/43 g.Kdos. on 2.1.1944 in the following organisation:

Staff
1.(Sf.) Kp. (14 s.Pak-Sfl. Read: hvy AT-SPG = Marder III)
2.(Stu.Gesch.) Kp. (10 StuG)
3.(Fla) Kp. (9 towed 3,7 cm flak guns)

Stab Pz.Jg.Abt. 352 was renamed from the former Stab Pz.Jg.Abt. 254. Personnel for the 1. Kp. was to be supplied by Pz.Jg.E.u.A. 13, for the 2. Kp. by Pz.Jg.E.u.A. 8. The 3. Kp. was to be supplied by Wehrkreis VI.

By an Org.Abt. order dated 9.3.1944 a Stabskp. was also added.

The 14 Marder III for the 1. Kp. were shipped from an ordnance depot on 3.2.1944 (=4), 23.2.1944 (=5) and 5.3.1944 (=5)
The 10 StuG III for the 2. Kp. - since 14.2.1944 renamed to Stu.Gesch.Abt. 1352 - were shipped on 18.2.1944 (=5) and 15.3.1944 (=5)
The 3.(Fla) Kp. was ordered to transfer from W.K. VI to the division on 22.1.1944.
(Information provided by Martin Block at feldgrau.net, Aug 07, 2005)

 

He was disappointed to have trained for years for a much longer swim in with the tanks, he had done so many practice swims and landings. In the event it was a short swim from the line of the 'mines on poles' beach defences to the shore. He was fortunate to be landed in line with Lavatory Pan Villa and just drove off the beach and straight up the road. He lost an eye in the engagement and was eventually made fit for duty but he never rejoined the regiment - he went out to Hong Kong!

My wife and eldest son have been to the Normandy Pilgrimages with the Creully club and have tried to get the old soldiers to talk about it - without success.
I am an intelligence analyst (RAF - retired) and when I served on II(AC) Squadron was the history custodian. I have copies of the images taken on D-Day by Wg Cdr Geddes of King beach. I was able to take the photos to an old soldier in Bristol (now deceased) and showed him the tanks on the beach. He landed a little to the east from 'CAB' and was able to 'get his bearings' and pointed to a black shape saying 'That was where my tank was hit'. The shape was of course of his burning tank.

There are odd snippets of information which have come to light over the years but of course these opportunities diminish as the years pass. Cecil Newton seems indestructible and is always worth listening to. My fife has tried to get the guys to tell her what her dad was like, there are some risque stories of them during training, but all they would say was 'for a little chap, he couldn't half drink a lot'.
Not much use in a forum like this but there it is.

After the war CAB worked with the army fording trials unit, so the amphibious side of life stayed with him.

Is there any information available about the crew of StuG '222'? Did any of them survive?

 

Ray,

I don't know if he came from StuG '222' but in WO208/3590 there is an interrogation report of an other rank of 2nd Coy, 352nd Pz Jag Bn (352 ID) captured on 6 June 44. Unfortunately I haven't got the file in question but hopefully some kind soul on here might have it. In the remarks column it says the interrogation report covers the Bn organisation.

I'd look in Int Reports of the 50 Division formations involved as they might have more information.

Regards

Tom

 

I covered 50th Div on D-Day in my book and I knew about this encounter, but I didn't know the German vehicles were Stug IIIs. I also didn't know that they were reported or rumored to be "40 Tigers!" That doesn't surprise me, though. Really gross errors in vehicle identification were depressingly common in the early stages of the Normandy campaign and could have disastrous consequences.

 

Please could you tell me the name/title of your book?

 

Hello Ray,

Thank you telling us the name of your father-in-law's tank and for your other posts.

The number "43" for the tank of 1th Troop Leader is puzzling though, because the tank of the 4th Troop Corporal, the one that got stuck just in front of the 5 cm gun emplacement, was No.55:


The numbering scheme for B Sqn on D Day must therefore have been the following:

SHQ – 40, 41, 42, 43
1 Tp – 44, 45, 46
2 Tp – 47, 48, 49
3 Tp – 50, 51, 52
4 Tp – 53, 54, 55
5 Tp – 56, 57, 58

Of course there might have been some 'irregularities', such as the Tp Ldr, Tp Sgt & Tp Cpl exchanging numbers within the Troop, but No.43 in 1 Tp would in any case mean that No.55 was in 5 Tp, which was clearly not the case. It would also have meant that No.58 did not exist, which is also incorrect:


My interpretation is that No.43 might refer to your father-in-law's tank number at a later date, when some tanks had been reallocated to make up for losses, or after a change in the numbering system had taken place. Another possibility is of course that my numbering theory above is wrong, and that another, non-consecutive numbering system was used, but it would be a notable exception as all other armoured regiments on D Day used consecutive numbers in each each of their squadrons, although sometimes with a gap between SHQ and Troops.

What do you think? Is there some evidence of a date, photo or else for No.43?

Michel

 

Hello,
and sorry for putting a spanner in the works,
My late father-in-law (CAB Day) was a keen model maker and made a faithful model of his tank to give to my wife when she was a child.
It shows the number 43 (red with white outline) on the turret and is generally accepted in the family as being the correct number. He was an absolute stickler for detail in his models and artwork.
The red square with the number 1 in it is on the hull sides and the fox with 994 is on the back - all accurate details.

When CAB met his future wife (Jean Bennett) she was living at number 43 High Street Clovelly.
They were both draftsmen in the Fording Trials Unit at Instow.
Throughout the war and in particular the Battle of Britain Jean closely followed the activities and personalities of number 43 squadron.
There is a theme here.
I have no photographic evidence, although there is a well publicised photo of a DD Sherman bearing that number.which is said to belong to the 13/18th Hussars.
I have spent my entire life working for the RAF and am well aware of how 'irregular' things often are in the military.
This is indeed a conundrum, how it can be resolved remains a puzzle.
Regards

Ray

 

Ray,

Many thanks for these explanations. Do you know whether the model tank your father-in-law made was that a DD tank or a standard tank? If he used a commercially available model kit, it must have been a standard tank since DD kits started to appear only (relatively) recently, but he might have added the flotation skirt etc. himself.

The fact that the number he used was 43 in red with white outline makes me think he used this number precisely because it is the number of the well known IWM pic of a 13/18H DD, which were then thought to use turret numbers in red with white outline. However, photo evidence shows that 4/7 DG DDs had only the white outline with no infill, as can be seen on this still from a colour film (not a colourised film!):

The same view as in my previous post, but from the original colour film:

Source: IWM ADM 1234B reel 2 around 00.12
SCENES AT ARROMANCHES AND AT KING BEACH [Allocated Title]

My guess is therefore that your father-in-law applied the correct unit markings, but that, for the turret number, he did not rely on his memory alone but in the current wisdom or in the markings available then. It would be quite normal that he would not remember his exact D Day turret number, or maybe conflate it with photographs of DD tanks he saw (or his future wife's street address!), because he must have had a number of different tanks in the course of his war campaign and could not be expected to remember precisely in which tank he was riding at what time.

Do you perchance have photos of his tank model that you could post here?

Michel

 

Another well known pic of a 4/7 DG Sherman II DD (No.54 = Tp Sgt 4 Tp B Sqn), showing clearly the absence of infill within the outline of the turret number, which was painted over the original tank's US Registration Number:

Michel

 

Hello,
Firstly I must apologise for leading you down a blind alley re the colour of the number,
this is entirely my mistake, it is all white.
I have dug the model out of the cabinet and here is a photo of it.
The number is barely discernible but is 43, with the B sqn number one.

It is, as you can see a standard Sherman, it's about 12" long and has a motor inside.
My wife said that he added extra boxes and tarpaulins on it.
This would have been made in the '60's.
As for the number of tanks he rode, there may have been many in the years of training but his war campaign with the 4th/7th began and ended on D-Day he got five miles inland.
He was a long time in hospital, he lost an eye and had chest wounds, and yes we have the broken pipe which was in his pocket.
After that he wasn't in tanks, he went to the far east to work with prisoners of war there.
The only DD-Sherman which mattered to him was this one.

 

Ray

Firstly, being history custodian in II(AC) Sqn must have been fascinating. Aerial photographs are one thing I never tire of looking at, scouring even - much to NCAP - National Collection of Aerial Photography | NCAP - National Collection of Aerial Photography ’s delight. Am I right in thinking Wg Cdr Geddes’ photos are the oblique ones with the invasion striped wing trailing edge showing?

I can imagine the frustration after training so much for the swim in and then the weather conspiring against it on the day.

This is what Austin Baker (of C Squadron) wrote of the event in his diary

“Two chaps from B squadron arrived at out harbour - a corporal driver and his co-driver from one Lieut. Charlton’s crew. They had gone over a rise and spotted a Jerry SP down the road ahead of them. They fired and missed, and the next moment the Jerry had got them through the turret twice, killing the operator and wounding the commander and gunner. They had baled out and the two from the turret disappeared somewhere (they got back, we found later, but Charlton lost a leg). The corporal and his mate walked all the way back to us - a distance of several miles. They were very much shaken up.”

And with regard to the StuG crew…

“In the late evening, Capt. Collins (Technical Adjutant) went off up the road on his motorcycle to have a look round. He had a startling experience. Apparently he rounded a corner and nearly ran full tilt into a Jerry SP. he had some very nasty moments before he realised that all the crew were dead. It was the SP which had engaged B Squadron, and somebody had been lucky enough to knock it out with an HE shell, which had dropped through the open top and exploded inside.”

Baker’s account is largely in agreement with your late Father-in-Law’s experience - though he seems to have been told that the gunner and not the operator survived. Regarding the StuG crew, I can’t prove that Capt. Collins encountered StuG 222 on his bike ride but it seems likely. This is despite the phrase “open top” possibly implying a “Marder” type self propelled gun - that ceolredmonger referred to in an earlier post - as I don't believe there had been any in the area that day.

My obsession with this subject means I have to ask if you ever learnt the names of the other crew members of Lieut. Charlton's tank? Did your late Father-in-Law possibly describe anything about the crossing to Normandy, the landing craft in which he was carried and anything about those who were on the same craft as him?

Cheers

Philip

 

Churchill's Armies at War. I studied the 9th Australian and 50th divisions side by side. I didn't go into a lot of tactical detail about Normandy, there wasn't room.

 

Michel

I agree that the numbering system you describe was used by 4/7 Royal Dragoon Guards, however there is evidence of instances where it was deviated from - particularly in B Squadron. One instance that comes to mind involves the photo below (see - DDay Sherman Help ). It is of tank #42 which, according to the numbering system, should be that of the B Squadron Reconnaissance Officer - in this case Captain Monkton. Though taken after D-Day, it is clearly bogged on the beach. However, it was Monkton who is credited with knocking out StuG 222 after it had hit Lieut. Charlton’s tank before being knocked out himself by another StuG later the same day to the south of St. Gabriel.

Why these deviations occurred may never be clear and will no doubt continue to frustrate those of us obsessives who delve into these things.

atb,

Philip

 

Philip,
I trained as an RAF Photo Interpreter/Int Analyst in '72 and am still working (under contract) to the RAF!
I am surrounded by piles of aerial images which I must get around to scanning one day - I hope to work until the end of next year and then call it a halt.
50 years continuous service is enough I reckon. Most of it classified although I have written a no-holds-barred autobiography for my sons. (accessible after I'm gone)
As an experienced analyst I am naturally sceptical and curious.
regarding Lt Charlton's crew, L/Cpl CAB Day was in the turret next to him (it was me who confused his role in the crew).
Trooper AWB Mathews was killed and the other two ..
.. well they are rarely spoken of by the regiment.
It is thought that they simply ran away from the scene and were picked up on their way back to the beach.
I could ask my wife for their names but there is so much information coming in that is difficult for her to handle.
I don't know what time of day their action/encounter took place but I know that CAB and Kit Charlton lay in a wheat field holding hands while bleeding and in pain.
They each didn't want the other to pass out as this would have been fatal. The Canadians who found them later were just in time.

As for the crossing, CAB had his 21st birthday on the planned D-Day (5th) afloat in a flat-bottomed LST Mk 3.

I know it was one of the eight LCT(3) which belonged to 12 LCT Flotilla, "L" LCT Squadron, which comprised twelve LCT(3) with pennant numbers as follows:
LCT(3) 427, 428, 429, 430, 432, 433, 451, 453, 454, 463, 475 & 7012.
Of the above I can only confirm 453 as having carried DD tanks on D Day.
There were five tanks per LST(3) one at the bow, the others spaced out staggered behind.
There was plenty room between each tank as there was the ever-present dander of damaging the raised skirts.
They were loaded at Stanswood Bay Embarkation Hard Q2 from 1800 hours D-2 (3 Jun 44).

I realise I have thrown a spanner in the works re the hull number of his tank.
Sadly he died long before I met his daughter, and the old soldiers I have met have been naturally reluctant to open up about it all.
I guess Cecil Newton might know .. he seems to know most things.
Time however is not on our side to discover first-hand accounts.

I hope some of this helps

Cheers
Ray

 

Ray,

Thank you for taking the time to dig out the tank model out and to post the photo. This is Revell's "Sherman M4 Tank" in 1/40 scale, first released in 1955:
https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-h-522-149-sherman-m4-tank--1019573
RARE VINTAGE 1960 Revell - SHERMAN M-4 TANK - MOTORIZED 1/40 scale Kit H-544:249 | #1831854329

Michel

 

Michael,
Thank you so much for finding this.
I note with interest the lack of hull/turret numbering in the box art.
Naturally CAB would not have completed it in the US Army markings as suggested on the box art and would therefore have been free to make it up in 4th/7th markings and chose number 43 which (we think) was his tank.
However, without evidence this is a 'probable' and not a 'confirmed'.

There does seem to have been a great deal of confusion which is to be expected.
My wife met Ron Scrunton who was in the tank ahead of Lt Charlton's at one stage but slid off the road into a ditch, at which point they were in the lead.
However, as you will know the tanks were constantly changing position when giving flanking cover to the infantry.
The IWM shows two tanks crossing into a field on one side, while another tank is stationary on the other side.
The tank of the Reconnaissance Officer (Capt Monckton) was following Lt Charlton over the rise when they encountered the Stug and sorted it out.

I have to say that I am deeply impressed by the knowledge and friendliness of this group.
Thank you all.

Cheers

Ray