Photographs of knocked out tank and graves of crew

[Mark Hone]

A colleague at work has come across a group of remarkable photographs and other material belonging to his relative 221849 Driver James Edwin Key, 283 and 886 MT Company RASC attached to 174 Siege Battery RGA. Two of the photographs show a knocked out British tank and the graves of some of its crew. As there are serial numbers on the tank and grave I wondered if knowledgeable Pals might be able to give a positive identification. I'm afraid that I only have fairly low quality scan printouts at the moment. I hope to have higher resolution versions soon. The first photograph is inscribed on the back 'The tank at Requicourt'. The serial number appears to be 9 (or possibly 3) 146.

The second picture is labelled 'Graves of the chaps who were killed in the tank'. The plate has the numbers 'IX, 46 and 17' painted on it.

[delta]

Mark - I'll start the trail

A Mark IV (Male) with 1918 recognition markings - possibly linked to 9th BN (IX) -might be tank no 8146 but I dont recognise the name of the village. I shall now handover to the hardware specialists

On.... on....

Stephen

[tanks3]

Mark,

Lovely photos. I think the serial number of the tank is 3146. Sidearm is your man on serial numbers. In the first photo it seems to have a broken track.

Can you see from the original photo if the actual grave crosses have any inscription?

Tanks3

PS when you have a better quality scan, any chance you could pm me a copy?

[Sidearm]

Thanks for posting the photos. I'd like to see higher res versions when available, but those posted are enough to be able to say this is a Mark V Male, serial 9146. For information, one thing that marks a Mark V ('cuse the pun) apart from a Mark IV is the radiator towards the rear side of the hull, plainly seen on the first photo posted. The number 3146 wasn't allocated as a serial to any tank of this period.

The photos are particularly interesting as I have no record of this tank's service in the Great War, which is mighty frustrating. However the tank did serve in the Russian Civil War. In fact it was captured by the Red Army in Georgia in 1921. This implies that it was recovered and repaired after being knocked out. A photo of it in Russia appears on the cover of the MAFVA magazine "Tankette" Volume 33 No. 2.

I'd be interested in any clues other Pals can find in the photos as this will doubtless add to my own knowledge.

Gwyn

[centurion]

Just a thought. Do we definitely know that the graves are of the tank crew or was it merely assumed because of their proximity to the tank? The reason I ask is that the tank does not appear sufficiently damaged to account for the deaths of at least four crew members. The track loss would account for the tank being abandoned. It could easlily have been salvaged, the track repaired and the tank later sent to Russia.

A search reveals no location in France called Requicourt. There is a place called Requiecourt but it is in Normandy.

Its the old problem - how much can one trust the accuracy of a note on the back of a photo?

[Gunner Bailey]

It's fair comment, I was thinking the same thing. The two photos seem to show both sides of the tank and the only possible damage looks to be to the top of the right track (see small gap). There could of course be a frontal hole, but it doesn't look like a burnt out wreck.

Great photos and thanks for posting them.

Gunner Bailey

[delta]

Good spot Gwyn

could 46 be the crew number?

[ianw]

Quite a few "..court" place names east of Villers-Bret fought over in 1918 . I wonder if any might be a suitable typo for the place name?

[Robert Dunlop]

Mark, is there any doubt about the spelling of 'Requicourt'? I presume not but just in case. If this was a Mk V operating in northern France, then there are not too many places that have the appearance of relatively flat featureless terrain with low hills in the middle distance. The tank was 'knocked out' or was abandoned in open terrain, presumably sometime in the last 100 days. There are no signs of the Hindenburg Line or equivalent, and this doesn't look like the area at the limit of the British advance towards the end of the 100 days. The lack of any standing crops and the thin grass would be consistent with autumn, but that is only relevant with respect to when the photograph was taken. My first reaction was that the location was east of Villers Bretonneux. Just some further thoughts.

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

PS: the crew may have been killed after getting out of the tank.

Robert

[eirridia]

Are the graves necessarily British?

Do the steel helmets look like British pattern?

Looks like a flag attached to the post. What country?

Could IX 46 17 be something like 9th Division, 46th Infantry Regiment, 17th Battalion?

[tootrock]

Just a thought.

The graves appear to have Brodie helmets placed on them.

I thought that tank crew members wore special (leather?) helmets for the unique protection required when inside a tank.

In which case the graves might not be of the tank crew.

Regards,

Martin

[eirridia]

How about Pecquencourt, north of Cambrai?

[Andrew Upton]

Just a thought.

The graves appear to have Brodie helmets placed on them.

I thought that tank crew members wore special (leather?) helmets for the unique protection required when inside a tank.

In which case the graves might not be of the tank crew.

Only the very earliest tank crews wore the leather helmets in action - the problem being that once the tank was ditched for any reason (hardly a rare occurence!), and the crew got out, the leather helmets somewhat resembled the German picklehaube minus its spike, and apparently lead to friendly fire incidents. I don't know when (or if) it became official, but tank crews certainly seem to be sporting steel helmets by the end of the war in period photos and similar.

[Mark Hone]

Thanks for the very interesting replies. Fascinating that the tank was recovered and ended up in Russia. I hadn't considered that the graves might not be those of the crew. However, isn't the presence of the figures 9 (or IX) and 46 on both the tank serial number and the grave marker more than a coincidence? Of course Driver Key is only turning up sometime after the action itself with his RASC buddies so may have misinterpreted the scene. I too was puzzled by Requicourt which I failed to find on the map. I may have misread Key's handwriting I suppose, so here is the back of the photo:

[At Home Dad]

Hallo

I dont know how it is pronounced (and therefore

the possible typo of Driver Key) but there is a

Rocquencourt in France, south of Amiens

Kind regards

I too was puzzled by Requicourt which I failed to find on the map.

[ianw]

As per Rocquencourt , isn't it likely that there will be a c in front of the q in a French name?

Were brodies often placed adjacent to grave markers to indicate the nationality of the dead?

[domsim]

Might it not be possible to get a clue on location from your man's unit? Anybody got access to war diary for 174th siege battery or its division-it might be a bit of a trawl but might throw up a clue?

Cheers

Dominic

[centurion]

Just some observations

The fact that the 9 is written in roman numerals and the 1 is missing or out of sequence would suggest sheer coincidence. I wonder is the IX 46 17 a reference for use when the bodies are to be collected for re burial? I had toyed with the possibility that it referred to a biblical or prayer book passage but can make nothing of it.

There is actually no direct evidence in the photo that the tank has actually been knocked out by EA, Track breaks, like the one seen, happened quite frequently even when the tanks were not in action (they were quite vunerable to hard or stony going)

The fact that the tank was repaired and sent to Russia suggests that it was not subject to serious damage

Obviously quite some time has passed since the deaths of the men buried there and the taking of the photo. There is clearly no enemy within a reasonable distance of the scene as people (including the photographer) can safely walk around the tank. The man poking at the ground is not wearing a brodie. The grave itself is no quick or impromptu affair but quite elaborate as field burials go with posts and ropes around the outside etc it would have to have been dug after the enemy had been cleared some distance from the area. The marker is no quickly scrawled affair but has been stenciled again suggesting that some time was spent making it - possibly not on site.

The photo does not suggest an area that has been heavily fought over in the immediate past.

Given that the photographer would have to pass the film on to someone with access to a darkroom it is likely that some time would pass between the photo being taken and having a print on which to write and memory sometimes slips (hence the possible mistake in the name of the location)

[delta]

if it is a mark V, could it have been during the battle for the Hindenburg lines

[Guest geoff501]

No help from The Search Engine. There are Tank Corps men from 17th Bn. and also 17th Coy. (if that's what 17 represents), but not possible to identify a full crew. Its also possible some are commemorated under their original regiments, before transfer to TC.

Is it possible the crew were stuck with a broken track and gassed? (intentionally or CO poisoning).

Tommy's weren't too hot on local names so its possible the name is 'correct' as the writer remembered it, but with severe mis-spellings.

[paulgranger]

A bit tangential, but what's a 'brodie'?

[centurion]

A bit tangential, but what's a 'brodie'?

'tin' hat, battle bowler

[centurion]

No help from The Search Engine. There are Tank Corps men from 17th Bn. and also 17th Coy. (if that's what 17 represents), but not possible to identify a full crew. Its also possible some are commemorated under their original regiments, before transfer to TC.

Is it possible the crew were stuck with a broken track and gassed? (intentionally or CO poisoning).

Tommy's weren't too hot on local names so its possible the name is 'correct' as the writer remembered it, but with severe mis-spellings.

Given that the track is mainly still on the tank and assuming that is what caused the tank to be stuck then the vehicle must have been stopped as soon as it broke. In which case the engine would be switched off or at least throttled back in neutral so CO emmisions would either be eliminated or reduced. The CO emmissions in the Mk V were caused by the overheating of the engine area so that differential expansion caused the seal between the exhaust and the engine to leak, if the engine were throttled back that shouldn't happen. Gas was not used much for anti tank work - a gas grenade just didn't hold enough gas. If you are going to fire gas shells at a tank why not just use HE instead? Tank crews carried and used gas masks.

Whilst its possible that some of crew were killed as they left the tank various accounts suggest that if a tank was stopped under direct fire from small arms the crew would use the tank as a pill box and fight it out from inside. With two six pounders and at least three Hotchkiss they could give a very good account of themselves. If this had happened one would expect to see much more damage to the tank.

[Sidearm]

could 46 be the crew number?

No reason to think so.

Gwyn