Sherman Crab T147955 “Avalon” Overloon. Regiment? Damage?

[Alex van de Wetering]

I am trying to find out a bit more about the history and fate of Sherman Crab I “T147955”, “Avalon”, that is displayed at the Overloon war Museum.

22nd Dragoons or Westminster Dragoons?

The museum states that the Crab was part of the 22nd Dragoons, while some internet sources say it was part of the Westminster Dragoons instead. The latter is based on an article in The Telegraph on William Hall, who is said to have commanded the very tank when it was put out of action in Broekhuizen (SW of Overloon). The museum however states that the tank was put out of action, close to Boxmeer (N of Overloon).

Is there anyone that could point me in the right direction to hopefully confirm to which regiment this tank belonged? I tried to find the war diaries for both regiments for the October/november 1944 period, but no luck so far. Could the WD-census number help to determine which regiment used the tank?

[Alex van de Wetering]

Here is a part of the article on William Hall:

At Overloon - in appalling weather, over boggy ground and under continuous fire - Bill Hall beat a path up to the bridge across the canal, then led his squadron across, though well aware that enemy tanks were waiting on the far side and that his flanks were exposed. His was the first tank to cross the Beek and in the ensuing battle his troop gave invaluable assistance to Allied armour and infantry.
He kept the squadron leader constantly informed of the situation ahead, engaged an enemy anti-tank gun and also knocked out a German mortar position which was inflicting losses on the infantry. He also engaged a Panther tank.
Although constantly under enemy fire, Hall showed complete disregard for danger and earned the highest praise both from his squadron leader and the commanding officer of the 4th Coldstream Guards. Hall had had to change tanks when his own became a casualty, and the flails in his troop frequently had to be replaced after being damaged, but this did not stop them pressing on and killing 24 enemy and assisting the infantry to take 20 prisoners.
Hall, who was also mentioned twice in despatches, was in the forefront of the action at Broekhuizen the following November when his tank cleared the approaches to the town before being hit by a bazooka which wounded him. His tank was later recovered by the Dutch authorities and is now on display in the War Museum at Overloon, complete with flails.

source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obi...liam-Hall.html

[Alex van de Wetering]

Target practice or battle damage?
The other “mystery” around this tank is the number of penetrations on the right hand side. All sources say the tank was put out of action by a Panzerfaust and some of the remaining ammo exploded. The strange thing though is that the tank has around 20 penetrations on the right hand side, that all penetrated into the fighting compartment. I have measured the holes and they are all somewhere between 17-20mm in diameter (they didn't exit the tank on the left). Apart from the penetrations there is also evidence of hits with smaller calibre weapons that didn't penetrate the armour.



Some suggest the tank might have been used for target practice, but to me that doesn't seem very likely. I don't think the Germans would have had the chance, and time, to use the tank for target practice. Allied units using the tank for target practice sounds like food for a court martial to me, especially as a Crab was an important bit of kit and likely to have been recovered for repair or parts. The third possibility for the target practice theory is that it was used for target practice post war........Dutch army? To me that doesn't sound likely as the tank was already moved to the museum in 1946/1947 and the army was still busy rebuilding itself at the time. So, did some youth find a bunch of Panzerfausts and use the Crab as a target?

[Alex van de Wetering]

Personally I think all damage might have been from the actual battle in which it was put out of action. But, what caused the damage to the tank? Multiple Panzerfausts? Maybe a 2cm KWK or FLAK gun at close range? A plane maybe.....German or even friendly fire?
One of the hits went through the armour protecting the Flail drive gear on the right side of the hull and exited again slightly lower and more to the rear. This is a very shallow downward angle.......a plane flying very low?


I would love to hear what others think about the damage to the tank and what might have caused it. I would also be very interested if anyone knows more about the history of this tank......or even publications that I don't know of.



Attached are some pictures of the actual tank in the museum.

Alex

[Alex van de Wetering]

Attached are some pictures of Avalon shortly after the Overloon museum opened in 1946/47. The tank still had a lot of its original fittings, stowage bins, spare chain and track links welded to the turret. Above all, the tank still was still in its original paint.

Colour pic; source: https://studiezaal.erfgoedhuisweert.nl/
picture with the children... picture with men standing on the tank.....and the head on picture: https://www.nationaalarchief.nl
The last picture is a section of another Dutch Archives picture.

[Alex van de Wetering]

Here are three pictures from about the same angle....but taken at different times.

In cronological order:

The first is a slide from a movie, taken shortly after the museum opened. It can be found in a documentary on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEMu...ndex=3&t=1064s

The second is a postcard I recently bought and it shows the tank in the late 40's.

The third is another postcard....still in the fairly early years of the museum (presumably 1950's)....but in the meantime the tank has lost the track links on the turret, the frame for the canvas mantlet cover and the stowage bin on the left hull side.

By the way....You can also spot Sherman "Cookie" in the background of some of the museum pictures; a relic of the US 7th Armoured division. About 10 years ago, this Sherman was painted in Canadian markings and used as a Monument in Ortona, Italy. It recently returned to Overloon and is now awaiting re-paint into the original (US) Overloon markings.

[David Dunlop]

Hi Alex.

I am having a little trouble sorting out these photos of Avalon. Can you help?

The blurry black and white from the rear and the one with the two children on the front of the tank look like they were taken at the same location. AVALON has lost the right track and seems rather dug into the sandy ground on that side. The large tree behind her seems to also be in the photo with the children. There is no sign of COOKIE anywhere. Are these photos taken where AVALON was actually knocked out and abandoned? The colour photo looks like it might be the same spot.

COOKIE then shows up in the background in another black and white shot. AVALON looks like it is still in its original resting place. The surroundings seem to be a field in a wooded area.

Suddenly, we then have a series of Black and White photos of AVALON and COOKIE in approximately the same positions to each other as in the field photo, but they are both sitting on a prepared road way. In the photo with the men standing on AVALON, COOKIE has a sign leaning against the front of it. In one photo, the road between the two tanks is littered with debris, like an attempt at an outdoor diorama, the next photo the road is clear, AVALON seems to be sitting very level and the surrounding area does not look at all like the earlier photos of the blurry rear view and the ‘open’ field.

My thought is there are two photos of AVALON where she was put out of action. Possibly that field. Cookie was recovered from another location and parked near AVALON in that field. Then both vehicles were moved to museum property??? And placed on a prepared roadway in approximately the same positions as they had been in the field?

Not being at all familiar with the natural landscapes of Holland, I wonder if the two possible locations for AVALON to have been knocked out are very similar, or are there enough differences to rule one out in favour of another.

Another possibility. If AVALON was moved from where it was knocked out to museum property, who moved it? That is an interesting project at any time. Somebody may have taken photos of that work or might know who, or what organization did it? And where AVALON was recovered from.

If a final resting place for AVALON could be narrowed down to two possible locations, perhaps a metal detector sweep of both locations could turn up pieces unique to a Crab and help confirm what was found.

A very interesting puzzle!

David

[Alex van de Wetering]

Hi David,

Thanks for taking time to share your thoughts!

The Overloon museum opened on may 25th 1946 in the wooded area on the Eastern edge of Overloon, bascially on the original battlefield. "Avalon" was there from the start. In the early days the museum tried to replicate the battlefield as much as possible, with weapons, shrapnel, boxes and vehicle parts littering the area around the vehicles. After a few years the "litter" was put indoors in a museum building and a path was created along the outdoor exhibits.
It seems that at some stage the vehicles were put on proper hardened surfaces, until the early 2000's when all vehicles and guns were put indoors in the new large museum building.

As far as I can tell Avalon and Cookie stayed in approximately the same location from 1946 to the early 2000's. "Approximately", as it seems they did end up a bit closer to eachother.

I presume "Cookie" isn't in the colour picture and the picture with the children, because Cookie is either obscured by Avalon, or it's just outside the frame.
The picture with the children is part of a series all taken at the same date and one also shows "Cookie" with the rurret reversed. These pictures are dated June 13th 1946, so only a few weeks after the museum opened.

The coloured picture is dated 1946/47 and is from a series that also includes the Panther and Cromwell tank, other well known Overloon exhibits.

Attached is an early picture of the museum with scrapnel and ammo boxes littering the museum grounds. On the left you will see "Cookie" with the turret reversed and on the far right you can see "Avalon".
source: NIOD through https://beeldbankwo2.nl




Also attached is a picture of Cookie from the same series as the ones with the children sitting on Avalon. June 13th 1946.
source: https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/onde...field=overloon




The third picture shows Cookie with Avalon in the background.....the blurry picture in my ealier post is in fact a section I cut from this picture. This picture is dated May 27th 1946.
source: https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/onde...field=overloon





.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Excellent research, Alex!

It is a subject I have been wondering about a long time myself. I'll share this thread in the hope that other may be able to come up with archive material from War Diaries or other prime sources.

[Alex van de Wetering]

David,

On all pictures I have seen of Avalon at the museum the right hand track is missing. I presume the track was left in the field where Avalon was knocked out and presumably "borrowed" as spare for another Sherman, or even as armor which seems to be quite common in late 1944/45.

I visited "Broekhuizen" a couple of months ago, and searched for the field where Avalon supposedly was put out of action. It's to the Southwest of Broekhuizen. As you will see from the pictures there isn't much more to see than just a field, but the trees in the background hide the ruines of the Broekhuizen castle, that was in fact destroyed during the battle in 1944.

[Alex van de Wetering]

It is a subject I have been wondering about a long time myself. I'll share this thread in the hope that other may be able to come up with archive material from War Diaries or other prime sources.

Yes Hanno, please do! I also put up a thread on the same subject on ww2talk some time ago.

I forgot to add...I did ask the museum about the history of Avalon years ago when we were working on the Conger carrier, but sadly the archive didn't give any answers, apart from 2 more early museum pictures and a small note from a previous repaint job. Sadly the people that were involved in the museum in the early days have since passed away, which means that it's hard to find the background of some of the exhibits in the collection. For instance; we are not sure when the Conger carrier was added to the museum collection, nor where it came from and why it was marked as a "Wasp" in the early days of the museum.

I am not sure who moved the exhibits from the battlefield to the museum grounds in early 1946.....could be a civilian company, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it was the British army as I think they were closely involved when opening the museum.

[Alex van de Wetering]

Here is another picture of the early days of the museum; source: https://www.strijdbewijs.nl/slag/overloon1.htm

it seems the writer on the website assumes it shows the actual battlefield, but in my view this is in fact the museum (Cookie in the background) shortly after it opened.
I seem to remember this picture was also included in a old museumguide, but I can't find it at the moment.

For those interested.....early museum pictures of a number of the vehicles can be found here:
https://studiezaal.erfgoedhuisweert....56693742f4b18c
https://www.nationaalarchief.nl/onde...hTerm=overloon

Not WW2 pictures, but to me these are still very interesting pictures as most of the exhibits still carry their original paint and markings.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

If a final resting place for AVALON could be narrowed down to two possible locations, perhaps a metal detector sweep of both locations could turn up pieces unique to a Crab and help confirm what was found.

A very interesting puzzle!

Fascinating, isn't it?!?

Some areas of the former Operation Aintree battlefield have been surveyed to assess the risk of unexploded ordnance. Maybe surveys like this will yield additional info?

E.g.: "Vooronderzoeknaar het risico op het aantreffen van Conventionele Explosieven in het onderzoeksgebied "Loobeek te Venray – fase 1”."
https://venray.raadsinformatie.nl/do...748/1/document

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

"Hall, who was also mentioned twice in despatches, was in the forefront of the action at Broekhuizen the following November when his tank cleared the approaches to the town before being hit by a bazooka which wounded him."

This document surfaced after I posted this thread on the Sherman Register FB page. It was found by Rik Teernstra at: http://www.geschiedenismelderslo.nl/...en_apr2001.pdf

It is a short history in Dutch about Lt.Col. R.C. Stockly (34921), Commander of the 3rd Battalion Monmouthshire Regiment. His unit attacked Broekhuisen castle with support from Sherman Crab flail tanks to clear mines. Stockly was killed during this attack on 30 November 1944.

This document contains no exact details on which Crabs took part in the attack on the castle, nor on how they were put out of action.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Wikipedia has distilled an article from reputable sources on the Westminster Dragoons during Operation Constellation to capture Overloon and Venray. It mentions "Lt Hall's tank engaged an enemy Panther tank".

Again, no exact details no exact details on the Sherman Crabs, but it is clear the flail tanks were in the thick of the heavy fighting.

Operation Constellation

For example, during Operation Constellation to capture Overloon and Venray, the Crabs of A and C Sqns deployed with the AVREs 617 Assault Sqn, RE, to support 3rd British Division and 6th Guards Tank Brigade. At noon on 12 October 4th (Tank) Bn Coldstream Guards advanced to Overloon, where it encountered a minefield and A Sqn was ordered up to flail a path. One Crab (Lt Sutton) was disabled by a mine, and Sjt Harmston flailed a diversion round the wreck; other Crabs flailed two other lanes, and the Guards' Churchills advanced to take the town. Next day the Crabs continued flailing in front of the Coldstreamers, without finding any mines, but Lt Hall's tank engaged an enemy Panther tank. On 14 October the Crabs flailed a path where RE mine-lifting parties had previously come under fire, but the advance was halted by a Tiger I that 'brewed up' seven Coldstream Churchills before starting on Lt Cooper's partly Hull-down Crab, which was subjected to a hail of fire. Inexplicably, the Tiger withdrew before destroying the Crab. 15 October was spent on maintenance, then on 16 October the squadron advanced again, in pouring rain, mud and a flooded brook (the Molen Beek). Although four crossings were attempted on 3rd Division's front, only Lance-Sjt Carter was successful, his Crab covered by smoke fired by the rest of his troop. The Churchills followed over what for the next 24 hours was the only crossing. On 17 October the Crabs were at work again, losing two to mines, and rapidly wearing out their flail chains when repeatedly requested to flail along roads. (6th Guards Tank Bde noted that the concentrations of minefields in Operation Constellation were the heaviest they had yet encountered, including a new mine powerful enough to disable their heavy Churchill tanks.) By 18 October the squadron was down to five serviceable tanks, but Cooper and Carter pushed on into Venray, flailing the town's main street and piles of rubble ahead of the Guards' Churchills.[63][64]

Meanwhile, C Sqn had been operating with 4th (Tank) Bn Grenadier Guards since 12 October. Fifteen minutes before H-hour a minefield was discovered just short of the start line, and the Crabs had to deal with this despite badly broken ground. That attack went in successfully. Next day Lt Pear's 3 Trp had to flail a 1,000 yards (910 m) path followed by another of 700 yards (640 m) so the Grenadiers could reach their objective, followed by another of almost 1 mile (1.6 km) in the afternoon. On 16 October the squadron got badly bogged in full view of the enemy while trying to cross the Molen Beek and the attempt had to be abandoned. Next day a composite troop, comprising the fittest tanks and least tired crews was sent to help 29th Armoured Brigade, losing some tanks but carrying on and engaging anti-tank guns and capturing prisoners. The rest of C Sqn (three Crabs under Capt Bell, Lt Pear and Sjt Birch) helped 1st Bn Herefordshire Regiment in an attack north-east of Deurne on 17 October, under heavy fire. On 20 October A and C Sqns were pulled out to rejoin the regiment, receiving many compliments for their work.[65]

B Squadron had been operating miles away with 7th Armoured Division and 53rd (Welsh) Infantry Division against 's-Hertogenbosch. 1 Troop operated so closely with A Sqn 1st Royal Tank Regiment that it was dubbed '5th Trp, A Sqn'.[66] Small actions continued through early November. Lieutenant Michael Sutton won an MC on 2 November when he was supporting 23rd Hussars with two flails. A Hussars tanks was blown up on a mine, but the heavy fire prevented the crew from bailing out or sappers from clearing a path to it. Sutton flailed a path up to and round the disabled tank, then carried on flailing the road until an anti-tank gun disabled two Hussars' tanks and shot off his flail gear. Ordered to withdraw he had to do so slowly in reverse. While doing so he spotted a wounded man in a ditch: calling for smoke he got out of his tank and ran 20 yards (18 m) to bring the wounded man back to the tank, where another crew member dismounted to help get him aboard, all under heavy machine gun fire. Lieutenant Brian Pear was killed the following day while supporting 15th (Scottish) Infantry Division in an attack on Meijel: when Sjt Birch's Crab was hit and the crew unable to bale out he placed his tank between them and the enemy. Both Crabs were destroyed by anti-tank fire and only one man survived to be taken prisoner. The volume of fire was so great that 15th (Scottish) postponed all operations for 48 hours. C Squadron then flailed a path for 6th Guards Tank Bde, though 23 Churchills and one Crab were lost in an hour.[67][68]

Sources:
Richard Doherty, Hobart's 79th Armoured Division at War: Invention, Innovation and Inspiration, Barnsley: Pen & Sword, 2011.
Lt-Gen H.G. Martin, The History of the Fifteenth Scottish Division 1939–1945, Edinburgh: Blackwood, 1948/Uckfield: Naval & Military Press, 2014

[David Dunlop]

Good Morning Hanno and Alex.

Curiosity about the Panzerfaust got to me this evening and I did a little reading up on it. An interesting evening.

First discovery, based on battle damage analysis from the USA, Russia, England and Canada was that tank losses from the Panzerfaust earned a very distant 4th place. Number One tank killer was another tank or anti tank gun. Number Two was aircraft. Number three was mines and then the Panzerfaust. It seems its terrifying reputation far exceeded its wartime effectiveness. It was noted to have been most effective in heavily wooded and urban environments, where good cover for the operator was provided. Even in those situations, however, it was noted that the firing gave away the location of the operator due to the black powder propellant charge used.

A well-disciplined tank crew could deal with a Panzerfaust hit in most instances. If fuel, ammunition, or critical mechanicals were hit you had a problem, but records showed more crew were lost to small arms fire exiting a tank following a Panzerfaust hit, than were actually killed by the hit itself.

The molten metal jet created by a Panzerfaust ran out of energy about half way across the inside of a Sherman. The penetration hole is definitive. It tapers from exterior impact point to its breakthrough point on the inside. The force of the jet breaking through the hull may tear metal fitting off the interior hull wall, but does not result in a spall of metal hull being torn free, like a BB Gun pellet on a plate of glass. You would not be able to push an object through a Panzerfaust hole in a tank hull because of this taper.

By comparison, a 20mm solid shot round would have a relatively consistent hole through the metal it hit and would also produce a circular spall on the inside wall.

Studies in Canada and the United States showed adding pieces of track to the outside of a tank hull made no difference at all to Panzerfaust penetrations. Minimum distance for supplemental armour to be effective was 12 inches off the hull and ideally 20 to 30 inches. Interestingly, chain link fencing was the most effective protection at 30 inches.

One account I read of a British Tank Troop overnighting in a town square after being cut off by a German Counterattack. The next morning, the tank to the right of the Troop Commanders exploded in flames suddenly. The Commander had all crews start up and then a Panzerfaust round struck the right side of his turret, just forward of him. He recalled a blinding flash and a piece of kit on the wall hitting him on the forehead and knocking his beret off. A few seconds later a second round struck the lower right front hull and the jet penetrated as far as the gearbox, slightly damaging it. By then the building the shots had come from had been identified and was promptly levelled. The Troop withdrew under fire from the town without further losses. The Commander did comment, however, that their Co-Driver was not with them on that mission and had he been, he would have lost both legs.

It would be interesting to study the hits on the right side of the Crab at Overloon to confirm they are Panzerfaust and to also see exactly where the hits were in relation to crew and critical internal components. If they are all indeed Panzerfaust hits, my guess is what we are seeing now is an accumulation of battle damage over some unknown period of time, and not the result of a cluster of German Infantry shooting everything they had available in a few short minutes at the Crab in an attempt to knock it out.

A careful study of the hits would likely indicate which one or ones were most likely to have ended its action at Overloon.

My thoughts are that a Crab Tank probably drew as much attention from the Germans as a Firefly did when spotted. They would have been a big threat to their defences.

As I said, an interesting evening.

David

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Good morning David,

Reading your posting about the Panzerfaust, I recalled the history of the King Tiger #213 currently on display at La Gleize - (also see this link). After the fighting it was used by US troops to try out the Panzerfaust - see some footage here: https://www.reddit.com/r/DestroyedTa...a_knocked_out/

There is a difference between a tank being used for target practice on a range post-war, and a using it to familiarize troops with enemy (or even: own) weapons during wartime. In the former case it would be stripped for spares and set up on range for safe shooting. In the latter case it was a much more impromptu manner, probably after finding a cache of enemy weapons and a knocked out tank nearby. Look at the footage at La Gleize above, I wonder if the US soldiers did much more than shout out "fire in the hole" or similar to warn bystanders of their dangerous game!
The latter is what happened with the La Gleize King Tiger and that is what may have happened to our Sherman Crab.

Looking at the holes punched by the Panzerfaust, they are considerably larger than the holes in Avalon's sides. Looking at various then & now photos of the La Gleize Tiger I wonder if all those holes were punched in by Panzerfausts - it they really were, it must have been a mighty weapon.

Interestingly, none of the holes visible after the training can be seen today. All carefully filled to restore it to its after the battle condition?

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

Studies in Canada and the United States showed adding pieces of track to the outside of a tank hull made no difference at all to Panzerfaust penetrations. Minimum distance for supplemental armour to be effective was 12 inches off the hull and ideally 20 to 30 inches. Interestingly, chain link fencing was the most effective protection at 30 inches.

In February 1945, First Canadian Army undertook a number of experiments using a derelict Sherman and captured Panzerfaust. These trials were later continued by Canadian Military Headquarters in cooperation with the British Directorate of Tank Design (DTD). Is this the testing you refer to?

"Allied Trials to Counteract Panzerfaust Attacks" by Roger V. Lucy: https://milart.blog/2014/08/30/allie...faust-attacks/

[Jakko Westerbeke]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

The molten metal jet created by a Panzerfaust

Small correction, to try and get rid of this common misconception Shaped charges don’t melt the metal, it stays sold but flows like a liquid because of the high relative velocities involved. Of course the material heats up because of the friction between the shaped charge’s liner and the armour plate, but the charge doesn’t actually melt anything. Tests with the liner being cut into sections and fired into water resulted in pieces corresponding to the cut liner being recovered, without having melted together.

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

By comparison, a 20mm solid shot round would have a relatively consistent hole through the metal it hit and would also produce a circular spall on the inside wall.

Last year, Alex shared photos of Avalon’s interior with me, and looking at them, I see spall scars around the penetrations and rounded, slightly bulged areas in other places where I suppose a round didn’t make it all the way through.

To me it looks like someone fired an automatic cannon at it, ±20 mm calibre. Perhaps a German AA gun, perhaps an aircraft? The slight downward angle would point to the latter, but whether it was German or British is anyone’s guess, I suppose.

[David Herbert]

It seems to me that the large impacts shown on the King Tiger in Hanno's post #17 are solid shot impacts, not even HESH or APDS, particularly those in the colour photo. There are small ones showing what could be Panzerfaust but those would show radiating marks around the entry side of the hole where the shrapnel from the outside of the shaped charge gouged the armour. Photos are not clear enough to show either way.

Similarly I don't see any sign of these very distinctive radial marks on the photos of Avalon though the marks on the relatively thin cover plate on the back of the flail drive box are similar. This piece is, I think, not armour so would have been easily marked by shrapnel from nearby hits. Also the hits shown in the photos have a significant bulge around the entry where the metal has flowed sideways. This would have been much less from a shaped charge hit.

If the interior of Avalon is as described above by Jakko then I agree with him that the many similar holes in Avalon were caused by automatic 20mm or similar fire. It is still possible that it was hit by a Panzerfaust but I don't see such a hit in the photos and have never personally inspected the tank.

David

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Jakko Westerbeke

Last year, Alex shared photos of Avalon’s interior with me, and looking at them, I see spall scars around the penetrations and rounded, slightly bulged areas in other places where I suppose a round didn’t make it all the way through.

To me it looks like someone fired an automatic cannon at it, ±20 mm calibre. Perhaps a German AA gun, perhaps an aircraft? The slight downward angle would point to the latter, but whether it was German or British is anyone’s guess, I suppose.

While I am not an ballistics/munitions expert, comparing the hits on Avalon with other Panzerfaust hits I would be more inclined to think these are projectile hits. Like you say, around 20-mm?

If it is 20-mm, it could be the British captured a German 20-mm AA gun (there were plenty of those around), and tried it out on one of their knocked out tanks? Just like the American soldiers did with the Panzerfausts in La Gleize. This sort of activity would not be reorded in war diaries, but another may well have been. It is a distant possibility, but if it happened it was must have been recorded in the test records somewhere:

The Skink AA tank did not go into production, but two of the three prototypes were shipped to Europe in 1945. On 4 Febrary 1945 one was assigned to the 6th Canadian Armoured regiment (6CAR/1st Hussars and saw action in an infantry support role near Kalkar. It was then passed to the 22nd Canadian Armoured Regiment (22CAR/Canadian Grenadier Guards) in the battle of Hochwald gap.
Roger Lucy noted: "From 6 February to 11 March 1945, the Skink visited all but one of the Canadian armoured regiments - from Nijmegen to the Cleve area - frequently engaging the German army. All units found it to be a valuable asset but no enemy aircraft presented itself to the Skink's guns and its main function was to flush out stubborn pockets of enemy infantry and force their surrender."

Now, seeing that Kalkar and Kleve are aprox. 50 kms (north-)east of Overloon, the 6CAR may have passed through the Overloon area and did some test firing on one of the many tank wrecks in the area?
Firing the quad 20-mm Polsten guns at the Sherman Crab would coincide with the "very shallow downward angle hit" which Alex described. It is a long shot, maybe even very speculative, but it may be worth looking into?


Photo of a Tank AA, 20 mm Quad, Skink at Lulworth Army Camp, GB, Fall 1944. Notice the 20mm Polsten guns and T54E1 VVSS Sherman tracks and sprocket. Note: I do not know whether this is the actual Skink deployed to NW Europe, but it is very likely as having regular medium tank type tracks, rather than CDP track, would not cause supply problems while in NW Europe.

[Alex van de Wetering]

This document surfaced after I posted this thread on the Sherman Register FB page. It was found by Rik Teernstra at: http://www.geschiedenismelderslo.nl/...en_apr2001.pdf

Thanks Hanno (and Rik!), even though that document and the other wiki one probably won't give us the true identity and fate of Avalon, it does give us some very interesting reading on the battle!

Some areas of the former Operation Aintree battlefield have been surveyed to assess the risk of unexploded ordnance. Maybe surveys like this will yield additional info?

Clever idea Hanno! I hadn't thought of that and will look into this.
David's suggestion of going there with a metal detector is something I have thought about multiple times, but never did as I don't have the kit and knowledge, nor do I know what the rules are. It could however confirm if there is shrapnel in the ground, confirming you are on the right spot.
The Broekhuizen location is documented, but the other possible location in Boxmeer is a bit more troublesome, as I haven't found an exact location in or around Boxmeer yet.

Interestingly, none of the holes visible after the training can be seen today. All carefully filled to restore it to its after the battle condition?

I think they are two different tanks. The "monument" Tiger had a crippled barrell, but did retain it's right hand track. The picture you posted with the white camo is what is now the monument tank. The other is the one they used as a target, but I have to agree with David that only the small holes would be Panzerfaust, while the others would be normal rounds.

Allied forces purposely testing weapons on an important piece of kit as a Crab; I don't see that happen. Even if it's beyond repair, the tank could provide valuable parts as engine, gearbox, transmission, tracks, bogies etc.

To me it looks like someone fired an automatic cannon at it, ±20 mm calibre. Perhaps a German AA gun, perhaps an aircraft? The slight downward angle would point to the latter, but whether it was German or British is anyone’s guess, I suppose.

The downward angle is so shallow, that apart from an aircaft hit, I guess it could also have been a level shot, if the tank drove through a crater at the time.

Similarly I don't see any sign of these very distinctive radial marks on the photos of Avalon though the marks on the relatively thin cover plate on the back of the flail drive box are similar.

David, thanks for sharing the interesting panzerfaust info. I will try to put up some more pictures of the penetractions and the inside of Avalon tonight.....maybe that will help determine the weapon that caused them.
When I visited the museum a few months ago I did bring a "christmas" drill bit, but maybe I should have brought some fast curing clay
I do seem to remember there were some radial marks around some of the penetrations.

Hanno; I would be exciting if there was a link between Avalon and the Skink, but again I don't think it's likely that allied forces would purposely shoot on their own mine flail.

Thanks everyone!

Alex

[David Dunlop]

Alex.

Following is a copy of an email I sent to Hanno earlier this morning. Thought I should post it here as well.

The more I look at the photos posted, the more questions I have and the more I start to see.

The hub of that flail is really banged up. Perhaps enough to have put it out of balance? Some of the control arms on the right side for the Flail also appear to be broken, missing or disconnected? Again, I wonder if all is connected to having hit a mine.

I think I have seen tall boxes like the one on the left side of the Crab, on both sides of a Crab on display at Borden. They might be Chalk Boxes used to mark either side of the trail being cleared.

In a couple of the photos you posted showing the left side of the Crab, just forward of this tall box, there is a dark rectangular mark. Hard to tell if it is where something was fitted to the hull at one time or possibly a marking in a dark paint like a four or five letter word. Part of a WD number in white can be seen further aft on the left side.

A long storage box appears on the front of the Crab behind the flail assembly in some photos and then appears to be on the ground in front of the Crab, and then disappears. Storage for spare flail chains perhaps?

The turret is always in the same position. I cannot imagine at least one person in all these years not having tried to move it. Any indications it still works and it is just being kept ‘as found’, or is it jammed?

I wonder if war diaries for COOKIE might explain why it was abandoned and shed any light on the Crab? Both seem to be facing opposite directions. At Overloon, what would have been the general direction flow of the battle and how does that fit in with the orientation of the Crab and COOKIE? Both vehicles may not have been lost at the same time, but that, sadly is how my mind wanders at times. Sigh!

David

Hello Hanno.

This was the first article I found on the Panzerfausts and I ended up branching out from it and its references.

https://warspot.net/132-the-tank-s-hidden-foe

My thoughts on the Overloon Crab at this point are that based on what appears to be its original location, with the front right corner sitting so low, it hit a mine that may have damaged the Flail Drive in some way, putting it out of action. I am not certain how, or if, the Flail Drive interfaces with the Shermans main propulsion system, but perhaps damage to the Flail Drive jammed the Sherman power train and the Crab crew had to hunker down and wait it out, abandoning the Crab as soon as able to do so,

The record of this Crab has to be in one of the diaries of the Regiments using Crabs at Overloon. That is not the type of equipment you lose in combat and fail to log. We probably just have not yet found the right diaries.

And from the German side, Overloon was a very important battle. As chaotic as it might have been from their perspective, knocking out a Crab would warrant mention by them in their war diaries when time permitted. The risk with this, however, is whether or not any or all war diaries from their side survived the war.

Alex mentioned the hits on the right side of the Crab showed a low angle of elevation. This would certainly be consistent with any single, or multi-gunned 20mm cannon the Germans were using in vehicle mounted equipments. Be also interesting to map out the hits to see if any linearity of the overall hits can be identified. Easy for a single barrelled, or twin barrelled weapon but gets more difficult with a general burst from a Quad.

I wonder what the landscape was like to the right of the Crab where it came to rest? Would it have been open enough for a large vehicle with 20mm weapons on board to have had a clear field of fire at the flank of the Crab?

Funny how one vehicle can raise sooo many questions?

David

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Hi David D.,

When I read your email I also saw your reply here. Best to vent our thoughts and findings centrally, the more people can think and work collaboratively the better.

I would not focus on the terrain you see in the pictures. While the museum grounds were established on part of the former battlefield, many of the large exhibits came from the surrounding area, Avalon and Cookie included. I believe much of the transportation was done by the British Army as they had an interest in establishing the museum. It was formally opened by a high ranking British General one year after the war ended.

After our pondering about the peppering of the RH hull side, the primary reason Avalon was put out of action may well be due to mines. In the report above we can read some areas were heavily mined and the mines caused considerable losses among men and machines.

Seeing Avalon in the metal many decades ago the damage to the flail rotor struck me. I don’t recall seeing the damage to the RH side. It’s RH track has been missing since the war, it may well have been broken by a mine.
The Churchill on display at the museum has its hull bottom ripped out by a mine and standing inside, I tried to visualize what happened to the crew. Gruesome thought. But that is the very reason these mangled artifacts of war were put in the museum - so we would never forget about the atrocities of war.

Summing up, we would need to get access to the war diaries of the two regiments mentioned above and see which Crabs were lost due to mines and/or enemy fire.

Let’s keep this flowing, something good must come out of it.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by David Dunlop

I think I have seen tall boxes like the one on the left side of the Crab, on both sides of a Crab on display at Borden. They might be Chalk Boxes used to mark either side of the trail being cleared.

In a couple of the photos you posted showing the left side of the Crab, just forward of this tall box, there is a dark rectangular mark. Hard to tell if it is where something was fitted to the hull at one time or possibly a marking in a dark paint like a four or five letter word. Part of a WD number in white can be seen further aft on the left side.

You mean this? That's strange, don't think I've seen this type of fitting before.

The dark rectangular mark could be the name or another marking painted out, that happened quite often after a vehicle was struck off strength.

[Alex van de Wetering]

The hub of that flail is really banged up. Perhaps enough to have put it out of balance? Some of the control arms on the right side for the Flail also appear to be broken, missing or disconnected? Again, I wonder if all is connected to having hit a mine.

the primary reason Avalon was put out of action may well be due to mines.

I agree; I think before being put out of action, Avalon was already crippled from mine damage. I think the flail jammed and the drive shaft on the right snapped. Today half of the drive shaft is hanging from the right hand side, but in the early days the other end of the shaft was also still present. Maybe the mine damage and it loosing a track meant it was a sitting duck for any German weapons.

I think I have seen tall boxes like the one on the left side of the Crab, on both sides of a Crab on display at Borden. They might be Chalk Boxes used to mark either side of the trail being cleared.

I actually think the left hand side box on Avalon in the early museum days was an ex-wading stack used as a box for spare chain, which I think I have seen on more Crabs, especially during the fighting in Normandy. It seems not all crabs had the chalk boxes or the later arrow system.
The long box seen in some pictures is the standard British tool box seen on Sherman V's. I think Avalon might have had two as I seem to see a crushed one on the rear of the tank as well. I think the other one might have been welded on the left hand hull side, behind the other box, as there are still some welds in that location today. The right hand hull side also shows some welds.....these are closer spaced; I think this might have been where the standard British turret box might have been located when it was hit by multiple rounds. I couldn't find any remains (angle iron) or welded on the rear of the turret that would indicate the box to ever been fitted there.

The turret is always in the same position. I cannot imagine at least one person in all these years not having tried to move it. Any indications it still works and it is just being kept ‘as found’, or is it jammed?

Exactly my thought! I presume it's jammed. Ten years ago the museum gave me permission to enter the tank, but I didn't try to turn the turret!

I would not focus on the terrain you see in the pictures.

Well David did got me thinking! All sources say the tank was moved from the battlefield to the museum, but I agree with David that the look of the terrain in some of the early pictures is somewhat similar to what the resting place of the tank would have looked like after some exploding mines! Than again....I guess moving around a Crab without a right hand track in soft sand, will give a similar look.

[Alex van de Wetering]

The dark rectangular mark could be the name or another marking painted out, that happened quite often after a vehicle was struck off strength

I can confirm that it actually says "Avalon" in white in a picture of it early in it's museum life. I have no clue why it shows up as a dark patch in later pictures, as this was already when it was a museum exhibit.

Summing up, we would need to get access to the war diaries of the two regiments mentioned above and see which Crabs were lost due to mines and/or enemy fire.

I was hoping the war diaries were to be found online somewhere, but no luck so far. I think I will send a request to the UK National Archives.

[Alex van de Wetering]

Attached are some close-ups of the impacts on Avalon. In the first picture you can make out a larger circle of small damages around some of the penetrations.

In case anyone wonders...that CSI-thingy is my lazy-mans tape measure for scale modelling....the small squares are 1x1cm. the larger ones 5x5cm.

Alex

[Alex van de Wetering]

And some pictures of the inside. I am afraid the camera flash and rust makes the penetrations hard to see, so I added some arrows to make it a bit clearer.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Originally Posted by Alex van de Wetering

I was hoping the war diaries were to be found online somewhere, but no luck so far. I think I will send a request to the UK National Archives.

This may be of help:

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/...d-war-research