Unit badge on Tiger tank

[Colin Alford]

In the first image I note the presence of a German reversible winter parka. My understanding is that winter clothing was intended to be issued in the fall and withdrawn from the troops in the spring. If my understanding is correct, then I believe it is very unlikely that the images were taken in August ‘44 (unlikely that German parkas were available for capture at that time). I also note the lack of weapons, personal equipment, and helmets.

Is there mention in the war diary of a trip laid-on to visit former battlefields? Ed may be onto something suggesting that the images might have been taken after the cessation of hostilities. Another possibility might be a small diversion en-route to, or from, a leave centre.

[Ed Storey]

Originally Posted by Colin Alford

In the first image I note the presence of a German reversible winter parka. My understanding is that winter clothing was intended to be issued in the fall and withdrawn from the troops in the spring. If my understanding is correct, then I believe it is very unlikely that the images were taken in August ‘44 (unlikely that German parkas were available for capture at that time). I also note the lack of weapons, personal equipment, and helmets.

Is there mention in the war diary of a trip laid-on to visit former battlefields? Ed may be onto something suggesting that the images might have been taken after the cessation of hostilities. Another possibility might be a small diversion en-route to, or from, a leave centre.

Yes, that is why I kept asking about the source of the two images; as the fellow with the German reversible winter parka and camera, lack of weapons and kit, the other fellow wearing the Denison Smock and that some 3rd Division Regiments returned for tours of the D-Day beaches after VE-Day, all points to the two Tiger photographs being taken in 1945. Therefore given the length of time that tank has been in situ, the marking on the front could be anything from a unit badge to some form of sign as Hanno suggested.

[m kenny]

I think capturing Unit badge is the most likely

[Ed Storey]

Originally Posted by m kenny

I think capturing Unit badge is the most likely

OK, so what are the details of these two photographs and how do they support your argument that the badge on the Tiger is SD&G?

[m kenny]

Originally Posted by Ed Storey

OK, so what are the details of these two photographs and how do they support your argument that the badge on the Tiger is SD&G?

It shows that marking enemy vehicles with a unit badges was a thing. My line of thought is large X on bow/St Andrews Cross/Canadian Scottish Units.
Simple as that.

[Ed Storey]

Markings, what markings? All you have done is post two photographs, lifted from who knows where and without any explanation, in support your argument.

[David Dunlop]

Some neutral thoughts on this topic.

All three of these vehicles look like knocked out and burned to some degree items.

The first two Tiger photos are clearly the same vehicle, in the same location, and in spite of the grainy second image, these photos look like they were taken far enough apart in time that the vegetation surrounding the tank has changed. In the second photo, a black shadow seems to be located where the drivers hatch should be located, suggesting this hatch has disappeared. If you go back to the first photo, the men standing where the drivers hatch would be located appear to be posed trying to avoid a large opening in the top of the hull in that location and no open hatch is evident in either photo. However, the gunners hatch on the opposite side of the barrel seems to be in place. In the first photo one person is standing right on top of where it would be located. If the drivers hatch is indeed missing, then this Tiger probably came to a sudden, violent end and possibly caught fire.

The shape of the opening of the foliage around the Tiger seems to mirror the general outline of the Tiger, suggesting it was backed into position. If so, then a fair bit of time passed after the Tiger was in place. Dead foliage and dirt has infilled in front of the tracks quite noticably. It would take a while for Nature to take back that ground, so if this Tiger was lost in late 1944, it seems probable these two photos were not taken until the summer of 1945, or even 1946. Photos of abandoned in place German armour in France are not uncommon, even as late as 1947 in the countryside. These photos may simply be postwar tourist shots taken by troops still in Europe waiting to be demobbed after the war.

The German SP looks oddly placed, almost posed, and the only trace of tracks are directly under the right front road wheel. It appears to have a coat of Zimmermit applied, but it looks oddly discoloured, as if perhaps having been heat damaged from a vehicle fire. The same heat may have also cooked this vehicles markings.

The last photo of another Tiger also looks like a fire damaged vehicle with that odd white and grey patches over the paint. A careful look at the rear of the turret can just make out an outlined ’14’ still showing through from the burnt paint. It is also possible the rear hull plate shows extensive heat damage that has cooked the original German Army markings to the point we can still see where they were, but not what they were. This phenomenon may also apply to the front of the first Tiger. Original German markings cooked beyond recognition.


David

[m kenny]

Originally Posted by Ed Storey

Markings, what markings? All you have done is post two photographs, lifted from who knows where and without any explanation, in support your argument.

The dragon on the bow of the Jagdtiger and the Fox head on the rear of the Tiger.
I posted the original Tiger photo just to get more info on the Unit badges and not the Tiger.

Whilst I am quite happy to provide more information the tone of certain posters is troubling.