I love the way Mr. Henkemans can unravel a photo and tell us the story of the action surrounding it. He's an invaluable asset to the WWII history community. Thankyou so much for presenting this to us.
Glad you enjoyed it Bill. There are some other things I left out that might still be worth mentioning here. Three of the more interesting: 1) the V sign. This was the German sign used for the N13 highway which ran from Paris to Cherbourg. You can also see this sign in footage taken in Paris later in the summer of 1944 so you can figure out where that material was shot. 2) the rear shot of this wrecked StuG shows tracks wrapped around the spare wheels. This was typical for this unit and a rather rare practice in Normandy, making it a useful identifying feature. 3) the company involved was officially called Stu.Gesch.Abt.1243, but that is just much too confusing and not easily explained. It also both was and functioned as 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243, which is a much clearer description of what this StuG unit really was.
Another great show Paul . Niels was a great, knowledgeable guest. It's good to see younger people like him so interested in the war. Hope you get him back from time to time with his knowledge of armoured sections. Fascinating. Thank you.
I definitely enjoy these short stories about the Normandy landings and the battle off the beaches. this one especially is straight to the point and very exact and I enjoy that. I hope you can keep this kind of content coming.
Another great espisode replete with details. This is why we watch your channel. Your guests always have the most accurate and detailed picture of what really happened and which units were involved in the actions described, as opposed to simply rehashing previously written historical information. WW2TV: A cut above the rest.
Great episode. I've been studying the 80th AA/AT in the 82nd and also its counterpart in the 101st, the 81st AA/AT Battalion, and there is very little analysis on these units let alone photos and analysis. Thank you for this one Niels and Paul
there were a lot of people decorated for getting hit during battles but not doing anything especially brave or brilliant but this guy shutting down the armor attack towards Utah Beach deserved his distinguished service cross. he actually had a serious effect on the outcome of that part of the war. very few soldiers can actually say that.
@@billd.iniowa2263 Gday Bill. There was a pic of an american wrecker that was retrieving a knocked out, I think as I recall a panther. It was only on for a moment. The wrecker was a variant of a range of heavy trucks used by the americans and built by the Diamond T company. I think they're really cool.
Has Niel's book been published yet? I am interested in a copy but can't seem to locate it anywhere. The bookshop link in the description is not working for me. Loved this video btw. Recently found the channel and enjoying every upload! 👍
@@nielshenkemans Hey Niels, is there a way to get in contact with you? Like insta or something? I am very interested in the 70th TB around Vierville and Dead mans corner. I am catching up to the episodes but I have Questions that sadly have not been part of the presentation and I would like to ask you since you seem to have the knowledge and material to help. Max
6 pounders (presumably only the airborne version with the lightened carriage) could also be dropped by parachute from modified Stirling bombers if necessary. The one time I know of this happening was during the Battle of Breville. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Br%C3%A9ville
The Australian Army also built lightened 6 pounders, that in addition to a lightened carriage were also shortened to permit them to be dismantled and hand carried in jungle terrain.
I greatly apreciate this sort of research & work. However,some questions remain in my mind as to how & in what order the dammage was caused. -Obviously there was an internal explosion,ripping off the top,possibly the engine cover,and likely caused the front armor of the cannon to disappear completely out of photo frame.. As usual,it's difficult to know if this explosion was caused by incoming fire,or the crew when they abandoned the vehicle. -The holes on the front plate do not look like anti-tank rounds to me. (someone correct me if I'm wrong,I'm not an expert,but have looked at many photos and some real impacts.) They seem way too large,and the crater-like shape reminds me more of bazooka impacts. -There must have been damage to the rear of the track earlier,as the Stug obviously tried to reverse after that and lost the track towards the front .So this would happen while the crew is still active. That does of course not exclude that the rear wheel gets hit again later on. -There is also damage to the muzzle break,and what seems to be a hole from an anti-tank round in the front of the track. Seems to me that they really peppered this one with all they had-understandably so.
- Bazooka (HEAT) rounds leave small holes. None of these hits match that pattern. They're all gun fire, but the question is which where 6 Pounder hits and which were 75mm Sherman hits. Damage on the track is the most difficult to ID, can have several causes. - When a track breaks while moving, the track still gets pushed forward, but there is no tension so the tank stops moving. Had the tank been moving backwards it would have tightened the track in front of the vehicle, not shed it. The idler is different because it has no teeth to hold the track in place, so it can slip off if it breaks near the idler (just gravity dragging it down.) Also, the vehicle is at an angle. Traction of the intact track can pull it to that side. Option is also that it turned intentionally, but thus allowed the track/idler to be hit. - Look closely, there was a hit on the front armor of the cannon, at the top. Welds broke, plate shattered. Explains it disappearing. - Engine deck of this vehicle remained intact. Tossing the roof is typical for exploding StuGs. Very common battle damage, especially with two holes in the bow which could have set off the ammo stored behind it.
6 pounders could be every bit as deadly to German armor as the much-vaunted 17 pounder when the former were firing APDS (discarding sabot) ammunition, these rounds being available in significant quantities by D Day, at least for use by the British and Canadian armies. I'm not sure if the Americans were issued any for use with their (essentially identical) 57 mm AT guns.
I can clearly see two shots in the lower hull and one in the track. When the ammo cooked off it blew the back off the Stug. For not being well liked the 57mm (6 Pound) anti tank gun could get the job done on most German armored vehicles.
@@WW2TV Yeah finally came around to see the clip after 1 year. So just for me: Stug 3 Ausführung G, Number 201, 2nd company of the 243 ID and the 6-PDR (57mm) Airborne version AT Gun of the A Company 80th AAA-bt 82nd AB
Not quite. When they first appeared, Stugs were indeed part of the artillery. Later in the war they were also part of the Panzertruppen. You can even see them as stand-in tanks in Panzer regiments. In infantry divisions in Normandy they were part of the AT-battalions and the crews were part of the Panzertruppen, including the associated uniforms.
@@nielshenkemansI could be wrong. As far as I remember, Panzerjäger and Panzergrenadier belonged to Panzertruppen. But neither Sturmgeschütz nor sturmhaubitze were in the same branch. Stug often used as tank hunter during later stage of war, for sure.
@@aps125 , plenty of StuGs made it into the Panzertruppen as the war progressed. Just go and check 1943. The limit to StuGs being only artillery is an EARLY war distinction. There are even reports comparing the performance of StuGs by Artillery crew vs Panzertruppen crews (the artillery guys were supposedly better gunners). StuHs were and remained artillery only though, that bit is correct. If you want to keep it simple: the formations using StuGs automatically identify if those StuGs are part of the Panzertruppen or Artillery. In Panzerjäger and Panzer formations the StuGs are part of the Panzertruppen.
I'm sorry Paul but I've got to call you on this one. You made a serious mixed metaphor with your comment that "it's a domino effect, it's a house of cards." At least both phrases involve table games. I'm just taking the piss.
Really interesting. Just an observation. I could be wrong but the two hits on the front of the Stug hull look too big to be 6 pounder entry holes. I think something else did that.
Good God, why did I care (I felt movement, at age 63 not kidding) when he identified that 57mm AT gun as a modded Brit 6lber BELONGING to & DELIVERED by the US 82nd PD???????
Hi WW2TV, that was really fascinating. Well-done and thank you
I love the way Mr. Henkemans can unravel a photo and tell us the story of the action surrounding it. He's an invaluable asset to the WWII history community. Thankyou so much for presenting this to us.
Glad you enjoyed it Bill. There are some other things I left out that might still be worth mentioning here. Three of the more interesting:
1) the V sign. This was the German sign used for the N13 highway which ran from Paris to Cherbourg. You can also see this sign in footage taken in Paris later in the summer of 1944 so you can figure out where that material was shot.
2) the rear shot of this wrecked StuG shows tracks wrapped around the spare wheels. This was typical for this unit and a rather rare practice in Normandy, making it a useful identifying feature.
3) the company involved was officially called Stu.Gesch.Abt.1243, but that is just much too confusing and not easily explained. It also both was and functioned as 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243, which is a much clearer description of what this StuG unit really was.
@@nielshenkemans Wow, good to know! I'll be looking for that "V" from now on, lol Thankyou so much!
Remarkable information from one photo! Brilliant!
Another great show Paul . Niels was a great, knowledgeable guest. It's good to see younger people like him so interested in the war. Hope you get him back from time to time with his knowledge of armoured sections. Fascinating. Thank you.
I definitely enjoy these short stories about the Normandy landings and the battle off the beaches. this one especially is straight to the point and very exact and I enjoy that. I hope you can keep this kind of content coming.
I'm glad this just popped up on my YT, as Niels is very knowledgeable regarding German armour and his analysis of this picture is very interesting.
Very fascinating stuff. There are a lot more pictures which deserves this attention. Hope to see Niels back in the show.
Another great espisode replete with details.
This is why we watch your channel.
Your guests always have the most accurate and detailed picture of what really happened and which units were involved in the actions described, as opposed to simply rehashing previously written historical information.
WW2TV: A cut above the rest.
Great episode. I've been studying the 80th AA/AT in the 82nd and also its counterpart in the 101st, the 81st AA/AT Battalion, and there is very little analysis on these units let alone photos and analysis. Thank you for this one Niels and Paul
great accurate presentation
Amazing Story ..Thank you. I LOVED it ....
I like your approach of discussing one photo, instead of showing a bunch of random clips of video. 👍
there were a lot of people decorated for getting hit during battles but not doing anything especially brave or brilliant but this guy shutting down the armor attack towards Utah Beach deserved his distinguished service cross. he actually had a serious effect on the outcome of that part of the war. very few soldiers can actually say that.
Great item, and nice to see a fellow Dutchman on WW2 tv !
Thanks Ivo
Brilliant!
Really enjoyed watching 👍🏻👍🏻
Thanks, Niels knows his stuff, that's for sure
Fascinating.
Thats a great photo of a diamond T being used.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term. "diamond T"??
@@billd.iniowa2263 It is a the tow truck in the video.
@@billd.iniowa2263 Gday Bill. There was a pic of an american wrecker that was retrieving a knocked out, I think as I recall a panther. It was only on for a moment. The wrecker was a variant of a range of heavy trucks used by the americans and built by the Diamond T company. I think they're really cool.
@@ToddSauve Ah, thanx.
@@jeffklepzig920 Ok, thanx. Much appreciated. :-)
Has Niel's book been published yet? I am interested in a copy but can't seem to locate it anywhere. The bookshop link in the description is not working for me. Loved this video btw. Recently found the channel and enjoying every upload! 👍
It will be out this summer, and Niels will come on to plug it when it's available
@@WW2TV thank you! Looking forward to it.
@@Wilderness_Recon, as Paul said it will be some time this summer. Hope to come with a formal announcement next week.
@@nielshenkemans Hey Niels, is there a way to get in contact with you? Like insta or something? I am very interested in the 70th TB around Vierville and Dead mans corner. I am catching up to the episodes but I have Questions that sadly have not been part of the presentation and I would like to ask you since you seem to have the knowledge and material to help. Max
6 pounders (presumably only the airborne version with the lightened carriage) could also be dropped by parachute from modified Stirling bombers if necessary. The one time I know of this happening was during the Battle of Breville.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Br%C3%A9ville
The Australian Army also built lightened 6 pounders, that in addition to a lightened carriage were also shortened to permit them to be dismantled and hand carried in jungle terrain.
@@allangibson2408 Do you have a reference for that?
I greatly apreciate this sort of research & work.
However,some questions remain in my mind as to how & in what order the dammage was caused.
-Obviously there was an internal explosion,ripping off the top,possibly the engine cover,and likely caused the front armor of the cannon to disappear completely out of photo frame..
As usual,it's difficult to know if this explosion was caused by incoming fire,or the crew when they abandoned the vehicle.
-The holes on the front plate do not look like anti-tank rounds to me.
(someone correct me if I'm wrong,I'm not an expert,but have looked at many photos and some real impacts.)
They seem way too large,and the crater-like shape reminds me more of bazooka impacts.
-There must have been damage to the rear of the track earlier,as the Stug obviously tried to reverse after that and lost the track towards the front .So this would happen while the crew is still active.
That does of course not exclude that the rear wheel gets hit again later on.
-There is also damage to the muzzle break,and what seems to be a hole from an anti-tank round in the front of the track.
Seems to me that they really peppered this one with all they had-understandably so.
- Bazooka (HEAT) rounds leave small holes. None of these hits match that pattern. They're all gun fire, but the question is which where 6 Pounder hits and which were 75mm Sherman hits. Damage on the track is the most difficult to ID, can have several causes.
- When a track breaks while moving, the track still gets pushed forward, but there is no tension so the tank stops moving. Had the tank been moving backwards it would have tightened the track in front of the vehicle, not shed it. The idler is different because it has no teeth to hold the track in place, so it can slip off if it breaks near the idler (just gravity dragging it down.) Also, the vehicle is at an angle. Traction of the intact track can pull it to that side. Option is also that it turned intentionally, but thus allowed the track/idler to be hit.
- Look closely, there was a hit on the front armor of the cannon, at the top. Welds broke, plate shattered. Explains it disappearing.
- Engine deck of this vehicle remained intact. Tossing the roof is typical for exploding StuGs. Very common battle damage, especially with two holes in the bow which could have set off the ammo stored behind it.
6 pounders could be every bit as deadly to German armor as the much-vaunted 17 pounder when the former were firing APDS (discarding sabot) ammunition, these rounds being available in significant quantities by D Day, at least for use by the British and Canadian armies. I'm not sure if the Americans were issued any for use with their (essentially identical) 57 mm AT guns.
The 2 rounds that penetrated the front were very close to each other. Do we know about how close the 57mm was to the German tank?
100 yards or less maybe. It was a 6 Pounder rather than a 57mm - subtle difference and often referred to as a 57mm
I can clearly see two shots in the lower hull and one in the track. When the ammo cooked off it blew the back off the Stug. For not being well liked the 57mm (6 Pound) anti tank gun could get the job done on most German armored vehicles.
Love this picture. Stug III Ausführung G. should be around St mere eglise if I remember correctly.
Yes, we explain the history in the film
@@WW2TV Yeah finally came around to see the clip after 1 year. So just for me: Stug 3 Ausführung G, Number 201, 2nd company of the 243 ID and the 6-PDR (57mm) Airborne version AT Gun of the A Company 80th AAA-bt 82nd AB
Stug (assault gun) was part of German army’s artillery arm. Its main purpose was infantry fire support, AT played a secondary role.
Not quite. When they first appeared, Stugs were indeed part of the artillery. Later in the war they were also part of the Panzertruppen. You can even see them as stand-in tanks in Panzer regiments. In infantry divisions in Normandy they were part of the AT-battalions and the crews were part of the Panzertruppen, including the associated uniforms.
@@nielshenkemansI could be wrong. As far as I remember, Panzerjäger and Panzergrenadier belonged to Panzertruppen. But neither Sturmgeschütz nor sturmhaubitze were in the same branch. Stug often used as tank hunter during later stage of war, for sure.
@@aps125 , plenty of StuGs made it into the Panzertruppen as the war progressed. Just go and check 1943. The limit to StuGs being only artillery is an EARLY war distinction. There are even reports comparing the performance of StuGs by Artillery crew vs Panzertruppen crews (the artillery guys were supposedly better gunners).
StuHs were and remained artillery only though, that bit is correct.
If you want to keep it simple: the formations using StuGs automatically identify if those StuGs are part of the Panzertruppen or Artillery. In Panzerjäger and Panzer formations the StuGs are part of the Panzertruppen.
I'm sorry Paul but I've got to call you on this one. You made a serious mixed metaphor with your comment that "it's a domino effect, it's a house of cards." At least both phrases involve table games. I'm just taking the piss.
Really interesting. Just an observation. I could be wrong but the two hits on the front of the Stug hull look too big to be 6 pounder entry holes. I think something else did that.
Good God, why did I care (I felt movement, at age 63 not kidding) when he identified that 57mm AT gun as a modded Brit 6lber BELONGING to & DELIVERED by the US 82nd PD???????
But the 57mm US anti tank gun was a modified version of the British 6pdr, so I don't see your point here
STUG: Sturm Geschuetz.