Pershing vs. Tiger?

well you have to think it was the first time a different tank had been used by the united states and the pershing had,nt been made until later in the war therefore leaving no room for improvement of the m26 pershing

 

Sorry, but the engagement bewteen Super Pershing versus King Tiger is pure american propaganda to show their most powerful tank beat the German's most powerful tank. Some people might be fooled by it but not those who are knowledgeable. We have a complete record of all King Tiger actions and movements and none were anywhere near Dessau on 21st April 1945. ALL Tiger unit movements and daily combat records are known and recorded. There were no King Tigers at Dessau! It would have been a one million to one chance that the ONLY Super Pershing in the entire ETO would have bumped into a rare King Tiger in an area where no King Tiger units were anywhere near.

There are NO pictures of this phantom King Tiger at Dessau. No unit ID. Not even a tank number. A King Tiger k.o'd by a Super Pershing would have been a great pictorial attraction for the occupying U.S forces.....yet there is not even one picture of the aftermath of this mysterious 'event'.
The U.S thought enough to take lots of pictures of the Tiger I k.o'd by the regular Pershing near Elsdorf in Feb '45, but 'mysteriously' NOBODY ever took a pic of this phantom King Tiger at Dessau????
The US captured Dessau and were there for ages.....yet NOT ONE picture?

If we go by all allied tanker's accounts of 'Tigers' they faced then there must have been thousands of them in 1944'45. 'Tigers' were everywhere if we listen to them. Panthers were mostly called Tigers. Jagdpanthers too. Even Panzer IV sometimes. Have you ever wondered why there was never any picture of this 'mysterious King Tiger' defeated by the Super Pershing? Because it didn't happen. No pictures. No Tiger unit ID. No records from German bundesarchives. NOTHING.Zip. Zilch. Nada.
Makes a nice 'mythical' story to try to show the most powerful US tank of WW2 bested the most powerful German tank of WW2 but that's all it was.

 

Great tanker 1408 ! Could you please tell me what Unit had this Tiger and what it was doing in Marle in August 1944?






I would also like to know what this dustbin-coupla Tiger I was doing near Villers Bocage in late June 1944 and the Unit it belonged to.



Also the parent Unit of this TII in France in August 1944



Should be easy if everything is documented...


Whilst you are here have you any idea who doctored this TII pic and added a bogus hit deflection?

 

From top to bottom:

1. Marle, one of the three Tiger I's of the FKL316

2. The same as 1.

3. At Villers Bocage, sSSPzAbt 101

4. Marines, Tiger II of the 3./sPzAbt 503

5. The King Tiger "301" of sPzAbt 503 that got 5 frontal hits near Paris in August 1944? The driver (Walter Jung) got out and we have the pic of him looking at the hits on the front plate.
here the original photo:


No informaton on the person who took or edited the photo though.

 

That is an informed deduction (who was the clever chap who first suggested it by the way?) I was asking for the 'records' that confirm the Unit and tank identity.

So sSS PzAbt 101 had an old style Tiger in its ranks? Where do the records confirm this previously unknown fact?

How can that be? 503 is claimed to only have had 2 TII(h) and that is not one of either of them. What do the detailed Tiger movement/loss records say?

This is one of the 2 TII (h) from 503. The other was '300' and it had track hangers on the turret and the one I posted above at 4 don't!


So where did the TII in 4 come from according to the detailed movememt/loss records?

Perhaps these Tiger' records' are not so complete after all and do not contain "ALL Tiger unit movements and daily combat records"?

 

Funny thing to see this thread just after completing my read of "Another River, Another Town : a Teenage Tank Gunner Comes of Age in Combat" written by John P. Irwin. He was the Super Pershing gunner mentioned in Super Pershing vs. King Tiger - Dessau when the Pershing destroyed the non-existant Tiger.
I agree that most GI's in the ETO would call any German tank a Tiger but as a tank gunner I would bet my money that Irwin knew the difference between a Tiger & the other German models. I'm not really suprised that there were no photos taken of the destroyed tank. The war was in Europe was in it's final stage, there was no pressing need for propaganda photos & by that point in time destroyed German tanks were probably "old hat". Cameras were not as common then as they are now & probably not high on the priority list of a combat soldier when deciding what to carry into action.
I believe the Super Persing is also mentioned in "Death Traps : The Survival of an American Armored Division in World War II" by Belton Y. Cooper.

 

With due respect to m kenny, none of the photos posted here Tiger im Focus - 3.Kp/503 France 1944 (re-equipped with Tiger IIs)
show "301" with track hangers added.

 

Which just go to show that no one is free from error.
I should have checked but I relied on memory.
300' had the hangers.
'301' did not.
The point in relation to the 'mystery' TII below:






is that it is not one of the 2 known TII(h) in 3/503. Thus it is not covered by any record anywhere.

Alawys check everything. Take nothing at face value.



TII(h) Wrecks positively identified as 3/503. They are not from 1/ SS 101 so no mix up in identification:








A very finely tuned point I know but still a perfect example (along with the others in my previous post) of how you should not rely on Schneider and claim ALL Tiger movements and ALL Tiger losses are recorded.

 

How the internet works. Fred went somewhere else to get the answers.

Thema anzeigen - Suche Informationen zu bestimmten Panzerabteilungen. - Panzer-Archiv

 

I've just finished reading Irwin's book. I've seen a few comments regarding Mr. Irwin's reliability, but I haven't heard the whole story. Has he been discredited? In the Kindle edition of his book, he speaks of his engagement with a Tiger at Dessau, but he doesn't refer to it as a King Tiger. He refers to seeing King Tigers a couple of times earlier in the book, but the one at Dessau is only called a "Tiger." Has the Kindle edition of the book been revised? Or are people just assuming that he was referring to a Tiger II at Dessau?

That aside, I thought Irwin's book was quite good. My only minor quibble would be that he writes it too much as a novelist. I doubt that all of the conversations he quotes are actually verbatim, and he does admit in a note at the end that he's refreshed his memory of places and events from referring to the official record. But still, it makes for an interesting read.