Mk IV Male, 4086

[Kevin Hunter]

Most, if not all, forum members will know what I mean if I say that Armortek models are something between a disease and an addiction. It's absolutely impossible to stop at just one!
No surprise then that Mk IV kit no 40 has just arrived in Guernsey.....
I recently posted elsewhere that my model would be of the male tank, number 4086. Quite by accident I discovered that not only did 4086 take part in reportedly the first tank v tank action in April 1918, but that the commander was a 2nd Lt Francis Mitchell, who was born here in St Peter Port . The combination of battlefield milestone, and locally born commander means it simply has to be.
Personally I was surprised to learn that tank on tank action seems not to have occurred until so late in the Great War.
I have begun researching Mitchell, who was awarded the MC and survived the war. There is a book "Tank Warfare - the story of tanks in the Great War" written in 1933 by one F Mitchell MC which I believe to be the same Mitchell. I have a copy on order......
Meanwhile, one of the "duel" book series, Mk IV vs A7, tells the story of the 1918 action at Villers-Bretonneux, as does the following clip which I found:

More to follow soon. Not sure how fast my build will be - I have 3 years until the centenary of this battle, after all!
Regards
Kevin

[Stephen White]

Kevin, if your MkIV is as good as your Cent, it'll be worth waiting for. I've been meaning for a while to post some pics of this print which has hung in my various offices over the years. It's your Lt Mitchell at work.













Fear Naught.

Stephen

[Kevin Hunter]

Many thanks for your kind words Stephen – although my Cent is so very basic that I’m sure you must be thinking of someone else?!

Anyway, thank you for posting the photos of your print – it really is a fabulous thing.

Taking a leaf from your book I have been enjoying myself, scouring the internet and various books for details of both Mitchell’s tank and the man himself.

The only other colour picture I have seen so far is just an illustration in the book Mark IV vs A7V, which shows the tank in a dark green. Your picture seems to support that – I think I see green under all that mud. What do others think?

The bigger question though concerns the actual number of Mitchell’s Mk IV. Your print, which I imagine has impeccable provenance, states that it was 4066. However there are a number of references that suggest it was 4086?

The book Mark IV vs A7V refers throughout to 4086.

The “landships” website lists 4066 as broken down and burnt out in March ’18. It notes a possible involvement at Villers-Bretonneux but then suggests that may be a mistake given that 4066 seems to have burned out before the battle.

The same site lists: 4086-Apr-18 – 1st bttn, A Coy, 1 sec, A1, 2Lt Mitchell - First Tank v's tank action. Tank engaged and KO a German A7V tank before being Hit and KO itself

A list of A Company tanks (same site) includes A1, 4086, Male, 2Lt Mitchell F

I have a copy of Mitchell’s own book ordered and en-route so it remains to be seen what he says, if anything, regarding his part at VB. Either way, I need to get the number right so it looks like more digging. Anyone out there got a definitive reference?

Thanks again for the pictures Stephen and for furthering this little controversy! Keep up the great work on your own Cent. I know I don’t always post but you can rest assured that I (and many others I’m sure) am following your progress closely in silent awe.

Kevin

[Chris Hall]

Kevin -

I haven't read Mitchell's book ("Tank Warfare") for some years, although I do have a copy. From memory it was written in the 1930's, and was somewhat self-promoting, although it is certainly a good account from Someone Who Was There.

I can't comment on the Tank number (without doing some digging !), but Mitchell's (Male) 'bus' was certainly something like No. 1 Tank, 1st Section, A Company, 1st Battalion of the Tank Corps. Pity you haven't got Armortek's Number 1 ! It's certainly a 'famous' one to model.

In your original posting you expressed surprise that tank v. tank action happened so late in WW1. It's not that surprising if you think it through. The British Army first employed tanks on the Somme on 15/9/1916. The French followed with theirs (the Schnieder, then the St. Chamond, and finally the FT17) from mid-1917. The Germans didn't get the A7V, supported by British Mark IV's they'd captured, until March 1918. So there wasn't much time left for a tank battle. And bear in mind that the Germans only had 20 A7V's, and 40 or so captured Mark IV's, so they wouldn't have wanted to risk them all in just one battle - which, in any event, would only have involved Male tanks as the Females (mg's only) would have been useless (as was discovered at Villers-Bretonneux).

Also, tanks simply weren't designed to fight each other ! The British and French designed theirs as Breakthrough weapons, destroying barbed wire and punching a hole which the cavalry could pour through on their way to Berlin . The Germans were off the pace in that regard as they were largely focussed on holding their gains and wearing the Allies out - at least until the USA entered the War, when they realised they only had a short time to win the War. Their Breakthrough weapon of choice was the Stormtrooper, with whom tanks couldn't really keep up.

So, to conclude, tanks seldom met each other and, when they did (on only a couple of occasions), they knocked each other around a bit while having no impact on the battle around them. It was all totally different 20+ years later, of course .........

As for colour, there's another debate on that which I'll add comments to. But, following the splinter camo used on the first Mark I's, I tend to believe that British tanks were universally painted brown, and only distinguished by numbers and (sometimes) names. Boring, but utilitarian, especially as they were often covered in mud anyway !

I'll look forward to reading about your build. Mine's No. 50 - so far I'm 20 hours in and I'm just thinking of putting the outer frames on. But this is my first Armortek project, so I'm feeling my way very, very carefully .......

Sorry to witter on, but WW1 Tanks are a long-standing passion of mine !

All the best,

Chris Hall

[Chris Hall]

Kevin -

Let's try and nail down your Tank Number (or, perhaps, add to the confusion !).

I've just had a flick through Mitchell's book. While mine is the 1987 reprint, it "reproduces the original text and illustrations complete and unabridged" (well, that's what it says in the front !). Mitchell describes the Villers-Brettoneux action in Chapter 14 (Page 184). In particular, on Page 196, he describes how his gunner, 75669 Sgt. J.R. McKenzie, got the Military Medal for the action (Mitchell got the Military Cross). He quotes the official citation, which specifically gives the Tank number as 4066. I've cross-referenced this to 'The Tank Corps Book of Honour' (issued in 1919, which is the definitive record of all Honours and Awards issued to the Tank Corps in WW1, together with a list of those killed in action), and the citation is identical.

So, on that basis, I'd go with 4066.

On Page 194 of his book, Mitchell says that his Tank threw a track later in the action, and had to be abandoned. That may be where the confusion with 'Landships' arises.

Hope this helps. You're absolutely right, though, to seek original sources - with regard to mine, I've got visits planned to the Archives at Bovington and Kew !

All the best,

Chris Hall

[IAN HINKS]

I am pretty sure there is a report on the action in the 'A', No.1 Battalion Files at Bovington. I thought I had made notes on it on one of my visits, but cannot find them. You could contact the archives and ask them to copy it for you, (not sure if they offer this service due to small staff numbers) or you could book a visit to the archives or ask someone else who is going to look in the file for you. The report I saw was not a Battle History sheet as they call the after action reports of the tank commanders, but was written up by the Company or Section Commander if I recall correctly. If in the meantime I come across my notes I will post again.
Gunner.

[Chris Hall]

As Ian says, the Bovington records should prove definitive.

However, here's a link to the artist who painted Stephen's picture (I've got a print of it as well):

http://www.davidrowlands.co.uk/gallery/ ... ntCode=053

As it was researched by Major Holt, and commissioned by 1RTR, the provenance would seem to be pretty good ...........

All the best,

Chris

[IAN HINKS]

As Chris says research on projects like the painting of that type is usually very thorough and would probably use source material such as the records at Bovington or diaries and notes from eye witnesses.

I would warn against using a sole record of any event though, as I am sure most of you have found out if you have gone through any official records they are full of transcription errors, typos etc. Which is why the forums and history sites have many topics querying or explaining these issues and hopefully having evidence to clarify matters some though are lost to time for now. Also why some errors get repeated in books, programs and myth until another researcher questions matters.

Now might be a time to raise a subject I have been meaning to post for some time. We know that each tank has a unique serial number 2025 for example. We have seen that some tanks have Battalion, company and section identities A25 and sometimes names, ARATHUSA. The Battle history sheets show in this case the A25 ident as a "crew number". There were more crews than tanks in a Battalion. So when a tank is listed as A25 for example, it might not have that ident on the side, and can be listed against multiple tanks. Different Officers would command crews as well due to casualties and postings, so several names can have the same crew ident. Getting complicated isn't it? Not all tanks had the section ident painted on the side, sometimes for lack of time, but I saw one reference in 1st (A) Battalion archives stating they were not to be used until further notice. Sorry to muddy things up, but sorting these things out can be good fun, or damned frustrating. Must close now, work calls. I hope this stimulates further debate. I will copy this into another post for discussion.
Gunner.

[Steve Stuart]

Ian, that is an interesting pebble to have cast into the pond. So now, how accurate is the Landships website in their information?
Steve

[IAN HINKS]

Hi Steve,
I have transferred the last post I added to another topic "Mark IV tank identities and markings" to save diverting this topic off course. but that is exactly the question I am raising. They have done a huge amount of work and have cross referenced loads of data but there are still so many questions. Fun ain't it?
Gunner.

[Kevin Hunter]

Time to reawaken this thread…..if only to say that I’m still here.

To recap briefly, I’m settled on modelling the tank (4066) commanded by Lt Frank Mitchell at Villers-Bretonneux on 24th April 1918 – accepted as being the first tank vs tank engagement in history. Quite by chance I discovered that Mitchell was born here in Guernsey, after which there was no going back.

To be honest, very little has happened on my Mk IV build. The hull has been loosely assembled for exhibition at various local shows, with labels detailing the tank, the VB action and the Guernsey connection. Armortek also get a plug of course. The model now needs to be taken apart again in order to fit those endless rivets, after which the build proper can recommence.

In the interim, I’ve been researching Mitchell and exploring his family tree. I’m slightly saddened to have discovered that he appears to have left Guernsey shortly before the outbreak of WW1, and was working for London County & Westminster Bank (now NatWest) when he enlisted in 1914. That aside he was undeniably a Guernsey-man by birth.

As Mitchell had a number of siblings also born here, I still hope to find living relatives here in the Island.

Meanwhile, I have successfully traced and contacted one of Mitchell’s grandsons living in the UK, and I’m told that the family are excited to learn that someone is showing so much interest in their ancestor. The family have inherited many historic papers / documents which they are studying with renewed interest and will let me know if anything especially pertinent to the Mk IV turns up.

One particular treasure in their possession is the pair of binoculars used by Mitchell at Villers Bretonneux, with a signed note to that effect. The family have kindly sent a photograph which I thought you might all be interested to see. (The note isn't well photographed, but can be read when zoomed in....)

More soon

Kevin

[Peter Silcock]

A fascinating story Kevin - scope for someone to do a book maybe?

[Chris Hall]

Ahh, Real History .... it really helps breathe life into our models.

And, dare I say it, there seems to be more than our fair share of it on the WW1 Mark IV forum !

Have fun with all those rivets, Kevin !

All the best,

Chris

[Chris Hall]

A fascinating story Kevin - scope for someone to do a book maybe?

Mitchell himself wrote the book - published in 1933, if memory serves. I particularly like the story of him trying to tap the Admiralty for 'prize money' for this action, as he was commanding a Landship ....

All the best,

Chris