Nice work, Kevin. I appreciate Randy making the letter available. Good to see Alane join us. Sgt. Kenneth F. Gamble appears on the Chalk #5 manifiest (along with Fuhrman), so Ihlenfeld's description makes sense. Gamble is listed as POW. For our newcomers I will repeat the warning that the Elie glider assignment list may have seen some changes by June 6: F/O Ballintine in his c.1992 reminiscence said Chalk #10 carried a jeep and gun. Those two items plus a minimal guncrew just about maxes out the Horsa weight limit, so something changed from the Elie list showing this one as Signal Co. I've often wondered about the six AT guns - the Elie list only shows two Horsas assigned to 81AAA - #13 and #32. The manifest for #13 shows several 81AAA members - but no gun (just two trailers and a handcart). With the capacity of a Horsa, wouldn't they always load a jeep and AT gun on the same glider to allow instant entry into combat? So where are the six AT guns (five if you accept Ballintine's account)? As to which Horsa Ihlenfeld and Doyle arrived in, I don't know. I previously had this wild guess that H1 and H2 were Chalk #1 and #2 (in either order) and that being the first in line, these two managed to surprise the Germans, a fact which gave some of the crew and passengers a little time to escape capture (copilot of #1 was KIA and pilot of #2 was WIA). If that works, then Ihlenfeld and Doyle would have known they were being shot at, yet they weren't surrounded as later Horsas appear to have been. Chalk #6 would have the advantage that IF glidermen were marched to the gliders in chalk order, then Ihlenfeld would have been in a good position to observe the Gamble/Guhrman tussle occurring just ahead of his place in the line of march. Until a better theory comes along, I'll stick with the idea that my expanded Dipper group includes Chalks 1-2-5-6-9-10-13-14 (and maybe 17 or 18 since there are nine Horsas in the neighborhood).
Sgt. Gamble and my dad Harold were indeed both POW's eventually ending up in Stalag 3C before liberation. Robert Towner also of Chalk #5 was captured upon landing but somehow either escaped or was recaptured by U. S. forces. He was wounded with a bullet through his leg, evacuated and some time in the future returned to the outfit. He remained there through the end of the war. He ended up being a long time sports writer in South Bend Indiana. The picture below is of my dad and Kenneth Gamble in 1987 a couple of years before my dad passed away. [img=850x575]http://imageshack.us/a/img28/4969/0z6p.jpg[/img]
Morning Guys, Just a quick thought as I head out - if a Horsa goes through a hedgerow with sufficient speed to clear it, how far out in the next field would we see wreckage? Could we safely expect to see some of the wreckage beyond the evening shadows visible in our current aerial cover? As an example, look at the left most Horsa marked with the blue 'X' in the first post on the "Extracts from 'Looking Down on War'" thread - extract shown below for clarity: The above extract is marked with the yellow rectangle below: Is it safe to assume that a Horsa, having gone through a hedgerow completely and breaking up during passage, would travel out into the next field as far as is seen above? Thanks, Pat
In the post above regarding Thomas Doyle. He was taken prisoner in Bastogne and died while a prisoner at Stalag 8A.
Hi All, You may recall we found footage on Critical Past which shows a Horsa wreck in a field being used to hold German PoWs. Screenshots from this footage are shown in this post on page 4 of this thread. It is known that PoWs were held in a field 'near' the 101st CP at Hiesville. The presence of glider pilots in the same field apparently awaiting transport back to the beach is also indicative of a CP location being close by in my view. Any Horsa wrecks found in the Hiesville area might help to further Kevin's efforts in confirming the route taken by his father MSG John McCarthy to the 101st CP on the morning of the 7th June. However, how sure can we be that the PoW footage was shot in the Hiesville area and not further north in 82nd territory? So far we cannot, but yesterday I was looking for something else entirely on Tyler Alberts '90th Imfantry Division - Invasion of Normandy' DVD and found some more footage of the same field which has two new points of interest. The first is the presence of what I take to be a German fallschirmjager among the prisoners: Can anyone confirm this prisoner to be a fallschirmjager? If he is, this field is very unlikely to be in 82nd territory. As far as I know, the 82nd did not face this unit in Normandy. The second interesting point is the presence of what appears to be an intact Waco in what I suspect is a corner at the uphill end the same field - note our spruce trees A-C also present in the Critical Past screenshots: Below is a composite of two screenshots shot from the middle of the field looking down towards the bottom end where a large number of German prisoners can be seen under guard: I suspect the ash hedgerow which seems to commence from a corner at right is the one which holds the Horsa wreck and the intact Waco at the top end. This is just a suspicion and I am by no means sure Anyone care to have a go at matching the trees' 'fingerprints' in the aerial cover for Hiesville. There are some nice long evening shadows available in the frames from sortie 1857 flown on the 12th June Regards, Pat
Hello Pat, The smock indeed seems to be a Fallschirmjäger smock. There appear to be a few guys in Luftwaffe uniform, but generally all LW troops had the same collar insignia. The background colour differed, eg yellow for aircrew and Fallschirmjäger. The boots beside the guy with the mess tin being checked look like Fj jump boots, so I would guess most (maybe all) of those in LW uniform are Fallschirmjäger. Cheers, Sean
Pat, did the 90ID video indicate the date it was shot? The 90th's June AAR states for June 8: "By midnight, all foot elements had closed into allocated positions in the Division's assembly area - Turqueville - Reuville - Audouville-LaHubert - Ecoqueneauville - with Division CP set up at the village of Loutres." Wonder if that area might be a better choice? Fields on the north edge of the ENE-WSW road just south of Loutres slope gently to the south somwhat similar to images, but 8010 is fuzzy along there and doesn't present any obvious spots. Might those two officers be 90th G-2 quizzing the POWs before the latter resume their march to the beach? The two officers aren't even wearing pistol belts. For what it's worth, van der Heydte claimed in his Foreign Military Studies account that 2/6FjR made it almost to the south edge of SME by midnight on June 6. The 358th IR of the 90ID was headed for a crossing at Chef du Pont a few days later, so if van der Heydte is anywhere close to accurate, there would be lots of opportunities for the 90ID to pick up paratrooper POWs (stragglers anyway). Tyler has done lots of good work on the 90th. You might pick his brain on where the video may have been made.
Thanks Guys for the helpful comments, I have a strong sense that this particular segment of footage is 101st/Hiesville related rather than 90th ID. The clapper board just states 'INV 68' and Tyler has a date of the 8th June on the preceding footage segments, all of which are 90th related. I presume the 90th would not have need of a PoW holding area until after they crossed the La Fiere causeway on the morning of the 10th June (IIRC), though some elements were attached to the 4th ID. As we know from other footage, scenes of common theme were often stitched together even though they were not related in either time frame or location. I think this might well be the case here. Regards, Pat
Several weeks ago, Don initiated a new line of research with the ultimate goal of obtaining first hand accounts of the Keokuk Mission landings from surviving Keokuk glider pilots themselves. Early on during this effort, Don discovered the online obituary of F/O Winfield Goulden, the pilot of my father’s D-Day glider, Keokuk Chalk #4. (As described by my father, “Our pilot (Goulden) did a superb job as he dropped onto the soft field.”) Unfortunately F/O Goulden passed away just six months ago in California after a full and productive life. My condolences to the Goulden family for their loss. I wish I had been able to personally thank F/O Goulden for his service. http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/pasadenastarnews/obituary.aspx?n=winfield-goulden&pid=165009535 Don’s next effort pointed me to F/O Lynus Ryan, the co-pilot of Keokuk Chalk #7. I established contact with F/O Ryan over this Veterans Day weekend. From my discussion with F/O Ryan, the key points about his D-Day glider landing are summarized below. - Chalk #7 did not land in the same field as General Pratt’s Waco glider. In Ryan’s words, “We landed in a field next to the field where General Pratt’s glider landed.” Ryan confirmed that he did not land in the field south of Pratt Field. Beyond that, he could not specifically recall the direction of his landing field from Pratt Field. - Chalk # 7 carried a jeep and a trailer and four or five 101st HQ personnel besides the glider crew. One T/5 stands out in his memory, but he could not remember his name. - Ryan could not recall the landing pattern that he flew after Chalk #7 released from their tow plane. - Chalk #7 lost one of its main wheels upon landing. Ryan described his landing field as being longer in the east/west axis than the north/south axis. - Chalk #7 landed parallel to a hedgerow in a field with no other gliders present. - Chalk #7 landed “right behind” and “relatively close” to Chalk #8 as Ryan described it. Ryan reiterated three times during our discussion that Chalk #8 went through a hedgerow, crossed a road and went through a second hedgerow before stopping in a field on the other side of a road from where Chalk #7 landed. Ryan stated that he believed that Chalk #7 landed west of Chalk #8 and that “just about everyone was killed” in Chalk #8. - Chalk #7 landed near a “country home” complex that consisted of “several buildings surrounded by a fence” as Ryan described it. Ryan stressed that the main structure was not a farm house or barn. - At least one glider pilot from the Chicago Mission came out to his landing field to meet him upon landing. Ryan stated that the pilot was not Colonel Murphy, but it was a “Lieutenant”. When I asked if it was a short drive back to the CP, he chuckled and stated, “it was a short walk”. - We used the generic term “CP” (Command Post) in our conversation. When I mentioned that the “CP” was probably the Lecaudey Farm, Ryan responded, “So, that is what it was called.” - Ryan was not aware of F/O Goulden’s death in May. I asked about F/O Frank Blalock (Chalk #4 co-pilot) and Ryan stated that he believes that Blalock is now deceased. Our conversation did not cover Goulden’s and Blalock’s D-Day activities, but Ryan did mention that he did not “run into" F/O Art Collins (Chalk #3 pilot) in Normandy on D-Day. Collins spent the night of June 6th hiding with my father in a farmyard and considering his injured leg, Collins was probably sent off for medical assistance as soon as they arrived at Lecaudey. I mentioned F/O Richard Meyers (Chalk #3 Co-pilot that is listed as KIA) and interestingly Ryan told me twice that he thought that I “had it wrong”. He said that he thought that F/O Ernest Van Houten was the co-pilot of Chalk #3. Van Houten is listed as the MIA co-pilot of Chalk #6 in our usual reference material. Using our current probable Chalk #8 landing site (south of Hiesville on the east side of Route de Rabey ) as a starting point, that leaves just two fields that border Pratt Field (NE quadrant) as possible candidates for Chalk #7. (I identified the obvious field, the one directly to the west of our Chalk #8 site. Pat identified the less obvious one just to the north.) As indicated on NCAP 4079_1073 (from a mission flown on the afternoon of June 6th), the field just to the west of the possible Chalk #8 landing site contained two Waco gliders by the time of the Keokuk landings on the evening of June 6th. Based on Ryan’s comment that his landing field was clear of any other gliders, that eliminates this field as a possibility. Disappointingly, the field just to the north of this first field appears to be clear of any gliders in NCAP 1857_4052 (from a mission flown on June 12th). However, Pat noticed a Chateau surrounded by what appears to be a fence or a wall on the eastern edge of the field. Other than the lack of a visible Horsa glider in the aerial, this field fits very nicely with Ryan’s comments that he landed in a field next to a “country home” surrounded by a fence that was just a “short walk” the CP. As suggested by Pat, perhaps this is another example of a glider hidden from aerial view by hedgerow shadows. Pat, can you assist with some aerials that cover this area of interest? While I am disappointed that Mr. Ryan had no direct information on Chalks # 3/4, this new information on Chalks #7 may further support the Chalks #3/4/8 theories previously outlined in this thread. I truly enjoyed my conversation with Mr. Ryan. He is a very gracious man. When I thanked him for his service on this Veterans Day weekend and for his skill as a glider pilot that allowed 101st troopers like my father to survive D-Day and live full lives, he in turn thanked me and our group for having interest in what he and others did during WWII. My thanks to Don for initiating this new line of research. R/Kevin
Hi Kevin, I am sending you some high resolution extracts of the Hiesville area which you may want to send on to F/O Lynus Ryan to see if anything rings a bell. The description in his account regarding the 'country home' being surrounded by a fence and a short walk from the 101st CP at Lecaudey Farm has indeed set me wondering about the field adjoining the garden of Chateau Hiesville (not to be confused with Chateau Colombieres). Below is an extract from NCAP_ACIU_US30_4079_1073 flown on D-Day: Image Credit: RCAHMS/www.aerial.rcahms.gov.uk The curved wall or fence is not easy to see in this photograph as there are no shadows, but bear with me...below is the same location on an extract from NCAP_ACIU_US7GR_1857_4052 flown on the sunny evening of the 12th June, six days later: Image Credit: RCAHMS/www.aerial.rcahms.gov.uk If you check GE cover today, you will see that the wall or fence has disappeared under the tree canopy - at least I hope it's not completely removed because it struck me the other day when I was spooling through Tyler Alberst's '82nd Airborne Division - Invasion of Normandy Series' DVD that a scene therein might be a match for the wall or fence at Chateau Hiesville. Its a long shot, even allowing for the fact that its tagged as 82nd footage but... If you look carefully at the 12th June extract, you will see occasional light toned 'spots' along the inside (garden side) of the wall; these I believe are ornamental shrubs catching the light above the wall like the one we see to the right of the MP's helmet in the ground footage extract. The distinctive plaster work is unusual and should be easy to match if we can, with the owner's consent, obtain a photograph of the wall (if it still stands) under the tree canopy at Chateau Hiesville: So why the excitement over a wall? Well if it is the correct location, it proves that at least one German PoW was interrogated in this field and therefore it's highly likely that all the ground footage of the PoWs in the field with the crashed Horsa was shot in this field adjoining Chateau Hiesville. The obvious problems are two fold - no intact Waco and no crashed Horsa are visible on the cover flown on the 6th or 12th June. I am not too concerned with the lack of apparent Horsa wreckage, but the Waco in one corner should be showing. If it is there in the shadows of the 12th, it must be from Mission Galveston or a stray from Mission Hackensack, arriving on the morning of the 7th June because the field is definitely devoid of intact Wacos on the D-Day aerial. I was interested in getting a look at the 'lie of the land' in this field but the Chateau obscures the view in Google Earth 'street view', so I moved on down the laneway to the next adjoining field to the south and got this view: I am very glad to see a slope down to the laneway in what I now term the 'Calf Field' . The IGN map extract below confirms a slope in both fields much like I would expect to see having viewed the ground footage of the PoW Field: On the above map, the 'Wall Field' is the one with the word 'Hiesville' and the straw barn visible in the 'street view' is the building hatched in black above the word 'Haras'. Weak but possible Regards, Pat
Great work Kevin and Pat. Using my patented shadow analysis voodoo on 4052, I can only say the wall/hedge is not a kneewall - it is head high or so. I suppose high walls were common where mansions abut cow pastures. GE's spot elevations seem reasonable in reference to the street view of the entrance. Based on that observation, Pat's field shows elevations as follows: Going W to E along the northern border - 112' - 105' - 111' Going W to E along the southern border - 111' - 104' - 107' If accurate, looks like a N-S trough in the middle and a dip on the SE corner. Anybody have Normandy photos of 101AB MPs? Did MPs not wear jump jackets? The earlier Horsa/Waco/POW photos don't show jump jackets on what are MPs and perhaps medical personnel. This latest image is cut off at waist level, but looks to be a short jacket. No reason corps G-2 officers wouldn't be up front, but the beach would seem to be a better spot for interrogations. Maybe a forward screening would be useful for sorting out POWs with info for immediate transportation to some central spot where the real experts could grill them. Might that be glider debris in the western end of Pat's field (be on alert for Pat giving it a unique moniker)? Time to break out my burned glider theory again? Could it be that the estate owner complained about the glider and had Ryan's #7 Horsa either burned or chopped up and removed by June 12? The owner (assuming he was present) was obviously well off - which suggests political and business savvy - and he was right down the street from 101AB HQ. As a final guess, might our earlier Horsa tail in the road photo (the one with the medic in the foreground) be the removal of #7. Pretty obvious that a Horsa snatch would be iffy in a field that size, so why not destroy (or let the estate owner salvage materials from) the glider if the Army can't retrieve it? I've always suspected that the Horsa tail in the road had a cable or strap of some sort around the most forward section. Might that be for yanking it through the sparse part of the northern hedegrow near the western end? If Ryan doesn't clarify the location, maybe visitors could quiz Hiesville locals - and keep an eye out for Horsa salvage. Kevin found a Horsa cargo ramp being used as as a header in a shed and awhile back I saw PSP sections used as fencing.
Thanks Don, There is a photo of MPs at a Waco with nurses sitting on the grass somewhere but I cannot find it on Fold3 just now. I cannot recall if they have the 101st shoulder patch though. I am sure Chateau Hiesville was used by the 101st during their stay in the hamlet so it could well be their G2 roof. I doubt if the owner had any real concern about what lay in his fields until things had calmed down and the war had moved on. I do agree that glider locations had changed in Pratt Field by the time sortie 1857 was flown on the 12th but I think the smaller fields were just left to the rear echelon guys to tidy up later in the summer. Will you turn your piece of witchcraft on the trees below and see if you can get a match for the crash site across the laneway from the present day straw shed: I think the fuselage is pointing the wrong way but the sortie 1857 frames are all pretty fuzzy. Regards, Pat
Wait up just one cotton pickin minute... What if the above shot was taken looking east from the 'Calf Field' and we are seeing nothing of what appears to be the fuselage with part of the port side wing still attached in the extract below??? That puts the gate in the right position and explains why you cannot see the slope of the 'Calf Field' across the laneway - the view is east, not west! ...or have I lost too much sleep last night Regards, Pat
Here is a link to a high resolution version of the cow crash site on Fold3: http://www.fold3.com/image/42265458/?terms=glider#35472587/ I thought there was part of the numeral '8' showing on the extreme left but I now don't think the white marking is a number. There also appears to be two GI's across the lane in the other field if you look through the 'U' shaped hole in the trimmed hedge (where I assume some part of the fuselage passed). The extreme right edge also appears to show some form of high rigid object which I first thought to be a telephone pole, but now when viewed zoomed in, does not look to be - perhaps the edge of a Horsa wing? Regards, Pat
Pat, In the high resolution fold3 image I agree with you on the Two GI's across the lane, and furthermore I think there are at least two additional GI's standing further away slightly to the right and directly over the debris pile. It might be a stretch but there may even be two other GI's even further away in the distance and more to the right directly between the debris and the horsa wing. I do think the right edge shows some object, I think it is either a telephone pole, damaged tree, or one of Rommel's asparagus in the foreground. I tried to look for a shadow line but I couldnt see one. I'm not sure it is another part of a horsa. Just my thoughts... John
Thanks John, Yes, I see the other guys to which you refer. This might indicate a 'busy' area which you would expect near a Divisional CP - or it might be guys just 'caught on camera'. The tone of the high object looks too dark for a telephone pole in my view, but I could be wrong. I have numbered the trees on the version below thus: If you look closely at #4, I think it's on the camera (near) side of the laneway. In fact, if I am not mistaken, it along with the gate post, appears to be holding up the wing section. I am also pretty sure there is an impact mark on this tree's bark as indicated on the zoomed extract below: If this is an impact mark it adds to the supposition that tree #4 is indeed on the near side and I am therefore a little less worried about the shadow profile on the extract below from NCAP_ACIU_US7GR_1857_4052 flown on the 12th June. A number of people have emailed me today about this apparent anomaly - and rightly so, the shadows indicate trees of varying heights while the 'Cows' ground photograph appears to show them of almost equal height. This is a serious hole in my theory Kevin has sent me some footage which he shot walking up the laneway last May and the ground to the left does indeed rise westwards from the hedge as we have seen in the GE 'street view' of the 'Calf Field' above. The question is - does the slope match the ground under the two 1944 cows? Below is a still from Kevin's footage: Initially I was expecting this footage to reinforce the apparent relatively steep slope away from the laneway but to my mind it's not quite as damaging to my theory as is the image from the 360° 'street view' camera. Below is a close up of the crash site which I am trying to marry with the 'Cows' photograph. The mark ups are just a bunch of questions running around in my head and should not be taken as conclusive proof of the 'Cows' crash site photograph having been taken at this location: If my theory is correct, the wreckage is shared on both sides of the laneway but the portions visible in both views are mutually exclusive - if you are viewing one, you cannot see the other. Hope this makes sense to the reader even if you don't subscribe to my theory Regards, Pat
Best guess with shadow analysis: Either about 0800 GMT with sun at Az. 95 deg - or - about 1615 GMT with sun at Az. 265 deg. That would mean the camera was pointing pretty close to either due South or due North. If you want to assume the first hedgerow is perpendicular to lens axis, then it runs about easty-westy. My guess is the camera is slightly closer to hedgerow on left side of photo, which, if correct, would swing the hedgerow counterclockwise a bit. As always, lots of opportunities for small errors which could compound. Maybe worst case (unless I've completely lost my touch) is +/- 10-12 deg. I don't think there's any way the hedgerow in question runs anywhere close to northy-southy. Anybody familiar with the neighborhood willing to guess orientation from the lean to the trees? Does seabreeze off the Channel tend to push them to the SW or do Atlantic storms push them to the east?
Hi Don, The prevailing wind is westerly off the Atlantic for most of the year until winter time when it swings north to east during cold spells. I get a sense that the far field field has a corner behind tree #3 just to the right of the two figures standing therein. If the bulk of the wreckage is in that field, I wonder if the scene would fit the Gayley crash site? Don't have access to my beloved aerial cover just now, but if I recall correctly there are pine trees on one or both hedgerows along the laneway south of the Holdy Battery position. How would you number crunching work over there? Thanks Don, Pat
Pat, I'll hunt around in the Holdy area tomorrow evening. I want to revise my previous calcs a little (more like educated guesses with numbers). It's really tough without any sharp edges, but looking at the shadows cast by the fuselage ribs, I now believe the low hedge may run as far towards the north as 75-255 deg - or - 105-285 deg. (for those perusing the recon photos for properly oriented hedges, visualize a very shallow 'X') For those who don't understand the mumbo jumbo - the length of a shadow cast on the ground is used to gauge the elevation of the sun - the angle above horizontal. Then an online calculator that factors in lat/long and date is used to find the two times during the day when the sun is at that particular elevation. The calculator shows an azimuth for the sun when it's at that elevation. Unless it's high noon, there are always two solutions: the sun is at the same elevation (angle above the horizon) around 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. for example. I agree on the far field. Looks like the corner is just to the right of #3. Not a huge field. Seems like these photo locations are usually found near major roads (for obvious reasons). Always aspiring to be like you when (if) I grow up: I can't help but think of Disney or Sesame Street characters when I see those five trees - especially #3 and #4 look like animals marching to the left. #4 looks like Oscar the Grouch (which I can also aspire to). At the very least, we know the sun never rises above about 67 deg at this latitude, so we know from Mr. Right Moo Cow's shadow that the right side of the image is not anywhere near due south (shadow is too shallow). Since it's northern hemisphere we also know the right side cannot be anywhere near due north. Hence the generally east-west conclusion for the low hedge - even before any number crunching.
Hi Don, Thanks, when you get the chance, I would be interested to know if there is a better match at Holdy. In the meantime, I am not giving up just yet on the 'Cows' crash site location. The shadow profile of the trees is, I believe, further complicated by the presence of an object in the eastern field as seen on the reconnaissance cover. If you look at the tree shadows within my blue bracket titled "Do shadows match 'Cows' crash site?" you can see that the longest shadow, which I first took to be caused by the top of a tree, has a lighter toned spot to the left, indicating more light is being reflected than by the surface of the field. This to me indicates an object resting on the field, rather than a tree (alone) is casting the shadow. The object is most likely another piece of glider wreckage. I'll do a screenshot to clarify over the weekend. Regards, Pat