Case #1 - Who Strafed Rommel's Car?

Discussion in 'German' started by Pat Curran, Feb 18, 2013.

  1. airforcedirector

    Guest

    Another aspect to consider, when pondering the possibility Rommel's staff car, or any staff car might still be detectable on the image: where are all the other destroyed vehicles? I believe some accounts have reflected on the number of damaged vehicles on almost all the roads. Squadron ORBs for allied units number in the hundreds the number of vehicles pilots destroyed over a period of two to four weeks. If there are the remnants of a destroyed staff car, in the image, then one would or should expect to see other debris and other vehicles, too.

    Sincerely,

    Dean
     
  2. Sean

    Sean Active Member
    Researcher

    Oct 24, 2012
    331
    2
    Male
    Battlefield guide
    Normandie
    Intriguing, Pat.
    It's about 3.5 miles from Vimoutiers (centre) which corresponds more closely, although not exactly, with Lang's description.
    There is a more sheltered route one could take from Livarot to Vimoutiers taling the Avenue de Neuville......:)

    Cheers,

    Sean
     
  3. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    Hi Sean,

    I have been trying to figure the contours of the main road and from what point you could see aircraft over Livarot - or rather know that they were over that town. I doubt if you could tell from the vicinity of Vimoutiers.

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  4. allan125

    allan125 Active Member
    Researcher

    Apr 20, 2013
    359
    0
    Male
    Retired - although it doesn't feel like it
    Cornwall/UK
    A good point Dean - obviously not in the manner of the debris left during the Falaise Gap strafing/shelling, but I would certainly expect to see other wrecks in the photos as the Germans certainly didn't have time to clear the roads, other than push the wrecks to the side, during this period, to keep a reasonable flow of traffic in the circumstances.

    Allan
     
  5. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    Hi Allan and Dean,

    I don't understand why you would be concerned as to the lack of wreckage...could it not be just chance that the visible section of road was devoid of wreckage?

    Looking at the zoomed extract of the Miller still...
    [​IMG]
    ...I think the mark at the eight o'clock position looks to be just debris from the road margin or hedgerow following a glancing impact from the overturned vehicle.

    I could be wrong though!

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  6. John Szweda

    John Szweda Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 25, 2012
    570
    9
    Male
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Hi Guys,
    I took another look at the 4 frames from the Miller/ Orbis publishing material, of which the above enlarged frame is from frame #1.
    I no longer think we are looking at is an overturned vehicle.
    What I also think now too is that frame #1 was as the gun camera turned on and just before the rounds started impacting near the vehicle. Take note that the road in each frame seems to get wider as the aircraft gets closer. I think what we considered was possibly an upside down vehicle in the zoomed in image, in fact is not for a few reasons.
    1) The vehicle does not seem to move from the first frames where it was engaged and its forward momentum would have moved the vehicle down the road.
    2) It is unlikely a pilot would have made another pass to confirm his "road kill" let alone from the exact same flightpath.

    I think it is just and odd shaped or covered vehicle that we have not sorted out from the still and what we see at the 8 o'clock position is a flaw on the negative.

    You may also want to view the British Pathe video again here: http://www.britishpathe.com/video/aerial-scenes-top-brass-confer/query/top+brass

    John
     
  7. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    Hi John,

    Here are the three stills from Miller footage dated 24th July:
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    I think Dean is correct; this does not seem to be the same location as that seen in the Orbis Publishing stills, unless the vehicle ended up much further down the road out of view in this BP footage.

    Then, as Dean also pointed out, we have two different dates to contend with!

    The 'look and feel' of the vehicle in the Orbis still #1 seems peculiar to my eye. It looks to be far too sharp when you compare it's lines with the adjacent hedgerows. Reminds me a lot of an over-sharpened modern digital image. I am not saying the object was airbrushed into the photo, just that it may have been enhanced in some way and in so doing, it's shape may have been changed.

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  8. John Szweda

    John Szweda Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 25, 2012
    570
    9
    Male
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Hi Pat,

    I still think we are looking at the same thing in the video and stills but it is that it was bad enhancements done in creating the 4 still images. I think Orbis Publishing over enhanced things such as the darkend fields, auto, and such.
    What was "photoshop" back in 1972, maybe a guy with some watercolors and a small brush? I focus on the trees (right) and scrubs (left) nearer the top of the images. They seem consistant to the video.
    Just my opinion...

    John
     
  9. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    OK John I see it now;

    The fourth still at bottom right in the Orbis grouping seems to be an extract from BP still #6 (or close by). This means that not all of the film is shown in the clip.

    I don't think it was Orbis who altered the image; it was probably done for the original press presentation with Lt. Miller in attendance so that the newspaper photos would pick up the vehicle. Probably nothing underhand intended, but it does make the job of identifying the vehicle type more difficult.

    In BP still #6 above, there appears to be a house running parallel to the road with a lean-to shed at the near gable. I don't like parallel; too many candidates but the lean-to, if still in existence, might bring this one home.

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  10. airforcedirector

    Guest

    Allan
    Clearing debris to unblock roads was one thing, but retrieval and towing is something entirely different - something I imagine they would have deemed of the lowest priority. I have also read many, many accounts of the sickeningly sweet odour of thousands of dead horses, and the incredible infestation of wasps. These images don't yet convey these aspects and the debris, that was the Falaise Gap experience - not yet, anyway.:)

    [hr]
    One aspect I would be interested in hearing your viewpoints about, concerns property lines. In references that cite Rommel's crash near the Gatehouse, one cannot help but notice the property lines that approach the thoroughfare from the left are not perpendicular, but the Miller footage clearly shows property lines that are perpendicular. If one is to accredit Miller with the attack on Rommel in the location that has been proposed by Lang and others (near the Gatehouse) then these property lines are a problem, because in the Miller footage they are at the wrong angle.

    Dean
     
  11. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    Hi Dean,

    I can say with some certainty that the Miller footage is not the gatehouse location. There is no good match anywhere on the N179 between Livarot and Vimoutiers. If I am correct, then either the strafing location at the gatehouse is incorrect and Miller is still in contention, or else Miller is unlikely to be the pilot involved.

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  12. airforcedirector

    Guest

    Hi Pat, Thank you for this. Major-General Rohmer is quite adamant about who he saw. Since he was not armed for a response, however, all he could do was "call it in to Kenway". He says "Kenway" acknowledged his report, and that left Rohmer with the impression a Spitfire had been dispatched to go after what Rohmer reported to be a very high-value ground target. Consquently, for the rest of his life, Rohmer continues to try and nail down who exactly got Rommel. He is in Florida, right now, but he answers all my e-mails. He is really unhappy with me, right now, but I'm working on him. As you can well imagine, at age 91 or 92 he is not interested in fielding any questions, and every question he gets from me he only sees assumptions, where there are none (not yet anyway! :0) )

    Sincererly,

    Dean
     
  13. allan125

    allan125 Active Member
    Researcher

    Apr 20, 2013
    359
    0
    Male
    Retired - although it doesn't feel like it
    Cornwall/UK
    hello Dean

    I do not understand your latest comment - "Since he was not armed for a response, however, all he could do was "call it in to Kenway"...." as you have already stated in a previous post "Rohmer was flying in a 430 Squadron armed recce P-51", and it was not the business of the RAF/RCAF etc. in 2TAF, or even previously in Army Co-operation Command, to send out fighter recce aircraft not armed for a response, especially one on an "armed recce"?!

    Another well known Canadian fighter recce. squadron - 414 - despite not being a fighter unit as such, frequent engagements had ensured, and while “defending” themselves, the unit’s pilots had claimed 28 victories, so why would 430 send out pilots "not armed for a response" on an "armed recce" - it doesn't stack up?

    regards

    Allan
     
  14. Pat Curran

    Pat Curran Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2012
    2,547
    11
    Co. Kilkenny, Ireland
    Hi Allan,

    The extract below from page 10 of his book 'Generally Speaking: The Memoirs of Major-General Richard Rohmer' appears to explain why Mustang 1 reconnaissance pilots did not attack ground targets, despite flying fully armed aircraft:

    [​IMG]
    Apparently these specialised recon pilots were too valuable to risk in a ground attack role and were provided with armed aircraft in order to fight their way out of a tight spot in the air.

    I wonder if other pilots would agree with this line of reasoning :D

    Regards,

    Pat
     
  15. allan125

    allan125 Active Member
    Researcher

    Apr 20, 2013
    359
    0
    Male
    Retired - although it doesn't feel like it
    Cornwall/UK
    Thanks Pat

    I had covered off whether he was acting under orders in my earlier piece to Dean "Can you please clarify the situation with regard to Major-General (ret) Rohmer as to whether he was alone, and, as he has spent his life trying to learn who actually got Rommel, why he did not attack himself - had he been instructed to attack MET etc. if seen, or simply report back, or knowing the importance of the target could he ignore any orders to the contrary and take action himself, and if so, why he didn't?"

    I would rather see the official 2TAF document with this instruction than accept 100% a piece in the memoirs of Major-General (ret) Rohmer, not that I am doubting the accuracy of the piece, perhaps Dean can supply a copy of this 2TAF document through his RCAF sources as I know that the Canadians have a different document retention/publication policy to here in the UK with certain items - as you can see from my piece just above this - the equally valuable armed recce. pilots of 414 Squadron RCAF had 28 air victories whilst fulfilling this role, and all fighters or fighter recce. aircraft were fully equipped to fight where required.

    As we ran out of the Allison engined Mustang I we had Packard-Merlin engined Mustang III's available, and later the Mustang IV, and 414 re-equipped with the Spitfire IX in August '44, and 430 changed to the F.R. version of the more powerful Spitfire XIV in December '44.

    regards

    Allan
     
  16. airforcedirector

    Guest

    Having seen the Trainor cinegun film stills, and the 3rd target (staff car), I'm convinced it is not Rommel's car because you guys have undoubtedly found the location where Trainor fired on the car, and it is far too close to Dietrich's HQ in St-Pierre-sur-Dives, and far too distant from where everyone believes Rommel was attacked (near Ste-Foy-de-Montgommery). However, when I look at this attached newspaper DATED 20 JULY 1944 I ran two scenarios through my mind: this is Rommel's car and Dietrich is part of a propaganda campaign to make sure no one knows it's Rommel's car, OR, this is Dietrich's car and this is the one Trainor fired at sometime around 17:30 hrs 17 July 1944.

    The placard on the front passenger side indicates it is "SS" - meaning this is probably not Rommel's car, but Dietrich's car. The newspaper makes that claim. I did a rough translation of the right-hand-side page:

    Field Marshal Rommel and SS Group Leader and Panzer General of the Waffen SS Sepp Dietrich look critically at the camera, she caught during a short walk. Sepp Dietrich is today Commanding General of the SS Panzer Corps "Liebstandarte".

    Sepp Dietric also has (his) "Luftspaher" (spotter), his first aide searches the sky for low-flying aircraft.

    That comes before! On one of his trips to the front made almost daily the car of the upper group Fuhrer Sepp Dietrich has been shot by fighter-bombers on fire. But by quickly grab his escort and French civilians the fire is erased and the ride... (soon continues)

    Wehn low-flying attack the windshield of the car was shot. Sepp Dietrich had can get out in time I would eat penetrate. When he said afterwards, laughing, hatt's caught me what fehit them? On its front drive Sepp Dietrich meets an SS man who has been left in his car. After a brief survey about the facts he takes the young soldiers in his car to save him from a long walk...

    [hr]
    Hi Allan, I really don't know the answer myself and it does seem odd. I'm only going on what Major-General Rohmer is sending me. I ordered a copy of his book from amazon two days ago. It should come next week. I really like what all you guys are doing, on this site. I agree with your questions about Rohmer's memoir. By the way, portraying oneself as a high-value asset not to be put at risk attacking low-value targets, is a lot more romantic than saying "I was out of gas"! :p
     
  17. Ellen Duinker

    Ellen Duinker Active Member
    Researcher

    Jan 6, 2015
    59
    2
    A little anecdotal evidence to add to the maps/satellite images/hard facts.
    On a recent visit to Vimoutiers, we acquired a historical booklet titled “L’annee 1944 a Vimoutiers”, edited in 2014 by the local Historical Society. In addition to the many pictures of Vimoutiers’ destruction during the June 1944 bombings, there are several pages dedicated to Field Marshall Rommel’s strafing, ostensibly gleaned from local citizen interviews.
    Since it is written in French, I submitted the pages of interest to Alliance Francais for translation.
    I recognize it is not as convincing as lat/long. I can forward the English text once received, unless you wish the French version now.
    Ellen
     
  18. airforcedirector

    Guest

    I just thought of something that you may find very interesting, Pat. Do you recall the reason Mustangs proved so successful? I think the answer is key to your important question regarding the value of the Mustang pilot. The answer may be their legs. The Mustang was designed to provide the same if not better killing power as the Spitfire, but with longer legs - more endurance - greater range. The Mustangs were able to escort the bombers much deeper into enemy territory than ever before. Now this all makes sense to me. I, too, was a bit put off by what seems like a bit of an arrogant response in Rohmer's explanation, but the Mustang's endurance and range means they were of much greater value, the longer they were in the air and over the battlefield, calling in the targets. Imagine if they were told to engage a ground target - there would be significant risk they would only see one target and then be shot down. That's not good return for investment. I hope you see what it is I am trying to explain.

    Sincerely,

    Dean:rolleyes:
    [hr]
    I would like to implore all of the experts, with the utmost respect, to reconsider their conclusions about the Sepp Dietrich staff car picture. Just for a moment, ponder the importance of the propaganda machine, during the war. Would it have been important to conceal the fact Rommel had been harmed, if not eliminated? Would it not have been the job of the Nazi propaganda machine to snuff out any rumours about Rommel being injured or killed, in the immediate aftermath of the shooting? How do you suppose they would have gone about such a monumental task, especially knowing that Rommel was cared for by French medical specialists for a time. In contrast, why would any German commander want to show to his countrymen that he (Dietrich) had been attacked (somewhat successfully) by allied fighter-bombers? First of all, I think it is extraordinary that a German General would go public with confirmation of an enemy's success; and, secondly, because this is so extraordinary, I believe we may in fact be looking at Rommel's car if only because of the need to deceive the public including the enemy as to whose car was so badly damaged. The date of this publication is certainly supportive of this immediate need to quash any rumours (20 July 1944).

    Food for thought!


     
  19. John Szweda

    John Szweda Administrator
    Staff Member

    Oct 25, 2012
    570
    9
    Male
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Hi Dean,

    I understand what you are saying and i'll let others speak up with their opinions but if Rommel went to Sainte-Pierre-sur-Dives to meet with Sepp Dietrich, why would Sepp Dietrich be on the road that day?
    Maybe we need to find out where the First Panzer Division HQ was.

    As for the magazine photos with Dietrich, in my opinion the background just does not match the "probable" location provided by other historic sources.

    Maybe others know the location of the Sepp Dietrich incident, or it could be discussed in another thread. I think the Halte sign (train station?) pictured in one of the photos might be a location we could locate.

    John
     
  20. Jpz4

    Jpz4 Active Member
    Researcher

    Oct 24, 2012
    362
    6
    Hi guys, although this thread is not really about a topic that interests me, there are a few things I found noticeable in the last few pages.
    First of all Clostermann makes several errors regarding details on the German troops. These are the kind of errors that make me suspicious about his understanding of the German side.

    The page from the German magazine is indeed about Dietrich's car. Dean's translation is a bit rough, but it did get the important stuff right.
    BTW, I noticed there is a unit symbol above the licence plate. The shield with oakleaves is rather typical SS too. See attachment.

    The fact the magazine is dated 20 July does not mean much. Actually it is fairly unlikely photos made it in a few days to the presses. It's quite possible the Dietrich incident took place one week before or even earlier. It's quite possible news on what happened to Rommel simply came in too late.
    I don't see any evidence for a cover up. Fact is the attack on Dietrich is being presented as an allied failure. His car was hit, but not knocked out and the people inside came away cleany. Point made: allied air attacks are not so dangerous after all. The caption of the photo on the left page pretty much starts this 'framing'.

    Dietrich did not command a division at this time. He commanded the I.SS-Pz.Korps. During this period their HQ was at Urville (s. of Chinteaux), not at St. Pierre s. Dives. (this is based on original German maps, and I could check the AOK7 KTB for it if needed. Although it is more likely this info is in the Pz.Gruppe West files which I do not have.).

    Or to be more precise:
    27 June-7 July: Clinchamps-sur-Orne
    8-25 July: Urville
    moved south on 26 July.

    I guess it is possible Rommel and Dietrich arranged to meet at St. Pierre sur Dives. (The HQ of the 21.Pz.Div. had been there at one time, and it was an import road junction). But I've seen nothing to suggest the I.SS-Pz.K. had its HQ there, as every publication on the strafing of Rommel seems to say.

    My point with all this? Are people just parroting what someone has stated once, without ever questioning it? At least go back to German sources and skip all the assumptions, or at least say that is what's happening. If there are original records showing the HQ was there, someone please show me. On a topic like this I don't think assumptions are a good idea. If a simple detail like this is incorrect....

    BTW, I do find it interesting that Rommel decided to return to his HQ, rather than his forward command post just east of Falaise.
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page