[?] Saving Private Ryan German Vehicles
L. Lee
here is some vehicle questions.
1) The Tiger I tank used was a converted T-34. You can tell from
the tracks employed. What about the coupla ? Did they use
the early version or late version ?
2) Was that a Wespe or late-model Marder III used in an
over-head shot of street fighting ? I am tempted to say
a Marder III due to the 75mm gun and the back-end fighting
compartment... but could not see the chasis
3) A motorcycle-tractor (kittenkraft ?)was also used...
seemed to be genuine.
4) Was there any Hanomag half-tracks (251A, B, C, or D).
5) Was there any SdKfz 250s (old and Neu models )
Leon.
Martin Rapier
says...
>Looking at the movie ads and books on "Saving Private Ryan"...
>here is some vehicle questions.
{snip}
>2) Was that a Wespe or late-model Marder III used in an
> over-head shot of street fighting ? I am tempted to say
> a Marder III due to the 75mm gun and the back-end fighting
> compartment... but could not see the chasis
Probably the one they had left over from 'The English Patient'. It was a
Marder.
>3) A motorcycle-tractor (kittenkraft ?)was also used...
> seemed to be genuine.
Ditto.
Cheers.
Martin.
--
Martin Rapier, Database Administrator
Corporate Information & Computing Services.
University of Sheffield Tel 0114 222 1137
The opinions expressed here may be those of my employer, or they may not.
http://rhino.shef.ac.uk:3001/mr-home/
Tim Marshall
contacted Porsche (wrong company, we all know) to make two Tigers for the
movie?
If L. Lee, below, is correct I am in big trouble!!!! I have been telling
my buddies, all history addicts like myself the above and we are all
geared up to attend the opening this Friday...if it turns out to be a T-34
(like what they did in Kelly's hero's - which was a good try, BTW) they
will probably throw popcorn at me before pummelling me to death! 8)
On 21 Jul 1998, L. Lee wrote:
> Looking at the movie ads and books on "Saving Private Ryan"...
> here is some vehicle questions.
>
Bruce Burden
:
: Didn't someone state in an earlier discussion on movies that Spielberg had
: contacted Porsche (wrong company, we all know) to make two Tigers for the
: movie?
Be prepared to be pummelled. The "Tigers" are actually
T-34 hulls with doctored uppers, just like "Kelly's Heroes".
And, the "Tiger" sound effects aren't Tigers/Maybach's,
either. I believe it is actually a Centurian ARV (diesel)
making that noise.
In early July I had the good fortune to be able to visit
probably the largest armor collection in the US, and the
owner was contacted for sound effects for the Marder III,
the Tiger, and one other vehicle that I can't remember off
hand.
Why the producers waited so long to get sound effects
is baffling, since Saumur has running Tigers.
Bruce
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX.
- Thuganlitha
The Power and the Prophet
Robert Don Hughes
DHeitm8612
<<
.....If L. Lee, below, is correct I am in big trouble!!!! I have been telling
my buddies, all history addicts like myself the above and we are all
geared up to attend the opening this Friday...if it turns out to be a T-34
(like what they did in Kelly's hero's - which was a good try, BTW) they
will probably throw popcorn at me before pummelling me to death! 8)
>>
Actually the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes was a British Comwell IV or V both of
which have a similar road-wheel arrangement to the Tiger I, and have a
strikingly similar silhouette to the Tiger I even though it is a smaller tank.
I didn't take much to make a believable Tiger out of one. The T-34 and the
Cromwell IV/V have a similar track/roadwheel arrangement and both lack the
return bogey wheels allowing the track to ride the rear on the top of the
roadwheels.
Keith Heitmann
dheit...@aol.com
Stalag 13 Aviation Links
http://users.aol.com/dheitm8612/page2.htm
This week's update includes: 91 new links, 6 updates and 24 deletions.
Total links listed: 6544.
Mark A. Serafin
Bruce Burden (bru...@bga.com) wrote:
:
: Why the producers waited so long to get sound effects
: is baffling, since Saumur has running Tigers.
There was a rumour that one of these Tigers shows up in the movie
- anyone know if this actually occurred?
Guess I'll just have to wait for tomorrow to find out...
--
Mark Serafin | "Imagine you were an idiot. Now imagine you
I speak only for myself | were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."
| - Mark Twain
Mike Woods
: In early July I had the good fortune to be able to visit
: probably the largest armor collection in the US,
and
Hmmm, can you tell us a little more?
-- Mike Woods
Jim Erickson
Panther) tanks so soon after D-Day. It's my understanding that most of
the high quality German armor was deployed in the British and Canadian
sectors in the immediate aftermath of the invasion.
Jim Erickson
Robert
Perhaps this Saumur is a private collector.
It's not unheard of. There's a wealthy fellow in
Portola Valley, California who has several restored types
of Shermans, half tracks, an ambulance, and even a military
crane on a rail car. He employs an Englishman to maintain
the collection.
Still, "running Tigers" i.e. more than one? That would be news.
- Robert :-)
Phil
I wondered about that also
Did the 2nd SS Panzer div get to Normandy by June 13th?
I thought they were strafed heavily on the way from Oradur.
And I think the 2nd SS went into action near Villers-Bocage
Phil
Jim Erickson <jw...@columbia.edu> wrote in article
<6pcvtq$qs8$1...@nntp6.u.washington.edu>...
Phil Mc Carty
home of their Bovington/Aberdeen Proving Ground equivalent collection?
Just a thought..
Phil
JDupre5762
>which have a similar road-wheel arrangement to the Tiger I, and have a
>strikingly similar silhouette to the Tiger I even though it is a smaller
>tank.
>I didn't take much to make a believable Tiger out of one. The T-34 and the
>Cromwell IV/V have a similar track/roadwheel arrangement and both lack the
>return bogey wheels allowing the track to ride the rear on the top of the
>roadwheels.
>
>Keith Heitmann
I would love to see a source for that comment as I have always believed that
the Kelly's Tigers were made out of T-34's which made sense since it was filmed
in Yugoslavia.
John Dupre'
Jay
>Actually the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes was a British Comwell IV or V both of
>which have a similar road-wheel arrangement to the Tiger I, and have a
>strikingly similar silhouette to the Tiger I even though it is a smaller tank.
The Kelly's Heros tank is clearly a T-34 (probably /85). The position
of the "turret" and the configuration of the running gear is a genuine
clue. As well, considering the time that the film was recorded (as
well as location), it is vastly more likely that the dressed up tank
was a T-34 than a Cromwell.
Jay
Ottawa, Ontario
Remove the wildcard when replying by email.
Edgar Driesen
JDupre5762 wrote:
> >Actually the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes was a British Comwell IV or V both
> >(snip)
> >Keith Heitmann
>
> I would love to see a source for that comment as I have always believed that
> the Kelly's Tigers were made out of T-34's which made sense since it was filmed
> in Yugoslavia.
>
> John Dupre'
Discussions weather the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes is a T34 or a
Cromwell are always returning in this newsgroup. Anyway in my opinion
the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes is a T34. Look at the tracks and you
can see the typical triangle-shaped items which keep the track at his
place. These were first used on the T3-tank designed by J. Walter
Christie. This tank was the basis for sovjet tanks as the BT-2, BT-7
and eventually the T34. The Cromwell (suspension) can also be seen as
a descended of the Christie T3-tank however it does not have these
typical triangle-shaped items on the tracks.
Cheers, Edgar
Nijmegen, the Netherlands
Bruce Burden
Edgar Driesen (e...@telekabel2.nl) wrote:
: > >Actually the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes was a British Comwell IV or V both
: > >(snip)
: > >Keith Heitmann
: >
: Discussions weather the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes is a T34 or a
: Cromwell are always returning in this newsgroup. Anyway in my opinion
: the Tiger I in Kelly's Heroes is a T34. Look at the tracks and you
:
Edgar is referring to the track drive teeth. Another telling
point is that the Cromwell, like the Tiger, used a differential
steering system. The vehicles in Kelly's Heroes clearly used
skid steering. This is a trademark of the T-34.
Another characteristic of the T-34 is that the three rear-
most roadwheels are spaced evenly, with a larger gap between
the first and second set of swingarms, and the largest gap between
the second and third set of swing arms.
By contrast, the Cromwell had even gaps between the front and
rear pair of roadwheels, and even gaps between the second and third
and third and fourth set of roadwheels.
Edbert
The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers. Aside
from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the Panthers?
I saw two Marders and what looked like it may have been a Hetzer or
something but no trace of a Panther. Most of the equipment was VERY
authentic, how could this have been allowed to slip?
Steve Guthrie
>
> The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers.
I thought he said 'Panzers'
Steve
JDupre5762
>from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
>ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the Panthers?
>From: "Edbert" <edb...@io.com>
What I saw was that after the Kettenrad with Edward Burns on board comes down
the street to the bridge they all wait to see if the tanks take the bait. Then
clearly seen in silhoute( sp?) is a Panther moving across the end of the street
and out of the scene. Then a Tiger moves up and turns down the street. You
never hear of the Panthers after that. Presumably they moved down to find some
other crossing or were somehow delayed in supporting the Germans at the bridge.
I couldn't tell if the Panther was real or a replica but would assume it was
dummied up out of a T-34.
John Dupre'
Bill Shatzer
"Edbert" (edb...@io.com) writes:
> The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers. Aside
> from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
> ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the Panthers?
> I saw two Marders and what looked like it may have been a Hetzer or
> something but no trace of a Panther. Most of the equipment was VERY
> authentic, how could this have been allowed to slip?
There is no eason to suppose that this fellow's recognition skills
were noticiably better than the American pilots who claimed that
they were shooting down Messerschmitts over Burma and Guadacanal.
The guy goofed and misidentified what he thought he saw - not an
uncommon occurance in combat.
Cheers and all,
--
Bill Shatzer- bsha...@orednet.org -or- aw...@freenet.carleton.ca
"Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say 'ni'
at will to old ladies."
Eric & Linda Gross
>>The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers. Aside
>>from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
>>ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the Panthers?
Well, it was equally "clear" to me that he said two Tigers and two
*panzers.* Though I thought that slightly odd since, up to that point,
reports and dialogue had been given in fairly precise terms (types of mines,
designation of weapons, etc.) it is not outside the realm of the possible,
as during WWII the term "panzers" was sometimes used as a term for any
German tank or armored vehicle of unknown designation; the sniper may not
have been able to, or known, exactly what kind of armor he was looking at.
Tom Adkins
>
> Edbert wrote:
> >
> > The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers.
>
I agree. When I saw it I thought he said "2 Tigers, 2 Panzers, ..."
i.e., he was identifying the Tigers specifically.
Tom
remove NOSPAM to reply
--
++++++++++
* Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
Jay
>I agree. When I saw it I thought he said "2 Tigers, 2 Panzers, ..."
>i.e., he was identifying the Tigers specifically.
Just saw the film today, so it's fresh in my mind. As Hanks translates
the hand signals he says "two tiger tanks, two panzer tanks..."
Clear as a bell.
tur...@yourinter.net
> BTW, someone posted that a Panther tank appeared briefly in the background
> when the Germans started to enter the city. Did anyone see a Panther tank
> in the final city scene? (The only tanks that I remember seeing were Tigers)
>
> --Mike
>
>
Yes. I just got back from the film, which I thought was terrible -- somebody
ought to make a law against Spielberg making films about serious subjects --
and the first tank which appears in the assault on the bridge appeared to be
a Panther, which is briefly glimpsed from the side as it crosses from left to
right at the far end of the road. As I recall, at that point one character
turns and remarks that the Germans failed to take the bait. Two Tigers and
some kind of tank destroyer (which I couldn't identify offhand) were the
vehicles used in the assault.
Mike Turton
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
B J Gray
>BTW, someone posted that a Panther tank appeared briefly in the background
>when the Germans started to enter the city. Did anyone see a Panther tank
>in the final city scene? (The only tanks that I remember seeing were Tigers)
Yes, I thought I saw that too, which confused me because I was sure that
Hanks had said panzers, not panthers. When I saw the Panther silhouette
I just thought I had heard him wrong. I still mean to see the movie a second
time and will look for that Panther moving across the background.
Cheers,
Buell
Steve Michaels
>
> > BTW, someone posted that a Panther tank appeared briefly in the background
> > when the Germans started to enter the city. Did anyone see a Panther tank
> > in the final city scene? (The only tanks that I remember seeing were Tigers)
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes. I just got back from the film, which I thought was terrible -- somebody
> ought to make a law against Spielberg making films about serious subjects --
> and the first tank which appears in the assault on the bridge appeared to be
> a Panther, which is briefly glimpsed from the side as it crosses from left to
> right at the far end of the road. As I recall, at that point one character
> turns and remarks that the Germans failed to take the bait. Two Tigers and
> some kind of tank destroyer (which I couldn't identify offhand) were the
> vehicles used in the assault.
>
> Mike Turton
It was a Marder. I personally thought the movie was excellent. I don't
get choked up from movies but this one had me. What about it was so bad
you want a law passed? The history channel had two vets who landed on
the 1st and 2nd waves of Omaha and they said that it was a accurate
portrayal of the chaos and carnage of battle. If it was just the plot
then I guess opinions vary.
--
Steve Michaels
Company A 1st Battalion
19th US Infantry, Regulars By God!
http://members.xoom.com/BillyYank
Generals can do anything, there's nothing so much like a god on earth as
a General on a battlefield. Jeff Daniels "Gettysburg" 1993
WirbelW
>- anyone know if this actually occurred?
Our group of friends was abuzz with the rumor that there were going to be
restored (or Saumur) Tiger I's in SPR. (We even heard that these restored
Tigers might be in the reenactment of the Battle of the Bulge in January 1999
in Pennsylvania.) I saw SPR last night and, despite the numerous and obvious
merits of the movie, I feel I must point out the following:
= The "Tiger I's" were clearly T-34 chassis/wheels/tracks with the upper
structure modified to simulate the real thing reasonably well (same concept as
in Kelly's Heroes);
= At this stage in the war, the Tigers should have all been equipped with the
lower profile late model commander's cupola;
= also, Tigers at this stage in the war in Normandy would have had steel rimmed
road wheels rather than the dish-shaped rubber-tired road wheels-however, my
compliments to their consultants for at least covering up the T-34 road wheels
and using simulated early Tiger wheels;
= My compliments to their consultants for using zimmerit anti-magnetic coating
(in the correct "horizontal" pattern) on the Tigers and for not painting the
damn things dark gray (the movie actually seems to have used dark yellow with a
lot -perhaps a bit much-of reddish brown and dark green overspray lines);
= The German halftracks, BMW sidecar motorcycle, and Kettenkraftrad looked good
-but can anyone confirm those "Panthers" were in fact Marder III's with 75 mm
guns and forward mounted engines (some had rear mounted engines) on Czech 38(t)
chassis/wheels?;
= The Heer and Waffen SS uniforms were very good, but every German without a
helmet had a buzz cut (made them look more evil), whereas photographic evidence
shows that almost every German and (most Americans) at the time had hair long
or fairly long on top and buzz cut on the sides-similar to today's "fade" (I
think) style.
In answer to another post asking about the 2nd SS facing American troops so
soon after the invasion: Literature shows that the 2nd SS arrived on the line
in Normandy north of St. Lo in mid June 1944 and did in fact face American
forces that had landed on Omaha and Utah beaches. SPR has the final battle for
the bridge and Capt. Miller's death occurring on June 13, 1944, so the timing
cannot be that far off (perhaps a week early if at all.)
Best regards,
Nick
Ozone
directors cut is out sometime next year, there may be the Panthers. Can only
hope.
Doug
--
When replying, due to spamers, remove XXX after the @.
Edbert wrote in message <6q05c9$b...@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>...
>
>
>The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers. Aside
>from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
>ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the
Panthers?
Aaron Day
>
>The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers. Aside
>from the errors in appearance of the Tigers they were still the "realest"
>ones I've ever seen in fictional footage. But what happened to the Panthers?
>I saw two Marders and what looked like it may have been a Hetzer or
>something but no trace of a Panther. Most of the equipment was VERY
>authentic, how could this have been allowed to slip?
The sniper guy refered to the tanks as "Panzer type". I find it odd that
this term was used by veteran infantry to describe a Marder and some
sort of assault gun (possible Stug IV ?). There were no Panthers in this
movie. The tank which "didn't take the bait" was the assault gun which
returns later on.
The reason no Panthers exist in this movie probably has to do more with
the fact that few normal people (people who wouldn't read this newsgroup
for ex) have even heard of the Panther, while most weekend war buffs
have at least know of the Tigers existance.
Aaron
Steve Michaels
> Edbert wrote in message <6q05c9$b...@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>...
> The sniper guy refered to the tanks as "Panzer type". I find it odd that
> this term was used by veteran infantry to describe a Marder and some
> sort of assault gun (possible Stug IV ?). There were no Panthers in this
> movie. The tank which "didn't take the bait" was the assault gun which
> returns later on.
Most US infantry referred to German armor as panzers, even veterans. The
sniper was signalling to Hanks that he saw 'panzers' not a Panther.
NLRaffaell
>> The sniper clearly said that there were two Tigers and two Panthers.
>
>
>
>
In the Book, on page 284, Jackson signal to Capt. Miller 2 Tigers,2 Panzers.
COMMANDE
How many infantry? this I was Really confused on I thought the Sniper
said 20, but, I saw way more!
Alex Von Kaufman
moment.
Alex Von Kaufman
COMMANDE wrote in message <6rtdd2$pp4$1...@nntp6.u.washington.edu>...