Allied anti-tank measures in 1918

[David]

The Allies on the Western Front did not have as widespread, unified or organised an approach to anti tank measures as did the German Army. They did not face the same threat. The number of tanks available to the German forces (indigenous A7Vs and beutepanzers combined) was but a meagre tithe of the Allied tank force. Moreover it was a wasting asset as the forward momentum of the Allies in the latter half of 1918 meant that much fewer damaged British heavy tanks (if any) fell into enemy hands. The evacuation of the Charlroi tank overhaul and refit facility back to Germany in the face of the Allied advance would only make matters worse. Nevertheless the German tanks could pose a tactical threat if not a strategic one. Moreover there was always the possibility that the Germans might start to produce tanks on a large scale.
Allied troops do not appear to have had formal anti tank training and appear to have been initially taken by surprise by the appearance of German tanks. This was probably exacerbated by Allied propaganda that exaggerated the tank’s superiority against infantry
Whilst there are records of some anti tank measures being ordered at a senior level most accounts of Allied anti tank actions have more than a whiff of ‘ad hocery’ (otherwise known as “make it up as you go along”) and were probably organised at battalion or even company level. Certainly after the first appearance of German tanks at St Quentin (March 21^st 1918) little or no information or instruction about German tanks had been passed to British tank crews so that when Frank Mitchell’s tank came up against an A7V over a month later he was unaware of what an A7V looked like or how it was armed. It is probable that the infantry and artillery were equally uninformed. Given this it is hard to be prescriptive, what was used in one place or by one unit was not necessarily used by others. What I have attempted to do in the following paragraphs is to indicate what weapons and techniques were available to the Allies and provide instances (if any) where these are known to have been used.
In describing such instances one is handicapped in that many of the original accounts do not specify whether the tank being attacked was an A7V or a beutepanzer and, given the German habit of often using both types in the same action the time and place cannot be used as a distinguishing feature. It should therefore be taken that whenever the term ‘German tank’ is used this could be either kind.
If all of this sounds bitty and piecemeal then its because that’s just what the Allied anti tank approach was.
Armour piercing bullets
The British government adopted armour piercing .303 inch rounds in 1915, for much the same reason as the K round was put into service in the German Army (dealing with sniper shields). A number of varieties were produced, including; Armour Piercing Mks W Mk 1 and W Mk 1 IP (these continued in production up until and through WW2). Such ammunition was also available to Australian, Canadian, Indian and New Zealand troops, Indeed it was also manufactured in Australia, Canada and India during WW1. The bullets had a hardened steel core in a lead jacket. All armour piercing rounds in service with British and Commonwealth forces had a green tip. It would appear that Remington made an armour piercing round for use by American forces, this had a black tip. Atelier de Construction de Puteaux in France is known to have produced armour piercing rounds in 1918.
The Allies certainly had armoured piercing bullets available and there are reports of a British issue of such rounds in 1918 during the great German offensive of that year. The performance of such ammunition is not known but one must assume it to be comparable with the German K round. It is not known if Allied infantry actually engaged German tanks with this ammunition.
Anti tank rifles
The Allies did not manufacture anti tank rifles at this time but British troops are recorded as using captured German AT rifles against Beutepanzers (at Niergenies in October 1918). This was a situation where British troops were firing captured German guns at Germans in captured British tanks! The Australians were familiar enough with this weapon to give it a nickname (peashooter) so that it is possible that some of their units also had these available. American troops are known to have captured a significant number of German AT rifles but what use, if any, was made of these remains unknown.
Use of German AT rifles would have been somewhat unofficial as captured weapons were supposed to be ‘turned in’ Consequently there are unlikely to be any formal records of their use by Allied troops. There may be further detail in individuals’ accounts, diaries and letters.
Rifle grenades
In 1918 Britain produced an anti tank rifle grenade, the No 44 grenade, this was cylindrical tin with a domed top and a steel rod on the base for fitting down a standard SMLE rifle. It had a contact fuse and was fired using a blank cartridge. The charge was 11.5 ounces of amatol. The grenade was steadied in flight by a canvas skirt, which ensured that it struck contact fuse first. Between 15,000 and 20,000 were made and less that 10,000 were in stores when the grenade was taken out of service in 1919 which indicates that it was issued in some numbers. There are no records of its use and effectiveness, however given the lack of success of the single German ‘potato masher’ grenade against MK IVs it does seem too light a charge to have been effective against beutepanzers.

The French produced at least 3 types of anti tank rifle grenades; 30mm, 40 mm and 75 mm, all fin stabilised. The 75 mm (3 inch) model resembling a miniature version of the German WW2 device intended to give extra punch to the 35mm anti tank gun. It certainly looks heavy enough to give a tank trouble but one wonders about the range (and accuracy).
The Americans also had an antitank rifle grenade the M9 AT (not to be confused with today’s M9 grenade launcher) that looked very similar to the French grenades but I have not been unable to determine if was actually in service in 1918.
Trench guns
The French decided that the 37 mm Puteaux trench gun would also suffice as an anti tank gun. At Reims on June 1^st 1918 a concealed battery of such guns knocked out a German tank. In the same battle a second concealed battery drove off a second German tank. The French appear to have adopted the tactic of surrounding some heavy machine gun positions with dug in and concealed trench guns. The machine gun positions were designated targets for the German tanks and so became the bait in a tank ambush. Apart from its relatively low muzzle velocity this gun had many of the attributes of an infantry anti tank gun; a low profile, easy portability and a small crew. It was also adopted by the American Expeditionary Force but it is not known if it was used in an anti tank role by US troops.

Field guns
Field guns using direct fire were a (if not the) major killer of German tanks. All Allied divisional artillery had anti tank work as one of their general roles (amongst many others) but some guns were specifically tasked for this job alone. The diary of Bert Cox, a gunner in the Canadian horse artillery (60th Battery Canadian field artillery 14th Artillery Brigade, 5th Canadian Division under the British 2nd Army ), reveals that for part of 1918 he was part of a five man anti tank gun crew in a position near Vimy. The gun may have been a 13 pounder firing a 3-inch calibre (76mm) 12.5-lb (5.7kg) shell . It had a maximum range of 5,900 yards (5.4km), with this distance being covered in a little over 10 seconds. There is no indication that Bert Cox’s gun ever saw action against German tanks.
Accounts of German tank actions suggest that a significant number were knocked out by Allied horse artillery (British 13 or 18 pounders, French 75s). Unfortunately there is insufficient information as to the degree to which these were specifically dedicated anti tank guns as opposed to general field artillery that happened to be in the right place.
It is possible that some (or even most) of the Allied anti tank actions were purely reactive, field guns being temporally assigned a specific anti tank task. 2/Lt Frank Mitchell describes how 2 hours after his tank’s duel with an A7V ( April 23^rd 1918) a British 18 pounder arrived to deal with the German tank (by then capsized and evacuated). The following extract describes the conversation that took place between Mitchell and the artillery officer;
‘ The youthful officer on horseback addressed them (Mitchell and his crew) excitedly
“I say old man, I’ve been sent forward to knock out a German tank. Is that the blighter over there?” he pointed in the direction of the knocked out tank.
“You’re a bit late,” Frank replied laconically. “It’s already been knocked out.”
“Oh,” said the horseman. “I see. Well …… thank you very much.” And turning his team about he galloped back the way he had come.’
This does not suggest a high degree of anti tank preparation in the British Army even though the existence of German tanks had been revealed a month earlier (at St Quentin on March 21^st 1918).
When German tanks attacked French positions for the first time (Soissons and Riems June 1^st 1918) French horse artillery appear to have responded with commendable rapidity. This coupled with the fact that the French had prepared tank traps (see below) and tank ambushes (see ‘Trench Guns’ above suggest a degree of French preparedness.
Heavy artillery

Unlikely as it would seem, Allied heavy artillery was used against German tanks with forward artillery observers calling down fire on the tanks. At Soissons (June 1^st 1918) a German tank (probably a beutepanzer) approaching Fort Pompelle came under fire from artillery directed by a spotter plane circling overhead. The tank crew abandoned ship whereupon the aircraft’s crew assumed that the tank had been destroyed and ceased directing fire upon it. After the ‘plane had ‘buzzed off’ the German crew reoccupied the tank and continued their attack although later having to abandon their vehicle again for reasons that are not clear..
Aircraft

Crews of Allied contract patrol aircraft (mainly RAF and US Air Corps ) were instructed that on spotting approaching German tanks they were to alert the troops in their path ( by dropped messages and klaxon signals) and then inform the divisional HQ by the same means so that artillery fire could be laid down.
I can find only one account of an Allied aircraft attacking a German tank directly. This was at Soissons where a German tank (probably an A7V) was attacked after its crew had already abandoned it, removing its machine guns. However tank attack was one of the roles envisaged for the Sopwith Salamander armoured trench fighter. This aircraft was intended to enter squadron service in late 1918 or early 1919 but in the event only two Salamanders were in France undergoing squadron evaluations (i.e. trying them out in action) before the war ended.

Grenades and anti tank mines

There appears to have been only one Allied anti tank grenade in service, this being the French MLE anti char 18. Moreover this was sufficiently large and of such an odd shape as to be more a portable mine. It would appear to have been designed to thrust under the tracks of an oncoming tank, rather like the Japanese lunge mines of 1945, an extremely risky excise. There is no evidence of it having been used (although it is unlikely that any valiant soldat doing so would have been able to report back on the result).

Several anti-tank minefields were laid on the British front, using modified ‘Toffee Apple’ trench mortar bombs as mines (the Toffee apple mortar) had been rendered obsolete and replaced by the Stokes); one of these fields around Gouzeaucourt was never properly cleared at the end of the war and killed many French farmers in the 1930s when they first started using tractors; it was known locally as le tillage du mort.
Other improvised anti tank mines were reportedly made from artillery shells and pipe bombs. I can find no record of their deployment (which is not necessarily proof that there was not some ad hoc use of these)
Tank traps and anti tank ditches

The A7V was particularly susceptible to falling in holes. On a number of occasions the deployment of individual A7Vs had to be aborted or delayed as the machine had driven into a hole (in one instance a pond) and had to be dragged out. The front half of the tank obscured the driver’s view forward and downward. This made the use of concealed tank traps a tactic likely to succeed. The French certainly used tank traps as two German tanks (probably A7V) drove into the same trap, directly in front of the French front line trenches, at Soissons. Although they managed to back out, under artillery and machine gun fire, only one succeeded in making it back to the start line, the other was destroyed by shell fire.

British forces are known to have dug some extra wide anti-tank trenches/ditches in the 5th army sector as part of the 'elastic defence' principle. The troops' felt (probably correctly) that they were vulnerabile to artillery bombardment while performing this task. This must have been sometime between the end of March 1918 (when German tanks first became known to the Allies) and mid August of the same year. Thereafter the British army was moving forward so that digging a static AT ditch would have been a lot of hard work for something that was goung to be left in the rear in any case. I have not been able to discover the extent of such fortifications. The Germans were certainly aware of the risks of the AT ditch as photos appear to show training execises on how to extract one’s beutepanzer (the A7V was a hopeless case) from such a predicament.