MyAlbum

John Van Kooten
That would be a seriously cool subject to model. Awesome scene! 👍

Wayne Hale
I am trying to determine if they are setting up or leaving.

Hunter Cummins
Im in
they are setting up
I can tell this ecause they are moving away from the half track
and I know this because of the angle they are at
hooe this helps your dillemma

John Van Kooten
Hmm, I'm not sure 🙂

The guy in the front at the end of the barrel is clearly pushing it down and away from the half-track (pushing down so the trails come of the ground and the gun can be turned more easily, which is also what the second guy from the left is doing > pushing down) and the guys at the back are at the side where they would be pushing the trails towards the half-track. It would make no sense to be on that side of the trails and pull, which is WAY harder to do, especially in a muddy area like that! Plus the guy second from the right is also clearly pushing in the direction of the half-track. So the trails would move towards the half-track.

So with the guy at the end of the barrel pushing down & away and the guys at the trails pushing, the gun would move in position to be hooked up to the half-track. Or at least, that's what I think is happening 😛

Then again, they could just be positioning it so that the gun faces in the direction of the photographer.

It's hard to say honestly. So... pretty good question, Wayne! 😄

Fabian D.
hard to say... but all interpretation is based on assumptions... we assume the AT gun and the halftrack belong together and we asssume those guy are not posing for the guy with the camera and actually doing something😉

if we have a close look at the only guy behind the shield, we see he´s pushing the gun twoards the viewer

I can agree on that the two guys are pushing down the barrel, but I don´t think they are pushing in any direction, (if so, at least one of them would take a bath in the mud)... they´re simply using their weight to for pushing the barrrel down...

and if we figure out the position of the 57mm in relation with the halftrack, it looks more like the´re limbering up. If they were unlimbering, the gun would have been closer to the halftrak, an a bit closer to the viewer, too...

so my explanation of the whole scene would be: the 57mm was positioned a bit behind the the position it is now and the halftrak drove by to pic them up... and as the front was already pushed a few miles further, there was also time for a photo😉

Wayne Hale
I think they are limbering up as well. My thought on this is based on the fact that if the gun had been recently trailed in those muddy conditions that the wheels and shield would be covered with a lot more mud.

John Thomas
Wayne, I think they are trying to get hook up and get the Hell out of Dodge

Es-haq Khosravi
Absolutely will turn to a great scene!

John Van Kooten
That's a good point, Wayne. Didn't think of that but I think you are absolutely right 👍

Brent Sauer
I'm reading the book 'Armored Thunderbolt' by Steve Zaloga. It specifically references this photo. They just unhooked from the half-track and are trying to get set up to repel an approaching German assault during the Ardennes offensive.

Wayne Hale
Thanks Brent that settles it for me

Hunter Cummins
Ah ha!!
I was right lol

Wayne Hale
You don't have to crow over an old man Hunter. Don't you know I am getting old and feeble minded.

Hunter Cummins
Sorry 😳
it is just im not always right haha

John Van Kooten
@Brent: Specifically referencing the photo is overstating it a little bit IMHO.

@all: My apologies in advance, for the long winded answer 😉 I like to get into detail when it concerns a topic I like, just like with my modeling 😛

I have the book as well and looked it up but it is more like a caption. Not an exact explanation of what is happening in the photo. The picture is used as a means of illustration in that chapter. The (only) text referencing the photo says this to be exact:

"This crew of the 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment, manhandles their gun from its prime mover near Butgenbach on December 17, 1944."

But just because Steve Zaloga says it, doesn't make it true 😉 in fact, Steve Zaloga has been wrong before. That's no secret at all.

He is using a US Military Archive picture that probably, like TONS of photographs I have seen in the Bundesarchive in Germany, has no details other than the general area of where it was taken and (maybe) what unit was photographed. So Steve Zaloga is also merely interpreting what he sees based on assumptions, just likes us 😉

Here's an example of what is known about one of the many photos I have found in the Bundesarchive. Taken by a member of a German SS Propaganda Unit, it depicts a couple of Panthers driving down a road in a rural area:

Inventory: Bild 183 - Allgemeiner Deutscher Nachrichtendienst - Zentralbild
Signature: Bild 183-J28646
Original title: Im Raum Bastogne
Unsere Grenadiere liegen mit den Nordamerikanern in erbittertem Kampf um Besitz einer wichtigen Höhe. Während von weitem schon der Kampflärm herüberdröhnt, setzen sich "Panther" in Marsch, um den schwer ringenden Kameraden Hilfe zu bringen. Achtung! SS-PK-Aufnahme! Bei Abdruck nennen: SS-PK-Kriegsberichter Schulz 23.1.[19]45
Archive title: Belgien, Bastogne.- Wehrmachtssoldat auf Panzer Typ "Panther"
Dating: 23. Januar 1945

That's not a whole lot of information, is it? It's like that for many wartime pictures. Prone to misinterpretation.

Another example is a small original WWII photobook I have from my hometown, Rotterdam. I inherited it from one of my family members. It contains pictures of German parachutists landing near the bridge at Moerdijk, crashed Junkers 52, bombed areas near Rotterdam Waalhaven, many bombed parts of the inner city of Rotterdam and much more. Only some of the photos have a truly meaningful description. Most of them do have a date and location. You know what is written on the back of most pictures? Her name 🙂 why would she bother writing where/when/how, when she already knows all of that. So even though I know exactly where it came from and who took the pictures, I still can't identify the exact location, what is going on in the photo and/or date of about 25% of the included photos. Just to show you, by example, how hard it is to get reliable information from a photograph, even if you are truly close to the originating source.

All in all, I'm still 100% convinced they are leaving. Because there's one more thing I noticed: if the half-track pulling the gun just passed the location where they are now handling the gun, where are the tracks in the mud?? It doesn't look like a heavy vehicle just passed over that area. Unless they backed up the half-track with the gun still attached? Is that plausible? I have never seen that happen in my time in the Army. I can, however, imagine the half-track backing up to get closer to the gun so they can hook it up.

Some background info on why I also believe they are leaving:
* source: First Division Museum *
On December 17th the battalion commanders of 26th IR (1st, 2nd and 3rd) and the btl. commander of 33rd Field Artillery met at Aubel to make plans to defend Butgenbach. They decided to set up a wedged shaped defense position at Dom Butgenbach (a large manor area with many buildings, in essence, a town), which they set up on December 18th. The purpose was to defend the Bullingen-Malmedy road and the road north from Moderscheid (which was the German's "Rollbahn C")
Also, on December 16th the 26th IR was put on a 6 hour alert and transferred from VII Corps to V Corps to assist the 99th to hold the line against German attack.

Seeing how the photo was taken on December 17th this leads me to believe they can't really be setting up. The photo shows no evidence of residential area and why would they set up only to leave a short while later to move to the Dom Butgenbach area on December 18th? That makes no sense at all.
On top of that, they were already set up on December 16th and engaged in combat. There are no reports of 26th setting up anywhere on December 17th.
On December 17th, it's much more plausible they are preparing to leave for the Domain Butgenbach, to set up the strategic defenses planned by their commanders that same day.

Anyway, I think the only people that really know what was going on in the picture are the people that were actually there. We can only guess 🙂 So it's up to Wayne to draw his own conclusion and use it as he sees fit 👍

B.t.w. I'm absolutely not trying to be a smartass, merely sharing my observations and honest input 👍 🙂

Fabian D.
Jap, captions of pictures are always in a way baised, often the author wants just you to see what he thinks...
As we're speaking of German PKs... in the invasion of France and the Low-countries especially fighting scenes were filmed in advance... so an infantry attack on a French strong point in the Wochenschau could have taken part on the "wrong" side of the Rhine and a few weeks too early😉

Steve Wilson
Well!!!...
I think it's Vettel's answer to winning the Malaysian GP next week😄

Phil Marchese
in any event, it will be an interesting project. The essential point will be conveying motion and resistence. That may require some adjustment in the poses and exact moment.

james johnson
I'm with Mr. Van Kooten, plus I have a very good friend of mine who has humped his share of field artillery (mostly the 155) and he took one look at the picture and without hesitation said that they were leaving.