The Schutzmütze: Headgear of the Panzerwaffe

(Author's Collection)

     The official birthday of the German Panzerwaffe was October 15, 1935 when the first three panzer divisions were established. To set themselves apart, the uniform worn by tank crews was inspired by the Herzoglich Braunschweigisches Korps (Brunswick Ducal Corps) which was a mixed formation of infantry, Jägers (light infantry), and cavalry raised by the Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, Charles William Ferdinand in 1809. The unit was characterized by their black uniforms and use of the Braunschweiger Totenkopf (Brunswick Death’s Head [Skull]) and thus earned them the nickname Schwarze Schar (Black Horde). The Schwarze Schar, by 1866, became the Braunschweigisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr.92 and Braunschweigisches Husaren Regiment Nr.17 and upon the German defeat in World War One in 1918, the “Black Horde” was disbanded.

     Thusly inspired, the German panzer uniform was all black and used the Totenkopf on the collar tabs. The Waffenfarbe (Corps Colors) for panzer troops was pink and so the piping on the uniform seen in the photograph along the collars, on the shoulderboards, and surrounding the collar tabs was pink. The most distinctive piece of the uniform was the Schutzmütze, first issued in 1934. It appears as an oversize, floppy beret but in reality, the Schutzmütze main purpose was as a crash helmet. The beret portion of the Schutzmütze, which was removable, was made of black wool and formed the cover for the crash liner underneath. The liner was constructed of thick felt padding covered in black oil cloth. It also featured a leather sweatband and had six rubber lined ventilation holes. Featured prominently prior to World War Two, once the war began in 1939, the Schutzmütze fell into disuse and by 1940, had been officially replaced by a black wool version of the German Army’s Feldmütze (Field Service Cap) that the Army had been using since 1938.

The Type 92: The Japanese Lewis Machine Gun

A soldier of the 32nd. Infantry Division poses with a captured Type 92 near Buna, New Guinea. Photograph by Life Magazine.

      When the Japanese sought to modernize their military following World War One and into the 1920s and early 1930s, they looked to the French, U.S., and the British for assistance. This assistance took the form of hiring foreign designers and engineers to work at the fledgling Japanese aviation companies, studying abroad, and in many cases, obtaining examples of foreign equipment to study and test or outright purchase production rights. In regards to aviation, the British featured heavily in terms of assisting the Japanese advancing in their aircraft. A prime example was former Sopwith engineer Herbert Smith who was the designer for the Mitsubishi 1MT1N torpedo bomber, the Mitsubishi 1MF1 carrier fighter, and the Mitsubishi B1M attack aircraft. Other prominent British aviation firms which influenced the Japanese included Blackburn and Short. Included in the exchange of aircraft data and technology was some of the weapons used by British airplanes that were simply adopted by the Japanese and one such weapon is shown here, the Type 92 (or Model 92) light machine-gun. The photograph shows a soldier belonging to the 32nd. Infantry Division holding up a captured Type 92 for the camera among other captured arms. The photograph was taken in Buna, New Guinea either in November or December 1942 while the Battle of Buna-Gona was underway. This battle commenced on November 16, 1942 and ran through January 22, 1943 and ended in an Allied victory. The Type 92 actually began as the Type 91 which was, more or less, the Lewis light machine-gun built for the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN). In 1932, production of the weapon commenced in Japan and was accepted into IJN service as the Type 92.

     Construction of the Type 92 was aimed more at usage on IJN aircraft and as such, it was typically devoid of the barrel shroud and utilized a spade grip rather than a buttstock. Also, the Type 92 had an enlarged trigger guard, necessary to allow for the gunner wearing thick flight gloves. The main reason for the lack of the barrel shroud was that airflow across the weapon from the slipstream was more than adequate for cooling plus it lessened the weight. A 96-round circular pan magazine was the usual load but it could also use a smaller, 47-round pan magazine as well. For ammunition, the Japanese copied the original British .303 inch (7.7mm) rimmed round. This was because the standard Japanese 7.7mm rounds already in use were either semi-rimless or rimless which meant they could not be used in the Type 92 since they would simply fall out of the magazine. The Type 92 as fitted to aircraft was 3.25 feet long and weighed 19 pounds. The weapon was gas operated and had a rate of fire of 600 rounds per minute with a muzzle velocity of 2,440 feet per second. Regular iron sights were used and every fifth round in the magazine was a tracer.

     The Type 92 was also utilized on ships for anti-aircraft defense. For this purpose, the Type 92 was fitted to a tripod which allowed for 85 degrees of elevation and 80 degrees of depression when the legs of the tripod were fully extended. If need be, a crew could shift the Type 92 on the tripod from vertical firing to horizontal firing in under 15 seconds. Finally, the Type 92 was also utilized by naval ground forces and the example shown here is typical of those used by naval infantry. When utilized on ships as well as the ground, the barrel shroud was usually fitted. The purpose of the shroud was to channel air that was drawn across the barrel by the muzzle blast. In addition, heat sinks were fitted to the front and rear of the shroud to aid in cooling. The front heat sink is underneath the shroud but the rear heat sink is visible in the photograph. For ground use, the enlarged trigger guard was not fitted as evidenced here. In addition, some Type 92 weapons deployed on ships and the ground had either the spade grip or the buttstock. It is believed this Type 92 was part of the arsenal of the 5th. Yokosuka Special Landing Party (SLP), a part of the IJN's Kaigun Tokubetsu Rikusentai (Special Naval Landing Forces). These were not marines (as, say, the U.S. Marine Corps which was part of the U.S. Navy) but were simply regular sailors who received additional basic training in infantry tactics and weapons, were grouped together into battalions, and were deployed as landing forces. The 5th. Yokosuka SLP was a part of the Japanese defenders at Buna. Since the Type 92 here was used by infantry, it was fitted with a buttstock and has a bipod fitted over the barrel shroud. In this guise, the Type 92 was longer, measuring 4.7 feet long and was heavier at 26 pounds. It had the same rate of fire and muzzle velocity as the Type 92 used in aircraft and it also utilized both types of pan magazines (not seen here). It also used a blade-type front sight with a folding leaf peep-sight in the rear that was graduated from 0 to 1,700 meters.

     By 1940 and 1941, the Type 92 as used in aircraft was obsolete and the 7.7mm caliber was underpowered with an effective range of 1,970 feet. Despite this, it remained in service until the end of the war in August 1945 though it was partially replaced in later IJN aircraft by the heavier 13mm Type 2 machine-gun and the 20mm Type 99 cannon. Despite being outclassed in the air, as a ground weapon, the Type 92 retained a level of effectiveness and was also utilized until the war's end.

British Mk. IV Tank No.2873 "Blarney Castle": Deadly Day at Fontaine-Notre-Dame

"Blarney Castle" photographed by the Germans following the combat near Fontaine-Notre-Dame.

      The Battle of Cambrai, which commenced on November 20, 1917 and ended on December 7, 1917, was a proving ground for advancements in tactics both on the side of the British as well as the Germans. For the British, air support was a key addition to the battle plans in which the Royal Flying Corps (RFC) was assigned ground targets to attack prior to ground forces commencing their advance. In addition, cooperation between tanks and infantry was improved and artillery methods modified (for example, predicted artillery fire) and sound ranging used to conduct counter-battery artillery fire. For the Germans, the battle showed the effectiveness of Stoßtruppen (Stormtooper) tactics which emphasized infiltration, small units which provided support for each other, and mobile heavy weapons (machine-guns, trench mortars, and flamethrowers) which provided the Stoßtruppen with a significant attack advantage. It also showed the Germans how effective their artillery was against British tanks which had the equal effect of showing the British how vulnerable their tanks were to such weapons.

     Cambrai was a vital German supply point for the German's Siegfriedstellung, which was a defensive line known as the Hindenburg Line by the British. If the British could take it and the surrounding territory, especially Bourlon Ridge near the town, it would pose a serious threat to the German rear lines. Included in the attack were 378 combat tanks of the British Tank Corps. All of these tanks were the Mark IV, the main tank deployed by the British during World War One. These tanks came in two versions. The Mark IV Male was equipped with three .303in. Lewis machine-guns (one in the front hull and one in each sponson) and two Ordnance Quick-Firing 6-pounder 6 cwt Hotchkiss Mk I guns, one in each sponson. The other type was the Mark IV Female which was equipped only with five Lewis machine-guns, one in the hull and two in each sponson. The purpose of the two types was that the Male tanks would engage enemy targets (for example, pillboxes) with the 6-pounder guns while the Female tanks would provide protection to the Male tanks by repelling any close assault attacks by enemy infantry and to bring down withering machine-gun fire on any exposed enemy troops that may be flushed out by the Male tanks. One of these Mark IV Female tanks, named “Blarney Castle“, took part in the combat in the commune of Fontaine-Notre-Dame, 2.5 miles west of Cambrai.

     The tank was part of 6th. Company, 12th. Section, of B Battalion. It carried the serial number of 2873 and was commanded, alternatively, by either 2nd. Lieutenant Julian Cecil Lazonby or 2nd. Lieutenant Thomas Henderson. The tank's crew number was B57. As was tradition at the time, tanks were named by their commander and the name had to start with the letter of the battalion the tank belonged to. Thus, Henderson got to select the name and he chose “Blarney Castle“. This was because his parents were land owners in Ardrum, Inniscarra in County Cork in Ireland. Ardrum was where the owners of the famous Blarney Castle resided at the time. For the combat to come, “Blarney Castle“ was commanded by 2nd. Lt. Lazonby while 2nd. Lt. Henderson was in command of a tank from the 10th. Company, “Behemoth II“ (crew number B54; Serial No. 4516). The tanks, along with four others, sought to enter the village on November 23, 1917 and came under fire by elements of K.Flak Batterie 7. The German unit was equipped with Krupp 7.7cm L/27 anti-aircraft guns that were mounted on Daimler-Benz trucks. While normally used against enemy aircraft, German forces requested two of the trucks to be brought forward to contain the British tank attack. The 7.7cm gun was able to hurl a shell to a velocity of 1,520 feet per second and when used in the direct fire role, had a maximum range of 4.9 miles. This hitting power was more than adequate to punch through the thin armor of a Mark IV tank which was 12mm thick in the front, 8mm on the sides, and 6mm on the rear of the tank. The two vehicles from K.Flak Batterie 7 were supported by a company of troops from Reserve Infanterie Regiment 52. Together, they destroyed seven tanks in all, which included the wiping out of the 6th. Company. “Blarney Castle“ was struck multiple times by the accurate fire of the German gunners. Hits to the tank are evident on both sides which suggests the two trucks were not together and thus were able to engage the tanks in a cross-fire. The eight man crew had no chance. The interior of the Mark IV was open which meant fuel tanks, the engine and its components, crew positions, guns, and ammunition were not compartmentalized. Thus, the penetrations by the 7.7cm shells turned the inside of “Blarney Castle“ into an inferno and those crew fortunate enough to be killed outright were spared the agony of being incinerated. This grim photograph was taken by a German in the aftermath of the combat and shows one of the crew on the ground and at least one other crewman visible in the open hatch below the sponson. “Blarney Castle“ was a heavily photographed tank and another picture shows that on the other side of the tank, another charred crewman was on the ground and two others perished trying to get out through the hatches beneath the sponson. “Behemoth II“ also did not survive the battle, being destroyed with a loss of all crew.

The Rhodesian Pookie: Expediency Turned Excellence

A surviving Pookie on display at the South African Police Service Museum in Muizenberg, Cape Town, Western Cape. The mine-detector "wing" pans are shown in the stowed position. Photograph by Steve Barrow.

      Desperation has often proved to be catalyst for solutions to a problem. During the Rhodesian Bush War which raged for 15 long years from July 4, 1964 to December 12, 1979, the guerilla forces of the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (ZANLA) and the Zimbabwe People's Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA) waged a campaign of mining roads as a means of limiting or cutting off roads, isolating Rhodesian Security Force garrisons, and also as a means to instill fear in any user of roads, civilian or military, by way of casualties and deaths caused by the mines. Rhodesian Security Forces took numerous steps to try to curb the mine campaign by interdicting supply lines of the guerillas, paving roads using tar (which made burying mines more difficult), and improving mine detection methods. In time, it was seen that finding every buried mine simply wasn’t possible and so another avenue was to improve the survivability of military vehicles that struck a mine. At first, improvised methods were used and while there was an improvement in survival, it was seen that the mine’s explosion was essentially trapped beneath the flat surface of vehicles (such as trucks) which caused severe damage. From this, vehicles began to be purpose built using V-shaped bodies which dissipated the explosive force of the mine away from the vehicle. It was seen that crew/passenger survivability improved significantly and that vehicles could be repaired rather than scrapped. 

     Still, the means to detect mines continued and using the new mine resistant vehicle technology, automotive engineer Ernest Konschel designed the Pookie (named after the Galago, a nocturnal primate) mine-detection vehicle. The driver sat in an armored monocoque capsule which was connected to the frame by shear bolts and the armor was proof against small arms fire. The frame utilized the front and rear suspension units from a Type Two Volkswagen Kombi as the units exerted less downward force than conventional coil springs. For wheels, the Pookie was fitted with used Formula 1 racing tires as their width was often wider than holes used to bury mines. For power, the Pookie used a 1,600cc Volkswagen engine and carried 40 liters of fuel. On each side of the Pookie was a “wing” which contained a Milton detection pan. In all, the Pookie had a ground pressure of 3lbs. per square inch which was less than that of a human which meant it could drive over a mine (even anti-personnel mines) and not detonate it. 

     Sixty-eight Pookie vehicles were built (some sources say seventy-six) starting in 1976 and were quickly deployed and by 1980, Pookie drivers located some 550 mines without a single loss to them. Twelve vehicles were damaged from rocket fire and also command detonated mines. Only a single driver was killed when the capsule was hit by an RPG. The Pookie would later be fitted with the “Spider”, a 24-barrel, 12-guage rotary shotgun system as a means to respond to guerrilla ambushes. The driver, using a chain rip cord, could ripple fire the barrels, throwing buckshot across a 270 degree arc. So devastating was this weapon that guerillas would often let the Pookie pass (as it typically led convoys) before launching their ambush. In 1999, MineTech (a British company) built a number of vehicles which looked much like the Pookie except for using different engines and other enhancements. These were deployed by private “de-mining” contractors in Afghanistan and Somalia.

British Mark IV Tank No.9146: Relic in Berlin 1945

 

A U.S. Army photographer gazes at the remains of No.9146. This is one of a handful of photographs that feature this same man around the tank.

     Following the German surrender in May 1945, among the debris of war scattered about what is today the Schloßplatz in front of the Berliner Dom (Berlin Cathedral) were two former British World War One tanks, both Mark V models. For some time, there was a swirl of mystery around them. Where did they come from? Were they used in action in the desperate final battles in Berlin? For one of the tanks, some unknowns remain. For the other tank, carrying serial 9146 and seen here, it is a story that can be told today.

     During World War One, 9146 was assigned to the British Tank Corps' 16th. Battalion. At this time, it was a Male, meaning, it was equipped with two 6-pounder guns, one in each side sponson. In addition to the guns, the tank carried four Hotchkiss machine-guns. On October 16, 1918, three tanks from the 16th. Battalion (to include 9146) were attached to elements of the British Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Regiment and IX Corps for an attack on German positions at the Bois-de-Riquerval and the Andigny-les-Fermas Ridge. On October 17, 1918 at 5:20am, the preparatory bombardment by artillery commenced and the attack got under way. One of the objectives during the battle was the French village of Regnicourt and 9146 took part in the combat to eject the Germans from the area. Unfortunately, the tank was struck by a round from a German 7.7cm (77mm) field gun. The paltry 12mm of armor, while adequate against German 7.92mm armor piercing rounds, was useless against field guns and other artillery. The round appeared to have entered the right sponson of the tank and killed four men: Corporal Drewitt, Private Daniels, Private Doig, and Private Fensome. It would appear that 9146 was recovered from the battlefield and repaired. However, it was turned into a Mark V Composite (sometimes referred to as Hermaphrodite) and so the damaged right sponson was replaced with the right sponson from a Mark V Female tank. Female tanks were armed with six Hotchkiss machine-guns and so 9146 now had a single 6-pdr gun and machine-gun in the left sponson and three machine-guns in the right sponson.

     Life for 9146 was not done and when the Russian White Army looked to England and France for tanks to equip their forces for combat against the Bolshevik Red Army during the Russian Civil War (fought from November 7, 1917 to June 16, 1923), 9146 was included in a shipment of surplus British tanks to Novorossiysk, Russia sometime in 1919. The tank was transferred to one of Lieutenant-General Anton Ivanovich Denikin's tank detachments within his Dobrovolcheskaya Armiya (Volunteer Army). When the Red Army went on the offensive in October 1919, the Volunteer Army began to crumble and as it retreated, many of the tanks were abandoned or left behind to delay Red Army troops to allow as many Volunteer Army soldiers to escape the onslaught. Thus, the Red Army came into a total of 50 British tanks including Mark V heavy tanks and Whippet cavalry tanks. 9146 happened to be one of these, having been captured sometime in 1921 near T'bilisi, Georgia.

     Sometime in the 1930s, it was found that some fifteen British tanks from the Russian Civil War remained on the inventory and so People's Commissar (Minister) for Defense Kliment Voroshilov (or Iosef Stalin himself source depending) directed that these tanks be utilized as monuments situated in various cities. For 9146 and one other tank, they were sent to the city of Smolensk and set up outside of the Holy Dormition Cathedral (Cathedral Church of the Assumption). Following the German occupation of Smolensk which began on July 16, 1941, the two tanks were removed from their posts and shipped to Berlin, Germany. Upon arrival, they were put on display outdoors as part of the Zeughaus' arms collection (today, the Deutsches Historisches Museum resides in the Zeughaus building). Most believe that both tanks were non-operational and in any case, their weapons had been removed from them prior to being put on display in Smolensk. The damage done to them was likely due to Soviet bombing and/or being struck by Soviet tank guns or anti-tank cannon during the Berlin combat. Soviet soldiers have scrawled words on the tank and after awhile, 9146 and its companion were broken down for scrap. There is an interesting story, completely unverified, told by an airman in 2003 about 2nd. Lieutenant James Conway of the 710th. Bomb Squadron. Conway was the bombardier for a Boeing B-17G (serial 42-31169) named “Hey Mabel!” The bomber was shot down on April 29, 1944 and crashed near Zermützel which was three miles north of Neuruppin, the latter town being some 50 miles from Berlin. In the story, Conway said that after he was captured following his parachute decent from the stricken bomber, he was “loaded into a turretless World War One tank for a trip thru Berlin's streets.” Whether Conway really was taken to Berlin in such a tank or he mistook a contemporary tank has never been confirmed though the chances of a fully functional Mark V tank, let alone it being able to make the journey from where Conway was captured to Berlin without any incident is not too likely.

     As a side note, the man next to 9146 wears a shoulder patch of one of the U.S. Army's armored divisions and he has three service stripes on his left sleeve. A ribbon can just be made out above the left pocket on his service coat. He is also holding what appears to be a Graflex Speed Graphic medium format camera which could make him a press photographer as such a camera was not used by the casual picture taker given its type, size, and expense. 

1971-1972: The Brief Existence of the "German Hair Force"

(Bundeswehr Photograph; Author's Collection)

     On February 8, 1971, German Defense Minister Helmut Schmidt issued a regulation that Bundeswehr male soldiers could have long hair as long as it was well kept and did not interfere with their duties. If their hair did, then a hairnet (similar to those used by food workers) had to be worn. This new regulation was the result of the fallout due to one Albrecht Schmeissner. After being inducted into service by his recruiters in 1967, it was assumed Schmeissner would buzz cut his flowing mane of hair. Except he didn't. Instead, Schmeissner pointed to the existing grooming regulations and stated there was no mention of a maximum length and so he did not have to cut it. Schmeissner stuck to his guns for 45 days during which time he was the frequent target of harassment and scorn. But, he finally caved and got his hair cut after being threatened with insubordination. Still, this act of defiance reached the ears of Bundeswehr leadership who, in light of long hair for men being “in fashion” at the time, pushed for the change in regulation. And so began the period of the “German Hair Force”.

     Veterans within the Bundeswehr, of which there were many who had served in World War Two, were appalled and outraged by the new regulations. To add further insult to the injury, the military forces of the Bundeswehr's NATO allies also railed against the decision to allow long hair and it was those very same allied forces that coined the derogatory term of the “German Hair Force.” This, however, was only the beginning of the problems. Soldiers felt that the hairnets could damage their hair if worn for extended periods and so the Bundeswehr was more or less forced to create a medical task force to investigate the claim. Needless to say, there was nothing to the claim of hairnets damaging hair. However, the task force found that long hair had a host of problems. These included a nice home for lice, skin problems, and parasitic infestations (such as, say, ringworm). It was also pointed out that long hair would be extremely difficult or problematic to care for in the field and thus posed a hygiene risk. Another issue was the allowance of long beards which also posed their own hygienic problems. The military pfennig pinchers weighed in, saying long hair required more water and long hair posed a problem for drains and pipes while all those electric hair dryers would drive up facility energy costs. All of these concerns finally came to a head when, in July 1972, the regulations were changed and now a male soldier's hair could not touch the uniform collar and beards had to be well groomed and short. This regulation remains in place to this day. With this change, the regulation revision ended the brief era of the “German Hair Force.”

     The hair regulation, however, did not (and still doesn't) apply to women in the Bundeswehr. Women were allowed to keep their hair long if they wished and when in uniform, she had to use a hair tie or put her hair into a single braid. In part, this regulation was put in place as a means for the encouragement of women in the Bundeswehr.

 

Soviet T-26A-2 Light Tank: Roadside Signpost

(Author's Collection)

      Sitting in a ditch alongside a dirt road, somewhere in Russia, is the abandoned hulk of a Soviet T-26A-2 light tank. The T-26A-2 was the Soviet license built version of the Vickers 6-ton Type A, the tank having been a successful private venture by the British Vickers firm. While the British Army wasn't interested in the tank, many nations were and the largest users were Finland, Thailand, and Poland. Like the Soviets, Poland would eventually license the 6-ton, producing an improved model as the 7TP. The Soviets purchased at least six examples of the Vickers tank in 1931 and these tanks were sometimes given the designation T-26A-1.

     There were a number of variants of the T-26A, usually changing armaments in one of the two turrets to either a 12.7mm heavy machine-gun, a 27mm gun, or a 37mm gun. The idea of having two turrets was to enable the tank to have a far wider engagement range that would be the case with a single turret. A lock in each turret ring prevented the two turrets from having their weapons entangle but this still provided each turret with 265 degrees of rotation. The T-26A-2 was equipped with a air-cooled 7.62mm Degtyaryov DT machine-gun in each turret. In the photograph, the DT machine-guns are missing and the lack of any apparent combat damage suggests that the tank had suffered mechanical difficulties and the crew removed the weapons before abandoning the tank.

     By the model of the T-26, it is reasonable to place the year and general time the photograph was taken to the summer of 1941, specifically, after the commencement of Unternehmen Barbarossa (Operation Barbarossa). This was the invasion of Russia by Germany which began on June 22, 1941. The T-26 light tank made up a significant portion of the tanks which equipped Soviet armor forces. Starting in 1933, the Soviets ceased production of the twin-turret T-26 tanks and switched to a single-turret design. In all, 2,038 T-26A tanks were constructed. By 1941, a large number of these tanks still remained in Soviet service, the majority without the heavier armament as previously mentioned and thus they were greatly outmatched by most German tanks. The all-around armor thickness of 15mm was able to afford some protection from the 2cm KwK 30 cannon which equipped the Panzerkampfwagen II light tank but against the Panzerkampfwagen 35(t) and 38(t) light tanks, the 3.7cm KwK 34(t) and KwK 38(t) guns could punch through up to 24mm of armor out to 1,500 meters.

     The photograph also tells us that a specific unit, or at least elements of it, had passed by the T-26 and elected to use it as a road sign. The unit was the 12. Panzer-Division (nicknamed the Pommerische Division (Pomeranian Division) and this can be told by the symbol painted on the turret. Consisting of a circle with a “Y” inside it, the 12. Panzer-Division used the symbol on their vehicles as an identifier. In this case, it was left on the T-26 with an arrow pointing down the road, informing anyone who saw it (and knew what the symbol was) that elements of the 12. Panzer-Division were somewhere ahead. The division was created in October 1940 from another unit, 2. Infanterie-Division (mot). For the Russian invasion, 12. Panzer-Divsion was under the LVII Panzerkorps which was commanded by General der Panzertruppe Adolf-Friedrich Kuntzen. LVII Panzerkorps itself was under Panzergruppe 3, the latter under Heeresgruppe Mitte (Army Group Center) whose commander was Generalfeldmarschall Fedor von Bock. 12. Panzer-Division's initial commander was Generalmajor Josef Harpe and he remained in command through the initial Operation Barbarossa actions before being replaced on January 12, 1942. The unit saw combat in the taking of Minsk and Smolensk but when the Soviets launched their winter counteroffensives in 1941-1942, the 12. Panzer-Division suffered significant casualties and was withdrawn to Estonia for refitting. The division was put back into action under Heeresgruppe Nord before seeing battle at Kursk. The unit would eventually become trapped within the Courland Pocket by July 1944 and what remained of the division surrendered to the Soviets on May 8, 1945.

Army Hospital Corps Radiologist: Early Personal Protective Equipment

A British Army Hospital Corps radiologist with the rank of sergeant wearing protective equipment to ply his trade.

      The man credited with discovering X-rays was German physics professor Wilhelm Röntgen in 1895 and it would earn him a Nobel Prize in Physics in 1901. His X-ray of his wife's hand made in December 1895 was the first of a human body part. The first discussion of using X-rays in combat medicine came from the Prussian War Ministry but it would be the Italians during the First Italo-Ethiopian War who used the X-ray to locate bullets in two Italian soldiers who had been injured during the Battle of Adwa in 1896. The British started their foray into military radiology when the British Red Cross set up an X-ray station during the Greco-Turkish War of 1897 to provide medical support for Greek forces. A prominent radiologist in England at the time was Dr. John Francis Hall-Edwards and in 1900, he joined the Warwickshire Regiment during the Second Boer War and became the chief radiologist at the Imperial Yeomanry Hospital at Deelfontein, South Africa. By this time, X-ray equipment was standard issue to British military hospitals. Dr. Hall-Edwards spent 14 months at the hospital, performing X-rays on some 280 wounded soldiers. Up until World War One, the apparatus to perform X-rays was stationary, being located at hospitals with fixed locations. That changed in 1914 when Madame Marie Curie created “radiological cars” that were standard lorries donated to her from private sources and converted to become mobile X-ray labs. Nicknamed “Little Curies”, some 20 lorries were fitted with the X-ray apparatus and support equipment plus a dark room for the processing of the photographic plates. Curie herself trained a total of 150 women volunteers to crew the lorries which operated in the front lines with French field hospitals. Not content to lead from behind, Curie operated her own “Little Curie” in support of the effort. The first such lorry was deployed during the First Battle of the Marne which commenced in September 1914. Soon, other warring powers deployed their own mobile X-ray trucks to the front lines.

     The dangers of X-rays were known from the very outset of their discovery and subsequent experimentation with them. The majority was burns caused by long exposure to the rays but other ill-effects were documented. Despite this, some physicians claimed that there was no consequences to X-ray exposure at all. Typically, neither the radiologist or the patient was protected in any way during an X-ray examination and in part this was due to the still (at the time) debated side-effects of exposure which contributed to a lack of reliable safety protocols and training. Nevertheless, some steps were taken and this rather curious photograph shows one of them. This was a World War One British radiologist with the rank of sergeant (as denoted by the three reverse chevrons) in the Army Hospital Corps (as denoted by the circular Red Cross insignia) who is wearing a protective apron, gloves, and hood. Although it might appear that the rank is on the actual protective garment, the sleeve seam for the apron can be seen just above the rank and branch insignia. The protection was derived from lead within the apron, gloves, and the hood. It is possible that the hood's vision ports may be leaden glass. The protrusions coming off the hood could be straps or fasteners. There does appear to be a tie at the waist for the apron which suggests it may be more open in the back. It is unknown if this was a prototype or a piece of protective equipment that was put into production and issued to British military radiologists.