tiger

[Die Hard]

The tank was found with a message from the crew, with "Bravo RAF" on the hull.

That is a very dubious assumption on your part. You assume that after being attacked by the RAF and set ablaze the Germans abandoned the tank and just stood there... waiting for the tank to burn out and cool down enough for them to write a message on it. I find that highly unlikely. I find it infinitely more believable that the German crew continued on their way on foot or by other means of transportation, and when the tank had cooled off the local French wrote the message.

[ScatterFire]

I find that highly unlikely. I find it infinitely more believable that the German crew continued on their way on foot or by other means of transportation, and when the tank had cooled off the local French wrote the message.

Or the Germans were gunned down after climbing out of the tank.  The quote from "The Little Drummer Girl" comes to mind:

"What is this?"
"Scars from a burning tank"

"These?"
"Bullet holes, from climbing out of the tank"

[Angus]

I guess there was no fingerprint analysis.
The "who did it" is of course a completely open thing. But such gestures as well as the other side of gestures were used on quite some occasions.
Your theory about the locals is IMHO quite good. However it could have been a case of a crew wanting to get out of the mess as well....
Here:
"Again, allied personnel nicknamed all German tanks "Tigers". I would also think such a "satisfying" occasion would warrant a photo of the tank. With 25 mm thick belly armor there is no way a 20 mm ricochet would do anything more than bounce off. If the tank was leaking fuel it might have caught fire, but that adds nothing to the argument that a Tiger's armor could be penetrated by a 37 mm M3 gun."

I somehow thought they were also nicknamed a panzer, - or did an allied soldier never see one?
As for the photo opportunity, - absolutely a minority of WW2 fighting population carried a camera, and what we have available on the net is but a glimpse of the lot. I have had the luck of being a guest at the IWM WW2 photo archives, so I'm not too green on what is there and what isn't. Being exposed to death every day doesn't also exactly make you into a japanese tourist collecting for the album. (Sorry Japan )

On this forum, years back, by the way, there is an account of an M8 killing a Tiger from behind. Many shots and no range.

[Ack-Ack]

On this forum, years back, by the way, there is an account of an M8 killing a Tiger from behind. Many shots and no range.

Despite numerous sources of the AARs on this particular engagement, since BigPlay and others can't wrap their heads around it, it didn't happen.


ack-ack

[Die Hard]

Numerous recitals perhaps, but one source as ScatterFire pointed out:

Yep.  And identical wording means one thing; they got the info from the same source.  Which is never good for "proving" an argument....

[Die Hard]

How often have we read that the 109K-4 had 15 mm MG 151 cowl guns in various publications just because Green made that one mistake back in 1960. Unfortunately many authors don't check their sources before copying other authors' material.

[Ack-Ack]

Numerous recitals perhaps, but one source as ScatterFire pointed out:

When the source is a unit AAR by those that took part and/or witnessed the engagement, it's a pretty good source.  Good enough for the US Army in teaching the use of armor in the defense.


ack-ack

[BigPlay]

Despite numerous sources of the AARs on this particular engagement, since BigPlay and others can't wrap their heads around it, it didn't happen.


ack-ack

Hey AkAk, last time I checked this was America and people have a right to their opinions. What's up ? Why do you have to make  unnecessary remark towards me in every post. I responded to yours civilly and without prejudice towards you. But everytime you have to slip in something that has nothing to do with the topic We are just having a discussion and in every post. You don't like me FINE, I can deal with that . Can you make an attempt to refrain from anything outside of the topic? I really dont want to go down the path that numerous other thread have,

[Die Hard]

When the source is a unit AAR by those that took part and/or witnessed the engagement, it's a pretty good source. 

You don't know the author's source since he didn't produce it in the book. For all you know he never read it and was just reciting second hand information. No source has been posted here, only the conclusions of an author who may or may not have had access to the actual source.

[BigPlay]

You don't know the author's source since he didn't produce it in the book. For all you know he never read it and was just reciting second hand information. No source has been posted here, only the conclusions of an author who may or may not have had access to the actual source.

He just likes to try and put me down every opportunity he gets. I have read many of his posts on various topics an most sound like they were obtained through very light reading.

[moot]

Hey AkAk, last time I checked this was America and people have a right to their opinions. What's up ? Why do you have to make  unnecessary remark towards me in every post. I responded to yours civilly and without prejudice towards you. But everytime you have to slip in something that has nothing to do with the topic We are just having a discussion and in every post. You don't like me FINE, I can deal with that . Can you make an attempt to refrain from anything outside of the topic? I really dont want to go down the path that numerous other thread have,

How is it that American right to your opinion counts for more than AKAK's? Refute his argument or concede.

[Die Hard]

How is it that American right to your opinion counts for more than AKAK's? Refute his argument or concede.

That's BigPlay's point. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinions.

[moot]

How's what AKAK said contrary to that?

[BigPlay]

How is it that American right to your opinion counts for more than AKAK's? Refute his argument or concede.

The difference being I don't make constant remarks about him in every post or belittle his position . Read back in this thread and the Sherman thread , he has something to say about me in every post mostly discounting my opinion. Like me he does have a right to his opinion and views. I however do not then make reference to how little he knows or about the relability of his reference source like he does.

[moot]

So just refute his factual arguments.