A Tank Gunner's Story: Gunner Gruntz of the 712th Tank Battalion

by Louis G. Gruntz

  With the Sherman in full mass production by American industry and the Army’s doctrinal thinking stuck in a pre-war mode, innovations in tank technology were stymied. Even though a prototype for a heavier American Tank had been developed, in 1943 the AGF nevertheless opposed the production of the M26 (Pershing). “Part of the resistance within the US Army to a heavy tank like the M26 to supplement the Sherman was a legitimate concern over logistics. American tanks had to be shipped thousands of miles to distant battlefields in Europe and the Pacific, and every extra ton of tank was a ton less of other vital supplies. The T26 (M26 Pershing) weighed nearly fifty percent more than the Sherman and would require elaborate new training, new spare parts and new ammunition.”11 Experiments showed that two Sherman tanks could fit into the space required by a larger tank on an LST.12

  As Germany introduced its larger and heavier Panther, Tiger and King Tiger tanks, it was emphasizing firepower and armor at the expense of speed and mobility. The Sherman tank, M4 series, which was the mainstay of armored weapons of the US Army throughout World War II, fell behind the advances in German tank technology, during the period of stockpiling weapons in England.

  The interior of the tank was noisy and confining, all of the crew had to fit in tight quarters. Dad said, “I don’t know how we all didn’t have prostate trouble. (We had a chair) but it wasn’t comfortable, you couldn’t stretch out like a lounge chair. It was more like a stool than a chair.”

  During training in 1943, the American tank crews were told that the Sherman was the best tank in the world.13 Soon after D-Day, however, the tank crews quickly learned of more deficiencies in the Sherman. American tanks were easily knocked out by German tanks and 88-mm anti-aircraft guns which German troops regularly used as an anti-tank weapon, while the shells from their own 75-mm guns bounced harmlessly off the heavier armor of the Panthers and Tigers.14 “The Sherman was universally denounced by anyone who had to fight in one against a Panther or Tiger.”15 Stephen Ambrose noted this major failure in the US Army to appreciate this growing shift within the German Army towards heavier and better armed tanks by citing historian Max Hastings to wonder how “could American and British industries produce a host of superb aircraft, an astonishing variety of radar equipment, the proximity fuse … (not to mention the atomic bomb) yet still ask its armies to join battle against the Wehrmacht equipped with a range of tanks utterly inferior in armor and killing power?”16

  Additionally, Sherman tanks were vulnerable to being crippled by a single soldier with a very simple weapon, the panzerfaust, which means tank fist. Stephen Ambrose described it as an ideal anti-tank weapon for the Germans in the hedgerow country. It was a one shot anti-tank rocket launcher, the German equivalent of the American bazooka but with a shorter range (up to 350 feet), which didn’t matter in hedgerow country. “In some respects it was superior to the bazooka. It was operated by a single soldier and was so simple no special training was required, while the bazooka required a trained two man team. The panzerfaust launched a grenade type bomb that was bigger and better designed than the bazooka’s.”17 The panzerfaust had greater penetrating capabilities than the bazooka. The hollow-charge head of the panzerfaust grenade contained enough high explosive to penetrate even the thickest tank armor, up to 200 millimeters. The explosive charge was shaped and when exploded caused the entire force of the explosion forward. The explosive force when striking the exterior of the tank was of such magnitude and intensity that when piercing the armor plate it caused the metal being pierced to become molten metal.

  But the Sherman tank did have some advantages over the German tanks, the greatest being its sheer numbers.18 At the height of production, one Sherman rolled off the production line every thirty minutes. The fact that the 75-mm gun could not penetrate the front of a German tank meant that Allied tank crews had to employ a different tactic than a one on one frontal attack. The Sherman crews would often defeat superior enemy tanks by outmaneuvering and “ganging up” on the Nazi tank. With a number of Shermans engaging a German tank, some of the Shermans could surround the enemy and get a shot at the thinner and weaker armor on the side or rear of the German tank, thereby disabling it. Although this tactic worked, it was costly. It has been estimated that four Shermans were lost for every Panther or Tiger destroyed.19 Another tactic was to have a Sherman remain hidden. Once the German tank got close enough, a shell from the hidden Sherman, could penetrate into the side of the advancing German tank and knockout the enemy.

  One of the Sherman’s main strengths was the speed with which the turret could be traversed. The turret was powered by a hydraulic and electric system that enabled it to make a full revolution in only 10-12 seconds, compared with 25 or more seconds required by German tanks which were frequently turned by a hand crank. The Sherman’s quick-turning turret often allowed it to get off a crucial first one or two shots in a tank duel.20

  Other strong points over its German counterparts was the Sherman’s higher rate of fire, and its higher degree of mobility. It was quicker and more maneuverable. The Sherman tank also exhibited high mechanical reliability — unlike the German Tiger and Panther tanks, which experienced frequent breakdowns. A minor breakdown in battle could be disastrous, exposing it to enemy fire resulting in the complete loss of a tank. The simplicity of the Sherman tank design lent itself to not only ease of production in great quantities but also relatively easy maintenance and repair in the field. In this respect the Sherman had a decided advantage over the German tanks.

  The 712th Tank Battalion had the same organizational structure as other tank battalions in the US Army: Headquarters Company, a Service Company and four combat companies. Headquarters Company, and Companies “A”, “B”, and “C” were equipped with the Sherman M4 tanks; “D” Company was a light tank company equipped with M5A1 Stuart light tanks.

  Each company consisted of three platoons containing five tanks each. The Sherman tanks were operated by a five man crew: a commander, a gunner, a loader, a driver, and an assistant driver/bow gunner. The priority of the crew positions were in the following order: tank commander, gunner, driver, loader, assistant driver/bow gunner.

  The commander of the platoon, usually a 1st or 2nd lieutenant, was the commander of one of the tanks. Platoon sergeants were commanders of the remaining tanks in the platoon.

  The tank commander sat behind the gunner and slightly above him when the turret hatch was closed. The commander’s seat, like the driver and assistant driver, could be raised when the hatch was open. In this position, the commander’s head and upper torso was exposed when the tank was not in combat. The commander also had direct control over the turret’s traverse and could set the main gun in the direction of the target himself, but leaving the more precise aiming to the gunner. The commander also operated the radio, through which he communicated with other tanks and headquarters.21

  Second in seniority was the gunner, usually a corporal. The gunner aimed and fired the 75-mm gun onto the targets indicated by the commander. He sighted the target through a periscope and traversed the turret and elevated the gun in order to effect the fire. He also fired the co-axial machine gun. The gunner’s position was on the right side of the turret, immediately in front of the commander and behind the assistant driver. The tasks of the gunner required considerable training and the fate of the crew could often depend on the gunner’s skill.22

  Cpl Gruntz with helmet and throat microphone. (Gruntz Sketch)

  The driver was next in seniority and was located on the left front side of the tank. Driving the tank was accomplished by a clutch-and-brake steering system. In addition to possessing the skills necessary to drive the tank, the driver had to have a reasonably good appreciation of tactics and terrain. During battle, the commander many times relied upon the driver to align the tank in the best position for the gunner to achieve the most effective firing as well as positioning the tank to avoid enemy fire.

  The lowest in seniority were the loader and the assistant driver/bow gunner. The
loader’s primary function was to keep the main gun and the co-axial machine gun in working order and supplied with ammunition. Of all crew members, the loader had the most room because he was required to reach all around the central portions of the tank to the areas where the ammunition was stored.

  The assistant driver, located in the right front of the hull of the tank. He was primarily responsible for operating the .30 caliber bow machine gun. He also assisted the loader by feeding him ammunition from the forward bins.

  The driver and the assistant driver entered and exited through hatches directly over their positions in the forward hull compartment of the tank. Both were furnished with seats which could be raised, so that their heads emerged from the hatches. This was how they operated the tank when not in combat situations. When the hatches were closed during combat, both used a periscope on the hatch covers in order to drive the tank.

  When the tank was in operation, the noise was deafening. One tanker described it as like being inside a cement mixer. Conversation was impossible and the crew communicated vital information to each other by a rudimentary intercom system. Dad explained, “You couldn’t talk to anybody in the tank, it was too noisy. We had a little strap around our throat with a button on the end and a thing in our ear and when we talked you could hear like through the speaker thing.”

  Patton was cognizant of the deficiencies in the Sherman tank but was satisfied that it would suffice in the hands of the men under his command. He stated, “It’s the unconquerable soul of man, not the nature of the weapon he uses, that insures victory.”

  CHAPTER 4

  The Beaches of Normandy

  There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but boys, it is all hell.

  Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman

  Dad and I landed in Paris late in the morning and by the time we went through customs, retrieved our luggage and obtained a rental car, it was mid-afternoon as we began navigating our way through Paris on our afternoon drive to the Normandy coast. We arrived in Caen about dusk and decided to find a hotel room for the night and begin our tour early the next morning.

  That night I plotted our next day’s itinerary. With cinematic memories still guiding my perceptions of combat, I was anxious to begin my European vacation by sightseeing some of the locations depicted in one of my favorite World War II films, The Longest Day. I was anxious to visit the Pegasus Bridge near Caen, Pointe du Hoc, and St Mère Eglise. I must admit that my curiosity in seeing these sites was prompted as much by their depiction in the movies as it was by the actual events that occurred on June 6, 1944.

  Our first stop on our tour of the landing beaches of Operation Overlord was the area near the Pegasus Bridge, captured by the British on D-Day. After spending just a few minutes there, we next traveled west along the beach road to the Omaha and Utah Beaches.

  Some of the events on D-Day in St Mère Eglise, involving paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne Division, form a good portion of the plot in The Longest Day. In the early morning hours, a house adjacent to the town square catches fire, ignited by an Allied bomb. The townspeople are awakened and alerted to the emergency by the church bell and quickly assemble to form a bucket brigade to fight the fire. The German garrison occupying the town is also awakened. Although intended to be silently dropped in the dark countryside, paratroopers, including Private John Steele, who was portrayed in the movie by actor Red Buttons, are dropped in error far from the intended drop zone and begin landing in the well-lit town square among the French townspeople and the German soldiers. Private Steele landed on the church roof and as he was sliding down his parachute gets caught on the church steeple. Although wounded, he limply hung from the church pretending to be dead for several hours, all the while watching the German troops on the ground firing upon and killing other paratroopers helplessly floating slowly through the air.

  Steele, although deafened by the continuous ringing of the church bell, is eventually rescued as other paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne, led by Lt-Col. Benjamin Vandervoort, portrayed by John Wayne, move into the town to secure its capture.

  The townspeople of St Mère Eglise continue to honor their liberators from the 82nd Airborne Division; a mannequin hanging by a parachute is attached to the church steeple. One stained-glass window at the rear of the church, destroyed during the invasion, has been replaced with a new stained glass depicting the Blessed Virgin Mary surrounded by American paratroopers floating through the air. The site upon which that burning house was located, now houses the Place du 6 Juin, a military museum full of artifacts from World War II.

  I was unaware until Dad told me that day that he had traveled through St Mère Eglise during the war; after coming ashore on Utah Beach, the 712th rolled through town on its way to its bivouac area the battalion’s first night ashore.

  From St Mère Eglise, Dad and I traveled to Pointe du Hoc, a high cliff situated between Omaha Beach and Utah Beach. It was fortified with heavy concrete gun emplacements with an excellent position to overlook and defend both beaches. The job of the Army Rangers on D-Day was to land on the beaches at the foot of the cliff, scale the cliffs and destroy the artillery guns.

  When we arrived at Pointe du Hoc, I was somewhat surprised to see that the site remains essentially in the same condition it did after the invasion and essentially as portrayed in The Longest Day. Many bunkers remain, with holes where shells exploded. The ground still has craters formed by the Allied shelling and bombing on D-Day.

  From Pointe du Hoc it is a short trip to Omaha Beach, the landing site that had the most casualties on D-Day.

  Omaha Beach

  The topography of the French coastline at Colleville/St Laurent sur Mer, the site of Omaha Beach, consists of cliffs and bluffs overlooking the beach. At seventy-five years of age, Dad was not up to making the trek down to the shoreline, therefore, I made this journey alone. At the water’s edge I looked up the steep incline I had just walked down.

  One picture may be worth a thousand words, but personal observation is worth a thousand pictures. The crest of the cliff along this section of Omaha Beach is much higher and steeper than it appears in all of the photographs and film that I had seen; likewise, the distance between the water’s edge and the base of the cliff is farther than it appears in photographic images of D-Day. Today there is a broad expanse of vegetation-covered sand dunes from the back edge of the beach to the base of the cliff. During the war, the Germans had removed all of this vegetation in order to provide a clear line of fire. I began to imagine what the infantry must have thought when they first gazed upon these bluffs on June 6, 1944, and the large amount of flat terrain that they had to run across to reach cover. As an out of shape forty-seven year old, I was huffing and puffing as I made my way back up the steps to the top, and thinking of how the GIs traversed this area weighted down with all of the gear they had to carry. I began to understand why Omaha Beach had the highest casualty rate on D-Day.

  Despite living through the Vietnam era, my deep-seated youthful concepts of war as a glorious adventure still lingered on. An old Latin proverb best described my perceptions: “Sweet is war to those who have never experienced it.”

  The Cemetery in Normandy

  The maps of Normandy show the American Cemetery as being adjacent to the English Channel overlooking Omaha Beach. It is 172 acres in size, however, the maps and these statistics did not prepare me for what was in store.

  When I entered the front gate, the main area of the cemetery was hidden from view. Whether, this landscaping feature was intentional or accidental, it certainly added to the visual impact when I first saw the main grounds. After a short walk along a footpath bordered on both sides with trees and shrubbery we arrived at the Memorial, the Wall of Missing, and the reflecting pool and I caught my first sight of the burial field containing over 9,386 graves with a panoramic view of the English Channel as a backdrop.

  Thousands of white marble crosses and occasional Stars of David stand row after row in perfect symmetry
regardless of the angle of sight. The weather that day was perfect without a single cloud in the sky. The rich dark green grass was perfectly manicured and the morning sun striking the headstones made each one brilliantly radiant; it was soul stirring. It is hard to describe the emotional impact when I first beheld this scene, it is a combination of patriotism, sadness, humility and gratitude all rolled up into one.

  Normandy Cemetery. (Author’s collection)

  Abraham Lincoln referred to the Gettysburg battlefield as hallowed and consecrated ground. Such is an appropriate description of the Normandy Cemetery. Visitors speak in soft hushed tones and with the same reverence reserved for the interior of a church or synagogue. When standing amidst those white crosses, although I was in a foreign country thousands of miles from America, I had a feeling of being home again, the feeling of being on American soil. I have been to Arlington Cemetery and the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, outside of Washington DC, on two occasions, once while I was in high school and again as the chaperone for my sons’ Boy Scout troop. I was awestruck with Arlington on both occasions perhaps because of the sheer size of that cemetery. Those experiences could not begin to compare with the emotional impact of Normandy. Perhaps my experience was more enhanced because I was in the company of my father, who personally knew some of the young men lying beneath those headstones.

  Prior to entering the cemetery, we had stopped at the visitor’s center, where Dad asked for the grave locations of three soldiers he knew from B Company of the 712th Tank Battalion, Nicholas Milczakowski, Frank Krusel and Tullio Micaloni. He also asked for a small pail of damp sand and a sponge. Dad wanted to take photographs of the headstones of Milczakowski, Krusel and Micaloni, but, the carvings in the white crosses are not readable in ordinary photographs. We placed the wet sand inside the chiseled inscriptions and wiped away the excess sand with the sponge. The contrast between the dark moist sand and the white cross makes the inscription readily visible and easily photographed. Within days, the wind and rain wash away this small amount of sand and the headstone is again solid white. Dad learned this little fete of photographic wizardry a dozen years earlier from his friend Henri Levaufre.