Actually, I got my info (regarding the unit designation) from Georg Tessin "Verbände und Truppen der deutschen Wehrmacht und Waffen SS im Zweiten Weltkrieg 1939-1945", Volume 6, "Die Landstreitkräfte 71-130", page 164, where Tessin seems to insist that a renaming did not take place.
EDIT:
I've got a declassified NARA scan of the "English Copy" of Feuchtinger's testimony ("21st Panzer Division in Combat against American Troops in France and Germany"), where he lists the OOB of the 21st. He keeps referring to the 22nd Pz.Rgt., in fact. On the first page he warns that the report may not be as accurate as he may wish for, because his own war diary and documents were not at his disposal at the time, and because his memory may not serve him well regarding all details.
Interestingly, despite mentioning the fact that the 21st Pz. Div was "torn to pieces in Tunisia", and that the unit had to be rebuilt completely in France, he does not mention ANY French tank. (Was he embarrassed?)
A quote from Feuchtinger's report:
ORIGINAL: "21st Panzer Division in Combat against American Troops in France and Germany", by E. Feuchtinger
"Our own construction staff had to assemble all armored and unarmored vehicles only from spare parts found in the salvage dumps of the campaign in the West in 1940. Only the tanks for the Panzer-Regiment were supplied. All weapons were allotted from German stocks, but we had to build the installations (self-propelled) and the towing mediums ourselves. Even after 6 June 1944 the division had no replacements for vehicles, but had to build up everything even in the most difficult situations. As the only division of the German Western Army the division had to go on fighting continuously at the most difficult points."
The part where he talks about the installations on/for "self-propelled" guns might refer to SPGs with Lorraine undercarriage. Still, why does he not mention the French tanks, even though they were listed and used at least until 1st of June?
ORIGINAL: Juggalo
"On 20 May 1944, Panzer-Regiment 100 of the 21st Panzer Division was ordered to reorganize to the "Frie Gliederung" and was renamed Panzer-Regiment 22 effective immediately . The I. Abteilung/Panzer-Regiment 22 was to be outfitted with 17 Pzkpfw IVs in each of it’s four Panzer-Kompanien and the II. Abteilung still in possession of Beute-Panzers [captured tanks] was to be outfitted with 14 Pzkpfw IVs in each of its four Panzer-Kompanien", Pg 158, Thomas L. Jentz, Panzertruppen Volume 2, Schiffer Military History, Atglen, PA 1996
Well, "was to be outfitted". That does not necessarily mean that the IST outfit had matched the SOLL layout on 1st of June (and the following days). From what I've read so far, the last detailed/known exact IST report is from 1st of June, and that still listed the number of French tanks I mentioned above.
Jentz does a good job. But from another discussion here in this forum (which dealt with tank production in Czech, Böhmisch-Mährische Maschinenfabrik), I got the impression that Jentz has some tiny weak spots here and there, and that some of his (really short) summarizing statements, like the one you quoted above, leave room for interpretation.
"Furthermore, on 24 May, 14 Mark IVs were sent to the division".....from Zetterling.
This would indicate the French junk was in the process of being phased out and the Frie Gliederung being implemented....
Actually, this does not rule out that some of them could have been part of something what I'd call an early "ad-hoc reaction force", similar to the Chars committed during Market Garden, as there is no indication WHEN these additional PzIV had actually reached the unit, as these tanks would have showed in the IST report, otherwise. The sum of previous deliveries, excluding the scheduled 14 tanks, matched the total amount reported as IST on 1st of June.
Furthermore, the expected delivery was supposed to replace the remaining French tanks, but if you do some MATH, then you'll figure that, with additional 14 tanks, only ONE of the THREE companies (5th, 6th and 7th, II. Abteilung) still operating French tanks could have been converted during the first weeks of June. Afaik, except for the 14 tanks being discussed, the 21st Pz did not receive any additional tanks until 8th of July.
As a result, at least 2 of the 3 companies I mentioned would have had to operate the obsolete equipment, unless the 14 PzIV (whenever they arrived) were distributed among these companies evenly, to establish a somewhat better combat value across the II. Abteilung, at least, but then the particular Coys would have been understrength and would have had way less combat value (if they really phased out the French stuff). Was that the case? I don't know, I'm not sure whether documents at BA-MA would shed some light in there, as documents (past 1st of June) seem to missing.
On the other hand, I could imagine, that these 14 tanks were mainly used to replace losses in the other companies (1-4, of I. Abteilung), as these had been fully converted to the PzIV already, so they had received some training and gained experience on that type, and that one or another PzIV was then held back as training vehicle for the other companies, until the next delivery would kick in.
EDIT 2: According to many war diaries, tank companies that were rebuilt or that were in the process of conversion (to diff. tank models), used to receive one or another "sample" of the particular model for training purposes, before the entire company/Abteilung was equipped with tanks. So I wouldn't be surprised if they had kept the French tanks in the II. Abteilung to maintain a minimum combat value until sufficient numbers of PzIV had reached the frontline.
GoodGuy, the action you're describing sounds like Pegasus Bridge in the British Airborne sector, but I think you're confusing photographic evidence with the American paratroopers actions at La Fiere Bridge.
Actually I thought the picture was taken somewhere in Ranville, around 1 kilometer away from the bridge, but I'm not sure anymore whether the particular French tank was up against US AT guns or British ATs/PIATs, I just remember seeing an AT gun, a French tank and a StuG .. there were 2 or 3 pics, one showing the tank, then the photographer must have made a turn to the opposite direction to take a pic of the gun.
I'd agree that right at Pegasus bridge, people seem to keep confusing a burned out halftrack with French equipment.
There are no photos of knocked-out French beute tanks in the British sector....believe me, I've looked.
Well, the French tanks were listed on 1st of June. The Pz.Rgt. 100 (or 22 [;)]) was the only tank unit in the sector during the first vital days. There is no evidence that all of the few French tanks were already phased out by 6th of June, either, imho.
I've seen these pics roughly 2-4 years ago, in some forum where people asked to identify a tank/picture. It wasn't one of the usual forums packed with history buffs, but sadly I can't remember the URL. I bookmarked it back then, but I lost my bookmarks like a year ago when I switched to a new 'puter.
And a quote from the file I linked:
Who compiled that pdf you linked above?
Well, his take is based on an internet site that doesn't exist anymore. In a reply, Jan-Hendrik, a really knowledgeable guy, states Zetterlinger's page as source, and this page here:
http://www.diedeutschewehrmacht.de/21%20pz%20div.htm , partially based on research by Martin Block (who checked BA-MA material and who is being mentioned below the 1945 entries of the 21st PD), which doesn't list a Pz.Rgt.22 as part of 21st Pz.Div. BEFORE 1945, either, though.