*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
June 25, 2018, 03:02:28 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Author Topic: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query  (Read 449 times)

Offline Unlucky General

  • bookworm
  • Posts: 81
Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« on: June 13, 2018, 12:13:03 AM »
Okay learned colleagues, I have a technical query.

I have been trawling through images on the internet for the Dieppe raid 1942 and very definitely observe a wrecked bren carrier on the beach. I have been wondering about the precise battalion structure for the infantry and in particular the elements of the support company.

I'm reasonably certain the anti-tank elements were still ATR and 2 pounders and the fire support 3" mortars and Vickers MMG. Personally I'd want a ride up the chert if I had the main components of the Vickers or a mortar but is it possible and does anyone know if they took their ATGs? I'd have assumes they intended to rely on close tank support for anti-tank capability.

Or am I off the mark completely?

Offline vodkafan

  • mastermind
  • Posts: 1516
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2018, 05:26:58 PM »
Not sure about the 2pdrs , I didn't think standard infantry battalions had AT gun platoons until 1943, when the original HQ Company was split into HQ Coy and separate Support Coy.
But Vickers MMGs were NEVER part of the infantry battalion line up, they were organized into Machine Gun battalions.

Having said all that, the battalions at Dieppe might have been re-organized, I don't know.
2018 Painting Challenge

figures bought: Lost count after Salute and Hammerhead @700
figures painted: 70, 1 artillery piece

Online Ultravanillasmurf

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 3027
    • Ultravanillasmurf
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2018, 06:17:11 PM »
I think this is the second query on the Dieppe raid in recent weeks, I am surprised that something so significant but of such limited scope does not have the details readily available.

I look forward to hearing more on this subject (and will have to improve my knowledge on the subject).

Offline Unlucky General

  • bookworm
  • Posts: 81
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2018, 05:57:49 AM »
Yes my misstatement about the Vickers - they would have been MG sections/platoons or companies from a MG Battalion - this was also the Australian practice.

I have read that the mortar crews dragged their equipment using 'dollies' with very mixed results - so I'm surmising that the carriers were not therefor theirs. A Flames of War ORBAT has carriers attached to elements of the Calgary tanks. The Churchills came in on LCTs; however, and I have images of carriers on LCMs so I remain confused. I'm still looking.

Offline grant

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3565
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2018, 12:36:19 PM »
http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/cmhqrd-drqgmc-eng.asp?txtType=2&RfId=83

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/doc/cmhq/cmhq089.pdf

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/doc/cmhq/cmhq090.pdf

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/doc/cmhq/cmhq100.pdf

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/doc/cmhq/CMHQ101.pdf

Here are the five official Canadian Military HQ DHH reports written by LCol (then Major) C.P. Stacey, the official historian, and who the DHH building would be named after.

I wouldn’t believe anything that comes out of Flames of War. They use sketchy research mixed with pure fantasy.

Have a go at reading these reports and see what you can glean.
It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words - Orwell, 1984

Offline Unlucky General

  • bookworm
  • Posts: 81
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2018, 05:37:54 PM »
Many thanks Grant. I will begin reading those accounts shortly to be sure. Before I do I'll share what I've uncovered since posting last.

In keeping with the MG Battalion providing support rather than a support company concept (which didn't come into effect for Canadian Infantry (rifle) battalions until November 1942) the Toronto Scottish Regiment (Machine Gun) deployed a section on each LCT (a gun fore and aft). They had fixed AA mountings for air defence and carried the usual tripods for ground attack. The intent was to provide beach over-watch from the elevated vantage points the vessels could provide.

So ... the carriers weren't apparently for them either. It doesn't look like ATG capability for Infantry went beyond issuing Boys ATRs per rifle platoon (replaced later by PIAT). The 2prds ATG proved impractical as a towed/man-handled piece and were relegated to dedicated Ant-Tank roles (batteries) with the Artillery. It doesn't look like close support ATG capability was realized until after Dieppe with the adoption of the carrier -towed 6pdr.

When/if I get to the bottom of this, I am suspecting they were a part of the Calvary regiment but we'll see. 

Offline vodkafan

  • mastermind
  • Posts: 1516
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2018, 08:34:38 PM »
If the Canadians followed the British organization, the HQ company of each infantry battalion had a scout platoon of 10 carriers. Isn't it possible that they took a proportion of these along?

Offline grant

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 3565
Re: Dieppe "Operation Jubilee' Query
« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2018, 02:37:08 AM »
Unlucky glad they are of use.

I have a large number of TO&Es salvaged from the now defunct Armoured Acorn; PM your email and I will get you what I saved.

I do know you’re going generally in the wrong direction - the anti tank guns weren’t part of armoured regiments.

Let me know if I can help.

Cheers

Grant