First foray into the Western Front in 28mm (updated 27 08 23)

[monk2002uk]

Turning to the Australian perspective, I have been examining the various war diaries and other accounts for the first attack on 22/23 July. The first aspect is around the deployment and use of Lewis Guns. All the sources so far confirm that Lewis guns were distributed as teams, rather than sections. This distinction is clearly made when the specialist bombers from Battalion Headquarters are described as a 'section'. In the case of 3rd Battalion, there were two Lewis gun teams assigned to the whole battalion. They were attached to C and D Companies, forming part of the 3rd attack wave. The 3rd wave was sub-divided into two 'lines', with the bomber section attached to the first line and the Lewis gun teams to the second line. The Lewis gunners were expected to make for the strong points that the engineers and pioneers were instructed to build. This is consistent with the role of Lewis guns in providing covering fire once a position had been consolidated. To help with provisioning the Lewis guns, three men each from C and D Companies were assigned to 'accompany the gun crew and carry extra magazines'.

The Australian attack was launched under the cover of a lifting barrage. The men only had short distances to cover, which they managed to do so effectively that the German defenders were taken by surprise. Accounts talk of machine gunners being attacked before firing. In other battles on the Somme, several attacks on BUAs required units to attack over much longer distances. In these cases, Lewis guns were used to provide a base of fire, pinning unsuppressed German defenders including machine guns whilst the riflemen and bombers manoeuvred against them. Thus Lewis guns would facilitate entry into BUAs but, once in the ruined villages, the bombers and mopper-uppers took over. I will touch on the roles of the latter specialist types in another post.

Robert

[monk2002uk]

Although Pozières itself was a village, the German defences including significant numbers of mutually supporting trenches. Most of the Australian attacks involved taking these trenches, rather than the fighting in the BUA itself. The situation was different in Longueval, for example, where the BUA was more complex and larger. The following account is typical of Lewis gun involvement in trench attacks. The details are quoted from Bean's official history:

'[On the 25th July] it was 3.55 when the leading companies of the 4th [Battalion] under Major Brown, headed by the bombing platoon under Lieutenant Boileau and three Lewis Guns under Lieutenant Cooke, and the company bombers, began their advance up the winding thoroughfare of "K" from the 2nd Battalion's barricade. ["K" Trench is marked as 3/157 on the German map of Pozières posted on March 20]. The trench here was about five feet in depth, with brown earthen walls. The Germans waited quietly behind their barricade, and the first intimation of their position received by the Australian bombers was the sudden bursting of about half-a-dozen stick-bombs, which killed or wounded several and caused a monetary scatter. Boileau and Sergeant Baxter, however, rallied the men and began steadily to bomb the enemy. Germans farther along the trench hampered the bombers by sniping over distant traverses. To check this and prevent the German bombers from jumping up to look where they threw, the Lewis gunners in rear of the bombers mounted their weapons on the sides of the trench and directed their fire ahead of the attack. By this time the two leading companies of the 8th were fast advancing through the village in extended lines. Traill's company of the 8th, now under Lieutenant Fay, followed some distance in rear, keeping pace with the 4th Battalion's bombers, who were not difficult to locate, since both they and the Lewis gunners were now advancing in the open, along the parapets. ...on the left, the Lewis gunners of the company [from 8th Battalion], firing at the Germans in front of the 4th, greatly helped the progress of the bombers, and the enemy retirement in "K" became faster and faster."

Lewis guns operated best when firing across longer lines of sight than were available in close quarters fighting.

Robert

[TacticalPainter]

More Germans completed, this time a few support units and once again all from Great War Miniatures.

[armchairgeneral]

Excellent work on those 

[Metternich]

Superb painting.

[monk2002uk]

Lovely paint jobs. The GWM range is very good and you have showcased the quality of the casts.

Robert

[monk2002uk]

The regimental history for Infanterie Regiment nr. 27 arrived yesterday. Part of the 6th Company was positioned on the southern side of Pozières, sandwiched between 10th and 11th Companies from RIR 77 (whose history has also arrived but I have not translated yet). Here is the relevant section of the history pertaining to the assault on 23rd July:

"During the night of July 22/23, the enemy attacked the position in front of Pozières with strong forces. They managed to break through the left wing of 4./157 and the right wing of 10./R.I.R. 77 with several companies, due to the fact that the trench garrison had been annihilated in this sector by very heavy artillery fire. The attack in front of the 6./27 and 11./77 was repulsed with heavy casualties, some of which were inflicted during close combat [in the trench south of Pozières not in the town itself]. 6./27 noticed the English [sic. Australians] in the rear and immediately deployed an M.G. thereby avoiding complete encirclement. The remnants of 6./27 and 10./77 retreated north so as not to be completely surrounded. Likewise, part of 6./27 (10 men) fell back to the switch line north-east of Pozières. The enemy repeatedly renewed his attack. An attempt was made to rally and counter-attack with elements of I.R. 62 and R.I.R. 77 but this failed and the English were able to penetrate further into Pozières. The situation was unclear. The two sector commanders, Hptm. Lyons, II. Battalion/27, and Major von Lettow, III. Battalion/77, noticed around 0400 hours that the enemy was in Pozières and conducted a fighting withdrawal from the town with their staff. They immediately deployed forces for a counterattack on Pozières, namely Major von Lettow with II./157 and Hptm. Lyons with parts of 5./27. The attack went in at about 0500 hours towards the enemy in Pozières. It was directed along both sides of the main street on the north-east edge of the town. By this time, however, the English had already fed substantial reinforcements into Pozières, estimated to be at least two battalions. It soon became apparent that a large number of enemy machine guns had been set up, so that the counterattack did not advance and it was not possible to recapture the town back from the English. Hauptmann Lyons and Doctor Albrecht, who had left the command post shortly before the English entered the town to bandage the wounded, were taken prisoner by the English."

Robert

[TacticalPainter]

Thanks Robert, very interesting and detailed series of posts. I think Alex Southeran who designed the scenario has carried out archaeological work in the area too.

[monk2002uk]

Thank you. The archaeology of the area is very interesting. I have had the privilege of going down into the tunnels near La Boiselle for example. It was a vivid though only partial reminder of what conditions were like.

Robert

[monk2002uk]

The history from Reserve-Infanterie-Regiment nr.77 has been a bit more difficult to navigate. The relevant section is quite short:

"In the early hours of the 22nd July, the enemy artillery fire abated somewhat but started again at 0700 hours with unusual intensity and continued uninterrupted into the evening. At 0850 hours 14th Infantry Brigade issued an order for 9th, 10th, and 11th Companies [of III. Battalion, RIR 77) and their staff to be replaced by three companies and staff from III. Battalion, IR 62. [Note that 10th Company, RIR 77 was defending the trench line due south of Pozières in between 4./157 and part of [Teile] 6./27.]

A short pause in the [artillery] fire was followed at 2130 hours by another heavy barrage on the front line, including the first and second trenches. The relief of 9th, 11th, and 12th Companies was carried out between 12 midnight and 0045 hours [on the 23rd July]. They moved off to a bivouac in Ligny.

The relief for 10th Company had not arrived by 0100 hours. In the meantime, the English [sic. Australians] managed to break through the companies on the right flank [of 10./RIR 77 - namely 3rd and 4th Companies, IR 157]. [The Australians] attacked 10th Company on the right flank and from the rear. Desperate hand-to-hand combat ensued, which probably wiped out 10th Company."

Note that the last paragraph appears to be supposition because the whole of 10th Company was wiped out. The description of the mode of attack is at variance with IR 157's account. This is not unusual. Any break through is usually attributed to the failure of a flank company(s). This is not unique to German regimental histories. Given that 10th Company had been in the line for several days and was expecting to be relieved at any time, it would not be surprising if the company was completely overwhelmed by the Australians. This would fit with the accounts from IR 157 and from IR 67.

Here is the relevant map from the RIR 77 regimental history. 10th Company is marked '10 Kp.':



Robert

[monk2002uk]

"...It soon became apparent that a large number of enemy machine guns had been set up, so that the counterattack did not advance..."

It is important to be cautious about what is meant by 'machine guns' from 1916 onwards. The term covers both automatic rifles/light machine guns as well as medium machine guns, often without discriminating between the two. We know from previous accounts that the Australians posted Lewis guns in strongpoints on the edge of Pozières. Undoubtedly fire from Lewis guns contributed to the German description above.

I have checked the relevant Australian Machine Gun Company war diaries. 1st Australian Machine Gun Company fired indirect barrages during the assault phase of the attack on Pozières but two Vickers machine guns were then taken forward to a strongpoint in Pozières. No time is given for this but it seems likely they were in place by the time of the German counter-attack.

Robert

[Shahbahraz]

That's correct, I only know you from your CoC games. O lordy What other gaming goodness have I been missing? 

Well AWI Sharp Practice for one...

[monk2002uk]

From the evidence so far, the Germans appear not to have defended the actual village of Pozières directly. There are no accounts of ruined house to ruined house fighting in this instance, though there were examples in other towns on the Somme, such as Longueval. This doesn't mean that a 'what if' scenario based on Pozières is invalid. I want to come back to this type of fighting separately.

Historically, Pozières reflected two types of fighting from a skirmish perspective: trench-based close combat; and clearance of underground fortified cellars once a village is captured. The latter process was known as 'ratting' by the Australians. There are some details of this process in Australian sources relating to Pozières, which I will share.

The trench-based close combat was similar to many other examples, both local to Pozières and more widely on the Western Front generally. The most vivid examples around Pozières related not to the village itself, although 'K' trench featured heavily in the immediate aftermath of the first Australian assault on Pozières, but to the fighting along the O.G. trenches (I and II - "O.G." referred to the "Old German" second line of trenches from July 1st, when the Somme infantry battle started).

Before examining these types of warfare in more detail, it is worth reviewing how "Through the Mud and Blood" rules handle the tactics involved. With respect to close quarters fighting, two 'specialist' functions are considered alongside 'The Rifleman': 'The Bomber'; and 'Trench Cleaner'.

'The Bomber' attacks close range targets with a bonus, attacking 'as a group rather than throwing individual grenades'. In addition to a bonus for operating at close range, there is an additional range band that defines the maximum effective range.

'Trench Cleaner' is defined as "an aggressive soldier whose job is to mop up any enemy resistance at close quarters".

I want to return to these definitions after considering more historical evidence of how tactics played out in BUAs and trenches during the Battle of the Somme, ie before the systematic introduction of rifle grenades on the British side and before the introduction of the MG08/15 on the German side.

Robert

[Grumpy Gnome]

Another entertaining and informative thread! Great stuff!

[monk2002uk]

I have not studied the Australian training programme for the lead-up to the Battle of the Somme. The most detailed study on this was published by Jon Porter in his wonderful two-volume (so far) series 'Zero Hour, Z Day'. Each volume deals with one British Corps in the preparations for and execution of the attack on July 1st, 1916. Within each volume, there is a section entitled: 'Training, Rehearsals and Orders'.

Volume 2 covers XV Corps and the operations involving Fricourt and Mametz. Porter wrote:

"The introduction of new weapons necessitated intensive training and consideration of tactics employed in their use in cooperation with the principal infantry weapon - the rifle. Previous British encounters with German infantry had exposed poor training, inferior grenades and defective tactics which usually resulted in Tommies coming off second best.

In a direct trench assault, grenades would now take the lead role as the primary infantry weapon. Assault and trench clearance training would develop around bombing tactics, with rifle and bayonet, rifle-grenade, Lewis-gun and Stokes taking a supporting role to bombing manoeuvres.

In order to achieve these training goals, initially, divisional 'Grenade Schools' were established."

Porter has included some very useful diagrams. This one covers the various roles and processes involved in bombing along trenches:



He also presented a description of the platoon organisation for a bombing attack:



Robert