Did the Combat Command concept basically mean two regiments?

[steverodgers801]

It all depended on the terrain and mission, generally the CC was assigned to a commander, given his task and units and then he decided how he would deploy them

[Tom from Cornwall]

Hi,

Rich mentioned that to start with the American armoured (sorry - armored) divisions followed British ideas about the infantry component being used to form firm bases and "pivots"around which the armour could manoeuvre. Can anyone identify when that idea was discarded by the American units? Were the first units to land in Normandy trained and organised to act as combined-arms teams, or was that part of the learning curve in France?

Or will I have to wait for Rich's book!

Regards

Tom

[RichTO90]

Hi,

Rich mentioned that to start with the American armoured (sorry - armored) divisions followed British ideas about the infantry component being used to form firm bases and "pivots"around which the armour could manoeuvre. Can anyone identify when that idea was discarded by the American units? Were the first units to land in Normandy trained and organised to act as combined-arms teams, or was that part of the learning curve in France?

Or will I have to wait for Rich's book!

Regards

Tom

Tom, it was essentially discarded as of the March 1942 reorganization and accompanying change to FM 17. The early division looked remarkably like a cross between a British and a German 1940-period armored division, but initial exercises appeared to follow the British model for infantry use. By the end of 1941 the results of the extensive maneuvers in Louisiana, Tennessee, and the Carolinas had invalidated a lot of the original thinking (while introducing some new oddities like the tank destroyers).

[Tom from Cornwall]

Rich,

Thanks. I've just been reading about the introduction of a task force of a Bn of tanks, a Bn of infantry and a platoon of engineers from CCB, 3 Armored Division into the 30th Division bridgehead over the river Vire on 7/8 July 44 (St Lo page 20). Was this the first action of a Amored Division in Normandy?

It would be interesting to read more detail of pre-Normandy training, and recommendations?

Regards

Tom

[RichTO90]

Rich,

Thanks. I've just been reading about the introduction of a task force of a Bn of tanks, a Bn of infantry and a platoon of engineers from CCB, 3 Armored Division into the 30th Division bridgehead over the river Vire on 7/8 July 44 (St Lo page 20). Was this the first action of a Amored Division in Normandy?

It would be interesting to read more detail of pre-Normandy training, and recommendations?

Regards

Tom

No, a task force of the 2nd AD was employed at Carentan on 11-13 June. That was TF 266 AKA the "266th Armored Battalion", which was actually the reinforced 2nd Battalion, 66th Armored Regiment. The 3rd AD was also employed in a major attack around 29 June.

[Tom from Cornwall]

Hi Rich,

Thanks for those details. I will go away and see what I can read up about them.

One further question about the early US armor in the Normandy bridgehead was whether there was a plan to launch a armor force inland like those planned on the 2nd Army front?

Cheers

Tom

[RichTO90]

Hi Rich,

Thanks for those details. I will go away and see what I can read up about them.

One further question about the early US armor in the Normandy bridgehead was whether there was a plan to launch a armor force inland like those planned on the 2nd Army front?

Not really; there wasn't anything really close that was a similar nexus. The closest were the plans for the link up with the 82nd Airborne. Elements of the 70th Tank Battalion and cavalry were to lunge inland to St Mere Eglise. In any case, as much attention was paid to antitank assets as to tank assets in the first 72-odd hours. Two Armored Groups and two TD Groups with roughly six attached battalions each.

[Aber]

Hi Rich,

Thanks for those details. I will go away and see what I can read up about them.

One further question about the early US armor in the Normandy bridgehead was whether there was a plan to launch a armor force inland like those planned on the 2nd Army front?

Cheers

Tom

I assume you mean the plan to launch armoured columns at Evrecy and Villers- Bocage?

I believe that somewhere I' ve seen a quote from Bradley explicitly rejecting the idea on the US front. Now where was it?

[Tom from Cornwall]

Hi,

I'm just coming to the end of Russell Hart's "Clash of Arms", which I bought in the hope that it would discuss American training in detail and explain changes to infantry-tank co-operation resulting from experience in Normandy. However, although he states that the American's innovated successfully and more swiftly than either the British or Canadians, I felt that he somewhat stretched what evidence he had found. I think I might need to read through it again to see if his writing style is distracting from his story.

I guess I'll just have to wait for Rich to publish!

Cheers

Tom