Kings Dragoon Guards
Kings Dragoon Guards
Does any one know when the Kings Dragoon Guards had their Dingos & Marmon Herrington armoured cars updated to either Humbers or Daimlers?
Thanks Dave.
Thanks Dave.
Re: Kings Dragoon Guards
David, I don't have the complete armoured car listings, but it appears that KDG began converting after 10 October 1942, when they had just 37 Marmon Herringtons (taken from 3 SAAC), and 10 December 1942, when they reported having 12 Daimlers, 43 Marmon Herringtons, and 2 AEC. By 30 December 1942 they had dropped to 6 Daimler, and increased to 44 M-H, with the AEC remaining at 2. Between 14 January and 10 February 1943 holdings changed from 7 Daimler, 46 M-H and 2 AEC to 4 Humber, 28 M-H and 18 AEC. Then as of 9 March 1943 they reported 43 Humbers and 18 AEC, so the last of the M-H went during that period (but there were still 235 with units in ME Command!).David W wrote:Does any one know when the Kings Dragoon Guards had their Dingos & Marmon Herrington armoured cars updated to either Humbers or Daimlers?
Thanks Dave.
Hope that helps.
David, this might be of some use, if you haven't seen it already that is.
http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussa ... ss_39.html
shane
http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussa ... ss_39.html
shane
I'm glad, the poor old PAO's usually only rate a mention thanks to the old tale about Cardigan and their colourful nickname, but to my mind they were one of the most professional units to serve in WWII.
As an unofficial member of the 11th PAO's fanclub, I can only ask that in due return for the favour, you at least give them a +2 (or better) bonus for Recce when putting the game table together
shane
PS Humber Mk.III's were jan 42 for them.
As an unofficial member of the 11th PAO's fanclub, I can only ask that in due return for the favour, you at least give them a +2 (or better) bonus for Recce when putting the game table together
shane
PS Humber Mk.III's were jan 42 for them.
And there was a great deal of mutual respect between them. But to be fair, we've got to give the KDG and the South Africans a wave too.
And that's only credit on the allied side, the Germans were well up there too, and they had the right kit (at least in terms of mobility). I'd not like to sneank past A-A 3, or 33 for that matter, on some dark night.
shane
And that's only credit on the allied side, the Germans were well up there too, and they had the right kit (at least in terms of mobility). I'd not like to sneank past A-A 3, or 33 for that matter, on some dark night.
shane
- Michael Emrys
- Member
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 19:44
- Location: USA
AIUI, the Germans had a different philosophy about recce from other armies. Their expectation was to fight for information, to probe for weak spots in the enemy line that could be exploited by the other resources of the division. To that end, they were a fairly well-balanced combined arms team. I suppose this could be termed active recconaisance.
The Western Allied armies, OTOH, engaged in a generally more passive form of recconaisance, recconaisance by observation. Their recce units were expected to avoid fighting as much as possible, to employ stealth and observation from a distance wherever possible. In pursuit of this goal, they were lightly armed and fast.
The Western Allied armies, OTOH, engaged in a generally more passive form of recconaisance, recconaisance by observation. Their recce units were expected to avoid fighting as much as possible, to employ stealth and observation from a distance wherever possible. In pursuit of this goal, they were lightly armed and fast.
I think every amry had its own view on recce. I agree the Germans expected to fight, their A-A's had all the elements of a 1914 Cavalry regiment just in motorised form. The British approach was more passive in some respects, but they also practiced the same idea of deep penertration as the Germans.
If my reading is any reflexion of reality, the Germans (in recce) only expected to fight to break through the FDZ, from then on, like at lest the Brits observation was the key. One of the few German cavalry officers to make it the whole way through the war was quoted as saying the most satisfactory patrols were those with clean guns. This certainly gells with British expectations too.
Like anything the tactics depended on the situation, screening, advance and retreat. My take is the Germans were better at advanceing and retreating, but the British did the screening job better, although I'm more than willing to be wrong on this.
shane
If my reading is any reflexion of reality, the Germans (in recce) only expected to fight to break through the FDZ, from then on, like at lest the Brits observation was the key. One of the few German cavalry officers to make it the whole way through the war was quoted as saying the most satisfactory patrols were those with clean guns. This certainly gells with British expectations too.
Like anything the tactics depended on the situation, screening, advance and retreat. My take is the Germans were better at advanceing and retreating, but the British did the screening job better, although I'm more than willing to be wrong on this.
shane
Re: Kings Dragoon Guards
Going back to the K.D.G, do we know when they replaced their Dingo Sqd with Marmons?
-
- Member
- Posts: 3370
- Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 14:44
Re: Kings Dragoon Guards
Sorry David I can't help you there, I didn't know they even had a squadron of Dingos.David W wrote:Going back to the K.D.G, do we know when they replaced their Dingo Sqd with Marmons?
Alan
Re: Kings Dragoon Guards
Yes, apparently as an interim until the third Sqd could be equipped with M/H