Gooner1 wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020, 14:58I don't think anyone would call the men of 7th Armoured Division who had 'only' served since Normandy or Italy or Alamein as inexperienced though?stg 44 wrote: ↑16 Nov 2020, 18:13
7th Armoured lost most of their experienced guys in November. From "Churchill's Desert Rats in Northwest Europe" by Patrick Delaforce in very late November (29th is the closest date mentioned in the text) all the men who had been overseas for 5 years could go home, which removed the most experienced men from just about every combat unit in the division. Queens 1/6th and 1/7th was broken up due to casualties and replaced on December 3rd by the 2nd bat. Devonshire regiment and 9th battalion Durham light infantry. So you're right in that they were replenished, I had thought that happened later in December. Within the combat units the experienced men who returned home were replaced by new drafts and had a fews weeks training in the unit by the 16th of December.
Absolutely not, which is why I didn't say that. Simply that the "OGs" of the division were gone by December 1944 and as far as I can tell sent back to train the next generation of warriors. As noted in the book they were replaced with raw recruits with limited training, though operational training in the unit eventually helped them fully integrate into the veteran unit...just not in time for mid-December 1944, as the offensive operations they were to take part in were at least a month or more out, not including the Ardennes imposed delay on operations.
Yes I have found that from another source. From the context it sounded like it was a 'farewell present' from the artillery before it moved out to get ready for Veritable in January, the originally planned date. Certainly had the offensive forces been in place then (which isn't 100% certain given that during the build up to the historical Bulge campaign units were arriving still as late as the 15th of December) and had been identified would have had a bad day. Sounds like, based on what reports I can find of German tactics at the time against British and US forces in the area, that any offensive would be preceded by night infiltration, which apparently had very good success against Wallied forces to the end of the war, that would really have exploited the biggest weakness of 7th AD and might have cracked the front lines before the Panzers or artillery had gotten involved depending on the scale of infiltration. I know I wouldn't want to be a tanker used as infantry in that situation, especially given the weather being what it was and giving good cover for just such a tactic. Given the terrain (woods and plenty of towns/cities), infiltration wouldn't be all that hard and followed up hard by mobile forces the British heavy corps artillery might quickly find itself on the front lines.Gooner1 wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020, 14:581st Battalion the Rifle Brigade. the Motor Battalion of 22nd Armoured Brigade. I think most of the tankers in the division took their turn dismounted and manning the frontline as ersatz infantry in that period. It enabled the infantry to take their turn out of the line in comfy billets but no, not a great defensive situation. On the other hand, from the War Diary of M Battery RHA "14 Dec 30 Corps arranged an HB programme on all German guns along the Corps front. The Bty took part. In all 6 Fd Regts, 7 Medium Regts, 2 Heavy Regts, 1 Super heavy Regt and one Heavy AA Regt were engaged and 12000s were fired."Apparently after the 7th of December when the division took over from the Guards Armoured the line from the Meuse to Sittard the '1st RB' (not exactly sure which rifle brigade that was) held a 3000 yard front from Nieustadt to the main road from Maastricht and Sittard to Holtum and in the text were complaining that they did not have enough strength to hold the line and patrol according to Col. Paley their CO. Also apparently the 8th Hussars at one point had to leave their tanks in the rear as act as infantry on the line. Division HQ was at Limbricht with only a small minefield between them and the enemy front lines 3000m yards; eventually, doesn't say which date, they switched with 5th RTR at Geleen.
Doesn't sounds like a great defensive situation.
I've found a source on part of the 43rd that said they were off the line on the 16th. So in this what if situation how quickly do you think they could respond and get into action against a surprise attack on the morning of the 16th? Historical response times aren't really all that helpful given that British forces weren't attacked, so they waited until they got requests for help before reacting.Gooner1 wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020, 14:58Guards Armoured Division got an order to move 'in two or three days time' on 16th December. 43rd Division and 34th Tank Brigade started moving away on the 19th. All their planned moves were affected by the Ardennes offensive. 34th Tank Brigade who had their tanks on tank transporters en route to Tilburg were turned around and directed south to Liege for instance.As to the plan for Shears it does sounds like it would have been a decent one had it gone forward as planned, but by the 12th it was cancelled and from what I can piece together units were moving off the line and reshuffling to Veritable and by the 16th were definitely not in a position to defend against an unexpected offensive. 9th AGRA does sound like it was around Sittard and would have been the corps assets, with 5th AGRA somewhere west of the Meuse for Shears at least in early December (no idea exactly where or if it was even still present by the 16th).
If you have any info about that I'd appreciate it.
9th AGRAs didn't move much, its HQ moving from Munstergeleen to Rumpen on the 21st. Don't know about 5th AGRA but given the general lack of urgency in operations it seems unlikely it would have moved before the 16th.
Sure, but I meant more in the sense of the 52nd division as a reserve then being short of forces needed to stop a breakthrough of 7th AD's lines. Given the proximity of the Meuse crossings and 9th army HQ at Maastricht to the front, there is very little room for error when the corps and divisions in the way are short on infantry.Gooner1 wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020, 14:58Well it wasn't such a problem by December as two data points provided should indicate. Nothing unusual in brigades temporarily being detached or coming under command of another formation during lulls in operations.Every division history I can find from the 43rd division, Guards Armoured, and 7th Armoured lists a shortage of infantry as a major problem. After all the 43rd division had to borrow a brigade from the 52nd for a while in December despite just holding the line.
What's your source on that? From what I can find from the 7AD book mentioned earlier GAD was to the east of 7AD after they were relieved between the Meuse and Sittard and it was only before Shears was cancelled that GAD was in reserve. On the 12 AG maps from the 10th-16th of December GAD is shown in reserve, but then from about the 13th on they take over the line from Sittard to the US 84th ID.Gooner1 wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020, 14:58The GAD, as mentioned, were in reserve behind 7AD. Best as I can make out 43rd Division, possibly including one brigade of 52nd Division, were in the line with 34th TB whilst 52nd were behind with 8th AB. 52nd replaced 43rd from the 19th December as the latter division moved.Where exactly was 43rd division holding the line? Where exactly was the Guards? What was the deal with the 52nd division once Shears was cancelled on the 12th?
The 12th Army Group sitmap is probably slightly wrong.
Of course you are probably right that 12th AG maps probably lacked the timely fine detail on deployments.