Armd Inf Bns - mounted vs dismounted assault

[Gary Kennedy]

A topic on another forum got around to the subject of armoured/halftrack infantry and the likelihood of their staying mounted during a offensive operation. It considered both German and US practise but I'm thinking more of US units here. I think there was a general assumption in the other forum that Armd Inf would stay in their halftracks for as long as possible during an assault, and use the vehicle weapons to provide cover once they were on foot. Meanwhile the Field Manuals issued for the Armd Inf Bn (17-42) and Armd Inf Co (17-40), both of November 1944, convey the message that Armd Inf will 'mostly' fight dismounted, with vehicle weapons offering support where they could be largely protected from enemy fire.

I had an admittedly brief spin through some AARs that have been transcribed and put online by those researching the US Armored Divs, and could find very little indication of Armd Inf Bns using their halftracks to get even reasonably close to expected defensive lines before dismounting, with the majority of assaults being conducted following a sometimes long advance on foot.

Was there ever anything compiled on the frequency of mounted versus dismounted actions by the US Armd Inf Bns in the ETO? I get the impression that commanders were a lot more conservative in their use of halftracks than popular opinion would have, and it would be intersting to find out if that's the case.

Gary

[Richard Anderson]

Nothing statistical complied that I am aware of Gary. About the only case of "mounted action" I can think of is the breakthrough to Bastogne by CCR on 25 December 1944. However, even there the breakthrough was by tanks, the infantry dismounted in the towns passed through to clear the German defenses.

[Kingfish]

About the only case of "mounted action" I can think of is the breakthrough to Bastogne by CCR on 25 December 1944.

If you stretch the definition of "mounted action" a bit you could include the opening phase of Op Totalize.

[Richard Anderson]

About the only case of "mounted action" I can think of is the breakthrough to Bastogne by CCR on 25 December 1944.

If you stretch the definition of "mounted action" a bit you could include the opening phase of Op Totalize.

Yeah, if Commonwealth forces were American...

[Gary Kennedy]

Well Totalize was predominantly Canadian, so North American perhaps...

Re the original question, I was looking back at the other forum discussion that had started me thinking. A few of the contributors had served in the 1980s and 90s in Mech Inf units and spoke of APCs (M113s) being used to get troops forward and debus very close to the enemy line from covered positions, and then possibly have these vehicles provide covering fire for the troops advancing on foot. I got the impression that they may be projecting their experience and training from that much later period back to 1944-45, while Armd Inf units of the day might have regarded the M3 halftrack as not much more than a somewhat more mobile and slightly armoured truck.

I found one comment from 6th Armd Div on the subject - "Our armd inf fight from their vehicles just as long as possible. This permits the maximum use of vehicular wpns , some protection from SA fire and shrapnel, and the men are fresher for the final assault" (Twelfth Army Group, Battle Experiences No.74, 24 Oct 1944). A few other contemporary and immediate post-war period reports made more mention of the Armd Inf riding their accompanying tanks in the advance to contact rather than their own halftracks.

Gary

[Kingfish]

Well Totalize was predominantly Canadian, so North American perhaps...

But Canada is the 51st state!