A30 Challenger

[yantaylor]

Hi everyone.

I think I asked this question some years back, but I cannot recollect if I did or not.

But did the British tank regiments which were equipped with Cromwell tanks, have the A30 Challenger as a heavy support tank in the same way as the Sherman regiments had their Firefly's?

I know that there was only around 200 Challengers produced, which makes it highly unlikely, so I expect that Firefly's may have been issued to Cromwell Squadrons, but the Challengers must have been issued somewhere.

Regards
Yan.

[Gary Kennedy]

It is one of those tortuous explanations :>

In 21AG, the Armd Recce Regts of 7th, 11th and Gds Armd Divs had Cromwells and these were slated to be partnered with the Challengers (in the same way Armd Regts proper mixed 75-mm and 17-pr Shermans). The Challengers didn't start to arrive in theatre until late summer of 1944 (there doesn't seem to be an absolutely agreed date, some Regts might mention them earlier but I tend to have August stuck in my head). Authorised issue also extended to the Armd Recce of the Polish Armd Div and the Czech Indep Armd Bde (the latter being largely Cromwell equipped). 22nd Armd Bde of 7th Armd Div was the remaining major Cromwell equipped unit, but they used 17-pr Shermans, not Challengers.

Unit Entitlements at the end of 1944 were 15 each for the Armd Recce Regts of 7th, 11th, Gds and Pol Armd Divs and 4 for the Czech Armd Bde. When 11th Armd Div switched to the Comet they were supposed to lose their Challengers but still had some on the books into March and April 1945. The Canadians might have reported a few for familiarisation and evaluation, but did not use them as standard kit.

Gary

[yantaylor]

Thanks Gary.

When the Firefly was introduced, was it held in a troop of its own?

The British seemed to change their make up later in the war [circa 44-45] and it looks like a standard tank squadron had five troops of thee tanks plus a four tank SHQ. Later they it seems that they changed to four troops of four tanks with one being a firefly.
This seems straight forward, but I am sure that I read years ago, that this was really four troops of Sherman [each with 3 tanks, and one troop of Firefly's [4 tanks].

I recall discussing the SQ HQ and its addition of two CS tanks a few months ago, I will have to try and find that post again, as I cannot remember just what these CS tanks really were, as we stopped using the old vehicles mounting the 3.7in howitzer in 1943.

Regards
Yan.

[Gary Kennedy]

It sort of depends...

The way I've come to look at it is that that, despite the various changes, the Armd Regt of 1944-45 was still based on a total of 61 cruisers. The WE laid that out as 4 tanks at RHQ, with three Sqns, each with 4 tanks as SHQ, commanding five Tps, each of 3 tanks. The WE also recognised that the specific formation of Tps and Sqns would be varied according to operational need, and the equipment available.

When the 17-pr Sherman came in the original intent was to have 15 per Armd Regt, so one 75-mm armed Sherman in each Tps would be replaced by a 17-pr. In reality the best that could be done as of June 1944 was 12 17-prs per Armd Regt. Regts then had to decide how to distribute those to best effect. The most common approach was to reorder the Sqn into four Tps each of four tanks (three 75-mm gun and one 17-pr), but still living within a 19-tank Squadron, so SHQ lost a tank. Some Regts did go for a concentration of tanks within a single Tp, but I don't think the idea persisted or was widespread.

CS tanks in 21AG are reasonably easy to dispose of; none whatsoever in British Armd Regts equipped with the Sherman as their main vehicle, two per Sqn HQ for Regts equipped with the Cromwell. Supposedly deleted by 11th Armd Div when they converted to the Comet, but still shown in the AFV returns in Mar-May1945. The Canadian units brought 105-mm M4s into the mix when they transferred from Italy, and latterly these show up in other Cdn Regts already in 21AG.

Gary

[yantaylor]

Thanks Gary, the reason I asked was that when I was putting our Christmas decorations back into the loft, I decided to uncover my model vehicle collection, which is made up of 1/76 and 1/72 AFVs. I forgot that I had so many plus tons of figures from nine different nations from WW2.

I started to arrange my British Sherman’s and Cromwell’s into various troops [as you do when go retro and forget you are 59 and not 19]. I don’t have any Challengers just Sherman’s, Firefly’s, Cromwell’s and Churchill’s. But I just forgot how to arrange them into Troops and Squadrons.

So I like the format you suggested for France 1944 and go with this;

SHQ: 3 x Sherman’s
4 x Troops each with: 3 x Sherman’s and 1 x Firefly

I would guess that Cromwell Squadrons would be the same but change the Sherman’s to Cromwell’s in the Troops.

Would this work with Churchill Squadrons too?

The light tank troop which was issued with Stuarts, would be built along the lines of three troops of three Light Tanks and two more at troop HQ.

Regards
Yan.

[Sheldrake]

Thanks Gary.

When the Firefly was introduced, was it held in a troop of its own?

The British seemed to change their make up later in the war [circa 44-45] and it looks like a standard tank squadron had five troops of thee tanks plus a four tank SHQ. Later they it seems that they changed to four troops of four tanks with one being a firefly.
This seems straight forward, but I am sure that I read years ago, that this was really four troops of Sherman [each with 3 tanks, and one troop of Firefly's [4 tanks].

I recall discussing the SQ HQ and its addition of two CS tanks a few months ago, I will have to try and find that post again, as I cannot remember just what these CS tanks really were, as we stopped using the old vehicles mounting the 3.7in howitzer in 1943.

Regards
Yan.

The standard was one firefly per troop. IRRC a couple of regiments played with a firefly squadron. These were the regiments equipped with two squadrons of DD tanks each for the Normandy landings. I don't think there was a DD Version of the firefly (barrel too long for the DD screen) and so the DD squadrons were all 75mm for the landing itself. So having allowed the 75mm tanks to train together there is at least half an argument for training the residue to be landed from landing craft and with a higher proportion of fireflies to train together. There are some wartime documents saying that this wasn't a good idea.

I also read that with the introduction of a better HE round and more fireflies the proportion may have risen to two fireflies and two 75mm tanks by the end of 1944.

[Gary Kennedy]

Yes, the Unit Entitlements (UEs) for 17-prs had increased by the end of 1944. It had been 36 per Armd Bde in June 1944, becoming 90 by Dec44 before dropping back to 72 by March 1945. The 90 figure indicates a move back to five Tps of 3 tanks each, with two 17-pr and one 75-mm, and the 72 total four Tps of 4 tanks, with 2 each of 75-mm and 17-pr.

Cromwell Sqns in Armd Recce Regts had a UE of 15 per Regt, allowing one per Tp of three tanks. In the absence of Challengers 75-m Cromwell tanks were used. 22 Armd Bde on Cromwells had the same UE of 36 17-prs in June 1944, increased to 45 by Dec44, and going to 72 by March 1945 (though they don't look to have gotten terribly close to that figure in practice).

No 17-prs in your Churchill Sqn please! 18 Churchills per Sqn, 3 in SHQ and five Tps of 3 each as the standard format, with two CS tanks in SHQ and a UE of 2 75-mm and 1 6-pr per Tp.

Gary

[Richard Anderson]

The standard was one firefly per troop. IRRC a couple of regiments played with a firefly squadron. These were the regiments equipped with two squadrons of DD tanks each for the Normandy landings. I don't think there was a DD Version of the firefly (barrel too long for the DD screen) and so the DD squadrons were all 75mm for the landing itself. So having allowed the 75mm tanks to train together there is at least half an argument for training the residue to be landed from landing craft and with a higher proportion of fireflies to train together. There are some wartime documents saying that this wasn't a good idea.

I also read that with the introduction of a better HE round and more fireflies the proportion may have risen to two fireflies and two 75mm tanks by the end of 1944.

As in everything to do with D-Day, the reality was not quite so clear cut. As I know you know.

Actually, the Sherman 17-pdr with the DD regiments in the assault were technically not considered part of the regiment, but were rather part of the naval plan as "concrete-busters" (CB). The CB were a late idea and were intended to work similarly to the Centaurs in the LCT(A), but were to run in on the flanks of the landing and would specifically target concrete bunkers, "sniping" at the embrasures (thus their designation). The tanks were actually furnished from the Forward Delivery Squadron supporting each armoured brigade, while the crews were drawn from the regimental 1st Reinforcement. After landing, each was to join one of the two DD squadrons as a "temporary" attachment, which turned out to be into July.

It was originally planned that each brigade sector would have a pair of CB tanks and the original landing craft allotment gave one LCT (CB) each for SWORD and UTAH, and two each for SWORD, JUNO, and GOLD. However, in the event only the LCT (CB) at SWORD (LTIN 2337) and JUNO (LTIN 2338 and 2041) are known to have carried Sherman 17-pdr on D-Day as planned. A total of 5 CB are mentioned in various of the AAR, so it seems likely GOLD also had its CB, but no account I was ever able to find described anything other than Centaur on the LCT (A) of 108th and 109th LCT (A) Flotilla. Curiously too, TNA ADM 179/458, Western Task Force, 1944 Mar-May, p. 7, mentions “EX-CB’s” along with LCT (A) and LCT (HE) intended for OMAHA Beach. It seems likely the limited number of Sherman 17-pdr for issue was the deciding factor.

Otherwise, the DD regiments on GOLD, JUNO, and SWORD each were issued four Sherman 17-pdr, one for each of the four troops in C Squadron, which was the follow-on squadron equipped with wading tanks.

The issue to the non-DD regiments in the brigades was also complicated. IIRC< RAC LIaison Letter No. 2 mentions specifics on on how the Sherman 17pdr were employed.

[yantaylor]

I know that the Centaur was only built in small number, around 80. The Royal Marines had a batch of them.
Did any manage to filter down to regular Cromwell regiments?

So far you guys have been great and the response marvelous.

Yan.

[Richard Anderson]

I know that the Centaur was only built in small number, around 80. The Royal Marines had a batch of them.

A few more that that were produced...1,781 beginning with 30 in January 1943 and ending with 1 in February 1945.

The 20 troops in the five RM Armoured Support squadrons each had four, which is your 80. However, many were also converted to other uses. There was also a Centaur bulldozer, an OP tank, and an AA tank.

1,020 Centaur 6-pdr
177 Centaur 75mm
65 Centaur 95mm (another 15, probably 6-pdr, were converted for use on D-Day)
361 Centaur OP
100 Centaur Polsten AA
177 Centaur bulldozer

Centaur was the A27(L), the Cromwell built by Leyland with the old Liberty engine and Merrit-Brown transmission of which the first 950 were so equipped. The remainder were fitted with Meteor engines as they became more available.

Did any manage to filter down to regular Cromwell regiments?

Not as gun tanks.

So far you guys have been great and the response marvelous.

Yan.

Glad to help.

[Sheldrake]

The standard was one firefly per troop. IRRC a couple of regiments played with a firefly squadron. These were the regiments equipped with two squadrons of DD tanks each for the Normandy landings. I don't think there was a DD Version of the firefly (barrel too long for the DD screen) and so the DD squadrons were all 75mm for the landing itself. So having allowed the 75mm tanks to train together there is at least half an argument for training the residue to be landed from landing craft and with a higher proportion of fireflies to train together. There are some wartime documents saying that this wasn't a good idea.

I also read that with the introduction of a better HE round and more fireflies the proportion may have risen to two fireflies and two 75mm tanks by the end of 1944.

As in everything to do with D-Day, the reality was not quite so clear cut. As I know you know.

Actually, the Sherman 17-pdr with the DD regiments in the assault were technically not considered part of the regiment, but were rather part of the naval plan as "concrete-busters" (CB). The CB were a late idea and were intended to work similarly to the Centaurs in the LCT(A), but were to run in on the flanks of the landing and would specifically target concrete bunkers, "sniping" at the embrasures (thus their designation). The tanks were actually furnished from the Forward Delivery Squadron supporting each armoured brigade, while the crews were drawn from the regimental 1st Reinforcement. After landing, each was to join one of the two DD squadrons as a "temporary" attachment, which turned out to be into July.

It was originally planned that each brigade sector would have a pair of CB tanks and the original landing craft allotment gave one LCT (CB) each for SWORD and UTAH, and two each for SWORD, JUNO, and GOLD. However, in the event only the LCT (CB) at SWORD (LTIN 2337) and JUNO (LTIN 2338 and 2041) are known to have carried Sherman 17-pdr on D-Day as planned. A total of 5 CB are mentioned in various of the AAR, so it seems likely GOLD also had its CB, but no account I was ever able to find described anything other than Centaur on the LCT (A) of 108th and 109th LCT (A) Flotilla. Curiously too, TNA ADM 179/458, Western Task Force, 1944 Mar-May, p. 7, mentions “EX-CB’s” along with LCT (A) and LCT (HE) intended for OMAHA Beach. It seems likely the limited number of Sherman 17-pdr for issue was the deciding factor.

Otherwise, the DD regiments on GOLD, JUNO, and SWORD each were issued four Sherman 17-pdr, one for each of the four troops in C Squadron, which was the follow-on squadron equipped with wading tanks.

The issue to the non-DD regiments in the brigades was also complicated. IIRC< RAC LIaison Letter No. 2 mentions specifics on on how the Sherman 17pdr were employed.

Thank you for the clarification. This might be the rationale for grouping the reinforcing fireflies together rather than parceling them out individually to squadrons in the middle of a battle. There is some good psychology bringing the reinforcements in together and introducing them to the regiment collectively. The firefly is a good bit of kit, but how much trust could you put in some to play a key part in your team if you had never met them before?

[yantaylor]

No 17-prs in your Churchill Sqn please! 18 Churchills per Sqn, 3 in SHQ and five Tps of 3 each as the standard format, with two CS tanks in SHQ and a UE of 2 75-mm and 1 6-pr per Tp.

Gary

Gary, I always thought that Churchill gun tanks where issued differently depending on the theater they were serving.
Northern Europe 1944-45, mainly Mk. VIs & Mk. VIIs

Italy 1943-45,mainly Mk. IIIs, Mk. IVs & NA75s

So did the later marks mounting the 75mm [not counting the NA75 which was only a stop gap] ever make it to Italy? and in return, did the marks mounting the 6 pdr serve in Northern Europe.

Regards
Yan.

[Gary Kennedy]

Italy is a definite Achilles' Heel for me as to what tank types served when and with who. In 21AG in early 1944 the Churchill tanks were initially Mark III and IV with the 6-pr, and a conversion process was begun to convert the 6-pr guns to 75-mm. This wasn't completed by the time the Tk Bdes were deployed and at some point it was decide to keep a portion of tanks in Churchill Regts with the 6-pr. The UE was one 6-pr and two 75-mm per three tank Tp, though AFV returns show a decline in the numbers of 6-pr tanks in the last few months of action.

So definitely Churchill 6-prs in NWE, but I don't know if the Marks VI and VII with a 75-mm made it to Italy. There was certainly some shortage there of Churchill tanks as I recall one Regt at least having to draw Sherman tanks to make up a shortfall (the North Irish Horse?).

Gary

[yantaylor]

Thanks Gary, I didn't know that the 6 pdr Churchill made it to Northern Europe.

In 1944, Italy seemed to be lacking behind with new equipment, I remember reading that a Canadian armoured division, received a load of worn out Sherman's and White scout cars when it went into action in Italy.

Yan.

[Gooner1]

So definitely Churchill 6-prs in NWE, but I don't know if the Marks VI and VII with a 75-mm made it to Italy. There was certainly some shortage there of Churchill tanks as I recall one Regt at least having to draw Sherman tanks to make up a shortfall (the North Irish Horse?).

Gary

According to the 7th April 1945 15th AG AFV returns:
21st Tank Brigade had 36 Churchill 75mm Heavy - presumably the MkVII - and, interestingly, 12 Crocodile MkVIIs, along with 27 CS 95mm, 48 6-pdrs and 47 75mm Churchills
7th Armoured Brigade had 24 CS 95mm, 20 6-pdrs, 9 75mm, 24 75mm MkVI and 24 75mm Heavy
25th Armoured Engineer Brigade had 32 Crocodiles, 31 AVRE and 30 Octopi (ARKs)

The September 15th AG AFV returns show just 1 Churchill 75mm Heavy in the Tank Replacement Group and 9 more in Ordnance Stock, Workshops & Training