51st Field Regiment R.A (TA)

[MarkN]

I've been reading the war diary of 51st Field Regiment for Nov 41 and find a reference to them having 3 Armoured O.P.s. Could anyone suggest whether these would have been tanks or armoured cars? They were noted as having been moved up by rail in early Nov 41 whilst the rest of the Regiment moved by road. My initial supposition being, therefore, that they would be tracked vehicles. Any further information very welcome.

Either way the Regiment as a whole (203, 370 and 436 Bty's) moved forward on 1 Nov 41 with "36 Quads, with trailers, and guns".

RHA regiments in armoured divisions were established for 4 x light tanks as early as 1939.

1RHA and 2RHA each took theirs to France and lost them there.

The re-equipped 1RHA took another 4 to the Middle East a couple of months later, used them through Op Compass and traded them in for others part-exchange for their return to Cyrenaica in March to join 2nd Armoured Division.

4RHA were also allocated 4 which were used during Op Compass and onwards during their border skirmishes as part of various 'Jock' columns.

2RHA also took 4 to the Middle East at the end of 1940 and then on to Greece where they lost that set too.

I cannot say whether 104RHA and 107RHA had their allocation or not when serving in Cyrenaica in early 1941. Probably they did too.

[Sheldrake]

RHA regiments in armoured divisions were established for 4 x light tanks as early as 1939.

Hi Mark

What is the authority for that statement?

Nigel Evans includes organisations tables for the WE for 1940 and 1941.
http://nigelef.tripod.com/fdregt40.htm which includes 2 x scout carriers per regiment. These are not shown in the table.

and
http://nigelef.tripod.com/fdregt41.htm This shows six carriers -one per FOO Troop Commander. These refer to armoured OPs and not light tanks

The 1944 WE of SP regiments included tanks, and Armoured Brigades held some OP tanks to mount the OP parties of towed regiments.

The reason I am skeptical is because adding tanks to a war establishment means adding driver mechanics and vehicle fitters trained to maintain tanks, spares etc., I am not sure tanks could simply be added to the WE - even little ones like the light tank mk VI or M3 Stuart. And the M3 stuart is a cruiser tank by 1941 standards.

Of course FOOs could be mounted in AFVs loaned by the supported arm or acquired unofficially.

[MarkN]

Hi Sheldrake,

16-gun RHA regiments within armoured divisions had a different WE to 24-gun Fld regiments RA with infantry divisions.

My information is nuggatory from an eclectic mix of unit and formation WDs and higher HQ documentation from Kew.

One document, a WO AFV summary entitled State of Readiness for RAC (ME) dated 14/12/40 indicates 2nd Armoured Division enroute to the ME with 117 Light Tanks. Next to the number is a footnote which states: "Includes 4 used as Carriers, Armd. O.P." Those 'belonged' to 2RHA who took them to Greece. They are further mentioned in the 2RHA WD and reports submitted by them.

I have other documents showing 'allocations' of tanks where 1RHA and 2RHA have 4 against their name.

I accept the information I have details what units 'possessed' - as in not borrowed - or were allocated rather than what was written up in an establishment table. It may well be the WE table identifies them as Carriers, Armd. O.P.. However, in practice, Vickers Light Tanks were issued against those Carriers, Armd. O.P.

Your concerns regarding spares and mechanical support I feel is misplaced. RHA regiments in armoured divisions used (at least initially when the establishments were first promulgated) tracked Dragon tractors not wheeled Quads or other. Thus there would already be experience of and support for tracked vehicles within the regiment. And then, of course, there is the blindingly obvious that, as part of an armoured division, there was plenty of 'tank' knowledge and support to be had close to hand.

Perhaps, if you have Royal Horse Artillery Regiment: WE I/1931/6A/2 to hand this can be cleared up immediately. The links to the Nigel Evans website you offer are of no help - as I think you already recognise.

[David W]

Thanks Mark.

[Sheldrake]

Hi Sheldrake,

16-gun RHA regiments within armoured divisions had a different WE to 24-gun Fld regiments RA with infantry divisions.

My information is nuggatory from an eclectic mix of unit and formation WDs and higher HQ documentation from Kew.

One document, a WO AFV summary entitled State of Readiness for RAC (ME) dated 14/12/40 indicates 2nd Armoured Division enroute to the ME with 117 Light Tanks. Next to the number is a footnote which states: "Includes 4 used as Carriers, Armd. O.P." Those 'belonged' to 2RHA who took them to Greece. They are further mentioned in the 2RHA WD and reports submitted by them.

I have other documents showing 'allocations' of tanks where 1RHA and 2RHA have 4 against their name.

I accept the information I have details what units 'possessed' - as in not borrowed - or were allocated rather than what was written up in an establishment table. It may well be the WE table identifies them as Carriers, Armd. O.P.. However, in practice, Vickers Light Tanks were issued against those Carriers, Armd. O.P.

Your concerns regarding spares and mechanical support I feel is misplaced. RHA regiments in armoured divisions used (at least initially when the establishments were first promulgated) tracked Dragon tractors not wheeled Quads or other. Thus there would already be experience of and support for tracked vehicles within the regiment. And then, of course, there is the blindingly obvious that, as part of an armoured division, there was plenty of 'tank' knowledge and support to be had close to hand.

Perhaps, if you have Royal Horse Artillery Regiment: WE I/1931/6A/2 to hand this can be cleared up immediately. The links to the Nigel Evans website you offer are of no help - as I think you already recognise.

Thanks,

You may well be right about the light tanks - I have read some references to Captain Grochen of O battery 1 RHA and Bill James DCM BSM of L Bettery 2 RHA as OPs in tanks rather than carriers.

I think artillery establishments were in a state of flux. I have not read that the RHA were intended from 1939 to be the artillery for armoured divisions, though that is how it turned out. It isn't mentioned is in either Pemberton or Farndale. 1 RHA fought in France as part of the artillery group of 51 Highland Division and 2 and 5 RHA came out through Dunkirk after serving as "Army artillery." I have not seen any reference to light tanks as OP vehicles in France in 1940. (If they had have done then maybe the Arras counter attack may have turned out better)

I am not sure why the RHA never adopted the 12 gun battery structure. I think they found reasons for not being diluted with lots of national servicemen . K battery were the riding troop at St Johns wood. The Regiments overseas such as 3 &4 RHA were in no position to absorb recruits and were lower priority than building up the BEF.

I'd be interested in seeing the WE you referred to and the documents usrtifying their adoption

[Dili]

I have read of several instances of OPs in tanks, Stuart tanks.

[Knouterer]

A page from Vol. 1 of Alan Philson's OOB of the BEF as of 10th May 1940, showing the transport of a RHA regiment (with sixteen 18/25pdrs), based on WE I/1931/6A/2. According to this source, a RHA Regt had two light tanks (one per battery) while a Field Regt had two Scout Carriers in the same role. The towing vehicles are still Light Dragons.

Elsewhere, Philson lists 87 "OP carriers" (as distinct from Scout Carriers) as lost in France. That presumably means vehicles on the basis of the Universal Carrier, which had replaced the Scout and Bren Carriers in production by this time. Apparently, 205 OP Carriers were produced in 1940 and 698 in 1941.

[Knouterer]

A thought on the role of RHA Regiments: at the outbreak of war it was planned to organize several Territorial divisions as Motor Divisions, with only two brigades each, which would exploit any breakthrough achieved by the Armoured Division. This was never carried out, for lack of motor vehicles and other reasons, and after Dunkirk the designated Motor Divisions were organized as standard infantry divisions again.

However, if they had come into existence, it may have been the intention to attach the RHA regts to these Motor Divisions.

[MarkN]

Thanks Knouterer.

Sheldrake,

I think artillery establishments were in a state of flux. I have not read that the RHA were intended from 1939 to be the artillery for armoured divisions, though that is how it turned out.

In simple (simplistic?) terms, the RHA was the cavalry's artillery. When the cavalry converted to tanks, the RHA became the artillery for the armoured force by default.

It isn't mentioned is in either Pemberton or Farndale. 1 RHA fought in France as part of the artillery group of 51 Highland Division and 2 and 5 RHA came out through Dunkirk after serving as "Army artillery." I have not seen any reference to light tanks as OP vehicles in France in 1940. (If they had have done then maybe the Arras counter attack may have turned out better)

When war broke out, both 1RHA and 2RHA were part of the 1st Armoured Division. They were both sent out to France as Corps/GHQ assets. Whilst in France, 2RHA nominally was added to the newly formed 2nd Armoured Division establishment.

They were both sent out on a 16-gun establishment. RHQ 1RHA was later added to 51st Highland Div when it moved to the Saar but took just one battery with it and another 12-gun battery from RA which had done a swop. So, 1 1RHA battery served south of the Somme with 51HD and 1 north of the Somme with the main BEF contingent.

1st Armoured Division thus deployed to France with no field artillery at all. 2nd Armoured Division never left the UK

I am not sure why the RHA never adopted the 12 gun battery structure. I think they found reasons for not being diluted with lots of national servicemen . K battery were the riding troop at St Johns wood. The Regiments overseas such as 3 &4 RHA were in no position to absorb recruits and were lower priority than building up the BEF.

5RHA was formed after the start of the war and, according to post-war CAB historical notes, was based on the 24-gun basis when sent to France. I have not looked at their WD to confirm or deny that. But it suggest that they may have conformed to the extant RA Field Regiment Establishment rather than the different RHA one.

4RHA in Egypt was based on the 24-gun regiment too with two batteries of 12 guns.

3RHA was a 4 battery organisation on 2-pdr anti-tank guns - with one battery effectively out on permanent loan to 7th Armoured Division.

I'd be interested in seeing the WE you referred to and the documents usrtifying their adoption

Sorry, don't have it.

Thanks to Knouterer for posting Philson's excerpt. Interesting that it notes 2 off Light Tank. I cannot deny that applied due the period in France. However, immediatly on return to the UK, both 1RHA and 2RHA reformed with 4 Light Tanks which they both deployed to Egypt with during 1940. Perhaps the increase was based on lessons learned in France.

[Sheldrake]

You are right - I should have checked Jocelyn. However, none of the RHA regiments nominally part of 1st or 2nd Armoured Divisions deployed with them until 1941 - which I guess reflects the rather chaotic military situation.

The distinction between 8 gun and 12 gun battery still looks arbitrary. Regardless of Jocelyn. 4RHA seem to have been defacto part of 7th Support Group from 1940.

[MarkN]

You are right - I should have checked Jocelyn. However, none of the RHA regiments nominally part of 1st or 2nd Armoured Divisions deployed with them until 1941 - which I guess reflects the rather chaotic military situation.

The distinction between 8 gun and 12 gun battery still looks arbitrary. Regardless of Jocelyn. 4RHA seem to have been defacto part of 7th Support Group from 1940.

The BEF sucked every available unit as soon as it was ready. As a division the 1st Armoured was a long way short - even after it had actually arrived in France!!! However, the two RHA regiments (2RHA only temporarily until formation of 2ArmdDiv) and the two motor battalions were ready for action and were thus plucked out from the formation. As soon as the units returned to the UK, they returned to their parent formation: 1RHA to 1ArmdDiv and 2RHA to 2ArmdDiv.

5RHA, I think was originally intended to provide fld arty to 3ArmdDiv which never got beyond a paper formation. On return from France it seemd to be at a bit of a loose end before joining 8ArmdDiv on its formation. I am not entirely convinced it was a 24-gun regiment on France. The only records I have seen are the post-war CAB documents which are notorious for 'guessing' what they don't know. It may have been 16 or 24-gun.

4RHA, being in the Middle East, was always an oddity as were all establishments for all types of units in the Middle East until the latter stages of 1941.

In August 1940, WS2 set of with reinforcements to the Middle East. It contained a collection of units but no formation. Artywise, it included 1RHA (25-pdr) from 1ArmdDiv, 51FldRA (18/25-pdr) from 42InfDiv, 64 and 68MedRA. Why those 4, why from those divs, I have no idea. There may be a document explaining the rationale, but I have not looked for it nor bumped into it by chance.

2RHA left with 2 Armoured Division in October 1940 on WS4. That was the first formation to leave Home Forces post BEF. The structure and establishment of an armoured division was changed during the sailing and on arrival it found itself out of date! Middle East command was tasked with reorganising it locally but was short of the additional units - so it never managed to restructure completely before being disbanded after its abysmal performace in Cyrenaica.

Arbitrary? Perhaps. What is perhaps more significant is that the armoured division had just 18 guns compared to the infantry division with 72. The 'doctrine' of the armoured force at the time left alot to the imagination! The fundamental principle of its purpose was solid; the practical organisation, training and establishment were well short of the mark. And that's before one considers the actual equipment being completely unfit for purpose!