The American (aka United Nations) observer is depicting a German division-level attack on a brigade-level (or smaller) box. Look at the ratio of arms the Germans employ and the width of the frontage and consider the ratio of attacker to defender.Don Juan wrote: ↑14 Nov 2019 22:48But this, which I assume is from here, just shows how the Germans used their weapons as part of a combined arms team in a methodological attack. Even if the British had brought forward the 3.7" AA gun, I don't see them knitting it in with 2 pounders, 6 pounders, 25 pounders, CS tanks, standard tanks, medium machine guns and motorized infantry in a seamless coordinated whole.
The British way of doing things was indeed somewhat different - especially during CRUSADER. They sent armoured brigade groups (ie. Armoured brigade with a bit of all arms attached) against a divisional position. Complete reversal of attacker/defender ratio. Then look at the use of their own arms: Scott-Cockburn launches his three pantser regiments into the anti-tank screen at el Gubi as if he's running the 2.30 at Haydock Park. Doesn't bother to give his field artillery, anti-tank artillery or infantry any task at all. I'm sure he would have put a troop of 3" or 3.7" reroled HAA gunners to excellent use picking up discarded donkey walloper fag butts.