44th Recce Regiment

Discussions on all aspects of the The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Andy H
User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3516
Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 02:30
Location: Devon, England

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#16

Post by David W » 24 May 2011, 12:58

Alan,

Is it fair to say that an Infantry division had a Recce regiment, and that an Armoured Division had an Armoured Car Regiment? Or were there exceptions? I am thinking of 1940 - 1942.

Alanmccoubrey
Member
Posts: 3369
Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 14:44

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#17

Post by Alanmccoubrey » 24 May 2011, 13:13

David, In general, yes. The British Infantry Divisions had a Recce regt which had Carriers, 15cwts and armoured cars while the Commonwealth Infantry Divisions had their own older style of "cavalry" regiment often with light tanks added.
Speaking only of the British Recce Regt, the fact that I understood them to have armoured cars is part of the reason I didn't understand the Monty comment on their lack of a role in the desert.
I have been unable to find an orbat for the Recce Regt in 1942 so am stuck to thinking of them in terms of the Normandy period organisation which is very like a motor battalion with armoured cars added !
Alan


User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#18

Post by Urmel » 24 May 2011, 13:16

Alanmccoubrey wrote:That link is for Armoured Car Regts and not the Recce Regts.

What we are talking about here is the Recce Regt of an infantry Division which was part of the Reconnaissance Corps and not the Armoured Car Regiments which were part of the RAC.

The Recce Regt as operated in Normandy etc in 1944 was organised on a chart dated December 1943 and known as the 1943 organisation.
7 SA Recce seems to have been similar to the SA AC Rgts? But I guess the South Africans did these things quite differently.

In Nov 41 4 Indian Division's recce regiment CIH had a carrier squadron and two lorried squadrons, so quite different from the AC regiments.

Regarding 44 Recce, since the name is 'Divisional Carrier Reconnaissance', are you sure it had any ACs? The name would imply carriers only, and if that had been the case, I think it would make any such remark more understandable.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#19

Post by Gooner1 » 24 May 2011, 15:00

Hi, found on John Salts org. tables that were floating around were George Forty's tables of a Recce. Regt. that sourced Richard Doherty 'Only the Enemy in Front'


The regiment has an RHQ, an HQ squadron, and 3 recce squadrons.
HQ sqn has an SHQ, a signals troop, a mortar troop, an ATk battery and an admin troop.
The mortar troop has 6 3-in mortars.
The ATk battery has a BHQ and 2 ATk troops.
Each ATk troop has 4 6-pdr guns.
Each recce squadron has an SHQ, 3 recce troops and an assault troop.
Each assault troop has a troop HQ and 4 sections.
Each section has a Cpl. LCpl, 5 soldiers and a driver in a 15-cwt truck.
Each recce troop has a recce section and two carrier sections.
Each recce section has 4 Light Recce Cars.
Each carrier section has 3 carriers.

Undated but the change to Cavalry terminology came in June 1942 and
"Towards the end of the Tunisian campaign armoured cars were issued to the reconnaissance troops which then deployed two armoured cars and three light reconnaissance cars each."

User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3516
Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 02:30
Location: Devon, England

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#20

Post by David W » 24 May 2011, 17:16

Thank you Gooner, that's great!

Do you have one for pre June 1942?

Alanmccoubrey
Member
Posts: 3369
Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 14:44

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#21

Post by Alanmccoubrey » 24 May 2011, 21:35

The 1943 organisation is on this link for comparison, scroll down to Recce Regiment. It seems very similar to me with just the half-tracks replacing the 15 cwt trucks.

http://truxmodels.co.uk/page35.html
Alan

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#22

Post by Urmel » 25 May 2011, 02:38

When I am in Kew next, I'll look up 44 Recce's WD. I am curious now.

38 carriers to me would indicate two squadrons of carriers. The third then probably lorried.

How many other divisional Carrier Reconnaissance regiments were there?
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Alanmccoubrey
Member
Posts: 3369
Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 14:44

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#23

Post by Alanmccoubrey » 25 May 2011, 16:22

I don't believe that Carrier Reconnaisance Regiment was a real name used in the British Army. Looking at an article in the first issue of Practical Wargamer entitled "British reconnaisance Units oin WW2" by Mike Taylor there are only three titles used; "Divisional Cavalry Regiment" and "Motor Cucle Reconnaisance Battalion" for the pre-Reconnaisance Corps days and "Divisional Reconnaisance Regiment" thereafter. He gives a "War Establishment" for December 1940 which is essentially the same as that given by Gooner for 1942 but with lighter/fewer heavy weapons and only LRC in the armoured recce sections rather than a mix of LRC and Armoured Cars. For example the Mortar Platoon only had 2 x 3" Mortars and the AT Platoon only had 12 x ATR.
Alan

David Reasoner
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: 10 May 2009, 04:15

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#24

Post by David Reasoner » 01 Jun 2011, 05:03

David W wrote:Thank you Graham.
General Montgomery declared that such units had no role in the desert
Bizarre.
I think the real issue was with the limited cross-country capabilities of the light recce cars which made up part of the equipment of these units, particularly in soft sand or rocky desert.

David

gjkennedy
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Oct 2003, 21:06

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#25

Post by gjkennedy » 10 Jun 2011, 21:29

The Recce Regts had two different WEs issued during 1942. The first one of April allowed for five light reconnaissance cars (LRCs) and seven universal carriers per Tp. I don't have war diaries or AFV returns to prove the point, but my interpretation is that both 44th and 51st Divs arrived in the ME on this WE. As has been pointed out, the desert was not kind to the LRCs, and 8th Army had not used such vehicles previously, relying rather on a large number of Armd C Regts.

51st Recce was roughly treated, its Assault Tps being used to form an Inf Coy and its carriers concentrated into a separate Coy. I don't know if the same was true for 44th Recce, but it seems neither Regt fought as intended prior to their arrival in theatre.

In August 1942 a revised Recce Regt WE appeared, whch allowed for two armoured cars, three LRCs and seven Universal carriers per Tp. Units coming in via the new front opened up by 'Torch' would, I believe, have been the first to be organised under the revised WE, and I think that armoured with Inf Divs can be confirmed for some units by those more familiar with the campaign.

So, my understanding is nil armoured cars for the Recce units of 44th, 51st and the earlier arrived 50th Divs during 1941-43 in the desert. Those of the later 1st, 4th, 56th and 78th Divs I think would have included armoured cars, though there was some musical chairs played between several of the Divs as to which Regt served where.

Gary

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#26

Post by Urmel » 16 Jun 2011, 20:37

Someone posted the WD of 18 Recce on WW2 Talk, might be some info in there on the equipment:

http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/recce/3638 ... 941-a.html
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#27

Post by Urmel » 19 Jun 2011, 09:23

Here's the vehicle state of 18 Recce of Oct 41, when the regiment was moving out to North Africa (they were diverted to Singapore while en route).

50 Light Recce Cars (15 per company)
67 Carriers (22 per company)

Many thanks to Recce Mitch for posting this on WW2Talk.
Attachments
18 Recce Vehicles Oct 41.JPG
18 Recce Road Movement Orders
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

gjkennedy
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 28 Oct 2003, 21:06

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#28

Post by gjkennedy » 19 Jun 2011, 15:42

That's actually very close to the vehicle totals for the December 1940 War Establishment, which would have been in force when 18th Div went overseas. The only real oddity is that the WE allowed for 5 cars (4-seater, 4-wheeled) and 45 armoured reconnaissance cars, when the total in the WD gives 50 light reconnaissance cars. I wonder if the two figures have just been added together? The only other differences are that the wireless trucks are shown as 15-cwt in the WE, and the 15-cwts are given as 42 GS and 23 personnel rather than 65 GS (again, same overall total).

Gary

User avatar
David W
Member
Posts: 3516
Joined: 28 Mar 2004, 02:30
Location: Devon, England

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#29

Post by David W » 02 Aug 2011, 23:05

Would 67 Universal Carriers have been the norm?
How would they have been distributed?

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 4896
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 10:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: 44th Recce Regiment

#30

Post by Urmel » 03 Aug 2011, 00:19

Probably not the norm, since otherwise Monty wouldn't have decided they were useless. ;)
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42

Post Reply

Return to “The United Kingdom & its Empire and Commonwealth 1919-45”