Boys anti-tank rifle combat reports wanted.

There are several mentions of the use of the Boys rifle in Brigadier Claude Nicholson's account of the siege of Calais (WO 271/1). Here's a couple of them from 24th May:



2 KRRC in the western sector:



Nothing to complain about with these, I think

 

No reports I'm afraid, but if anyone has a full diary for 45 (RM) Commando for the summer of 1944, it might be worth looking in it. See this Twitter thread about a Boys I noticed in a photo recently: Spitfires of the Sea on Twitter

 

There is a story of a Biber class submarine being sunk by a Boys rifle in NWE in 1944/45, but I had always presumed this was apochryphal because no-one would have been carrying such a weapon at this time.

But it seems it might not be so apochryphal after all...

 

Panzerfaust in WWII - how effective was it?
It is known that the Boys ATR was used against German midget submarines near the Belgian coast during WWII, where one, returning to base part-surfaced along a canal, was fired on from adjacent cover. The vessel submerged, but the pilot/skipper was found further upstream floating in his lifejacket having abandoned the sinking craft, which had been holed low down in its diminutive "conning tower"

TD

 

I wonder where we could find out more about this...

 

I would have thought the War Diaries of the Regiment would have something but which WD's/Regiment - I am still looking, just had a break for some tea and a beer so expect anything now

TD

The first Biber operation was launched on 30 August 1944 from Fécamp harbour
The last Biber mission was an attempt at mine laying and took place on the night of 26 April 1945

There a couple of possibles but need help defining the area and who might be there as regards Allied forces
German Midget submarine operations - U-boat Operations - uboat.net

Biber:
One sunk by gunfire off Westkapelle on 8 March. - [no mention of type of gunfire]

Seehund:
16 February 1945 - 4 (four) sailed for the Scheldt. 2 vanished without trace.
Summary of operation for March 1945 - 2 unknown.
12 April 1945 1 (one) Seehund sunk off the Hook of Holland [no mention of how sunk]

 

Cant find other refrences to the incident at the moment, but if anyone else wants to search be my guest, although I have to say I have learnt one thing and that is there were quite a number of 'mini submarines' designed and built by the Germans so it may not have been a Biber it could have been a:

Seehund
Molch
Neger
Marder
Hecht

Prototypes:
Delphin
Seeteufel (abandoned)
Schwertwal (too late)

My brain hurts now
TD

 

Is it a definite link between 45 Cdo and the sinking or are they just in the frame because they are known to have had a Boys?

 

Idler - dont know at the moment - even the dates dont seem to line up with the geography and timescale - Bibers werent used until Aug 1944 [based at Fecamp], then quickly withdrawn to protect Rotterdam, Antwerp and Scheldt, so I would suspect the incident if indeed it took place would have happened perhaps end of 1944, Jan/Feb 1945

TD

 

Hmm... were the attacks against Nijmegen bridge subs or just frogmen?

 

Dont know at the moment but your suggestion throws up - U-BOATS AND OPER. MARKET GARDEN! - Midget subs and 1-man torpedoes used. [Archive] - SubCommittee Forums interesting reading and unknown to me before this evening

TD

Nijmegen 1944
Reading these if troops had Boys [or Boyes] rifles around they would probably have used them for sniping the mini subs

 

From -
6th Green Howards Gravelines 23/24 May 1940

Their original orders had been to move to Gravelines but these had been changed to the Seclin Area. However as the officer carrying the change in orders failed to find them in the fog, on the morning of Thursday, May 23 ,the 6th Green Howards had taken up position on a wide front along the mouth of the Aa.

The company covering the main road had its one anti-tank rifle deployed with the forward platoon. In view of the lack of anyone practised in its use and of the fear of its alleged ‘terrible kick’, Second Lieutenant Hewson himself manned it. A block was put across the bridge but there was no explosive with which to blow it up, and Hewson took his weapon forward to a position where he was concealed but isolated. He bravely held his fire when the tanks — almost certainly light ones — approached, and he then knocked out the leading one, and damaged two others but was then subjected to a double pronged assault. Shouldering his Boyes rifle, he tried to withdraw, but having no covered line of retreat he was shot dead. The tanks came no further and soon departed.

As an aside my uncle Jim Judson was with the 6th Green Howards at Gravelines but sadly passed away before I got really interested in 1940 campaign . A familiar story I suppose.

Craig

 

The real stuff starts about 3 mins in but this was a Canadian Training film on the Boys helped out by Disney


TD

The Boys' reputation after the Battle of France was such that the Canadian government, through the Directorate of Military Training, The Department of National Defence and National Film Board of Canada (NFB) commissioned a training film, Stop That Tank! (1942), from Walt Disney Studios to counter the rifle's "jinx" reputation

 

I hope there is some method in my madness with the little film above in that The Canadians thought the Boys was a useful piece of equipment for certain jobs and also I believe the Canadians were instrumental in the task of clearing Antwerp/Rotterdam and the Scheldt, therefore perhaps the story of a mini sub being sunk by a Boys falls to a Canadian.
I am afraid though that about where my expertise comes to an end I'm afraid, but perhaps one of our members with knowledge of Canadian Troops etc might wish to take on the baton and see what emerges

TD

 

In an odd twist I once (c.1983) read a published account of the US evaluation of Anti-tank rifles in an effort to identify avenues for development of long range sniper rifles. Working on all the variables - e.g. calibre and type/shape of round, cartridge type, amount of propellant, action and sighting. This included field trials of 2nd WW Anti-tank rifle, variants from all nations, during both the Korean and Vietnam Wars. I recall a Boys modified to fire a standard .50in BMG round did rather well. I assume this led to the competition which led to the Barratt M82 /M107 family

I wish I had kept my notes! Or pinched the booklet....

 

Interesting conclusion on the 'shock' of firing a Boys - the recoil isn't too bad but the backblast from the muzzle brake is significant:

 

From Len Baynes's Kept - The Other Side of Tenko (he was A Coy, 1 Cambridgeshires):

 

It is interesting that measures to dispel ‘the opinion that is held in certain quarters in the Army that the Boys Anti-tank rifle is of little value’ were already being undertaken by March 1940.

 

Please can anyone point me in the direction of the British 8th Army report on the use of Boys anti-tank rifle following Operation Crusader in 1941...?
I am trying to work out to what extent Boys anti-tank rifles were abandoned by infantry units on their own initiative without orders or whether there were any explicit orders from above authorising infantry units to abandon use of their anti-tank rifles.
I have found passing mention of this report in two Osprey books, but neither provide any clear bibliographical reference details:
- The first mention is on page 51 of Steve Zaloga's book about anti-tank rifles, as already recommended in this thread.
- The second mention on page 44 of Tim Moreman's 'Battle Orders' book about the 'Desert Rats' British 8th Army.
In both cases, it is related that this report could not find any examples of the Boys anti-tank rifle having been used successfully against enemy tanks during Operation Crusader.
However, Steve Zaloga adds that the Boys had been effective in the earlier fighting against more lightly armoured Italian tanks.
Neither of these books make it clear if infantry units had already started abandoning the Boys on their own initiative during Operation Crusader thus prompting an investigation and report.
Or was it that infantry platoons were still under orders to carry their Boys AT rifles into battle, but there were widespread grumblings and complaints about the extra burden of an ineffective weapon, which then prompted the report and resulted in general orders giving official permission to ditch the Boys...?