The Tank Museum website's page about the Archer talks about "assault" infantry divisions, and I swear I've seen this somewhere else - possibly coverage of the Archer in the Osprey book on the Valentine (and Archer). Was an "assault infantry division" actually an official designation, or was it more an unofficial assessment of how well a division was performing in battle? (I feel those assessments sometimes do not seem to have been entirely fair, but maybe that's an issue for another thread.)
I've only ever seen the term Assault Division applied to the three Infantry Divisions involved in the Normandy assault landings, as in 3rd (Br), 3rd (Cdn) and 50th (TT). I've always understood it as being related to their different artillery equipment (M10s and SP M7s or Sextons). I can't think of it having any specific relation to the Archer as they were for use by all Br/Cdn Inf Divs in 21AG. Gary
My understanding was/is that the assault infantry Divisions were just that. i.e. they were the first infantry to land/ assault the enemy.
I've also heard the 8th Armoured Brigade aka 8th Independent Armoured Brigade referred to as the 8th Independent Armoured Assault Brigade; again in the context of being part of the Normandy Assault Landings where they supported 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division on Gold Beach. Source of the information was verbal communication by a chap who was 'there' on the day. Not sure how 'official' the title was as I've never actually seen the term in print.
I’ve seen Assault Force in official documents to describe initial Neptune formations including assault divisions, brigades and beach units. As Gary says, I don’t think it is relevant to issue of Archers. Regards Tom
Thanks, guys! I agree that it doesn't seem to be relevant to the Archers, despite what the tank museum says. Based on the war diaries I have looked at, one regiment received Archers in November 1944 but was not in the line, and most of the others received them in January '45.
I have a hazy recollection that I have seen "the Assault Division" mentioned somewhere, probably in a book, meaning divisions in the NW Europe used more often than what was normal in main attacks, 3rd and 15th (Scottish), probably also 43rd (Welsh) and maybe a couple others. But as I said, only a hazy recollection and no idea where I might have seen it.
3 Div's history was called Assault Division. The term is probably better understood as relating to equipment and organisational changes for the assault units. Cases in point are the allocation of SP artillery instead of towed and swapping Loyd Carriers for Universals as 6-pr tractors because, presumably, the Universals were more easily waterproofed .
To go off on a bit of a tangent to a different year and theatre (mid-1943 Burma), 'Assault Field Regiment' became the official designation for the two arty regiments (130th & 178th) joining 36th Infantry Division, but I haven't found any reference to 36 Div itself being called an 'Assault Division' at any point. The division underwent Combined Ops training near Bombay with the intention of being used in upcoming amphibious landings, and the two arty regiments were re-equipped from the standard 3 x 25 pounder batteries to 1 x 25 pr battery, 1 x SP battery (with Priests) and 1 x Light battery (with 3.7-inch howitzers). The war diaries and official communications all begin to add the title 'Assault' to the two arty regiments' names at this point. In the end the division got rushed into the Arakan to meet the Ha Go offensive and training was abandoned. The SP batteries were never deployed, and a few months later were switched back to 25 pounders again prior to deployment into North Burma in 1944, which was a long air-supplied ground slog down the Railway Corridor towards Mandalay. The 'Assault' designation sort of stuck to the 130th and 178th from then on, though: it gets used on and off in official documents for the rest of the war, pretty much at the whim of the writer it seems.
