Battle Experience Questionnaire

Battle Experience Questionnaire - R Bacon
Standard questionnaire, completed by R Bacon of the Calgary Highlanders. His remarks are in blue, those of the webmaster are in green. Some abbreviations have been expanded and some unintelligible comments have been either noted or deleted. Irrelevant portions of the questionnaire have been deleted and wording of some questions edited for Internet use.

BATTLE EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE "A" GENERAL

Note--this questionnaire is intended to ensure that the best use is made of your practical experience in the field during the present war.
a) Please be quite frank. Your replies to these questions will be treated as confidential.
b) Except where you are specifically asked for an opinion, please base your replies only on what you personally have done or seen in your own unit. Do not include anything which you have merely been told by others.
c) Please answer every question. If you have no information on any particular question insert the letters N.K. (not known.)
d) If you have opinions and/or experience of value which are not covered by the questionnaire, please attach them to the questionnaire on seperate sheets. It will be helpful if you will give as much factual evidence for your views as possible.
Name
Bacon, RR
Present Rank
Captain
Age Last Birthday
33
Regular, TA or Temp Commission
TA (This was a British form, so TA here probably means the Canadian Non-Permanent Active Militia)
Arm
Infantry
Unit
Calgary Highlanders
Theatre
European
Date From
10 Aug 1944
Date To
22 Apr 1945
Rank
Lieutenant and Captain
Job in Unit
Rifle Platoon Commander
Carrier Platoon Commander
Mortar Platoon Commander
Support Company Commander
ACTUAL OPERATIONS ON WHICH YOUR INFORMATION IS BASED (WITH DATES):
France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Please complete the following table in respect of the enemy weapons which have been used against your unit. In column two insert an estimate of the number of times the weapon in column one has been used against your unit. (For example, if your unit has been dive bombed three times, put a 3 in column two beside Dive Bomber. If many times (e.g. Rifle) insert "often."
In column three insert the figure "1" against the weapon which in your view had the greatest adverse effect on the morale of your unit, the figure "2" against the weapon which had the next greatest advese effect on the morale of your unit, and the figure "3" against the weapon which had the next greatest adverse effect on morale.

Enemy Weapon
# Times used against your unit
Weapons adverse moral effect
(rated 1-3, 1 being greatest, 2 being next greatest, etc.)

Rifles

Often

Sub Machine Guns

Often


Machine Guns

Often


Mortars

Often


Anti-Tank Guns

Often
2 (88 mm)

Other Artillery

Often


Bayonets

Never


Grenades

Often


Flame Throwers

Never


Land Mines

Often


Booby Traps

6 times


Tanks

10 times
3.

Armoured Cars

2 times


Dive Bombers

None


High Level Bombers

Once
1.

Aerial Machine Guns

None


Aerial Cannons

None


Please give your view of the main reason for the adverse moral effectiveness of the three weapons you have marked in column three:
(1) Weapon with the greatest adverse moral effect, ie High Level Bombers effective because Such tremendous bombs - dugouts and slit trenches no use - no way of fighting back for infantry
(2) Weapon with the next greatest adverse moral effect, ie 88mm anti-tank guns effective because They are used on personnel - you cannot hear it coming - is so accurate
(3) Weapon with the next greatest adverse moral effect, ie Tanks effective because They look so formidable - tremendous firepower - takes guts to wait until they are in range of PIAT
List any weapons whose effect upon morale in your unit appeared to decrease with experience
Rifle
Medium Machine Gun
Schmeisser
Mortar
Stick Grenades
Egg Grenades
List any weapons whose effect upon morale in your unit appeared to increase with experience
88mm
heavy artillery
105 mm
Moaning Minnie
(Planes of course are always demoralizing, but there has not been any lately)
Please list in order of importance factors which, in your unit, appeared to have the effect of raising morale
appearance of Typhoons (ground attack aircraft)
Tanks
Meals
Being in the picture
Getting rest when promised - men fight much better if they can see the end of a battle and a rest
Baths
Please list in order of importance factors which, in your unit, appeared to have the effect of lowering morale
Not knowing when they eat next, or rest, or bath. Being promised a rest after a battle and not getting it. Fighting men should have leave more often than desk warmer(s) back of (the) lines. The opinion of the man in the line is that there should be some type of danger pay. A clerk can draw trades pay without risking very much.
Date30 April 1945
Present AddressInfantry Heavy Weapons School, Netheravon, Wiltshire, England

BATTLE EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE "H" INFANTRY
Name
R.R. Bacon
Unit Served With
Calgary Highlanders
Underline the weapons which your unit has actually used in action (add any not listed):
Rifle
Medium Machine Gun (.50 Browning)
Sticky Grenade
Sub-machine gun (Sten)
Anti-Tank Rifle
36 Grenade
Bren Gun
2-inch Mortar
69 Grenade
Pistol
3-inch Mortar
68 Grenade
20 mm Gun
Twin Anti-Aircraft Machineguns
Bayonet

77 Grenade
2 pounder anti-tank gun

WASP Flame Thrower
6 pounder anti-tank gun


Projector, Infantry, Anti-Tank (PIAT)


Have you found any of these weapons outstandingly effective? If so, which and why?

Weapon
Chief reason(s) for Effectiveness

Bren Gun
High rate of fire, mobility, accuracy
Medium Machine Gun
High rate of fire, accuracy, men like it, good flank protection
3" Mortar
Good searching power, effective smoke screen, close support
WASP flamethrower
Always available, terrific burning power, bad for enemy morale
PIAT
Great blasting power, men who know how to use it, love it



Have you found any of these weapons ineffective? If so, which and why?

Weapon
Chief reason(s) for Effectiveness

Submachine gun (Sten)
Poor manufacture, men have no confidence in it, constantly jamming in action
69 Grenades
Useless, as bad as Jerry stick grenade
68 Grenades
Never use it, PIAT so much better
Bayonet
36 Grenade used where a bayonet might be used - seldom used
Sticky grenade
Never used it - men rather use PIAT



Has your unit undertaken mine cleaance?
Yes
If so, what equipment was used?
30 cord, detector, prodders
Was smoke used for clearance?
No
Was night used for clearance?
Yes
If you have experience of both, which do you prefer?
Night
Have you had experience of operating in an area containing anti-personnel mines?
Yes!
If so were they actuated by trip wires, pressure or both?
Pressure
Based on your experience, what percentage of casualties may be expected in crossing an anti-personnel minefield?
15% of rifle companies


Has your unit undertaken mine laying?
Yes
If so what types of mines were laid?
Enemy Tellermines
Mk II Anti-personnel British Mine
Booby Traps
Trip Flares
How were mines marked?
British red triangle
How were mines recorded?
Triplicate copies 3017A sent to Brigade
Did you have Royal Engineer assistance?
No
Do you regard Royal Engineer assistance as necessary. If, why?
Only for heavy demolition
When moving forward, did you clear your own mines?
Yes


Did your unit take part in Night Operations?
Yes
If so, were they specially trained for Night Operations?
No!
What methods did you use for keeping direction?
Map, Common Sense, Roads, Burning Buildings, Artificial Moonlight
Were they effective?
Yes
If not, why not?
-
What distances did you cover?
2 to 3 miles


Did you ever receive Direct Air Support?
Yes!
If so, how were targets indicated to Air?
Patrols returning with map reference
Was the support effective?
Yes
If not, why not?
-


Did you ever have to organise rapid defence against counter-attack?
Yes!!!
If so, what equipment and gear were used (eg wire, sandbags, mines, etc.)
None
Did the Royal Engineers bring it forward?
-
What necessary equipment and gear were not available?
No time to lay on any such gear in quick counter attack. Mortars, arty lay on targets; also unintelligible, Brens, etc.


What methods did you use for indicating objectives and targets in battle?
Map references
Pointing out targets to tanks by word of mouth
2" (mortar) smoke
What signals (whistles, etc) did you use in battle? Were they effective? If not, why not?
Just the odd field signal - no whistles
Have you ever used coloured smoke?
No
If so, for what?
-
Was it effective? If not, why not?
-
Have you ever used coloured flares?
No
If so, for what purpose?
-
Were they effective?
-
If not, why not?
-


Did your section go into battle under War Establishment strength?
Yes!!
If so, what was the average number of Other Ranks in the section
Five
Please list, in order of importance, the causes of wastage
In great danger men throw away all but rifle and ammo. Such food as Harricot stew is thrown away. Meat and Vegetable (stew) is thrown away. There is too much hardtack in a compo (ration) box - tremendous waste. Reason for waste of stew is the oiliness, smell, etc.
In your view, did your sections at the strength given above prove adequate for close quarter fighting?
Yes
At this strength, did they prove adequate for carrying sufficient ammunition for platoon weapons into battle?
Yes
From where did you get casualty replacements?
We didn't - at once.
Was their general standard of efficiency high, moderate or low?
High now, not 4 months ago.
Did you detach "Left Out of Battle" personnel before going into action?
Yes


Were you able to put the tactical principles of fire and movement, taught as battle drill before going overseas, into practice?
Yes!
Often, fairly often, or seldom?
Seldom


Did your unit carry out an attack under an artillery barrage?
Yes
If so, did they have preliminary training?
No
Did they keep up with the barrage effectively? If not, why not?
Not always. They have been caught under our arty barrage before.
Was the attack by day or by night?
Night
If by night, were any special aids used to help troops to lean on the barrage?
No
If so, give details



List the main tasks carried out by your Pioneer platoon in battle.
Section with forward company clear mines in path of vehicles, clear Tac HQ before Tac HQ moves in
Was your unit ever short of ammunition in battle?
No (seldom)
If so, of what natures of ammunition and how frequently?
Sometimes for short period Small Arms Ammunition. Only until carriers or runners could get to forward position.
From where did you get ammunition replenishments when in action?
Regimental Sergeant Major('s) dump
Who brought the ammunition to this point?
Regimental Sergeant Major
Who brought it forward to you?
Company Carrier - Company Sergeant Major
Did this system work effectively?
Yes
If not, why not?
-


Have you ever co-operated with Infantry Tanks?
Yes!
If so, did you move in front of, behind, or amongst the tanks?
In front
If either in front or behind, what distances were maintained between you and the tanks?
100 yards
If the tanks led, please estimate the time interval between tanks and yourselves reaching the objective?
-
Please estimate the time between your arrival at objective and releasing the tanks to forward rally
30 minutes


With what wireless sets was your unit equipped?
18 - 38 - 46 (sets)


Into what groups were stations netted?
Netted to battalion; 1 to brigade


Give details of any difficulties experienced when working two wireless sets in one vehicle.
None


Give date as to any use made of:
Remote control
Satisfactory
Re-broadcast
-
Relay stations
Satisfactory


What use respectively was made of:
RT?
Always in battle
WT?
None
Line?
In static positions


Was assault cable used?
No
If so, how?
-


Are line-laying facilities adequate?
Yes
If not, state in what respect they are inadequate
-


Did you have any battery or charging troubles?
No
If so, give details
-


Was visual signalling used?
No
If so, how?
-


Is knowledge of semaphore to be desirable?
No


How were communications arranged with:
Artillery
Artillery Representative - Forward Observation Officer, 22 Set good
Armour
18 set in tank - operated by Support Company Commander, netted to Battalion HQ
Air
none


Give details of any improvised methods of communication or signalling equipment:
-
Have you any complaints about the nature or scale of issue of signalling equipment?
No
If so, give details:
Have you any experience of jamming or deception by the enemy?
Yes
If so, give details:
Enemy speaking on our net
Continual noise interference
Please attach, on accompanying seperate sheets any answers for which there is not sufficient room above, and any notes on matters not covered by your answers....Information is particularly required on:
Detailed description of any night operation in which you have been engaged
Incidence of physical and mental fatigue under battle conditions
The best size and weapons for an infantry section
Details of any operation in which you have co-operated with infantry tanks
Details of use of smoke to cover an operation and how it was used (Arty, Mortars 4.2 in, 3 in, or 2 in, smoke generator or 77 grenades
Details and comments on systems of patrolling in your Unit
Detailed account of any particular operation in which tactical lessons of outstanding importance emerged or in which any original ruse or new use of weapons proved successful.
The self-heating cans (of soup) sometimes issued (very seldom) were really appreciated, and are the greatest treat in the way of warm food, that our men...experienced in the army, in action.
Smoke great help in attack, in covering evacuation of wounded. Covering 6 pounders going in support forward companies. Ranging with 3" mortars. Indicating targets (2" mortar). Burning buildings with thatches roofs (3" phosphorous).
New Brens poorly machines and have very many stoppages. The old Bren was a fine weapon, and a man always tries to get one of the older weapons.
Sometimes the PIAT is used as a mortar, by holding it at a very high angle. The blast and morale effect on the enemy is great, and it is particularly useful for firing over buildings, in street fighting....is also good for use in dead ground. it has been successfully used on snipers, by firing through walls and roofs. Any improvement on this weapon would only increase its usefullness, such as greater range and lighter weapon.
Our unit marched by night and arrived at its objective at the edge of the Hochwald Forest by first light.
When the enemy discovered, to their surprise, that we were almost upon them, they opened up with everything they had. The weapons used were, 12 barrelled mortars, unintelligible, bazookas, MMGs, rifles, grenades.
They must have realized they would have to leave their position and retreat sooner or later, so they fired, we believe, all their ammunition (one of his habits). We found no ammunition of his in this area.
During the day, in which there was no respite from enemy fire, TAC HQ moved up and the building used was continually under fire. An artillery Major and an artillery Captain were both killed at TAC HQ.
Tanks tried to help, and got bogged down in the soft earth. Company commanders could not get in to TAC HQ for (Orders) Groups; in other words, practically the whole unit was pinned down.
During the day two platoons were cut off, but finally got back to their company the following night.
Our 3" mortars were used to great effect and broke a counter attack. We fired harrassing fire nearly all night and there was no more counterattacks. Our greatest worry was keeping our mortar ammunition up, as we had to bring it up in a carrier.
There were quite a few casualties but, we lost more men there because of Battle Exhaustion than any one other place I can think of, including officers.
Perhaps the reason for being caught out on a limb like that was because we were the first unit to reach the Hochwald, and were so far ahead of the other infantry units.
If several units had reached there in line and at once, perhaps Jerry could have been driven out sooner. We finally did the job of course, but it took more time and cost more to our unit. Other units came up later, anyway, and might have come with us.
I am not ready to say positively that a larger scale infantry offensive could have achieved the same element of surprise, but I think it could - at night.
Date 30 April 1945
Present Address Infantry Heavy Weapons School, Netheravon, Wiltshire, England

 

Looks a little better in Word - if you would like a copy email me.

webmaster@battlefieldsww2.info

 

That's great Paul. You can feel the amusement (bemusement) of a couple of the responses with the "! (exclamation)" marks.

Just a quick question. Was the "Did you detach "Left Out of Battle" personnel before going into action?" question, the same as the WW1 idea that a number of personnel were left behind, as a core for the re-establishment of a unit in case the the unit became inoperable (destroyed, captured etc)?

 

Absolutely fascinating.
Especially the negative commentary on later Brens and the positive on PIATs.
Who'd have thought an exclamation mark could tell a thousand words.
Any more of these Paul?

I have a couple more which I will post when I can find them!

 

Just a quick question. Was the "Did you detach "Left Out of Battle" personnel before going into action?" question, the same as the WW1 idea that a number of personnel were left behind, as a core for the re-establishment of a unit in case the the unit became inoperable (destroyed, captured etc)?


Yes, in WW1 it was the "10%" and WW2 "LOB" - from reading Normandy War Diaries it was certainly common practice in 1944; for the reasons you state - wiped out or made ineffective by combat, it could be re-built using those LOB.

 

very interesting, i too thourght the PIAT was dis-liked.

 

Interesting Paul thanks for sharing. The PIAT was disliked by those who didn't know how to use it properly if you read, those who knew how to use it liked it.

 

Several veterans have told me that the PIAT was a great weapon, for house clearing, blowing in walls, doors etc. and like the above an improvised mortar. What they didn't like was using it against the bigger German tanks. Said it was verging on suicide to tackle a tank.

 

Several veterans have told me that the PIAT was a great weapon, for house clearing, blowing in walls, doors etc. and like the above an improvised mortar. What they didn't like was using it against the bigger German tanks. Said it was verging on suicide to tackle a tank.

This is a common story I hear too, but War Diary after War Diary I read have tales of men taking on tanks with PIATs, and either neutralising them or scaring them off. And not just PzIv but Panther and even Tigers. Tanks will always be vulnerable in a built up enviroment without an infantry screen, and occasionally it seems in Normandy the tanks outran the infantry, or the infantry didn't or wouldn't go in with them.

 

Having been the Piat man. let me say this: It is heavy, cumbersome. very inaccurate, with a poor chance of hitting anything you aim at.

The recoil is such that you should never fire with your legs open. Seriously! (if you value your virility!) After firing roll quickly to one side...Why? The fin of the projectile is blown back at the firer.

It sometimes takes two men to load the spring, you have to stand up to do that, as one end must be supported on the ground while you tug with all your might to pull the spring into place. Not nice when the shells and mortars are coming down ...........Suicidal!

Everyone hated it. it was often conveniently forgotten if possible. The infantry loathed it, and thought it was the most idiotic weapon of war that was ever invented.

But don't take my word for it...if you ever get a chance? try it out for loading, and get in the firing position...Then thank your lucky stars you were never called on to use it in action.

If you do get the chance? I can promise you that where ever you try, you will be embarassed and red faced, as you struggle to cope with this ugly, ungainly, useless bit of weaponry.

I do hope that someone will get the chance. then report back here!

Why is it I wonder do we read descriptions totally at odds with the men on the grounds experiences?
Sapper

 

Oh I had better report on the result of the firing on a tank. it bores a small hole in the metal, (Rather like an acetylene torch burn) the explosive force then follows though, and spreads the occupants around the inside of the tank, rather like strawberry Jam! The men that fired it? 99% dead.

it will bore a hole in solid rock at least six feet deep! sometimes used to provide a hole to "tamp" in explosives to bring down a rock face over a road.
sapper

 

Hi Sapper

Remember this video ?

YouTube - PIAT british antitank weapon in WW2

Cheers

Ron

 

I have certainly come across that form before, but can't for the life of me remember where. I will have to re-read some of my Regimental histories because I have seen them somewhere.

 

! The men that fired it? 99% dead.

sapper

Was it really that bad? So are you saying that if I fired a PIAT I have a 99% chance of dying?

And if so, how? You mean backlash or something or just the fact that your suicidally close to the enemy?

P.s. Another excellent piece from you Paul. Spot on.

marcus