Desperate to find out about my Grandfather

Discussion in 'Service Records' started by JBaron, May 11, 2017.

  1. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member


    There's certainly something odd about the lead vehicle. The second is a gun tower. It matches the Overloon survivor.
     
  2. DannyM

    DannyM Member

    Hi,
    Thanks for posting the link to the footage.

    The gun tower looks like it might have the 30 Corps formation sign on the left rear side.

    The other one is an AA Crusader. Found a photo of the rear end of one.

    Regards

    Danny

    Gun  Tower.jpg AA  Crusader.jpg
     
    Warspite1 likes this.
  3. JBaron

    JBaron Member

    Thanks for the link.
    It was really interesting.
    It's a shame I don't know which battery my grandfather was with.
     
    Warspite1 likes this.
  4. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    It strongly appears, given WD entry, he was in 130 Battery.

    As stated before, lateral research will bring results on this.
     
    Warspite1 and JBaron like this.
  5. JBaron

    JBaron Member

    Hi
    Apologies for my ignorance but how did you find that out and what was 130 Battery?
    I'm afraid I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to military terms
     
  6. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    First page of the thread 18 July War Diary, 1015 - when 130 Battery is hit by mortar fire.
     
    JBaron likes this.
  7. JBaron

    JBaron Member

    Thank you very much
     
  8. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member

    The Royal Artillery can be a little confusing but allow me to assist. Officially the Royal Artillery (RA) is all one great big regiment as that is how it started back in the 17th and 18th centuries. However as warfare got larger and more complex different independent batteries were raised of 4 to 8 guns each and that is how it was at the time of Waterloo (1815). Each division had one battery assigned to it. As warfare became more complex again a different organisation was needed and all the batteries which were formerly independent were then linked into groups and (confusingly) these groups were also called regiments. So you had regiments within THE regiment. That was the situation in the First and Second World Wars.

    So the 86th was officially a regiment in itself and this was divided into four batteries. Each battery had three troops each of four guns. Two batteries were equipped with M-10s which were self-propelled American tank destroyers which had been re-armed with the British 17-pounder as this gun was much more powerful, two batteries were armed with towed 17-pounders, first towed by Quad gun tractors, later towed by Crusader gun tractors. A troop could also be split again into two pairs and these pairs were called sections but let's not go there!

    This link: ANTI-TANK is brilliant and very informative and covers the development of British WW2 artillery. I strongly suggest you read the whole thing as it covers manning, equipment and training.

    The theory was that the self-propelled guns could operate in advance or on the flanks of the whole unit while the clumsier but easier to conceal towed guns followed on and would be set up as a gun line, to allow defence-in-depth, at which point the self-propelled guns could either fall back behind the gun line as a mobile reserve or operate on its flanks. In practice batteries and even troops could be separated to operate independently. It was rare to split a battery into two-gun sections but even that could happen.

    Most anti-tank regiments were part of a division of all-arms, tanks, infantry and supports. The 86th was almost unique as it was part of no division, instead it was a direct part of XII Corps which was a plug-in 'reserve'. So when you read the link (above) look for 'Corps regiments' as that is what the 86th was…!

    The M-10s were also found to be valuable supports to Churchill tank regiments as the Churchill could not carry a 17-pounder. So often (as at Hill 112) the M-10s were deployed in support of Churchill regiments whenever enemy tanks were expected to be encountered.

    Barry
     
    JBaron and Chris C like this.
  9. Tricky Dicky

    Tricky Dicky Don'tre member

    Looking for something else and came across this

    12TH CORPS FOLLOWS UP THE GERMAN RETREAT FROM THE ODON VALLEY [Allocated Title] | Imperial War Museums
    An Army Film and Photographic Unit jeep drives through what is left of the village of Evrecy in company with a Crusader AA tank from 12th Corps' anti-tank unit, the 86th Anti-Tank Regiment RA. In the background can be seen Hill 112, the scene of much fierce fighting during late June and for most of July 1944. An engineer probes with is mine-detector for mines near Evrecy's church, which like the rest of the village is in ruins. Two Universal carriers from the 4th Battalion Royal Welch Fusiliers' Support Company rumble through the village along the main street. 53rd (Welsh) Division's troops and transport climb the slopes of Hill 120 between Evrecy and Amaye-sur-Orne; there they pass an abandoned battery of 8.8cm Flak 36 dual-purpose guns destroyed by gunners of 1/53 Luftwaffe Flak regiment (?) during the German retreat.

    Not sure if it has been linked before but ...........

    TD
     
    JBaron and Warspite1 like this.
  10. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member

    Interesting…! The only thing I am not sure about is the ID of the Crusader AA as an '86th Anti-Tank vehicle'. The Crusader AA was not issue or establishment equipment to the 86th and many units were actually discarding the type as the Luftwaffe had ceased to be a major problem. One of the few units to retain the Crusader AA was the Polish Armoured Division which used them very effectively against snipers.

    I have blown up a still of the Crusader AA and (with the eye of faith) it is just about possible to make out a dark square on their left (our right) mudguard with a pale oval containing something. That 'something' could be the three trees (oak, ash, thorn) which was XII Corps badge. However on the other mudguard is a single '2' which appears to be an Arm-of-Service badge.

    Now… (going all 'Sherlock Holmes' here) I know my late father was part of the team which 'obtained' an off-the-record Daimler Dingo scout car for their own use. Now it is possible that with everyone else dumping the Crusader AA someone from the 86th obtained one for anti-sniper or AA work.

    Now… doing a bit more digging I discovered that '2' was the Arm-of Service badge of the Royal Marines 2nd Armoured Support Regiment.

    See: http://www.fireandfury.com/britinfo/divmarkings.pdf (see half way down)

    The RM 2nd Armoured Support disbanded at Juno Beach on June 14th as the 86th arrived at Juno (dad said) around the 17th (D+11). It is therefore quite possible that someone in the passing 86th spotted the now idle Crusader AA sitting in a field and 'obtained it'. Any unit with open-topped vehicles - like the M-10 or Crusader gun-tower - would welcome an AA gun plus it would be a good anti-sniper weapon as the Poles later found out.

    An intriguing discovery, well done!

    Barry


    aaa1.jpg

    Above: see mudguard (our right) for possible XII Corps badge and see mudguard (our left) for definite '2' on a square.
     
    JBaron likes this.
  11. The IWM caption is correct in this case. The '2' in a Red over Blue square with the white bar above means the A tk Regt of a Corps, in this case 12 Corps as indicated by the unmistakably shaped Formation sign on the nearside mudguard (darky things inside a light shade oval inside a dark horizontal rectangle). Note that the AoS sign for 2 RMAS Bty looks rather different, being a Blue square with three central horizontal stripes of Yellow over Green over Red:
    Crusader AA  A tk Regt, 12 Corps - A70 113-15 00.27 - Notes.jpg

    B_005458 - L - Centaur 'HUNTER' H Tp 2 Bty RMASG Tilly 13 Jun 44.jpg THE BRITISH ARMY IN NORMANDY 1944. © IWM (B 5458) IWM Non Commercial License

    This Crusader AA therefore does belong to 86 A tk Regt RA, 12 Corps as captioned.

    Michel
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2018
    JBaron likes this.
  12. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member

    Interesting! Perhaps as a Corps Anti-Tank unit it received the AA as an extra weapon?
    Many thanks!

    Barry
     
  13. As usual, the answer lies with Trux in his Anti tank artillery thread:
    ____________________________________________________________________
    Command and Observation Post vehicles (SP Anti Tank Units)
    Crusader OP
    Initially units used the Armoured Observation Post Carrier for troop and battery commanders. These did go to NW Europe but were soon found inadequate and replacements were sought. Since Crusader AA tanks were being removed from armoured regiments for lack of targets these seemed a convenient, if not ideal, alternative to the AOP carrier. Some sources state that the guns and ammunition stowage were removed and units fitted them out to taste. Others maintain that the armament was retained and occasionally used to good effect against ground targets. At first they were issued to commanders of self propelled anti tank batteries, but were later issued to troops as well. First issues were as early as July 1944.
    ____________________________________________________________________

    An extremely interesting article by Peter Brown here: Crusader AA History - Features
    tells us that:
    ____________________________________________________________________
    the AA Troops were disbanded in July/August. This is confirmed and the fate of some vehicles is given in ‘21 Army Group RAC Liaison Letter No 2’ of September 1944. It reads:
    SECTION D - AFV AA EQUIPMENT
    26. AA TANKS
    (a) Air superiority is such that AA tks have been dispensed with.
    (b) A number of the AA tks thus rendered surplus have been issued to certain CO’s and Bty and tp comds of A-Tk Regts as chargers on the following maximum scale:
    (i) One for C.O. of Corps and Armd Div Regts.
    (ii) One for SP bty comd in Corps or Armd Div Regts.
    (iii) One for each SP tp comd in Corps and Armd Div Regts. ​
    ____________________________________________________________________

    At the end of the same article, the 21 Army Group tank states for June 44 show no Crusader AA in Corps troops, whereas those for 31 Dec 44 have nine each in 8 Corps & 12 Corps, plus five in 30 Corps.

    Michel
     
    Tolbooth likes this.
  14. JBaron

    JBaron Member

    So, as a Gunner, would this be something that my Grandfather would have driven? I think from other people's knowledge and comments, I can assume that he was with 130 Battery ?
     
    Warspite1 likes this.
  15. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    In short...no.

    He died before they were removed from the Tank and Armoured Regiments.

    Although Crusader AAs are cool pieces of kit, such posts are confusing matters - probably best to split off such discussion to another thread.

    A further dig here...

    Battle for Hill 112 - Feldgrau.net

    Indicates 128 and 130 Batteries were towed, although one would have to confirm this. In which case he'd have (probably - assuming he was a member of a Gun Detachment) been involved with Crusader Gun Tractors (which towed the 17 Pounder.) Rather than the self-propelled M10 17 Pounder, which was only in 129 and 340 Batteries.

    We could probably tie this down more with his paperwork, but given this is lacking I suggest one tries to track down more personal accounts from the unit etc and hope to get lucky.
     
    Warspite1 and JBaron like this.
  16. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member

    JBaron and Swiper I can confirm that the line-up of the 86th was: 128th battery, 129th battery (self-propelled M-10s), 130th battery and 340th battery (M-10s).

    I strongly recommend the book Hill 112 by Tim Saunders (part of the Battleground Europe edition of paperbacks). It is ISBN 0 85052 737-6. However as Operation Epsom which led to Hill 112 started on June 25th, regrettably JBaron's grandfather was already a casualty. The battery line-up above is confirmed at the foot of page 189 which also confirms that 86th Anti-Tank was the only 12 Corps formation to take part in Hill 112 operations.

    JBaron: as your grandfather was with 130th (towed) and my father mainly mentioned the towing vehicles such as Quad and Crusader then the chances of my father and your grandfather being in the same battery drop to 50:50. Unfortunately I cannot remember which battery my father was in. I have some of his documentation here and will try and dig it out.

    If JBaron has not already seen it, this it the XII Corps badge which troops wore on their sleeves. I still have my late father's.

    a XII.jpg

    It represents the Oak, Ash and Thorn trees and is a pun on the name of the first commander (Thorn) and a reference to Puck of Pook's Hill where the Corps was first raised.

    Barry
     
    JBaron and Tricky Dicky like this.
  17. Swiper

    Swiper Resident Sospan

    "The battery line-up above is confirmed at the foot of page 189 which also confirms that 86th Anti-Tank was the only 12 Corps formation to take part in Hill 112 operations."

    Err... XII Corps oversaw much of the battle, surely you mean Corps Anti-Tank Regiment?

    Also given the OP's relative became a casualty on 18 July, that is after Epsom (and indeed Jupiter, Greenline etc). Its worth mentioning the valley was heavily shelled by II SS-Panzerkorps on 18 July in direct retaliation for Greenline (and to prevent anticipated assaults launched to support Goodwood which was pushing I SS-Panzerkorps to the limit).

    NB: Have a few reservations on Saunders, he follows How's Hill 112 fairly closely in parts, most bizarre (and persistent) typo is that he promotes Mostyn Thomas from a Lance Corporal to Lieutenant!
     
    JBaron and Tricky Dicky like this.
  18. Warspite1

    Warspite1 Member

    I misread June and July :(
    The entry on page 189 says 'XII Corps troops' and lists only the 86th. I repeated what I saw.

    Having dealt with my date mistake I would still recommend this book to JBaron.

    Barry
     
    JBaron likes this.
  19. JBaron

    JBaron Member

    hi Ba
    Hi Barry

    Do you know which beach Wally landed on? Or what town it was near?

    Thanks
    Jo
     
  20. CL1

    CL1 116th LAA and 92nd (Loyals) LAA,Royal Artillery

    Hello Jo
    Barry has not been on the forum since late February

    regards
    Clive
     

Share This Page