17th Field Company Royal Engineers

Mark,

It's not that I am tight but I really don't want to register for the free trial as these are the sort of things I never use more than once and usually forget to cancel when I start paying.

Does the article mention where Gerry McMahon lived and when he died? My reason for asking is that he could well be the guy who contacted my brother. She recalls Mike meeting "him" at his house (I wont publish details on the site, for data protection reasons).

I am seeing my sister-in-law next weekend.

Best Peter

 

Sorry 22.38% updated the numbers this morning not the percentage.

 

Peter

Thank you for the diaries which I will read over the weekend.

As far as naming the men, this may be an almost impossible task.

We have your father, some of the NCOs, the individuals who received gallantry awards and sadly the casualties.

I have started going through the CWGC site with the view of recording each 17 Coy fatal casualty and will also try to put together a list of the gallantry awards.

The R E museum may be worth approaching to see what they have.

 

All,

With Arty's, Mark's and Michel's help I think this (the attached file) may explain how 17 FC RE landed on 6/6/1944 (particularly 2 Platoon) and the dispositions of 2 Platoon later that day (i.e. until they all RDVed at the Chateau de Beuville AM/PM on 7/6/1944).

It is still a WIP and needs to be stress-tested and I would welcome any and all comments. I am going to do my best to name all the members of 2 Platoon, 17 FC RE (difficult task but I like a challenge!)

I will continue to work on it and "publish" later versions as it develops.

Best Peter

 

Peter,

Very nice effort!

To answer your questions to me in it, I'm not sure what you mean by "juxtaposed", but the data are all the same as in the original table. In the example you give: "(for example see vehicles landing at H+240, all weigh 1 ton and some vehicles have not got drivers)", the figure in column I "No/tons (g)" does not correspond to the "tons" option but to "No", i.e. Number of vehicles. The header "tons" is only valid when cargo is mentioned, and is usually spelled out in full. See for example the Verbatim sheet for LTIN 297:
Column "No/ton (g)" = "two hundred tons"
Column "Type (h)" = "amn stores"

Back to you example, the repeated '1' means "1 veh". When no "Vehicle parties (f)" appear on the next column to the left, it means that the personnel for this vehicle is included in the total stated for the group of vehicles considered, just left of the first veh listed. Example: LTIN 351 carried 1x car lt recce Humber, 1x 3 ton GS Austin and a total of 4x Vehicles parties for these two vehicles, i.e. four men and two vehicles. The split of personnel ("Vehicles parties") between the vehicles is not specified:



Not sure I'm being very clear!

Michel

 

Looking again at LTIN 311-319 carrying the main body of 185 Inf Bde, one must note that the total of personnel from 17 Fd Coy (thus from 2 Pl) for each battalion is the same figure 12, which happens to coincide with the number of men in a Section. See this extract from Arty's summary with my highlights in Black colour:



I now think it unlikely that one of the three Inf Bns would have elements of Pl HQ, because this would mean that the Section in this Bn would be less numerous than in the other two Bns. I also do not believe that Pl HQ would have been split between the three Inf Bns, in which case the Section strength in the various Bns could have been identical, but command would have been a problem.

I would therefore now tend to believe that one complete Section of twelve men from 2 Pl was alloted to each of the three Infantry Battalions and embarked in their craft (LCI(L)), while the Platoon HQ and the fourth section would land later in one or several other craft.

So, I changed my mind and now agree with Arty's latest conclusion that the 17 men in LTIN 327 probably included men of 2 Pl HQ (including Lt Crush), plus possibly its 4th section, while the rest of the Platoon landed later with its transport.

Michel

 

Wow Michel, on a games and quiz night on Skype with Friends (just list at Perudo so reading your posts with interest - as usual).

Whilst this turns my latest theory on its head it makes a lot of sense. I will reconsider.

Any solution has to cater for 2 locations - Hermanville (forming-up) ad Colleville (185 Brigade HQ) but I think your new theory caters for that. Remember Paterson catches up 2 Platoon in Colleville.

This is hard but very rewarding.

cheers Peter

 

Hello Peter,

Another quick response, without even reading the posts above that is. I've had a quick read through Spr Paterson's story. Great stuff, however I think he muddled up the period from landing on 06June to the morning of 08June. However, his info all but 100% confirms him & the Pl HQ carrier onboard LTIN 337. And I'm all but sure now that Lt Crush was onboard LTIN 327.

Regards
Arty

ps. Read your PM!

 

Peter,

Right then, I've had a chance to look at your 17 FC RE Organisation PDF (though I’ve still got a lot more other reading to do). Here's some feedback....

1. Great effort!

2. I think we are collectively getting closer to all but confirming specific craft for all the men of the Platoon that landed on 06June. I’m still thinking:

H+150 three sections attached to Inf Battalions of 185 Bde – but not Lt Crush.

H+185 Platoon HQ including Lt Crush, and the fourth section. I’m still trying to place Sgt Graham.

H+250 Spr Paterson with 2 Pl HQ’s carrier

H+250 onwards – further men & 2 Pl vehicles….

3. I agree with you, Lt Crush almost certainly headed for Hermanville first. The War Diary of 185 Bde states the Brigade Commander conducted an O Group in Hermanville at 1200 hrs. Whilst there was still a traffic jam on the beach at that the time, it would have not been difficult for 2 Pl HQ to get on foot from Queen White (at 1030hrs) to Hermanville (by 1200hrs). The Brigade Commander then headed towards Colleville about 1430hrs – with Lt Crush probably ‘in tow’. And of course, Spr Paterson with the carrier apparently caught up with his boss in Colleville.

4. I agree, it looks like 2 Pl HQ went to Colleville, then apparently went to an O Group in SADA on the evening of 06June. That’s fine.

However, I’m still thinking there’s a day ‘missing’ here. I can’t see 2 Pl getting together in the Beuville area until the 08June.

From the 185 Bde War Diary for 07June: “….Bde HQ at COLLEVILLE SUR ORNE where it had been established since evening D day.”

On 07June 185 Bde made a rather clumsy & costly attempt to continue the assault, with the Warwicks advancing, KSLI at Bieville and the Norfolks initially holding at ‘Rover’. At this point the sections of 2 Pl 17 Fd Coy were probably still attached to the respective battalions.

It wasn’t until the morning of 08June that 185 Bde HQ moved towards Beuville. An initial move at 1010 hrs to a “field near BEUVILLE” – when some flyboys appeared with 61 ‘ex-chaperones’ in tow ie. when the “Squadron Leader” seems to have actually appeared. Then at 1430 hrs 08June the 185 Bde HQ reported moving to “BEUVILLE Chateau…”

5. Again, I do not believe 2 Pl were organised with Assault Demolition Teams. Unlike elements of 246 Fd Coy, the men of 2 Pl 17 Fd Coy were not attacking fixed defences. Another example of the deployment of RE teams on 06June comes from the Op Order of 2nd RUR – the attached teams of 253 Fd Coy were to remain in reserve unless mines were encountered. Again, I'm thinking route clearance.

6. Regarding the break-up of men of 2 Pl onboard the LCI(L)’s, that landed the Infantry Battalions of 185 Bde at H+150, don’t get too ‘excited’. The fact that there’s 4 men on one craft, 5 men on another (etc etc) is probably just a result of number crunching long before the event. It’s probably just a result of trying to squeeze everybody into a spot somewhere.

7. Great effort!

Regards
Arty

 

Looking for clues in other Fd Coys, it looks like the detailed unit loading was already being worked on as early as March-April 1944.

Does anyone have the 17 Fd Coy War Diary for those two months, as with (much) luck it might include the loading plan?

The May War Diary is remarkable by its paucity, unless some Appendices exist of which I have no knowledge...

Michel

 

Loving your work Arty! If we can place Sergeant Graham at a different location to Dad in any Hypothesis I’d sign-up to it immediately.

I think the personal diaries conflate events around the 6, 7 and 8 June and the move from SADA to the Chateau. I will find out more about that when I see my sister-in-law next weekend.

Can’t thank you guys enough. It’s all very very interesting.

Best Peter

 

Michel,

Loving your work!

That was my next move - the WD of 17 FC RE (which I got in the week - the copy I had originally was a synopsis typed-up after the war by a party unknown). I like researching to prove/disprove theories rather than developing them as it gives you an idea where to look (in my humble opinion).

I also want to complete that reconciliation of 17 FC RE personnel. As a goodish sized detachment appear to have landed after D-day.

Finally I am seeing what else I can dig-up from family papers about the “Squadron Leader”. Now thinking it was McMahon’s son who contacted and met up with my brother.

Best Peter

 

Michel

I have found 17 FC REs Operation Instruction No 1 dated 27 May 44. Fills in a few gaps for 3 and 1 Platoon but none for 2 Platoon. I guess because they were under command of 185 Bde it makes sense they'd appear In a similar document produced by that unit.

I had a quick look at the KSLI WD for D-day - no specific mention of 2 Platoon but that’s not surprising either I guess.

I am also just going to research the capacity of those LCI(L)s carrying 185 Brigade’s infantry battalions and their loads to see if there is a pattern i.e. loads by “operational design” or “carriage happenstance / necessity”. BTW for tasks after 2 Platoon were off the beaches And at the RDVs I fully accept yours/Arty’s opinion on the disposition of 2 Platoon i.e. one RE section with each Infantry battalion.

Thanks once again for all your help/guidance!

Best Peter

 

[Intermission]

♩♭♫♫♪♬

A Morris light reconnaissance car of 17 Fd Coy RE behind Sherman Crabs of 1 Lothians on their way to Escoville at the start of Operation GOODWOOD, 18 July 1944:

Source: IMW B7540

♬♬♪♫♩

[End of Intermission]

 

First of all, aren't Intermissions supposed to have music?

Secondly, the Morris LRC - what a fantastic war fighting vehicle. At the risk of being very non PC, I can imagine an observer saying: "Mein Gott, zees Englanders drive some crap!"

 

Done

 

Hello Peter,

When I finally opened the Sapper Churchill Diary and started reading, unfortunately my first reaction was “Oh dear” - because it’s all a ‘tad’ confused. Then as I read on, I exclaimed “Author???”

I have the distinct feeling that most, if not all of the text therein, just might be from “17th Field Company Royal Engineers, 3rd Infantry Division, A Brief History from 6th June 1944–8th May 1945” by Denis Stephenson.

Now, I haven’t a clue who Denis Stephenson was – although one ex RE chap suggested online that Denis did not serve with the Company until after the war. Which might explain the confused info at the beginning. However, there is still some useful info to be (cautiously) extracted regarding 2 Platoons activities.

Meanwhile, after some more burning of braincells, I have discovered more about 2 Platoon's role for the first few days in France 44.

As for the what the remainder of 17 Fd Coy was up to at Benouville that’s another story. I’m only interested in what roles the various engineer units working with 185 Bde were tasked to perform. These are:

2 Pl 17 Fd Coy
1 & 2 Pl 253 Fd Coy

And not actually RE, but not forgetting, the Pioneer Platoons of KSLI, Norfolks & Warwicks.

Firstly, from the gospel of the time, in this case: “Infantry Training Part I - The Infantry Battalion – 1944”:

Action of the advanced guard…

(d) It will usually include reconnaissance parties (and, perhaps, detachments) of R.E. to deal rapidly with problems of roads, bridges, minefields, and other obstacles.

This immediately ‘defines’ a role for the sections of 2 Platoon attached to the respective Infantry Battalions.

Next, a revisit of 3 Division’s Operation Order No. 1 (14May44). I have highlighted info relevant to 2 Platoon…

From Page 9:

26. Engineers

(a) Allotment to Brigade Groups

8 British Infantry Brigade - 246 Field Company under command
185 Infantry Brigade - One platoon 17 Field Company under command
9 British Infantry Brigade - One platoon 253 Field Company under command

Brigade groups are responsible for mine gapping on their own forward
routes.

From Page 10:

(c) Forward Routes

Routes will be opened as follows:

(i) By 253 Field Company behind advance of 185 Infantry Brigade

(a) Two forward routes, preferably :-

WHITE : HERMANVILLE 0779 – BEAUVILLE 0575 – CAEN and
include an additional deviation to PERIERS-SUR-LE-
DAN.

RED : COLLEVILLE-SUR-ORNE 0878 – BEAUVILLE 0575 –
BLAINVILLE 0873 – HEROUVILLE 0671 – CAEN.

(b) Laterals to connect forward routes…

(ii) By 17 Field Company

Two way route to BENOUVILLE

From Page 2 of Appendix B, Part II:

Under Command

185 Infantry Brigade
HQ 185 Inf Bde incl def pl,….

One Pl 17 Fd Coy...

In Support…

253 Fd Coy (less one Pl) Forward routes…

An important note to make, is that whereas the sections of 2 Pl 17 Fd Coy were, under command, attached to the respective battalions, the two platoons of 253 Fd Coy, were in support, moving behind the advance of 185 Inf Bde.

Thus, the task of the sections of 2 Platoon for the first days becomes clearer. That is, moving forward with the Infantry Battalions of 185 Bde, where they would be working in concert with the respective pioneer platoons, to deal with mines and other obstacles that impeded the advance.

Whereas, the platoons of 253 Fd Coy were following 185 Bde, systematically checking roads and road verges for mines, removing knocked-out vehicles which blocked the roads etc. The platoons of 253 Fd Coy also had an additional role (also from the Op Order):

185 Infantry Brigade have call on 253 Field Company and
mechanical equipment in emergency for passage of obstacle
to forward move of tanks.

Back to 2 Pl 17 Fd Coy again. The Pl HQ was co-located with 185 Bde HQ, that make sense as 2 Pl was under command of 185 Bde. I think the we can safely assume that the fourth section of 2 Pl provided a reserve that could be used if/where the situation demanded it.

Regards
Arty

 

Hi Arty,

Sapper Stevenson (“Lofty”) is almost certainly that guy Frank Faulkner mentions under the photo of the half-track at page 112 of Monty’s Ironsides. He constructed the top box on the vehicle and provided the shuttering for the bridge at Tinchebray according to Frank.

I am just in the throes of completing a review / reconciliation of all of the landing dispositions of 3. Div’s REs on D-day. This will allow me to do a compare and contrast of those for 2 Platoon 17 FC RE. 99% confident that with yours and Michel’s help we’ve identified 2 Platoon on their landing craft and “pinpointed” Dad (O/c) on two “probables”. Hope my latest work will allow us to finally identify one (and agree it) which, in turn, should, I think, identify the craft Sergeant Graham (2 I/c) was on.

looks like we’ve both independently found the same addition sources: The previous RE “sweep” of the HERMANVILLE to COLLEVILLE to PEGASUS BRIDGE Route via SADA changes the 2 Platoon “weekend theory” a bit I think. Will complete, compare with your latest sand post for comments.

I think we are all but there now on the D-Day dispositions, and movements.

On to the “Squadron Leader” at the weekend.

Best Peter

 

Some of our equipment was awful wasn’t it. There’s a story about how Dad got two new bikes for his blokes that merits telling I think ...... but still working on the disposition is 2 Platoon at the moment and don’t want to start another hare running at the mo!

 

Sorry for the radio silence.

I’ve been working on a reconciliation of “3rd Div RE loads” (I.e. in landing order: 246, 17 and 253 FCs) in the landing table with other sources. My aim was to settle the debate about which landing craft my Dad landing from on D-Day morning.

Before starting this “frustrating” exercise I was labouring under the belief that the way in which units/detachments were loaded on their craft equalled their immediate tactical formation once on shore.

Starting with R.M.S. Maude’s account of 246 FC RE (he was c/o 246 FC RE on D-Day) which is reproduced in “RE Battlefield Tour No 1: Normandy to the Seine” (which I took as unimpeachable evidence) my “theory” unravelled very quickly.

The landing table (compiled before D-day and equally unimpeachable) does not reconcile exactly with Maude’s account (written after the war) which contains a schematic of how 246 FC RE was disposed in the landing craft of the assault waves.

I haven’t given-up yet! As I said I like a challenge. But we are left with two possibilities: First, there were changes in the detail of the landing table between 24 May 1944 and 6 June 1944 or secondly, veteran’s memories of D-Day are understandably “fragile”. I recognise that’s something more experienced members may have concluded way before me. I am leaning towards the former as Maude’s schematic seems quite deliberate and based on fact.

By the way I eventually found that eyewitness account of the REs arriving at Pegasus Bridge before Lovat’s Commandos: It was Private H John Butler of the 7th (Greenjackets) Battalion of the Parachute Regiment reproduced in “The Battle of Normandy 1944 by Robin Neillands”. He talks about a seeing a section of REs in White scout car and a Bren gun carrier by the cafe at about midday.

We (the family) are still looking through my brother’s papers trying to find something about the “Squadron Leader”. I am down to see my sister-in-law next Saturday.