Some nice Archer video footage (markings question)

The IWM digitized this video. I'd seen a still of it in a Tank Museum video on the Archer but knew nothing of its origin.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1060059336

There are actually several segments including 3.7mm AA guns firing in a ground role.

As to the Archer, the description reads: "In the vicinity of Sant'Apollinare in northern Italy, K Troop of 314 Anti-Tank Battery, 13th Anti-Tank Regiment Royal Artillery, demonstrate their Archer self-propelled gun, a Valentine tank chassis mounting a rear-firing 17-pounder gun."

"AYY 886/1 shot by Sergeant Ostinelli, 6 March 1945 A sergeant paints out an old formation sign on an Archer self-propelled 17-pounder gun named 'Furious'. The markings include '355' on three coloured horizontal stripes, the shield of 8th Army, the gazelle badge of XIII Corps, and a square containing a right-pointing triangle. Shot from the moving vehicle, looking down at a dry rutted track. View from behind the driving, with some of the view from the driver's open hatch. Looking down into the fighting compartment; a corporal opens a cover on the breech of the vehicle's 17-pounder gun before loading a round of ammunition. He wears a XIII Corps badge. Alternate angle showing the gun breech being opened. A gunner turns a traversing handle. Views of the turret rotating. Views of the Archer driving along a track. Static views of the vehicle from the front, side, and 45-degrees. The vehicle is numbered S279684. The vehicle turns. View of the front of the vehicle; the driver looks directly at the camera. Two other parked Archers, one numbered S279687."

The markings are puzzling. First, what is the square containing a triangle? I can't even begin to guess here. Interesting to see that actually there is a dark square encompassing the whole thing.



Second, why the 355 and three horizontal stripes, the 8th Army shield AND XIII Corps? Also, note that at the start of the video, the 355 seems to be half painted out, which suggests that the footage is perhaps out of order?

The 8th Army shield and bright lowest stripe, plus the question of which AOS backgrounds had horizontal stripes, leads me to conclude that the bottom is the white Army Troops stripe and the two stripes above it are the RA red and blue. Thus 355 must have been some 8th Army level RA unit.

This footage comes after the corps anti-tank regiments in Italy were broken up. These Archers had been in 105th Anti-Tank Regiment RA which was under 13th Corps in 5th Army. I guess they simply haven't painted out the gazelle emblem yet. I can't remember which corps 10th Indian Infantry Division was in.

It seems like maybe the 355 and 8th Army emblem were painted on during the transfer of the battery from 5th Army to 8th. That's about all I can think of. If anyone has more info or suggestions I'd be all ears.

 

Italian Army used something like this. Coy-Commander, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, just a guess...

 

Interesting. In the frames showing the loader, it looks like the driver is still in his seat. A bit risky because the recoil would have pushed him right through the vision port! Obviously it was a demo but even so...... I imagine the Bombadier would have been a bit miffed to be listed as a Corporal.

 

No, it wouldn't, actually...

I think I'll have to make a thread about it.

 

355 was the arm of service number for 105 Anti-tank regiment, the 13 Corps anti-tank regiment in May 1944. This is not the unit identified in post #1 - 13 Anti-tank Regiment. 105th Regiment was disbanded in April 1945. This probably reflects a merger of units as many towed 17 pounder batteries were disbanded as useless.
314 (SP) Battery was transferred from 105 Anti tank RA to 13 Anti tank RA. 13 Anti tank seems to have been listed as part of 10 Indian Division, but this vehicle seems to have retained the markings of the 13 Corps unit - or maybe 13 RA became the 13 Corps anti tank regiment.

The square with the triangle pointing left is unfamiliar. Maybe it is a local version of the troop/ battery markings, how we could know the vehicle belongs to K Troop.

 

Thank you, Sheldrake! I had no idea what the AoS number for 105 Anti-Tank regiment would have been.

But by March 1945 (IIRC) most at least of its batteries had been detached. The regiment must have continued to exist formally until May. For instance here is (from the war diary - what I have seems to only contain the battery diaries) a page from 316 Battery, and movement order details. Would you be interested in the file I have on corps regiment reorganization in Italy? (I think it's actually a MGRA AAI file, and the reorg is one topic.)

Actually you're right in the sense that the movement order says of 314 Battery: "to under command CCRA 13 Corps, attached 13 A/Tk Reg't, RA on completion of move."

So... I have to revise my understanding, I think. That sounds like formally they were a 13 corps unit and only temporarily attached to 13 A/Tk Reg't RA, so they wouldn't have badged as such. Does that sound correct to you?

 

Also, checking the 13 A/TK Regiment war diary, it's a little weird because... I'll have to check, but there is a reorganization note mentioning an SP battery (as part of the organisation of the battery) which I believe refers to 314 Battery (24 Feb) but on 25 Feb the WD says, "314 Bty to relieve 209 Bty in its present posn and is to come under operational control 13 A Tk Regt as of 1 MAR 45." So, not actually part of the regiment.

On 1 March the regiment was apparently able (unless I mistaken) to specify the letter designations for the troops within 314 Battery as well as all the other batteries. (According to my notes the batteries had been DEF but under 13 A/Tk Reg't they were DGK.) But maybe that part of normal operational control.

 

105 Anti tank were the Corps anti-tank regiment of 13 Corps in March 1944. Happily the ra39-45.co.uk website gives the AOS for this unit. 13 Corps - Cassino - The Royal Artillery 1939-45

It was a corps unit equipped with two SP batteries and two towed batteries. (Deacons and 6 pounders)

13 Anti tank was the divisional anti-tank regiment for 10th Indian Division, and in theory should have had four batteries each with a mix of 17 pounder and 6 pounder troops.

As the war progressed and the threat of massed German armour diminished, many of the towed 17 Pounder batteries were disbanded. This was because the 17 Pounders were not being used. Thus 91 Anti tank regiment handed over its two SP M10 batteries to another unit which provided a corps Anti tank regiment with four SP M10 batteries.

 

Thanks for pointing out that the ra39-45 website gives the AOS.