50th Infantry Division

Discussion in 'Higher Formations' started by merdiolu, Dec 6, 2013.

  1. DavidW

    DavidW Well-Known Member


    It would be of interest to me if we could tie in the 25th any earlier. As that still leaves a long period of "Ducking!"
  2. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Hello David,

    They had no (semi) permanent LAA attachment prior to the 34th LAA joining them on 18 October 1942. I believe the 34th LAA was put in 50 Div solely for the purposes of the 2nd Battle of El Alamein, as it left the Division on 6 November 1942. It was permanently replaced by the 25th LAA on 16 December 1942, which stayed with the Division until 30 November 1944; when the Division was reduced to a Training Cadre.

    That said, the 25th LAA was put under the command of 50 Div from 25 April 1942 until just after the Gazala gallop i.e. end of June 1942, and lost its 81st Bty (permanently) when the 150th Brigade Box at the Rotunda Ualeb was overrun by the DAK on 1 June 1942.

    Before this I believe 50 Div had to largely 'improvise'; it certainly first arrived in Egypt from the 23 June 1941 without an AA Regiment of its own.


  3. DavidW

    DavidW Well-Known Member

    Thanks Steve
  4. paulcheall

    paulcheall Son of a Green Howard

    My goodness what a great thread this has been to follow. My dad was 50 div in 6 Green Howards. He was wounded following d-day and when better returned to Europe to rejoin his regiment, so he thought, but was put in the East Lancs where he ended the war in war-torn Germany as Corporal in charge of the regimental police. What a war he had from Dunkirk right through to Germany. Luckily he missed out on Gaza in 1942 but fought in the bloody battle of Wadi Akarit in 1943, followed by Sicily.
    Thanks to everyone who posted their perspectives. I found it all most interesting.
  5. Tom Canning

    Tom Canning WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran


    " Luckily he missed out on Gaza in 1942 ' do you mean the Gazala gallop …June '42…?

  6. paulcheall

    paulcheall Son of a Green Howard

    <groan> yes of course Tom. Thanks for picking me up on that. Paul

  7. Wapen

    Wapen Well-Known Member

    Lovely stuff. I know I'm 6 years late but PM sent.
  8. Wapen

    Wapen Well-Known Member

    Nicely done. I've seen a few respected acdemics blame it all on morale or the GOC without mentioning these points.
    stolpi likes this.
  9. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake All over the place....

    Ike was the boss and the ,man with the political clout. He agreed with Montgomery's assessment and backed it. Montgomery was unfair to Morgan, who had been told to make a plan based on the shipping allocated. The extensions to Utah had been looked at as a what if, they had more ships. Montgomery's real value was to develop the operational concept of how they would fight the battle once ashore. This would become a bigger version of the dog fight at El Alamein. Montgomery was good at winning that kind of battle.
    Wapen and stolpi like this.

Share This Page