Motor Transport for a Inf Brigade in 1942

I'm having a bit of a problem getting my head around this. The 1st Guards brigade covered some of the largest distances in MT in the 1st Army (nothing compared to the 8th army but still...) and they were an infantry battalion in an infantry division (78th before transferring to the 6th Armoured admittedly).

Anyway... what level of MT transport could a standard unmotorized Bn expect in 1942/1943?

No.2 Coldstream had an MTO, which I expect (unless you know different) is standard for most battalions, which means they had to have *some* vehicles, and Indeed they did, quite a few in fact, which has left me thinking whether this was normal in Andersons 1st Army.

I know the 1st Bde was an independent Bde for a long time in its role in Force 110, so maybe they had a bit more trucks then usual. But the fact is, from the accounts, it looks like a lorried infantry battalion well before its involvement in the 6th armoured. So if anyone can give me an idea of whats normal it would help a lot...

 

According to the American TM 30-410 Handbook of the British Army... of September 1942 (the handiest source) a rifle battalion had:

1x 4-seater car
6x 2-seater cars
1x 30cwt lorry
2x 15cwt personnel trucks
32x 15cwt trucks
1x 15cwt water truck
13x 3ton lorries
27x motorcycles
31x bicycles
14x Bren Gun Carriers
7x Universal Carriers (Mortar)

Each rifle platoon had a 15cwt truck for men's kit and stores but the 'bayonets' would have been carried by an RASC Troop Carrying Platoon as the need arose. At this period, RASC Troop Carrying Companies (capable of lifting an infantry brigade) were Army or Corps Troops doled out to divisions as required.

 

So in a motorized Battalion... they would have more vehicles for transporting supplies (I'm guessing). I mean if what you have shown is right... then it seems that a Battalion is already lorried to a certain extent...

 

The only infantry battalions that were fully 'motorized' were the Motor Battalions in Armoured Brigades. Their riflemen were carried in the battalion's own trucks, later halftracks.

Armoured divisions eventually had an organic Divisional Transport Company, RASC to lift the division's infantry brigade but I don't think that troop carriers were ever organic to infantry divisions. (still checking: I think 50 Div was a 'Motorised' Division in 1940, so that may be the first exception...)

 

From the RASC history:
Medjez el Bab was held by the 1st Guards Brigade, the third brigade of the 78th Division which on its arrival in North Africa was immediately carried forward by a GT company to occupy that keypoint.

GT being General Transport, the actual designation of the troop carrying units according to the history, but not TNA: WO 175 RASC Troop Carrying Companies!

 

Idler
I think your last post implies that there was no Troop Carrying company available so the Brigade had to be moved forward in the General Service lorries of a GT company instead of in Troop Catting vehicles.
Noel

 

British units were quite extensively motorised, even the standard 'leg infantry' in comparison to their US and German equivalents.

As mentioned above, a typical Inf Bn had a large number of vehicles, which were largely concentrated in HQ Coy. The Mortar, Carrier and AA Platoons were fully mobile, Pioneer, Signals and Bn HQ only partially so. Admin Platoon was (without digging out the WE) capable of lifting all its perosnnel, but was mostly concerned with stores and supplies.

The Rifle Coys only had five 15-cwt trucks allocated apiece, to carry equipment and baggage as Idler says. To lift the Rifle Platoons proper, and the excess of HQ Coy (the marching personnel) required a RASC Platoon. The RASC WE for a HQ, CRASC of July 1941 lists two unit types that would fit the bill -

General transport company, RASC (3 platoons, 3-ton, GS lorries); Transport for general purposes: capable of lifting the marching personnel of one infantry brigade (previously a troop carrying company).

General transport company, RASC (2 platoons, 30 seater, 3-ton lorries); Transport for general purposes: capable of lifting the marching personnel of one infantry brigade.

As aluded to above, this wasn't 'tactical' transport in the same manner as a Motor Bn, where each Platoon had its own MT, but a way of putting enough bums on seats to move the marching personnel of a standard Inf Bde/Bn from A to B.

Gary

 

This thread is very enlightening, the 1st Guards Brigade was in the 6th armoured from 43 to early 45 and was never motorized; I'd always assumed they were given extra trucks. But from the accounts I have and what you have all told me here, it seems the term 'lorried infantry' (which the guards classed themselves as) was only applicable in their usage... not in the amount of trucks they had.

From the RASC history:

"Medjez el Bab was held by the 1st Guards Brigade, the third brigade of the 78th Division which on its arrival in North Africa was immediately.

To be fair, that was only because the convoy and the "Nea Hellas" specifically did not have enough space to hold the three Battalions organic motor transport. This was moved up a month later by Sea to Bone.

 

6 Armd Div ought to have had a RASC company for (primarily) troop carrying. Mailed Fist doesn't mention RASC, though, its orbat only lists the div's arms, not its services. They must be mentioned in the war diaries, if you have them?

Idler
I think your last post implies that there was no Troop Carrying company available so the Brigade had to be moved forward in the General Service lorries of a GT company instead of in Troop Catting vehicles.
Noel

Still trying to untangle that one. The Trux establishments (21 AG) imply GT Coys were equipped with Troop Carrying Vehicles (TCVs), I couldn't find any Troop Carrying Companies listed. Similarly, the RASC history refers to troop carrying as a task, but not as a unit type.

Armd Divs aside, it makes sense that TCVs were Army/Corps Troops detached to infantry divisions as required. Giving each Inf Div three coys of TCVs would have left them with a lot of trucks standing idle a lot of the time. That's not quite the same as knowing how they were used, of course.

 

The RASC organisation was overhauled during early 1943, and I think that used in 21AG had some significant changes from the one used by 1st Army in late 1942.

The Canadian Army provide a nice summary of the changes in their cmhq168 report (if you google that ref it should come straight up as an Adobe file). The report notes that circa 1942 General Transport Coys were considered 3rd line, and were allocated one per Div and one per Corps. There is always a danger assuming Canadian practice was identical to British, but I don't think the RCASC interpretation would be too far removed from the RASC.

The RASC Armd Div Tps Coy included two Platoons of TCVs from early 1943 onwards, roughly when the Armd Divs added an Inf Bde, though I'm not sure if this applied to 6th Armd Div when it deployed overseas in late 1942. This allowed them to lift their Inf Bns while the Motor Bn catered for itself.

I'd agree that the TCVs were held in pool, and I get the impression were quite rare. I don't think there were ever sufficient for one per Inf Bde, no matter how far up the food chain they were held. A detailed orbat for the admin elements is the kind of thing needed to sort these queries out, but sadly they are hard to find it seems...

Gary

 

Going back a couple of years:

From Clay's The Path of the 50th:
Towards the end of 1938 it had been decided that the 50th Division was to become one of the motorized formations, with its own transport for dismounted personnel so that it should be highly mobile and capable of acting in close support to armoured forces.
In order that the Division should be a "handy" size, it was decided that it should contain only two infantry brigades, two regiments of artillery, two field companies and two field ambulances. On the other hand, the Division was to have two mechanical transport companies, each of three sections, and each company was to transport all the dismounted personnel of an infantry brigade.


The 1940 orbat identifies:
11 Troop Carrying Coy RASC
12 Troop Carrying Coy RASC

The other special feature was the Motorcycle Reconnaissance Battalion (4th Royal Northumberland Fusiliers in the case of 50 Div) instead of a standard infantry division's Divisional Cavalry Regiment.

 

Thanks... that helped a lot. If you're right and around that number was standard, then here's what I have pieced together so far.

In December 1942, the 2nd Bn Coldstream Guards was reported as having 13 "30" CWT transport vehicles organic to the Battalions motor pool... which their motor officer described as being able able to hold 16 Guardmen (20 non-guardsmen).

This puts battalion transport in 1942 (in a Infantry brigade) being able to handle 208 men (a single company), which means that (assuming a battalion had around 900 men) transport capacity was only around 23% for the battalion max, excluding equipment and material, so in fact it would be susbtantially less then that percentage wise.

When I get to that section in my research, i'll see if any documentation exists regarding what the changes (if any) were made when the Battalion (and its Bde) were moved from the 78th into the 6th armoured division.... supposedly becoming "lorried infantry" as opposed to foot infantry.

 

Thanks... that helped a lot. If you're right and around that number was standard, then here's what I have pieced together so far.

I'm fairly certain the 1938-40 50 Div was the exception, not the rule, in having organic Troop Carrying Coys. After Dunkirk, they seem to have reverted to a standard, three-brigade division; unfortunately the post-Dunkirk orbat doesn't detail the services to categorically say that they had lost the TC Coys.

The war diaries should clear things up for 78 Div and 6 Armd. There ought to be a CRASC (Commander, RASC) diary under the division that will [hopefully] identify the divisional RASC coys so you can pull their diaries.

It's also possible that the Guards Bde were on light scales for vehicles because of their expeditionary role: were the 13x 30cwt (1.5 ton) trucks their equivalent of the standard battalion's 13x 3 tonners?

 

Phaethon,
The 13 30cwt trucks in an infantry battalion would not normally be available for transporting fighting troops - this was not their purpose. They were required to transport baggage, rations etc.
I have a table for the BEF which shows: -
1 for the Mefical Officer and his stores
1 for Officers Mess Cook and rations
5 for Cooking Sets & Rations for other ranks
1 for MT Stores and tools
2 for Baggege
2 for Gas capes & reserve clothing
1 for petrol
A total of 13 30cwt trucks in 1940 and I would assume just about the same roles in 1942.
Noel

 

Related info on 1940 Motorised Divisions.

 

I'm not sure if this is of any help at all as I am very ignorant of military speak “ but I'm really trying to educate myself ”
Anyway I have a letter that my grandad wrote to my nana, and his details on the letter were
D Plat, 17Coy, (T)
RASC
B.O.A.R
He was a Driver and in his letter he says that he has his 30 seater TCV parked outside, I am not sure if my grandad was attached to the 21st Army because his arm patch is the same shape as their patch but without the crossed swords, I believe the 21st Army patch changed to a yellow shield with the blue cross and I think he may have this patch but it's hard to tell because the pictures I have are B&W.
I also know that he was in Hamburg because it's written on the back of one of his photos, I'm not sure if this is any help regarding your research of what transport was where and when but I thought it might be of some interest to someone

 

Hello
The archive link in your post doesn't work, I am completely useless at trying to search the archives database and wondered if you have a new link for that info please I'm trying to find out more information about D Plat 17Coy, RASC and thought maybe there may be some info in that link about troop carrying companies, I've searched and searched and can't find anything about the platoon or Coy my grandad was in when he wrote his letter

 

They've changed their catalogue in the last 13 years!
Try: Browse records of other archives | The National Archives

 

I'm really sorry, I didn't realise the post was so old

 

Shazbaz It's OK. Relevantly resurrecting threads isn't a crime here.