|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 6, 2023 12:36:51 GMT
They were also in the Assault Gun Company of the Armoured Regiment in both the 2d and 3d Armoured Divisions, Many armoured units changed to M4/105s after 1943 but these two divisions retained their early 1942 T/O&E.
The 77th Infantry Division also had M8 HMCs and they were photographed in action on Leyte in 1944. The 81st Infantry also had M8 HMCs at Angaur Island 1944.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 6, 2023 16:02:15 GMT
I am not sure if that is completely correct. Certainly, the M8 HMC was used in more than in the cavalry squadrons, and I was not at all clear on that point.
I have a TO&E for a "heavy" armored division in front of me, and there is no assault gun company. Every battalion of that type regiment did have an assault gun platoon in the battalion HHC's though.
Cannon companies of Infantry Regiments also used the M8's at some time during the war. Don't know if they were later replaced on not.
It would seem logical to me that the 77th and 81st ID's retained M8's as the M8 was relatively light, and those were both Pacific divisions. Most likely all the other divisions deployed to the Pacific retained the M8 as well.
Always remember this, in the US Army the Table of Organization and Equipment is a very flexible document. The letter designator designates the equipment scale and type, and the mod digits that follow the letter indicate substitutions, additions or deletions. Example TO&E 7-15ENG03, can very well have different equipment scales than 7-15ENG02. One might have M-14 Rifles for instance and the other may be equipped with M-1's or M16's. The short answer here is one must know the specific designation of the TO&E before anyone can make a specific determination on exactly how a US Army unit was equipped
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 7, 2023 10:36:12 GMT
There was an official order for the Cannon Company which requested that the six towed 105mm howitzers be replaced by six M7 HMC, I think this was only for divisions in the PTO.
Heavy Divisions originally had no M4/105s, the 2nd and 3rd did eventually get them after the issues first raised by Eisenhower on 15 July, when he requested permission to replace 18 of the M8 in each of the divisions with M4/105s, the 2nd and 3rd both received nine each by the winter of 1944.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 7, 2023 11:43:41 GMT
I think you mean M8 HMC's not M7's, but that sounds perfectly logical. I have read of M8's in the European Theater cannon companies too. Most likely the answer is a mixture of both towed and tracked pieces, depending upon when they got into theater, and a whole lot of other variables. Towed howitzers are a complete pain in the ass in a fast moving situation, or when the other guy has good, prompt counter battery. Digging a towed piece in is at least partial protection against counter battery, but the down side of that is the more you dig in the less mobile you become.
Oddly enough I stopped by my favorite hobby shop on the way to church last evening. Tamiya just brought out a model of the M8 in 1/48 scale. Looks real good although I did not purchase the kit. The markings were for the 106th Cavalry Group (Illinois Army National Guard). Again by coincidence the history of the 106th Cavalry Group is a great read, far better than most of the WWII unit histories. My mom used to check it out from the Library of Congress for me. I think I read it three or four times in my late teen years.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 7, 2023 18:39:43 GMT
I too like the M8 HMC, I have always said that PSC missed the boat when they failed to add the M8 version to the M5 light tank kit, they could have gave an option to build a M8 instead of the standard M5. They also failed to make any of the Tank Destroyers too along with the M8 Armoured car. I had plans to utilise PSC for all my US vehicles, but failure to add the vehicles above plus a GMC truck or Jeep had really put me off.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 7, 2023 21:30:52 GMT
Not surprising PSC is hit or miss in my view. Some very nice kits, the 251's, Valentines, and T55's are quite good, but they also produce some schlok from the kit design perspective
Not your scale but the Tamiya 1/48 M10 TD and M8 Armored car are hard to beat. Most of their 1.48 scale kits are better in my opinion than their 1/35 offerings. Mike is working on a 1/48 Easy Eight by Tamiya, and I finished an early production M4 six weeks or so ago. Best one in their 1/48 line is the desertized Challenger 2. The kit almost falls together.
Rubicon has that M5/M8 option in 1/57 scale, but again it's not your scale.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 8, 2023 19:18:37 GMT
Found one in 1/72 link but it looks like a Chinese job, millions of little parts to drive you mad.
You dont happen to have a T/O, ref 7-14S dated from 26 Feb 1944 do you?
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 9, 2023 6:00:28 GMT
Don't recognize the 7-14 series off the top of my head. Much more familiar with the 7-15 series which is light Infantry. Tell me the type unit that is organized unde 7-14 and I will see what I have.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 9, 2023 8:40:11 GMT
It concerns the M7s in the cannon company, I checked if it was a error and apparently it was official, and that was the T/O it was listed in. I don't know if it was implicated as some did have as you mentioned M8s, but I thought it would be a good idea to get to the bottom of it. Happy Easter Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 9, 2023 13:38:32 GMT
I agree, and I do believe I have a cannon company TO. It will have to wait until after church as I am going to be as busy as a fiddler at a barn dance all morning.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 9, 2023 19:47:21 GMT
Its Easter Sunday, take your time, no hurry.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 10, 2023 2:47:24 GMT
Standard equipment for the cannon companies of Infantry Regiments, as well as the 105mm FA battalion in the Airborne divisions was the M3 and M3A1 105mm towed howitzer (snub nose). It seems it was disliked by nearly everyone, having several deficiencies. Does not surprise me then that some units would want to get rid of it as soon as they could using every excuse in the book to try and get something better. Biggest complaints were range and lack of mobility. You would probably have to go into the various board reports, done after the war, to see the specific issues. These board had as their purpose applying WWII lessons learned, so that the Army could correct them from an organizational perspective.
The Infantry regiment cannon companies were dropped about the same time the tank destroyer command was eliminated. The cannon company was replaced by a Heavy Mortar Company using the 4.2" mortar, which neither has the range or mobility to support a regiment. Not saying the 4.2 was no good now. Had a platoon of them to lead for about a year. They were just no good at regimental level. They were superb when they became part of the Infantry battalion HHC, and later moved, around 1967 or so to newly formed Combat Support Companies. The battle groups under the PENTOMIC concept also had a battery of 4.2, and later a platoon, but the BG was also too big for the 4.2 to support adequately.
All in all it is my view that the M8 SP howitzer was ideal for cavalry operations, and while its range was not that great, their mobility, the ability to shoot and scoot made them better than average Infantry support weapons as well at the regimental level.
Do not be fooled by cannon companies though. Most times they just parked their junk some place and served as a small rifle company. It was not that they did not have fires to contribute to the battle. It was that we just needed riflemen in Europe a hell of a lot more that we needed cannon companies.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on Apr 10, 2023 19:44:49 GMT
Thanks for that QC.
When you look at the US Army in the early war period, they do tend to share similarities with other nations, the cannon company was one such similarity. German, Russian and Japanese all had artillery pieces located in Infantry Regiments, they called them Regimental Guns and the ranged from 75mm to 150mm. The Soviets four 76mm guns at regimental level, and six 120mm mortars too. The Germans started to replace their 15cm IGs with 12cm mortars mid-war, they still kept their little 7.5cm IGs but added a 120mm mortar platoon to each Infantry Battalion, moving their 8cm to rifle companies.
One last note on the cannon company; 36th infantry division had 105mm SPs in the cannon company of at least one of its regiments. This is in the AAR for the month of August of the 141st IR I believe. The 117th Cav Squadron had replaced its M8 HMCs by 7 M7 HMCs.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Apr 10, 2023 20:24:47 GMT
Yes, that right and we were very much copy cats until after WWII.
Regimental guns made a lot of sense to some armies, but I would argue that the U S Army had a world class field artillery system, that included all the elements necessary for close and continuous fire support, primarily a combination of guns, communications, and training, and we did not need them, while the Russians and Germans certainly did.
The 141st Infantry Regiment is the "Remember The Alamo" regiment, where one, and possibly two companies (I can't recall which) go back to pre-republic days of ranging companies. Can't recall but I think one of those companies was the ranging company that reinforced the Alamo on or about 3 March 36. Pretty sure I am correct, but I will look it up. The 141st was the best of a very good bunch of regiments that made up the 36th ID, The 143rd "Houston Light Guard" were no shrinking violets either.
|
|
|
Post by yanmacca on May 1, 2023 14:38:51 GMT
Here is a project I was working on but had to shelve due to other commitments, they are all US military from WW2, starting with; US Marine Platoon 1944 (based on three fire teams per squad + a LMG team) US Airborne Platoon 1944 (circa Normandy) Late war US Armoured Infantry Platoon Standard US Infantry platoon 1943/44 I have also added my almost finished German Pz Gren company for fun. Ian
|
|