ARMY AIR FORCE ANNEX

The principal method of transportation of the party throughout the trip was aeroplanes. This afforded the opportunity of observing in considerable detail the functioning of Air Force personnel and material in three continents. It is felt, therefore, that the presentation of certain observations and conclusions may be of assistance to the Chief of Army Air Forces.

There is a noticeable lack of fundamental discipline in Air Force Personnel, principally among junior officers and enlisted men. It is felt that correction of this will not only increase the effectiveness of combat missions which are now being undertaken but also increase the number of planes which can be kept in the air. The following points may be of interest:

1. A casual attitude towards important matters indicating a lack of sense of responsibility. This is evidenced by a habitual failure to observe punctuality as to time of departure, or careful checking of equipment, such as maps for a particular flight.

2. Lack of leadership on the part of officers, particularly with respect to the discipline of enlisted crews. This is evidenced by dirty aeroplanes, failure to stow equipment efficiently, filthy personal appearance, failure to observe fire precaution regulations, and lack of training in military courtesy among enlisted men. Also noticeable was the failure of the commanding officer of a plane to exercise supervision over the crew on matters, which pertain to the plane in general.

3. Utilisation of personnel on flying missions whose technical proficiency is not adequate to meet a particular requirement. This applies particularly to navigators and radio operators and invariably results in unnecessary loss of lives and aeroplanes.

4. The failure to establish a command arrangement whereby authorised members of the Air Transport Command, for instance, can institute corrective measures where obviously necessary in tactical units which utilise their facilities and vice versa.

HEADQUARTERS

EUROPEAN THEATRE OF OPERATIONS

UNITED STATES ARMY

January 18^th 1943

Report To:  Lieutenant General J. L. Devers.

Subject : Ordnance Annex to report of visit abroad.

The more important observations of Ordnance equipment in the hands of the British Eighth Army and the American Forces in North Africa are given under the following headings:

 I. Tanks.

 II. Tank Transport Vehicles and Tank Recovery Vehicles.

 III. Self-propelled Artillery.

 IV. Half-Tracks, Scout Cars and Personnel Carriers.

Recommendations.

I. Tanks.

1. At the conference held with Lt. General R. L. McCreery, British Army, Cairo, he gave as his opinion that the M4 tank is the best tank in this war. He also held that the American M3 light tank, which the British call the “Honey”, has been of outstanding value and has remarkable speed and reliability. The British all of both of these tanks they can obtain.

2. When questioned, he stated he would be in favour of the new 76 mm tank gun in a proportion of the medium tank M4. The suggested ratio, one 76 mm gun to three 75mm guns.

3. Major General C. W. Norman, Cairo, similarly stated that the British had been trying for three years to build a satisfactory tank. He marvelled at the M3 and M4 tanks, which had been produced so quickly. Both General McCreery and General Norman stated that the American M3 tanks had stopped the Germans at the El Alamein line and that the M4 tanks defeated the Germans in the break through. He spoke of the lack of capped ammunition for the British 6 – pounder and said that this deficiency detracted from the value of the 6 – pounder gun.

4. One modification which the British have made to the M4 tank has been to weld a light steel rail along the sides of the tank with about one inch clearance. This permits the use of steel bows which can be covered with canvas making the tank look at a distance like a truck. This same cover can also be attached to one of the rails and staked to the ground to form a tent shelter for the gun crew. The above method of camouflage was used to deceive the Germans before the El Alamein drive. A large number of trucks were parked in position and left there for some considerable length of time. The Germans very carefully photographed this truck park from the air. The British gradually replaced most of the trucks with tanks covered with canvas. The Germans were later completely surprised when these tanks appeared in battle, and this gave the British considerable advantage from the standpoint of surprise. All American medium tanks M3 and M4 in the hands of the British were so modified. It is recommended that in future American tanks M4 be equipped with this rail when manufactured.

5. Several officers of General B. L. Montgomery’s head quarters (Commander, British Eighth Army) spoke of the gun stabiliser which they had used successfully. The British Eighth Army as a whole is not very much interested at the present time in the stabiliser as in all their recent battles they have fought with tanks with the hull down. Some of the younger officers and sergeants are very much interested in this device. The difficulty of keeping the stabiliser working has been the principal difficulty up to date as the device is not sturdy enough for field service conditions.

6. General R. Briggs, Commander, First British Armoured Division is of the opinion that the concealed anti-tank gun is the greatest enemy of the tank.

7. General McCreery and General Norman expressed the conviction that the M4 Tank is a better tank than the best German tank. They are very much pleased with the gun and turret. The M3 Grant tank has been found satisfactory as far as mobility and firepower are concerned. The one advantage of the M3 was the low position of the 75 mm gun in the sponson which prevented placing tank in the hull down position which is the tactical method of tank emplacement used by the British.

8. The General Motors diesel engine in the M4 tank has given excellent service in Egypt and these tanks are very much liked. More difficulty has been experienced with the left-hand engine.

9. The only modification required by General Briggs and his officers was that the Calibre .50 machine gun be carried on a bracket attached to the rear of the turret except when the tank was in bivouac. The Calibre .50 machine gun is only used to protect the tank when stationary. It is not used when the tank is on the march or in fighting formation.

10. General Briggs stated that most of his M4 tanks had driven an average of 1,100 miles without difficulty. The greatest deficiency was spare engines. Distances on the desert are very great and tank engines are soon worn out. This indicated the necessity of having a tank engine of longer life, such as the new Ford engine, the manufacture of which must be expedited as much as practicable.

11. Brigadier General R. H. S. Arkwright, Armoured Force Staff officer at General B. L. Montgomery’s headquarters stated that the British 6 – Pounder gun was not a suitable weapon. He confirmed the opinion expressed by General Norman and General Briggs.

12. Private Nichols, First Armoured Division, British Army, who destroyed nine German Tanks with his M4 tank stated that the new periscopic gun sight was fine and that he recommended no changes.

13. I talked with several sergeants and other members of tank crews and found them all enthusiastic over the M4 tank and 75 mm gun and were fully satisfied with its performance throughout. They were confident that they could easily defeat any German tank.

14. In the discussions with General McCreery, General Norman, General Arkwright and others it was apparent that the Germans were surprised by the gun power of the M4 tank, which was not disclosed until the El Alamein breakthrough. General Rommel came into the battle apparently expecting to defeat the British with his tanks of superior gun power. When he came into contact with the M4 tanks in the hull down positions the German tanks were knocked out and destroyed in great numbers, thus insuring Rommel’s defeat. The desert at El Alamein is still littered with hundreds of German tanks, trucks and other armoured vehicles.

15. The British officers stated that the attacks of the German ‘Stuka’ dive-bombers were not effective against our medium tanks. The British tank crews stated that they never closed their turret tops during battle and would be perfectly willing to have these armoured tops replaced by light metal covers to keep out the rain. When questioned as to this point, the American officers on the Tunisian front stated that they used the covers, which they closed in battle and found the periscope in the cover of great use.

16. The British were limited in their pursuit of the Germans by the amount of gas, which could be carried in each tank. At one time in the El Alamein section they could have completely cut off the German retreat if they could have travelled 50 miles. They ran out of gas and were immobilised and the opportunity never again presented itself. As the fighting continued at El Alamein for twelve days without ceasing, the tank engines required more and more gas and oil per mile. The need for a tank engine with greater life was thus illustrated and the serious need for a tank engine, which will give 400 hours of operation, is apparent.

17. In breaking through the El Alamein line General Montgomery used 400 guns and approximately 500 rounds of ammunition per gun.

18. The 75mm gun in the M4 was used to destroy anti-tank guns up to 3,500 yards using H.E. shell.

19. General Arkwright stated that the M3 tanks ran 240 hours during the El Alamein action and when called upon in an emergency were able to run 40 hours more without difficulty. This was under battle conditions where practically no maintenance of any kind was possible.

20. Colonel Waters, U.S.A. First Armoured Division, who fought with the light tanks M3 on the Tunisian front, praised the 37 mm gun and stated that it gave good results in battle destroying the German Mark 3 and Mark 4 tanks at about 300 yards.

21. General Patton and his officers are very enthusiastic over the performance of the new M5 light tanks in action against the French at Casablanca. They had encountered no difficulties with them up to the present time.

22. In conferences with General Norman and Colonel W. M. Blagden, Deputy Director, A.F.V., British Eighth Army, it was stated that they preferred the diesel type of engine on account of the longer mileage on one filling of fuel and the decreased fire hazard. They consider that it is desirable that a tank have a fuel capacity to take care of 12 hours of operation, approximately 240 miles.

23. Our rubber tracks on all American tanks have given splendid results and are well liked on account of their long life. Some M4 tanks have already been driven more than 1,500 miles without changing tracks.

24. The question as to whether a trailer should be attached to the back of a tank to carry ammunition and additional fuel was discussed. Several British officers were not in favour of the use of the trailer due to the decreased performance of the tank. Others felt that this was a good idea in that additional fuel and ammunition could be carried forward, and if necessary could be detached and dropped should the trailer interfere with the operation of the tank.

II. Tank Transportation Vehicles and Tank Recovery Vehicles.

1. Tank transporters have played an important part in desert warfare on account of the long distances, which have been involved in operations since the break through at El Alamein. After this break through the First Armoured Division Travelled 400 miles with its tanks on transporters in ten days.

2. On December 22^nd the tank recovery organisation service of the British Eighth Army was visited. This is considered one of the most important tank service organisations seen, and it is believed it would be well for the American Army to copy this type of service. A complete description of the Tank Delivery Regiment of the Eighth Army was obtained. This paper gives the functions and organisations of this regiment. The tank delivery regiment is a unit formed to receive and deliver armoured fighting vehicles to the forward organisations. Besides transporting the vehicles from the base shops to the point where the tanks are to be delivered to organisations, the tank delivery regiment has set up a complete inspection service. Before being issued to the fighting organisation, each tank is completely checked for its mechanical fitness. This includes examining and testing the guns, gun sights, machine guns, engines, transmissions, tracks and all other vital mechanisms of the of the tank. The work is functionalised so that a small group takes care of each type of inspection. One group is assigned to inspect the 75mm gun, another small group to inspect the machine guns, and so on. After the vehicle has been inspected as to mechanical fitness, it is then supplied with the necessary rations, water, fuel and ammunition so that the vehicle is then ready to fight. It has been found that although the tanks and other armoured vehicles are inspected thoroughly at the base, still 8 or 9 tanks out of 10 will be found to be deficient in some respect or another. When this final check is made at the forward station of the tank delivery regiment, this will insure that no tank is issued to the troops, which is not in condition.

3. It is strongly recommended that the Ordnance Department set up a tank delivery service patterned after the British organisation. Sufficient details concerning this organisation were obtained from the British to enable this to be done without difficulty. ( Enclosure, Tank Delivery Regiment, 8^th Army, Regimental Standing Army, Exhibit 1)

4. In conference with General D. J. R. Richards in charge of the British base at Cairo, I witnessed the importance of the transport vehicle and the transport delivery regiment. The type now being furnished is considered satisfactory as it is used on good roads. The importance of this service is shown by the fact that in November 1,200 tanks were recovered from the battle field and brought back to Cairo and 1,000 of these tanks were later put back in service. he brought out the fact that in planning operations, approximately two tanks will be required behind the lines at all times for every one in combat at the front. Approximate figures which he gave were 3,000 tanks in the hands of the British Eighth Army and of these, about 1,400 are now at the front, the rest either being at the base shop undergoing repair, or enroute. These figures, of course, vary widely from day to day as vehicles are received or sent forward. At the present time the British Eighth Army is operating about 600 of these transporter vehicles.

III Self Propelled Artillery.

1. General McCreery and General Norman praised the performance of the 105mm howitzer carriage on medium tank chassis M7 which the British call the ‘Priest’. The minimum range at which the British Eighth Army engaged targets with this weapon was about 2,000 yards. Usually 3 to 5 shots were required to get on the target 2,000 to 3,000 yards, The most desirable ranges for operating efficiently is approximately 2,000 to 6,000 yards.

2. Officers of General Briggs’ command preferred the 105mm howitzer to the 25-pounder British gun. The reasons given were that the 105mm-howitzer carried a larger explosive charge (3.8 lb.) than the British 25-pounder (1.8 lb.). The 105mm howitzer also provided a better variety of fuses. The 25-pounder gun has given some difficulty due to leakage of the recoil system, which has not been encountered with the 105mm howitzer. The 24 self propelled mounts which General Briggs had in his organisation in the drive against the Germans came through the battle without losses.

3. This is in contradiction to the report received in Washington of General McCreedy that 50 of the 105mm self propelled mounts were lost in this action. One mount received a hit on the recuperator system which was corrected in the field by filing off the burrs so that the mount went back into action. Another unit had the track damaged … this was replaced. The third had slight damage to the sight bracket which is also readily repairable.

4. In the landing operations in Casablanca two M7’s of the Cannon Co. Sixth Infantry were closely engaged in the assault of a stone fort under heavy small arms fire. The 105mm materiel materially aided in forcing the capitulation of this fort. A 105 mm howitzer was put out of action by a bullet which punctured the rear end of the recoil system. the recoil mechanism as mounted is somewhat vulnerable and action has already been taken by the Ordnance Department to have a shield added which will give additional protection.

5. It was desired by both the British and American troops to have the side armour of this vehicle increased in height and sketches were obtained to indicate the modifications desired which can be readily carried out.

6. The conference with General Arkwright at Marble Arch stated that the 105 mm howitzer mount was used at times at ranges as great as 11,500 yards and tanks were destroyed at ranges as great as 8,000 yards.

7. Some of the modifications suggested by the British which were more or less minor are as follows: Addition homolite generator satisfactory to keep batteries charged; The skate mount for anti-aircraft guns does not always rotate freely due to difficulty in lubricating; improvement of present seats which are high and small; traversing lock weak and does not hold the gun sufficiently tight; a metal case for carrying sight should be provided; lanyard pull is heavy; shift lever very close to the edge of gun shield.

8. While visiting General Briggs’ command we saw a 6-pounder anti-tank gun which had been mounted on a 4x4 British truck chassis. the gun had been provided with a heavy shield. General Briggs stated that his command which had been equipped with a number of these units did not like them due to their high silhouette and the fact that the 6-pounder could fire only A.P. ammunition.

IV Half-tracks Scout Cars and Personnel Carriers

1. While there is some difference of opinion among American officers, the majority were greatly in favour of half-track vehicles, whether used as scout cars, personnel carriers, or vehicles for self propelled artillery.