"Support Brigade" at Gazala

Von Melethin referred to a British attack on the cauldron on 4-5 June ending in disaster. After which Rommel started a counterattack with both Panzer regiments and overrun the "support group" of the 22nd Armored Brigade. While the attack itself was not contested by British armor, von Melethin noted this attack knocked out or captured over 100 British tanks.

If support group is not a line unit in the British Armored Brigade structure, than what was it doing with all those tanks? Were they operable when the Germans attacked? What was the OOB of the support group at the time?

 

The support group of a British armored divsion at that time referred to a brigade structure that included the artillery regiments, antitank regiment, antiaircraft component, engineers and, the motorized infantry (not the infantry brigade if under a TO&E that had one). I'll see if I can find the exact OOB for one under the 41 or 41 British armored division TO&E.

 

Thanks! If that's the case, the 100 British tanks captured or destroyed probably refers to the losses of the failed attacks earlier that day.

 

On Wiki it says (and I qoute) 22nd Armoured Brigade, having lost 60 of its 156 tanks, was forced from the battlefield by renewed attacks from 15th Panzer.

 

I found out from a book that the British armoured divisions had a Support Group, but deleted it in 1942, please see below.
1 x RHA Regt
1 x ATG Regt
1 x LAA Regt
1 x Infantry Bn (motorized)
I dont think these formations were used at Gazala and they did not contain Tanks.

 

The armoured division support groups had been broken up by the time of Gazala. This was part of the conversion of line brigades to "brigade groups" which were intended to be more balanced combat teams. Part of this was that artillery and other elements formerly resident in the support groups were now organic to the brigade groups, although there was one critical exception - armoured brigade groups did not include infantry, nor did motor or infantry brigade groups include tanks. Armoured divisions at the time of Gazala were intended to control 1-2 each of armoured and motor [ized infantry] brigade groups.

IMO the brigade group system was a step in the wrong direction. The fundamental problem in 8th Army, revealed by operations like Crusader, was the inability to bring all their combat power to bear in a coordinated manner. Crusader in particular was an ongoing story of brigades being smashed one at a time by the Afrika Korps. Making brigades more self-sufficient missed the point; what was needed was for divisions, corps, and the entire army to function as a unified whole - one of the things Montgomery made them do right when he assumed command.

Gazala was yet another example of brigade groups chewed up one by one, armoured and infantry, on offense or defense.

 

Very true, The British also assembled there Churchill tanks into seperate heavy brigades and held them at corps level, they tried to copy the German panzer divisions by adding infantry tanks to infantry divisions but the infantry left them behind due to there slow rate of speed, but I am sure the Guards had a brigade of churchills when they landed in Normandy and they were a an integral part of there formation I will have to check up on this to make sure.

 

The British used "Army Tank Brigades" which were equipped with infanty tanks like the Matilda, Valentine, or Churchill. "Armoured Brigades" initially were the tank components of armoured divisions, but later there came to be independent armoured brigades also used in the infantry support role. At times, such as NW Europe 1944-45, almost every infantry division had a tank/armoured brigade attached. Getting back to Gazala, the front-line divisions, 50 and 1 South African, were initially supported by 1 and 32 Army Tank Brigades. 32, which had only two battalions, was later attached to 2 South African Div in Tobruk and lost there.

The only Guards I am aware of in Normandy were the Guards Amoured Division which was equipped primarily with Shermans. Initally it used the standard organization including 5 Guards Armoured Brigade and 32 Guards Brigade (motorized infantry). After initial combat experience in Normandy, they adopted a combined-arms organization somewhat like the American "combat command": each brigade had two regimental groups, each comprising one tank and one infantry battalion from the same Guards regiment, e.g. Irish Guards Group. As far as I know this was unique in the British army.

 

The Churchills must be the 6th Guards tank bde assigned to the 15th Scottish div.

The balanced structure of the armoured division was pioneerd by 'Pip' Roberts of the 11th Armoured division. He would switch the organisation according to the situation. His experience harked back to commanding the 3rd RTR in the desert and several armoured brigades. He quickly discovered that having a single coy of infantry supporting a regiment of armour was not enough, nor was there enough artillery in to go around. Results form the NZ divison with two Inf Brigades and a british armoured brigade and other experiments in the 1st and 7th armoured division led to the more balanced oob of 1 armoured bde of three armoured regiments and one inf bn and the infantry brigade. Coupled with the armoured recce regiment of 1944 the armoured divsion had a parity of 4:4 with Armoured regiment and infantry bn's.

Gen Adair of the Guards Armoured Division kept the balanced structure for the remainder of the NW campaign. In his biography he says that to change to the balanced organisation was: the best decision I have ever done.

The Brigade groups that were used in the desert were not going in the wrong direction, it was honest attempts at creating combined arms formations. Unfortunately the balance was not right, nor did the british have right tools for the job. The tanks did not have the HE capability of the german tanks, and there was no proper carrier for the infantry. Many of the officers had cavalry training from the armoured cars regiments or the light brigades and they did not grasp the advantages of all arms formations. The 'balaclava charges' against german AT screens continnued.

 

I found this in an old 1970s book.

The Guards Armoured Division Late June 1944

The Guards Armoured Division
5th Guards Armoured Brigade
2nd Armoured Battalion Grenadier Guards (Sherman’s)
1st Armoured Battalion Coldstream Guards (Sherman’s)
2nd Armoured Battalion Irish Guards (Sherman’s)
2nd Armoured Battalion Welsh Guards (Sherman’s)
1st Motorised Battalion Grenadier Guards
6th Guards Tank Brigade (Attached end of July)
4th Armoured Battalion Grenadier Guards (Churchill’s)
3rd Armoured Battalion Scots Guards (Churchill’s)
4th Armoured Battalion Coldstream Guards (Churchill’s)
32nd Infantry Brigade
5th Coldstream Guards
3rd Irish Guards
1st Welsh Guards

I think that the 6th tank brigade may of had some other tanks maybe some Shermans ?. Was it also British doctrin to attach M.10 tank destroyers to Churchill formations for extra anti-tank fire.

 

Bit of necromancy on my part given the time elapsed. Just to note that 6th Guards Tank Brigade was, along with 31st and 34th Tank Bdes, one of the three Churchill equipped formations available to 21st Army Group for general support duties. They were not tied specifically to Divs, either Inf or Armd, but were attached as required. 31st Bde was absorbed into 79th Armd Div as a holding formation during Sep 1944, eventually commanding the three Churchill Crocodile Regts available by early 1945.

6th Guards and 34th Tank Bdes continued to provide inf tank support throughout the campaign. When Guards Armd Div reverted to an Inf Div in June 1945, 6th Guards Tank Bde 'dismounted' along with the rest of the Guards Armd Bns and only then joined the Div proper. Tank Brigades in 21AG only used Churchills except for Bde HQ, which was authorised four Sherman tanks. At least one Tank Bde in Italy was forced to adopt a mixed Churchill/Sherman format due to shortages of replacements for Churchill tanks (25th I think) during 1944.


There were Anti-tank Regts, RA, at Corps level with a mix of towed 17-prs and SP M10s available for general assignment to units requiring additional atk support. I think I've seen some mention of them operating with Tank Bdes on occasion, but the primary role of Tank Bdes was to support inf onto the target, not get involved in tank v tank actions.

Gary