Hello all

New armor enthusiast here with a couple ?'s I cannot seem to locates on my own.

#1 How are the Armored Regiments Broken down to Platoon level such as 28th Canadian Armoured Regiment (British Columbia Regiment, I see they are Red,White,Blue and Yellow. So I assume that is HQ, 1st Batt,2nd,3rd.

#2 How is the Equipment allocated, I have partially seen it as 20 tanks per Battalion Hq had (4)3 Sherms and 2 105 Sherman, and then each Batt had 5 each Sherms 1 being a version of a Firely. Am I close. Thanks

This site has info on Canadian Order of Battle

http://www.armouredacorn.com/Reference/CVM/Not3.htm

Highway thanks for the scoop I got a lot of info on the buids I want to do.

Now Ihave a question for those out there, I have a picture here of thr TRR in Italy and both tanks have 5A on the back. Does that mean A troop 5th squadron? cause it cant be 5th troop, A or (#1 tank) right?

http://www.canadaatwar.ca/photos/italy/ortona_c2.jpg

Also this Tank how do you tell it is a Mk III as title says? I thought canadian units in Italy had the Mk V except for 1 i think the 8th Princess or somthing.

http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/vehicles/tanks/shermanortona.jpg

Eugene,

the Three rivers regiment was the senior regiment in the 1st Canadian armoured brigade. I have seen Canadian tanks with similar letters and they do not denote the squadron.
I suspect the ``A`` denotes the regiment being the first and most senior of the 3 regiments that compose the brigade. The number 5 being the troop.

Hi Eugene,

Do you have a link to the caption text? The spotting features suggest it's an M4A4 (Sherman V) - large flared radio pot, the driver's hoods (rounder edges, bevelled notch across base of front, & more "flowing" joints at the base than those of the M4A2), and of course the three-piece tranny. I would like a better image just to see if it has the typical weld joint down the middle between the hoods. I'd also like to see it from the side just to be positive, but I've been considering a model of it for some time and have set aside a Sherman V for the purpose!

Captions are only as good as the folk who write them, and sometimes things get garbled. Even the best get it wrong sometimes - David Fletcher mis-identified some Firefly Vcs as Ics in his Osprey book...

Tom

Here you go is this what you need it is the first tank. I hope this helps I still cannot tell the differences yet of the variations, and some of the refrences that you sherman guys have provided. Except maybe the Fireflys Ic Hybrids and the VC just by the hull but after that im still lost in the sauce. Cheek bulges and engine decks and all that.

My main mission right now while im in AFG is to find Decals of the kits I have planned in my Head.


http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/vehicles/tanks/shermantank.htm

I believe Tom is correct. This is a Sherman V as is the first one in the photo you posted. It has the flared antenna pot and 3 piece transmission cover. Sherman III`s with 3 piece transmission cover had the more `D` shaped antenna pot. It also has the wide driver`s hoods not seen on Sherman III`s. Sherman III`s had either the narrow cast drivers hoods or square welded ones.

More information can be found here:

http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/index.html

Eugene

If you are really interested in Canadian Armor, I would suggest investing in the following two books, they are a great reference.


http://www.squadron.com/product-p/agc1004.htm
http://www.squadron.com/product-p/agc1005.htm

Thanks for the tips to look at.

Kevin, I am as ost of my Ideas will be of Candadian Armor with some brits and US. I will snag those 2 books for sure.

Also that Armoured Acorn site you showed me is awsome.

Merry Christmas to you all.

Eugene

You may note that one of the authors, Barry Beldam is the proprietor of the Armoured Acorn site as well.


Kinda, but not really.

The crux is that the term "regiment" in Commonwealth armies doesn't mean the same as it does in the US Army.

In the US army a Regiment is always 3 battalions and is fought as a unit at all times. There were ususally 2 or 3 regiments to a US division. The equivalent structure in the Commonwealth was the Brigade, which in WW II held 3 battalions, but almost never of the same Regiment.

In the infantry a regiment was a holding formation, not a fighting formation and was generally from one geographical area. It was the home unit for recruiting fromm that area and was responsible for the post-basic training of soldiers and held the traditions of the units created within it. A British regiment could have very many battalions 4, 5, 6, maybe even more. They all drew their traditions from the regiment but served in different brigades as needed. With WW II some of the batallions were assigned to the armoured corps, so you get tank units with traditionally infantry or cavalry roots.

As yet another stroke against unterstanding and clarity, the "Royal Tank Regiment" was a single "Regiment" wherefrom sprung all of the various battalions that ususally served in the British independant armoured brigades, generally tasked with supporting the infantry, much like the US independant tank battalions.

Now having confused matters regarding the infantry, armoured regiments in the Canadian army were all of single batallion size. Tank batallions (i.e. regiments) were organised as such: each Troop was a platoon and each Squadron was company sized.



So the army has a list of all regiments and batallions in order of "seniority", usually related to when the uinit was created. The markings of any unit within any brigade is related to its seniority in the army list.
Bgde HQ tactical markings were White,
Sr. Regiment - Red,
2nd Sr. Reg't - Yellow
Junior Reg't - Blue

Unbrigaded regiments used light blue or ocassionally white as well (these were ususally the recce regiments assigned to divisions and not to brigades)

Within each regiment (remember, sized as batallions) each squadron was denoted using a geometric shape in the regiment's colour.

HQ Sqdn - Diamond
A Sqdn - Triangle
B Sqdn - Square
C Sqdn - Circle




So each Sqdn (company) has an HQ troop (platoon) & 4 or 5 fighting troops with 3 or 4 tanks each. The HQ troop would have 3-4 Shermans and maybe (Italian service only) 2 105mm Shermans. Each fighting troop would have 3 or 4 shermans. If they were all 75mm types, then there would be qty 5 3-Sherman troops. If there were Fireflies available (Jun-Dec 1944) then there were either 4 troops of 3 75mm Shermans and a troop of 4 Fireflies or 4 troops each with 3 75mm Shermans & 1 Firefly. By the end of the war, most troops could field 2 Fireflies and 2 75mm Shermans. The decision on which way to go was made by the regimental commander, a Lt. Col.




Nope, tanks marked as such both belong to 5 troop, A Sdqn. It also indicates that the regiment at that point had no Fireflies as if there were 4 tanks in the troop, there would be no 5th troop or if there were still 5 troops, all the vehicles in that troop would be Fireflies. Regiments in Italy got Fireflies later than NW Europe any really only started to get them in quantity in late 1944/ early 1945.

How's that? Clear as mud?

Paul

Paul

You nailed it!! perfectly. Now 1 more small question. I have been reading all around that, Gen Mont didnt really like the Sh Mk Ib and most of them served in Italy. Now testing my knowledge here you guys can grade your student. But some were allocated to the AD's and AB's in the BHQ of the Regiment, as well as I think I read it was 2 of them and some of the OP tanks. But in August or Sept 44 they were later moved to the HQ Squadron of the Reg then again shortly after reorganized as the Armed Recce Regt got some and the HQ Troop of each Squadron got 1 or 2 I think. I think the British we aligned like that but read that some regt's used 95mm Churches and not 105 shermans. How did I do.

All of that is generally correct, just don't make the mistake of thinking that all regiments had the same organisation simply because that was what was in the orders. Regimental commanders had/have a fair amount of flexibility in how they allocate their resources, once they have them. Exactly where the allotted 105s were in any regiment can only really be determined by looking at each regiment's war diary (or books purporting to have done so) or by looking at photos of vehicles properly marked to allow you to make the determination (and good luck finding many of _them_).

The fact that the Italian regiments had the 105s at all was somewhat against the standing war establishments and then, when the 5th Canadian Armoured Div & 1 CAB went to Holland in Spring 1945 and _kept_ the 105s, they were the only regiments in the entire theatre that had that level of fire support.

With Commonwealth units, especially the Dominion and foreign national troops, who tended to be even more "discretionary" in following some regulations than the regular British Army, you really have to look at the details to say for sure how things were at the time.

The regs will generally tell you how things _should_ be, but only photos and primary documents will tell you how they really were.

Paul

Thanks for the great info I am still hunting more knowledge, learnig all the differences is tough. Well I sourced most of the decals I was hunting for but I have to say I think I paid way more than I should have from AA. I hope you chistmas was well?

oh yeah what do you all think about the Cyber hobby Firefly VC I can get one for about 30$ Us is it ok out of box besides the seams??

Euge

Hi Eugene!

I built a Sherman V a while back that can give you an idea of what the CH Firefly is like. (They use the same hull.) It's do-able with a bit of effort.

Tom

Hey Eugene,

Have you seen this build here on Armorama?

DML Sherman V build

It's an excellent example of what I was trying to explain about taking a single subject, doing the in-depth research and running with it. It also shows how the DML kits can be built into models every bit as nice as the Tasca kit.

You'll note how very little (actually almost none) AM was used in the build - just mostly good old fashion model-building skills.

Good luck with your builds!

Unless you paid some sort of premium, I can assure you that you haven't paid too much. They are of first rate quality.

If you have not used dry transfers before, I would recommend practicing on something before using them "in anger".

There are two other ways of using them, one with archer's waterslide paper. In essence you apply the decals to the speacial paper which essentially puts a layer of waterslide glue on the back of the dry transfer. Then you apply them like a wet decal but without the edges that leave silvering on normal decals.

The other way is to simply apply the decals to clear decal sheet. Then you cut them out & apply as normal decals, but you have to deal with the clear border & cutting things close.

Personally I find applying the dry transfers to the model directly to be not my way of doing it. I like the freedom that comes from the wet application methods.

Paul