Armd Inf in 2d and 3d Armd Divs, 1944-45

[Gary Kennedy]

Just wondering whether anyone on the other side of the Atlantic might be able to help regarding an old query of mine regarding US unit organisation in WW2.

When the US Army adopted the new 'Light' structure for its Armd Divs in September 1943, the 1st, 2d and 3d Armd Divs were either already overseas or departing shortly. 1st Armd changed to the Light org during 1944 in Italy, but 2d and 3d both remained on the 'Heavy' (or old) organisation right through their stints in the ETO.

Now I have the Tables of Organization books by JJ Hays on the US Armored Divisions, and photocopies of a number of original T/Os. I was never certain whether the 2d and 3d adopted the new T/Os issued in Sep43, or simply stayed on those issued back in Mar/Apr42. I've found enough bits and bobs of info to convince me that the Armd Rcn Bn, the Armd Eng bn and the Armd Arty all did, and the Armd Regts mostly did (some things that still nag at me there, but that's another post...).

I'm down now to the Armd Inf Bns and their Rifle Cos. Problem I have here is that the original version of the Armd Rifle Co was noticeably smaller than the one adopted in Sep43, and required the Rifle Pls to man their own anti-tank guns, one being towed by each HQ vehicle. Firepower wise there wasn't much difference, but personnel saw the old Coy on 178 and the new on 251, including a dedicated Anti-tank Pl of three guns. I appreciate that these numbers were the paper ones and in combat they were routinely understrength, but there's an obvious difference.

I found this nugget on the net recently, which indicates the Coy was still operating about the 180 mark -

http://www.3ad.org/testimonials/wwii...air_pacios.htm

He describes the Rifle Pls as being smaller still than the book strength of 49 all ranks, and doesn't mention the 57-mm anti-tank guns being involved in this action. I know some US Armd Inf units turned their Anti-tank Pl into a fourth Rifle Pl due to an overall shortage of infantrymen in the Armd Divs, but 36th and 41st Armd Inf Regts weren't even allocated full time anti-tank gunners from what I can see.

So I was wondering if anyone might have any information on the way the 36th and 41st handled the 57-mm towed anti-tank guns, or even discarded them, or has any accounts similar to the above link that might cast some light on their Rifle Co organisation.

Thanks,

Gary

[The Purist]

So far as I have been able to ascertain the 1944 armoured infantry platoon had:

1 x M3a1 ht w/ rifle sqd, & Baz
2 x M3 ht with a rifle squad ea.
1 x M3 ht w/ 60mm mortar team
1 M3 (MMG) with MG squad
1 M2 or M3 ht w/ 57mm ATG & crew.

A company had three such platoons.

A Battalion had three companies plus:

1 MG platoon of 3 x M3 (HMG) w/ three MG squads
1 mortar platoon of 3 x M4a1 or M21 MC ht (3 x 81 mm mortars)
1 SPG platoon of 3 x M8 Scout HMC

On paper at least,... most probably had more kit.

Quite a lot of firepower.

[The Land]

I understand that Bazookas were in good supply - certainly more than one per platoon...

[T. A. Gardner]

On the antitank guns / platoons. In the field most of the armored infantry battalions ditched the guns and used the crew as infantry replacements. This was done because the battalion commanders realistically saw that they could count on having plenty of antiarmor support from the division tanks or attached tank destroyers and that the 57mm was not worth the effort to keep in action.
So, while these guns existed on paper in reality they often were not present in the battalion.