"British/Commonwealth Sections - Strength?" Topic

A quick glance across TMP turned up nothing about the British rifle section, but I have 2 questions.

1. British TO&E shows that each rifle section was to have an NCO, a 6 man rifle element, and a 3 man LMG team, equating to 10 men. However, LOB shows that this number varied from as low as 5 link . Why has 8 men become the norm, although it was not uncommon to have a section of 5 men? Was it a lack of reinforcements, an attempt to raise the ratio of Brens per men (ie. 1 Bren for every 5 men rather than 1 for every 10) or something else?

2. In the supplementary books for my rules I list TO&E up to battalion level. Would it be acceptable to list a rifle section from 5-10 men, or keep the standard 8?

Combination probably of lack of trained replacements and the left out of battle system- I think unlike in US army new replacements weren't always fed straight into the grinder and were put into the lob parties until they assimilated into the unit.
Maybe also the brits realised that a Bren team + 3 or 4 experienced riflemen did the same job as a Bren team and x number of recruits

cheers chris

8 is an average figure, but certainly not the standard; to answer question 2, I definitely wouldn't put 8. Reasons for "short" sections varied, but late war sheer lack of manpower figures highly. It's also worth noting that British battalions had 4 rifle companies, and some units disbanded the 4th to keep strengths up in the other 3.

Dom.

10 was the standard formation until the 1990's. The low numbers might represent casualties.

8 has become the norm for todays' armies as this allows for the section to break down into two "fire teams" each with an NCO, MG, Grenadier/Rifleman, and a rifleman (some armies have this as a Anti-tank gunner).

Going back to WW2 – try this link for – it shows a Rifle Coy and how it is organised: link

By using the other links on this page you can get other TO&E for WW2

Sometimes platoons would go down to 2 sections and companies would consolidate down to 2 platoons in order to ensure a fire element and a manoeuvre element. Once replacements and a brief time out of the line were available the platoon/company would revert to normal size.

So 6-10 men per section would be a good answer. 8 per section is too rigid a standard IMO.

This was also common in armoured regiments to maintain squadron size.

Brian

I'm not sure what you mean by 8 men becoming the norm. A British Infantry Section always had an established strength of 10 men during the war. Certainly due to casualties etc that would drop, but 7 men was considered the minimum necessary for a section to function. Should a platoons sections fall below that the troops were combined into 3 companys in a battalion instead of 4. I have read accounts of Battalions operating at 3 company strength so that the platoons could remain viable fighting units.

Re increasing the number of Brens, again there are reports of units scrounging additional Brens, perhaps from disbanded units, and in some cases using 100 round drums pinched from the divisional recce regiment. these would be ad hoc and specific to time and place so I wouldn't be inclined to use them in a TOE, better to include this in a specific game.

A britsh motor platoon's section had 8 men and I think that's where a lot of confusion occurs between the infantry's 10 man sections.

Shelldrake,
Thanks for the link, I have already used this resource many times for the TO&E.

VonStengel,
By 8 men being the norm I simply implied that many gamers field 8 man sections (1:1 Scale), and I have rarely seen anything else.

Thanks for the input everyone. I have been aware of the shrinking platoon and company sizes, which is straight-forward to me, and I mainly needed a range for the section's strength.

The answer would mostlikely be "2".

One thing you ned to keep in mind is that recruitment in the UK works differently. Each regiment (with the exception of ones like the Royal Marines) recruit only in limited regions like one or two counties or a certain city. This usually is where the unit was first raised.
Later in the war this caused problems when the unit could not recruit enough new men in their region. At times this led to amamlgamations of units that had a "similar" background (like two from Scotland) or not even that (like an English and Welsh Reg.) which were not really popular with men. They sudddenly had a lot of men at their side they did not know or could not even understand, plus one group lost their history by being incorperated into a new unit.

Cheers,

Burkhard

Hello chris you may find help for any other TO&Es on the yahoo group which is for 1:1 scale from ww1 to moderns ..

link

thomas (owner TO&Es groups)

Each regiment (with the exception of ones like the Royal Marines) recruit only in limited regions like one or two counties or a certain city. This usually is where the unit was first raised.

Not at all true in late WWII. Troops all over the place Cockneys assigned to Highland regiments and Scottish borderers in English county regiments.

Recruits were sent where they were needed.

Platoon organisations were only suggestions anyway, as the manuals make clear – it was up to the CO how they actually allocated the men, just as in WW1.

Some WW2 British infantry platoons operated as two groups, a large fire element with all the Bren guns etc and an assault group with the most reliable riflemen and didn't bother with sections at all.

The suggestion organisation was 10 man sections though, in practice smaller numbers were common partly due to unreplaced losses and partly due to LOB. IIRC the minimum section size to be regarded as effective was 6, Section leader, two men on the Bren and a three man assault element. I guess five might just work.

As other people have said, modern organisations are quite different, being arranged around the higher proportion of SAW type weapons plus what can practically fit into an FV432/Warrior….

Thanks for the input again.

6-10 men per section it is. The sections will be arranged NCO, 3-6 men in the rifle team, and 2-3 men in the Bren team.

P.S. 14th Brooklyn, what do you mean by the answer "2"? I would assume you mean two distinct groups of people in a regiment/battalion, as I hardly believe any sane CO would use 2 man sections!

I think he meant option 2 (of the original question): 5-10 man sections.

The section 2iC was meant to command the Bren team, so its normal strength was three.

Ah… Thanks for clarification Martin!

Oh by the way the 2 man Bren team is for the lowest total. If you don't like it, don't use it!

Chris.

Martin got it right, I was refering to your second option.

Cheers,

Burkhard

S you mention Commonwealth, I was today reading about the Australian 6th Division. Australian Sections up to 1944 were:

8 x rifles
1 x Bren Gun
1 x Owen/Thompson Sub Machine Gun.

Pl HQ had a 2inch mortar & Boys (speccling) AT Rifle.

VonStengel's comments are dead wrong. 7 men minimum is a fantasy – actual combat reports indicate the sections in Canadian service in NW Europe normally went into action with 5 or 6 MAXIMUM.

link

link

link

See these battle questionnaires for more discussion.

From the above links – RR Bacon's comments:

Did your section go into battle under War Establishment strength?

Yes!! (emphasis in original)

If so, what was the average number of Other Ranks in the section?

Five

Those questionaires are extraordinarily interesting. One of the guys seems to really have liked the PIAT's

Sidney Jary, in his excellent '18 Platoon' states that three sections of ten men was much too cumbersome a formation to control in any case. He was much happier with two sections (which sometimes happened due to attrition) or with three understrength sections of 6-8 men (which was often the case).

It was initially 8 men. It was increased to 10 to better sustain LOB and losses. Though some Commonwealth countries stayed with 8 man sections (i.e. the NZ Division).
Regardless, this was simply the War Establishment, which bore little relation to actual strength in combat which was usually far less. In the NZ Division most Sections were 5-6 men – I talked to several veterans in 25th NZ Battalion (including a Company CO and two platoon COs), and they all said that they didn't know anything about any War Establishments, but that a Section needed a reliable veteran to lead it, two good men who were usually given the Bren, and two or three newer men to do other tasks such as sentry duty, carry rations and tea up to the front, etc. However, before a big attack, a few replacements would be received from Base so the Section could absord a few casualties and still keep the Bren in action.

In addition to the above, the Company CO (who fought in North Africa and throughout the Italian campaign) I spoke to said that Rifle Platoons in the front line were never supposed to be more than 15 men because any more men became targets for enemy artillery, but that every effort would be made to keep the three Brens manned. Howard Kippenberger also discusses how veteran infantry units would try and thin out their frontline strength in favour of firepower.
I think what this shows is that War Establishments were just a guide, and that in the frontline rather more common sense arrangements prevailed.

Thanks Bugeyedmonster! That was the main answer I was looking for. I always believed sections were at war-establishment 10 men, but apparantly this was a change!

Anyways, my own platoon is two sections of 6, and an HQ and one section of 7 men each.

P.S. That's going to be the strengthened platoon. Less men in the others!