| Royston Papworth | 04 Apr 2013 4:08 a.m. PST |
I see that Warlord are bringing out a Lee and a Grant to go with 28mm figures. Now I would like one to go with my 14th Army platoon as a bit of support. I know that we used both Lees and Grants in Burma; and that Lees were in larger numbers. However, did the Lees have the machine gun in the cupola, the same as the US version? If not, am I better off using the Grant rather than the Lee? Hoping that Mark Davies pop along soon and answer this! 8^) Cheers! Tim |
 Doms Decals  | 04 Apr 2013 4:13 a.m. PST |
|
| Royston Papworth | 04 Apr 2013 5:04 a.m. PST |
Hadn't seen the previous post, ta, but I do have the PDF (and great it is too). Hmmn, the cupola was removed from the Lee, but the turret was still different to the Grant's. So, either I buy the Grant and live with it being not as correct as I would like, or I get a Lee and hope the hatch covers the space where the cupola goes, using my amazing ability with green stuff and plasticard… Ok, I think a Grant it is then! Cheers! Tim |
| kallman | 04 Apr 2013 6:12 a.m. PST |
Glad to know that Warlord is bringing out a Lee and Grant. My North African Desert Rats will be getting some armor reinforcements. |
 BrigadeGames | 04 Apr 2013 6:39 a.m. PST |
|
| Jemima Fawr | 04 Apr 2013 7:29 a.m. PST |
Hi Tim, Grant Mk Is only seem to have been used in small numbers (as command tanks), by one regiment of 50th Tank Brigade at the very end of the war, during amphibious operations along the Arakan Coast. The vast majority of M3 Mediums in Burma were Lee (or Grant Mk II, which looked just like a Lee – don't ask me…). An awful lot of Lees (perhaps the majority?) had the MG cupolas removed, though there were still lots of Lees wih cupolas still knocking around in Burma. However, those with cupolas always had the .30 Cal removed. I've never seen one with an MG in the cupola. So if it were me, I'd go with the Lee and just remove the MG from the cupola, like this one:
Does that help? Mark |
| Royston Papworth | 04 Apr 2013 9:12 a.m. PST |
Oh yes! That is perfect! I knew you would have the answer… 8^) Now to find a 25Lb with jeep tow…. Cheers! Tim |
| Jemima Fawr | 04 Apr 2013 10:01 a.m. PST |
No worries. But why the Jeep? They generally used CMP Quads, or CMP 15cwt trucks or Dodge WC15s when dedicated quads were unavailable. The only instance I know of them using Jeeps as gun-tractors was in 81st (West African) Division, where they used Jeeps to tow their 3.7-inch Mountain Howitzers, with 15cwts to carry the ammo. |
| archstanton73 | 04 Apr 2013 11:00 a.m. PST |
Yep I don't think a jeep had quite the muscle to shift a 25lb!! Otherwise we would have used then all the time! |
| kevanG | 04 Apr 2013 2:51 p.m. PST |
They stripped the quns down of excess weight, reduced the length of the axel and made them jeep portable to get though narrower trails. The gunshield was laid on the bonnet to counterweight it when towing. The jungle axel version is what the post-war 25pounder design had. I think that is why he wants jeep tows. |
| Jemima Fawr | 04 Apr 2013 3:49 p.m. PST |
129 Fd Regt RA came up with the Jury Axle idea in 1943 (which was later formalised as the Mk II Carriage), but it was more to do with making them generally easier and lighter to handle and to make them air-transportable, rather than Jeep-towable. The few regiments that received Mk II carriages still used Quad tractors (or other 4x4 trucks) to tow their guns and on the three occasions they were sent by air, they went without any transport at all. I'm not saying that Jeeps were never used to tow 25pdrs, but Jeeps were only used as an absolute last-resort and were not typically used as 25pdr tractors. Similarly, 17pdr tow-hooks were welded to tanks in NW Europe for use in emergencies, but it was not typical for Shermans to tow 17pdrs. |
| Royston Papworth | 05 Apr 2013 9:19 a.m. PST |
Oops! Perhaps I don't want a jeep towed 25lb after all! 8^) I suppose it was just something I read somewhere and it stuck in my mind… Thanks for clearing that up. Tim |
| kevanG | 05 Apr 2013 9:58 a.m. PST |
Mark, I also used to think that until a conversation I had on the RFCM yahoo forum a few years ago. nigelef.tripod.com/RAorg.htm This is the interesting bit where we were investigating what was used for tows, ammo carriers and basically everything for the 'light' division makeup. "In 1944 a new type of organisation appeared: a 'Field Regiment RA in a Light Division'. Artillery units in such divisions, which were designed for the war in South East Asia, had establishments in the series XV/65n/.
These 25-pdr field regiments had several distinguishing characteristics.
First they were some 200 men stronger than a standard field regiment, notably having 4 additional officers in each battery, including 2 captains and their parties designated as 'forward observation officers' in addition to the 2 troop commanders. Next they had two organisations – 'Normal' and'Alternative', both had the same number of men but differed greatly in their vehicles.
The Normal establishment had fewer vehicles all of which were'cars, 5-cwt' (ie Jeeps). This meant that a substantial portion of the men were designated as 'Marching', including the CO, BCs and observers. The Alternative organisation had transport for all, using cars 5-cwt, FA tractors for the guns, Armoured OP vehicles and 15-cwt half-tracks for
observers, 3-ton lorries for ammunition and stores and a 'Tractor, Crawlerclass 4 with angle-dozer'." It looks like the document you want is the XV/65n and jeeps would be the only ammo carriers. I would guess that they must have used jeep trailers.
Interesting to know that they had extra men and the crews walked" |
| Jemima Fawr | 06 Apr 2013 8:50 a.m. PST |
Cheers Kevan Weird, I read virtually the exact same thing on p.444 of Slim's 'Defeat Into Victory' last night. :o) Seems it was a new org for one of 17th Division's Field Regiments from Oct 1944 onwards. 17th Division at this time converted from being a Light Division to a fully motorised division, though one brigade was maintained on a light scale for airmobile operations. 5th Division also followed suit with having one airmobile brigade, so probably also had one 'Light' Field Regiment. |
| kevanG | 07 Apr 2013 2:10 a.m. PST |
It is coming back to m as to why I have a marked absence of 25pdrs in my 14th Army. I didn't know which regiments used the jeeps and whether they would have been Indian. |
| Jemima Fawr | 07 Apr 2013 7:53 a.m. PST |
The vast majority of Field Regiments and all Jungle Field Regiments and Medium Regiments in India/Burma were Royal Artillery, with the Indian Artillery taking responsibility for Mountain Regiments. However, the odd Indian Field Regiment did crop up: 17th Indian Division had 1 Indian Fd Regt in 1942 and again from December 1944 onward.
19th Indian Division had 4 & 5 Indian Fd Regts from Oct 1944 onward.
23rd Indian Division had 3 Indian Fd Regt.
25th Indian Division had 5 Indian Fd Regt from 1943 to Sep 1944.
26th Indian Division had 7 Indian Fd Regt. 5th, 7th, 14th, 20th & 36th Indian Divisions had no Indian Field Artillery, though they all had Indian Mountain Artillery at various times. |
| Jemima Fawr | 11 Apr 2013 9:24 a.m. PST |
Those Lee & Grant models are out and best of all, they don't have sand-skirts, so are ideal for Burma: TMP link |
| kevanG | 12 Apr 2013 9:40 a.m. PST |
Great stuff Mark, I am eyeing up 1 Indian fd regiment as they look like very good jeep driving 'culprits' |
| Jemima Fawr | 12 Apr 2013 4:05 p.m. PST |
129 Fd Regt started the trend and they were 17th Indian Div, so I think it was probably them rather than 1 Indian Fd Regt in 17th Division, though it might be the case that 129 Fd Regt had since converted back to a 'conventional' Fd Regt, handing the role over to 1 Indian Fd Regt… Slim mentions 5th & 17th Divisions specifically as being the two divisions with one airmobile brigade and two mechanised brigades. He doesn't mention any other divisions converting. |
likes the look of the Soviet KV-1 tank, and plunges into a project to paint three of them - plus a spare KV-2 turret!
