"US Tank Coy radio net - 1944/45 (ish)" Topic

I'm wondering whether anyone more familiar with US Tank units might know how far down the radio net extended?

The two wartime Field Manuals, FM 17-32 of Aug 1942 and Nov 1944 (the latter via a Nafziger Collection reprint as it does not appear to be otherwise available) both indicate a Company frequency was used. When each Sergeants' tank was equipped with the SCR-538 receiver only set (so four per Pl and those tanks at HQ less the CO's) that makes sense, as only the three Platoon commanders and the Company commander had a transmitter set so Pl nets would be a no go.

Once units start to replace the SCR-538 with the SCR-528 set, that could both send and receive, (which from an old thread of mine dates to circa June 1944, so quite late), it feels like Pl nets become an option, however I've no idea if they were actually used. Pl commanders also got bumped up to the SCR-508, with a secondary receiver unit, which the Nov 1944 FM says could be monitoring the Bn command net while the primary receiver was on the Company net.

The Tank Battalions of the 1st and 6th Marine Divs were both using Pl nets as of Okinawa at least, and given they were very dispersed and operating in the infantry support role, that would again make sense. With separate US Tank Bns supporting Inf Divs, in Europe and the Pacific, it feels like Pl nets would be a good fit too.

I've found FM17-70, Signal Communication in Armored Units, to be unobtainable, which might give a clue as to whether the practice was used.

A few of the post-war US FMs online suggest Pl nets came in when the SCR-508 and 528 sets began to be replaced by the AN/GRC-7 and AN/GRC-8 sets in the 1950s.

More idle curiosity on my part than anything.

Gary

FM17-70, Signal Communication in Armored Units

archive.org/details/FM17-701960

Wolfhag

Thanks, the 1960 publication date for that is a bit late to reflect WW2 practice I think. There were Jun 1944 and Apr 1945 editions from the wartime years that are not in the public domain it seems.

Osprey has a series out called "Battle Orders" that is exceptional. I remember reading in one the answer to your question and more! (Will dig mine out and post later today).

What I found interesting is that only the US used FM radios in WWII (meaning no other combatant country did). AM (as you might know) picks up static very easily and the modulation of the talk gets very garbled. (Just be listening to an AM station while passing a Semi without spark plug suppressors on the interstate.)

Found the reference that (I believe) will answer your question(s). Osprey Battle Orders #10; US Tank and Tank Destroyer Battalions in the ETO 1944-45. See pages 40,41,43,44 and 45. The reference for use of FM radios mentioned in my earlier post, can be found in Battle Orders #21, US Armored Units in the North African and Italian Campaigns 1942-45, page 53.
This series by Osprey is exceptionally well done! Grab them while you can, Gary, as I have been told the series was cancelled! This is NOT your average Osprey series. I believe they can still be downloaded from the Osprey website as a pdf file IF you cannot find copies.

Thanks for the reference, I'll look into the Osprey.

The FM sets in US use were effective at short range comms, 5 to 10 miles effective range depending on the set type. Comms from Bn level to Regt/Combat Command and between higher level HQs still required AM sets and the option of CW (Morse).

The decision to have separate frequency ranges for the sets used by tanks, field artillery and infantry units did present problems in combined arms at lower levels, in that there was only a fractional overlap between SCR-500 and SCR-600 series sets for the first two arms, while the Inf SCR-300 was on an entirely unique frequency range. The post-war ETO Board reports also dismissed the possibility of SCR-500/600 sets using their overlap because of frequency congestion.

I'm still hoping to see a late war Signal Operation Instruction for a US Inf, and ideally also Armd, Div showing the frequency allocation to units and HQs. I've actually made some headway recently on the British system of 1944/45 in this respect but not seen anything for the US oddly (it's normally the other way around).

Thanks,

Gary

Gary. Pg 45 of BO 10 touches base on cross communication and ways they addressed it. While AM radios were available to distribute, again, AM operating within an armored vehicle was more trouble than it's worth. I did not find frequency management info but did find models of radios used, when and why. HQ did have multiple radios/frequencies as they had to monitor for actionable intel and fire requests, logistical requests, etc. and again to your frequency allocations, didn't seem to have the ability to monitor it all on fewer sets. HQ G-3 would have to approve requests unless direct response was authorized beforehand in the orders/battleplan. Frequencies to be dedicated for that purpose would have been an appendix for the operation furnished by G-6. Therefore, logic would indicate that the G-6 would be the only function that had control/visibility on available frequencies that would not interfere with established standards with other subordinate units who may need to pass on additional intel, etc. (This from experience at Battalion level HQ training. Some countries do not yet have modern technology to do things that would make comms easier/efficient.)Hope all this helps yet I know sometimes answers lead to even more questions to research! 8>)

The SCR-508 was used until 1958 and was probably used in the reserves even longer. I don't think much changed after the war as there were no new changes or implementations of equipment and tactics.

In the early 1970s we used the PRC-25, a further development and smaller version of the WWII SCR-300. I don't think there was much difference between the capabilities of them.

Wolfhag