Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Kellett
Lt Walter G. Pavey was a very experienced troop leader in "B" Sqn, 7th Recce (he landed in Normandy on 6 June in command of a contact detachment). By November, when the Humber IVs were withdrawn, the unit was in the middle of a 4-month spell of relative quiet, billeted on the Maas. Lots of time for the fitters to removed the Besas from the Humbers and prepare mounts for them on carriers. In 1948 Pavey wrote that the Besa was a "wicked little weapon...without a doubt, one of the most demoralizing pieces of equipment owned and operated by the regiment." He may well have been the instigator of equipping one or more carriers with a weapon he admired. I am still puzzled at the apparent lack of other examples of Besas on carriers.
|
The answer is ammunition supply, as Ed asks. The BESA was very British and unique to armoured regiments. As Tony mentions above the usual vehicles equipped with BESAs were armoured cars, but by this date had been withdrawn. We know supplying Canadian tankers was on the British model. But wouldn't the DCO and all the echelons have wanted to keep simplifying their supply chains, not keeping one odd nature going up?
From photos of the Staghounds in Canadian service, there are shots of ones and twos carrying sections of bridging. Tarp rolls, ammo boxes, camp cots and kit bags all over their call signs, but placed to leave the crews ready to engage as required. That tells me their crews were quite accustomed to living well forward and outrunning their supply lines. And that the echelon was staging loaded trucks as far forward as safe, waiting for a call or written orders for a cautious meeting for resupply. How would the truck at the tippy end of the supply column know to load rations, water, SRD, grenades, belted 30-06
and belted 7.92, besides the usual fuel, oil and greases?