New D-Day vehicles for the Canadian army

derk derin · #1 18-11-09, 07:42

Peter,
Do you have any info on when they began to produce the new vehicles and how long it took to build up the right amount of vehicles for the invasion?
Bill Gregg's book Canada's fighting vehicles was aparently copied from an original list of vehicles needed and picked for the invasion from what I understand.Were the pictures that were taken of the vehicles already produced and in England ready to use for D-Day or were the pictures a visual list of what to order and build for the planned invasion?

Ed,
I have been a collector of Canadian webbing and equipment for 25+ years now and have always wondered when the British equipment was first used by the Canadians.I can see battledress being readily available and issued as needed but who makes the decision to try new equipment like the MK 3 or 4 helmets,the battle jerkin and other items not normally issued to Canadian troops.
Derk.

peter simundson · #2 18-11-09, 15:07

Regarding the Uniforms. I have Invasion worn Uniforms. They are Canadian style (no outside buttons) and British made. The high boots were 3rd Div. Well known, as are the helmets. The webbing is British made and marked. Easily spotted by the Canvas D's. I have several sets of it all. Two were worn by the vets that gave it to me.
After the Invasion relaced material was from Canadian Stores.
And the invasion battledress had thad gas coating on it that hardened from the water.
Imagine coming ashore in a totally soaked Bd. uniform with all pouches and packs filled with water. What fun.

Simundson

Ed Storey · #3 18-11-09, 21:18

There are several questions and responses happening at the same time from this thread with regards to uniforms and I will attempt to add something to this.

When it comes to the design, manufacture and issue of clothing and equipment for the most part, Canadian uniform designs stemmed from the UK. Not everything, but if we look at in this case just BD, boots, web and helmets, the Canadian Army worn items that were designed in the UK. Generally this was because the Canadian Army was part of the British Empire in which the doctrine, tactics and equipment were all British, therefore you could in theory have British, Canadian and say Indian troops all fight side-by-side essentially using the same ‘stuff’, and fighting using the same methods.

Uniforms and equipment constantly evolve so at some point through testing and evaluation there would be a new design for a field uniform or a helmet, I have no documentary proof, but I am speculating that examples would have been sent to the various countries for trials and potentially adapting. In the case of Canada who would be manufacturing its much of its own clothing and equipment a decision would have to be made as to if the new item would be adopted and if so was there the budget and resources. All of this would have to be looked at in the overall scheme of Imperial defence and if you look at Canada during the Great War were we manufactured clothing and equipment that was not compatible with UK, the items had to be replaced once the army was in the field so the details of who would pay and how much stuff would have to be worked out. If Canada adopted a new item, then there is also the decision of how many and if the item will be made in Canada or purchased from the UK. All of this procurement is not taken lightly and there is more to it then the average collector knows and I do not profess to be a supply expert.

In the case of Mk III Helmets, it was the ‘new’ helmet and the decision would have to have been made as to if the whole Army was going to get this helmet, what would be done with the Mk II Helmets already in stock and who would make it. What you have is a decision to purchase a limited number of MK III Helmets from the UK, primarily for 3rd Division and to use up the stock and retain the Mk II for general issue. For sure someone was keeping track of the number of MK IIIs and Mk IV Helmets used by Canada and someone in the Canadian military would have stipulated who could or could not get the helmet and some sort of reckoning would have taken place at the end of the war; as we all know Canada did not adopt the Mk III and did not manufacture it.

Uniforms and web would go through the same process. Obviously in Canada, in the case of BD and web, the issue kit would be Canadian manufacture and you would take this kit with you when you sailed for Europe. Once in Europe, if something needed replacing, they the individual would take whatever were given from QM. Now Canada tried to make sure that the Canadians wore Canadian manufactured goods, especially in the case of BD which was of a better quality and looked a little different. But, if there were not Canadian items available in the supply system, then obviously British or whatever (could be Indian in Italy) would have to do. In the case of webbing, 1st and 2nd Divisions went to the UK in 1908 Pattern Web and replaced it with UK manufactured 1937 Pattern Web and common sense would dictate that you are not going to force two complete divisions to re-equip with Canadian made web at a latter date just so everyone had Canadian made. Obviously personnel coming into those formations from Canada would have Canadian made web. As items were replaced, you could potentially see a mix of UK and Canadian web and in fact this is common in sets obtained from Veterans.

Now the topic of uniforms and equipment for 3rd Division for Normandy, unless someone can come up with a document that proves that the whole of 3rd Division was issued new uniforms and equipment for Neptune, I tend to doubt it was done. As I stated, for B vehicles yes, it makes sense, but not uniforms. Specialist clothing for the invasion was issued to some of the sub-formations of the division, such as Mk III Helmets, boots and Assault Jerkins, but even this was not division wide. Yes, the BD was suppose to have been anti-gas treated, if this was division-wide, I have no idea.

As for having uniforms that landed at Normandy, fought at Vimy Ridge or took part in the Battle at Kap Yong, I tend to think that owning a uniform from any of these key battles is very wishful thinking on the part of the owner. Veterans, god love them, are wonderful people and they may tell you that they wore the uniform at such a key battle but you have to think, what are the chances of a person wearing, every day, the same uniform from June 1944 until May 1945 and then wearing it back to Canada? I can see having webbing, a helmet, a respirator or a razor that could well have landed at Normandy, but to have a uniform that not only survived 11 months of day-to-day wear but also the communal unit laundry system and the odd chance to exchange worn clothing for newer; boggles my very simple mind.

servicepub (RIP) · #4 18-11-09, 22:30

Ed makes some very valid points. Canada had a policy, accepted by the UK, that certain items were to be "of continuing Canadian supply". This list included clothing, vehicles, insignia and small arms. There were a few acceptable exceptions to this such as any No4T could be issued to a Canadian formation rather than issue only Long Branch-made examples.
For those who are not aware, the UK charged Canada for any issues of British kit. In the early days the Canadian Army paid rent for British vehicles and then, later, bought vehicles outright. In return, Canada charged the UK for CMP's bren guns, Sniper rifles, optics, etc...
This meant that both sides employed a shadow army of accountants who kept track of who owed whom how much. At various times Canada (who was always owed money by the Brits) made a grant to the UK. In fact, when the Mutual Aid Act was passed the very first grant was for a Billion dollars - which covered Britain's war costs for a year.

peter simundson · #5 18-11-09, 22:36

I operate a Museum for the Queens Own Rifles. In the Museum I have at least seven original sets of Battledress from WW2. The nicest one was invasion worn and given to me by the guy who wore it. On June 8th he was
winged in the head and sent back to England to recover. Two weeks later
when he was at his "girlfriends" the Provost (he got daily passes) picked him up and delivered him to base to return to his Unit. He was in civvies, was outfitted at base and RTU'd. He survived the war and picked up his Kit on the way home. It was hanging in the basement in the original bag, with helmet, when he gave it to me. Five years ago I picked up a Kit from a Sgt. MM winner. I wanted his MM but got two sets of Battledress. One he returned home in. It had the red lanyard, rank machine stitched on and about a dozen pleats on the back. A new Cdn made uniform. The other was a well worn, pants and tunic, that he wore on the invasion and through the war.
I also have the CO's tunic, trousers and web (camo'd with dark capo yet)
(Col. Steve Lett). The rest of the uniforms are WW2 but not invasion.
If you take the time to check out paybooks and message books you will find that the sgts and section commanders made a list of weapons issued to their troops. They dont have Canadian serial numbers. Although later in the war
Canadian Long Branch Numbers start turning up.
I deal with fact. Not Part 2 orders. Or coffee table books.
In the defence of history when I say Third Div. I refer to the invading troops. Not support troops or Att's and det's that came in later or on day 2.
More on the actual vehicles later
Simundson

Ed Storey · #6 19-11-09, 00:41

Now we have the full story, I wish you had provided those details earlier as you had me believing that you had some mythical BD uniform tht had travelled all through NW Europe.

The well-worn BD in the kit bag is interesting, but how do you know it was field used?

It is nice that you represent the QOR Museum, but to be frank, museums are some of the biggest offenders for glossing over the details, especially when it comes to material history. I asked you about your original earlier post, "Not only that the third Division had new weapons, Uniforms and web. The helmets were the Mk 3 style , the web was Brit. web with web "D"'s, and the uniforms were Canadian style British made. With the exception of the Brens the weapons were new Brit made stens and Enfields." Specifically if you had any primary source material to back up the statement or is this just a theory of yours?

I am glad you deal in more than just Part II Orders and coffee table books, so I will press you again to see if you have any primary source data to back up your statment? Nothing would impress me more if you could provide the QOR QM returns for Mk III Helmets or a written order from the QOR CO directing everyone in the regiment to draw new BD prior to the invasion.

Ed Storey · #7 19-11-09, 04:32

Bill Gregg's book was based on this Canadian WWII Vehicle Data Book.

derk derin · #8 19-11-09, 07:43

I was wondering if the pictures were taken for a visual list of vehicles to build for the invasion but I read the introduction of Bill's book and he writes that Canadian army photographers went to various camps a few months prior to D-Day and took the pictures so I guess that answered my question.I have to stop looking at all the pretty pictures and do a little more reading!
Does anybody have a number of vehicles the Canadian army needed for the D-Day invasion?
Derk.

Bruce Parker (RIP) · #9 20-11-09, 02:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by edstorey

Now we have the full story, I wish you had provided those details earlier as you had me believing that you had some mythical BD uniform tht had travelled all through NW Europe.

The well-worn BD in the kit bag is interesting, but how do you know it was field used?

It is nice that you represent the QOR Museum, but to be frank, museums are some of the biggest offenders for glossing over the details, especially when it comes to material history. I asked you about your original earlier post, "Not only that the third Division had new weapons, Uniforms and web. The helmets were the Mk 3 style , the web was Brit. web with web "D"'s, and the uniforms were Canadian style British made. With the exception of the Brens the weapons were new Brit made stens and Enfields." Specifically if you had any primary source material to back up the statement or is this just a theory of yours?

I am glad you deal in more than just Part II Orders and coffee table books, so I will press you again to see if you have any primary source data to back up your statment? Nothing would impress me more if you could provide the QOR QM returns for Mk III Helmets or a written order from the QOR CO directing everyone in the regiment to draw new BD prior to the invasion.

Peter Peter Peter. If only you knew something about WW2 and the military. If only you didn't fall for fake vet's stories. If only you accepted things only after you found the original order that authorized them. Dam, only 40 (maybe 50?) years at this game. What do you know???

Then (oh you really gone and done it) you don't write the entire history of everything you know IN YOUR POST ON A SILLY INTERNET FORUM...well then, there's no hope for you.

You must feel so ashamed.

Ed Storey · #10 20-11-09, 02:53

Bruce, I will take your post in the jest it was intended...

I don't care if someone has been in the game 50 years or 5 days, posting theories without being able to provide some form of primary source proof is just adding the the litany of myths and half-truths that exist in this industry. There is nothing that would make me happier then to have someone attach a scan from a document of CO giving instruction to draw BD for the invasion or what ever, but so far, I have not seen anything.

Vets are great people, we own them a lot and they achieved great things, but they are human. Stories from Vets about kit, weapons, locations, events or daring do are just that, stories. Most Vets didn't give a rat’s backside about what they were issued or when, so enjoy the stories, right them down, but they are but one piece of the puzzle, to base a theory on one piece and one piece only is not good methodology.

I am a Vet, from UNPROFOR, it was 17 years ago. If I told you that we had to paint our issue helmets blue when we got them in Croatia because Canada had to get there fast from Germany an there was not time to paint them in Lahr. Would you believe me? Remember, I was there, I am a Vet (and to boot I have 30 years collecting experience).

servicepub (RIP) · #11 20-11-09, 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by peter simundson

I deal with fact. Not Part 2 orders. Or coffee table books. Simundson

Wow. I have never been accused of that before.
All of my books are based on historical record and I would prefer to rely on that than on the 60+ year memory of a veteran. Further, any individual CO may order or condone changes to Orders but it is the study of these Orders that tells us what the Army's intent was. It is Part 2 Orders that are fact - not the reminiscences of a veteran or the provenance of a uniform. I respect your knowledge and experience but your sweeping statements about wholesale replacement of all categories of materiel is hard to swallow.
There is written support that all units, prior to embarkation, were to report shortfalls in their War Establishment. In all cases material was supplied at the embarkation point with British material - this included motorcycles, vehicles and smal arms and allowed for the replacement of material which was lost on the way to the embarkation point. Obviously the "Continuing Canadian Supply" policy was not observed in these cases.
I don't understand the comment about British-made Canadian uniforms. The reason the Brits were making their economy pattern was because of their shortage of wool. If they were to re-clothe Canadians they would either do it with stocks of Canadian BD or they would issue British pattern BD, not a Brit-made Canadian pattern - and in which colour, British or Canadian?
In any event, until I see documented evidence or other primary sources I will file this one as an interesting story.

Bruce Parker (RIP) · #12 20-11-09, 03:35

All that occurred with a quarter million troops in WW2, and elsewhere for that matter, is not going to be found in orders or have a document trail.

And all that you say about museums, second hand stories from vets and wishful thinking is mostly true.

But this is Peter Simundson we're talking about. If you knew him, or had dealt with him, you'll know his knowledge and experience will turn out to be better informed than you can otherwise prove with documents. Not one to exaggerate or make things up is Peter. Quite the opposite. He's one to listen to it all and sort out the likely from the crap.

Coffee table books. Now you take that back!!

peter simundson · #13 20-11-09, 05:41

In a few posts Vet's (which we are supposed to love and respect) have been called liars and unreliable sources, a uniform I've got on the rack doesnt exist in a canadian pattern and colour and a British maker's name, even though the guy who says it doesn't has never seen it, Clive, who has done a great job publishing a series of informative Canadian books calls himself a "coffee table" book publisher,(coffee table books are 99 cents at the remainder sale at bookstores and you all know what they are) and, a guy I've never met says I don't know what I've got here and it's all fake.
Boys the fakes are on E Bay and they turn up all the time. The crap is at the Militaria Shows and it's "original" ss uniforms and Canadian battledress jackets that a month ago had no flashes and now is 3rd div. original d day. It's kangaroo badges aged with a blowtorch or whatever.
I'll give up annoying all you experts now. No more posts. I've had three phone calls asking me what's going on.
Who is this Bruce Parker guy anyway??? Seems to me someone said he had a perfectly restored Fox (all covered with red fur?) and carrier. Both ground up Museum quality. Bruce I see a complete original list of WW2 Tac sign markings in your future.

Simundson