Help: Canadian WWII artillery terminology

[Crewman]

Hello,

The subject of this thread is the following document:

Royal Canadian Artillery, 2nd Canadian Corps, Counter Battery Policy, Operation "Totalize", Appendix L, Addendum A to RCA, Operation Instruction No. 5, 7 August 1944

I would like to ask you for explanation of several phrases or abbreviations related both to this document and generally to artillery operations.

The problems are the following. What does it mean?:

1. CB
The context is as follows: "CB programme", "CB bombardment", "CB task".

2. CBO
The context is as follows: "… ammunition at the rate of 30 rpg for 2 Cdn AGRA and 9 AGRA may be expended by the CBO" and "further ammunition can be made available to CBO on request" or "on call from CBO".

3. HAA
The context: "HAA Regiment"
Heavy Anti-Aircraft...?

4. HB
The context: "NIL – only for long range HB"

5. NIL
The context as above: "NIL – only for long range HB"

6. "Apple pie" bombardment
The context: "Apple pie" bombardment will probably be required on occasion during D plus 1 and D plus 2.

7. FMN
This abbreviation appears in the table "Ammunition allotment" and sometimes it is also "FMN/unit". The abbreviation appears in the first column of the table over the names of various units or sectors.

8. SP
This time I do not think that it is "Self-Propelled". The context is: "In sp of Attack". This phrase appears in the same "Ammunition allotment" table, this is a title of column No. 2 where the quantities of rounds are mentioned.
In spite of...? ... there would be something strange if so, but maybe I am wrong...?

9. RPG
Rounds Per Gun? The abbreviation appears many times in various contexts related to the quantities of rounds.



I will be very thankful for your consultation

Best regards

C.

[Waycool]

Will give it a whirl on a couple of these I am taking educated guesses

CB I think is counter battery fire?

CBO COunter Battery Operations

HAA Heavy Anti Air 3.7 inch AA guns

HB Hostile Battery

Apple Pie Counter-Flak targets, called `Apple Pie' in European theatres, were included in major fire plans when air support was incorporated, again usually as concentrations. HF (Harassing Fire) tasks might be included if resources allowed, although only a few guns were needed, but were unusual in smaller fire plans.


SP support

RPG Rounds per gun

Some of these are on the site below which I posted here.

This is the best Biritsh and Commonwealth artillery site I know of.


Artillery British / Commonwealth WW2

[rob love]

#4 HB I think HB is heavy bombardment.
#5 "Nil", means no/none, nada. It is still frequently used in the military today as in the following context:" How many APC s are in your unit have cracked hulls?Nil returns need reply", which means, that even if the answer is none, you must still reply so the sender knows you actioned the origional question.
#7 FMN = formation

[Mark W. Tonner]

Originally posted by Crewman
Hello,

The subject of this thread is the following document:

Royal Canadian Artillery, 2nd Canadian Corps, Counter Battery Policy, Operation "Totalize", Appendix L, Addendum A to RCA, Operation Instruction No. 5, 7 August 1944

I would like to ask you for explanation of several phrases or abbreviations related both to this document and generally to artillery operations.

The problems are the following. What does it mean?:

Hi Gregory;

Some answers:

CB = Counter Battery
CBO = Counter Battery Officer
HAA = Heavy Anti-Aircraft
NIL = nothing/blank, etc.
FMN = formation
SP = support
RPG = rounds per gun

Cheers

[Crewman]

In alphabetical order:

Mark – thanks

Rob – thanks

Waycool – thanks


The document I mentioned at the beginning is very interesting. I bought it because Canadian Maj.-Gen. George Kitching in his every one memoir imputes Polish 1st Armoured Division extremely high consumption of the artillery and tank ammunition, poor logistics system and general disorganization. He suggests that the Polish artillery and tankers consumed the ammo over all possible limits. I wanted to know what these limits were both for the Canadian 4th Armored Div. and for its Polish partner. Sometimes I understand general Kitching, sometimes not. The Canadian 4th had more than twice as much ammo limits as the Poles had but the tasks for both divisions in the Totalize were almost identical.

For example:

4th had the following allotments for divisional 25-pounders (HE ammo category):
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

4th had the following allotments for divisional 105mm guns:
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

Polish 1st had only the following allotments for divisional 25-pounders (HE ammo category):
▪ In support of attack – 200 rpg
▪ On call – 400 rpg


Best regards

C.

[charlie fitton]

The Canadian 4th had more than twice as much ammo limits as the Poles had but the tasks for both divisions in the Totalize were almost identical.

4th had the following allotments for divisional 25-pounders (HE ammo category):
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

4th had the following allotments for divisional 105mm guns:
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

Polish 1st had only the following allotments for divisional 25-pounders (HE ammo category):
▪ In support of attack – 200 rpg
▪ On call – 400 rpg


My 2 cents...

I read the ammo allocation as being nearly the same, However the Polish first had no Counter-Battery (CB) tasks, therefore no CB ammo allocated,
The 600 Rounds Per Gun (RPG) remaining are still expended in support of the attack, but in different phases or roles. Ammunition "on call" will be expended as the supported unit wants, most likely on targets of oppurtunity which will be determined as the battle develops. The ammunition tasked as "in support" may be utilized on targets previously identified in a fire task table.
Another consideration is that this ammo may be tasked from higher levels of command in addition to the normal unit holdings.

[Crewman]

Hi Charlie,

Thank you very much for your comment, it explains a little more. I am also slightly surprised that the Polish 1st had no allotment for CB. Maybe the reason is in fact that the TOEs of both divisions were not identical when it comes to artillery. The only one kind of field artillery of the Polish unit were the Sextons and their 25-pounders. There were two such regiments in the 1st whereas in the 4th there was only one and the second regiment was composed of 105mm field guns.

Unfortunately the problem may be more emotional than merit-based because generals Kitching and Maczek did not like between them too much and accused between them of various things. Kitching has always emphasized the fact that his division had no supplies shortage in the Falaise Pocket and Gap and the Polish 1st consumed food, fuel, ammo and whatever else at such a high speed that it was the only one division in the Falaise Gap that needed air drops of the supplies. As I wrote above I understand Kitching many times when he criticizes Maczek and his division because I know all weak points of the 1st but in this case Kitching is unjust in my opinion, what is more his information that the 4th has never had supplies problem is not true. Of course the 4th had the same supplies shortage problems at least in one region – St. Lambert and Chambois but I think I do not have to write the SAR story here.

In 1977 Kitching told in his interview that the Poles received hundreds of tons of supplies dropped by the RAF. Canadian general means the only one such a drop which took place on August 20th for encircled Polish positions at famous Hill 262, hellish "Mace" hill. In fact the drop was so dispersed and misdropped that almost nothing reached the Poles. According to the Polish Quartermaster Section documents three-fourth of the ammo air dropped then reached the Canadians and only one-fourth landed at the positions of the Polish 10th Mounted Rifles Regiment.

Also "on call" category of ammo allotment for the Poles is twice as much as in the case of Canadian 4th and this is – in my opinion – an advantage of the 4th over the 1st. The ammo allotted is ammo allotted and stored at the guns whereas "on call" in war circumstances is pure theory. The Canadian 4th had more ammo really allotted and stored and less "on call". The figure "400 rpg on call" for the Poles is such a "virtual" figure and pure theory in the real battlefield circumstances of the Falaise Gap. Both the Canadian 4th and Polish 1st were so dispersed in terrain and so mixed with the Germans that many times it was impossible to deliver the ammo on time. Polish veterans of the 1st Armoured Division of Normandy Campaign period mention great sacrifice of their quartermasters to deliver them ammo. Total losses (KIA, WIA) in the midst of Polish quartermasters then were 36 men including CO of the Quartermaster Service.

One more time thank you very much for your comment.

Best regards

C.

[Mark W. Tonner]

Originally posted by Crewman
For example:

4th had the following allotments for divisional 25-pounders (HE ammo category):
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

4th had the following allotments for divisional 105mm guns:
▪ In support of attack – 400 rpg
▪ CB – 50 rpg
▪ On call – 200 rpg

Hi Gregory;

In regards to your above mentioned, "4th had the following allotments for divisional 105mm guns:", these were not 'guns' of the 4th Armoured Divisional R.C.A., but were the 'guns' of the 19th Army Field Regiment, R.C.A. (M7 'Priest' 105mm How.), who were 'Army Troops' under command of the C.R.A. 4th Cdn Armd Div (for the second phase of Operation TOTALIZE) and were on call to support either the 10th Inf Bde or the 4th Armd Bde, if needed.

15th Field Regiment, R.C.A. was in support of the 10th Inf Bde on the right and 23rd Field Regiment (Self-Propelled), R.C.A. was in support of the 4th Armd Bde next to the Caen-Falaise road, for the second phase of Operation TOTALIZE.

All of the 'Field Regiments' of the 4th Armoured Divisional R.C.A., were, at this time, equipped with the 25pdr (15th Field Regiment, R.C.A. - towed 25pdr equipments; 23rd Field Regiment (Self-Propelled), R.C.A. - 25pdr Sexton equipments).

Further, you mention this document:

Originally posted by Crewman
The subject of this thread is the following document:

"Royal Canadian Artillery, 2nd Canadian Corps, Counter Battery Policy, Operation "Totalize", Appendix L, Addendum A to RCA, Operation Instruction No. 5, 7 August 1944"

19th Army Field Regiment, R.C.A. was not one of the regiments tasked for the two pre-arranged counter-battery bombardments, that were to be fired at H plus 100 minutes and at H plus 7 hours.

Just some points.

Cheers

[Crewman]

Mark,

Thank you very much for additional info. The document I quoted is not so precise and it doesn't give all regimental names and full names. For example the reader of this document doesn't know that the ammo allotments table tells about Polish 1st Motorized Artillery Regiment and 2nd Motorized Artillery Regiment according to Polish terminology.

Thank you also for your details and corrections to the 4th Armoured artillery. I used the TOE from Michael Dorosh's this site but it seems to be too general in the case of "Totalize".

C.

[Crewman]

Ooops, sorry, now I see that I linked the site which is no longer active. :

I started in this thread from artillery ammo allotments but what is interesting is the fact that Polish Quartermaster Section documents state that... during Totalize there were no allotments in the Canadian RCASC Field Depots and the Polish drivers might load as much ammo as possible

Best regards

C.

[Mark W. Tonner]

Hi Gregory;

I won't mention the author's name or the title of his book, but I've always found him to be 'dead-on' with facts in the past, so I was a bit surprised this morning when I read about how during the pre-TOTALIZE R.C.A.S.C. dumping program of artillery ammunition, that rounds of 105mm were placed behind the gun positions of the 2nd Divisional Artillery, R.C.A. (4th, 5th and 6th Field Regiments, R.C.A.) :

I wonder how the gun crews managed to fire 105mm shells from their 25pdrs....

I guess the author in question had a brain fart and us Canadians being from North America, I guess he figured we were equipped with 105mm How., like the Americans....... :

Military History, don't ya just love it..........

Cheers

[Crewman]

Originally posted by Mark W. Tonner
I wonder how the gun crews managed to fire 105mm shells from their 25pdrs....

Mark,

I would say that it is typical unfortunately in the Falaise Pocket/Gap history. That is why I am not surprised that Mr. Brian A. Reid decided to write totally new book on this ETO episode. In the books on it from both sides of the ocean there is so big number of quasi-historic "facts" taken from the air. My country is the best example of this phenomenon but also when I read in Canadian book that the Polish 1st Armoured Div. attacked Chambois and its region... by mistake ... I do not know what to say...

In case of the Falaise Pocket/Gap history I am like priest-confessor -- nothing can surprise me, neither the greatest bullshit nor newly discovered real fact.

Look for example to the US books dedicated to the "Falaise-Argentan Gap" (as they call it) and the US Army's 90th Infantry Division history. You may read that only selected battalions of the 358th and 359th Infantry Regiments fought then in that region. I correspond with variouis 90th ID veterans, also with one of the commanders of the third divisional infantry regiment, 357th. I have always wanted to be sure that 357th was in fact in other place and was absent at Chambois region. I have always read and heard: "What? 357th at Chambois? Never, ever!"

Some time ago I received an email from the USA. Mr. Jim Hammitt wrote to me. I am quoting the fragments:

Originally written by Mr. Jim Hammitt to Crewman

Dear Sir,

I was with the 90th Division at the Falaise Gap battle near Chambois! I was helping man a road-block on one of the roads leading out of the valley where the German 7th Army was trapped. [...]

I was in B Company, 357th Infantry Regiment, 90th Division. I walked most of the way across France, to Mazieres le Metz, where a land mine took off my left foot, so i got to go home!

Moral? Never too much research in the case of Falaise Pocket

Best regards

C.