Michael Dorosh Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Finally found some hard evidence that the Churchill was not used in Sicily by the Canadians. The Churchills were replaced in all Canadian units in March 1943 by the Ram, then shortly after the Sherman. Page 125 of THE TANKS OF DIEPPE: THE HISTORY OF THE CALGARY REGIMENT (TANK), 1939 TO AUGUST 19, 1942 states this quite clearly. The source is cited as "War Diary, 14 CATR, May 4, 1943". This is a doctoral dissertation by Hugh George Henry, Jr. This MA thesis formed the nucleus of the book by After the Battle called DIEPPE: THROUGH THE LENS OF THE GERMAN WAR PHOTOGRAPHER. Cost me a small fortune to get a copy, but it is the only published history of the 14th Canadian Army Tank Regiment. Odd, given their prominence at Dieppe and later in Italy, and since they live on today as the King's Own Calgary Regiment with a strong presence in the City and a good regimental museum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Why is it do important to remove stuff from certain months of the OOB? If somebody wants to do a historical scenario he will have an account of the battle, giving tank types, in front of him, no? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 Originally posted by Redwolf: Why is it do important to remove stuff from certain months of the OOB? If somebody wants to do a historical scenario he will have an account of the battle, giving tank types, in front of him, no? Canada NEVER used the Churchill in combat in the Mediterranean theatre, so it should be removed from the game entirely. What are you talking about? :confused: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 i thought all this kind of stuff was a gift from bfc so that nw europe battles could be done in cmak. too bad the pziiif was taken out in the first patch. i'm all for adding things in, but not for taking things out. i paid for the things in 1.00, anything changed should be pluses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 Originally posted by junk2drive: i thought all this kind of stuff was a gift from bfc so that nw europe battles could be done in cmak. Good freaking Lord Canada NEVER EVER USED THE CHURCHILL IN COMBAT DURING THE CM TIMEFRAME. Canada NEVER USED THE CHURCHILL IN SICILY Canada NEVER USED THE CHURCHILL IN ITALY Canada NEVER USED THE CHURCHILL IN NORTHWEST EUROPE, COMPRISING FRANCE, BELGIUM, HOLLAND AND GERMANY Canada used the Churchill exactly once, at Dieppe, in August 1942. Many of these were early versions that aren't even in CM:AK to begin with. There is no reason for any game as well researched historically as CM to have them included. I really wasn't attempting to reopen the debate of pluses and minuses. I presumed that Moon's comment that BFC really did read the boards and look to us for historical assistance was true - that being the case, since the only resource previous as to Churchill availability was a resource buried somewhere in the bug thread, I thought I would post this primary reference - the War Diary of one of only three Canadian regiments to be equipped with the Churchill. Someone in the other thread had suggested that the source indicated replacing the Churchills only after Sicily. The war diary entries show that this was not the case. BFC's stance on historical accuracy was made clear time and again; this info is presented for their info. So even if we want to pretend CM:AK's vehicle sets were designed to facilitate NW Europe scenarios (if that was true, where would the Cromwell and King Tiger be), CANADA STILL NEVER USED THEM. sheesh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Its just a game, no need to get so upset about it. So Canada never used them, then don't put them in Historical Scenarios, very simple solution. I know that Canada never used Churchill so I would never put them in even a Fictional battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 what do they look like so i can avoid them, they must give you high blood pressure. did they use them in the pacific? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 Well, if the idea is to make games that are historically accurate I would think this to be a detail for BFC to note down for future reference, even if they don't patch CMAK again. That alone makes it a worthwile contribution from Grog Dorosh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 4, 2004 Author Share Posted September 4, 2004 Thank you, Sirocco. Yes, junk2drive, all three divisions of the Canadian Army Pacific Force did use Churchills, since they could be fitted with the Crocodile flame equipment. Their only combat use was in the Phillipines, when the 7th Division found itself in street fighting for Manila. The 20th Saskatchewan Dragoons had an entire squadron of Crocodiles, but only ten vehicles were serviceable during the fighting itself due to the corrosion caused by the salt water landings and lack of proper waterproofing. Brigadier Sowden commented after the war rather unfavourably on the US Navy's performance during the landings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darknight (DC) Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 I guess you learn something new every day....I was not aware that we (Canada) fought in the Pacific War except for the 2 battalions at Hong Kong in '41 and the Aleutian Islands (never really had much interest in the Pacific Campaign though, so there's a lot I don't know about that theatre)..... The other thing I wanted to mention was with regards to the 1st Cdn Tank Bde history....Michael, have you ever gone through the Royal Canadian Armoured Corps History? I have a copy of it and it had the information about how the brigade was equipped for Sicily; also, this book should still be in print (or at least accessible). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 thank you michael was the action on the way out of the philippines early war, or on the way back in late war? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakthrough Posted September 4, 2004 Share Posted September 4, 2004 There was a Mexican AF contingent (P-47) Tac Group in the 44 PI Campaign as well. Anyone have any info? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 5, 2004 Author Share Posted September 5, 2004 Originally posted by Darknight_Canuck: I guess you learn something new every day....I was not aware that we (Canada) fought in the Pacific War except for the 2 battalions at Hong Kong in '41 and the Aleutian Islands (never really had much interest in the Pacific Campaign though, so there's a lot I don't know about that theatre)..... The other thing I wanted to mention was with regards to the 1st Cdn Tank Bde history....Michael, have you ever gone through the Royal Canadian Armoured Corps History? I have a copy of it and it had the information about how the brigade was equipped for Sicily; also, this book should still be in print (or at least accessible). I've heard bad things about that history, mostly from uber-Canadian-armour-grogs, so they may be minor points. I recall some photo captions being wrong, for example, but have never read the book myself. I should ask Don Dingwall and the other grogs about it I guess. Re the Pacific - don't believe everything you read on the Internet, eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 5, 2004 Author Share Posted September 5, 2004 Originally posted by Breakthrough: There was a Mexican AF contingent (P-47) Tac Group in the 44 PI Campaign as well. Anyone have any info? Focus, for God's sake!!! I'll mold you into something worthwhile yet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breakthrough Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Focus, for God's sake!!! I'll mold you into something worthwhile yet. [/QB] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Originally posted by Breakthrough: That one is on me in the interest of good will among allies pal.... puzzled silence What does that even mean? You're right, Dorosh. I can't tell if it's a dearth of useful hate and anger, or some sort of weird language barrier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 5, 2004 Author Share Posted September 5, 2004 Originally posted by Seanachai: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Breakthrough: That one is on me in the interest of good will among allies pal.... puzzled silence What does that even mean? You're right, Dorosh. I can't tell if it's a dearth of useful hate and anger, or some sort of weird language barrier. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted September 5, 2004 Share Posted September 5, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: I'd be less concerned if this thread actually dealt with where we buy our clothes. :confused: You are such a fashion maverick. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emar Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Michael, will throw out another grog question since you seem to be the man to ask. I am currently working on 2 ops set in the Canadian sector of Normandy and some of my sources mention the use of AVRE tanks at Berniers and other battles as well as mentioning infantry support from Crocs. Could these then have been British manned tanks on loan or is the information in error (dont have the books in front of me but believe one of the sources was "fields of fire"). If the tanks don't belong in the Normandy ops then I want to leave them out to be accurate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 6, 2004 Author Share Posted September 6, 2004 Originally posted by Emar: Michael, will throw out another grog question since you seem to be the man to ask. I am currently working on 2 ops set in the Canadian sector of Normandy and some of my sources mention the use of AVRE tanks at Berniers and other battles as well as mentioning infantry support from Crocs. Could these then have been British manned tanks on loan or is the information in error (dont have the books in front of me but believe one of the sources was "fields of fire"). If the tanks don't belong in the Normandy ops then I want to leave them out to be accurate. Many of the support tanks or "funnies" (AVRE, Crocodiles, etc.) were consolidated into the British 79th Armoured Division - they supported not just other British divisions, but the Canadians and even the Americans on occasion (definitely the Crocodiles were used in support of US operations at least once). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted September 6, 2004 Share Posted September 6, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Brigadier Sowden commented after the war rather unfavourably on the US Navy's performance during the landings. Ah, Great-Uncle Baldy. We never heard much from after he ran off with that hussy from the travelling opera with the good legs and great, erm, 'lungs'. I don't think he ever really forgave American sailors after the unfortunate 'incident' with his seachest, which through round-a-bout circumstances I still have in my possession. I think it coloured all his later dealings with things American and nautical. So, Michael, what are your real thoughts on using Churchills in Canadian scens set in Sicily in late May? Regards JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.