Wars and Conflicts聽 permalink
VICTORIA CROSS Winners
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.聽
Posted by VESTURIS (U10660293) on Saturday, 3rd May 2008
What were some of the most inspirational stories of Victoria Cross winners from it's inception?
-
Message 2
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Saturday, 3rd May 2008
Vesturis -
the account of "Smoky" Smith's action at the Savio River, Northern Italy in October 1944 when he was awarded the V.C...... on a Tank bustin patrol..his section came upon a Panther Tank - who fired it's M/c gun and wounded his N.C.O. -
"Smoky" grabbed the PIAT - fired and knocked out the Tank then killed a few of the accompnying PG's with his Thompsom M/c gun - another panther showed up - Smoky fired the Piat again - hit the Tank which reversed into a ditch - killed a few more PG's then the third Panther came along - took a look at the scene ..and retreated at speed. "Smoky" then carried his NCO to the RAP for treatment.
"Smoky" just died a couple of years ago aged 91 here in Vancouver.
He was a member of the "C" Company of the Seaforth Highlanders of Canada which we of the 145th regt RAC were supporting in Italy after Rome was liberated and he often stood on the back of my Churchill Tank into action at the Gothic Line until my tank was knocked out.
The ditched Panther was hauled out - cleaned up and presented to my "A" squadron 145th and we used this to great extent in pummeling the makers of same... then head office found out and declared it a NONO.....The Gunner was my old friend Walter Pollard from Yorkshire who died after stepping on a schu mine.. and is buried at Cesena Cemetery. -
Message 3
Posted by Scarboro (U2806863) on Sunday, 4th May 2008
"Smokey" Smith was indeed a colorful character who wasn't afraid of much, including his own officers. I believe he was promoted to corporal 9 times, and demoted back to private 9 times. Also after he took his wounded buddy to an aid station he then returned to the battle zone to keep fighting.
Another interesting VC recipient is Robert Hampton Gray, a Canadian member of the Fleet Air Arm. In August 1945 he attacked a destroyer in Tokyo Bay. Wounded and on fire he continued the attack until he sunk the destroyer and then crashed into the bay.
The Japanese were so impressed that there is a memorial to his courage in Japan, the only such monument to a foreign enemy soldier on Japanese soil. -
Message 4
Posted by Mr Pedant (U2464726) on Sunday, 4th May 2008
Regarding Smoky Smith,
I'm really surprised that a PIAT was any good against a tank as advanced as a Panther. I thought the PIAT was a poor weapon? -
Message 5
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Depend how close you are willing to get!!!
I think a simple hand grenade down the turret would be 100% effective, but the problem might be getting volunteers to deliver it . . . -
Message 6
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Follow the link for a good article on 'Smokey' smith -
-
Message 7
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Mr Pedant 鈥
If you will note the timing of that action by 鈥淪moky鈥 Smith as being October 鈥44 鈥 that weapon had been improved after the orginals
had been having too many flash backs and killing the users. As someone else remarked 鈥 鈥渋t depends on how close you get !鈥 鈥 Ten yards is very close to a Tank to be seen !
Of the 20 V.C.鈥檚 awarded in the Italian Campaign only three 鈥 I believe - went to users of the PIAT.
Interestingly 鈥 In the Italian campaign - 11 British 鈥 6 Indian and 3 Canadians were recipients of the highest award with 8 being killed in their actions, from Casa Berardi in the south by another Canadian 鈥 Capt. Triquot of the Vandoos to 鈥淪moky鈥檚鈥 in the North. The V.C鈥檚 or the G.C鈥檚 were not just handed out with the rations -
Message 8
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Monday, 5th May 2008
For me this has to come down to only a few, these heroes are:
Noel Chavasse VC and Bar,
Charles Hazlitt Upham VC and Bar,
Henry Cain VC,
Rambahadur Limbu VC,
And
Johnson Beharry VC.
For me these represent the most inspirational VC's that I have had the pleasure to read accounts of. I would have put the name of the third man to win a bar to his VC but at this moment it eludes me, any words from trooper Tom? -
Message 9
Posted by Nielsen (U3014399) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Re message 1,
I'd be a poor Dane if I forgot Anders Lassen VC, MC & Two Bars, who received the VC posthumously after a night raid in Northern Italy - in the wiki section there's a nice bit on him, including the citation from the London Gazette. -
Message 10
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Raybans - a very good choice !
In my view - ALL V.C. holders are away above the common man - to read of their individual exploits leaves me with a sense of wonderment.
I only tell the story of "Smoky" Smith as I knew the man as he often rode on the back of my tank into action - last time I had the opportunity to meet him was in Chilliwack a few months before his death when he came to unveil the statue of another very young V.C.of the first war - Piper Richardson V.C. of Chillwack
In due course we shall no doubt have a statue to "Smoky" either in Vancouver or New Westminster as we shall have one for Beharry V.C.
somewhere in Britain - or his birthplace.
One of our Officers - Major Kempster was awarded the G.C. for throwing himself on a hand grenade thus saving the lives of four men - extraordinary courage..... -
Message 11
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Monday, 5th May 2008
The 3rd VC and Bar is:
Surgeon Captain Martin-Leake
Arthur Martin-Leake was born in Standen, Hertfordshire, on 4 April 1874. Surgeon Captain (later Lieutenant Colonel) Martin-Leake was a member of the South African Constabulary then Royal Army Medical Corps, attached to the 5th Field Ambulance.
On 8 February 1902, at Vlakfontein, South Africa, Surgeon Captain Martin-Leake went out into the firing line to dress a wounded man under very heavy enemy fire only 100 yards away. He then attended a badly wounded officer and while doing so was shot himself. He only gave up when thoroughly exhausted and then refused water until other wounded men had been served. This award was published in the London Gazette on 13 May 1902.
During the period 29 October to 8 November 1914 near Zonnebeke, Belgium, Lieutenant Martin-Leake showed most conspicuous bravery and devotion to duty in rescuing, whilst exposed to constant fire, a large number of the wounded who were lying close to the enemy's trenches. The bar to his second VC was published in the London Gazette on 18 February 1915.
During World War Two, Arthur Martin-Leake commanded a mobile ARP unit. Arthur Martin-Leake died in Ware, Hertfordshire, on 22 June 1953. He is buried in St. John's Church High Cross in Hertfordshire. -
Message 12
Posted by VESTURIS (U10660293) on Monday, 5th May 2008
I was always amazed by the story of 3 VC winners who grew up on Pine street in Winnipeg probably played hockey together. Their names were Clarke (somme), Hall (Ypres), Shankland (passchendale). Two were posthumous and after World war 1 the street was renamed to VALOUR road.
Every time we drive to the city and pass that street it reminds you of special the area was and
their sacrifice. What would the odds be for 3 VC's growing up blocks from each other? -
Message 13
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Vesturis -
If they played Hockey together - then they didn't needs lessons in fighting ? -
Message 14
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Monday, 5th May 2008
One of our Officers - Major Kempster was awarded the G.C. for throwing himself on a hand grenade thus saving the lives of four men - extraordinary courage.....聽
Billy MacFadzean was awarded a VC for doing the same at the Somme.
Who decides that one action merits a VC while a similar action gets a GC? -
Message 15
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Trke -
Army commander I guess - then War Office - then Monarch
Thing is that Major Kempster of "A" squadron of the 145th RAC was not facing the enemy as the fighting in North Africa was all over and we were training for the next fighting in Italy -
Message 16
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Tom,
That would explain it. The VC being for valour in the face of the enemy.
Thanks, Trike. -
Message 17
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Hi Trooper Tom,
Isn't a VC awared for acts of the utmost valour in the face of the enemy and the GC for the same but not in the face of the enemy?
On the note of Beharry, I have very fleetingly met the man! as well as reading his book, I believe that he came to Eastbourne College as his unit 1st Battallion the Princess Of Wales Royal Regiment is the sponsor unit of the schools cadet force but after reading his book and then listening to the man himself was quite incredible. luckily i had persuaded a few friends to leave house a little early so we got front row seats! i now have an autographed copy of his book sitting in pride of place somewhere in my bedroom. Beharry thoroughly deserves a statue but especially in Grenada, his home.
Raybans13 -
Message 18
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Monday, 5th May 2008
"In the face of the enemy"
There's the story of Flying Officer Trigg, a New Zealander serving with Coastal Command.Trigg's VC was unusual because it was based on a recommendation by the captain of the U-boat he was fighting.
-
Message 19
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
Raybans as Trike states - the V.C. is awarded for 'valour in face of the enemy' - not UTMOST - and to all ranks
the GC & GM were instituted to be awarded to those not in face of the enemy but people like the engineers who were dealing with unexploded bombs etc
Things change and now we have the M.C. which was awarded to Officers only for gallantry being awarded to N.C.O's and -- shock horror - Other Ranks !
Cheers -
Message 20
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Monday, 5th May 2008
wasnt the gm and gc awarded to civilians ??
(ie malta GC)
the beauty of the vc was it was awarded to all ranks
to our eternal shame we (GB) used to award different medals to different ranks - military cross to officers - military medals to ors
dfc and dfm
and the medals are awarded by medal boards miles from the front
the us award medals on the battlefront
st -
Message 21
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Monday, 5th May 2008
ST - if you will note - I did say the GC and GM were awarded for those " not in face of the enemy and as only an example - "engineers dealing with UXB's" - did not exclude civilians - It would have been unfair to award the GC to the Maltese Governor as he already had a V.C.
from the first war !
The Medal committees were quite rightly miles from the front as we could not expect the Army Commander -C.I.G.S. - or the Monarch to do the paperwork now - could we ?
The Americans did their own thing with their medals- as did the German's - Italian's et al but our tradition was based on the officers being Gentlemen - Other Ranks merely the cannon fodder - but even this is changing albeit very slowly.
During the early part of the war - if an Officer spoke to you - it was an order - then along about the end of 1942 they actually wished us all a "Good Morning" - I think the RTR and RAC had something to do with that as we were all sleeping - eating - fighting together - hard to ignore !
Cheers -
Message 22
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
The PIAT was something of a stop gap weapon. Albeit a long lived one I dont think it was withdrawn till the sixties.
The powers that be knew the infantry needed a light man portable anti tank weapon. As the lightest anti tank gun needed to take out a German tank with reliablilty now needed to be pulled by a vehicle and was the 17pdr twice if not 3 itmes the size of the pre war 2 pdr. The increase in size bought with it a degree of tactical inflexibility if it was used as a wheeled mount rather than an SP or tank gun.
The hollow charge warhead was just being introduced and it wasnt properly understood at the time. But it did enable the infantry too have a degree of local security. Which they couldnt have from bigger guns. Particularily when they were advancing quickly or forming a hasty defence. In the Piats case possibly a bit more than the US Bazooka as there was no backblast on firing. It meant it could be fired from houses amoungst others.
Occasionally though if the warhead failed to hit exactly right it failed to detonate and if the tank wasnt hit in the right place then it could fail to cause any lethal damage to either the crew or the tank. Veterans ive spoken to about it are fairly equally divided some think it was the best thing since sliced bread. Some think the only way you could hurt a tank with it was if you wedged the launcher in the tracks. -
Message 23
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
BTTDP -
"three times the size of the PRE - WAR 2 pounder"
The 21st and 25th Army Tank brigades landed in North Africa with Churchill Tanks armed with the "pre war" 2 pounders - and waited for the next boat to arrive with the six pounders....but - at the same time FOUR only 17 pounders landed with an Artillery battery NOV '42 - and were whistled down to Medenine to halt the three Panzer Divs in Rommels last battle before being fired...then at Sicily - July '43 a whole battery of Canadians had the 17 pounders - which they finally lost at the Gustav line - The Churchill tank never was armed with a 17 pndr although most Cromwells - Comets and some Shermans were ! -
Message 24
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
The 2pdr Churchill? Thats the one with the 3 inch howitzer in the hull isnt it? Was that actually of any use? or was it just a good idea that never worked out?
The 17pdr is, or was a very handy gun. well to use, I'd have hated to be tasked with dragging one about the country side though.
I've seen pictures of a tank called the Black Prince? basically a Churchill on steroids built o take a 17pdr gun in the turret but as far as i am aware they only ever built the prototype. -
Message 25
Posted by LongWeekend (U3023428) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
dan
Another well-known PIAT V.C. was Major Robert Cain at Oosterbeck (although his V.C. was for rather more than handiness with a PIAT).
The PIAT, being springloaded, took some effort to fire and cock, which put people off. Its main drawback was the unreliability of the bomb - specifically the fuse, which could be unstable. General Crocker was injured at a demonstration of the PIAT in North Africa, and Major Cain had a bomb blow up in his face during the Arnhem battle - didn't stop him getting his hands on more PIATs later.
The PIAT remained in service post-war, but the firing of live ammunition in peacetime was suspended in 1947, on the grounds of safety. The weapon was superseded by the US 3.5 inch rocket launcher - the second generation "bazooka" - in the '50s.
It is interesting that originally the powers-that-be decided pre-war that the 2lbr was too big to be operated by infantry battalions and the plan was to get a smaller weapon - the French Hotchkiss 25mm, some of which were acquired. The fall of France scotched that plan, and the infantry did without until 2lbrs were eventually issued, and proved manageable. There was then resistance to providing 6lbrs, on the grounds that they were too big, as well, but that was over-ruled and, with the improved ammunition available from June 1944, could take on Panthers and Tigers. Infantry battalions did eventually get 17lbrs after the war, but even on a lightened mount, that really was too big and heavy, and recoilless guns replaced them. -
Message 26
Posted by LongWeekend (U3023428) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
st
I think we've covered this before. As well as the VC, the GC and GM could be awarded to all ranks - the qualifying criteria for the two are different (I think based on the risk of the recipient being killed). The original rationale for different medals for officers and ORs was that the criteria were different, given the different responsibilities of officers and ORs. This was probably justifiable for the DSO and DCM (which were for distinguished conduct as well as gallantry), and possibly true for the MC/DSC and MM, but not obviously so for the DFC/DFM, which were awarded for pretty much the same thing.
Different social mores, and times change, so the system has changed, but hardly shameful.
The US system of "battlefield" awards might seem better, but it could result in a unit that happened to be near to the General getting medals whereas other deserving cases who were further away didn't - there are always drawbacks. The British did have a system that allowed local decision on awards. As well as "immediates", where an individual went up through the system, after successful actions, a formation could be allocated a number of awards, to be distributed as the local commander saw fit - this normally resulted in a battalion commander being asked to nominate, for instance, a couple of MCs and MMs.
These were known as "up with the rations" awards, and allocation varied. In some units, they were distributed evenly, in others they tended to go to the Regular officers and SNCOs, on the basis that "they would need them after the war for their careers". -
Message 27
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
BTTDP -
All we had on Churchills - and any other tank at that time was the 2 pounder - the 6 pounder came along - as I said late in October '42 to the two Churchill Brigades in North Africa - in regular producyion numberes wheras the 17 pounder was just being produced and first went into action at Medenine.
We did get lucky now and then as we were up against the Tiger with it's 88mm's as 4th troopp 48th RTR were the first to knock out a Tiger with a shot to the gun mantlett which jammed the gun turret - this Tank now sits in the Bovington Tank Museum.
What you are probably thinking of was the American Grant/Honey which had a 3inch gun in the Hull.
The Churchill "Black Prince" was widened to take the 17 pounder but 6 only were produced - too late as the Comet and Challenger 1 were brought into service towards the end of the war !
Try this link for a complete line up of Churchills - and all the others - scroll down to Infantry Tanks for the Churchill- we only had Mk' 1V's until we got ONE 95mm per squadron in Aug '44 ! :-
-
Message 28
Posted by LongWeekend (U3023428) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
Tom
The Churchill Mk.I had a 3-inch howitzer in the hull, but this was found to be too low and was deleted in later marks. A few Mk.Is were at Dieppe, its only use in combat.
I'm told that this was the reason that the Churchill was considered roomy for a tank - the removal of the howitzer and its ammunition storage. You will have a much more informed view as to whether the Churchill was roomy compared to other tanks!
LW -
Message 29
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Tuesday, 6th May 2008
Lost W/end -
quite right - I had forgotten the Mk 1 - as they were hustled away after Dieppe under a cloud as being fairly useless in a climbing role which was not lifted until Gerry Chester's "B" squadron of the North Irish Horse of 25th Tank bde climbed up Longstop - much to the enemy's shock as their tanks could not climb that hill ergo - NO A/t guns to stop the Churchills - this led to the reprieve and further developement of Marks V- V11 along with the Ark - AVRE - Crocodile - and other "funnies" from Hobo's 79 Div.
The "Roomy" Churchill turret ? - well we didn't try to hold a dance in them but there was enough space for me to fall down to the floor when we were hit - without me banging into anything ! It was away ahead of the Crusader - Valentine and even the Cromwell - only saw the Comet from a distance before it was introduced ! -
Message 30
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
I've read something somewhere that if the armour on most british designed tanks had been tilted some of them, the author picked out the Matilda II and the Churchill, would have had comparable perfomance to the Panther. The fault isnt so much in the thickness of the plate or the quality, but the fact that the plate that was used was presented at 90 degrees to any potential enemy gun, possibly the best way of ensuring the shot penetrating.
That and the fact that both were comparitavely slow so were exposed as targets longer.
My dad was a radio operator with the Guards armoured division. Using Shermans and various M3 half tracks. Till the day he died he didnt like the smell of barbeques cooking. -
Message 31
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
The same can be said for any tank with vertical armour surfaces, I can't remember the exact figure but if you slope any thickness of armour by 45 degrees it virtually doubles it's effectiveness. Hence the reason for the Panther and Tiger II's frontal armour being so effective.
-
Message 32
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Steelers -
actually the Tiger was fairly straight and box like - it was the later Panther which was sloped in a copy of the Russian T34
BTTDP -
Can well understand your Father's revulsion to BBQ's - the Sherman was not known as a "Ronson" for nothing - the German's called them "tommy-cookers" ! The Guards armoured also had a brigade of Churchill's -
Message 33
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Trooper Tom,
Hate to put you right but it was the Tiger I that had the traditional box type superstructure, the Tiger II had sloped surfaces everywhere, although some were minor, like the Turret Front that had only a 9 degree slope. -
Message 34
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Trooper Tom,
Forgot to say also that whilst the Panther was influenced by the T-34, it was not a copy. -
Message 35
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Steelers -
You really are on the ball to-day - and it's not even 9a.m. over here....you are right of course that the Tiger 11 was sloped in places and that the Panther was "influenced" - i.e copied ...trouble is....like the British for example we out in Italy never had many Firefly's - Cromwells - Comets - Challengers - the Germans didn't send many Tiger 11's into Italy - as far as I know therefore all we knew was the Tiger 1 which you will agree - was box like and still tough to knock out with our 6 pounders - even with the APBC ammo -
Cheers -
Message 36
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Trooper Tom,
Your quite right both sPz Abt 504 & 508 fought in Italy, but they were both equipped with the Tiger I, and your quite right again that with 100mm frontal armour and the deadly 8.8cm Kwk 36 L/56 it was certainly a very potent weapon. -
Message 37
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Hi trooper Tom,
forgive me for asking this but I feel the need to ask whether you boys in the tanks on the frontlines felt that your kit was of lesser quality than the panzers and tigers that you faced. I remember part of Spike Milligans war diaries (volume 4??) where he states that it was unfair to say the least on allied tank crews whose commanders used quantity rather than quality to beat the panzers. this begs the sad question could more lives have been saved had allied tanks been more heavily armoured/armed and continually up armoured and up gunned as the germans did?
Raybans13 -
Message 38
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Steelers -
thought so - we didn't bother about the names of the outfits facing us - all we knew was that 1st & 4th Paras - 26th Panzers - 29th PG's were around for us to stay awake ! to get some idea of the 88mm's effect try standing on the edge of the platform when an express comes past....
Cheers -
Message 39
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Wednesday, 7th May 2008
Raybans -
good questions - Old Spike was right - our Army Commanders depended on numbers in order to win as Gen. Oliver Leese said around the Gustav Line battles - "I have 2000 Tanks - and I can afford to lose 50% - ! " that was 1000 tanks @ 50,000GBP each plus 5,000 well trained men- but he was O.K.- he was an Infantryman !
We never FELT that we were badly served with Tanks and guns - we KNEW we were !- but not only equipment but leadership and tactics.
You see back in 1922 there was a big shake up in the Army after the lessons of the first war had been studied to death. A greater emphasis on Tanks as opposed to Cavalry Regiments which were
merged with each other e.g 16th Lancers merged with 5th Irish Lancers to become 16/5th lancers - who left their horses in India when they came home in 1940 to take up Tanks !!! -and again in 1992 merged with 17/21st Lancers to become the Queen's Royal Lancers.- with Tanks etc
Now the "old boys' of the Cavalry didn't like to have to tend to dirty - noisy - evil smelling Tanks as they preferred dirty - evil smelling horses... and so when "brains" like Fuller - Swinton - Liddell Hart and Hobart came along with the fundamantals of the "Blitzkreig" they were rejected by the British powers that be....
but studied intently by the German tank experts like Guderin- Manston and Rommel.
At the same time we were having problems with our air power and so the money was spent on that area - which proved to be our salvation - meanwhile out in Egypt - the 11th Hussars were charging around in 1922 vintage Rolls Royce armoured cars - Hobart was setting up the 1st Armoured Division but was fired by Finlay- Gordonson, who was an Infantryman who didn't think that tanks were any good - and he just didn't like Hobo !
And so the desert became a killing ground for inadquate British Tanks using old fashioned Cavalry tactics against a chap like Rommel with his hidden 88mm's and so when the British Tanks went chasing after his Mk3 and Mk 4's in true cavalry style - his tanks went off to the flanks leaving the British tanks in full view of the 88.mm's - end of story.
It was not until Monty reached Tripoli that these Cavalry types were gone and the Tanks became modernised with real tank men and so at the battle of El Hamma - we saw the first British Blitzkreig - almost succeed but unfortunately the reinforced US 2nd Corp failed to keep the 10th Panzer Div out of the battle and thus the 15th and 21st Panzers escaped and so the second British Blitzkreig took place from Medjez El Bab - to Tunis and Cap Bon thus ending the North African campaign.
There were no opportunities in Italy for blitzkreig until the Argenta Gap which saw the end of that campaign the other one was at Normandy to Brussells and Antwerp !
We were always late with guns - ie. 6 pounder in Nov '42 same with the 17 pounder but no quantities until '44 - the 3.7' AA gun was not introduced until the Bulge in Feb '45 - the Cromwell was ready for D Day but the Comet came later along with the Challenger 1
The Churchill was a very fine Tank but no gun over the 6 pounder !
hope this answers your questions...
Cheers -
Message 40
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Saturday, 10th May 2008
Hi Trooper Tom,
Back to the original purpose of this post; another VC who I've just read up on happens to be Lord Gort of Dunkirk fame, despite the image of him that is presented through the reading of Dunkirk and his actions, the VC citation or accounts of the actions leading to it are quite phenomenal. Have a look on his wikipedia page and let us know what you think.
Raybans13 -
Message 41
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Saturday, 10th May 2008
hi lw
we have indeed done this many times and i still say the us system is better - where medals are awarded on the battlefield
british medals (i believe) are still awarded via the class system - look at big h in the falklands - he got killed in a stupid act when his plan failed - but he got the vc - troops killed and injured cos of that idiot were ignored - my mate who got shot in the head and laid on the gorse for 5 hours got nothing -
the remote medal board decided big h - an officer was braver than the brave tho!!
st -
Message 42
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 10th May 2008
It can take up to 18 months to process an MoH
-
Message 43
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 10th May 2008
What were some of the most inspirational stories of Victoria Cross winners from it's inception?聽
I would nominate Mick Mannock RFC/RAF. Mick had a tough upbringing and in 1914 was interred in Turkey, an experience he only survived thanks to the intervention of the US Consul.
Back in Britain, he joined the RAMC then the Engineers, before transfering to the RFC.
Joining 40 Squadron in France, Mick admitted himself that he was scared, overcoming this he became one of the top scoring pilots of the war.
Mick's VC was for sustained courage rather than a single action.
Trike. -
Message 44
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 10th May 2008
Some more on Mick Mannock;
-
Message 45
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Sunday, 11th May 2008
Raybans 鈥
Yes you are right about Lord Gort 鈥 he did a fabulous job in earning his V.C. as Battalion Commander 鈥 and he did teach at the War academy 鈥 and he did re-write the Infantry manual 鈥 and his work in Malta during the worst of the siege
In 鈥42 & 鈥44 certainly went a long way to allow the award of the G.C. to that beleaguered Island, as I noted in a previous comment.
However his leadership with the BEF in France leading to Dunkirk has always been questioned as it was felt that he had shot through the higher echelons without the requisite experience. His corps commanders Alan Brooke and Dill had divergent views 鈥 and Monty 鈥 who had followed Gort at the war academy 鈥 and re 鈥 re wrote the infantry manual was apoplectic, as always with inefficiency !
To be fair to Gort though 鈥 he was not helped by the CIGS at the time Ironside before Dill replaced him or the Government didn鈥檛 know if they were coming or going with the vain attempts of Finland then Norway.
The breakdowns of at least two Corps and Div Commanders at crucial times set the stage for as Colville 鈥 Gorts biographer stated 鈥 an鈥渁dministrative nightmare鈥- Then came the blitzkreig !
Many felt that Gort was happier as a battalion Commander leading his Guards.
But it must be said that the actions of say 鈥 Captain Paul Triquot of the Vandoos of Cdn 3rd bde at Casa Beradi and Major Mahony of the Westminsters of Cdn 5th Div at the Melfi were equal in valour to Gort 鈥 as were many others -
Message 46
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Monday, 12th May 2008
I see no one has mentioned the name of one of the greatest holder of that medal. Flashman.
-
Message 47
Posted by Tom Hreben (Ex Raybans13) (U8719631) on Friday, 16th May 2008
Hello Grumpy Fred,
Who would Flashman be and where and when did he win his VC?
Raybans13 -
Message 48
Posted by Trooper Tom Canning - WW2 Site Helper (U519668) on Friday, 16th May 2008
Raybans -
you should know by now that Grumpy has a PhD in Kidology - an Msc in mirth and a BsC in BS.....his friend Flashman was a figure in the Comic Cuts or reasonable facsimile who was a forerunner of Superman, Batman et al - he fools a lot of people - then hits them with an unbounded degree of common sense ! -
Message 49
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 17th May 2008
Raybans,
If you've never read the books by George McDonald Fraser, you should give them a try;
-
Message 50
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Sunday, 18th May 2008
Raybans. Thank you (I think) Yes I was joking. Flashman is indeed the hero of the Flashaen novels, and the villian of Tom Browns school days. I have met a couple of V C holders in my time. They all seem to be quiet unassuming men. Until that moment when it needs that one man to step forward and hold the line. During the Battle of the Atlantic 1993. I was on duty as a mayors attendant. I was standing with the other attendants, when one of my co workers (Ex Army) suddenly said. "Mayors attendants Shun." Without thinking, most of us who had worn uniform came to attention. A very small man walked past us, and nodded. He wore a V C. Earned I found out later on X Craft attacking the Tirpitz.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or 聽to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
麻豆约拍 iD
麻豆约拍 navigation
麻豆约拍 links
麻豆约拍 漏 2014 The 麻豆约拍 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.