How did better battlefield recovery of men and equipment influence battles and campaigns and who best dealt with them?
It’s not an area I know much about apart from reading various memoirs, but for recovery of men I doubt anyone would be better than the USN Corpsmen serving with the USMC in the Pacific, and the USMC forward rifle company troops such as mortarmen not right at the front of rifle companies who were used as stretcher bearers when not serving their guns.
The USMC, at least until the very late stages of the war when some poorly trained troops seem to have been pushed through, had unexcelled espirit de corps and prided themselves on doing everything possible to rescue wounded Marines, even under the most impossible circumstances.
The work the USN Corpsmen and Marines did in an ordinary day in places like Pelileu and Okinawa was worth countless medals, none of which were awarded or even recommended. There wouldn’t have been enough medals to go around!
No doubt the same can be said of other services in the US and other armies, on both sides.
Well, I know that battlefield recovery of armor helped put firepower back in the fight right away. Also, equipment too damaged could be cannibalized for use in other less damaged vehicles. I read a book about that very subject some time ago. I can’t remember the name, but it had to do with battlefield recovery in Europe. A very good book i would say. I’ll try to get the name for you.
My inspiration for opening this thread was a piece I read recently regarding the Africa Korps panzer recovery in the Western Desert. Unfortunately, I have forgotten where I read it, but I am sure to find it lying about on a bookshelf somewhere.
My inspiration for opening this thread was a piece I read recently regarding the Africa Korps panzer recovery in the Western Desert. Unfortunately, I have forgotten where I read it, but I am sure to find it lying about on a bookshelf somewhere.
Thre is plenty books dealing with this topic, for exampl e"The great tank scandal" by David Fletcher, “Tobruk, Rommel opening moves” from the Campaing Osprey series. etc.
Most of the people agree that the recovering support of the germans were superior to than the british.
‘Death Traps’ by Belton is recomended. Belton as a Lieutenant was the ‘reconissance’ officer for the tank recovery unit in the US Third Armored Divsion in 1944-45 (First Army). His task was to follow the fighting and record the location and condition of the damaged tanks. His unit’s operations officer took Beltons reports each evening and planned out the next days recovery operations.
Belton provides plenty of detail on the recovery of the tanks, from the initial evaluation, the damamge he observed, planning salvage ops, removal of the corpses, what damage could & could not be repaired, parts salavage, repairs, and the return of the tanks to combat.
The title stems from Beltons opinion of the M4 Sherman. He saw on a daily basis gore splattered tanks & developed a low opinion of the M4. Much of the book is a argument that the M4 should have been replaced by a better tank by 1944. I’ll leave it to the reader to judge Beltons conclusions.