The British Infantry Battalion (1943) - Four Minute Formation

[@DigitalBattlefieldTours]

A full-resolution image can be found for free on Patreon: www.patreon.com/posts/69592915

[@iatsd]

Paper vs reality is always interesting. Most British infantry battalions in Europe were seriously under strength by late 44 onwards. Infantry Sections would often be 8 men and they would have 2 LMG. The number of PIATs was also increased as they were used for direct fire support more often than they were for AT work. The organic 6pdr was often done away with as they slowed the unit down and didn't have much regular work. When heavier AT firepower was needed, RA AT units, whether 6pdr, 17pdr, or one of the TD options, were usually available. The armoured infantry often get even weirder in what they usually had vs what they were supposed to be on paper.

[@jepkratz]

Well done for this and the other, German and American Bn and Co organization videos. I wish your channel great success.

[@Euan_Miller43]

thank you for the high quality video

[@Glove513]

I’m wondering how the BREN gun carriers compared to the US supplied half tracks in the assault, especially considering their lower profile.

[@DigitalBattlefieldTours]

The universal carrier is a peculiar vehicle that defies easy comparisons. While it could function as an APC, this was generally not recommended. It is for good reason that the British mechanized infantry used US half-tracks instead of their own carriers. The real strength of the universal carrier was that it gave the regular infantry some protected off-road mobility. Casualty evacuation, combat resupply, hauling heavy weapons, this could all be done by universal carriers without exposing them to direct fire.

[@mnguy98]

I feel like it's easier to think of the Bren/universal carriers as more of a hardened jeep, rather than a full-on armored fighting vehicle. When you look at the intended role of the UC and the tasks it was actually used for, I think that comparison becomes even more clear.

[@Glove513]

@@mnguy98 I see. So the UC was not routinely used in the assault although the machine gunners position would indicate that it was originally designed to be used in such a fashion.

[@mnguy98]

@@Glove513 Uh, no, that's not at all what I'm saying. The UC is a Jeep with tracks, not an armored vehicle built for assaulting. Can it be used as an ersatz fighting vehicle, with a machine gun mounted? Yes. Was it designed for that? Absolutely not.

[@iatsd]

>>in the assault