So you're a company commander in Normandy, trying to coordinate your three platoons in action, & liase w supporting tanks & some arty, & keep battalion headquarters appraised, & adapt as needed.

You know your platoons' sets are a bit crap.

What do you do? /1
#WW2 #SWW #History
The whole thing is a bit of a juggling act.

The core set at Company HQ was the WS No. 18 set, linking in with WS No. 38 sets used by platoons & back to Battalion HQ.
0.25 Watts
6-9Mhz
2.5 miles range with R/T and 4 miles with W/T
Interference in woodlands/around armour /2
The 18 set was more durable than the WS No. 38, but much less powerful than the popular WS No. 19 and 22 sets... then again you can carry it about and not worry about a vehicle or cart for it in action. /3
Much like the WS No. 38 set, the No. 18 set also relies on a rather conspicuous aerial - 10' (3m) high.

The Army knew such height wasn't desirable and trials of ground trailing aerials for the 18 and 38 sets were underway in theatre but there were problems... /4
It performed poorly on wet ground, and Normandy was... frequently soggy, whilst movement through thick undergrowth could damage the copper wire which also had the habit of snapping if stepped on.

So signallers, and those around them, had to be pretty considerate in action. /5
Given the opportunity cost of having a giant target clearly denoting Company HQs or using rather finicky ground aerials, the latter did show promise.

So operational trials in Normandy were pushed - with 4 Welch becoming frequent users by 2 August. /6
No. 18 sets were much larger backpack mounted radios held on with heavy duty soldier straps and a modified 08 pattern belt.

Once frequencies were set the waterproof canvas cover could be sealed over the core controls.

Receiver - top
Sender - bottom /7
Despite being of better construction than the WS No. 38, it was still not thought highly of by XII Corps.

It's best viewed as what it is, a man-portable compromise. /8
A core problem was that... well... 19 and 22 sets could easily 'swamp' No. 18 sets in action.

As could tanks (big metal boxes), woodland, terrain, and... umm... other, more powerful radios.

Umm...

Such chonky wireless sets were pretty common. /9
Like, every tank has a WS No. 19 set in it, which are fantastic pieces of kit.

Tanks are also big metal interference boxes.

Forward Observation Officers (FOOs) often have 18 and 19 sets.

Battalion HQ has a 22 set, with Tac HQ using 18 sets... airwaves can get cluttered. /10
*Insert a strange note that Churchill appears to cause more interference than Sherman but that's another story for another day when we look at tank/inf comms in detail which is an amazing story you will all totally enjoy involving balls of steel and the occasional hammer* /11
Even when the wireless net is carefully managed by the Royal Signals it can get pretty messy very quickly.

And... umm... frequencies can easily repeat just an independent brigade or division over, risking ample confusion.

Eavesdropping was common by both sides.* /12
*It remained common for other battalions to listen in to actions & keep track of events - occasionally taking notes and shoving these scraps of paper in war diaries...

This means, occasionally, one finds good detailed records of a rather distant engagement!* /13
Now bare in mind that each of your platoons' WS No. 38 sets probably has half a mile range if using 4' battle aerials, common sensible practice, & these are underpowered.

You've just got so much interference about you need damn good signallers.

Who are in short supply. /14
It is very hard to replace such skilled personnel in the event of casualties, and the rate of attrition is such that they will become casualties - it is really just a matter of when.

Investigations of the causes of interference were not always helpful... /15
Units would rotate in and out of an area, and the same problems would persist - which divisional signals etc would normally blame on atmospheric conditions such as fog, rather than the terrain/woods/valleys/ground - which was really the bigger problem. /16
It doesn't help the reports on which they relied on could frequently be incomplete datasets and flat out contradictory.

Not least as the key knowledgeable personnel were high priority targets carrying big aerials indicating where they were & likely to fall as casualties. /17
So if your company wireless net fails, what then?

Runners & messengers remained popular but were vulnerable to enemy fire, similarly some officers would pop onto the RA or tankie nets to communicate back.

Systems were relatively slick in allowing information to flow. /18
Some companies went to near-comic extremes to guarantee communications, lugging forward captured telephone exchanges, field telephones and spools of cable reel.

This could leave fields and villages strung with random cable like a yeeting kid with silly string. /19
Numerous actions that should have never happened probably owe themselves to 18 set failures, such as Tasker Watkin's scrap where he earned his VC near Martigny.

1/5th Welch Bn HQ ordered B Coy to not cross the road, for fear of stirring hornets' nest. But this never arrived. /20
When analysing engagements in Normandy this trend becomes all to clear, but was obfuscated by the very tiny no. of accounts.

I mean small.

Infantry combat is extremely violent.

Of a battalion of approx 800 men you can find a handful of accounts, occasionally as low as 0.4% /21
As a result we deal with very weak datasets, which takes a lot of work to analyse, deconstruct & reconstruct narrative from.

It's why we have so much poor, quickly researched feedback looped history repeatedly pumped out on the same subjects. /22
So any glimpse at the No. 18 set is complicated, esp as comms failure could easily bring all those involved a cropper.

That company attacks by British and Commonwealth infantry succeeded when relying on such temperamental essential kit... /23
speaks volumes as to the infantry's ability to quickly adapt, know their job, improvise on the fly, clearly communicate and excel in exceptionally adverse situations.

Perennially pertinent. /thread
*Some of the above images are pre-Normandy, with a smattering from Italy.

Hope it doesn't detract.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jonathan Ware

Jonathan Ware Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ReassessHistory

20 Jan
The Churchill Tank in Normandy: Part One 40-44

Ratty Relic or Bocage Buster?

How did it go from a hated, atrocious POS tank worthy only of the scrapheap to a reliable, trustworthy, survivable and popular gun tank in action?

Another pertinent tale. /1
#WW2 #SWW #History Image
At 38 tons the Churchill was clearly a beast but a manageable one, given concerns about railway loading gauge had informed development (even then you still had to remove the side air louvres for rail tpt).

As always, compromise & industrial limitations underpinned design. /2 Image
Early Mk I and Mk II were respectively armed with a 2 Pounder with coaxial Besa in the turret but with differing hull armament, I - 3" howitzer, II - Besa machine gun.

88.9mm of front armour provided excellent protection for the five man crew, and WS No. 19 provided comms. /3 Image
Read 24 tweets
18 Jan
So you're a platoon commander in Normandy, you've got your three infantry sections, and you need to quickly confer with your company commander. You're wireless op is ready with his WS No. 38.

Easy right?

Well... read on. /1
#WW2 #SWW #History
The WS No. 38 set was a compact wireless set (hence WS) assigned at the platoon level, allowing communication to headquarters, who used the bulkier and more powerful as WS No. 18.

A dedicated wireless operator controlled the set at platoon HQ, speaking via the throat mic. /2
WS No. 38 was usually controlled by Wireless Op's throat mic. Mounted on the chest with a nifty webbing cradle.

Aerial: three piece 12' aerial or 4' 'battle' aerial
Power: 0.2 Watts
Frequency: 7.4 - 9 MHz
Weight: 6kg
Battery: 20 - 35 hrs
Range: <mile /3
Read 15 tweets
18 Jan
A German family's war.

Discovered by my mates James in the charity shop he volunteers in.

Probably of the Wagner family

I'll let the pictures do the talking /1
#WW2 #SWW #History
/2
/3
Read 10 tweets
18 Jan
Fantastic thread & not dissimilar to dealing with museums over image fees & some others regarding permissions.

Most spicy was discovering a publisher published a book with - no - permissions granted.

Nadda.

Zilch.

But wanted me to pay ££££ to quote.
#History
One of the craziest elements, not least that many UK museums own none of the core rights they claim *and openly sell items with illegal terms and conditions tacked on I kid you not* is how this damages discourse and exploration of new narratives.
So as a result other image libraries and more copyright accessible generi-material is used by the tanker load, whereas the correct material is never utilised.

Myths continue their cold dead grasp on our remarkable shared heritage and god forbid you want to write on a new topic.
Read 4 tweets
17 Jan
A quick look at 6 Pounder in Normandy

For all those wondering, 1 Tyneside Scottish did use 6 Pounder APDS rounds to devastating effect at Rauray.

But why comment on the use of 6 Pounder Sabot rounds?

Surely they were common? /1

#WW2 #SWW #History
WO205/405
APDS was new in Normandy, it was also a very rare round with (it may be as much as most) use requiring Corps authorisation, occasionally Army.

This meant 6 pdr sabot tended to be issued for specific engagements, and no we don't have tank allocation data easily to hand. /2
6 Pounder remained a serious bane of Panther crews throughout the campaign.

APDS was bloody rare, but other rounds remained devastating.

Esp as many engagements were <1,000 yds. /3
Read 8 tweets
16 Jan
So is there much controversy about John Gorman's remarkable King Tiger ramming action?

Sorta, sorta not, let's have a look! /1
#WW2 #SWW #History
The first thing I want to highlight is I used over a dozen publications to write that thread, war diaries, first hand accounts, citations etc.

There's some amazing analytical study out there, please look at Michael Kenny's customary amazing work. /2

forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?…
It's one of those gold standard Normandy tales with an impressive amount of evidence backing it up, and I'm quietly sure even more lurks in archives.

Also it's a pretty consistent tale with multiple eye witnesses and a plethora of evidence. /3
Read 26 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!