DOCSLIB.ORG

Dogfaces: the Infantry in Normandy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dogfaces: the Infantry in Normandy Dogfaces: The Infantry in Normandy Soldiers aboard an LCT landing craft crossing the English Channel, June, 1944. Photo 80-G-59422. Courtesy Naval History and Heritage Command. By Michael Kern Program Assistant, National History Day 1 “The rifleman fights without the promise of either reward or relief. Behind every river there’s another hill – and behind that hill, another river. After weeks or months in the line only a wound can offer him the comfort of safety, shelter and a bed. Those who are left to fight, fight on, evading death, but knowing each day of evasion they have exhausted one more chance of survival. Sooner or later, unless victory comes, this chase must end on the litter or in the grave.” - Lt. Gen. Omar N. Bradley 2 What is National History Day? National History Day is a non-profit organization which promotes history education for secondary and elementary education students. The program has grown into a national program since its humble beginnings in Cleveland, Ohio in 1974. Today over half a million students participate in National History Day each year, encouraged by thousands of dedicated teachers. Students select a historical topic related to a theme chosen each year. They conduct primary and secondary research on their chosen topic through libraries, archives, museums, historic sites, and interviews. Students analyze and interpret their sources before presenting their work in original papers, exhibits, documentaries, websites, or performances. Students enter their projects in contests held each spring at the local, state, and national level where they are evaluated by professional historians and educators. The program culminates in the Kenneth E. Behring National Contest, held on the campus of the University of Maryland at College Park each June. In addition to discovering the wonderful world of the past, students learn valuable skills which are critical to future success, regardless of a student’s future field: • Critical thinking and problem solving skills • Research and reading skills • Oral and written communication and presentation skills • Self-esteem and confidence • A sense of responsibility for and involvement in the democratic process Participation in the National History Day contest leads to success in school and success after graduation. More than five million NHD students have gone on to successful careers in many fields, including business, law, and medicine. NHD helps students become more analytical thinkers and better communicators, even if they do not choose to pursue a career in history. 3 What is the Normandy Scholars Institute? Established in 2011, the Normandy Scholars Institute is a program which teaches high school students and teachers about D-Day and the fighting in Normandy during World War II. The program is a partnership between National History Day and The George Washington University made possible by the generosity of Albert H. Small. Mr. Small is a veteran of the U.S. Navy who served in Normandy during World War II. He is passionate about history education and wants to ensure that the sacrifices of World War II veterans are honored and remembered by America’s youth. Each winter National History Day selects a group of teachers from across the country to participate in the program. Each teacher selects a student to work with during the institute. The teacher and student work as a team, learning side-by-side, making the institute a unique educational experience. Starting in spring, the team reads books on World War II and on D-Day, giving them a better understanding of the history and historical context of the campaign. Each student selects a soldier from their community who was killed during the war and who is buried at the Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial. The team works with a research mentor to learn about the life of their soldier. In June, the teams travel to Washington, DC for several days of program events before flying to France to visit the historical sites where the teams’ soldiers fought and died. The trip culminates with a trip to the American cemetery where the student reads a eulogy in front of their soldier’s grave. After returning to the United States, the students and teachers share their experience with others by making a website about their soldier and giving presentations at their schools. In addition to getting to experience Normandy firsthand, students and teachers will: • Learn the true cost of war and the meaning of freedom and sacrifice • Improve research and problem solving skills • Attain a deeper understanding of America’s participation in World War II • Establish relationships with peers and colleagues from across the country 4 Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………..6 Infantry Combat, 1914-1941…………………………………….7 The Infantry Division……………………………………………9 Infantry Regiment……………………………………………….11 Field Artillery Battalion…………………………………………15 Tank Battalion…………………………………………………...19 Ranger Infantry Battalion………………………………………..23 Infantry Combat in Normandy…………………………………...26 Resources…………………………………………………………30 Bibliography………………………………………………………35 5 Introduction This guide covers U.S. infantry forces in Normandy. It should be a helpful reference for students who are researching a soldier from any of the units listed below. All of these units were either organic or attached to the infantry division, so they are treated here. In addition, the Ranger infantry battalion is discussed in this guide, because the Rangers worked in close cooperation with regular infantry units in Normandy and their experience in Normandy was similar to an infantryman’s. This guide discusses the history, organization, tactics, and combat experiences of the men in these units. It is worth reading all sections of this guide regardless of the type of unit your soldier served with, because these units all worked together. • Infantry Regiment • Field Artillery Battalion • Tank Battalion • Ranger Infantry Battalion Army poster urging workers to produce more equipment. Courtesy Center of Military History. 6 Infantry Combat, 1914-1941 The Rock of the Marne The U.S. Army in Action series. Courtesy Center of Military History. Great advances in infantry weaponry were made in the years after the Civil War. The bolt action rifle, machinegun, and rapid firing artillery all extended the range and lethality of infantry combat. Against these weapons, soldiers could not hope to advance across open ground and survive. Yet, soldiers in trenches were almost impossible to hit with artillery or machineguns. The infantry had to move in close to attack successfully.1 Infantry tactics struggled to overcome these technological advances during the first two years of World War I. Dense lines of soldiers disappeared as soldiers spread out to survive in the face of modern firepower. Military commanders turned to the artillery cannon as the solution to the difficulty of successfully attacking soldiers in trenches armed with machineguns and rifles. Their efforts were in vain – even firing millions of shells at enemy trenches did not kill the soldiers sheltering inside. The machineguns of the day were too heavy for soldiers to carry with them in an attack. The only way to capture enemy defenses was for the infantry to get close to the defenders and attack them with hand grenades and close range shooting. But infantry lacked the firepower to be able to cross no-man’s land without the help of machineguns.2 1 Civil War weapons, Brent Nosworthy. The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War. New York: Carroll & Graf, 2003; and newer weapons, Paddy Griffith. Battle Tactics of the Western Front: The British Army’s Art of Attack, 1916-18. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994, 38-44. 2 1914-1915 combat, Griffith, 47-64. 7 In 1916, the British Army introduced two weapons that made infantry attacks possible. First, they adopted the Lewis Gun, an invention made by an U.S. Army officer named Isaac Newton Lewis. The Lewis Gun was a light machinegun, light and portable enough to be carried forward by soldiers and used in the attack. The British Army also developed the first tanks. Though the first tanks had thin armor, were painfully slow, and were mechanically unreliable (and their crews tended to get carbon monoxide poisoning), the tank and the light machinegun offered the infantry mobile firepower they could use to overcome enemy defenses.3 The British Army took advantage of these new inventions to develop new tactics which became called ‘fire and maneuver’ tactics. They decided that the key to a successful attack was in not allowing the enemy to shoot at their soldiers while they were crossing open ground. An artillery barrage before the infantry attack ensured that German soldiers stayed in their protective underground shelters instead of venturing into the trench to shoot at the British soldiers. The infantrymen moved forward while the barrage was keeping their enemies occupied. Half of the British soldiers fired Lewis Guns at the trenches to make the Germans keep their heads down while the other half of the soldiers moved in close to finish the enemy off with grenades. In 1918, the U.S. Army issued instructions which stated that when attacking trenches: “The assault on such positions must be prepared and supported by artillery directed by its own observers and agents of laiason, and by the infantry’s own weapons. The close cooperation of infantry and artillery is of prime importance. On favorable ground, the artillery preparation may be completed, or even replaced, by the assault of a line of tanks.”4 These tactics proved successful and were soon adopted by all armies (and they are still standard today). After the war, each squad was equipped with a light machinegun. This allowed infantry squads to perform their own fire and maneuver attacks. Half of the squad provided covering fire while the other half moved.5 3 Lewis Guns and tanks, Griffith, 103-134. 4 Fire and maneuver, Griffith, 65-83; and “the assault on such,” War Department.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Pistol in British Military Service During the Great War
    Centre for First World War Studies The Pistol in British Military Service during the Great War A dissertation submitted by David Thomas (SRN 592736) in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MA in British First World War Studies September 2010 1 Contents Introduction 3 Current Literature Review 3 Questions to be Addressed 5 Chapter One-Use and Issue 6 Chapter Two-Technique and Training 11 Accessories 14 Ammunition 16 Chapter Three-Procurement 18 History 18 Army Procurement 19 Royal Navy Procurement 23 Private Purchase 24 Overall Numbers 26 Conclusions. 26 Bibliography 28 Appendix 33 Acknowledgements 37 All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the written permission of the author. 2 Introduction The British military services made considerable use of pistols during the Great War but it is evident that there is widespread ignorance and poor literary coverage of the weapons and their use. It is proposed to examine the pistol in British military service in the Great War, covering issue and use, technique and training, and procurement. Approximately half a million pistols were procured during the war, making it one of the numerically most widely issued weapons. A number of Corps, including the Machine Gun Corps, Tank Corps, and Royal Flying Corps were issued pistols as personal weapons, as well as extensive distribution in other arms. It is known that pistol use was widespread in trench warfare and critical on occasions. Decorations, including several Victoria Crosses, are recorded as being won by men using them aggressively.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States Atomic Army, 1956-1960 Dissertation
    INTIMIDATING THE WORLD: THE UNITED STATES ATOMIC ARMY, 1956-1960 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Paul C. Jussel, B.A., M.M.A.S., M.S.S. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee Approved by Professor Allan R. Millett, Advisor Professor John R. Guilmartin __________________ Professor William R. Childs Advisor Department of History ABSTRACT The atomic bomb created a new military dynamic for the world in 1945. The bomb, if used properly, could replace the artillery fires and air-delivered bombs used to defeat the concentrated force of an enemy. The weapon provided the U.S. with an unparalleled advantage over the rest of the world, until the Soviet Union developed its own bomb by 1949 and symmetry in warfare returned. Soon, theories of warfare changed to reflect the belief that the best way to avoid the effects of the bomb was through dispersion of forces. Eventually, the American Army reorganized its divisions from the traditional three-unit organization to a new five-unit organization, dubbed pentomic by its Chief of Staff, General Maxwell D. Taylor. While atomic weapons certainly had an effect on Taylor’s reasoning to adopt the pentomic organization, the idea was not new in 1956; the Army hierarchy had been wrestling with restructuring since the end of World War II. Though the Korean War derailed the Army’s plans for the early fifties, it returned to the forefront under the Eisenhower Administration. The driving force behind reorganization in 1952 was not ii only the reoriented and reduced defense budget, but also the Army’s inroads to the atomic club, formerly the domain of only the Air Force and the Navy.
    [Show full text]
  • PANZER BRIGADES on the EASTERN FRONT by Phil Yates
    By Phil Yates UPDATED ON 11 SEPTEMBER 2014 1 PANZER BRIGADES ON THE EASTERN FRONT Y HIL ATES B P Y After the destruction of Army Group Centre in Byelorussia by the Soviet Operation Bagration, there was little left to stop them short of the German border, 600 kilometres to the west. Hitler ordered twelve new panzer brigades created to ‘surprise and destroy the attacking armoured spearheads’. The first four of these entered combat on the Eastern Front in late August 1944, launching immediate counterattacks against the Red Army’s deepest thrusts. When the Red Army launched its counteroffensive after the The first four were to be ready in just over one month. Bearing Battle of Kursk in August 1943, the German Army had little in mind that a panzer division was usually given six months to stop it. The much vaunted panzer divisions had worn to rebuild after being mauled at the front, the timetable for themselves out attacking the Soviet defences around Kursk, creating whole new units was incredibly short. The Army had leaving the new Panther and Tiger battalions being rushed to suggested rushing refitting panzer divisions back to the front, the front as the only significant armoured forces. A number but Hitler had insisted on forming new units instead. of Kampfgruppen, ad hoc battlegroups, were formed around The first of these was 101. Panzerbrigade under the command these battalions and the remains of various panzer divisions of the highly decorated Generalmajor Hyacinth Graf von under the command of experienced panzer leaders. Wherever Strachwitz und Camminetz (Major-general Hyacinth Count they were employed these powerful battlegroups halted and of Strachwitz and Camminetz), known as the Panzergraf or threw back the Red Army’s thrusts.
    [Show full text]
  • REFERENCE BOOK Table of Contents Designer’S Notes
    REFERENCE BOOK Table of Contents Designer’s Notes ............................................................ 2 31.0 Mapmaker’s Notes ................................................. 40 26.0 Footnoted Entries ........................................... 2 32.0 Order of Battle ....................................................... 41 27.0 Game Elements .............................................. 13 33.0 Selected Sources & Recommended Reading ......... 48 28.0 Units & Weapons ........................................... 21 29.0 OB Notes ....................................................... 33 30.0 Historical Notes ............................................. 39 GMT Games, LLC • P.O. Box 1308, Hanford, CA 93232-1308 www.GMTGames.com 2 Operation Dauntless Reference Book countryside characterized by small fields rimmed with thick and Designer’s Notes steeply embanked hedges and sunken roads, containing small stout I would like to acknowledge the contributions of lead researchers farms with neighbouring woods and orchards in a broken landscape. Vincent Lefavrais, A. Verspeeten, and David Hughes to the notes Studded with small villages, ideal for defensive strongpoints…” appearing in this booklet, portions of which have been lifted rather 6 Close Terrain. There are few gameplay differences between close liberally from their emails and edited by myself. These guys have terrain types. Apart from victory objectives, which are typically my gratitude for a job well done. I’m very pleased that they stuck village or woods hexes, the only differences are a +1 DRM to Re- with me to the end of this eight-year project. covery rolls in village hexes, a Modifier Chit which favors village and woods over heavy bocage, and a higher MP cost to enter woods. Furthermore, woods is the only terrain type that blocks LOS with 26.0 Footnoted Entries respect to spotting units at higher elevation. For all other purposes, close terrain is close terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • MOUNTED RIFLEMAN COUNSELING GUIDE Message from the 74Th Regimental Commander to Leaders of the 3D Cavalry
    MOUNTED RIFLEMAN COUNSELING GUIDE Message from the 74th Regimental Commander to Leaders of the 3d Cavalry Many leaders will receive this guide and ask why it is necessary. They will say, “I don’t need a guide to know my Troopers. I do that already.” What we are seeing in the Regiment is that our current standard for “knowing our Troopers” is too low. This fact has become evident in the wake of several serious incidents, where “post-blast investigation” revealed facts about the Trooper that several echelons of leaders should have known. For instance, it is unacceptable for a leader not to know that a Trooper has separated from his wife and for months has continued to live off post. It is also unacceptable for a leader not to know if a Trooper pays child support or has designated someone other than his spouse to receive death benefits/SGLI. Conversely, I expect our leaders to know their Troopers’ personal goals and map out a plan to meet them. As much as we think we are practicing engaged leadership, and although we can never mitigate risk to zero…we can always improve. Using this guide, I expect 3d Cavalry Regiment leaders to achieve the following guidance: Leaders will prioritize engaged leadership through daily interactions and formal counseling, and do so at the expense of METL training, when necessary. Leaders will actively gather critical information from personnel documents and associated agencies to “connect the dots” of their Troopers’ lives. This effort is decisive in identifying risk and setting conditions for that Trooper’s success.
    [Show full text]
  • Mg 34 and Mg 42 Machine Guns
    MG 34 AND MG 42 MACHINE GUNS CHRIS MC NAB © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com MG 34 AND MG 42 MACHINE GUNS CHRIS McNAB Series Editor Martin Pegler © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 DEVELOPMENT 8 The ‘universal’ machine gun USE 27 Flexible firepower IMPACT 62 ‘Hitler’s buzzsaw’ CONCLUSION 74 GLOSSARY 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY & FURTHER READING 78 INDEX 80 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com INTRODUCTION Although in war all enemy weapons are potential sources of fear, some seem to have a deeper grip on the imagination than others. The AK-47, for example, is actually no more lethal than most other small arms in its class, but popular notoriety and Hollywood representations tend to credit it with superior power and lethality. Similarly, the bayonet actually killed relatively few men in World War I, but the sheer thought of an enraged foe bearing down on you with more than 30cm of sharpened steel was the stuff of nightmares to both sides. In some cases, however, fear has been perfectly justified. During both world wars, for example, artillery caused between 59 and 80 per cent of all casualties (depending on your source), and hence took a justifiable top slot in surveys of most feared tools of violence. The subjects of this book – the MG 34 and MG 42, plus derivatives – are interesting case studies within the scale of soldiers’ fears. Regarding the latter weapon, a US wartime information movie once declared that the gun’s ‘bark was worse than its bite’, no doubt a well-intentioned comment intended to reduce mounting concern among US troops about the firepower of this astonishing gun.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lewis Gun (Pennsylvania Military Museum, T
    PMM BLOG ARCHIVE August 12, 2020 The Lewis Gun (Pennsylvania Military Museum, T. Gum, Site Admin.) At the start of World War I, American forces relied upon British and French armaments until state-side manufacturing was able to meet demands. One particular arm that would become a viable option for use on land and by air, was the Lewis Gun, better known as the Lewis Machine Gun. Photo of soldier, MM2019.17.26 Pictured here is a member of the 28th Division along the southern border training on a Lewis Machine Gun prior to deploying to France in 1916. Invented by Issac Newton Lewis (COL., US ARMY) in 1911, and mass produced by two companies, the Birmingham Small Arms Company (BSA) and Savage Arms, it is estimated that more than 300,000 were produced from 1913 to 1942. Despite it being realized before WWI broke out, it would take until 1914 for it to be widely produced and dispersed to ally units. Photo of Lewis Machine Gun. Weighing nearly thirty pounds and providing a rate of fire of 500-600 rounds per minute, it is considered a light machine gun being chambered in four possible rounds, two of which being the 30.06 and the British .303. Perhaps its most recognizable features include the aluminum barrel shroud that assisted with cooling, and the large ammunition “pan” on its top. A number of military historians attribute the Lewis not being as broadly used as it could have been by American forces to a number of differences between US military leadership and the gun’s inventor, though it was officially adopted by the US Navy and Marines in 1917.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Rifleman in the Revolutionary War
    HISTORYHISTORY — STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM The American Rifleman in the Revolutionary War American frontiersmen were practically raised from birth The buckskin-clad American riflemen of Morgan’s Rifle Corps rush into position to with rifle in hand, and their marksmanship prowess thwart the British advance at the Second Battle of Saratoga. Timothy Murphy is de picted repeatedly interfered with British and Indian threats. gesturing toward British Brig. Gen. Simon Fraser in the distance. by Roger D. McGrath an armed citizenry was essential to the preservation of freedom. Once disarmed, crack shots, whom the family depended “When the resolution of enslaving Amer- a people either submit meekly to tyrants upon to hunt game for food and to beat ica was formed in Great Britain, the Brit- or fight in vain. The American Revolution back Indian attacks. ish Parliament was advised by an artful strongly reinforced the historical perspec- The Kentucky rifle was a finely crafted man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, tive of the Founding Fathers: The armed tool that no family on the frontier was to disarm the people; that it was the best American colonists defeated the mighty without. The rifle was not made in Ken- and most effectual way to enslave them; British Empire. tucky, as its name would suggest, but in but that they should not do it openly, but While the British had to quickly train Pennsylvania. The towns of Lancaster and weaken them, and let them sink gradually.” their troops in the use of firearms, the Reading were particularly important cen- — George Mason of Virginia, 1788 American rebels could rely on men who ters of production.
    [Show full text]
  • The U.S. Military's Force Structure: a Primer
    CHAPTER 2 Department of the Army Overview when the service launched a “modularity” initiative, the The Department of the Army includes the Army’s active Army was organized for nearly a century around divisions component; the two parts of its reserve component, the (which involved fewer but larger formations, with 12,000 Army Reserve and the Army National Guard; and all to 18,000 soldiers apiece). During that period, units in federal civilians employed by the service. By number of Army divisions could be separated into ad hoc BCTs military personnel, the Department of the Army is the (typically, three BCTs per division), but those units were biggest of the military departments. It also has the largest generally not organized to operate independently at any operation and support (O&S) budget. The Army does command level below the division. (For a description of not have the largest total budget, however, because it the Army’s command levels, see Box 2-1.) In the current receives significantly less funding to develop and acquire structure, BCTs are permanently organized for indepen- weapon systems than the other military departments do. dent operations, and division headquarters exist to pro- vide command and control for operations that involve The Army is responsible for providing the bulk of U.S. multiple BCTs. ground combat forces. To that end, the service is orga- nized primarily around brigade combat teams (BCTs)— The Army is distinct not only for the number of ground large combined-arms formations that are designed to combat forces it can provide but also for the large num- contain 4,400 to 4,700 soldiers apiece and include infan- ber of armored vehicles in its inventory and for the wide try, artillery, engineering, and other types of units.1 The array of support units it contains.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Speak
    Military Speak A glossary for Soldiers and Chiefs Soldiers have a language of their own. Some of these words and phrases are technical descriptions of aspects of the military life. Others are slang or metaphors that have found their way into everyday speech. You might be using military terms without even realising it! As you explore the displays in the Soldiers and Chiefs exhibition, you might find some unfamiliar terms. This information booklet provides definitions for a number of military words, grouped into these categories: • Kinds of Soldiers • Army Ranks • Army Weapons 1 Kinds of Soldiers This set of military terms for different kinds of soldiers will help you to become familiar with the terminology used in the exhibitions. Some of these terms are no longer used in today’s armies. Civilian a non-military person: a soldier’s life starts as a civilian Soldier a soldier serves in an army, wearing a uniform and carrying a weapon Infantry soldiers who are trained to fight on foot Civilianin the past, included such types as fusilier, grenadier and rifleman Cavalry soldiers who were trained to fight on horseback the common types of cavalry were hussar, lancer and dragoon Artilleryman a soldier with specialized training to operate artillery (cannons) a term used since the 16th century Rifleman an infantry soldier trained to use an accurate weapon (a rifle) and to operate in small groups to harass the enemy a term used since the 18th century Hussar Specialist Soldiers of the 18th and 19th Centuries Hussar (pronounced ‘who’s-are’) an elaborately
    [Show full text]
  • Download Machine-Gun-Employment
    UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS THE BASIC SCHOOL MARINE CORPS TRAINING COMMAND CAMP BARRETT, VIRGINIA 22134-5019 MACHINE GUN EMPLOYMENT B3N4478 STUDENT HANDOUT Basic Officer Course B3N4478 Machine Gun Employment Machine Gun Employment Introduction This lesson will cover the basic principals and definitions surrounding Machine Gun Employment. Also discussed will be offensive and defensive considerations, to include the support relationships that will be used when dealing with supporting elements such as machine gun units. The class will be based around the three Machine Guns found in an infantry battalion, the M240G, M19 MOD3 and the M2 HB .50 cal heavy machine gun. We have already been introduced to the organization of the weapons platoon and weapons company and the individual machine-gun units within. Individual classes on the M240G, M2, and MK19 will also be given. You will be expected to be familiar with these organizations and the capabilities of these weapons prior to familiarization with this material. The focus of this class will be centered upon the introduction of the employment of machine guns. Importance For some, this handout in conjunction with the practical application will be the last formal instruction received on the employment of these weapons. But the likelihood of these weapons being employed by all MOS’s, from the Marine Wing Support Squadron to the Truck Platoon, is highly likely. In This Lesson The basic principles, definitions and operating guidelines of machine guns will be outlined in this text. More specific details in relation to the individual weapons systems mentioned above will be covered in their respective classes.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Of
    Technology of War First World War Watch the 3 minute introduction to technology of war Collect your copy of the ‘Technology of War’ booklet and complete a cover page with an appropriate drawing of the Great War – this could be a trench scene, soldier, headstone, a weapon or something else from your imagination! To complete your booklet you will need to collect a Weaponry Fact-File – you need to choose 4 weapons from the 7 that are available and complete each section of your booklet for each of your chosen weapons To help you with your weapon sketch you can use some of the undernoted templates to colour in and stick in your booklet but of course you can choose to draw your own! The following video clips from Dan Snow’s WW1 Uncut series can be used to help you add some extra information to your booklet Gas Machine Gun Planes Rifle Tanks To finish your booklet you need to complete the last page with a statement saying which of your 4 weapons you think was the most effective with at least two supporting reasons Rifle Easy to clean and An infantry The weapons that most repair soldier was British soldiers carried equipped in the trenches was the with 2 basic Lee-Enfield rifle weapons – rifle & bayonet Reloading was time consuming So accurate that it could kill a person almost The average soldier could fire 1400 metres away 15 rounds per minute Light and easy to Bullets were slower carry around then German rifle Killed hundreds Machine Gun of thousands ‘Vickers Machine of men Could overheat Gun’ needed very easily between 4-6 men to move them
    [Show full text]