DOCSLIB.ORG

The Maritime Archaeology of Duplex Drive Tanks in the United Kingdom

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Maritime Archaeology of Duplex Drive Tanks in the United Kingdom The Maritime Archaeology of Duplex Drive Tanks in the United Kingdom Thomas Cousins Bournemouth University, UK [email protected] Thomas Harrison MSDS Marine, UK [email protected] Dave Parham Bournemouth University, UK [email protected] Abstract The catastrophe at Dieppe in 1942, where unsupported infantry attempted to capture a fortified beachhead, showed the allied forces how difficult such a venture was. As part of the invasion plan for what became Operation NEPTUNE or the Normandy landings, the allied staff saw the need for armoured support for the first waves of troops ashore. This need evolved into the concept of ‘swimming tanks’ that would land a few minutes ahead of the first infantry waves. The development of such a weapon was undertaken in conditions of absolute secrecy in the UK from late 1942 onwards. This secrecy led to the destruction of much of the historical records that relate to these armoured vehicles, leaving a confused and largely unknown record of what was an important aspect of WWII. This project sets out to record the known examples of such vehicles on the coast of the UK including a group lost as part of ‘Exercise SMASH’, the largest live ammunition exercise of the war, a full scale beach assault training exercise with all supporting arms including amphibious tanks. Though six tanks were lost during the exercise in conditions, which are not fully understood, the loss led to the changing of the operational plans for D-Day. Using archaeological and historic data, this project offers an alternative interpretation for these loses and provides a better understanding of their subsequent impact on Operation NEPTUNE. Keywords World War II, D-Day, Duplex Drive Tanks, Exercise SMASH Introduction short distance across the Channel, the allied forces also needed to pre-empt an invasion of mainland Europe In late 1941, following the Japanese attacks on Pearl to meet the now advancing Soviet army to the east of Harbour, Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the Germany. Furthermore, Stalin was keen for the allied United States (Belcham 1981: 10: Doherty 2011); in forces to create a western front, relieving some of the response, under Prime Minister Churchill and President pressure Germany was putting on the Soviet armies. Roosevelt, the American and British forces formed an alliance. Although differences arose in their ideas, their In response, Churchill and Roosevelt devised the defining decision was the large scaled assault of Europe largest and most complex invasion ever to take place, to defeat Germany, launched from the British coast Operation OVERLORD. The plan was to land forces on when the time was right (Belcham 1981: 10; Doherty the northern French coasts, liberate France, then push 2011). The British Combined Services Committee towards Germany. The invasion, which was to take (BCSC) was formed to study methods of gaining access place on the Normandy beaches, was named Operation to Europe, as by 1942 Nazi Germany had control over NEPTUNE and was described by Churchill as ‘the most much of Europe. During the Nazi occupancy of France, difficult and complicated operation that has ever taken Hitler had also ordered the construction of the ‘Atlantic place’ (Winter 2014: 2). Wall’. This series of coastal defences running along the Channel coastline were constructed between 1942 During the planning of the landings on what became and 1945, for the purpose of preventing amphibious known as ‘D-Day’, the vast scale of the task at hand invasions (Anderson 2010: 61–63). With France being a meant that invaluable cooperation was needed from IKUWA6: 649–656 Thomas Cousins, Thomas Harrison and Dave Parham all of the armed forces including resources and amphibious tanks had been studied by several nations specialist equipment. Armoured units were needed to prior to the war (Fletcher 2006: 3). Many concepts were eliminate the German defences along the Normandy devised but Straussler eventually broached the idea of beaches, otherwise high casualties among the infantry Duplex Drive swimming tank. The Duplex Drive tank would prove unacceptable. During the earlier landing works by having a transfer box within the gears that at Dieppe in August 1942, a force of c. 6000 British, switch power from the tracks to a single three-blade Canadian and US infantry was landed suffering heavy propeller (two propellers on the later Sherman tanks) casualties (Thompson 2011: 38). There, the infantry (Anderson 2010: 23). Flotation being provided by a was supposed to be supported by the Canadian 14th canvas screen erected using compressed air filled tubes, Army Tank Regiment with their new Churchill tanks; given shape by a series of tubular supports running these were late arriving, leaving some of the infantry around the circumference of the tank (Doherty 2011: unsupported and exposed to German machine gun fire 51; WO185/66). Once the tank has ‘swum’ ashore after (Poolton 1998: 38). Driving the landing craft loaded leaving its transport the Landing Craft Tank (LCT) at sea, with tanks up to the beach resulted in the Churchill the drive reverts to the tracks and the screen is lowered tanks getting stuck in the shingle beach, with two and propeller(s) raised (Fletcher 2006; WO185/66). landing craft reported to have sunk as a consequence of this. Those tanks that made it over the sea wall were The British took on the idea of Duplex Drive (DD) tanks prevented from progressing further due to a mass of and Straussler was provided with an 8-ton Tetrarch Mk anti-tank obstacles. The losses were very high, with 60% VII from the 1st Armoured Division in July 1940 to begin of infantry being either killed or captured (Thompson work on his prototype (WO185/66; AVIA22/1522). The 2011). Tetrarch prototype was fitted with an outboard motor for propulsion, technically making it not a DD tank. The failed raid at Dieppe in 1942 led to the formation of The resulting prototype was trialled around the Brent the 79th Armoured Division, later known as the ‘Hobart Reservoir in June 1941, and in September the Tank Funnies,’ in October 1942 under the command of Major- Board agreed Straussler’s design would be applied to the General P.C.S. Hobart. At this time the Duplex Drive Vickers-Armstrong Valentine and later the Sherman (DD) units consisted of the 27th armoured brigade, tank (Fletcher 2006: 6–7; WO185/66; AVIA22/1522). which itself consisted of the 13th/18th Hussars, 4th/7th Dragoon Guards and the East Riding Yeomanry, and On 6 July 1942, the first order for 450 sets of DD the infantry of 285th brigade. In April 1943, Hobart’s equipment was made prior to the seaworthiness trials division was reformed as the only division in the British due to the equipment being a ‘matter of great urgency’ army made up of just specialised armoured units (Anon (WO185/66). The DD tanks were all placed under the 1945: 9). A series of vehicles designed for specific command of Hobart’s division (Anon 1945: 9). Hobart roles during the invasion, including Bridge laying, began his career in 1904, a Royal Engineer throughout minesweeping, flamethrowers and swimming tanks the First World War, his career continued through to were all developed and extensively tested (Anderson the end of the Second World War. He was described 2010: 223; Anon 1945: 31). A key feature was the Duplex as a determined leader who the war office received Drive system (DD) i.e. having a transfer box within the countless comments about as being ‘impossible to work gears that switch power from the tracks to a single three with’ (Macksey 1967: 12). Nonetheless he was a devoted blade propeller. The novel idea of these inventions was patriot with high expectations and a sense of urgency, that they were armoured engineering machines, able an inspiration and irritation (Duncan 1972: 1). After to assist troops and other vehicles across and off the transferring to the Royal Tank Corps in 1923 he was beaches as quickly as possible. To ensure their success responsible for the training of some of the best known the special vehicles had to be kept under extreme and most successful armoured divisions of the Second secrecy, for example the DD tank does not appear in the World War including the 7th Armoured Division, better normal A.F.V. schedules (AVIA22/456). Additionally, the known as the Desert Rats, the 11th Armoured Division, destruction of records was ordered in some cases, ‘All acknowledged as the best British armoured unit in papers concerning Exercise SMASH will be destroyed Europe and the creation of one of the most important after the final conference’ (WO199/2320). This high aspects of success on D-Day, the 79th Armoured Division level of secrecy was maintained throughout the build- (Macksey 1967). up to D-Day (Anon 1945). While the DD tanks would not directly operate under the Development 79th Armoured Division, Hobart would be responsible for the training (Doherty 2011: 51). Most training in Nicholas Straussler was a boat builder specialising Britain took place using Valentine tanks and Hobart in floatation devices. He began working for Vickers- eventually trained ten regiments from Britain, Canada Armstrong designing tank accessories. The idea of and the United States (Anon 1945: 9; Fletcher 1984: 23). 650 Thomas Cousins, Thomas Harrison and Dave Parham The Maritime Archaeology of Duplex Drive Tanks By the time D-Day was approaching the light Valentine Wight, as well as further landing sites at Hayling Island, tank had become out-dated compared to other allied Bracklesham Bay and Littlehampton during Operation and German tanks, both in terms of firepower and FABIUS. FABIUS was the final and largest rehearsal for armour (Fletcher 1984: 23).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Copy of the Thesis Has Been Supplied on Condition That Anyone Who
    University of Plymouth PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk 04 University of Plymouth Research Theses 01 Research Theses Main Collection 2014 The British Way of War in North West Europe 1944-45: A Study of Two Infantry Divisions Devine, Louis Paul http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/3014 Plymouth University All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author. This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and that no quotation from the thesis and no information derived from it may be published without the author's prior consent. 1 THE BRITISH WAY OF WAR IN NORTH WEST EUROPE 1944-45: A STUDY OF TWO INFANTRY DIVISIONS By LOUIS PAUL DEVINE A thesis Submitted to Plymouth University in partial fulfilment for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Humanities May 2013 2 Louis Paul Devine The British Way of War in North West Europe 1944-45: A Study of two infantry divisions Abstract This thesis will examine the British way of war as experienced by two British Infantry Divisions - the 43rd ‘Wessex’ and 53rd ‘Welsh’ - during the Overlord campaign in North West Europe in 1944 and 1945. The main locus of research centres on the fighting components of those divisions; the infantry battalions and their supporting regiments.
    [Show full text]
  • •Œto Close for the Guns!•Š 9 Canadian Infantry Brigade in The
    Canadian Military History Volume 12 Issue 2 Article 2 2003 “To Close for the Guns!” 9 Canadian Infantry Brigade in the Battle for Rhine Bridgehead Lee A. Windsor University of New Brunswick, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh Recommended Citation Windsor, Lee A. "“To Close for the Guns!” 9 Canadian Infantry Brigade in the Battle for Rhine Bridgehead." Canadian Military History 12, 2 (2003) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Windsor: 9 Canadian Infantry Brigade in the Battle for Rhine Bridgehead "Too Close for the Guns!" 9 Canadian Infantry Brigade in the Battle for the Rhine Bridgehead Lee A. Windsor ie spring of 1945 was the "sweetest of all not consist of weary old men and young boys, Tseasons" for Dutch and Canadian but the latest, albeit last, crop of keen Nazi participants in the Second World War. That April, replacements prepared to die for their Fiihrer. First Canadian Army lifted the yoke of Nazi oppression once and for all from the people of The North Nova action at Bienen on 25 the Netherlands. It was a month of rapid March was the climax of 9 Canadian Infantry advances from the Rhine to the North Sea Brigade's role in Second British Army's punctuated by sometimes bitter "mopping up" Operation Plunder. Nine Brigade was attached battles to clear isolated German garrisons from to XXX British Corps during its assault crossing towns like Zutphen and Groningen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Quandary of Allied Logistics from D-Day to the Rhine
    THE QUANDARY OF ALLIED LOGISTICS FROM D-DAY TO THE RHINE By Parker Andrew Roberson November, 2018 Director: Dr. Wade G. Dudley Program in American History, Department of History This thesis analyzes the Allied campaign in Europe from the D-Day landings to the crossing of the Rhine to argue that, had American and British forces given the port of Antwerp priority over Operation Market Garden, the war may have ended sooner. This study analyzes the logistical system and the strategic decisions of the Allied forces in order to explore the possibility of a shortened European campaign. Three overall ideas are covered: logistics and the broad-front strategy, the importance of ports to military campaigns, and the consequences of the decisions of the Allied commanders at Antwerp. The analysis of these points will enforce the theory that, had Antwerp been given priority, the war in Europe may have ended sooner. THE QUANDARY OF ALLIED LOGISTICS FROM D-DAY TO THE RHINE A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Department of History East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History By Parker Andrew Roberson November, 2018 © Parker Roberson, 2018 THE QUANDARY OF ALLIED LOGISTICS FROM D-DAY TO THE RHINE By Parker Andrew Roberson APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF THESIS: Dr. Wade G. Dudley, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: Dr. Gerald J. Prokopowicz, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: Dr. Michael T. Bennett, Ph.D. CHAIR OF THE DEP ARTMENT OF HISTORY: Dr. Christopher Oakley, Ph.D. DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL: Dr. Paul J.
    [Show full text]
  • D-DAY in NORMANDY Speaker: Walter A. Viali, PMP Company
    D-DAY IN NORMANDY Speaker: Walter A. Viali, PMP Company: PMO To Go LLC Website: www.pmotogo.com Welcome to the PMI Houston Conference & Expo and Annual Job Fair 2015 • Please put your phone on silent mode • Q&A will be taken at the close of this presentation • There will be time at the end of this presentation for you to take a few moments to complete the session survey. We value your feedback which allows us to improve this annual event. 1 D-DAY IN NORMANDY The Project Management Challenges of the “Longest Day” Walter A. Viali, PMP PMO To Go LLC WALTER A. VIALI, PMP • Worked with Texaco in Rome, Italy and in Houston, Texas for 25 years and “retired” in 1999. • Multiple PMO implementations throughout the world since 1983. • On the speaker circuit since 1987. • PMI member since 1998, became a PMP in 1999. • Co-founder of PMO To Go LLC (2002). • PMI Houston Chapter Board Member from 2002 to 2008 and its President in 2007. • PMI Clear Lake - Galveston Board Member in 2009-2010. • PMI Region 6 Mentor (2011-2014). • Co-author of “Accelerating Change with OPM” (2013). • Project Management Instructor for UH College of Technology. 3 Project Management and Leadership in History 4 More than 9,000 of our boys rest in this foreign land they helped liberate! ‹#› 5 WHAT WAS D-DAY? • In the early morning hours of June 6, 1944, American, British, and Canadian troops launched an attack by sea, landing on the beaches of Normandy on the northern coast of Nazi-occupied France.
    [Show full text]
  • Shaef-Sgs-Records.Pdf
    363.6 DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER LIBRARY ABILENE, KANSAS SUPREME HEADQUARTERS, ALLIED EXPEDITIONARY FORCE, OFFICE OF SECRETARY, GENERAL STAFF: Records, 1943-45 [microfilm] Accession 71-14 Processed by: DJH Date completed: June 1991 The microfilm of the records of the Secretary of the General Staff, Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force, was sent to the Eisenhower Library by the Modern Military Records Division of the National Archives in September 1969. Linear feet of shelf space occupied: 4 Number of reels of microfilm: 62 Literary rights in the SHAEF records are in the public domain. These records were processed in accordance with the general restrictions on access to government records as set forth by the National Archives. SCOPE AND CONTENT NOTE The Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) was a joint U.S. - British military organization created in England in February 1944 to carry out the invasion of Western Europe. Dwight D. Eisenhower, an officer of the United States Army, was appointed Supreme Allied Commander. Eisenhower organized his staff along U.S. military lines with separate staff sections devoted to personnel (G-1), intelligence (G-2), operations (G-3), logistics (G-4) and civilian affairs (G-5). The most significant files at SHAEF were kept in the Office of the Secretary of the General Staff (SGS). The SGS office served as a type of central file for SHAEF. The highest-level documents that received the personal attention of the Supreme Allied Commander and the Chief of Staff usually ended up in the SGS files. Many of the staff sections and administrative offices at SHAEF retired material to the SGS files.
    [Show full text]
  • Neptune Wrecks Project Report
    NEPTUNE WRECKS PROJECT REPORT Foreword Members of Southsea Sub-Aqua Club are proud to present this NEPTUNE Wrecks report as a record of all of the activities and investigations into local wrecks in the Portsmouth to Selsey Bill area. The project was a natural follow-on to our highly successful Tanks and Bulldozers investigations of 2008 and concerns a number of wrecks believed to be associated with the maritime phase of the WW2 Invasion of Normandy (Operation NEPTUNE). This report is testament to what individuals and/or groups of divers can achieve with the help and support of others. These wrecks are not the ancient wooden ships of long ago or the valuable treasures that grab the public attention, but they are associated with tragedies of a more modern era – a time of war, conflict and ultimately victory which have a real and direct relevance to the vast majority of people along the South Coast and beyond. Below the water these reminders of the valiant efforts of the men involved in the largest ever maritime invasion are not evident to many and we aim to share with others the results of our efforts so that their contribution in history is not forgotten. Alison Mayor Project Leader - NEPTUNE Wrecks Southsea Sub-Aqua Club BSAC 0009 31 May 2010 All enquiries about the content of this report should be addressed to Alison Mayor, Southsea Sub-Aqua Club. email [email protected] or Fort Widley, Portsdown Hill Road, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3LS. The report is subject to Copyright and therefore not to be reproduced without permission of the owner.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Combat Effectiveness of Lighter-Weight Armored Forces
    The Dupuy Institute 1497 Chain Bridge Road Suite 100 McLean, VA 22101 Phone: (703) 356-1151 Fax: (703) 356-1152 Website: http://dupuyinstitute.org/ THE HISTORICAL COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS OF LIGHTER-WEIGHT ARMORED FORCES FINAL REPORT Contract Number DASW01-98-D-0058, Task Order 005 6 August 2001 Prepared for: U.S. Department of the Army Center for Army Analysis 6001 Goethals Road Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060-5230 I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Definitions .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Study Plan..................................................................................................................................................... 2 Technology ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Wheeled Tanks ............................................................................................................................................. 3 The Interim Brigade/Division ....................................................................................................................... 4 II. USE OF ARMOR IN CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS........................................................................................ 5 Presence of Armor in SSCOs.......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SILENT WINGS MUSEUM: Newsletter the Legacy of the World War II Glider Pilots Vol
    SILENT WINGS MUSEUM: Newsletter The Legacy of the World War II Glider Pilots Vol. 19 No. 3 Spring 2020 General Information 6202 N. I- 27 Lubbock, Texas 79403 - 9710 Direct Line 806.775.3049 Information 806.775.3796 Fax 806.775.3337 Web www.silentwingsmuseum.com Directions Driving: North Lubbock, I-27 at Exit 9. The museum is located in the historic old airport terminal building just two blocks east of I-27. Look for the silver “G” wings on the tower above the entrance. Flying: The museum is accessible by taxi or rental car from the airport terminal. The museum is adjacent to and within easy walking distance of Lubbock Aero, FBO at Lubbock Remembering Operation Varsity 75th Anniversary Preston Smith International Aiport. GPS March 24, 1945 Coordinates for the museum are: N 33” 39.467’ IN THIS ISSUE W101”49.911’ Around the Museum 2 Upcoming Changes Admission Fees Combat Training for Glider Pilots 3 General Admission $8.00 Welcoming Dorothy Svgdik 4 Senior Citizens (60+) $6.00 Children (ages 7-17) $5.00 National WWII Glider Pilots Association 5 Students (w/ college id) $5.00 Children (6 & under w/ family) Free Research & News Museum Members Free The Leon B. Spencer Research Team 7 The Rhine Crossing Active Duty Military Free The Flying Pipeline 12 In Memoriam 20 Museum Hours New Membership Program 21 Tuesday - Saturday 10 AM - 5 PM Upcoming Exhibits 22 Sunday 1 PM - 5 PM Call For Holiday Hours 1 2 AROUND THE MUSEUM Museum Staff Directory Director of the Municipal Museums Jacqueline Bober Assistant Municipal Museums Manager Museum Curator Eddy Grigsby Sebastian Forbush Museum Curator Museums Store Manager Sharon McCullar David Seitz Marketing and Special Events Coordinator Education and Volunteer Coordintor Jacqueline Marchildon Dorothy Svgdik UPCOMING CHANGES: Going Digital Silent Wings Museum Newsletter is Going Digital! SILENT WINGS Help bring the Silent Wings Museum newsletter into the digital MUSEUM: Newsletter age! We are preparing to transition to a digital newsletter by the The Legacy of the World War II Glider Pilots Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Tank Training Site, Fritton Lake Somerleyton, Ashby & Herringfleet HER Ref. SOL
    Tank Training Site, Fritton Lake Somerleyton, Ashby & Herringfleet HER ref. SOL 029 Archaeological Survey Report SCCAS Report No. 2013/052 Client: Suffolk County Council Author: Mark Sommers April 2013 © Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Tank Training Site, Fritton Lake Somerleyton, Ashby & Herringfleet HER ref. SOL 029 Archaeological Survey Report SCCAS Report No. 2013/022 Author: Mark Sommers Contributions By: Stuart Burgess Report Date: April 2013 HER Information Site Code: SOL 029 Site Name: World War 2 Tank Training Site, Fritton Lake Report Number 2013/052 Planning Application No: n/a Date of Fieldwork: 25th - 28th April 2013 Grid Reference: TM 4803 9977 Oasis Reference: suffolkc1-148843 Curatorial Officer: Sarah Poppy Project Officer: Mark Sommers Client/Funding Body: funded by the European Interreg IV Project Client Reference: n/a Digital report submitted to Archaeological Data Service: http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/library/greylit Disclaimer Any opinions expressed in this report about the need for further archaeological work are those of the Field Projects Team alone. Ultimately the need for further work will be determined by the Local Planning Authority and its Archaeological Advisors when a planning application is registered. Suffolk County Council’s archaeological contracting services cannot accept responsibility for inconvenience caused to the clients should the Planning Authority take a different view to that expressed in the report. Prepared By: Mark Sommers Date: April 2013 Approved By: Dr Rhodri Gardner Position: Contracts Manager Date: April 2013 Signed: Contents Summary 1. Introduction 1 2. Location 3 3. Historic Background 3 4. Methodology 3 5. Survey Results 4 1. Military camp 5 2.
    [Show full text]
  • World War Ii Veteran’S Committee, Washington, Dc Under a Generous Grant from the Dodge Jones Foundation 2
    W WORLD WWAR IIII A TEACHING LESSON PLAN AND TOOL DESIGNED TO PRESERVE AND DOCUMENT THE WORLD’S GREATEST CONFLICT PREPARED BY THE WORLD WAR II VETERAN’S COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, DC UNDER A GENEROUS GRANT FROM THE DODGE JONES FOUNDATION 2 INDEX Preface Organization of the World War II Veterans Committee . Tab 1 Educational Standards . Tab 2 National Council for History Standards State of Virginia Standards of Learning Primary Sources Overview . Tab 3 Background Background to European History . Tab 4 Instructors Overview . Tab 5 Pre – 1939 The War 1939 – 1945 Post War 1945 Chronology of World War II . Tab 6 Lesson Plans (Core Curriculum) Lesson Plan Day One: Prior to 1939 . Tab 7 Lesson Plan Day Two: 1939 – 1940 . Tab 8 Lesson Plan Day Three: 1941 – 1942 . Tab 9 Lesson Plan Day Four: 1943 – 1944 . Tab 10 Lesson Plan Day Five: 1944 – 1945 . Tab 11 Lesson Plan Day Six: 1945 . Tab 11.5 Lesson Plan Day Seven: 1945 – Post War . Tab 12 3 (Supplemental Curriculum/American Participation) Supplemental Plan Day One: American Leadership . Tab 13 Supplemental Plan Day Two: American Battlefields . Tab 14 Supplemental Plan Day Three: Unique Experiences . Tab 15 Appendixes A. Suggested Reading List . Tab 16 B. Suggested Video/DVD Sources . Tab 17 C. Suggested Internet Web Sites . Tab 18 D. Original and Primary Source Documents . Tab 19 for Supplemental Instruction United States British German E. Veterans Organizations . Tab 20 F. Military Museums in the United States . Tab 21 G. Glossary of Terms . Tab 22 H. Glossary of Code Names . Tab 23 I. World War II Veterans Questionnaire .
    [Show full text]
  • Lindsley Family Genealogical Collection, 1784-2016
    State of Tennessee Department of State Tennessee State Library and Archives Lindsley Family Genealogical Collection, 1784-2016 COLLECTION SUMMARY Creator: Rose, Stanley Frazer Inclusive Dates: 1784-2016, bulk 1850-1920 Scope & Content: Consists of genealogical research relating to the Lindsley family and its related branches. These records primarily contain photocopied research relating to the history of these families. There are two folders in Box 1 that hold information regarding Berrien family membership in the Society of the Cincinnati. Rose also compiled detailed genealogy trees and booklets for all of the family branches. This collection was kept in the original order in which it was donated. The compiler also created the folder titles. Physical Description/Extent: 6 cubic feet Accession/Record Group Number: 2016-028 Language: English Permanent Location: XV-E-5-6 1 Repository: Tennessee State Library and Archives, 403 Seventh Avenue North, Nashville, Tennessee, 37243-0312 Administrative/Biographical History Stanley Frazer Rose is a third great grandson Rev. Philip Lindsley (1786-1855). He received his law degree and master’s degree in management from Vanderbilt University. Organization/Arrangement of Materials Collection is loosely organized and retains the order in which it was received. Conditions of Access and Use Restrictions on Access: No restrictions. Restrictions on Use and Reproduction: While the Tennessee State Library and Archives houses an item, it does not necessarily hold the copyright on the item, nor may it be able to determine if the item is still protected under current copyright law. Users are solely responsible for determining the existence of such instances and for obtaining any other permissions and paying associated fees that may be necessary for the intended use.
    [Show full text]
  • Normandy '44 Invasion Example of Play
    Normandy ‘44 Invasion Example of Play INTRODUCTION steps on the General Records Track (these represent airborne The special invasion phase of the first turn is designed to be troops that have scattered and will slowly find there way back to very simple so players can quickly begin to play the regular their units. The 505th has a good landing but is still Disrupted. game. There are three rule changes that must be remembered Now the Allied Player rolls for the three 101st units, from north in this phase: DR results convert to EX results, A1/DR results to south: convert to A2/D1 results, and a 2-hex Advance After Combat is only allowed in a D1 or A1/D1 result. Unit Die Roll Result 502nd 2 S1 US AIRBORNE DROP 506th 6 - 501st 1 S2 The 502nd loses 1 step, the 506th has a perfect landing, and the 501st loses two steps. The Allied player records two more Air- borne replacement steps on the General Records Track. UTAH BEACH Next the Allied player resolves Utah Beach. The first step is to select the two regiments and one armored battalion that will make the beach assault and move them adjacent to the beach hex. Next he rolls for the Beach Assault and the DD Tank ca- sualties. The assault is resolved on the CRT using the odds col- umn printed next to the beach (4-1 in this case). The DD Tank casualties is determined by using the DD Table. The Allied player rolls a 4 for the assault and a 1 for the DD tanks.
    [Show full text]