Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 The Bulge Bugle~. THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION VETERANS OF THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE, INC. ~,~,~ ~~~ In combat, the field artillery has two ways to locate its targets; unoiiserved fire, in which the target cannot be seen and is identified either by intelligence that has been provided or by firing at a location found on the map. For example, you might ,s.~. .~ ~x ~. .~ ~~ . ~~ fire at an important crossroad. It is, in effect, firing blind. The second way is to have someone up front who can observe the enemy and his activity and radio back to the battalion Ere direction center (FDC) both his exact location and the location and details of the target he proposes to take under fire. That is the job of the Forward Observer, (the "F.O:'). THE FIELD ARTILLERY BY M. J. "Mike" Levin -see page 8 50,000 rounds since our arrival shortly after D-Day into Normandy. Thanks for Mr Biggio's artillery article. P.S. Our battalion at the end of the war was awarded five battle stars. E. W. Mortensen 955 FA BN HQ WHY NO FORWARD OBSERVERS? I spent four years in the 4th Armored Division as a forward observer during the war. I write as I would like to see something in our Bulge Bugle about the duties of the forward observers--FO as we were called. I was in the Headquarters Battery of the 66th Field Artillery Battalion and trained as a forward observer. We had three medium tanks. We traveled next to the first tank in all actions. When the tank commander needed artillery, we went into action. With out the FO's the artillery couldn't fire accurately because we called for fire. We could see the target and the guns could not. Without us observing where the guns were. They couldn't see and we could. The T05's could fire to a coordinance but couldn't see the target. Our artillery was the best--ask Col. Leach. There were a lot of FO's in the 4th and I would like to see something written in The Bugle, explaining what we did, always up on the line. Our 105's could not fire accurately without the FO's as we could see the hits on all the targets. We helped a lot to end the conflict. My call sign was Fox Dog 23. I am now living in a retirement home and doing pretty good--I am 89 years old. I will never forget those days up on the line and the other days. I lived with the finest people ever in my life. Most of them are gone and remembered. Albert Gaydos 66 FAO Bn HQ (Editor: 1 believe you will find some information regarding forward observers in this issue. Remember, we print what we receive--we have no research staff and depend on you for our stories.] REBUTTAL TO PREVIOUS ARTILLERY ARTICLE In my article in The Bulge Bugle of November, 2006, on the U.S. & German Field Artillery in the Bob, I stated that by December, 1944, the American field artillery had rid itself of all WWI cannon and replaced them with ones of American design and manufacture. I stand by that statement. In response to my article, Mike Nosanov, of the 11th Armored Division, wrote to challenge my article as a "contrived effort of a feuilletonist." He maintains that he saw a French 75mm gun being fired in the BOB by American soldiers of an armored infantry company of his division. The French 75mm gun (1897) was designed and manufactured by the French--and was France's main light artillery piece in WWI. Since it was the best gun of its caliber at that era, and since they were plentiful in France, the American AEF decided to use the French 75 as their main light artillery weapon both during WWI and between the great wars. By 1942 the U.S. had developed a 105mm howitzer to replace the French 75 as the U.S. field artillery's main light artillery piece--and the French 75 was phased out. By 1944 there were no French 75's left in the units of the U.S. field artillery. I realize that Mr. Nosanov firmly believes that he saw a French 75 in action with his 11th Armored Division in the Bulge; however, after thoroughly searching the army files in the Archives and reading all the pertinent books on this subject, I have found no evidence at all to support his contention. The TO&E 17 of February, 1944, lists all of the equipment authorized by the U.S. armored divisions. The only cannon that were authorized in To&E 17 for the armored division in 1944 were as follows: (1) The field artillery of the armored division was authorized eighteen 105mm howitzers, self-propelled for each of its three artillery battalions--a total of 54 for the entire division artillery, (2) There were seventeen 75mm howitzers (SP) authorized for the armored division--eight in the cavalry reconnaissance squadrons and nine in the armored infantry battalions. These were considered infantry weapons, and did not operate under field artillery control. (3) There were thirty 57mm guns, towed, authorized for the armored division. These also were controlled by the infantry. (4) A 105mm howitzer was also authorized as the main gun of each medium tank in the division. There were no other cannon authorized for the armored division. I am not arguing that it was impossible for Mr. Nosanov to have seen a French 75 in December of 1944. But I can find no evidence that one was there that day. I believe that what he saw was one of the 57mm guns, towed, by the armored infantry battalions and mistook for a French 75. I wonder if any other members of an armored division which took part in the Bulge thought he saw a French 75 during the battle? Charles P. Biggio, Jr. 99 INFD TANK DESTROYERS As a former tank destroyer soldier and along-time member of VBOB, I appreciate your publishing Ralph Storm's article "Tank Destroyers" in the February 2007 issue of The Bulge Bugle which received top notice of the article on the cover, although I must say their mission was offensive instead of defensive, as mentioned on the cover. Storm dealt well with most of the high points of the strengths and weaknesses of tank destroyer doctrine, tactics, and weapons used during the brief existence of this new "branch of the army." It would have ben appropriate for him to mention Major General A. D. Bruce, who established the then Camp Hod for implementing the Tank Destroyer Force. He is known as the "Father of Fort Hood," as inscribed on a state historical marker at the fort. It must be remembered that the Tank Destroyer Force, THE BULGE BUGLE $ August 2007 initiated by General George C. Marshal, nurtured by Lieutenant General Lesley J. McNair, and implemented by Major General A. D. Bruce, found that the battlefields and the enemy's combined arms tactics forbade the tank destroyers from implementing its prescribed doctrine. Instead, the tank destroyers developed a new doctrine on their own, creating success where it counted most--on the battlefields of Europe. Calvin C. Boykin, Jr 7 ARMD 814 TD BN RECON President, WWI Tank Destroyer Society BROUGHT BACK MEMORIES On page 20 of the May copy of The Bugle, there appeared an article entitled "Barracuda Restored." I read this article several times because it brought back many memories. I drove a tank in Company B and was close by when the Barracuda was hit. I remember those men mentioned. Capt. Ameno was CO. His last words were "The enemy is retreating north, shoot the s--- out of them." ...my tank commander, First Lt. Williamson became CO and rode in my tank for a couple of days and then was wounded after the war was over. Pvt Goldstein wrote a letter about his ordeal as a POW. I received a copy of the letter and I am glad I was never a POW. Roy A. Minnerly 11 ARMD 41 TK BN B OVERSIGHT? Having received the multi-colored certificate of participation in the Ardennes, I am impressed by its craftsmanship making it a symbol of pride to the recipients and their families. There is; however, a 'glitch' of oversight in the recording of the number of divisions so shown. Specifically, the absence of the insignia of the 104th Infantry Division; one having seen protracted combat at the northern extremity of the Bulge. This absence needs correction to justify the memory of the 16,000 who served, fought and died, in the "Pine Tree" Division. Possibly a properly designed paste-on recognition would suffice, not requiring a redo of format. Whatever, this outfit merits honoring as others, not inadvertently slighted, as now. I believe this of sufficient importance to be included in "Letters to the Editor" soliciting input. Phillip W. Robbins 4 INFD 12 INF 2 BN (The insignia shown on the VBOB certificates are those included in the General Order #114 issued by the War Department 7 December 1945. As there were over 2, 000 individual units entitled to the Ardennes credit, it would have been impossible to include all. Therefore, those groups not shown are encouraged to place their patch on the certificate before framing.] THE BULGE BUGLE STILL PROUD I really enjoy reading all the articles in The Bulge Bugle. I was a member of Company C, 202nd Engineer Combat Battalion and was shelled by the Germans at Stavelot, Belgium ... December 16, 1944. I was driving the command car that led our company out of the town to 1st Army Headquartrs in Spa. Our acting company commander, Lt. Chinlund, told 1st Army officers of our encounter with the Germans. They informed him they didn't know the Germans were that close. Our company ended up in Liege, Belgium, during Christmas of '44. I am still a proud veteran of 83 who helped serve to "Keep America Free." My wife and I are hosting our company's reunion on July 26-28. Our Company C has held a reunion every year since 1954--the last full week in July. This year's reunion (2006) was held in New Oxford, Pennsylvania. One of our buddies came that we hadn't seen in 61 years. I believe he now regrets that he never attended any of our previous reunions. Seventy-eight percent of our company came from Ohio and Pennsylvania. Carl C. Miller 202 ENGR CMBT BN C (Thanks for the kind words, Carl. We try to emphasize to our members the importance of attending reunions. No one ever understands like those who were there.] MISSISSIPPI MONUMENT In the April 2007 issue of The Bulge Bugle, the "President's Message" lists the memorials (monuments) to the VBOB in the U.S.A. We were disappointed that the Mississippi monument located at the Armed Forces Museum in Camp Shelby (the post office apparently got Mr Hunt's letter caught up in one of its machines, but we get the message. That particular newsletter item resulted in a number of chapters telling us that the memorials in their vicinity had not been mentioned. We have two of them covered in this issue. I'm not sure if we ran a picture of the monument at Camp Shelby, but it was mentioned in three or four earlier newsletters. Please send us another picture and we'll cover it in a future issue. The same applies if your chapter's memorial was never in the newsletter. Send us a short story regarding same and a picture. No oversight was intentional.] James W. Hunt 1 INFD BATTLE FOR TILLET With regard to the article "Setting the Record Straight," by Thomas Williams, I think a little more straightening is in order. While the 761st Tank Battalion was a good outfit, and does deserve a lot of credit, they have been credited with far more than their real accomplishments. Because they were a black unit there have been an unfortunate number of actions that they have been credited with that embellish the truth to say the least. Over the years some of these stories have taken on a life of their own. August 2007