The Adventures of Kampfgruppe Klink

[pierre the shy]

I do like your scenery Jack, has a good Greek look about it  

The Commonwealth troops were pretty unlucky again....but the A10 crew's reaction was 100% in line with what they did......from what I have read the British armour in Greece lost far more vehicles to mechanical breakdown/impassible terrain/blown bridges etc than to direct enemy action.

The whole idea of committing British troops into Greece seemed like a good idea at the time but turned out to be disasterous for them in the end....

Look forwarded to the next installments.....3RTR vs the German Panzers should be....interesting.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Thirded! 

[bigjackmac]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's been an ugly campaign for the Allies, so for all of you complaining, crack open a history book! 

"The whole idea of committing British troops into Greece seemed like a good idea at the time but turned out to be disasterous for them in the end...."
Yes, exactly.  My understanding is that troops were thrown in rather haphazardly and didn't fare very well because of it, so that's how I've handled the Commonwealth troops in this campaign. 

It does feel a bit like cheating when you're playing solo and you get to ambush the hell out of your 'opponent' like that...

I can tell you there will be different tactical flavors to the campaigns; for example, while these Allies are sort of slapped together and fighting haphazardly, you won't see that sort of thing from the Commonwealth in Italy and Caen.  They would have gotten over the bridge, taken their time consolidating the bridgehead (augmented by the fact Shermans and Churchills are faster than A10s and Matildas, as well as trucks or half tracks for the infantry), then push ahead methodically.  Probably start with a CoC dice too, for a 25-pdr stonk right off the bat.

I'm thinking when I get to Barbarossa that Soviet infantry in the defense will be pretty lethargic, while their vehicles run around like chickens with their heads cut off, while both infantry and vehicles dash straight ahead in waves on the counterattack.

I've got an order in to Leon to get me all I need for Barbarossa.

V/R,
Jack

[bigjackmac]

All,

Morning, 12 April 1941

Here we are, continuing Kampfgruppe Klink's campaign in Greece.  The first battle saw Captain Freitag's 1st Schutzen Battlegroup take a key mountain crossroads manned by members of the British Royal Engineers supported by Armored Cavalry from New Zealand.  The fight saw the Germans infantry nearly eliminate the Commonwealth battlegroup, which fell back in disarray.  Captain Freitag pressed his advantage, immediately pursuing south down, where it ran into defensive positions manned by the remnants of the New Zealand 21st Infantry Battalion.  1st Schutzen then evicted the NZ 21st Inf Bn from its positions, forcing them to fall back.  The third fight saw 1st Lt Ginter's 2nd Schutzen moving secure a crossing over the D3 bridge, forcing the 27th MG Battalion back.  The fourth fight saw Major Bohm's 2nd Recce Battlegroup push back the Australian 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment after some fierce fighting.  The fifth battle saw Captain Freitag's beleaguered 1st Schutzen Battlegroup defend the B3 bridgehead against attacks by the British Rangers/9th King's Royal Rifle Corps, and the Royal Engineers/New Zealand Cavalry, pushing the former back and destroying the latter!  Now we turn to Battlegroup Wehner (1st Recce) attacking the Lee Force/Australian 2nd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, in order to keep them from interfering in the battle further south between Lt Loeb's Panzers and the Allies' 4th Hussars.


British armor (two Matilda Is and an A10 Cruiser) arrive and begin shooting up the German armored cars.


The German anti-tank guns get called forward, but get caught still limbered up!


German panzers and motorcycle troops push up the left flank.


But things don't go so swell for them on the left flank.

To see how the fight went, please check the blog at:
https://blackhawkhet.blogspot.com/2020/04/kg-klink-in-greece-fight-6.html

Next up we witness Lt Loeb's Panzer battlegroup take on the 4th Hussars.

V/R,
Jack

[paulr]

Another close one Jack, very enjoyable

A minor point the Australians in WWII used a strange numbering system
2/7 Battalion is not as you would expect the 2^nd battalion of the 7^th regiment
It is the second 7^th battalion
The 7^th Battalion was raised in WWI and disbanded after the war, it was re-raised as a Militia battalion in the 1920s (as were most numbered battalions) and served during WWII
The 2/7^th Battalion was raised in 1939 as part of the all-volunteer Second Australian Imperial Force

New Zealand solved the problem a different way, we started numbering our WWII battalions at 18 but then we can count higher than most Australians

[Ace of Spades]

Wow, that was a tough one!
Really interesting to see how both parties were holding on by their fingernails but one still snatching a complete victory from the jaws of defeat!

Cheers,
Rob

[Techno]

Great stuff again, Jack ! 

Cheers - Phil.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Thought that was going the allies way! Hell of a scrap mate!

[bigjackmac]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate it!  It really was a close one, wasn't sure how that was going to shake out!

Paul - What???  The second 7th Battalion???  Man, I had no idea.  Maybe I still don't

V/R,
Jack

[paulr]

Yes really, some of our Australian members can confirm it

[bigjackmac]

Paul,

Sorry man, what I mean is, I believe you, I just still don't understand.  So you're saying a particular formation has two 7th Battalions in it; I don't get how that happens.  I mean, there's going to be between 9 and 16 infantry battalions in a division (depending on whether it has three or four battalions per regiment, and three or four regiments).  So let's go big and say the division has four regiments of four battalions, for a total of 16.  So, are you saying the battalions are being referred to as in their place in the Corps?

So a Corps of two divisions would have two of everything, two 1st Battalions, two 2nd Battalions, etc..., and that's why they call it 2/7?  Or are you saying a single division would have two 7th Battalions?  Or something else?  I'm not saying there's not a logical explanation, I just can't figure out what it is!

V/R,
Jack

[pierre the shy]

No Jack not quite two of everything......Its a bit of British Army/Commonwealth naming "quirkiness" I think you'll find.......

Say in 1939 you have a regular infantry battalion - call them the 2nd Battalion of the Queens Own Gindrinkers Regiment. When war comes the Army has to greatly expand so the War Office decides to use half of the men in the 2nd Battalion Queens Own Gindrinkers Regiment to form a new war raised battalion, the 2/2nd Battalion of the Queens Own Gindrinkers Regiment.

So half of the original 2nd Battalion is drafted into the the new 2/2nd Battalion and both battalions are bought up to full strength by drafting in new recruits. The 2nd and 2/2nd would not necessarily be in the same brigade, or even theatre of war.

I think thats how it works. No doubt I will be corrected if I am wrong 

Cheers
Peter

[paulr]

You should have mentioned the 2/1st to really confuse Jack

What Pierre the Shy described is how the British did it.

My understanding of the Australians is that the 2/7th has no relationship to the 7th

In fact the 7th etc were pre-war Militia units, the 2/7th were volunteer units raised for overseas service

So to summarise, its complicated

[Lord Kermit of Birkenhead]

Liverpool OTC when I was a member was 5th/8th (Kings Liverpool) Rgt of foot..That's why British Infantry units are Battalions, not Regiments. During WW1 it was slightly different, the New Army and Conscript units were "Service" btn's so my Grandfather was in the 18th Service Btn Herefords. So perhaps it's not that surprising that the ignorant Colonials could make it even more complex ! 

IanS

[fsn]

Just to chuck in another factor, a number of British cavalry regiments were made by combining two regiments, but manage to keep both numbers - like the 14th/20th Hussars, or 9th/12th Lancers.

Always with the lowest number regiment first except the 16th/5th Lancers. This was because the 5th got reformed in 1858 and lost seniority. They were disbanded in 1798 after accusation of Irish sympathies.