Title | Analysis of operational use of Churchill Crocodile flame throwers in NW Europe, June-October 1944 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Description | Analysis of operational use of Churchill Crocodile flame throwers in NW Europe, June-October 1944 | ||
Source | UK_National_Archive | Reference | SUPP 15/36 |
ANALYSIS OF ACTIONS (continued) Page 3
DATE | PLACE AND TYPE OF OBJECTIVE | NUMBER OF CROCODILES DEPLOYED | QUANTITY OF FUEL USED | ENEMY KILLED OR SHOT WHEN RUNNING ABOUT ON FIRE | PRISONERS OF WAR | QUALITY OF ENEMY | REMARKS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
22 JULY | NOYERS (Hedgerows, wood, houses) | 3 on 4 occasions | 1/2 trailer each average in all | Nil known | Some to Inf | Good S.S. | Three of these were well-planned small jobs. One was a failure, infantry did not come. (59 Div.) |
24 JULY | BON REPOS (Hedgerows, House | 5 out of 7 | 1/2 trailer each average | 16 | About 30 | Good S.S. | Very well-planned "shock" raid. Good artillery and tank support. Inf. followed up well. Fine flaming a big success. (53 Div.) |
31 JULY | CAUMONT (wood) | 4 out of 7 | 1/2 trailer each average | Nil known | 10 - 20 estimated | Fair | Well-planned and carried out. Little opposition in the event. Good flaming. (15 S. Div.) |
31 JULY | ST. GERMAIN D'ECTOT (Hedgerows, houses) | 3 twice | 1/2 trailer each average in all | Nil known | About 20 | Fair | Small operation. Flame valuable. (50 Div.) |
? Aug. | ? (East of TILLEY) (Hedgerows and Ditches) | 4 out of 6 | 1/5 trailer each average | Nil known | Nil Known | Good S.S. | The barrage was lost. The Inf were pinned. The tanks failed to support the Crocodiles. Disappointing. (15 S. Div.) |
8 Aug | MAY-SUR-ORNE (Village) | 9 out of 12 | 1/3 trailer each average | Nil known | 100 approx. | Good S.S. | Quick simple plan. Inf. tired and disheartened - had just been driven out. Behind the Crocodiles they had no casualties and retook the town. A flame-thrower triumph. All 9 Crocodiles in line. Ideal use. (2 Can. Div.) |
8 AUG | SECQUEVILLE A LA CAMPAGNE (Hedgerows, wood) | 9 | 1/6 trailer each average | Nil known | 50 approx | Poor | Good plan. String artillery and tank support. Good Inf who followed up well. Enemy had been heavily bombed. Attack overwhelmed a weak defence. (51st Div) |
(Archive transcripts © Copyright Normandy War Guide)
Found an error with this archive item? report it here!