WI: Top generals in US Armored Force died in a plane crash

[Arnold d.c]

In December 1942, LTG Devers (head of Armored Force) along with MG Edward Brook ,BG Gladeon Barnes ,William Palmer went to North Africa on a fact-finding mission to see how US armored divisions were performing. After their stay in North Africa , they flew back to the UK where they had an interesting issue.

On January 15th 1943, the B-17 carrying them got lost and crashed at Ireland. IOTL though the plane was wrecked, the members of the party were uninjured.

But what if the Armored Force officers did not survive the crash landing? So, we now have the interesting situation that on 15th January 1943, the General in charge of all US tank doctrine and training, the General in charge of developing all the equipment used by the US Army, the General in charge of evaluating the merit of future armored vehicles (The head of the Special Armored Vehicles Board), the Commanding General 11th Armored Division (tapped to command 2nd Armored in Normandy), their advisors, and their fact-finding report are lost in a plane crash. What happens next?
Note: These are the conclusions of the fact finding mission were as follows:

1. The M-4 Medium tank (General Sherman) is the best tank on the battlefield. [Chieftain’s note: Yes, they actually say “General Sherman” in the document. This is a nearly two years before Ordnance officially names the vehicle]
2. The self-propelled 105mm howitzer is the best supporting light artillery weapon on the battlefield.
3. The same tactical principles and doctrines taught by the Armored Force are today being successfully employed by the British Eighth Army. The British have evolved, independently in battle, methods of tank gunnery similar to latest Armored Force teachings.
4. The present war is definitely one of guns. The attack is built around air, tanks, and artillery. Defense is built around air, concealed anti-tank guns, and artillery.
5. In order for ground forces to advance, hostile aircraft must be rendered ineffective.
6. To achieve success all combat units must be able to repel tanks and low flying aircraft with their own weapons. They must have 75mm antitank guns and .50 calibre anti-aircraft weapons organically assigned. Also 37mm antitank guns should be provided liberally to artillery trains and similar units.
7. The separate tank destroyer arm is not a practical concept on the battlefield. Defensive anti-tank weapons are essentially artillery. Offensively, the weapon to beat a tank is a better tank. Sooner or later the issue between ground forces is settled in an armored battle – tank against tank. The concept of tank destroyer groups and brigades attempting to overcome equal numbers of hostile tanks is faulty unless the tank destroyers are actually better tanks than those of the enemy.
8. A higher standard of discipline of American troops must be attained.

Five recommendations were put forward.

1. That each infantry battalion include eight self-propelled 75mm anti-tank guns, that all battalions include four AA vehicles each mounting four .50 calibre machine guns.
2. That 37mm anti-tank guns be provided liberally to artillery trains and similar troops.
3. That the training facilities of Camp Hood, Texas, be used to produce and train anti-tank artillery personnel for all troops equipped with anti-tank guns of 75mm and larger caliber; surplus production, if any, to be sent to tank units.
4. That “Tank Destroyer Battalions” be redesignated as “Anti-tank artillery battalions”, and their number limited to those sufficient for divisions and larger units.
5. That better battle uniform including waterproof shoes be provided.

 

[marathag]

What happens next?
Note: These are the conclusions of the fact finding mission were as follows:

Seems It will get buried, as even with Devers Alive, McNair won near every political battle they had. Dead, he won't even be a speedbump.

That's why towed AT had such a comeback, McNair loved them, besides the Tank Destroyers existing as separate command. He got his way OTL

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Seems It will get buried, as even with Devers Alive, McNair won near every political battle they had. Dead, he won't even be a speedbump.

That's why towed AT had such a comeback, McNair loved them, besides the Tank Destroyers existing as separate command. He got his way OTL

Heh.
So, in an alternate history where they DID die, everyone would talk about when what would happen if they didn't die, and that report was acted upon....

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

In the long run most of those recommendations were implemented, & not just because Devers was in a position to continue pushing them. The battlefield commanders were seeing the same & increasingly modifying the earlier doctrines to fit their experience.

Without Devers & Co the details will be different, but the end result is much the same.

 

[TonyA]

Am I reading his right? Did Devers recommend 72 SP 75mm guns for each Infantry Division, or is that "8 per battalion" reserved for Armored Infantry Battalions? And, despite his own statements, wasn't he advocating, by default, for the M3 GMC "tank destroyer" in doing so?

 

[marathag]

Am I reading his right? Did Devers recommend 72 SP 75mm guns for each Infantry Division, or is that "8 per battalion" reserved for Armored Infantry Battalions? And, despite his own statements, wasn't he advocating, by default, for the M3 GMC "tank destroyer" in doing so?

6. To achieve success all combat units must be able to repel tanks and low flying aircraft with their own weapons. They must have 75mm antitank guns

Now he wanted fully tracked self propelled guns, like the earlier attempts of the T24 and similar T40 3" GMC, with the T40 being Standardized as the M9, but McNair killed it in April 1942, saying that the supply of 3" guns was too limited and the M9 was too slow, in favor of his favored M10 that was Standardized in June. It has less armor and an open topped turret, rather than the M7 'Priest' vibe the M9 had.

There was also the 3" M5 GMC, based on an high speed Clectrac Tractor, that was also canceled at the same time.

 

[TonyA]

6. To achieve success all combat units must be able to repel tanks and low flying aircraft with their own weapons. They must have 75mm antitank guns

Now he wanted fully tracked self propelled guns, like the earlier attempts of the T24 and similar T40 3" GMC, with the T40 being Standardized as the M9, but McNair killed it in April 1942, saying that the supply of 3" guns was too limited and the M9 was too slow, in favor of his favored M10 that was Standardized in June. It has less armor and an open topped turret, rather than the M7 'Priest' vibe the M9 had.

There was also the 3" M5 GMC, based on an high speed Clectrac Tractor, that was also canceled at the same time.

You seem to have missed my points:
1) For this time frame, 72 organic AFV is a mighty load for an infantry division
2) "75mm" is pretty specific, if he meant something different, he should have said something different
3) 72, 75, 76...just numbers, but M3, M5, M9 are ALL tank destroyers, the very thing that Devers was supposed to be arguing against, and the M10, too.
If he wanted to champion the inclusion of Sherman tanks in infantry divisions, shouldn't he have said something more to that point...I sure as hell would have...

PS, always got a kick out of the M5 GMC, an earlier generation's M56 Scorpion...

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Am I reading his right? Did Devers recommend 72 SP 75mm guns for each Infantry Division, or is that "8 per battalion" reserved for Armored Infantry Battalions? And, despite his own statements, wasn't he advocating, by default, for the M3 GMC "tank destroyer" in doing so?

Probablly not 72. Perhaps as few as 4 per infantry battalion as that is the ratio of 37mm & later 57mm guns used. Even at four per its still a lot of fire power. If the regimental cannon companies are retained this gives a US infantry division overwhelming artillery firepower. Add in the historical ratio of corps artillery support, usually 4-6 battalions per division, & a single US infantry division can go toe to toe with the artillery of a entire German corps :O

 

[marathag]

You seem to have missed my points:
1) For this time frame, 72 organic AFV is a mighty load for an infantry division
2) "75mm" is pretty specific, if he meant something different, he should have said something different
3) 72, 75, 76...just numbers, but M3, M5, M9 are ALL tank destroyers, the very thing that Devers was supposed to be arguing against, and the M10, too.
If he wanted to champion the inclusion of Sherman tanks in infantry divisions, shouldn't he have said something more to that point...I sure as hell would have...

PS, always got a kick out of the M5 GMC, an earlier generation's M56 Scorpion...

There were only three 75mm weapons at the time, the M1897, and the M1916, and pack howitzer, and only the M1897 made it into the M3, being the fastest a GMC could be built.
There were no GMC prototypes using the new M2 75mm that was in the Lee/Grant, but the more powerful 3" M1918 AAA piece

anything can be a tank destroyer, but he was against towed guns, and for self propelled mounts, Gun Motor Carriage. McNairs the one who wanted the high speeds and open turrets to be the defining mark of being a TD, and he cancelled every other GMC that did not match that criteria

With McNair out of the picture, you would have seen organic SPG 3" and 90mm in the Infantry Divisions in 1943, rather than 37mm towed guns in place in Italy thru 1944.
McNair got rid of the M6 GMC, but added more towed 37s in the TO&E after Tunisia.