Experimental Armored Force and Beyond

What they would do depends on Money.

The Brits want tanks with the infantry divisions, it reduces casualties. The Armour heavy Divisions ( pre ww2 Tank division) is tanks with limited infantry support to protect them overnight. They are designed as an exploitation force. Which is what Guards Armoured was.

The ideal would probably be like the Mixed Division - 2 inf 1 Amd bde [plus comprehensive supporting troops. )

That's probably not attainable so reverting to Inf Div with an Attached Amd Bde, initially for specific ops, later permanently and in practice inf Bde with a tank Batallion the norm.
 
Do the British designs confirm to that split though? Infantry/Calvary tanks seems like a unique split.

T34/KV1 split was simply the natural progression of the old BT cavalry tanks/ T series infantry tank split. The French likewise foresaw one role for cavalry tanks and another for infantry tanks.

I think those above arguing for a more integrated doctrine in the British Army are probably closest to the truth. The horse was on its way out because the horse was the too expensive option and Britain had a small regular army allowing it plenty of time to train army drivers even before the fact that it had a larger driving population than Germany.

Interested in the idea that British might get a half track family out of the longer lived EAF but would hedge any bets on it.

There are of course cost savings in having all the Armoured Corps regiments equipped with interchangeable tanks and mission doctrine. Likely most most artillery regiments in both field and anti-air roles would continue to be towed and most infantry lorry mounted but even so a more integrated approach on the ground similar to the '44 Army would have increased effectiveness.

Though such by itself should not lead one to expect miracles of arms.
 
Top