-
Please note the figures I was referring too included the entire France 1940 campaign, not just the Belgium operation.
There were considerable losses in the Cherbourg/ LaHavue area. I seem to recall the 51st division lost something like 6 to 8,000 men in the withdrawal, a minor German divisional General of the 7th panzer being the officer who took their surrender. From what I recall the Germans did upset the withdrawal of British troops from Normandy, I would expect a lot of the rifles were lost there.
I do know in some other source I read that the losses of Brens was very significant. Given such a high number of these arms being lost there must have been a fairly significant loss of rifles as well. My recollection was the issue ration was something like 10 to 12 rifles issued per Bren gun issued; a figure of 90,000 is not out of the question given the 8,000 plus Bren guns that were lost.
That said it is my recollection, I am more than open to hearing any figures that indicate the total rifles lost was even lower than 90,000.
-
In the official census of war stores available for the defence of the realm/UK in August 1940, it states that 27,000 Bren guns were lost in Europe and that some 3,000 were ready and available for the defence of the UK.
There is some dispute about this figure but that the official one!
-
"Only" two brigades were lost at St Valery-en-Caux, nearly all of the other 144,000 British servicemen (and 47,00 French and Polish) south of the Somme were evacuated from Le Havre, St Nazaire and other ports. These evacuations took place out of contact with German ground forces, and thus suffered little loss (apart from individual tragedies such as the sinking of the Lancastria). It should be noted that a large numbers of these British "forces" were labour corps, pioneers, RAF and other who may not have been armed at all.
I don't think you can necessarily link the Bren gun losses to those of rifles, either quantitatively or by circumstance. The high rate of Bren gun loss remains unexplained. Part of the reason may have been that rifles were very much seen as a soldiers' personal arm, whereas Brens were section or platoon equipment. Part of the reason may have been that Brens were reliant on heavy boxes of magazines and thus liable to loss or abandonment in contact (c.f. lots of Vickers appear to have made it back to the evacuation points, possibly because belted ammunition was plentiful from supply dumps?).
-
Well there is the limitation of memory, I thought the figures for Brens lost was 8,000 plus (that is under 9,000).
Capt. Laidler; do you have an official history figure for rifles lost? If not what would your guess be, as it seems that folks have figures from as low as 60,000 up to 300,000.
