Arm of Service numbers.

[Tony Wheeler]

Hi Gina,

To address your specific question - the unit sign on your tank represents the January '43 system of vehicle marking. Under this system the serial numbers 50, 51, 52, 53 on a red background indicate Armoured Brigade vehicles. 50 indicates Armd Bde HQ while 51, 52, 53 indicate Armd Regts within the Brigade. These were to be allocated sequentially as Regiments arrived within the Brigade. In other words the unit sign does not identify the Regiment specifically, and Steve Taubert's work can't help you in that respect. It's something you have to research in unit histories etc.

The vehicle marking system was revised in June '44 and a fractionated unit sign was introduced, which identified units specifically. The numerator identified the unit while the denominator identified the type of unit. In the case of Armoured units a green background was used, with the denominator 50 indicating HQ Armd Bde and 52 indicating Armd Regt. In other words, your tank under this system would be marked 13 over 52 on a green background, while 2/4 Armd Regt would be marked 2-4 over 52 on a green background.

Clear as mud!

[Mike Cecil]

As I think Tony has alluded to, the fact that the key to individual unit identification is the combination of signs, ie both the formation sign and the unit sign.

53 with a red background during 1942 indicated an infantry unit, for example, 23 Aust Inf Bn of 3rd Aust Inf Div, so conceivably the same Unit sign seen on Gina's tank could also be found on an MG carrier.

In 1943, the sign could be found on AFVs, such as Gina's 2/4 or 13 Armd Regt of 3 Arm Div. But the sign was also found on units of other divisions, eg 2/7 Armd Regt of 1st Armd Div. Hence my earlier comment, and Taubert doesn't help solve that little problem even if the formation is identified.

Taubert's book (either version) is the best available and does give the unit sign arm of service colours used at various times. But it is difficult to use because, as Darrin said, it reproduces the documents, rather than re-ordering and presenting the contents in any usable/logical order. It takes a lot to find what you are looking for, and then a lot of additional ferreting beyond using Taubert to nail down the combination of unit/formation to identifying an exact unit for a particular time period. This is the other problem in unit identification (as also indicated by Tony): units were shifted between formations, so what might apply in, say January may be different to what applied several months later.

Yep, clear as mud!

Mike

[Mrs Vampire]

Thanks to you both. I was contemplating purchasing Steve's CD... But if it doesn't clarify the issue then its not much good to me.

I was kind of looking for the thing Mike referred to ...something that makes it easy to interpret set out in a logical way.

So my question to you Gurus...how do you work it out...just huge experience ???

[Mike Cecil]

a misspent youth......!

Mike

[Mrs Vampire]

Hmmmm so the rumors are true .... tch tch

[Mike Cecil]

Sure are, Gina!

Oh, ..... and a database painfully and time consumingly compiled over many, many years. When it gets to 10,000 + single entries, I'll publish it like I did the Aust Military Abbreviations book and the Unit Serial Numbers book.

Mike