.50 cal armed Universal Carriers

[Andrew Morrison]

Have a picture of a Canadian carrier of the 1st Battalion Queens Own Rifles at Camp Wainwright preparing to deploy for UN service in Egypt dated 1956. Will put up the picture when near a scanner

The crew of 4 are all looking very serious in a Ford Canada carrier with what looks to me (who is no expert) to be a 30 cal - belt fed air cooled machine gun with a pistol grip - mounted on the air scoop

[Michael R.]

Originally Posted by Andrew Morrison

Have a picture. . .
The crew of 4 are all looking very serious in a Ford Canada carrier with what looks to me (who is no expert) to be a 30 cal - belt fed air cooled machine gun with a pistol grip - mounted on the air scoop

Browning 1919A4 .30 cal.

[stephen crowhurst]

I notice that they are using the Vickers Pedestal to mount the Browning. Were the tapers the same on the two cradles or did they make a different cradle to mount the Browning?

[maple_leaf_eh]

I learned that machine gunnery is about suppressive fire, not necessarily point of aim. Putting MGs on a carrier might seem exciting to contribute to the fight, but their effect would have been mostly salutary.

The carrier platoons in an Infantry Battalion were for carrying things and not for fighting. There are accounts of carrier charges in the early days after DDay, but most of them seemed to have fizzled with heavy losses. That said, getting a ride into battle is much less tiring than trudging ahead on foot.

[Dan Martel]

Photo I have of an RCR MMG detachment mounted in a carrier from 1954. Post-war, after the MG battalions were converted back to rifle infantry, Vickers MG's were allocated to the rifle battalions and mounted on the carriers in the carrier platoon. The designation 'carrier platoon' and 'MG platoon' were used interchangeably in documents, I've found.

RCR MMG Det 1954.jpg

[Ed Storey]

Here is a photo of a M1917A1 .30 cal MG mounted on a Canadian Universal Carrier.

Medium Machine Gun Browning, Cal. .30 M1917A1.jpg

[Davidedwardmawer]

Carriers of 7th Armoured Division's Rifle Brigade had 0.5" fitted - photographed in Ghent (See p56 of Autumn Gale).

[Tom Millward]

Originally Posted by maple_leaf_eh

I learned that machine gunnery is about suppressive fire, not necessarily point of aim. Putting MGs on a carrier might seem exciting to contribute to the fight, but their effect would have been mostly salutary.

The carrier platoons in an Infantry Battalion were for carrying things and not for fighting. There are accounts of carrier charges in the early days after DDay, but most of them seemed to have fizzled with heavy losses. That said, getting a ride into battle is much less tiring than trudging ahead on foot.

Don't forget that Suppressive fire also is no good unless it's in the right place. A Carrier would have been a great tool for getting your heavy machine guns quickly onto ground where they could have the best effect. In that respect the Carrier is not a great deal different to modern Infantry Fighting Vehicles, just not as capable and doesn't carry infantry, but it does fulfill the mobile fire support role.

[Hanno Spoelstra]

Ted Harvey wrote:

It was the liberation of Brussels, my father is driver on far left
TedHarvey-FatherInCarrier.jpg

[Colin Alford]

Here are some documents from CMHQ file “1/BROWNING/1” which gives a timeline for Canadian policy regarding the mounting of .30 and .50 cal MGs on Carriers, Cars Lt Recce, and Halftracks.

The documents can be found at this link: https://heritage.canadiana.ca/view/o...eel_t17481/310