Talk:6th Airborne Division (United Kingdom)

B class review
Some suggestions
 * B1 It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations.
 * All sections except the Rhine crossings are uncited. The Rhine crossings are cited but the reference sources aren't e.g. Harclerode, p. 553  with no citation for the name of the book etc.  Were they in there at some earlier point and have been removed by accident?
 * ✅ Done. Added from Operation Varsity. Bazj (talk) 11:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * B2 It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.
 * I think that the section on formation needs to explain why the division although the second formed was numbered the 6th. It's discussed below but the explanation needs to go into the article.
 * Would the formation section also beenfit from the OOB being laid out as it is later for the D-Day OOB? With so many briagdes and battalions being mentioned, reading it in linear form isn't easy (to me at least).
 * If there is to be a timeline for D-Day activities it should come after the paragraphs on D-Day not after the entire section on operations in Normandy.
 * The attachment of pathfinders to the division is mentioned but they aren't idenitified in the OOB (especially as the only image in the article is of pathfinders).
 * B5 It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams
 * Is there a citation for the nickname. Discussion below is a bit inconclusive or at least not acted upon. NtheP (talk) 11:37, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Division Numbering
The reason the second Br ABD was number 6th was that the preceding numbers were deception formations (info from Axis History Forum - http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=67514): 2nd,formed with the 11th & 12th Parachute Brigades and 13th Air-Landing Brigade. Based in Lincolnshire. Used as a deception division leading up to DDay, and then again for the proposed Air-Op around Kiel-Bremen when actually Arnhem was underway. The Division was disbanded in December'44, as its troops provided replacements for the 1st & 6th Airborne Divisions.

3rd, was active in SE Asia, for proposed missions in Burma etc. Elements of 5th Parachute Brigade (6th Airborne) were allocated to the division from March'45 onwards

4th, composed as of April 1943 of the 6th (Gurkha) Parachute Brigade, 1st Special Air Service Brigade and 7th Airborne Brigade (OoB's available if you want). The division arrived in Palestine in early'42 for notional op's against Greece. Then moved to Cyrenaica as part of Twelth Army for nominal op's against Crete.

5th was activated in late 1943 and contained the genuine 2nd Parachute Brigade from 1st Airborne. The division stayed in the western Med till 1944 where it was used in various ploys concerning Allied landings along the Adriatic coast. At a later stage German agents were close to finding that this division was not all it was made out to be. So the division was moved. Its HQ and 9th Brigade were sent to Rome, where the genuine 2nd Parachute Brigade was based, whilst its 8th Brigade was 'sent' to Malta for training and to recieve reinforcements from England.

32nd (Air Transit), formed in late '44, and was doing training with transport aircraft, under Central Command, India in early 1945

Nickname
1st Airborne Division gained the name Red Devils during the fighting in Tunisa, but did this nickname carry over to all British airborne forces?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't believe so, although a number of post-war publications do use the phrase to refer to all British airborne divisions and forces. Skinny87 (talk) 10:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, with no official word on it or citations to show it was used during there service ill remove it.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If you wouldn't mind replacing it in the article, I have a book I've just used in the Operation Varsity which I can use to cite it, but it'll take a few days to get a hold of it and cite from it. Skinny87 (talk) 18:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok then, right oh - readded--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 21:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Glider Pilot Regiment
The current Order of Battle shows that two wings of the Glider Pilot Regiment was attached to the division for the invasion of Normandy, is this correct? I would have imagined they were assigned to lift the division in but not temporally attached to the division so i.e Gale would have command etc of them. Can anyone clear this up?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it's my understanding that the Glider Regiment pilots were trained as infantry and often fought alongside the infantry they had piloted into battle. Whether that means they were under Gale's control I'm unsure of. Skinny87 (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * At Arnham they were deployed as Infantry and dug in holding the line, I have not read/seen anything about what they did in Normandy , Skinny 87 is correct that they were trained as infantry unlike there US couterparts who had had no training and had to be defended by the troops they delivered.

JS1 (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Right oh, fair enough guys :) --EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Page move
Just to let everyone here know why, I moved the page (Airborne -> Airbourne) to conform with WP:ENGVAR. Since this is a British military article, it should use British English. I'm sure there wouldn't be many American paratroopers happy with 82nd Airbourne Division (United States) :). Parsecboy (talk) 22:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

As stated on the talk age for the 1st Airborne, i dont believe this is the correct spelling.

The army and the official history do not spell it this way and it doesnt even show up as a legimate version of the word in the Oxford or Cambridge dictionaries.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * See my reply on 1st Airborne. Parsecboy (talk) 00:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Strength
In the info box the divsion's 'size' is stated as 12,148; but in the text, in the 'Formation' section, it is written as 8,500 in September 1943. I assume one is wrong, but which? RASAM (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)