Tony
"The Churchill VII was removed from the Tank Brigades and turned into Crocodile flamethrowers. So there were very few Churchill VIIs in the Tank Brigades."
I cannot understand why you complained on that. The only function the Crocodile had was to give support to infantry, ie do what you want tanks to do. And of course the converted the most heavily tank around because of flamethrowers were short distance weapon. And crocodile had the flametrower put in place of hull mg and it could easily discart its trailer so it had its 75mm gun and co-axial mg ready to use as normal gun tank.
On Point 226. Now it didn't make a slightest difference were they Mk IIIs, IVs or VIIs because all Churchills were vulnerable to 88mm L/71 flanking fire. And the JagdPanhthers did their damage when they opened fire from their flanking ambush position. All went well to Germans until they made the basic mistake and charged out of their ambush position to the open. So infantry A/T weapons would not have helped.
Now most effective German weapons on D-Day were those capable to flanking fire along the beaches and in fact the effectiveness of flanking fire was known already before Ancient Romans and the reason why towers projected out of walls in medival castles is that so they allowed defenders to shoot flanking fire in front of the walls. All those permanent fortification lines build during 1920s and 30s whose basic design principle I remember were based on interlocking flanking fire zones(, and also to mutual support). So your earlier claim that flanking fire doesn't matter is false.
"The landwarfare I am talking about is a battalion of infantry with the support of a troop of tanks and artillery attacking fixed German defences. It happened repeatedly in the Low Countries and the Reichswald."
Now I can be wrong but I recall that the relation was a troop of tank to an attacking infantry coy. And aditional problem to tanks at Reichswald was that the terrain was sea of mud and in a thick forest the main risk to tanks was a flanking shot from Panzerfaust or -Schreck. And with good infantry 88mm in the forest wasn't unsurmountable obstacle. Finns always attacked through forests without tank support and the examples I can remember for Russian use of tanks in thick forests was that infantry opened the way, engineers prepared a route for tanks and Germans were surprised when the tanks burst out from "impervious" forest. And forest fighting was often bloody because of its nature. But I admit that there wasn't too much room for manoeuvring inside Reichswald.
"The standard infantry gun – not the howitzer. See the following about anti-tank guns in 1918 at
http://rapidttp.com/milhist/vol035hk.html"
Didn't check the link but I think you mean fieldgun, normal 77mm fieldgun Model??. I knew that and I must admit that I quess that you meant them, but IIRC you talked on anti-tank guns and I could not resist the temtation, sorry.
Juha