Any military 'geeks': Can someone explain D-day to me?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

Why didn't the battleships and heavy cruisers just carve a path across the beach and up to the cliffs before the troops landed?

[Tetrachloride]

1. i believe that nobody wants to admit epic mistakes

[Hermit-The-Prog]

6. I remember reading an account of a commander in the Pacific...

A hill on an island was blocking his view, so he ordered the top taken off by the 16 inch guns. I've wondered since why such force couldn't be used to clear a path for some of the invaders of Normandy.

[brooklynite]

24. There was plenty of bombardment of the beach defenses...

But there were also plenty of Germans behind the wall to move in when the bombardment stopped.

The issue wasn't getting on the beach per se; it was getting up the cliffs and inland.

Consider that we didn't just "bomb an entry point" at Iwo Jima or Leyte or any other Pacific island.

[oldsoftie]

57. Yep; Iwo Jima was bombarded for over 70 days & look how that went

When the enemy is well dug in, it doesnt get enough of them

[sl8]

104. 70 days aerial bombardment, 3 days naval bombardment.

The Marines were really not happy with the Navy about that, they had wanted at least 10 days naval bombardment.

[brush]

2. Not that easy. German machine gun nests in dug-in, hardened concrete pill boxes.

[brewens]

38. The German positions were also set up at angles to provide crossfires. They weren't easy to fire right into

from offshore. I'm not sure battleships could get in close enough to have a direct line of sight to hit anything accurately.

[Dave Bowman]

40. Back in 94 there were commemorations for the 50th anniversary of D-day

and I remember an old German man who was invited on a French TV show saying that he was operating a heavy machine gun that day.

He bragged that he killed over 2000 American soldiers. The other people on the show were pretty disgusted.

[Dan]

48. I don't recall that 50th anniversary, but

I do remember an older German Army soldier saying that he killed in excess of 2000 soldiers that day. He stated that at an earlier time he didn’t want to repeat that information because of the concern for his well-being and feelings of the participants of the battle.

As I recall, he might have been captured after the battle.

He was a soldier doing his duty for his country and for that he has my respect.

[Grins]

67. He's a Bullshitter.

4,400 died at Normandy that day. And this guy accounted for almost half of them?

[Dave Bowman]

73. He probably meant that he killed that many soldiers during the whole battle of Normandy.

Last edited Mon May 27, 2024, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1)

But he was interviewed on June 6 '94.

"A total of 4,414 Allied troops were killed on D-Day itself, including 2,501 Americans. More than 5,000 were wounded. In the ensuing Battle of Normandy, 73,000 Allied forces were killed and 153,000 wounded."

ETA: I did a search and found the guy. You're right to call him a bullshiter.

"Heinrich "Hein" Severloh, also known as the Beast of Omaha, (23 June 1923 – 14 January 2006) was a soldier in the German 352nd Infantry Division stationed in Normandy in 1944. Severloh became notable for a memoir he published in the German language..."

"In the book, Severloh claims that - as a machine gunner - he inflicted over 1,000 and possibly over 2,000 casualties to the American soldiers landing on Omaha Beach on D-Day. However, Severloh's claim is not viewed as credible by either US or German historians."

[Mountainguy]

91. Nope

He retreated and surrendered the day after the invasion.

He claims to have killed 2000+ on the beach. Complete hogwash.

[Dave Bowman]

92. Yes, I edited my post to add some information about that guy after doing a search about him and

Historians agree that his story was BS.

[Grins]

117. Trying to remember from Vietnam...

We fired about 50 rounds to kill each enemy VC/NVA troop. With pretty good weapons.

Using an average of 1,500 dead Americans on D-Day, this guy would have fired - at least - 75,000 rounds.

Not possible. The barrel would have melted.

[Abnredleg]

3. Naval Gunfire is not that accurate

And the targets for the most part were small and well protected. Naval gunfire can erode an enemies defenses but to totally defeat them would take so much ammo and time as to be impractical.

[Irish_Dem]

8. If it took a lot of time that would have defeated the purpose of a surprise attack.

And give German troops time to amass on the site?

[DiverDave]

109. The other thing i read

Was hitler was asleep, and no one wanted to disturb him.
So reinforcements weren't ordered in.

[Irish_Dem]

112. Yes, but there were already some German divisions stationed in the area.

Hitler (like Trump) was a control freak but quite lazy. This is a bad combination.

Because even German generals could not make emergency decisions without Hitler's express permission.

So the generals had to wait until Hitler woke up to move more divisions to the beaches on D Day.
They were afraid to wake him.

[DiverDave]

113. It helped the allied forces

To get men and equipment to the beach.
I wonder how many lives were saved because they were afraid to wake him.

[Irish_Dem]

114. Yes the allies took full advantage of the German problems.

The Germans had spent years preparing for the invasion, they built a seeming fortress along the coast.
But when the day came, they failed to stop the Allies.

One blunder after another. Some of it set up by the Allies.

The Germans made other mistakes as well that day, operationally and strategically.

The German Luftwaffe had withdrawn most of its fighters to Germany to deal with the
relentless American daylight bombing operations all over Germany. The German Navy ships
were either in bad shape or bottled up in ports, unable to move out.

The Germans only had ten Panther divisions in the area, but not close to the beaches like some had wanted.

So in the first hours of the invasion, the German resistance nests used machine guns to mow down the Allies.
It was a blood bath and Allied bodies lined the beaches. Gen. Bradly watching from a ship on the ocean actually considered evacuating and calling off the invasion. But as we can see, no German Air Force, Navy appeared which could have repelled the invasion.

The invasion came as a complete surprise to the German commanders. Hitler was sleeping in as usual. Rommel was back in Germany celebrating his wife's birthday. The others were spread over France and Germany and had to scramble to get back.

The German Generals could not send in more divisions without Hitler's permission.

False reports came in to the Germans about paratroopers landing and they went on some wild goose chases.

Even when Hitler did finally wake up, he spent several days in disbelief. He could not fathom that the Normandy was the location of the invasion. A vast system of information, too much to outline here, had made Hitler believe the invasion would hit at another location. He thought the Normandy location was a trick and did not want to be sucked in.

By the time he figured it out it was too late.

So how many lives were saved by Hitler sleeping in? Some say it didn't make much difference.
He would have awakened in a barbiturate drug haze and made silly decisions, plus he didn't believe it was the
real invasion any way.

Even if the Germans had stopped D Day, it was only a matter of time.
The Russians were approaching Berlin, the US army had liberated Italy, it was just a matter of time.

But I think the Battle of Normandy which was the battle to secure the beach would have been bloodier
if Hitler had woken up early, been on top of his game and moved more divisions in right away. The Allies lost 73,000 lives
and it would have been much higher Hitler took appropriate action right away.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

10. Naval gunfire back in '44 wasn't all that accurate, but today's naval gunfire

is highly accurate, and the ammo is much more lethal now than what was available back then.

[PJMcK]

75. Exactly

The ships weren’t that stable and the English Channel is notorious for rough waters making aiming accuracy difficult. Additionally, the explosives were basically heavy-duty dynamite. If the warhead missed by fifty or more yards, it would probably be ineffective.

In contrast, today’s ships are more stable and because of computer technologies, many of the weapons are “smart” with on board targeting capabilities, often with video cameras for additional targeting.

In 1944, the Germans were deeply dug into the cliffs overlooking the English Channel. In many cases, they couldn’t even be seen until they started firing. It would’ve been very difficult to blast a safe landing zone. The only viable option was the one the Allies chose: Overwhelming numbers of soldiers over-running the entrenched Nazis.

As horrible as D-Day was, that’s how battles have been fought for millennia, that is, two armies squaring off and fighting to the death. Ancient Greeks and Romans fought this way and the American Revolutionary and Civil Wars were mostly fought similarly. War is hell no matter the year.

Thankfully, the Allies had superior forces. On this Memorial Day, I am humbled and grateful to the tens of thousands of brave warriors who gave their lives to provide our freedoms.

[lapfog_1]

93. my father was the gun control officer ( but enlisted ) on the USS Parker ( a destroyer )

His ship was part of the Anzio landing in Italy. They were offshore providing artillery support for the landing ships. The Army spotted a German outpost high in the steeple of a local cathedral... where there was a artillery spotter for the German artillery located on hills behind the city, picking off the American landing force. The Navy was asked to shell the steeple but NOT damage the cathedral... hopefully putting a round into the base of the steeple and peeling it away from the church.

The destroyer got as close to the shore as they could, and bobbing up and down and a 4 foot or 5 foot swell, he timed the shot just right... and hit the steeple so it fell to the side of the cathedral. His ship and he were awarded a medal for this action.

There are a lot of reasons battleships didn't obliterate the Germans in Normandy. Battleships have a much deeper draw than a small ship meaning that they cannot get close to shore, because of the enormous shells they use, the firing of those shells tend to rock the ship when firing broadside... which makes them more inaccurate, if they fire facing forward then only the main guns can take part. The Germans spent two years or more building the Atlantic wall. The Allied ships are trying to hit targets they can't see. And the bombardment was taking place early (pre dawn) because they hoped to catch the Germans asleep ( they sort of did ). Not to mention that Rommel was commanding the German forces and he was convinced to have his tanks and infantry held in reserve to be able to counterattack but Hitler overrode his strategy. Not to mention that Rommel was on leave on June 6th because of the expected bad weather ( we had better weather forecasters than did the Germans ).

Last point, the objective was to establish a beach head with the artificial harbors ( mulberries ) to drive a lot of supply trucks and tanks onto the beachhead and the surrounding area... not just destroy the Germans manning machine guns in the pill boxes, but to do it FAST before the Germans could react and counterattack. So pounding the German positions for a day or more was not possible.

Compare to the Island hopping Pacific landings of the Allies... they shelled each island with battleships and cruisers for days before trying to land... and while devastating, it still wasn't enough to eliminate the Japanese in their caves and bunkers.

[Irish_Dem]

4. I can't picture what you mean.

Are you saying allied ships should have flattened the cliffs somehow?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

9. Just carve a canyon for some.

I'm probably being naive and over-rating the power of the big naval guns.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

12. Back in '44, the accuracy and lethality of naval gunfire was very spotty at best

compared to today's standards and the German defensive emplacements were designed to withstand direct hits from such gunfire.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

14. Every time I see the stats for D-day, I wish the Navy could have wasted the whole area.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

19. I hear ya, even the fighter and bomber aircraft of the day

couldn't peel open the German defenses, it took ground troops to do that and sadly many, many soldiers, sailors and airmen died doing so.

[Irish_Dem]

16. US troops would still have to scale canyon walls and would be sitting ducks.

Surrounded by three sides of canyon walls. The troops would have cornered themselves and been
easily killed by German troops. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Maybe some of the Army and Marine folks can add to this.
I am a WWII buff, but just an Air Force brat. What do I know.

[Lonestarblue]

65. The Germans also had buried huge heavy metal spikes, aimed toward the sea, to disable tanks coming ashore.

Omaha Beach has replicas on the beach. The spikes were not visible at high tide, so many tanks were disabled allowing the German guns buried in the tops of the hills to blast away at them and the soldiers inside. Some of the guns were buried in bunkers hidden from the air. Normandy is a fascinating place to visit.

This site has some interesting photos of the German defenses, including the spikes on the beach.
https://whatifworldhistory.com/blog/dday-german-defenses

[Irish_Dem]

69. Yes I knew about the deadly spikes.

They are usually depicted in movies.

Thanks for the article. The pictures are clear and close up.

Interesting article, more from the German perspective than Allied which is interesting.

[NutmegYankee]

34. Consider that this strategy was tried in WWI, and failed miserably each time.

The British even blew up an entire ridge by placing mines full of explosives under it, and they still could not achieve a breakthrough. It takes overwhelming troops to exploit such a gap, and if not wide enough of a front, it becomes a killing box, like the Battle of the Crater in 1864.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

43. It's not quite a new idea, is it? I didn't think to compare it to those actions.

[Srkdqltr]

53. But the cliffs were the top of the land . they were not free standing with nothing behind. I doubt there was a through.

Only over.

[Swede]

5. The Normandy beach attacked that day was 40 miles long, for one.

nt

[Hermit-The-Prog]

13. Just one path. I torture myself every Memorial Day by watching documentaris of D-day.

[Swede]

15. Bunching up the invaders in one spot was probably dismissed early on.

nt

[Hermit-The-Prog]

18. Oh, yeah, but clearing a path anywhere surely would have helped.

[Irish_Dem]

31. I believe your plan would have resulted in a massacre of allied troops.

Would have given Germans time to surround the location in vast numbers.
Then allied troops would have been sitting ducks as they came through the canyon.

But I understand what you are trying to do.
So you get credit for that.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

41. Be glad we have more informed people in charge of our military.

[Irish_Dem]

44. I am only an old Air Force brat, but it did not sound good to me.

Some of the Army/Marine guys here said it better with military terminology.
But it all comes to the same thing. Curtains for Allied troops.

But I respect anybody who is trying to come up with a better mousetrap.
And trying to save lives.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

46. Watched "D-Day: Lost Films" earlier today and I just wish we could rewind and re-do.

Such horrendous losses; such incredible sacrifices.

[Irish_Dem]

55. The men who died saved lives.

The men who died on D Day did so courageously knowing they would save countless lives.

Over 75 million people died over the course of World War II making it the bloodiest conflict in the history of the world.

Every month the war continued meant more huge losses, including civilians.

Hitler was killing Jews by the millions and was always working on killing more people in a quicker way.

FDR and Churchill knew that the war had to end by any means possible to stop the world wide carnage.

Eisenhower was the best military mind and a true leader, he was born to head up D-Day.

Before Eisenhower was appointed the commander of allied forces for D-Day, the plan was headed
for a giant cluster-f. For example the British Air Force did not want to co-ordinate with the Army and Navy or
other Allies. Eisenhower was fed up with the BS and prima donnas. He went to Churchill to tender his resignation
if there was not a coordinated effort for D-Day. Churchill looked at Eisenhower, weighing up the situation and
made him Supreme Commander on the spot.

Eisenhower came in and cut out the bullshit.
He did a superb job, the plan was brilliant, and the rest is history.

So yes D Day was a horrendous loss of life, but it ended up saving many many lives in the long run.

[Irish_Dem]

22. There were 200,000 allied troops on D-Day. You cannot put them in one spot.

Just logistically it is not possible for 200,000 men to congregate on one path.

And strategically it is a nightmare. It would take forever for those all those men
to get to the top of the cliffs. And would take away the element of surprise which was crucial.

If Hitler would have quickly mobilized his troops to the cliffs it would have been more of
a bloodbath than it already was.

As I said in a previous comment, allied troops trapped in a canyon
of their own making would have been suicide.

And military malpractice.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

26. Oh no, not what I meant

Just blast the hell out of it with the big guns 'walking' up ahead of the invasion force and hope there's at least one path through the wire and obstacles.

Sorry to be so unclear.

[Irish_Dem]

35. The men still have to get to the other side on that one path.

It will take a lot of time to make that one path.

But then half the German army is standing there waiting with loaded guns.

German bombers bombing the path.

German ships surrounding the LST's waiting offshore.

The whole point of the invasion was to do it quickly, quietly, a sneak attack.

The Allies had to get inland as fast as they could before the Germans realized what was happening.

Once German troops arrived it would be a blood bath.

[BoRaGard]

37. Union Forces in the Civil War were 'fish in a barrel' during Battle of the Crater

This story will curl your nose hairs.

?feature=shared

"... The Yankees were slow to exit the trenches, and when they did the 15,000 attacking troops ran into the crater rather than around it.

Part of the Rebel line was captured, but the Confederates that gathered from each side fired down on the Yankees.

[Irish_Dem]

42. Yep this is the picture of the canyon on the D-Day beach I was seeing.

[rsdsharp]

52. One path for five beachheads?

[Prairie Gates]

7. You have an extremely optimistic and unrealistic view of the effective of bombardment

There's really not much more to say than that.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

11. No doubt. The documentaries running today give me heartache.

[Prairie Gates]

17. It also would have given time for the Wehrmacht to move their forces to block the breakout

Part of the Overlord plan was a feint; German forces were not ideally positioned to block to breakout from the beachhead. A three to four day bombardment (which is what you propose would have taken, at a minimum) would have allowed the Germans to reposition their forces to better prevent the breakout.

We teach DDay a bit misleadingly by focusing so intently on the beach landing, which was no doubt heroic. But the fighting on DDay +1, 2, 3, 4 etc. in the towns and hedgerows of Normandy was really just as crucial (and deadly). Had there been numerous additional Wehrmacht divisions dug in at strategic points to block the breakout (especially in force with armor, and artillery sighted to breakout routes), it likely would have failed.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

20. Yes, it was over a month of brutal fighting before it was clearly a successful invasion.

My father was in Italy -- where Hitler was convinced the invasion would come.

[maxrandb]

21. Not that easy

We've used massive, overwhelming force as recently as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, but with a determined enemy and dug in defenses, it's simply not possible.

BTW - the Vietcong, Iraq and Afghanistan had nowhere near the equipment, training and command and control that Germany had.

Just like today, I have no doubt that America and our NATO allies would prevail if a war with China and Russia broke out, but it would require almost ALL Americans to completely put their lives on hold for years. The same type of selfless sacrifice we commemorate today!

Our Normandy comes this November when we storm the ballot box on election day with overwhelming numbers.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

23. To honor those sacrifices...

We must turn out in November.

My mother went from driving a team of mules on a farm to inspecting welds in a munition factory. My father went from being a mechanic to driving a 6x6 in Italy. I know of members of my family from WWI to Afghanistan. I sure as hell can vote, at the very least.

[maxrandb]

28. I have a picture of my Grandmother that was in a CT newspaper

she was photographed assembling rifles at the Winchester factory in New Haven.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

39. Such images are precious.

I have a picture of my grandfather in a WWI uniform, complete with the side bags pants. He was sent home from France after an Army mule kicked him and gave him a permanent limp.

[Irish_Dem]

25. I was thinking about part of your comment earlier today coincidentally.

Could Americans could prevail in a war against China and Russia?

You state they could if they were willing to put their lives on hold for some years.

I have strong doubts that Americans could show the determination, courage and strength needed.
These are people who cannot wear a mask in a global deadly pandemic.

[maxrandb]

84. I think circumstances would demand it

I still believe that the vast majority of the American people would come together and sacrifice to save our country and democracy.

We really haven't been demanded to since WWII. I think that would change if a full scale war broke out in Europe, or the Pacific, and I think the American people would respond.

Some wouldn't, just like some didn't in the war against the Nazis and Imperial Japan, but I still have faith that those folks would be a minority.

[Irish_Dem]

86. But Americans are turning on our democracy now.

People saying they like Putin and Russia.
Democracy is no longer working for them.

I guess we would find out quickly if Americans can do the right thing or not.

[maxrandb]

89. I guess we'll find out in November

I don't think the media "normalized"" the American Nazi Party in 1936 the way they are currently "normalizing" the Retrumplican Party of 2024. If so, maybe FDR would have lost a squeaker to some fascist dipshit, but like I said; "we'll see".

[Irish_Dem]

90. The media was not yet totally corrupt like today.

Yes we will know the score in November.

[NutmegYankee]

27. Hardened bunkers reisist naval gun fire. We had the same problem in the Pacific.

We could pound the hell out of small islands, and it really only killed a very small percentage of the defending Japanese troops.

[Irish_Dem]

47. We were stationed near the Okinawa beaches in the 1960's.

20 years after the Battle of Okinawa, the Japanese pillboxes on the beach there were still intact.
Perfectly preserved, they withstood 20 years of ocean waves and typhoons hitting them.
Believe it or not, there were still MREs sitting in the bunkers.

We used to take them home and some of the military kids would eat them.
They were still edible.

[Gore1FL]

29. Depth, probably. Detroyers came in and hitt the German defenses, though.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2004/june/gallant-destroyers-d-day

[RockRaven]

30. You need to land sufficient troops and equipment in a short enough

amount of time that said troops can effectively defend against the inevitable (and beginning essentially immediately) counterattack. In order to do so, you have to land across a wide area.

Consider how many troops you need, how quickly you need to land them all, how long it takes for their transport to make the trip into the beach and away, how much width of beach that one transport needs to operate without impeding others... And then do the math.

Even if naval guns were magically as effective as you imagine, the numbers don't work if you try to send everything through narrow corridors.

[Bad Thoughts]

32. Uh, there were sailors and soldiers between the ships and the beach

The landing craft containing the invasion force was on the ocean, in small craft, slowly moving toward the beach at the time. Aircraft should have taken out German defenses, but couldn't. As many have said, naval artillery fire lacked accuracy. At some point, several destroyers came close to shore, nearly running aground, in order to fire directly at the German placements, but that was different from the outright shelling you think should have taken place.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

33. For a few reasons

WW2 naval bombardment wasn't that accurate. French civilians still lived in the area. I believe 15-20k were killed in the pre invasion bombings and another 20k or so during the invasion itself. Saturation bombardment would have greatly increased that number and would have done little to assist with the invasion itself.

The entire invasion took place over a 40-50 mile stretch of beachfront. Not enough ships, not enough guns, and not enough ammo to clear a beachhead that large, particularly since a good portion of the beach was right up against cliffs that had fortifications built into them.

Some of the fortifications were strong enough to withstand direct hits from allied bombs or naval artillery. These bunkers were made of several feet of reinforced concrete.

Carving a single path through an entrenched enemy is tactically unsound. All you have done is create a bottleneck for your troops to get slaughtered in. You essentially would be making a killzone for your own troops. The germans would have been able to focus all artillery and air attacks on any path the the bombardment would have cut through the line.

An invasion like that requires multiples points across a wide area to be attacked, seized, and held, in order for the invasion to succeed and for a secure beachhead to be formed. This can't be accomplished by attacking a single point or two. You need to attack a wide front in order to control a large enough zone to secure the beachhead from a counterattack. This is key, because if the counterattack succeeds in pushing back, your men have zero place to retreat with the water at their backs. The entire invasion force would be destroyed.

[jmowreader]

36. The Nazis had prepositioned eight divisions along that beach...

...and they had five more as a Quick Reaction Force just a few miles from the beach. While Patton's ghost army was effective at convincing the Nazis that an invasion would occur somewhere else, they weren't stupid enough to not think that Normandy was an obvious place to invade.

[sarisataka]

45. If such a thing had been done

It would have been a VERY narrow corridor. The troops trying to pass the lane would have been vulnerable to the German positions on their flanks and artillery behind the beach.

A defense in depth cannot be overcome with overwhelming firepower at just one point. Supporting layers also need to be engaged and neutralized.

[jobendorfer]

49. There were a number of problems

I think you are asking about the American landing at Omaha Beach, so I'll speak to that, other than to observe here that there were *five* landings that morning: American forces at Omaha and Utah beaches, and British forces at Juno, Gold, and Sword beaches. These landings were spread out over a distance of some twenty miles of coastline. Most of the naval ships that had large guns were out in the Pacific. So the Overlord (the operation that spanned all five of these beaches) had to make do with what they could get, which in fairness to Overlord planners was not nearly what they had asked for in terms of Naval support. What they got had to be distributed along that long coast line.

Specifically to Omaha beach: the weather was awful. It was overcast and foggy. The surf was rough, which contributed to the loss of most of the tanks that were supposed to land that day. It is hard to believe in this day and age of cell phones and instant reachability, but in 1944 the Navy and the Army both used radios ... but on different frequencies. The rough surf scattered the landing parties so when they got ashore the forces were badly scattered. The troops on the beach could not call fire in from Navy ships using their radios, and it wasn't until a few Navy forward observers got ashore that it became possible to direct naval artillery at the enemy (without killing our own troops).

Next: unknown until very last minute, the German Army had moved a tough infantry division to the high ground behind Omaha Beach. Army intelligence figured this out on June 5, but there was no time to communicate this to the fleet that was already underway in any secure fashion. So the heavy resistance on Omaha came as a surprise to the forces storming ashore.

That said: I can tell you that the first message from the beach to reach the V Corps command post out on a nearby ship read:
"Thank God for the US Navy" as naval gunfire began to provide some cover in a horrendous running battle.

A very informative account of the planning and execution of the Omaha landing can be read in Omar Bradley's _A Soldier's Story_. There are probably errors of detail in Bradley's account, but for a first pass explanation of what they had planned to do and how it unfolded, it's very readable. Bradley was the senior US ground commander, on that day, of the US First Army, and later, of the First US Army Group. He was offshore at Omaha that morning and did his best to unscramble the mess.

The cost was high. But at the end of D-Day, the Omaha beachfront was under US control. Within a couple of weeks, the American and British forces managed to link their beach landings in a continuous front, 42 miles wide. Four weeks after D-Day, the US Army captured the deep water port at Cherbourg, which opened a high-capacity, all weather supply line. Eight weeks after D-day, after bitter fighting in the Cotentin Peninsula, the allied forces broke through the German lines in western France and were at the German border in early September.

At the ten thousand foot level, if there was a failure of Operation Overlord, it was the failure to plan for the possibility of the rapid advance across France that unfolded in August and September. It took several months for the logistical supply pipeline to catch up that advance, which gave the Germans an opportunity to stiffen their border defenses and plan the counter-attack that we know as "The Battle of the Bulge."

I hope this sheds some light on your question. One of my uncles went ashore on D+5 and served in France and Germany until war's end. He was one of the lucky ones. I miss him terribly. So today I think of him, and his mates, some of whom were not as lucky.

John

[Hermit-The-Prog]

58. Thank you.

[Irish_Dem]

87. Good summary.

Yes today is a good day to think of our dads and uncles who served in the war.
My uncle was killed in WWII and he is in my thoughts today too.
Battle of Guadalcanal. Not Europe like your uncle.

[FBaggins]

50. They real answer is "they did"

An incredible amount of ordinance was dropped/fired onto the defenses prior to the assault. But remember that the assault was supposed to be a surprise and 1940s military tech did not include nighttime GPS or laser-guided munitions that you can put through a window. They needed daylight, but couldn't burn so much of it that the Germans had time to reinforce the area of the coast where the invasion was coming. So that bombardment was limited to about 3/4 hour.

If you're browsing stories - look for some of the emplacements and other defenses that the Germans had constructed. Some remain to this day.

It's also worth noting that while the casualties were horrific... they were still lower than what had been projected.

[Irish_Dem]

61. The amphibious invasions began at 6:30am. Sunrise was 5:58 am.

So it was dawn but enough light to see a bit of what they were doing.

Yes this was a surprise invasion and time was of the essence.
They could not tip their hands with a lot of noise and drama.
Or take forever to scale the cliffs.

[FBaggins]

68. I've always envisioned it just as depicted in The Longest Day

The Frenchman yelling out his window while waving the tricolor and Major Pluskat's "My God... Invasion... they are coming" with the opening of Beethoven's 3rd in the background.

[Irish_Dem]

71. So many good movies about D-Day.

Yes Major Pluskat shows us the surprise on the part of the Germans.
And the joy of the French people.

Longest Day, Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, Churchill.

[Irish_Dem]

63. A top military strategist told Eisenhower that the D-Day death rate could be as high as 75%.

The Allied troops knew going in that many of them would not make it back home.

They knew full well it was a horrific mission but did so to stop the carnage of WWII, to stop a madman from
killing more people.

Allied top brass knew the casualties might be staggeringly high, but that price had to be paid to establish
an infantry stronghold in France. It was the only way to end the war. Allied bombing of Germany was not going
to do the job.

Because of the bad weather and fierce resistance by the Germans it was a bloody and chaotic battle.
Especially for the US troops at Omaha Beach and Canadians at Juno Beach.

But Allied troops persevered with raw grit and determination. They took all beaches by nightfall.

[FBaggins]

70. All true

They believed (I think correctly) that the freedom of Europe was worth it.

But it wasn't just Europe. Had the invasion failed... the history of the entire world could have gone in the wrong direction. Germany was not as close to a bomb as some feared, but without the almost year-long decline after D-Day? Who knows?

[Irish_Dem]

74. Yes it was not just about Europe.

It was also about the Pacific and Japan.

And the direct danger to the US.

Also the Allies simply did not know how close Hitler was to inventing the bomb.

The German and Japanese military were formidable. And they assumed defeating America
would be easy. They saw the US as nation of spoiled, indolent men. But as Yamamoto said,
they awoke a sleeping giant. The sheer genius, courage, resilience, adaptability of the US
came to full force against them.

I remember my mother talking about WWII and she said that the American people were
afraid of being invaded by Japan or Germany. Pearl Harbor deeply shocked them
and they put nothing past Germany or Japan. The outcome of the war was never certain.
The fighting was very fierce, especially in the Pacific. It was only when the war was ended in
Europe that Americans began to have hope.

It was said that 2 million lives would have been lost during an invasion of Japan.
Defeating Hitler was crucial in breaking up the Japanese and German alliance.

[haele]

51. Because Adm. King wanted to keep most of the Navy capital in the Pacific

Admiral King didn't have a large amount of US Navy in the Atlantic side of the war because he:
1. Didn't see a need for major ships to fight the relatively weak German surface Navy, especially since the Brits were handling them in the North Sea, and the Germans didn't have aircraft carriers (even though they did have U-Boats).
2. Didn't need a whole lot of landing craft and landing support for the European/North African coastline, as opposed to island hopping in the Pacific against a much larger, better equipped Japanese Navy and Naval air force.
3. Didn't want a lot of important ships to be targets of U-Boats just to protect the Lend Lease convoys.
and finally -
4. Didn't want to put the War in the Pacific "on hold" for a month or so just to transfer a few dozen warships currently tasked to protect other ships and Marines who were still fighting island to island for one landing, claiming that the British had enough battleships, cruisers, and destroyers they could more quickly put in place than he could. The Brits themselves didn't include as many as they could because large movements of ships to pre-position would give the plan away.

As it was, one US light destroyer did capture a German gun emplacement and another nearly ground itself to provide covering fire on another beach during D-Day.

Haele

[Irish_Dem]

76. Yes moving some of the US naval fleet to Europe doesn't make sense.

The fighting was so fierce in the Pacific islands, the US navy was needed there.
And the Brits had a huge naval fleet, they were a sea going nation for a long time.

Yes D-Day was a secret operation, certainly moving the US pacific fleet to Europe would
not be wise.

[kairos12]

54. Destroyers were very effective.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2014/june/navy-saved-our-hides

I recommend this article.

The "tincans" did the job.

[Irish_Dem]

79. This is such an interesting part of the D-Day story.

The destroyers could see things going sideways on the beach for the allies and came and did what they could.

[Picaro]

56. Question sounds simple but the answer is complex

If that kind of naval and aerial bombardment had been undertaken it would’ve taken days if not weeks to accomplish. And the task might even have been impossible. What this would have done with 100% certainty is tell the Germans where we were planning on invading.

The allies spent a lot of time and effort convincing the Germans that we would attack elsewhere. For one thing, the incredible difficulty of attacking at Normandy with its’ heavily defended cliffs made it seem extremely an unlikely spot for invasion.

The German general staff simply could not believe that the allies would choose Normandy because the casualties were going to be huge. The Germans knew it. And the allies knew it. For many of those poor boys D-Day was a suicide mission. A mission that had to succeed.

What was absolutely crucial to the success of the operation was that key German divisions couldn’t be in range of Normandy or the likelihood of getting thrown back into the sea would’ve been very high.

If D-Day had failed that failure would have added potentially years to the war. A period of time during which the Germans could have achieved the atom bomb.

[Irish_Dem]

80. If D Day had failed the war would have ended very differently.

And I don't mean in a good way.

[Picaro]

82. Spot on

[Irish_Dem]

85. FDR, Churchill, Eisenhower knew full well was what at stake.

Last edited Tue May 28, 2024, 07:17 AM - Edit history (1)

And so did the troops to some extent. They knew time was running out and it was
now or never. They gave it their all.

Churchill did something I think was a bit odd with Eisenhower.
Churchill was a cynic and control freak.

But he turned over everything to Eisenhower, made him Supreme Commander of the D Day operation.
Bypassed his own British generals. Made them answer to Ike.

I think Churchill knew that Eisenhower was a genius and superb leader of men.
Churchill put all of his chips on Ike. There was no other choice left.

[Ex Lurker]

100. Eisenhower had prepared a statement in the event the invasion failed

taking full responsiblity

https://slideplayer.com/slide/12983940/79/images/44/Eisenhower%E2%80%99s+In+Case+of+Failure+Letter.jpg

[Irish_Dem]

105. That is Ike down to the bone. A true leader.

He was highly respected by all.

[Shermann]

59. It was a massive operation with a thousand moving parts

There wasn't One Weird Trick to Conquering a Beach that the Germans Don't Want You to Know.

[Irish_Dem]

81. The Germans were a formidable military force.

They had thought of the various ways the beaches could be breached and were ready for it.

[GreenWave]

60. IIRC, there was another sneak attack on Nazis.

Our pals, Brazil, allow the USA to make makeshift air bases in Amazon. Planes land there and get readied to fly across the Atlantic to attack the Nazis from the South in Africa!

[._.]

62. They Did

The landing beaches were subject to both air and sea bombardment. It turns out the air bombardment impacted too far inland, for whatever reason. The Navel bombardment was a bit more precise, and could be directed from the beaches. Having said all that, the German defenses were formidable. Casualties were heavy, as they are in all beach landing/invasions. Our troops were well trained, persistent, and brave. Mistakes by the German high command helped mitigate some of the difficulties, and with the help of the war Gods, we prevailed.
And now the fucking Nazi's are at our throats again. Go figure.

[Angleae]

64. Accuracy sucks, rate of fire sucks more, payload per shell is pathetic.

Accuracy of big guns at that distance is something like 3-5% tops. Rate of fire for battleships is 2-3 rounds/minute. Payload for Iowa's 16 in shells that weigh 1900lb hold a whopping 153lb of explosive (compared to 192lb for a 500lb bomb). And as someone else stated, most such US ships were in the pacific (unless very old) and british ships were on convoy duty.

Edit: also, these ships have a finite ammunition capacity after which they need a couple days with an ammunition ship to rearm.

[sarisataka]

72. I don't have an accuracy percentage

However I would expect against fixed targets it is better that 5%.

The battleship USS Texas sustained 7.5 rounds per minute for over two hours.

I was in a group that came across a shell hole from a 16 in. gun. We all had seen many bomb craters of bombs upto 2000lbs. The reaction to the battleship crater was "what the hell did that?" It was huge.

[Kaleva]

78. BBs could hit other BBs at ranges over 10 miles

HMS Rodney hit the Bismarck at a range greater then 20,000 yards.

[Ex Lurker]

101. They would fire dozens of rounds to get one or two hits

and a battleship is a considerably bigger target than a concrete pillbox

[Kaleva]

103. The Rodney hit the Bismarck on it's 3rd salvo

Can you provide an example of where a BB in WWII fired dozens of rounds to get 1 or 2 hits? I bet you won't be able to.

The OP asked about clearing a path through the defense's at Normandy. A path big enough to allow thousands of troops through would be bigger then the Bismarck.

[Ex Lurker]

115. Rodney had a main battery of 9 16 inch guns

In three salvos, that's 26 misses for one hit. That was the state of WWII naval gunnery. And don't get me wrong, it was often good enough to do the job, since one hit from a large caliber shell could disable or sink an adversary, as the Bismarck did to the HMS Hood a few days earlier. I'm just saying naval gunfire was fairly inaccurate and was rarely enough to be decisive in a shore bombardment.

[Kaleva]

116. You make valid points

A debate on this topic would be interesting but I'm just too tired from a long day at work to make the effort !

[ForgedCrank]

66. I never

heard first-hand accounts from anyone who was there, but reading the countless analysis on the subject tells me that there were a multitude of reasons for the high casualty rates. Weather was a big one resulting in a lot of stuff not making it to shore that was supposed to. It also cannot be understated just how well fortified the German placements were. We were going ashore with absolutely zero cover against heavy guns (and a lot of them). It was the best possible conditions for the Germans to run defense, and the absolute worst for us to run an offensive.
It should also be said that there would have been FAR more casualties had it not been for engineering and planning. Reading on the subject brings about absolute awe when considering the logistics of it all. It truly was incredible the lengths gone to get men, equipment, materials and supplies ashore and (mostly) in the right places. The arrangement of such massive amounts of men and machine in a coordinated effort of that size really shows what man is capable of when he is determined enough.
I just pray we never have to see anything like that again.

[Irish_Dem]

83. Weather and fierce fighting by the Germans were two factors.

Factors that made for high casualties.

Yes when you break down DDay and look at the huge complicated military operation,
it becomes clear that Eisenhower was a genius. With the help of Churchill and the Allied generals.

[marble falls]

77. Damn, someone get a quick message to General Eisenhower!!

[Irish_Dem]

88. This thread is making me laugh and cry.

[marble falls]

94. Me, too. Grinding the chaff makes no more flour. But it is fun watching them standing with a bag awaiting the result ...

... first time I've ever heard of the Allies forgetting the boats.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

98. Thankfully, there have been many enlightening comments.

[Xavier Breath]

95. What if Spartacus had a Piper Cub?

Sorry, couldn't resist. I too have watched WWII docs and wondered why they zigged when they could have zagged, but I have precious little study of military strategy and zero experience deploying such strategy, so I must defer to Ike and company.

[marble falls]

96. The USN is under the impression they were at Normandy with the big guns Operation Neptune ...

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2004/june/gallant-destroyers-d-day

The Gallant Destroyers of D-Day

The big-gun battleships softened the German defenses and made for dramatic newsreel footage 60 years ago. But the spunky destroyers in the Normandy Invasion—including the Emmons (left) and Doyle (background right) in Dwight Shepler’s dramatic combat art—came within less than 1,000 yards from the shore, providing direct gunfire support for troops on the beach.

By Thomas B. Allen
June 2004
Naval History Magazine
Volume 18, Number 3

-snip-

D-Day is always the story of brave men struggling across beaches and then fighting their way inland. Another story, however, was unfolding at sea. At least 200 ships and landing craft sank off the beaches.1 Among them were three U.S. destroyers and three British destroyers, including one manned by Norwegian officers and crew. The losses began on D-Day, 6 June 1944, and continued into July.

Among the nearly 7,000 ships, boats, and amphibious craft of Operation Neptune were 34 U.S. destroyers and destroyer escorts.2 Many of the destroyers had begun their D-Day mission escorting the battleships and cruisers that would bombard the Normandy coast from several miles off shore. Newsreel coverage of D-Day inevitably began with the thundering barrages of the big guns, while overhead, waves of Allied aircraft headed for Normandy to pulverize what Adolf Hitler called the Atlantic Wall, “impregnable against every enemy.”

Allied strategists believed the wall’s fortifications could be destroyed by naval bombardment and aerial bombings. A briefing officer in England, describing the expected results, said, “Every grain of sand will be turned over twice before the first wave hits the beach.”3 But the naval bombardment was aimed at inland targets. The aircraft had dropped their bombs far beyond the beaches because clouds obscured targets, compounding fears of hitting Allied troops on the beach.4

Among the nearly 7,000 ships, boats, and amphibious craft of Operation Neptune were 34 U.S. destroyers and destroyer escorts.2 Many of the destroyers had begun their D-Day mission escorting the battleships and cruisers that would bombard the Normandy coast from several miles off shore. Newsreel coverage of D-Day inevitably began with the thundering barrages of the big guns, while overhead, waves of Allied aircraft headed for Normandy to pulverize what Adolf Hitler called the Atlantic Wall, “impregnable against every enemy.”

-snip-

[Hermit-The-Prog]

102. Thanks. My question was less "what was" and more of "what if"...

Several responses give good reasons why
A. Carving such a path would be very hard to do, and
B. It could have resulted in even more horrible losses.

Even if some battleships could have been devoted to chewing up the landscape leading up those cliffs where there were no big guns, it still wouldn't have worked, based on all the commentary up-thread.

[marble falls]

106. EVEN iF? A battleship's guns can put a shell 25 miles aways within 4ft of the target. A broadside from a battleship ...

... will move it 4ft sideways and will require realigning every fourth or so salvo. Your "what if" was a what was.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Allied_warships_in_the_Normandy_landings#Support

Battleships

Seven battleships took part: four British and three US:

USS Arkansas, eastern Omaha Beach (Wyoming class, 26,100 tons, main armament: twelve 12" guns) primarily in support of the US 29th Infantry Division.
USS Nevada, Utah Beach (Nevada class, 29,000 tons, main armament: ten 14" guns).
HMS Ramillies (1915, Revenge class, 33,500 tons, main armament: eight 15-inch guns).
HMS Rodney (1925, Nelson-class, 38,000 tons, main armament: nine 16-inch guns).
USS Texas, western Omaha Beach (New York class, 27,000 tons, main armament: ten 14-inch guns, Flagship of Rear Admiral Carleton F. Bryant) primarily in support of the US 1st Infantry Division.
HMS Warspite (1913, Queen Elizabeth class, 35,000 tons, main armament eight 15-inch guns, only six operational).

In addition HMS Nelson (Nelson class main armament: nine 16-inch guns) was held in reserve until June 10.
Heavy cruisers

Five heavy cruisers (main guns of 8 inches) took part, three from the United States and two from Britain, HMS Hawkins had her original armament of seven 7.5-inch guns while HMS Frobisher's main gun armament had been reduced from seven to five single-mounted 7.5-inch guns.

USS Augusta (Flagship of Rear Admiral Alan Kirk – Lt. General Omar Bradley embarked)
HMS Frobisher
HMS Hawkins
USS Quincy
USS Tuscaloosa

Light cruisers

17 British light cruisers took part along with two of the Free French navy, and one of the Polish navy. All carried either 6- or 5.25-inch guns of varying numbers.

HMS Argonaut
HMS Ajax
HMS Arethusa
HMS Belfast (Flagship of Rear Admiral Frederick Dalrymple-Hamilton)
HMS Bellona - also carried jamming equipment against radio controlled bombs
HMS Black Prince
HMS Capetown
HMS Ceres (Flagship of U.S. Service Force)
HMS Danae
HMS Diadem
ORP Dragon (Polish, damaged in July and then used as a blockship in "Gooseberry" breakwater)
HMS Emerald
HMS Enterprise
Georges Leygues (Free French)
HMS Glasgow
HMS Mauritius (Flagship of Rear Admiral Patterson)
Montcalm (Free French, Flagship of Rear Admiral Jaujard)
HMS Orion (which fired the first shell of the coastal bombardment)
HMS Scylla (Rear Admiral Philip Vian's flagship, mined and seriously damaged, out of action until after the war)
HMS Sirius In reserve until June 10

Destroyers and escorts

139 ships (eighty-five British and Dominion, 40 US, 10 Free French and 7 other Allied):

HMCS Alberni (Canadian)
HMCS Algonquin (Canadian)
USS Amesbury
USS Baldwin
USS Barton
HMS Beagle
HMS Bleasdale
ORP Błyskawica
HMS Boadicea (torpedoed and sunk 13 June)
HMCS Cape Breton (Canadian)
USS Carmick
HMS Cattistock
HMCS Chaudiere (Canadian)
USS Corry (sunk during the invasion)
HMS Cottesmore
USS Doyle
HMS Eglinton
USS Emmons
HMS Faulknor
USS Fitch
USS Frankford
HMS Fury (mined 21 June and not repaired)
USS Glennon (hit by mine 8 June, sunk by German artillery 10 June)
USS Hulbert
HNoMS Glaisdale (Norwegian)
HMS Grenville
USS Harding
USS Herndon
USS Hobson
USS Jeffers (DD-621)
HMS Jervis
HMS Kelvin
HMS Kempenfelt
HMCS Kitchener (Canadian)
ORP Krakowiak, (Polish, former HMS Silverton)
La Combattante (Free French, former HMS Haldon)
USS Laffey
HMS Loyalty
USS Maloy
USS McCook
HMS Melbreak
HMS Middleton
USS Murphy
USS O'Brien
HMS Pytchley
HMS Pelican (L86)
HMCS Regina (Canadian)
USS Rich (sunk by mines 10 June)
USS Rodman
USS Satterlee
HMS Saumarez
HMS Scorpion
HMS Scourge
HMS Serapis
USS Shubrick
HMCS Sioux (Canadian)
ORP Ślązak (Polish)
HMS Stevenstone
HNoMS Stord (Norwegian)
HNoMS Svenner (Norwegian, hit by German torpedo and sunk off Normandy at dawn, 6 June)[1]
HMS Swift (mined and sunk 24 June 1944 off Normandy)
HMS Talybont
HMS Tanatside
USS Thompson
HMS Ulster
HMS Ulysses
HMS Undaunted
HMS Undine
HMS Urania
HMS Urchin
HMS Ursa
HMS Venus
HMS Verulam
HMS Vigilant
HMS Virago
HMS Wanderer
HMS Wallflower
HMS Whimbrel
HMS Wrestler (damaged by a mine and not repaired)
RHN Kriezis Royal Hellenic Navy (Greece, Flower-class corvette ex HMS Coreopsis (K32))
RHN Tombazis Royal Hellenic Navy (Greece, Flower-class corvette ex HMS Tamarisk (K216))

Frigate La Surprise ( Free French )
Frigate L'Escarmouche ( Free French )
Frigate La Découverte ( Free French )
Frigate L'Aventure ( Free French )
Corvette Aconit ( Free French )
Corvette La Renoncule ( Free French )
Corvette La Roselys ( Free French )
Corvette d'Estienne d'Orves ( Free French )
Submarine-hunter Benodet ( Free French )

Monitors

HMS Erebus, monitor with two 15-inch guns
HMS Roberts, monitor with two 15-inch guns

[Hermit-The-Prog]

108. I don't understand your questioning my use of "even if"

It's apparent that none of the participating battleships were devoted to only carving a hypothetical path up the beach and cliffs. I suspect all of the ships you listed had other orders and none could be spared for something that likely wouldn't help.

Lots of folks gave what seem to me to be probable results of employing some battleships to "carve a path", and those results weren't good. Everything would have to go exactly right to have a good outcome and that never happens.

[marble falls]

110. WHAT IF???? There, all better. If only some of those armchair Admirals had been there, Normandy would have ...

... been a cakewalk.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

111. I hope whatever is making you mad goes away soon. Be happy.

[Alpeduez21]

97. The Navy can't win a ground war. n/t

[marble falls]

99. Hear of the Marines? The world's largest air force is the US Air force, the world's second largest air force? the USN.

The Navy has three or four times the number of the rest of the world's aircraft carriers, and our are all Nuke.

Here's one for you: look up how many nuclear weapons are on US submarines. Allegedly every Boomer has twenty four missile tubes. Each missile has alledgedly MIRV or nuclear capable cruise missile. The MIRVs have allegedly from three to 10 warheads. There are 14 Ohio class Trident and four cruise missile submarines.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UGM-133_Trident_II

The UGM-133A Trident II, or Trident D5 is a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), built by Lockheed Martin Space in Sunnyvale, California, and deployed with the United States and Royal Navy. It was first deployed in March 1990,[6] and remains in service. The Trident II Strategic Weapons System is an improved SLBM with greater accuracy, payload, and range than the earlier Trident C-4. It is a key element of the U.S. strategic nuclear triad and strengthens U.S. strategic deterrence. The Trident II is considered to be a durable sea-based system capable of engaging many targets. It has payload flexibility that can accommodate various treaty requirements, such as New START. The Trident II's increased payload allows nuclear deterrence to be accomplished with fewer submarines,[14] and its high accuracy—approaching that of land-based missiles—enables it to be used as a first strike weapon.[15][16][17]

Trident II missiles are carried by 14 US Ohio and 4 British Vanguard-class submarines, with 24 missiles on each Ohio class and 16 missiles on each Vanguard class (the number of missiles on Ohio-class submarines was reduced to 20, by 2017,[18][19] in compliance with the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty). There have been 177 successful test flights of the D5 missile since design completion in 1989,[20] the most recent being from USS Maine (SSBN-741) in February 2020.[21] There have been fewer than 10 test flights that were failures,[22] the most recent being from HMS Vanguard off the coast of Florida in January 2024.[23] The D5 is the sixth in a series of missile generations deployed since the sea-based deterrent program began 60 years ago. The Trident D5LE (life-extension) version will remain in service until 2042.[24]

The Navy can't win a land war??? We spend more on defense than the next seven countries put together. We can win any war we want to win. Seriously.

[tazkcmo]

107. YouTube Channel: World War Two

Highly, highly, HIGHLY recommend their D Day In 24 Hours special. They breakdown each hour of the first day. There is also plenty of info on the run up to D Day especially the disinformation campaign to convince Hitler the invasion would be at Calai. Lots of great WW2 info and extremely well done.