Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Change in DDay OB

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Change in DDay OB

    Just for grins I took the stock Omaha Beach scenario in SPWAW and substituted Marines with amtrac's for LCVP's. There was also a amtrac version with a 75mm gun.

    I'm still tinkering with it to get the OB and mix of troops right.

    Has anyone else tried that with Omaha?

    I have read earlier that the use of amtracs in Normandy was turned down by Eisenhower (?). In 1944 the Marines were using amtracs as a matter of course in the Pacific.

  • #2
    I bet the crews of the DD Shermans that sank off of Omaha Beach would agree with you.
    Lance W.

    Peace through superior firepower.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Lance Williams
      I bet the crews of the DD Shermans that sank off of Omaha Beach would agree with you.
      I was watching something on the history channel about those. It was about those divers who go down and do scientific inquieries and this one was about why the Omaha DDs sank so much more than any of the other beaches.

      Their conclusion was that swift currents carried the DD tanks down from their landing spots and they corrected their headings to try and reach the deisgnated landing spots and in doing so they turned the weaker side screens into the rough water which caused them to collapse and subsequently sink.

      Cheers!


      :armed:
      Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

      "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

      What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by RichardS
        I was watching something on the history channel about those. It was about those divers who go down and do scientific inquieries and this one was about why the Omaha DDs sank so much more than any of the other beaches.

        Their conclusion was that swift currents carried the DD tanks down from their landing spots and they corrected their headings to try and reach the deisgnated landing spots and in doing so they turned the weaker side screens into the rough water which caused them to collapse and subsequently sink.

        Cheers!


        :armed:
        Intriguing. I was always led to believe that it was because the men on the boats panicked and sent the DDs out too far and in seas that were too rough, and they were simply swamped. That's what I've seen and heard from eyewitnesses anyway.

        Dr. S.
        Imagine a ball of iron, the size of the sun. And once a year a tiny sparrow brushes its surface with the tip of its wing. And when that ball of iron, the size of the sun, is worn away to nothing, your punishment will barely have begun.

        www.sinisterincorporated.co.uk

        www.tabletown.co.uk

        Comment


        • #5
          I remember trying to get my DD tanks onto the shore while playing TCS/Omaha Beach. Out of all the tanks (2 coys I think, been awhile) only 2 tanks made it. Pretty sorry fact.
          If you can't set a good example, be a glaring warning.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Doctor Sinister
            Intriguing. I was always led to believe that it was because the men on the boats panicked and sent the DDs out too far and in seas that were too rough, and they were simply swamped. That's what I've seen and heard from eyewitnesses anyway.

            I think everyone agrees the water was too rough, but the fast current close to the shore was discovered. Granted, I'm not saying they weren't released too far from shore, but it's probably all three.

            Cheers!


            :armed:
            Eagles may fly; but weasels aren't sucked into jet engines!

            "I'm not expendable; I'm not stupid and I'm not going." - Kerr Avon, Blake's 7

            What didn't kill us; didn't make us smarter.

            Comment


            • #7
              I watched on the History Channel some 3-hour D-Day special a few years ago that mentioned the release being too far out and the current being faster than expected so that certain parts of the invasion didn't quite go as planned.

              It always stuck me as odd why even small groups of Marines weren't used in the first wave given the obvious amphib op training they had and the better equipment for taking a beachhead. It would seem having experts on hand could only have helped.
              If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

              Comment


              • #8
                The Army blew off and ignored everything the Corps was doing in the Pacific. This is something I've been pondering for years.

                The amtracs/amtanks (some had 75mm and 37mm guns) went through four model changes in the war. It wasn't till late '43 (?) that their use became widespread.

                Even then a lot of follow waves still used Higgens boats.

                Compared to amtracs the Higgens boats were cheap and simple to build.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by RichardS
                  I was watching something on the history channel about those. It was about those divers who go down and do scientific inquieries and this one was about why the Omaha DDs sank so much more than any of the other beaches.

                  Their conclusion was that swift currents carried the DD tanks down from their landing spots and they corrected their headings to try and reach the deisgnated landing spots and in doing so they turned the weaker side screens into the rough water which caused them to collapse and subsequently sink.

                  Cheers!


                  :armed:
                  I saw the same show. The current at Omaha was unique to the five landing beaches. With the prevailing weather conditions as soon as they tried to fight the current they were swamped. In calmer seas they would have likely been able to counter the current. With the sea the way it was on June 6th the only way the DD Shermans intended for Omaha could have landed would have been to "go with" the current and land east of their intended zones. In retrospect it would have been the better choice.
                  Lance W.

                  Peace through superior firepower.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Dr. Adrian R. Lewis's book "Omaha Beach: A Flawed Victory" discusses the DD tanks extensively. Lewis's conclusion was that the DD tanks sounded great in theory but were in reality pieces of junk. "They were an inexpensive, poorly designed solution to the problem of deploying armor in an amphibious assault." Lewis also noted that "Admiral Hall, the naval commander of Amphibious Forces "O" and "B", was unimpressed not only with DD technology but also with the concept for the employment of the tanks."

                    In regards to the LVTs, there wasn't enough of them to go around. It was thought to be more important for the LVTs to be in the Pacific to help the landing forces to cross the coral reefs that abound in that area. As the beaches of Europe have no coral reefs, the thought was that Higgins boats were more than adequate for Operation Neptune.
                    "The legitimate object of war is a more perfect peace." General William T. Sherman , 20 July 1865

                    Comment

                    Latest Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X