Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Normandy beaches reversed.

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

    I think the US, once ashore and clear of the beach, would move more aggressively against Caen.
    Charge straight into the teeth of 21st Panzer Division? Won't end well.

    Besides getting ashore and then clear of the beach was the major problem at Sword. Unlike all the other beaches which were much wider (and deeper), on Sword British 3rd Division could only land one brigade at a time and the poor weather made exiting the beach diificult:
    "A high wind had driven the full tide up the beaches to within 10 yards of the sand dunes. Vehicles, now being landed in large numbers, were so tightly packed along the waterfront that it was almost impossible to move along the shore to a prepared exit; the delay was already upsetting the time-tables. The narrow beaches were still under fire from gun positions inland and from beyond the Orne - the exposed left fland of the British assault."


    The US, unlike the British, don't have to be very careful about managing casualties. The US can take more and has the replacements-- even if for a period in the ETO their system was stretched. I'd also think that the US would be less inclined to set-piece battles like Goodwood and more inclined to apply massive firepower continuously against the Germans.
    Yes, the US forces would probably apply their preferred operational technique of attacking all along the front, all the time.

    Comment


    • #17
      The loss ratios can make the tactic rather dubious....but as the Russians showed 'quantity has a quality all its own'.
      Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
        One thing to note here is that the topography of the beaches is quite different. The US at Omaha had just 4 or 5 routes up "draws" -- narrow ravines-- leading off the beach. The rest of the beach was pretty much cliff face.
        Up to a point, the eastern end was shallow enough for tanks, especially if you use Churchills. The British might not follow the US plan to land opposite the draws.

        Comment


        • #19
          21st Pzr is one of the most poorly equipped panzer divisions there is. Half it's tanks are ex-French 1940 vehicles, and all of the self-propelled guns etc., are those Becker conversions. Worse, the division chose to defend right up to the beaches which means the USN is going to pound the snot out of them.
          The division had no Panther tanks whatsoever, and had 98 Pz IV, including a few old C - E models with the short 75, 6 Pz III, and 23 S-35 Souma tanks. So the lack of Firefly's or Churchill's is no big deal. US Sherman's could take on what they were facing.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            21st Pzr is one of the most poorly equipped panzer divisions there is. Half it's tanks are ex-French 1940 vehicles, and all of the self-propelled guns etc., are those Becker conversions. Worse, the division chose to defend right up to the beaches which means the USN is going to pound the snot out of them.
            The division had no Panther tanks whatsoever, and had 98 Pz IV, including a few old C - E models with the short 75, 6 Pz III, and 23 S-35 Souma tanks. So the lack of Firefly's or Churchill's is no big deal. US Sherman's could take on what they were facing.

            Yes, 21st Panzer was one of, if not the most poorly equipped Panzer Divisions in Normandy. No, none of its tanks in Normandy were ex-French or early model Panzer IVs. No, none of the division was defending the beaches, though if they were I'm puzzled why you think the USN could 'pound the snot out of them' when historically they couldn't do the same to the defenders on Omaha.


            On 6th June 1944 21st PzD had, at least, 98 Pz IV(lg), 31 self-propelled Pak 40s, 24 Pak 88s, 8 Flak 88s, 48 self-propelled 10.5cm guns, 24 self-propelled 15cm guns and infantry guns, 8 12.2cm guns and 4 K18 10cm guns. There were also 8 self-propelled half track rocket launchers and a company of Nebelwerfers.

            North of Caen on the eve of D-Day were only the two motorised infantry battalions, most of Beckers self-propelled gun battalion and the long range 10cm and 12.2cm guns. The latter being able to bring fire on the beaches and indeed Allied vessels at sea.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Gooner View Post


              Yes, 21st Panzer was one of, if not the most poorly equipped Panzer Divisions in Normandy. No, none of its tanks in Normandy were ex-French or early model Panzer IVs. No, none of the division was defending the beaches, though if they were I'm puzzled why you think the USN could 'pound the snot out of them' when historically they couldn't do the same to the defenders on Omaha.


              On 6th June 1944 21st PzD had, at least, 98 Pz IV(lg), 31 self-propelled Pak 40s, 24 Pak 88s, 8 Flak 88s, 48 self-propelled 10.5cm guns, 24 self-propelled 15cm guns and infantry guns, 8 12.2cm guns and 4 K18 10cm guns. There were also 8 self-propelled half track rocket launchers and a company of Nebelwerfers.

              North of Caen on the eve of D-Day were only the two motorised infantry battalions, most of Beckers self-propelled gun battalion and the long range 10cm and 12.2cm guns. The latter being able to bring fire on the beaches and indeed Allied vessels at sea.
              According to Eric Lefévre in Panzers in Normandy, Then and Now the 21st on 6 June had 98 Pz IV of which 6 were older model B and C's (photos of some of these included), 6 Pz III, 23 Souma S-35, 2 Hotchkiss H-39, 43 7.5cm Pak and 10.5cm FH on various ex- French chassis (aka Becker conversions), 45 Lorraine conversions. The division's panzergrenadiers used modified French Souma halftracks.

              Comment


              • #22
                https://www.fireandfury.com/orbats/late21pzd6jun44.pdf
                ‘Tis said his form is tiny, yet
                All human ills he can subdue,
                Or with a bauble or medal
                Can win mans heart for you;
                And many a blessing know to stew
                To make a megloamaniac bright;
                Give honour to the dainty Corse,
                The Pixie is a little shite.

                Comment


                • #23
                  One of the more interesting aspects of naval gunfire support was the USN was using naval aviators flying Spitfire V's in Normandy during the invasion.

                  http://spitfiresite.com/2010/04/spit...e-us-navy.html



                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                    According to Eric Lefévre in Panzers in Normandy, Then and Now the 21st on 6 June had 98 Pz IV of which 6 were older model B and C's (photos of some of these included), 6 Pz III, 23 Souma S-35, 2 Hotchkiss H-39, 43 7.5cm Pak and 10.5cm FH on various ex- French chassis (aka Becker conversions), 45 Lorraine conversions. The division's panzergrenadiers used modified French Souma halftracks.
                    That pretty much conforms to what Niehorster has at his site http://niehorster.org/011_germany/44...iv_pz-021.html

                    Though they might have 'belonged' to the division I doubt any of the obsolescent tanks were south of the Seine on D-Day. Certainly I don't think any evidence has been found for them having fought in the Normandy campaign? More likely they were at the big German tank training ground at Mailly-le-Camp near Paris. Or perhaps at the 21st PzD old area around Rouen.

                    In addition to the PzGr Regiments having seven Pak40s each, the reconnaissance battalion probably had another six Pak40 SPs.

                    So all in all 21st PzD was still a very powerful force, it just gets a bit overlooked because of the complete bollix of it they made on D-Day.

                    Comment


                    • #25


                      The reason they bollixed it up was due to the massive AT firepower of the British. A commonwealth infantry division of June 1944 has 70x57mm and 32x 17 pounders. A US infantry division of the time only has 81x57mm. Each commonwealth division had a full tank brigade attached which is in the order of 210+ tanks each of which 30 to 40 are fireflys. They also had all the crocodiles, avres, crabs and centaurs as well. They also had attached independent AT regiments. US assault divisions were a little different. 1st had 3 tank battalions, 29th had 1 tank battalion and 4th had 1.5 tank, 1 towed AT and 1 SP AT battalions attached. US tank battalions are weaker than commonwealth as they have 51 x 75mm armed M4s and 17x M3s. US AT battalions only have 36 tubes each.

                      FYI numbers taken from Niehorster

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by AdrianE View Post

                        The reason they bollixed it up was due to the massive AT firepower of the British. A commonwealth infantry division of June 1944 has 70x57mm and 32x 17 pounders. A US infantry division of the time only has 81x57mm. Each commonwealth division had a full tank brigade attached which is in the order of 210+ tanks each of which 30 to 40 are fireflys. They also had all the crocodiles, avres, crabs and centaurs as well. They also had attached independent AT regiments. US assault divisions were a little different. 1st had 3 tank battalions, 29th had 1 tank battalion and 4th had 1.5 tank, 1 towed AT and 1 SP AT battalions attached. US tank battalions are weaker than commonwealth as they have 51 x 75mm armed M4s and 17x M3s. US AT battalions only have 36 tubes each.

                        FYI numbers taken from Niehorster

                        Funnily enough the massive AT presence which defeated the main part of the 21st PzD belated attack - were just the six-pounders of a single infantry battalion (KSLI), 1 troop of M10s (20 A-Tk) and two squadrons of Shermans, (Staffordshire Yeomanry).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gooner View Post
                          Funnily enough the massive AT presence which defeated the main part of the 21st PzD belated attack - were just the six-pounders of a single infantry battalion (KSLI), 1 troop of M10s (20 A-Tk) and two squadrons of Shermans, (Staffordshire Yeomanry).
                          Given that a troop is 19 vehicles, the British had somewhere around 40 to 50 tanks and tank destroyers and 6 x 6pounders. They likely had 8 to 10 fireflys.

                          The point is that the commonwealth had so much anti tank firepower that they had enough everywhere. There were no weak spots.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by AdrianE View Post

                            Given that a troop is 19 vehicles, the British had somewhere around 40 to 50 tanks and tank destroyers and 6 x 6pounders. They likely had 8 to 10 fireflys.

                            The point is that the commonwealth had so much anti tank firepower that they had enough everywhere. There were no weak spots.
                            19 per squadron in an armoured regiment of which 6-8 Fireflies, 4 M10s in an anti-tank troop. Kampfgruppe Oppeln, opposing, had about 80 Panzer IVs. So almost a 2-1 superiority.

                            I expect US forces could inflict a similar reverse on 21st PzD. More troublesome for the US would be facing Panthers of 12th SS from 7th June.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X