Quote:
(Herr Oberst @ Feb 10 2006, 05:44 PM) [post=45584]Jim, I think we dropped our DD tanks too far out and they sunk in the swells. That's why there wasn't any armour at Omaha to support the initial landings.
Thanks for bringing up the funnies Sapper.
I think the crocodile would have been particularly effective.
I remember hearing that the US commanders kid of hurumphed at the funnies. They were highly effective for the British...oops we should have used them. They would be vulnerable to heavy AT fire...but would have overall made the op more effective.
[/b]
|
Agreed on the DDs. But what does that have to do with missing an opportunity? We had LCTs too. Most of them got caught up on the underwater obsticles of morning invasion. Shermans could have defended themselves. An M7 could have but artillery rounds straight through the openings of the fortresses without even being completely on the beach. Roll up a small number of M7s off of the LCTs and the Germans would have fled the bunkers even before the infantry got there. Then you can remove all the obsticles you want without having your engineers shot at. Funnies can't do any of that. I fail to see it's utility. Even if it had utility that something else wouldn't it was a one trick pony. But blaming losses at Omaha on not having Funnies is beyond the frey.
If I had the chance to be in one or the other, I would rather have something that could defend itself and supress the enemies fire. Removing anti-tank obsticles is just not that big of a deal. We did it just fine with engineers so why waste money on a piece of equipment that doesn't buy you anything and stands a good chance of becoming a tank block that even the engineers couldn't remove? Just my personal opinion. I would have preferred a formation of B-17s to clear the beach in one fell swoop. That was the US plan, the engineers were a backup if the weather didn't hold.