View Single Post
Old 11-02-2006, 05:18 PM   #29 (permalink)
jimbotosome
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
(angie999 @ Feb 11 2006, 05:44 AM) [post=45627]
Quote:
(Herr Oberst @ Feb 10 2006, 10:44 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.
[/b]
Some of the armour at Omaha was landed by LCT. For instance, in the Easy Green and Dog Red sectors, A Coy, 743rd Tank Battalion, was scheduled to land by LCT at H-hour.
[/b]
Yes, I stated this in post #21 above. The primary problem at Omaha (as I understand it) was the inability to get armor ashore NOT the fact that they didn't have "Funnies". My claim is that on Omaha, had a "Funny" have been unloaded on the beach it would not have been successful because of the direct fire on it and its ability to suppress enemy fire 100s of yards away. I just don’t buy that it was the negligence of not using it that caused so many Omaha casualties.
  Reply With Quote