Normandy Opinions

[Gotthard Heinrici]

Ok, whilst reading Carlo D'Este's decision in Normandy a few Questions came into my head and I wanted to ask the forum's opinions about them.

1. Where the Germans Damned either Way?
One of the great debates about Normandy on the German Side is the type of Defence undertaken by the Germans. I realise that with Hitler compromise was always going to be the tactic but if Rommel had his way would an aggressive attack by the Panzers have jeopardised the operation or would the Panzers have been decimated by Naval and air support off the beaches? Or were the Germans NEVER going to win Normandy due to overwhelming Allied Air Support?

2. Was Pegasus Bridge really that important?
In the book D'este describes a meeting between the Corps Commander Crocker, Division Commander Rennie and the Commander of one of Rennies Brigades, Cunningham of the 9th Brigade. The Brigade's objective was Carpiquet Airfield and then on to Caen - but it was diverted to Pegasus Bridge because Crocker was concerned about his left flank and the Airborne units there? I'm just wondering was this an opportunity missed to get Carpiquet airfield early or was Crocker Correct?

any answers would be gratefully received - And especially Sapper's.

[Tom Houlihan]

I'm not sure about Pegasus Bridge, but I do believe it would have been interesting had Rommel been able to use Panzers up near the beach. I have this dreadful image in my mind of 4-5 Mk IVs rolling down the beach in echelon. I know it couldn't exactly happened like that, but still... I mean, NGFS couldn't have been called in without destroying dozens of troops or more, right? Rather defeats the purpose. With the difficulties the Allies had getting anything heavy ashore, a few Panzers could have raised holy Hell!

[Harry Ree]

The Pegasus Bridge was one of a number of bridges which were identified to be taken or destroyed to protect the bridgehead from a German counter move against the invasion beaches.The Sword, Juno and Gold beaches were as it happened, isolated by sealing passage to German armour crossing the Caen Canal and the River Orne.The River Dives was blocked by taking the bridges across it at Robehomme, Bures and Troan further east.The overall plan of isolating the invasion beaches was delivered and ensured that German armour and reinforcements could only approach the bridgehead from the south. Here they would be subject to the continual buildup of Allied air superiority.

The other important priority for D day was to eliminate the Merville battery which had the capability to interfere with the landings on the eastern invasion beaches.This battery although heavily bombed on D Day -1 was still functioning when No 6 Airbourne dropped in to capture it.

[sapper]

One thing that is not welcome from the media, was that the Sappers had got to Pegasus just before the Commandos. Mind you they enjoyed the Piper!
This is my description of Pegasus, I hope you find it interesting and of value to your questions.
Sapper.

Pegasus Bridge!
Tiger was wrong.

Pegasus Bridge, The bridge that spanned the Orne Canal and River was of vital importance, it was the only link between the Airborne forces and Third British Infantry Division that had landed on "Sword beach" the most important conduit between two separated fighting groups in Normandy. Absolutely vital that tanks would be available to assist the Airborne to repel any Enemy counterattack, without armoured support, they would have been overrun for certain.

When we arrived at the bridge the bodies of the Airborne were still laying about where they had fallen, I can recall how impressed I was by how close to the bridge the gliders of this task force had landed in pressing home their attack. Indeed, one of the gliders was very close to the actual bridge approach on the far, or East bank. I have seen films about D Day, and the scene where they assaulted with gliders was not right! One of those gliders landed much closer to the bridge than in the film! In the early of the invasion, there had been some doubt about the capability of Pegasus bridge to support the weight of tanks, and indeed, whether the bridge might have collapsed under the strain of such heavy loads.

The CRE. Of Third British Infantry Division. Colonel ‘Tiger’ Urquhart. DSO. R.E. (A name he richly deserved) had forbidden tanks to use the bridge in case of its collapse, the argument being that if the bridge were to go, then the supply line into the Airborne areas would be cut, leaving them stranded. Tiger Urquhart was renowned for having his own private war with the Enemy, sometimes to be seen crawling back towards the forward infantry, and legend has it, without his driver and signaler.

Elements of 246 Field Co R.E. because of the danger to the bridge, were drafted in and assisted in rafting and building tidal bridges over the Orne, as a back up to the existing bridge. The Enemy wanted that bridge back, no matter what. To that end, there was a lot of sniping, shell and mortar fire, making the rafting and bridging a very hazardous operation, not helped by Luftwaff pressing home very determined and continuous air raids, carried out at very low level, air attacks that resulted in 17 planes being shot down in the area, mostly by ground fire. (It is claimed)

In one instance during this operation, one of the platoons engaged in the bridging came under such heavy fire that they had to withdraw, 2 platoon took up the challenge and finished the job. The Enemy shell and mortar fire succeeded in holing some of the pontoons, but someone had the foresight to fill them with empty Jerry cans before we left England, this prevented them from foundering completely, and enabled us to replace the damaged pontoons much quicker while still under artillery fire.
One of the bank sites for a "tidal" bridge came under such severe artillery fire that we were forced to move to a different site. To make things even more difficult while we were engaged in the rafting and bridging, we had to break off at times and defend the bridge from direct Enemy attack.
I dug my fox hole on the Western bank and about 40 yards to the South, when watching TV one day, I saw that the bank has trees growing along the bank .so my foxhole can no longer be there! Shame! I have heard how the family from the café close by, took part in helping our men, with great respect and from what I can remember, I never even saw the place, we had little time to pay attention to civilians, let alone café's.

Later, and while the bridges were being constructed, the Germans put in a determined armoured counter attack to drive the Airborne into the sea, those under attack needed tank support desperately, a squadron of tanks arrived at the bridge to give the armoured support, only to find themselves staring across a road over the bridge they could not use. Lieutenant M. Edwards R. E. climbed down under the bridge and investigated the end supports to see if the bridge had "end packing" finding that the Germans had strengthened the bridge, he told the tank commanders that they could cross.

The tank men still not happy about the situation, hesitated, then, when Lt M Edwards R.E. offered to sit on the front of the leading tank, they were convinced, they all drove over, Lt M Edwards sitting on the front of the lead tank! later, the armour returned with their hessian camouflage smoldering, having driven off the counter attack.
During the assault bridging operation sniper fire was a constant menace, one of our R.E units tired of being subjected to small arms fire, broke off the bridging operations, located the whereabouts of a sniper in a church spire, sent out a fighting patrol and got him, much to everyone's satisfaction.
Hope this helps?
Sapper.

[51highland]

Now that's what you can call a Eye witness report.!!!!! Cheers Sapper.

[General Mayhem]

Originally Posted by Gotthard Heinrici

Ok, whilst reading Carlo D'Este's decision in Normandy a few Questions came into my head and I wanted to ask the forum's opinions about them.

1. Where the Germans Damned either Way?
One of the great debates about Normandy on the German Side is the type of Defence undertaken by the Germans. I realise that with Hitler compromise was always going to be the tactic but if Rommel had his way would an aggressive attack by the Panzers have jeopardised the operation or would the Panzers have been decimated by Naval and air support off the beaches? Or were the Germans NEVER going to win Normandy due to overwhelming Allied Air Support?

Hey GH excellent Q's and post as usual,
I enjoyed the book but you bring up a great point. Obviously Carlo does not address the question. Don't know why because he's usually pretty good about critical analysis. Rommel obviously thought he needed the panzers but as far as rolling down to the beaches, not unless they could spill over the cliffs. Who am I to question Rommel, but in war gaming where the Panzers were forward they were anihilated by air and naval fire. Overlord looks far more inevitably successful in retrospect. I think the german's could have beaten the invasion back. But the panzers on the beaches wouldn't have been the key. Had they not fallen for the allies
ruse and had forces waiting inland to counter attack, different outcome.
At least the way I see it. I'd like Sapper's opinion on your first question as well.
Best regard comrade
GM

[T. A. Gardner]

If you want to see what would have happened had Rommel gotten panzers "down to the beach" I suggest reviewing the German operations at one of those often forgotten landings in Italy; Salerno. There, the Germans did just that, to their regret no doubt.
As in Sicily, the Germans quickly found their panzers, Tigers included, were absolutely no match for naval firepower.

[sapper]

Re-reading this question, There is one bit unanswered. Monty strategy in Normandy was masterful, resulting in the wholesale carnage of the Falaise Pocket. I saw it. I did not like it.
Monty's plan was to take on the Panzer's, to keep them away from the American sector, and to destroy them.....It worked wonderfully... resulting in the battle for Normandy being over ten days ahead of the planned schedule.

That plan brilliantly carried out, was simple. A continuous series of attacks....Here there, everywhere...A rolling programme in the British sector.... That had the Panzer's dashing to fill the potential holes that threatened to appear in the defences. That stopped the Enemy from ever gathering a strong Panzer force that could PUNCH through to the coast, The effect was that of what appeared to be Static war...But it was never that....As I know only too well.
It also kept the panzer's away from the Cherbourg area ...To such a degree that the Americans had half a Panzer div to contend with. We had the rest...The plan in my estimation ...was great!
For a start the British and Canadians were far better suited for that task than the Gung HO Americans. One trouble with it was the continuous action for us.... here, there, every bloody where.
But remembering what took place in the final days at Falaise. This ruthless Monty plan came to its fruition......The Carnage......The sights inside that boiling cauldron of death...Will not be forgotten in a hurry by those that were there.

All the paraphernalia of a totally destroyed army, Weapons, tanks, Bodies, some in depth. the complete mangled detritus of the aftermath of Armageddon.
A fire swept scene of utter desolation.
I shall never forget.
Yet we still have Monty detractors...This man was utterly ruthless in the destruction of our enemies.
sapper

[Korps Steiner]

Thanks Brian a Great piece , Monty's strategy for the Battle outlined by someone who had to carry it out at the sharp end.

Unbelieveable that some contempory historians stiil have a pop at Monty !!!

What i've always thought is what would have happened if the landings had been the other way round and the Americans had had the Caen area to deal with ??

Imagine the casualties if the likes of the " Gung Ho "Patton had had to take on the Panzers in the Eastern area of the Front ?? As you say the British and Canadians were much better suited and commanded to carry out this job.

As for the Pegasus Bridge area without the Airborne Bridgehead in place the German Armour held in reserve in the Pas de Calais could have arrived , hit the allies in the flank and rolled up the whole invasion front so it was a very vital area to the overall plan and it is of great credit to Brian and his comrades and the boys of 6th Airborne that it was held and even extended eastwards.

regards

Paul

[Gotthard Heinrici]

Originally Posted by Korps Steiner

Thanks Brian a Great piece , Monty's strategy for the Battle outlined by someone who had to carry it out at the sharp end.

Unbelieveable that some contempory historians stiil have a pop at Monty !!!

What i've always thought is what would have happened if the landings had been the other way round and the Americans had had the Caen area to deal with ??

Imagine the casualties if the likes of the " Gung Ho "Patton had had to take on the Panzers in the Eastern area of the Front ?? As you say the British and Canadians were much better suited and commanded to carry out this job.

As for the Pegasus Bridge area without the Airborne Bridgehead in place the German Armour held in reserve in the Pas de Calais could have arrived , hit the allies in the flank and rolled up the whole invasion front so it was a very vital area to the overall plan and it is of great credit to Brian and his comrades and the boys of 6th Airborne that it was held and even extended eastwards.

regards

Paul

Paul I do agree with you that it was some achievement that Brian and his comrades took and held the area against determined attacks. Whilst I am no lover of Patton I do believe that the Americans were extremely capable troops who showed in places like the Huertgen Forest and the Ardennes that they were able to take whatever the Germans could throw at them.I have no doubt that they would be well able to "hold the line" in the east as well. But that is not to take away from the extremely difficult position facing the British and Commonwealth forces in front of Caen. To me this was Monty's finest hour.