Heavy Bombers In Normandy

[ham and jam]

From my reading of that post Brian I think jimbotosome has got a few battles mixed up in one. Seems to me a mixture of 21st PZ divs attack on D-day and Goodwood with Cobra thrown in, also the 21st were not SS.

The second time I read it, it was'nt funny because this guy thinks this is what happened

Andy

[angie999]

Apart from the pre-invasion bombing campaign, the first use of strategic bombers was on D-day itself.

During the night of 5/6 June, RAF Bomber Command had the task of bombing a number of German gun positions. As far as I can determine, there was nothing wrong with their aim in terms of the accepted level of accuracy, but I am not convinced that they put many German guns out of action.

Next, on the morning of 6 June, the 8th USAAF, the American strategic bomber force, was tasked with bombing the German forward positions just as the Americans were on their way in to the beaches. My reading suggests that their mission included the British beaches, but you see little about this in most accounts. What is certain is that the US V Corps at Omaha Beach saw this as a key element of the bombardment plan.

The idea was that they would drop a large number of small HE bombs to ensure maximum damage to German positions, while avoiding extensive cratering. However, they received no special training for this tactical mission at all and right up to the day before, they had been engaged on other missions. They only had their "D-day stripes" marking painted on during that night.

In the event, they encountered heavy cloud cover, could not see their targets and bombed by H2X radar, which did not give a very clear picture of the target. Afraid of bombing short and hitting the landing craft coming in, they overflew their targets and bombed too far inland. This bombing was a total failure and it is one of several reasons for what happened at Omaha.

However, 8th USAAF does not deserve too much criticism. They did their best to carry out a tactical operation which they were neither trained nor equipped for. They had no margin for error, but no means of ensuring accuracy in less than optimum conditions.

Perhaps we have become too used in recent conflicts to expecting levels of bombing accuracy which were simply not achievable in WWII, particularly by strategic forces when taken away from their primary role.

I think the same logic applies to the short bombings during Operation Cobra. The USAAF was bad at communicating the expected difficulties to the ground force commanders, who therefore had expectations that there would be unachievable levels of accuracy. Contrary to their boasts, the 8th AAF really could not hit a "pickle barrel" from 10,000 feet.

[sapper]

removed

[spidge]

Originally posted by sapper@Sep 5 2005, 11:28 PM
jimbo version is completely wrong in every detail....bar none!
Sapper

Quoted post

Jimbo seems to have read a good number of reports/histories on many things. It is sad if such an important day can be bastardised by "historians" to such an extent.

Jimbo may be able to put a finger on some of the culprits (authors etc) so their version of events can be openly refuted.

[jimbotosome]

Originally posted by sapper+Sep 4 2005, 02:42 PM-->

If that's true, then most of what we "know" about WWII is dubious. But I guess debates about WWII have been going on since 1939.

<!--QuoteBegin-sapper@Sep 4 2005, 02:42 PM
Not a word of truth in what you say. The Caen raid was entirely made by British bombers, Lancasters mostly. I never saw any others, but Lancasters. And they came in quite low, I recall cheering at the time, not realising that we were killing only innocent French folk.

Not an Us Eighth airforce plane anywhere. beleive me! They had nothing to do with this operation or this theatre of war. As to your SS panzer Division laying in wait in Caen? never existed mate, believe me!

Ouch! You are too harsh, sapper. Too harsh (though your little British idioms tickle me!).


The other oft repeated comment is that the bombers did little to help the capture of the city and may have hindered the advance of British and Canadian troops by blocking streets with rubble. Of course it also helped persuade Field Marshal Erwin Rommel that there was no possibility of reinforcing the 12th SS Panzer Division that was being ground into little pieces by the Allied assault. What mattered most to Montgomery and Harris is that for over an hour bombers had identified and hit a 1,000-yard-wide rectangle with virtually no spill over. They concluded that bomber crews who were well briefed could provide accurate close support.
Source: Legion magazine, not Jimbo’s imagination. http://www.legionmagazine.com/features/can...story/98-11.asp.

I don’t doubt that you were on the ground sapper (BTW: thanks for what you did buddy, we owe you a lot). But, I find that most of the time, on the ground, soldiers had very little tactical understanding and even less strategic understanding. They were told to take objectives without really knowing the importance of them. That was the role of the high command. I don’t remember if Bradley comments on the Caen bombing in his book or not. He didn’t say as much about Monty’s war. I do know (from his book) that he and Patton were both very pissed at Monty for not closing the Falaise gap fast enough when Von Kluge was trapped and this let about 40,000 troops escape (40%). Patton wanted to close the gap for Monty using Gen Haislip's XV corp, but since it was Monty’s territory and Monty had boasted he would close it, they had to stop and form a line on the road along the demarcation point in order to prevent an overlap that could have resulted in accidental targeting of each other. It took Monty too long to close the gap and this infuriated Patton who believed that Monty was “too conservative”. Patton’s philosophy was to never give the enemy a chance to escape nor a chance to dig in, you will incur more casualties if you do. Again, those are his words, not mine, save your mortar round sapper.

I might not have all the i's dotted going from memory, but the gist of what I remembered is true, which was the point of the original question. I mistook Bomber Command for the Eighth. Is that such a major deal that every word I said was wrong? You wouldn’t be exaggerating here would you sapper? After all, you said it wasn’t to stop an advance of Panzers. It was. After all, what do you think Rommel was going to reinforce the decimated 12 SS Panzer with? If there were no Panzers Groups on the road to Caen as you infer, then why would that have been a consideration for Rommel? You can't reinforce a decimated Armor division with infantry alone. I think my point stands here. You may say it was not a correct conclusion having the benefit of hindsight, but you can't say that wasn't the intent of the strategists and that was what I had claimed. Read the article. Maybe on the ground you didn’t realize why it had been done. But if it had not have been done there is always a possibility you wouldn’t have be here today to slam me.

The two main points, the crux of my post, seem to be supported by the article link I posted. 1) (At least one of the reasons) Caen was bombed was the intention to stop panzers from advancing through the city and reenforce 12th SS. 2) Eisenhower became reluctant to use heavies because ground losses (though minimal) were intolerable.

To say the Eighth Air Force didn’t bomb in the ETO is ridiculous. I am amazed you would dare say something like that. Shame on you Sapper. Very few would have made such a brash statement. Maybe you resented the Americans but they did have an impact on WWII. Eighth was no exception. Go read the story of operations like Saint Lo (COBRA), read about the D-Day preparations, I know Doolittle mentions several missions called for in the Saint Lo time frame. You might be surprised to find that Eighth had a lot of activity not only in the ETO but also in Normandy campaign supporting the ground troops. Heck, they even made several missions to drop supplies at 200 feet to reinforce the FFI from B-17s! Friend, that’s low for a B-17.

Let’s see, not a word of truth, then this means (as you infer) that the bombing of Saint Lo didn’t result in 300+ American casualties on the ground. Where do you get these "facts"? Then could I to assume you also don't believe that “Totalize” did happened and that it did not cost the Canadian and Polish 400+ causalities either?

My claim of the Eisenhower's reluctance to use heavies in tactical roles came from General James Doolittle’s book. He was there too, and though I know you have forgotten more about what was happening in the ground than I will ever know, I think Doolittle knows more about what Eighth Air Force did and what they feelings were on using heavies than anyone. He said that even though 90% accuracy of the bombing of Saint Lo (the Eighth mission you said didn’t happen) was successful, Eisenhower had decided that it was just too risky and that bombing using strategic (Eighth Air Force) bombers would be reserved for emergencies. I have to take him at his word. What other source do I have? Am I to doubt them all?

Also sapper, you said that there were no Panzers that had intended to go through the city. If that’s true why didn’t you guys simply waltz into Caen and the idea of a bombing of Caen never even entertained? I remember reading in Bradley’s book that he was deeply concerned with the trouble Monty was having in Caen and if Monty had been thrown back, that his assault on Cherbourg could have turned into a disaster. Therefore, if Monty had “detoothed” all the Panzers, then why did it take so long for Caen to fall and why was a bombardment required (or believed by higher command that it was required) to “break up the stalemate”? I am almost certain, the documentary I watched on this invasion stopped the reinforcements from attacking you guys because had interviews with group leaders that were distressed that they had to go around the city since the debris had filled the streets from the bombing. I remember they interviewed Panther crews that were astonished that their tanks were so easily destroyed by fighter/bombers when they tried to go around the city. Is it possible, you don’t know of these because they were destroyed before you folks got there or maybe they were indeed on the outskirts of Caen destroyed where they would have been redirected? Do you know of another city in the area where this happened besides Caen? It has been over a year since I saw the documentary. I have to believe it was Caen. What other city was Monty in a stalemate that would have necessitated a bombing so close to your front lines?

Anyway sapper, I am glad there are people like you here to tell a story that we could never tell and who have insight to straighten us out when we do get off the beaten path of facts. But a little more tact wouldn't hurt would it?

jimbo

[sapper]

removed

[morse1001]

the raid on Caen by aircraft of bomber command was made at the behest of Monty and was designed to prepare the way for the capture of the city

[ham and jam]

A few points, the link and article is ok but its your interpretation of it I see wrong Jimbo.

[[quote]]There was actually a tactical reason for bombing Caan with the heavies. It saved Monty and the gang and possibly the entire invasion. There was an SS Panzer division sent to repel the Allies back into the sea. Had they have caught the forces on the beach and in the assembly areas, they would have decimated them.[/[quote]]

Where in the article does it say or suggest that the bombing of Caen saved Monty 'and the gang'? This SS division im assuming is the 12th SS as is mentioned in the bit you quoted above. When they were put into line with the idea of driving the British and Canadians back into the sea, they were not bombed by the heavies, they were attacked by fighter bombers using 'cab ranks' nothing to do with 'heavies'. There was no chance anyway that they could of thrown them back into the sea by the time the 21st and 12th SS were ready to attack, we had built up sufficient forces to repel their attack. As it happen's when Meyers attack went in the Canadians were also attacking and so this 'dangerous drive was stopped'.

[[quote]]Recon spotted this massive counterassault, and seeing this, Eisenhower ordered Caan to be leveled by the Eighth Air Force to stop it. [/[quote]]

Where does it say that in the article, and if it does not where did you get this from?
Besides, Montgomery was in charge of ground forces, yours and ours and I cant see it would have been Ike who ordered it. Ive never read Ike ordering Caen to be levelled. But please correct me if you have the evidence.

[[quote]]Without the bombing of Caan, the invasion with at least the British and Canadian forces would have failed[/[quote]]

I think I must be missing something as I did not get that from the article Jimbo, or is that your view?

[[quote]]He didn’t say as much about Monty’s war. I do know (from his book) that he and Patton were both very pissed at Monty for not closing the Falaise gap fast enough when Von Kluge was trapped and this let about 40,000 troops escape (40%). Patton wanted to close the gap for Monty using Gen Haislip's XV corp, but since it was Monty’s territory and Monty had boasted he would close it, they had to stop and form a line on the road along the demarcation point in order to prevent an overlap that could have resulted in accidental targeting of each other.[/[quote]]

Actually Monty had NOTHING to do with Patton being stopped, it was Bradley who ordered Patton to halt, but as usual Monty gets the blame.

Monty wanted to approach Falaise and trap the Germans with a long hook to the Seine, Bradley wanted to go short and close at Argentan. Ike went with Bradley's idea and Monty had to agree.

From "The battle for Normandy" by Eversly Belfield and H Essame
[[quote]]The final stage of the campaign can be said to date from 13th august, when Patton's forces, driving North to close the Falaise pocket, was halted by German opposistion just South of Agentan, about 15 miles from Falaise, and thus less than 25 miles seperated the armies. As Pattons troops were prepapring to continue North towards falaise, Bradley forbade them to go on. Though this decision was taken with Eisenhowers agreement (he was with Bradley when the order was issued) Montgomery apparently was not consulted. Patton naturally flared up at this restriction. He wrongly blamed Montgomery for this delay and characteristically asserted that if allowed to "go on to falaise well drive the British back to the sea for another Dunkirk".

The halting of Pattons army at Argentan was one of the most momentus and controversial decisions of the war and the reasons for making it have been the subject of much discussion[/[quote]]

Yep it was the old limey farts fault as usual.


[[quote]]The two main points, the crux of my post, seem to be supported by the article link I posted. 1) (At least one of the reasons) Caen was bombed was the intention to stop panzers from advancing through the city and reenforce 12th SS. 2) Eisenhower became reluctant to use heavies because ground losses (though minimal) were intolerable. [/[quote]]

I disagree, what the article says to me is that the bombing made Rommel think twice about reinforcing the 12th SS not the damage they caused them, where does it say that the bombing blocked or stopped 12SS from using the city of Caen? Also the 12th SS Hitler Jugend were fighting the Canadians at Carpiquet, do you know wher abouts this airfield is on a map? not inside the city but outside to the West, 12th SS could be reinforced by other roads. What stopped Rommel was that the 12th SS who were dug in round the airfield were being wiped out, by heavies, fighter bombers, naval artillery and field artillery.

[[quote]]To say the Eighth Air Force didn’t bomb in the ETO is ridiculous[/[quote]]

Dont think Brian said that, just in certain operations, the only time I recall the US bombing in our sector was before Goodwood kicked off and they used HE so as not to crater, but then again they missed the target anyway.

Brian said

[[quote]]The Caen raid was entirely made by British bombers, Lancasters mostly. I never saw any others, but Lancasters[/[quote]]

Where does he say the 8th never bombed in the ETO? if you read a bit further down, Brian mentions the US bombing during Goodwood

[[quote]]Let’s see, not a word of truth, then this means (as you infer) that the bombing of Saint Lo didn’t result in 300+ American casualties on the ground. Where do you get these "facts"? Then could I to assume you also don't believe that “Totalize” did happened and that it did not cost the Canadian and Polish 400+ causalities either? [/[quote]]

Sounds like telly tubby land to me, whats one of them called? LaLa

You forgot to add the big British element involved in Totalize, try reading a Ken Tout's book.


Your going on about what 8th airforce did and didnt do, who is disputing it? certainly not Brian

[[quote]]Also sapper, you said that there were no Panzers that had intended to go through the city. If that’s true why didn’t you guys simply waltz into Caen [/[quote]]

Have you never heard of flanks? both flanks were strongly held by formidable strong points. This statement shows me how unread you are on the battle for Caen, and that you have fallen hook line stinker for all the Hollywood rubbish out there.

[[quote]]I remember reading in Bradley’s book that he was deeply concerned with the trouble Monty was having in Caen and if Monty had been thrown back, that his assault on Cherbourg could have turned into a disaster.[/[quote]]

Funny I had read that Bradley was totally aware of what Monty was doing at Caen and he had his full support. But oh yea perhaps your reading the Bradley book that was wrote after his death and not the one where he couldnt write what he wanted because of diplomatic unity

[[quote]]Therefore, if Monty had “detoothed” all the Panzers, then why did it take so long for Caen to fall and [/[quote]]

Theres no if, 2nd army did have 90% of the Panzers, question for you, why did Bradley take so long in breaking out? when he hardly had any armour or 88's to face?

[[quote]]why was a bombardment required (or believed by higher command that it was required) to “break up the stalemate”[/[quote]]

Where does it say it was needed? certainly not in the article, no single bombardment had the slightest difference on the outcome of the Normandy campaign

[[quote]]Is it possible, you don’t know of these because they were destroyed before you folks got there or maybe they were indeed on the outskirts of Caen destroyed where they would have been redirected?[/[quote]]

thats just laughable, so 2nd army saw no tanks because they were all destroyed en route to the front?

You have proved mine and Brian's point very well, thank you.


Andy

[sapper]

removed

[sapper]

removed