Why was Omaha beach so much harder than all the rest? Was it just chance and more german soldiers were there at the time, or were there other reasons.
One reason waas that the allied air force missed bombing Omaha Beach and insted dropped their bombs well in land away from the defenses.
All the beaches were much harder than when they were chosen by the COSSAC team in 1943, because once Rommel took command of Army Group B he directed a lot of effort into strengthening beach defences. This was not done equally everywhere, because in any given sector there were only so many suitable beaches. Omaha Beach itself was only marginally suitable and I don't think it would have been chosen except as the right flank of the Caen sector. It fell to the Americans and not the British simply because of the way the two armies were located in Britain (Americans mainly on the western side of the country) and the need once the bridgeheads were established to resupply the American army with ships arriving direct from the US. It was not desirable to have either invasion forces or shipping crossing paths. There were two difficulties at Omaha which did not apply elsewhere: 1. The beach itself forms a gently curved bay, slightly banana shaped, meaning that German weapons could lay down enfillading fire along the entire length of the beach from positions offset from the sea and difficult targets as a result (at least one of the surviving concrete fortifications is invisible from the sea, yet has embrassures looking along miles of beach). 2. Overlooking the beach there are bluffs up to 170 ft high and the only exits are a series of draws, only two of which, heavily barricaded, were suitable for tanks. This meant that unless the Americans could force the exits quickly, they were in a German killing zone. Also, the disposition of the German forces was different at Omaha than elsewhere. The Caen sector, including Omaha, was in the sector covered by the German 716th Division, a static coastal defence division of generally poor quality. The nearest reserves covering the British beaches, 21st Panzer Division, were some miles back. At Omaha beach, however, the German 352nd Infantry Division, a good quality field division, had been moved close to the beach and was in a position to directly intervene when the landing were taking place. In the Mediterranean landings, such as during Operation Torch (North Africa) and Operation Husky (Sicily), British practice had been followed of landing in darkness to achieve tactical surprise. This meant that there was limited scope for preparatory bombardment. In the Pacific, where generally the Americans were invading islands which had no hope of reinforcement, the practice was to sacrifice surprise in favour of increasingly extended bombardment. For Neptune, the landing phase of Overlord, a hybrid doctrine was used, a partical sacrifice of tactical, but not operational, surprise to allow a short bombarment in the hour or so after dawn (a little longer could be taken in the British sector where landings were an hour later due to tide/beach features). A Omaha the bombardment failed to inflict sufficient damage. The main reason was the failure of the bombing by the US 8th Airforce, the main American stategic bomber force, which bombed the invasion beaches that morning. RAF Bomber Command had bombed ten specific battery positions the night before and not the actual beaches. The American bombers dropped thousands upon thousands of 100lb fragmentation bombs, designed to destroy wire obstacles, trenches, etc. and produce small craters to provide cover for the invading troops. Large bombs would have produced large craters which would have been obstacles for vehicles. As the landing craft were already coming in when they bombed, they were under strict orders not to bomb short. However, the sky was overcast, they couldn't see the beaches and their H2X radar failed to give a clear enough target picture, so the bombing was up to 3 miles inland. This was not their fault, it was simply beyond their capability. They had had no special training for D-day and they were not trained as a tactical bombing force. It did mean though that a major part of the planned beach bombarment did not happen. This was more crucial at Omaha than elsewhere, as the defences were stronger. Also, the naval gunfire available was insufficient for the time allowed and the rocket ships in the main fired short. For instance, there was only one battelship off Omaha, compared with two at more lightly defended Utah. Naval gunfire, magnificent though it was, was generally insufficient for the task on D-day. Finally, almost all the American Sherman DD amphibious tanks, launched 6000 yards offshore, sank at Omaha in the rough conditions and the Americans did not employ the specialist British armour designed to deal with beach obstacles, which had to be attempted by engineers exposed to murderous fire. Once all this had happened, the infantry, landing without support or adequate preparation, were slaughtered. The plan had gone badly wrong. The day was saved by improvisation and the initiative of a handful of outstanding leaders, such as Brig Gen Norman Cota, deputy commander of the US 29th Infantry Division and the senior officer on the beach. The survivors of the assaults from the US 1st and 29th Infantry Divisions, supported by members of the 2nd and 5th Rangers, infiltrated up the bluffs to take the German positions in flank and rear and by evening they had secured positions on the high ground. It was a precarious foothold, but fortunately the Germans could not mount a powerful counter-attack that night. "Saving Private Ryan" gives the impression that the beach was cleared in about 20 minutes. In reality, it took from 6.30 am to sunset for the Americans to secure their positions above the beach. Omaha Beach was a disaster and nearly a failure, but this takes nothing away from the bravery and tenacity of the American who overcame adversity and won in the end.
The exact losses on Ohama have never been established, apparently, but are estimated at about 2,200 for the entire day, the 1st & 29th accounting for 1,900 of those. Some companies were decimated while others came off the beach with barely a scratch. While the collective memory of Omaha is one of bloody slaughter, the level of casualties were hardly singular. There was plenty of dying to be had both before, afterwards and elsewhere, and one might argue that Omaha hass somewhat hijacked other, bloodier fights.
The German defenses were also well-sited for crossfire, which caught American troops extremely well. A key reason why the Germans did not hold: 352nd Infantry Division had everything in "the front window." It had no mobile reserve to counterattack. If they had been able to do so, they might have driven the Americans into the sea. Peter Tsouras makes that suggestion in his book, "Disaster at D-Day," in which Rommel's wife has a big headache, so Erwin heads up to Normandy to look around on June 5 instead of to Herrlingen. While there, he decides to move the 12th SS Panzer Division forward during the night of June 5/6, and when the Americans land on Omaha, they meet the fanatical SS men and their armored vehicles. The rest, as they say, is "alternate history."
But, another reason that the Americans got off relatively easy at the beaches is because that the Führer had taken sleeping pills the previous night. He did not want to be woken up and no one dared to give the order to move the tanks without consulting Hitler first. This was a major blunder which save the live of countless, and made the operation a sucess.
Originally posted by =SWM= Capt. FG@Aug 31 2004, 12:45 AM But, another reason that the Americans got off relatively easy at the beaches is because that the Führer had taken sleeping pills the previous night. He did not want to be woken up and no one dared to give the order to move the tanks without consulting Hitler first. This was a major blunder which save the live of countless, and made the operation a sucess. [post=27878]Quoted post[/post] Yes, I agree. This was a big factor and it goes right back to the command structure. Army Group B had a degree of tactical control of 21st Panzer, but panzer forces as a whole came under Panzer Group West, which was directly under OKW control, which is why they needed authority to be released. And with Hitler asleep, Keitel would not make this decision. Not only that, but the commander of Panzer Group West disagreed with the idea of forward deployment in favour of a more "classical" panzer battle inland.
Thanks alot. Do you think the allies could have secured Normandy as fast without taking Omaha- With a narrower corridor for supplies and one that was split down the middle?
Thanks alot. Do you think the allies could have secured Normandy as fast without taking Omaha- With a narrower corridor for supplies and one that was split down the middle? I suppose the answer to that is; the allies would have put in massive resources to to take the sector from the land rather than the sea. However, given the precarious supply situation then if the germans had put up a good fight then .............
I feel that Omaha was critical. Without that beach secured, the Allied offensive would be split in two and liable to be destroyed piecemeal.
May I (Without prejudice) offer this, as a main reason why they suffered so badly on Omaha? Despite the losses of the DD tanks they needed, there were two vital elements missing from the American landings. The first, but in my opinion, not the most important, was the refusal of the Americans to make use of “Hobarts Funnies” to assist the landings. But, what I think was of the greatest importance was the lack of “highly specialised Sapper teams” tasked with the vitally important job of removing anything that stood in the way….. No matter who, or what… and also to provide a mine free passage off the beach to the lateral road that ran parallel with the beach. The reason why so many young Americans were killed, it seems to me, was this lack of small, but highly trained assault teams. That element was missing. For in the end they forced a way off the beach, but not before a massacre had taken place….With those teams it would have been the initial task, no matter what, to open up the Enemy defences. It has often been said that Sword Beach was easy…That is just not so. I can provide all the proof that is needed for that statement. Sapper.. A member of the Royal Engineers Company that provided the three assault teams that opened up the path from the beach to the road beyond, on “Sword” Queen Red, and Queen White, sectors without letting anyone get in the way. I am not trying in any way to belittle my American friends, for I fought alongside them. And I might add, Factual History in the cold hard light of day, is so often, completely different from the Hollywood versions, for they tend to cloud what actually occured. Sapper
Originally posted by sapper@Nov 9 2004, 03:38 PM May I (Without prejudice) offer this, as a main reason why they suffered so badly on Omaha? Despite the losses of the DD tanks they needed, there were two vital elements missing from the American landings. The first, but in my opinion, not the most important, was the refusal of the Americans to make use of “Hobarts Funnies” to assist the landings. But, what I think was of the greatest importance was the lack of “highly specialised Sapper teams” tasked with the vitally important job of removing anything that stood in the way….. No matter who, or what… and also to provide a mine free passage off the beach to the lateral road that ran parallel with the beach. The reason why so many young Americans were killed, it seems to me, was this lack of small, but highly trained assault teams. That element was missing. For in the end they forced a way off the beach, but not before a massacre had taken place….With those teams it would have been the initial task, no matter what, to open up the Enemy defences. It has often been said that Sword Beach was easy…That is just not so. I can provide all the proof that is needed for that statement. Sapper.. A member of the Royal Engineers Company that provided the three assault teams that opened up the path from the beach to the road beyond, on “Sword” Queen Red, and Queen White, sectors without letting anyone get in the way. I am not trying in any way to belittle my American friends, for I fought alongside them. And I might add, Factual History in the cold hard light of day, is so often, completely different from the Hollywood versions, for they tend to cloud what actually occured. Sapper [post=29309]Quoted post[/post] I agree completely with the funnies part. The Americans were almost as bad as the french- stuck in a rut and refusing to use any thing new. They were lucky to have accepted the landing craft> I have to admit that I was always under the impression that the Americans got the harder beaches. Thanks for the clarification Dp
What is so often forgotten, when friends write in giving their opinons on various operations, and indeed, battles. Is their total inability to understand the atmosphere pf war in which these operations take place. It really is a matter of; you have to experience the battle or what is taking place "At that time" No author, writer, or comentator, can ever really know that what he is writing about has anything but the very faintest tenuous thread with actuallity. That is why, for many years, I have written about those times, and at the same time, to ensure that the memory of my fallen friends will not be forgotten. I am sometimes quite staggered at the innuendo that passes for fact. Or the reshaping of history, so that the real events fade into the background to be superceded by Authors, or Hollywood versions. The Veterans find what certain Authors have wriiten, as absolute nonesense, some times with whole divisions lost! and units put in places where in truth they never got within miles of the area in question. Most of us feel we are fighting a losing battle, a battle lost to some author sitting in a cosy chair writing about something they know absolutely nothing about, and in the process fulfill thei predujices. Sapper
Sapper, I know how you feel. Some guy in an armchair, sipping his bourbon, watching a documentary on TV, becomes an instant expert on what you lived through after watching 20 minutes of said documentary. Walter Lord said it best in his book on the Titanic, "After the sinking, the bronzed men of the sea were replaced by a pallid cast cast of journalists, investigators, and ultimately, historians."
Right! I do like that Kiwiwriter! We old fellows are quite amazed at what we read at times. some of it is quite frankly incredulous. Canadians landing first on Sword Beach, Wrong! No mention of Third British Infantry, did not exist! In fact some of it is so garbled that it seems the book should be referred to the trading standards as being fraudulent. Cheers
Just remember that I'm part of that "pallid cast." At the same time, as a writer, as I've said in another thread here, I bust my butt to put out a piece of work, and get an answering snottygram from a reader outraged that I haven't written the book he wanted to read. Well, I'm not a psychic...if you can do it better, do it.
Ah! There's the rub....That just proves what I have said...So many authors have tp write what their readers want to read. Sapper
