If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The greatest missions were tactical, not strategic
Take the thousands of tactical missions flown against targets behind the
Normandy beaches to deny the Germans access cutting of re-enforcements. Bridges, railines, marshalling yards. crossroads, ordnance depots, choke points, ammo dumps, fuel dnmps, gasometer farms all destroyed contributing to the success of the D Day landings without which victory would have been impossible. The Martin Marauder B-26's played a vital role in this effort with their extremely accurate low level bombing and highly trained crews working in very tight precision formations.. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"ArtKramr" wrote
Take the thousands of tactical missions flown against targets behind the Normandy beaches to deny the Germans access cutting of re-enforcements. Bridges, railines, marshalling yards. crossroads, ordnance depots, choke points, ammo dumps, fuel dnmps, gasometer farms all destroyed contributing to the success of the D Day landings without which victory would have been impossible. The Martin Marauder B-26's played a vital role in this effort with their extremely accurate low level bombing and highly trained crews working in very tight precision formations.. It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Bob Coe wrote:
It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. Yes and no. Yes, the Strategic Bombing campaign did syphon off resources and men that would have been manning positions at Normandy, but it did not make the Germans short of any equipment or resources. Within a few months of D-Day, the POL shortages would begin, but on D-Day the Germans had plenty of POL. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... Bob Coe wrote: It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. Yes and no. Yes, the Strategic Bombing campaign did syphon off resources and men that would have been manning positions at Normandy, but it did not make the Germans short of any equipment or resources. Within a few months of D-Day, the POL shortages would begin, but on D-Day the Germans had plenty of POL. Yeah, but they did NOT have plenty of fighters stationed forward to use that fuel to deal with the invasion force. They had retained the bulk of their fighter force to protect against the strategic onslaught against Germany, and IIRC by the summer of 1944 they were already suffering the strategic campaign's attrition effects in terms of training of replacement pilots to take the place of those they had lost, a large part of which were lost defending against the 8th AF and RAF BC. Brooks BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Brooks wrote:
Yeah, but they did NOT have plenty of fighters stationed forward to use that fuel to deal with the invasion force. They had retained the bulk of their fighter force to protect against the strategic onslaught against Germany, Absolutely, I used ground air defense assets as an example of syphoned resources, but fighters were just as big a factor. and IIRC by the summer of 1944 they were already suffering the strategic campaign's attrition effects in terms of training of replacement pilots to take the place of those they had lost, a large part of which were lost defending against the 8th AF and RAF BC. Absolutely. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"BUFDRVR" wrote in message ... Brooks wrote: Yeah, but they did NOT have plenty of fighters stationed forward to use that fuel to deal with the invasion force. They had retained the bulk of their fighter force to protect against the strategic onslaught against Germany, Absolutely, I used ground air defense assets as an example of syphoned resources, but fighters were just as big a factor. IIRC, their Wehrmacht units of 1944 *were* understrength in terms of both equipment and manpower--they had been forced to cut the number of sub-units in divisions, Panzer and Panzer-Grenadier divisions did not have near the number of tanks they had in previous years, etc. Given that the German government had been forced to increase production of anti-aircraft armament (and was already resource constrained), and assign many more men to work in AAA units, by '44, I'd posit that the strategic offensive *did* have a definite effect in terms of reducing the available manpower and equipment resources for their ground forces as well. Brooks and IIRC by the summer of 1944 they were already suffering the strategic campaign's attrition effects in terms of training of replacement pilots to take the place of those they had lost, a large part of which were lost defending against the 8th AF and RAF BC. Absolutely. BUFDRVR "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips everyone on Bear Creek" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: The greatest missions were tactical, not strategic
From: (BUFDRVR) Date: 9/1/2004 8:36 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Bob Coe wrote: It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. Yes and no. Yes, the Strategic Bombing campaign did syphon off resources and men that would have been manning positions at Normandy, but it did not make the Germans short of any equipment or resources. Within a few months of D-Day, the POL shortages would begin, but on D-Day the Germans had plenty of POL. BUFDRVR But it was tactical bmbing that cut the Germans off from Normandy. They had plenty, they just couldn't move it forward as we sliced up the roads and rail lines and took out the bridges. Arthur Kramer 344th BG 494th BS England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany Visit my WW II B-26 website at: http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"ArtKramr" wrote in message ... Subject: The greatest missions were tactical, not strategic From: (BUFDRVR) Date: 9/1/2004 8:36 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Bob Coe wrote: It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. Yes and no. Yes, the Strategic Bombing campaign did syphon off resources and men that would have been manning positions at Normandy, but it did not make the Germans short of any equipment or resources. Within a few months of D-Day, the POL shortages would begin, but on D-Day the Germans had plenty of POL. BUFDRVR But it was tactical bmbing that cut the Germans off from Normandy. They had plenty, they just couldn't move it forward as we sliced up the roads and rail lines and took out the bridges. The main reason they couldnt move it forward is der Fuhrer wouldnt let them. On the morning of 6th June the Wehrmacht were desperate to move the armour to Normandy but the high command wouldnt release them without Hitler's authorisation. Those panzers DID get to Normandy and the British army had to fight them around Caen while the US army broke out to the south and west. The bombing helped delay them and inflicted losses but it didnt stop them getting there. Keith ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ... "ArtKramr" wrote in message ... Subject: The greatest missions were tactical, not strategic From: (BUFDRVR) Date: 9/1/2004 8:36 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: Bob Coe wrote: It took years of strategic bombing to even have a Normandy. Yes and no. Yes, the Strategic Bombing campaign did syphon off resources and men that would have been manning positions at Normandy, but it did not make the Germans short of any equipment or resources. Within a few months of D-Day, the POL shortages would begin, but on D-Day the Germans had plenty of POL. BUFDRVR But it was tactical bmbing that cut the Germans off from Normandy. They had plenty, they just couldn't move it forward as we sliced up the roads and rail lines and took out the bridges. The main reason they couldnt move it forward is der Fuhrer wouldnt let them. On the morning of 6th June the Wehrmacht were desperate to move the armour to Normandy but the high command wouldnt release them without Hitler's authorisation. Those panzers DID get to Normandy and the British army had to fight them around Caen while the US army broke out to the south and west. The bombing helped delay them and inflicted losses but it didnt stop them getting there. Keith Half-heartedly following this exchange, it occurs to me that no one person, group, or even army can rightfully take credit for anything other than their own relatively tiny part in the overall picture. If you want to get downright silly about it, nothing that happened in the ETO would have happened if we in the MTO hadn't had Kesselring and his troops tied up in Italy. Those extra Heer troops might have had a decisive influence on the outcome of our invasion efforts. George Z. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Greatest Strategic Air Missions? | Leadfoot | Military Aviation | 66 | September 19th 04 05:09 PM |
Greatest Strategic Air Missions | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 45 | August 31st 04 11:29 PM |
Tactical Air Control Party Airmen Help Ground Forces | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | January 22nd 04 02:20 AM |
French block airlift of British troops to Basra | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 202 | October 24th 03 06:48 PM |
Strategic Command Missions Rely on Space | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 30th 03 09:59 PM |