Here we all will discuss the Airborne units of WW2. Not only the Americanones but all the Axis and Allied ones too. Post away.
Please add images if you have them thanks
Wouldnt it be better to call this OP MARKET-GARDEN?
“Did Operation Market Garden do as well as it was planned?”
Have you been sniffing solvents ?
I would say operation market garden was a failure.
Well One thing Im not sniffing solvents. Can’t afford it. No its about airborne units of WW2.
It seems Hiddenrug has passed the glue to PSB!!! :twisted:
Market Garden was not a failure. It was three seperate drops/ops of which only Arnhem was not taken. XXX Corps managed to move forward 100s of miles forward, and secured the important bridges.
Why, in your opionion, was it a failure?
Is that question directed atr me becuase i never said it was a failure.
operation market garden was a failure. Entire british first airborne destroyed, along with much of the headquarters elements. 10,000 men lost.
The US 101st and 82nd airborne suffered heavy losses, losing around 3,000 men each.
the german forces merely got scratched.
Question to PSB, hiddenrug.
If you look at it like that, hosenfeld, but bridges were taken and XXX corps advanced significantly forward.
I believe it was a failure as the goal of the Operation was to advance into the North German plain and win the war by Xmas!
The resources would have been better used either further south or clearing Antwerp properly. However, hindsight is great eh! At the time I suppose it seemed worth the risk to Eisenhower.
I have to go with failure. But here is the wikipedia info so make the call your self.
Some really good pics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden#Conclusions
A couple of thousand troops died, and they succeeded in capturing several bridges, and advancing. Around somewhere in 17,000-18000 or more troops died, ( this includes the american troops and british troops that died, and several hundred MIA). This means it was a failure.
PLT.SGT.BAKER wrote:
A couple of thousand troops died, and they succeeded in capturing several bridges, and advancing. Around somewhere in 17,000-18000 or more troops died, ( this includes the american troops and british troops that died, and several hundred MIA). This means it was a failure.
You do know a lot more men than that died throughout the war?
That is what happens in war, men die. Bridges and towns are taken.
The story of it all being over by christmas, is that really the actual objective? Or wishful thinking that has since become reality?
I know it appears in the start of the film “a bridge too far” but I doubt very much Monty rocked up to an O group one day and said…
“Mission: to finish the war by Christmas. Mission: to finish the war by Christmas.”
He would have been laughed out of the room.
The two main objectives of Market Garden, as far as I am aware were…
- Cross the Rhine (a river that is wide and has few crossing points - forced bridgeheads are a right pain, I believe).
and
- Capture, or at least neutralize, the German industrial heart, the Ruhr Valley.
This was basically an op to open up a hole for large armoured
formations (spearheaded by XXX Corps) to get into, and carry out maneuver warfare, North German Plain. Admittedly this was never achieved.
One of the problems that the whole invading force, from one side to another, consisting of American, British and Canadian Divsions and Corps was that they were getting bogged down, the Germans were no longer running and actually beginning to dig in.
Stores were not coming forward in adequate quantities because Antwerp wasn’t taken, and they were too far away from the beachheads for the Mulberry harbours, etc to land and transport sufficient supplies.
As an added problem, the whole forces’ reserve was centred upon a large airborne formation. These men could have been brought forward to fight as conventional infantry (they could have been dropped / landed behind the armoured lines to bolster a particular front), however, even with armoured support they would still have suffered a lack of organic heavy weapons and transport.
Therfore, this was why ‘market garden’ was planned as it was - a huge airborne force dropped at key possitions to allow xxx corps to punch a narrow corridor into the industrialised Ruhr.
Also bear in mind with regards to casualties, airborne opperations inherently attract higher casualty rates; due to the nature of insertion. Parachute units are generally bigger than (eg) armoured units; to compensate for these increased casualty rates, and of course the lack of transport.
The reason for an Airbourne (over the horizon (in modern parlance) reserve, I can only surmise, was that it could have been deployed at short notice either to a flank or to reinforce a flagging middle formation. Or to land in the enemies rear to allow rapid advance of the armour.
Which is pretty much the role of airbourne forces anyway.
It would have been much harder to move such a reserve quickly if they were armoured/mechanised or even non-airbourne. (even if they were on the continent!!!)
Sorry 1 Thousand yard stare. I think, if that is in reply to me, that you got my resources point wrong.
The resources I meant was the fuel and ammo that for the reasons you state above were just not available to everybody.
As I said Ike decided it was worth the risk. But in the cold light of reflection it may have been a better idea to use the fuel and ammo and men (not airborne) to clear Antwerp and the Scheld. This was only slowly and painfully done ater M-G and in my opinion one of the forgotten hard battles of WW2.
Or possibly allocate this resource further South and let Patton try and punch through.
I believe that the whole Op was bourne out of frustration after the rapid advance of the previous 2 months stopped.
Not at all. I was just stating that the supplies were hard to bring up.
I can see what you mean about the sudden slow down of advance. But also when you get 'em on the run, it is often a good idea to keep 'em there!!!
Whilst they are moving back, they are always leaving kit behind, never have time to fix kit, never have time to sort their kit out and amongst other things are on a bit of downer because they are going backwards!!!
I believe there were a number of thoughts discussed. I think something like 20 plans were discarded prior to Op Market-Garden. Which did indeed include the taking of Antwerp and an advance by Patton (I think).
Yes, I think that the supply situation really frustrated the Allies and they started to clutch at straws. After all they thought that once they got the Nazis on the run they would crumple.
I suppose they thought it was a Gamble worth taking.
Hitler once used his Luftwaffe Paratroops inly to discover it had failed and never used them again.
Crete - they never jumped into action again after it.
Crete - they never jumped into action again after it.[/quote]
Although they were in action on land in multiple places. I believe in Normandy when counter-attacking the beachhead they were told “parachutists only need knives” when supplies and support were very late coming through. I don’t recall their reply, but it is unlikely to have been polite…