D-day paratroopers?

There were some 500 LVT shipped to Europe in 1944. All cargo carrier models as far as I know. Many of those were actually used on the Normandy beaches, as unarmed cargo carriers much like the DUKW vehicles. It was not until October the Brits used them to land a Commando brigade on Walchern Island. In 1945 they used them to cross the Rhine.
 
Last edited:
I mean, wasn't Operation Neptune the biggest airborne operation ever at the time? You really couldn't go beyond what they actually did.
 
For educational purposes here are some comparative casualty numbers for the US Army assault regiments on 6th June. These are taken from Balikowskis books UTAH Beach & OMAHA Beach. The author spent considerable time analyzing the original US Army documents from 6th, 7th, & 8th June, and the work of other on this subject. Below is a abridged version of his best estimates of the losses to midnight 6th June.

UTAH Beach vs air delivery:
....................Killed...WIA.....MIA
8th Inf Reg.....29......110.......0..........This was the lead assault regiment
12th Inf.........10........39.......0
22d Inf.........13........34.......4
29th Artillery..39........22.......0

359 inf...........1...........1......0.........90th ID landed late 6th June

20 Cav Grp....2..........18......0

Engineers......32........150....0.........Components of 237, 297, 298, 299 engineer battalions & 1 Special Engineer Brigade

87 Mtr Bn......2............3.....0..........107mm Chemical Mortar Bn

70th Armor....19.........19.....0
746 Armor......4...........4......0

65th Artillery..2..........22......0........Armored Artillery Battalion

US & Royal Navy.........................235 total casualties

IX Bomb Cmd.30........0......0.......A20 & B26 Bombers that attacked half hour before landing
IX Troop Car...27.......28.....0.......C47 crews that carried Airborne

82 AB Div.................................1259 total
101AB Div.................................1240 total

So, it cost a bit over 940 casualties to get four infantry regiments, two tank battalions, a armored artillery bn, a oversized engineer brigade, & Miscl across the beach.

To fly in four parachute, two glider regiments six pack howitzer bns (?) cost over 2400 casualties

For comparison on OMAHA Beach

1 Inf Div....107.....740.....417......Total 1346......This includes 88 men lost but not differentiated by the 32 FA Bn, 1 Med Bn, & 26th Regiment

29 ID........321.....710.....231......Total 1272......This includes 10 undifferentiated losses from a MP platoon.

Supporting Engineer (9bn), Armor (3bn), AAA (3bn) Mtr bn, Signal bn, Eng Brigades (2), Ranger (2bn)..... Total 1568

Naval Total 539

8th AF 10 Killed One B24 crashed enroute over Britain.

So, getting six inf regiments, three armor bn, nine Combat Engineer Battalions across the beach cost a total of 4720 casualties.

In terms of men landed 34,000+ men crossed OMAHA Beach by midnight 6th June. The total US airborne op landed under 20,000 by the same time.
 
Heavy equipment is the key answer here. You can't get tanks, artillery/AT guns, or serious logistics assets in by air because airplanes can't carry enough. For this reason paratroopers are lightly armed. They did OK in OTL because they got put into the Reich's rear and attacked less heavily defended targets, but troops like that wouldn't have done well attacking the main line of resistance and its concrete and steel fortifications.

At some point you're going to need a heavy force to deal with the strongpoints and panzer divisions and it wasn't coming by air.
 
For educational purposes here are some comparative casualty numbers for the US Army assault regiments on 6th June. These are taken from Balikowskis books UTAH Beach & OMAHA Beach. The author spent considerable time analyzing the original US Army documents from 6th, 7th, & 8th June, and the work of other on this subject. Below is a abridged version of his best estimates of the losses to midnight 6th June.

UTAH Beach vs air delivery:
....................Killed...WIA.....MIA
8th Inf Reg.....29......110.......0..........This was the lead assault regiment
12th Inf.........10........39.......0
22d Inf.........13........34.......4
29th Artillery..39........22.......0

359 inf...........1...........1......0.........90th ID landed late 6th June

20 Cav Grp....2..........18......0

Engineers......32........150....0.........Components of 237, 297, 298, 299 engineer battalions & 1 Special Engineer Brigade

87 Mtr Bn......2............3.....0..........107mm Chemical Mortar Bn

70th Armor....19.........19.....0
746 Armor......4...........4......0

65th Artillery..2..........22......0........Armored Artillery Battalion

US & Royal Navy.........................235 total casualties

IX Bomb Cmd.30........0......0.......A20 & B26 Bombers that attacked half hour before landing
IX Troop Car...27.......28.....0.......C47 crews that carried Airborne

82 AB Div.................................1259 total
101AB Div.................................1240 total

So, it cost a bit over 940 casualties to get four infantry regiments, two tank battalions, a armored artillery bn, a oversized engineer brigade, & Miscl across the beach.

To fly in four parachute, two glider regiments six pack howitzer bns (?) cost over 2400 casualties

For comparison on OMAHA Beach

1 Inf Div....107.....740.....417......Total 1346......This includes 88 men lost but not differentiated by the 32 FA Bn, 1 Med Bn, & 26th Regiment

29 ID........321.....710.....231......Total 1272......This includes 10 undifferentiated losses from a MP platoon.

Supporting Engineer (9bn), Armor (3bn), AAA (3bn) Mtr bn, Signal bn, Eng Brigades (2), Ranger (2bn)..... Total 1568

Naval Total 539

8th AF 10 Killed One B24 crashed enroute over Britain.

So, getting six inf regiments, three armor bn, nine Combat Engineer Battalions across the beach cost a total of 4720 casualties.

In terms of men landed 34,000+ men crossed OMAHA Beach by midnight 6th June. The total US airborne op landed under 20,000 by the same time.

Good anlysis Carl

I guess the answer here is that the 3 principle Airbourne landings were conducted in support of the Beach landings not in spite of them and in each case relied upon forces driving inland from the beachs to releive / support them.
 
Heavy equipment is the key answer here. You can't get tanks, artillery/AT guns, or serious logistics assets in by air because airplanes can't carry enough.

Large gliders can:

Hamilcars were only used on three occasions, and only in support of British airborne forces. They first saw action in June 1944, when approximately thirty were used to carry 17-pounder anti-tank guns, transport vehicles and Tetrarch light tanks into Normandy in support of British airborne forces during Operation Tonga.

could transport a military load of 17,600 pounds (8,000 kg)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Aircraft_Hamilcar
 
For the D-Day landings, why did we have soldiers land in slow unarmed boats then have them try to get off the beaches amidst a hail of bullets? Why couldn't we have them parachute in, which seems to me a lot less risky? I'm sure there's a good reason for it, and I'd like to know.

Apart from all the other very good replies, I'd add another detail: who says paratroopers don't land in a hail of bullets? Consider Maleme in 1941 or Ste.-Mère-Église on D-Day. The hail of bullets depends on how prepared and thick the defenders are, not on the means of transportation; that can vary a lot, not only along beaches, but also around obvious paratroop DZs.
 
WWII gliders can carry relatively light armor, jeeps, and relatively small artillery pieces. Also LIMITED amounts of ammunition and fuel. While one might get some fuel from captured sources, ammunition is another issue and of course if you don't find a convenient gas station or fuel dump everything comes to a screeching halt. What a airborne division can bring to the fight is limited to begin with, and with losses due to gliders crashing, wind dispersion, failure to identify drop zones and so forth is, in reality, well less than the T/O and T/E.

Interestingly a lot of Soviet equipment, weapons were designed to accept NATO standard fuel/fuel nozzles, and certain calibers of ammunition (although Soviet equivalents would not work the other way around). This would allow Soviet forces, including airborne, to scavenge off NATO. Additionally modern weapons such as ATGMs give light forces more firepower than their WWII equivalents, and modern aircraft and techniques can drop heavier items to the battlefield. Still, no matter what, airborne forces are light and have a short duration of action and need to be relieved/reinforced in short order.
 
For educational purposes here are some comparative casualty numbers for the US Army assault regiments on 6th June. These are taken from Balikowskis books UTAH Beach & OMAHA Beach. The author spent considerable time analyzing the original US Army documents from 6th, 7th, & 8th June, and the work of other on this subject. Below is a abridged version of his best estimates of the losses to midnight 6th June.

UTAH Beach vs air delivery:
....................Killed...WIA.....MIA
8th Inf Reg.....29......110.......0..........This was the lead assault regiment
12th Inf.........10........39.......0
22d Inf.........13........34.......4
29th Artillery..39........22.......0

359 inf...........1...........1......0.........90th ID landed late 6th June

20 Cav Grp....2..........18......0

Engineers......32........150....0.........Components of 237, 297, 298, 299 engineer battalions & 1 Special Engineer Brigade

87 Mtr Bn......2............3.....0..........107mm Chemical Mortar Bn

70th Armor....19.........19.....0
746 Armor......4...........4......0

65th Artillery..2..........22......0........Armored Artillery Battalion

US & Royal Navy.........................235 total casualties

IX Bomb Cmd.30........0......0.......A20 & B26 Bombers that attacked half hour before landing
IX Troop Car...27.......28.....0.......C47 crews that carried Airborne

82 AB Div.................................1259 total
101AB Div.................................1240 total

So, it cost a bit over 940 casualties to get four infantry regiments, two tank battalions, a armored artillery bn, a oversized engineer brigade, & Miscl across the beach.

To fly in four parachute, two glider regiments six pack howitzer bns (?) cost over 2400 casualties

For comparison on OMAHA Beach

1 Inf Div....107.....740.....417......Total 1346......This includes 88 men lost but not differentiated by the 32 FA Bn, 1 Med Bn, & 26th Regiment

29 ID........321.....710.....231......Total 1272......This includes 10 undifferentiated losses from a MP platoon.

Supporting Engineer (9bn), Armor (3bn), AAA (3bn) Mtr bn, Signal bn, Eng Brigades (2), Ranger (2bn)..... Total 1568

Naval Total 539

8th AF 10 Killed One B24 crashed enroute over Britain.

So, getting six inf regiments, three armor bn, nine Combat Engineer Battalions across the beach cost a total of 4720 casualties.

In terms of men landed 34,000+ men crossed OMAHA Beach by midnight 6th June. The total US airborne op landed under 20,000 by the same time.


Do you have any figures for the casualties at the Canadian Juno and British Gold and Sword landing areas? I think they suffered lighter casualties than Utah but it would be good to see the numbers for the purpose of a overall general comparison between the seaborne and airborne operations on D-day.
 
Do you have any figures for the casualties at the Canadian Juno and British Gold and Sword landing areas? I think they suffered lighter casualties than Utah but it would be good to see the numbers for the purpose of a overall general comparison between the seaborne and airborne operations on D-day.

Unfortunately I don't have those, can't recommend a source. Usual wisdom is the Canadians suffered second worse of the five beaches.
 
I guess the answer here is that the 3 principle Airbourne landings were conducted in support of the Beach landings not in spite of them and in each case relied upon forces driving inland from the beachs to releive / support them.

It worked both ways. Capturing the water crossings near Caen & @ UTAH Beach enabled the landing force to advance inland rapidly. Scattered paras did kill the corps commander responsible for the Cotientin area, which stalled the local reaction for the better part of the day.
 
Large gliders can

They can carry some artillery pieces (although not heavy ones like the 155 mm and taking requisite ammunition, the crew, the mover, etc. as well would strain things). They CANNOT carry tanks, 2 1/2 ton trucks with any load, or the amount of follow on supplies needed to sustain and support a force. A single U.S. WWII division needed 500 tons of supplies a day. That’s not getting in by glider. Simply not enough capacity.

Beyond that gliders were horrendously unsafe, fragile, and unreliable and large numbers crashed. Those numbers will get sharply worse if you have a ton of extra large weighed down ones trying to land.
 
Do you have any figures for the casualties at the Canadian Juno and British Gold and Sword landing areas? I think they suffered lighter casualties than Utah but it would be good to see the numbers for the purpose of a overall general comparison between the seaborne and airborne operations on D-day.
According to the Legion magazine, Canadian casualties on D-Day were 340 killed, 574 wounded, and 47 POW. Another source said 359 dead.
 
General Goerge C Marshall: MARINES in Europe? GET THE FUCK out of my office i'll be damned if those fucking gloryhounds steal the credit for the war again GODDAMNIT
There were Marines at D-Day - on many of the USN ships. They were stationed in the bows with rifles, to detonate any loose mines that drifted in front.
 
Do you have any figures for the casualties at the Canadian Juno and British Gold and Sword landing areas? I think they suffered lighter casualties than Utah

Simply NO.

All 3 of the British/Canadian beaches had higher casualties than Utah. It is arguable that in some places they had higher casualties for the first wave landing than Omaha - the difference was that at Omaha the assault stalled at the waterline so that later waves also suffered higher casualties; while on the British/Canadian beaches, the assault breached the defences and moved inland away from the killing zone on the beach.
 
A single U.S. WWII division needed 500 tons of supplies a day.

Not to fight an individual battle.

That total is the average to fight a campaign and so includes beyond food, fuel and ammunition things like replacement uniforms and equipment, and probably a share of a Coca-Cola plant.
 
Asp said:
A single U.S. WWII division needed 500 tons of supplies a day.

Not to fight an individual battle.

That total is the average to fight a campaign and so includes beyond food, fuel and ammunition things like replacement uniforms and equipment, and probably a share of a Coca-Cola plant.

Logistics planners for Op OVERLORD allowed 900 tons daily for the first few months, per 'division slice'. That is all the men ashore divided by the number of division HQ. It averaged out to 44,000 men per division slice. That includes the service units and tactical air forces. The 900 tons was calculated for average full scale offensive operations in mobile warfare. That is not the attritional battle that was actually fought in Normandy for 60 days. The planners recommended that after 90 days a average of 950 tons daily be delivered to build up a reserve.
 
Top