Simultaneous Overlord and Dragoon?

Some German generals did advocate a withdrawal to a defense line along the Orne in mid-June. Hitler, naturally, wouldn't hear any of it.


IIRC Rommel did not admit the Normandy defense was defeated until the 18th June. Until then he kept thinking a decisive counter attack could be organized. But, every time reserves for such attack started assemblying some fresh just landed Allied corps would attack and create a new emergency requiring any reserves at hand.
 
The main bottleneck for successfully pulling off both OVERLORD and DRAGOON at the same time is the numbers game; getting enough shipping together to transport enough troops to the beaches to overrun the defenses, plus enough warships to provide fire support, plus enough shipping to both supply the initial divisions and land additional divisions and supplies to expand the beachhead, plus enough planes to drop paratroopers and provide air support. As I understand it, the main difficulty was landing craft, in that there were only so many of them and they were being split between the Pacific, the Mediterranean, and OVERLORD. Not enough landing craft=no invasion.

The easy answer to the problem is to not invade Italy, but that poses a whole new question. What do the Western Allies do between mopping up in North Africa and launching OVERLORD/DRAGOON? If we accept that OVERLORD/DRAGOON cannot be launched before summer of 1944, that leaves a good eleven to twelve months in which the only Allied forces fighting the Wehrmacht in face-to-face combat are those of Soviet Russia.

Which is politically unacceptable to Churchill and FDR. They have to be seen to be taking on their fair share of the war, or Stalin is going to make political hay about the western capitalists sitting back and letting Russia do all the dying for them.

The Western Allies had to fight Germany SOMEWHERE between North Africa and OVERLORD/DRAGOON. The Balkans were out (Churchill was in favor but the Americans, especially Marshall IIRC, said NO). Norway was out. So where else but Italy?
 
Carl Schwamberger said:
Monty wanted a "Colossal Crack" as some folks would put it. Since there were in the end enough boats for a five corps/beach assault that's what he & Ike went for. Trivia note: The original 'Monty plan unveiled in January was a four corps/beach assault. The Cotintien site or Utah beach as not in at that point. Monty had taken Morgans older three corps plan and squeezed in another Commonwealth landing site. That was also targeted for a early May landing, which fit the amount of amphib lift estimated to be ready at the end of April. The fifth beachhead was added after map exercises showed difficulties in the US first Army wheeling right and advancing to Chebourg. The terrain around Carentan & further inland enabled a infantry/artillery blocking force to stall a heavily mechanized attack for a week or more. The solution was to outflank Carentan with a fifth landing to the northwest, and to rearraign the airborne objectives. That required more amphib lift, which delayed the attack by a month.
That looks like a problem unlikely to be ignored. TTL, tho (given no Italy), there might be enough lift to carry it off even with a southern op.

Maybe delays into July '43?
Carl Schwamberger said:
The biggest surprise was the German decision to make a stand of it in Normandy....It is a large streatch, but maybe if the problem of a German stonewall defense in Normandy was understood Ike may have gone with a smaller Op Neptune in order to draw part of the Germans reserves south. Maybe.
IMO, it's a bit much to expect, when even after Anzio, they didn't expect an immediate "hold on the beach" response.

That said, with the balance of forces what it would be in Summer '43, the "wall" the WAllies faced was much weaker. (Just frex, no 21. Pz in Caen.) Plus, it's likely there will be more combat-experienced troops landed. Plus, the "infantry crisis" is unlikely to arise, with lower total casualties; could be it only gets pushed back into 1943...

Allowing a 4-beach op, & screw-ups in Cherbourg, what do you say about a shift in focus toward Antwerp? (Yeah, that's a pet focus of mine.:p Bonus points if FCA clears the Scheldt estuary before September.:p:p)
 
The main bottleneck for successfully pulling off both OVERLORD and DRAGOON at the same time is the numbers game; getting enough shipping together to transport enough troops to the beaches to overrun the defenses, plus enough warships to provide fire support, plus enough shipping to both supply the initial divisions and land additional divisions and supplies to expand the beachhead, ....

The easy answer to the problem is to not invade Italy,... So where else but Italy?

I'd settle for canceling Op Shingle, the half ased attempt to capture Rome with a amphib flanking movement. that beachead sucked away landing craft for lighterage, and transport in general for supplying five divisions acrss a beach for nearly five months. Months when concentrating landing craft at the decisive points was critical. A landing @ Anzio may have looked good in October 1943 when it first came up, but with the late November commitment to execute Op Overlord & the related Anvil Op in six months (1 May) operation Shingle became a diversion of resources.
 
Top