Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Arnhem

Discussion in 'WWII General' started by GunSlinger86, Mar 21, 2017.

  1. GunSlinger86

    GunSlinger86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    45
    Could Arnhem have worked if instead of sending in airborne troops, make a thrust with 30 Corp and another armored corp on the flank, light a two-speared attack, and send fighter-bombers and medium bombers ahead of them in a tactical role to perform what the air borne troops were supposed to do. Now I know planes aren't men and they can't hold a position, but if they pulverized the German positions enough and kept the attack steady and hard to the point where the Germans couldn't stay manned at any one point or risk being bombed out.
     
  2. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Light and medium bombers will not prevent the Germans from destroying the bridges to Arnhem.

    Further, pulverizing the German positions around the bridges will hinder a rapid advance more than help it. Bomb craters make for excellent tank traps, not to mention that such a moonscape would probably be impassible for wheeled vehicles.
     
  3. GunSlinger86

    GunSlinger86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    45
    If they didn't destroy the bridges when the paratroopers were landing and fighting, why would they destroy them in P-47s and Tempests are constantly attacking?
     
  4. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    The Son Bridge was destroyed. The Germans also attempted to demolish the Waal Bridge, but the attempts to detonate the charges failed.
     
  5. GunSlinger86

    GunSlinger86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    45
    If they were constantly strafed with 50 cals and 20mms with the occasional rocket and bomb to keep a lot of the land intact, it would be harassment to keep them on the run. Say they destroyed the same bridges as they did during the real operation, could the different strategy of a more concentrated two-pronged ground effort with tactical fighter-bomber support had more of a chance of success?
     
  6. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    This is the same airpower that could not find the German armor during recon flights...
     
  7. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    One big reason the British Airborne troops landed so far away from the bridges at Arnhem was because of the flak defences were considered too strong for the airfrioces to fly in daylight near them.

    Arnhem was close to the Germans fighters operating close to their all weather bases. They Germans fighters could concentrate their forces, Its a reverse Battle of Britain problem. Its a reverse Battle of Britain problem.

    Arnhem too far away from UK airfields to mount any kind of continuous patrol over the bridges. Even fast light bombers like the A20/ Boston or Mosquito needed a fighter escort. It is a 400 mile round trip from Norfolk, and a transit of 2-3 hours there and back, Even a long range escort would only have an hour or two over the target area.
     
  8. GunSlinger86

    GunSlinger86 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    45
    They were in France at that point. If the Allies could have build a few fighter bases in France and flew the light bombers from Britain? But there were enough German fighters in the area to put up a fight? It wasn't total air superiority like it was over Normandy?
     
  9. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    The Allies had several airfield in France...However, Operation Market Garden was only one of their many concerns.

    For example, Operation Truckin' was using some of the fields so that gasoline could be ferried into France.
    http://www.458bg.com/truckin.htm

    Further, several of the closer airfields to Arnhem, in France, had only recently been liberated and were not yet "open for business."
    This site gives a good rundown of many of those: France

    Finally, some of the airfields in Britain were actually closer than those in France.
     
  10. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    568
    Location:
    London UK
    Op Market Garden took place at the end of the pursuit from Normandy. The allied logistic system was under severe strain supporting the advancing armies and the tactical air forces were pressed to keep up. None of the fuel guzzling, ordnance hungry twin engined bombers were deployed to France before there was adequate port capacity.

    from HyperWar: Army Air Forces in World War II Volume III: Europe: ARGUMENT to V-E Day, January 1944 to May 1945 Chapter 8

    These forward airfields weren't any closer to Arnhem that airfields in East Anglia. Its about 200 miles from Peronne to Arnhem. None of the 2 TAF RAF aircraft were operating from much closer either.

    There is an argument that Op market would have been better served had the air side of the operation been run by 2 TAF, which had a lot of expereince of army co-operation, and assets such as tactical reconnaissance wings, embedded air ground liaison teams and fighter ground wings with experience of delivering close air support. Leigh Mallory's Air Defence of Great Britian and 8th Air Force weren't that familiar with working with soldiers - and it showed in Op market Garden.
    .
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017

Share This Page