Question: Paratroopers and Normandy Beaches

Is there any reason paratroopers were not used closer to the Normandy beaches on D-Day? From my understanding, the landing sites were pretty far inland, though necessary to prevent German reinforcements. But I suppose I always wondered why paratrooper landings were never more simultaneously timed with and more proximate to the beach landings. It seems that Omaha could have particularly benefited since things didn't go that well and particularly wonder when seeing guys on ropes going up the cliffs of Pointe du Hoc.

I admit I can probably guess some of the reasons but would love to know others' thoughts, particularly since some of you are likely more familiar with the paratoopers' capabilities.

 

Due to their vulnerability ( both the paratroopers and the slow-moving aircraft ) the drop needed to be at night. Sicily had been un unmitigated disaster, with many killed due to being accidentally dropped over the sea. The most accurate way to deliver airborne troops was via glider ( as with the 6th Airborne at Pegasus Bridge ) but the coastal areas were well-defended against such attacks with static defences.

 

Omaha was never part of the airborne drop on D-Day. The missions assigned to the 82nd and 101st was to protect the flank of the American part of the invasion by establishing blocking positions on the flank of Utah and to capture the exits off of Utah. This was done because the flank of an Army is it's most critical and vulnerable position. And if the flank goes, the opposing Army can essentially "roll up" the position(look at Stonewall Jackson's decisive victory at Chancellorsville.)

The night drops allowed the airborne forces a level of protection, had it been done in the early morning light, the troops probably would have been massacred while they were coming down. Night also gives the benefit of surprise to the lightly equipped airborne troops.

You also need to define "Closer". The 101st was dropped roughly 3 miles behind Utah


And the 82nd was dropped a little further inland, about 5 miles.

 

The paratroopers were also meant to take the bridges etc to make the troops that landed on the beaches able to continue inland faster once they reacheds the targets. Without bridges the heavier vehicles would not be able to continue straight on.

Also the paratroopers would invite German units to fight them, and less units to go to the beaches for Germans.

 

That's a good point.

 

The airborne were used to secure objectives that the troops landing from the sea couldn't get to immediately, like the exits from Utah Beach or Pegasus Bridge in the British sector.

That said, there might have been a few points like Pointe du Hoc were a small paratroop or glider force could have been used; for example the British airborne took out an important German battery at Merville.

 

Hmm how close do you think you need to land to materially effect the landings on the beaches?

The strength of the German defences rested on more than the string of troops in defence nests. Infantrymen were only a small fraction of the defenders firepower. Behind the machine guns were mortars hundreds of metres behind the front line and artillery 4-5 km back and reserves 5-20 km in the rear.

The two US airborne divisions landed on and behind the 709th and 91st Divisions defending Utah Beach. There were far more Germans defending the Cotentin peninsular than Omaha Beach. They disrupted German artillery, communications and reserves and contributed to the success of the landings on this beach.

The initial British drop caused mayhem across the boundary of 7th and 15th Armies and diverted the German reserves towards the 15th Army. The second British airborne drop on the evening of D day apparently in the rear of 21st Panzer Division dispirited the Germans who had reached the coast.

There was a very effective diversionary operation that helped Omaha beach. The SAS and fake paratroops led the German 84th Corps reserve on a merry dance away from Omaha Beach for most of the morning of 6th June. Paratroops dropped south of Omaha beach could have disrupted the artillery of the 352nd Division, which could have done more to support the seaborne landings than landing on the cliff tops.

 

Also recall that there were squadrons of bombers and dozens of ships trying to hit the beach fortifications. The closer the paratroopers landed the more likely the chance of friendly fire.

 

The American airdrops were largely scattered, but in the end that worked out because that put a lot of troops in the rear areas that wreaked a lot of havoc with the German forces moving towards the landings at the beaches.

A friend of the family that I knew as a kid was in the 82nd Pathfinder Platoon. He was in the 504th PIR that arrived too late from Italy to be a part of the invasion. He said that there was no way he was going to miss out on the big show, so volunteered as a pathfinder. Anyway, he said that they were dropped many miles, possibly 20 miles inland and missed most of the early actions of D-Day. He and his team ambushed convoys, demo'd telegraph lines, took pot shots at advancing German troops, and generally did whatever they could to be as much as a pest to the Germans as possible. He had some ugly stories about fighting in and around Nijmegan also. He was a mean and tough dude, but not very old at the time. In 1942 he joined up when he was 16. Got discharged in 1945 as a platoon sergeant, w/3 combat jumps, 4 purple hearts and a CIB. Talking to him while growing up led me to go Airborne myself when I got old enough to sign up.

 

Thank you for your responses. Takao, I loved the map of the drop patterns of the 82nd and 101st. Question, were "drop zones" the intended bullseye for the landings with the dots representing where the actual landings took place? If that's the case, then the I can see why they would not wanted to drop them any closer, since 1/2 may have landed in the Atlantic. Nonetheless, the drop zone for the 101st was a lot closer than I would have imagined, with one being about 2 miles from the beach. One or two of those dots practically were on the beach,

 

I suppose the follow up question would be, why weren't there any paratroopers supporting Omaha, while both the 82nd and 101st went to Utah? Takao, you may have answered this question in your response but, was this because Utah was considered the western flank of the invasion?

Nonetheless, considering how well the paratroopers performed in assisting Utah (drawing away and cutting off Germans), you have to assume their absence from Omaha may have been a contributing factor to some of the issues at Omaha and a factor I don't recall ever having heard cited.

And, I stress "recall ever having heard" since I do not claim to have anything more than general history buff knowledge about Normandy.

Thanks again everyone for your responses.

 

Securing the Cotenin Peninsula and the port of Cherbourg was an important early objective of Overlord; it was assumed/hoped that the Allies would be able to land most of their supplies through captured ports. The airborne landings, both in themselves and by facilitating rapid movement inland of troops landed on Utah Beach, would allow the allies to cut off the Cotenin and then secure it.

Movement inland from the British-Canadian beaches would facilitate the Allies' ultimate goal of advancing eastwards and would threaten to cut off all German forces west of that sector, so airborne forces were also used to seize key objectives there like Pegasus Bridge.

Omaha Beach was intended mainly to link Utah and the British-Canadian beaches; there was not the same urgency to advance rapidly inland.

 

It is worth remembering also that some British paratroopers were not combat soldiers at all, but specialists, such as Field Ambulance, including even conscientious objectors voluntarily transferred from the Non-Combatant Corps to the RAMC, dropping without weapons but with full medical kit.

 

I recall the Germans open the flood, and at some places it worked..

"The most complex operation of the night was also the most costly. The 9th Battalion had the objective of taking the gun battery at Merville: four guns defended by 100 troops. Following a precision bombing raid, 555 paratroops were to attack the battery using anti-tank guns dropped by glider. In the event, the bombers missed their target, the anti-tank guns were lost and the troops were scattered - many landed in marshes and drowned..."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/timeline/factfiles/nonflash/a1142092.shtml