Heinrich Severloh The beast of Omaha

Thanks for posting this! History is written by the literate, BUT in today's world it is illegal for some to write of it, no matter if it be true! Have you ever heard of the "conspiracy theory" that Roosevelt knew that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor and did nothing about it? There are a fair number of those concerning Roosevelt and Pear Harbor. Many are laughable. Some almost true, but not really. Consider this: Under the terms of un conditional surrender (excepting only that person of the Emperor would not be touched) signed by the Japanese government, that government can not issue a statement that they were obligated to come to Germany's assistance by the terms of the 1936 Anti-Comintern Pact, because Roosevelt had ordered US warships to attack German subs in the Atlantic.

 

I'm not claiming anything, except that there is evidence that tends to support the claim that Severloh was likely the "Beast" of Omaha Beach. You and some others, seen to have a problem in accepting evidence contrary to "OPINIONS" based on questionable evidence. In an effort to bolster your highly biased notions of what you think happened at Omaha Beach, you and others have continuously made silly claims that I said this or that. Keep it up, expose yourself for what you are!

 

You must be mistaking me for one of you Bull-hiting groupthinkers. If you can come up with something that actually resembles a valid critique of what I have posted, DO IT!

 

You must be a stand up comedian to say such silly nonsense!

 

Hmmmm.........

"Severloh likely did kill or wound some 2000 GIs on D-Day! To understand how this is not only possible, but likely."

"Do the math. If Severloh fired 10,000 plus rounds on D-Day, then he killed or wounded near 2000 GIs. No doubt about it."

"What I have posted is FACT."

"FACTS are FACTS!"

"No doubt about it, it is fact."

 

There you go again! Wrong as usual. It is obviously German. You will get a goose egg on your report card!

 

Thanks for posting this! It is nice to see that somebody is paying attention.

 

I'm not the one being laughed at! But you do say the silliest things!

 

Simple question:

If two MG34s were firing, how many pop cans... err I mean Americans... would be killed per belt of ammo?

 

You really suppose you're not being laughed at? Seriously?

Okay, you wanted respect for your age. Given the evident senility you exhibit, I will grant you sympathy instead for the effect aging has had on you. I will also grant you respect for your insanely obsessive knowledge of the technical aspects of operating and firing the MG 42.

However, your lack of knowledge of the actual events of D-Day and its aftermath, the composition, organization, doctrine, and tactics of the German and American forces, the actual as opposed to theoretical weapons effects, and all else you have bloviated on in this thread get no respect at all.

Have a nice day!

 

You are laughable! You and your buddies are blowing off nothing but hot air in an insane attempt to defend you lack of knowledge in a groupthink effort to silence real truth, because it upsets your questionable opinions on events concerning Omaha. Y'all (Southern speak) are doing a really good imitation of snowflakes who are highly upset at "Free Speech"! I'm sorry I made your little head by forcing you to try and think.

 

Okay bright eyes, display your own copious knowledge of these events. Tell me, which LCVP with which units landed on which beaches and when under the sights of the Germans in WN 62? What were the casualties in some of those units? Which American units under whose command encircled WN 62? Which American units knocked out the two westward facing casemated 7.5cm FK 235(b) and the casemated 5cm KWK 39 facing eastward?

 

Rich, Thomas Paine said, "To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead".
I'd bet another eight pages of this will find his opinion hasn't changed a bit.

 

Just for $hits and giggles, lets deconstruct this train wreck of an "answer".

Yeah, neatly avoided the point of the question...why is Severloh the ONLY "Beast of OMAHA" when there were so many others there capable of being just as beastly? Why not the nameless Landser or Landsers in WN 71, 72, and 73 that so famously wiped out B Company, 116th Infantry? And inflicted more casualties on the 116th Infantry than were suffered by the 16th Infantry under Severloh's gun?

Or are your logical faculties too eroded by senility to comprehend such a question?

No one asked you if you were there. You have provided zero real evidence for the cover up of the 100,000 additional casualties suffered by American forces on D-Day that follows from your senile train of thought. Please provide the evidence.

Yes, the typical dodge of the deliberately ignorant...appeal to God and claim that something is impossible to know...and yet somehow, although you were not there, and now no man is living who was there knows, you somehow "know" that Severloh killed 2,000 Americans with his magic MG 42. The logical disconnect in your thought process is yet more solid evidence for either your senility or your insanity.

Yet another laughable avoidance of the question, while trying to sound all "thoughtful" by throwing out meaningless phrases. The probability and chances of a single soldier out of some 1,000 present with just one of some 100 similar weapons inflicting 54% of the casualties in an engagement, ignoring the effects of all other weapons systems present in a war wherein 32% of American WIA and 20% of American DOW were caused by small arms, is vanishingly small. Infinitesimal. On the order of 0.001 times 0.01 times 0.46 times 0.70. Here, since you are likely incapable, I'll work the math for you. 0.00000322. In other words, about a 310,559-to-one chance. So better than the 960,000-to-one chance of being struck by lightning.

[edit: I just realized I inverted one of the probabilities and dropped a decimal. It should be 0.001 time 0.01 times 0.46 times 0.30 or 0.00000138 or about 724,638-to-one. About as likely as being struck by lightening.]

 

Yeah, but the giggle factor is pretty high at least. It's more entertaining than arguing with a guaporense or an ljwd and reminds me of those true believers of the Screed Belton regarding the Medium Tank M4 and Perfidious Patton. Utter goofiness and misplaced righteous indignation substituting for good sense.

 

I'm glad you posted this as it gives me a forum to expose certain TROLLS who are pretending to be knowledgeable "experts" concerning matters they obviously have no expertise in.
There has been a lot of nonsense posted by these trolls concerning the capabilities of machineguns. More particularly, they make claim that (insert anything they choose) is equal to and therefore capable of doing exactly what a MG34/MG42 was designed to do. As I do have real and verifiable expertise in these matters concerning the use and capabilities of machineguns, I will express my expert opinion:

First generation machineguns = the Maxim, the Vickers machinegun, the Model 1919 Browning and other weapons in this class, are uniformly HEAVY. They, plus their mount, which must be used, generally weigh 75 to 100 or more pounds. They have a moderate rate of fire, usually in the range of 400 - 450 rounds per minute. Their sighting system is approximate, meaning that, by design, they are intended to be used by a man sitting and grasping the firing mechanism ("trigger") with extended arms/hands. The aiming eye therefore, is at a greater distance from the fore and rear sights than is normal with most small arms, excepting pistols, and as with pistols, accuracy suffers to a greater extent when compared with shoulder arms, such as rifles. They may have a limited arc of fire, depending upon their mount. Often, it may be difficult/impossible to bring to bring their fire upon a new foe which may appear in a rapidly changing battlefield.
In contrast, the MG34 weighs 11.1 kg. or 24.5 lbs. The MG42 weighs 11 kg. or 24.25 lbs. Both have sights similar to rifle and may be fired like a rifle with excellent accuracy. Both have high rates of fire. 15 rounds per second for the MG34. 25 rounds per second for the MG42. Either is extremely fast to bring fire upon unexpected targets on the battlefield.

Second generation machineguns = Of called a "light" machinegun. The Lewis gun, the Bren gun, the Japanese type 99, soviet DP 29 (Degtyarev), ZB30 and others. Weapons in this class are almost all magazine fed with rates of fire comparable to generation 1 machineguns. Most have "quick change" barrels and weigh (no ammo) 22 to 30 pounds. They are generally very reliable and can be brought to fire upon new targets on the battlefield, very quickly. Almost all of this class of machineguns are top mounted box magazine fed weapons. The box magazine partially blocks the battlefield view of the operator and he may be killed by a enemy combatant that he did not see. This is why NO modern machinegun has this feature as a part of the design. The box magazines themselves may be tricky to reload, as is the case of the Bren with it's rimmed cartridge. Most magazines require a special tool to reload and hold 25 to 30 rounds. The weight of the ammo box, plus the weight of the box magazines, plus the weight of the ammo, plus the difficulty of reloading box magazines equates to an inability to engage in very long fire fights. The Lewis and Degtyarev are fed from top mounted circular magazines which are heavy and difficult to load, requiring special tools to do so. This negates their ability to engage in very extended fire fights. Their quick change barrel system requires that the barrel be removed the front, requiring that the weapon be removed from the firing position and two men, one to the front and the operator himself, pull in opposite directions to remove the barrel. Barrel replacement is generally easier.
In contrast, both MG34 and MG42 are fed from bullet chains that are linkable to form a chain of any desired length. This makes it very easy for either to engage in a fire fight of unlimited duration. That means that the gun may be fired until there is no ammunition left, if all other factors are unchanged.
Both MG34 and MG42 have quick change barrel systems that are done from the rear, without breaking the gun, in a very short amount of time, under 30 seconds or less. A bit more, if done by one man. Neither MG34 or MG42 need be removed form its' firing position for barrel change or reloading. It is also interesting to not that only 1 can is required, to contain 300 rounds of belted, ready to use ammo for the MG34 or MG42. TEN 30 round magazines in two cans are required for the Bren and most of the others.

Third generation machineguns = Only two existed in WW2, the MG34 and the MG42.

Feel free to as any reasonable question.

 

ANSWER: By some miracle, a confession of an error from a TROLL who has made thousands of them! There is hope after all! Keep it up, I am enjoying this!

 

"If two MG34s were firing, how many pop cans... err I mean Americans... would be killed per belt of ammo?"

 

????

How is it, that the Lewis gun and the Hotchkiss M1909, which Shooterike considers 2nd generation weapons, were actually introduced before many of what he considers 1st generation machine guns? The world wonders...

 

Answer...None.

You see Shooterike's MG-42 is an airsoft weapon, for he is too young to play with real ammunition...