Crossing the Rhine and other River crossings

River Crossing
The purpose of any river crossing is to project combat power across a water obstacle to accomplish a mission. A river crossing is a unique operation. It requires specific procedures for success because the water obstacle prevents normal ground maneuver. It also requires detailed planning and control measures and different technical support than other tactical operations require. The nature and size of the obstacle, the enemy situation, and available crossing assets limit the tactical commander's options.

The challenge is to minimize the river's impact on the commander's ability to maneuver. The force is vulnerable while crossing, as it must break its movement formations, concentrate at crossing points, and reform on the far shore before continuing to maneuver. The tactical commander cannot effectively fight his force while it is split by a river. He must reduce this vulnerability by decreasing his force's exposure time. The best method is to cross rivers in stride as a continuation of the tactical operation, whether in the offense or retrograde. Only as a last resort should the force pause to build up combat power or crossing means before crossing.

Throughout history, armies crossed rivers to engage or flee from enemy forces. The ancient Persian Army built bridges during their invasion of Greece in the fifth century BC. Herodotus drew many parallels between Xerxes and Darius, notably their building of bridges across the Bosporus.

In 513 BC Darius the Great embarked on the Scythian expedition, the first historic attack of Asia on Europe. According to Herodotus, in Darius assembled 700,000 men and 600 ships to the Bosporus, where a bridge of boats had been constructed. To cross the Danube delta into Thrace (in modern Romania), in 513 BC Darius built a massive bridge of boats. Miltiades, the Athenian despot, advised the leaders who were left at the Danube bridge to destroy it and leave Darius to his fate. This story is improbable, as Darius left Miltiades in possession of the Chersonese for some twenty years longer, though Persian forces were frequently in the neighbourhood. Darius was planning a second invasion of Greece when he died, leaving the throne to his son Xerxes, under whom the war with Greece was carried to a disastrous climax.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/river.htm

read the rest

and discuss

 

In retrospect, very few questionable decisions were made concerning the execution of the campaign. Perhaps Patton could have made his initial Rhine crossing north of Mainz and avoided the losses incurred crossing the Main. Also, the airborne operation in support of the 21 Army Group's Rhine crossing was probably not worth the risk. But these decisions were made in good faith and had little bearing on the ultimate outcome of the campaign. On the whole, Allied plans were excellent as demonstrated by the rapidity with which their objectives were met.

http://www.world-war-2-history.com/campaigns-page/4/12/

 

On 21 March a massive Allied ground force thus lay poised along the Rhine from Arnhem to Switzerland. Eisenhower's awesome armies, containing some 4.5 million personnel, included ninety divisions that anxiously awaited the final drive into the heart of the Nazi



http://www.army.mil/cmh/brochures/rhine ... neland.htm

 

Any stuff about the Eastern Front?