US (and our allies) all suffered from issues replacing their infantry casualties in 1944. A good look from reddit /askhistorians (the author even provides cites.)
Casualties breaking out from Normandy in the weeks that followed were very high. ~90% of all those casualties were in the infantry. The terrain in much of the area was well suited for a short range infantry defense. The Allies struggled with replacements The Germans mostly just bled out until their unit remnants were to weak to stop the eventual breakout. ISTR a number of units suffering over 100% casualties from D-Day until the end of August. That’s based on unit slots against total casualties (in Army terms where wounded counts.) Units would get topped up with replacements and troops who were able to return to duty after treatment for minor wounds. It’s likely that some troops counted more than once; they returned to duty after their first wound and then got hit again.
The airborne divisions were trained light infantry that added a special skill. If there was plenty of infantry available to take over the more routine fights it might have made sense to try and conserve them. There wasn’t.
You can see in this link battle casualties per US Army division in WWII. Pg 84 has it for European Theater which may be more comparable than mixing in the more episodic combat in the Pacific. The three Airborne Divisions had a middling number of casualties, 7-9k, not comparable to the longest serving Infantry Divisions with over 20k, but generally more than the Armored Divisions and more than many high numbered infantry divisions. But some of that was because the high numbered divisions entered combat as late as late 1944. Anyway gives an idea that the Airborne Divisions were not carefully conserved for true airborne operations, and/or suffered heavily in those operations. Even the relatively little known 17th Airborne Division didn’t get off all that lightly among all divisions in Europe (first pressed into service in the Ardennes fighting then later Rhine crossing airborne operation).
Especially considering that the TO&E strength of Airborne Divisions was significantly smaller, 8,596 in June 1944 v 14,253 for Infantry Divisions.
my recollection is that the casualty count in the Normandy campaign began to approach the “meat grinder” numbers of WWI, which is exactly what the Allied planners had feared would happen.
I’ve read a post-war monograph about how the army rangers were also misused. Instead of being saved for important missions or objectives, they were used as light infantry on the line. A waste of superior quality troops. Especially since they were generally lightly equipped, just like paratroops.
On the one hand, my mind is blown. On the other hand, I really shouldn’t be surprised to learn that the Army’s love affair with ETLAs* goes back that far.
*Extended Three Letter Acronym
Can’t find the direct quote today, but John Keegan wrote about the difficulty the Allies had with the “bocage country” in France. The thousand-year-old hedgerows were thick and closely spaced and made for ideal defensive terrain – which the Germans expertly used to exact agonizing casualties from the Allied armies. Keegan said that the “green American infantry” was so demoralized by the deadly hedgerows that the US Army called on the paratroopers (including the 101st Airborne) again and again to lead the attack. This was a waste of their talents and caused heavy casualties, but the situation was dire.
Eventually an enterprising noncom experimented with welding parts of captured German beach obstacles to the fronts of Sherman tanks to make cutting blades. These “Rhino” Shermans bulldozed a way through the hedgerows and the Americans were able to break out into open ground.
Why would it be a waste ? There’s a job needs doing and they’re there to do it. It’s not like every week there’s going to be a Pointe du Hoc to climb. Really once you’ve scaled that one cliff, Normandie’s pretty flat. As for Belgium, they don’t call it the Plat Pays (Flat Country) for nothing
The only way their skills were being wasted/the generals fucked up was if the Rangers were tasked with holding the line while the 132nd Freshly Conscripted Greenhorn Division stationed in the same camp got told to assault a bridge or something.
Why ? You think he get a percentage ? Nigga, please. The man who invented these, just some sad ass down at the basement of US Army. Thinking of some shit to make more tactical aids for the *real *players.
Fuck right. It ain’t about right, it’s about killing Jerry. Now, you think Uncle Sam is going to go down in that basement and say “hey mister tank trap, you the bomb. We killing Jerries faster than you can rip them beach obstacles out. So I’m gonna write my uncly-ass name on this fat-ass commendation for you !”
Shit. Man, the nigger who invented them things still working in the basement for some regular wages, thinking of some shit to counter panzershreck with, some shit like that. Believe.
The invention of a hedge-breaching device is generally credited to Curtis G. Culin, a sergeant in the 2nd Armored Division’s 102nd Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron. However, military historian Max Hastings notes that Culin was inspired by “a Tennessee hillbilly named Roberts”,[6] who during a discussion about how to overcome the bocage, said “Why don’t we get some saw teeth and put them on the front of the tank and cut through these hedges?” Rather than joining in the laughter that greeted this remark, Culin recognized the idea’s potential.[6] A prototype tusk-like assembly was created by welding steel scrap (from destroyed “Czech hedgehogs”) to the front of a tank to create a hedge cutter. The teeth helped prevent the vulnerable underside of the tank from being exposed while it knocked a hole in the hedgerow wall.[11][6] On 14 July, Lieutenant General Omar Bradley inspected the tank[11] and “watched in awe as a hedgerow exploded … to make way for the Sherman bursting through”.[6] According to Hastings, Culin, “an honest man”, attempted to give credit to Roberts, but this was forgotten in the publicity surrounding the invention. Hastings concludes: “[Culin] became a very American kind of national hero”.[6]
Kobal2, what the Hell is this? That post is in no way appropriate for General Questions. This is an official Warning for, let’s call it inappropriate language, because I’m not even sure how to describe whatever that is.
It was a waste because they were losing elite specialists on missions that could be done by regular troops. And in many ways done better by standard infantry who were more heavily equipped than the rangers who were supposed to make fast, daring raids instead of slugging it out on the line.
