Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Boak
No, but if you read the campaign histories you will find that the advance was slower than expected (and planned) because of the tendency of the leading units to stop upon reaching opposition and call up the fighter-bombers.
|
I'm sorry Graham but that view shows very little understanding of the difficulties and challenges confronting the Allied armies, especially the British, in their battles in Normandy. And is a great injustice to those men who served in that campaign.
I highly recommend that you read "Decision In Normandy, The Story of Montgomery and the Allied Campaign", by Carlo D'Este. D'Este is a retired US Army Colonel and, unlike many, actually provides a very reasoned and balanced view of all participants involved in the Normandy campaign.
He's quick to point the finger of blame where it's warranted (at all levels), but also looks into, and analyses, the reasons why the battle didn't go as planned. By both sides. And one aspect that he highlights with many specific examples is the less than successful efforts of 2nd TAC and the 9th AF in their support of the ground forces. In most cases due to inaccuracy, not effort.
It was a case of constant friction between Army and Air Force leaders throughout the campaign. It was only following the final breakout into the more open plains south of Paris that air support became a significant contributor, when distance and space lent themselves to the fighter bomber tactical smother approach.