Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Aber
Member
Posts: 787
Joined: 05 Jan 2010 21:43

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Aber » 20 Jan 2017 19:27

Richard Anderson wrote:I've been hesitating about commenting on this one, but...

Meanwhile, the idea ignores the simple fact that the shipping wasn't available to execute NEPTUNE and DRAGOON simultaneously.
Don't think anybody disagrees with this.

And the ports are important, but the question is whether it would have been better to use the Dragoon forces in Italy during the summer of 1944. As senior commanders were split at the time (and not simply on nationalistic grounds) I don't think we're likely to get a consensus here. :D

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2825
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Richard Anderson » 20 Jan 2017 20:21

Aber wrote:And the ports are important, but the question is whether it would have been better to use the Dragoon forces in Italy during the summer of 1944. As senior commanders were split at the time (and not simply on nationalistic grounds) I don't think we're likely to get a consensus here. :D
The SOLOC ports aren't important, they're vital. As early as September, one-quarter of all American tonnage was coming through them. Without them, you ground XV Corps by mid-month, leaving Third Army with a wide open flank and a reconstituted 11. Panzer Division on it.

So what is VI Corps and the FEC in Italy supposed to do June-August? They are unlikely to breach the western Gothic line. Move them east and put them under Eighth Army for OLIVE?
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 1795
Joined: 06 Jan 2006 12:24
Location: London

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Gooner1 » 23 Jan 2017 17:44

Richard Anderson wrote:So what is VI Corps and the FEC in Italy supposed to do June-August? They are unlikely to breach the western Gothic line. Move them east and put them under Eighth Army for OLIVE?
The Harding plan was to breach the Gothic line in the centre on the axis Florence-Bologna. Alexander was persuaded by Leese to make the main effort on the Adriatic in part because of the absence of the mountain skilled FEC.

Even missing those two corps Fifth Army almost did breakthrough onto the plains.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 14 Feb 2017 03:26

Aber wrote:...

The map doesn't make complete sense on its own terms - how and where is the threat from south of the Loire to come from, and be supplied?
In reverse order...
Where were the German 1st & 19th Armies supplied from through August? Hint, there were two army & a army group HQ in south & western France, with supplies stocked for two Pz Corps & two infantry armies.

As of 1 Sept German Army Group G appears to have five field or mobile infantry divisions to deploy northward, & the 11 Pz Div. There were another five static & training divisions to leave behind. In theory a infantry division or two from the Ligurian Army could be transfered to AG G. Its not difficult since the railway link between Italy & the Rhone valley is still usable.

Facing the US 3rd Army 1 Sept were the 3rd & 15th PzGr Div, two field Inf Div, & assorted regiment/brigade size units.

I dont have the precise distribution for the German formations that appeared along the Rhine 1 - 15 September. It looks like a total of eight Inf Div & seven Pz Brigades crossed to reinforce the western defense. Another six Inf Div appeared from 16 - 30 September. If 33% of these reinforced the defense south of Trier then five Inf Div & a couple of the armored brigades are added to those present in the Lorraine region 1 Sept.

It looks like 3rd Army had two armored + four infantry divisions, and 3 armored cavalry groups. This looks strong, but it appears only two divisions reinforced the 3rd Army during Sept, the 79th ID & Fr 2d Armored. & there is the question of supplying the extra corps.

So, as Sept progresses the US 3rd Army finds itself fighting in two directions, with eight divisions or nine if the aggregate AC Groups are counted as a division. That is vs vs a dozen infantry divisions, two PzGr Div, a Pz Div, & assorted Pz brigades.
What it does show is that a thrust towards the Ruhr with a subsidiary thrust towards the Saar does not have to reach the Swiss border.
I'm really skeptical. Note that if the Swiss border is not reached the railway connection between Germany & south central France (Army Grp G) remains available to move supplies or reinforcements in that direction. Conversely the 3rd Army lacks the supplies sent north from Marsailles, which keeps its operational ability cramped to early September supply delivery levels. Vs a 50% stronger defense in raw numbers a thrust towards the Saar looks unproductive.

There is a political question as well. Anyone wish to speculate on how ethusiasticaly the French leaders, or ranks would accept fighting across several mountain ranges to secure northern Italy & hypothetically Vienna? Meanwhile foreign armies are fighting over French territory. I suspect the eight French divisions at hand in Sept 1944 would be of marginal value in any ramped up Italian or Alpine campaign.

randwick
Member
Posts: 291
Joined: 23 May 2006 22:08
Location: randwick

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by randwick » 13 Nov 2019 22:16

.
It seems to me , and some others than launching Anvil in the early spring of 1944 was a killer blow

Italy was a strategic dead end street , militarily there is no such thing as the "Ljubjlana gap " this is a Churchill fantasy
during WW1 the Austrian defended this area with one hand behind their back


Anvil great prize is of course the port of Marseilles with Toulon and port-de-bouc as cherries on top
it would put the Germans in an impossible situation , Italy was always a side show

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 957
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Aida1 » 17 Nov 2019 20:56

One landing first to pull in German reserves and the second one later to outflank. Never simultaneously even if that were feasible.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 18 Nov 2019 06:41

Oddly this thread has been revived just a few weeks after I'd restarted testing a April ANVIL operation on the game board. At this point I'm just examining game mechanics & more historical data. I'm hoping to test the scenario with some actual opponents & get a better test out of that. My solitaire rewind does reiterate the tough decision the defense has. With a April invasion in S France the defense acts in the south with the knowledge a larger army will be assaulting in the NW before a strong force could destroy the southern lodgment and redeploy north. Hindsight works against the defense here as its clear everything is needed to stuff the northern attack, but that leaves the southern incursion able to expand and obtain a rally good position for the battle in he interior. In the context of this specific game, or most other systems easily available its difficult to reproduce the Allied deception ops & the confusion they created.

Examining the German reinforcements I noticed several relatively powerful formations that had been withdrawn from Italy to rebuild in Germany. Specifically the 3rd & 25th PzGdr divisions. This led to the question of what else Hitler might have withdrawn from Italy in April or May to deal with the 6th AG? Not drawn any conclusions, but its a question worth pursuing.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2825
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Richard Anderson » 18 Nov 2019 17:44

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
18 Nov 2019 06:41
Oddly this thread has been revived just a few weeks after I'd restarted testing a April ANVIL operation on the game board.
Keep in mind it is the landing craft that remain the decider for when. DRAGOON was executed mid-August because that was when it was expected the necessary craft diverted to NEPTUNE could be transferred and refitted for the new operation. Working backwards from mid June means a spring ANVIL would have to be mid March. That means no DIADEM, no breakthrough of the Winter Line, and continued stalemate in Italy. The upside is that the German divisions in France are somewhat weaker, but the downside is there is little likelihood of a swift breakout from southern France, which likely means greater demolition of the southern French railway system, nullifying the supply advantage that eventually gave the Allies.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

User avatar
Kingfish
Member
Posts: 2836
Joined: 05 Jun 2003 16:22
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Kingfish » 19 Nov 2019 00:42

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
18 Nov 2019 06:41
With a April invasion in S France the defense acts in the south with the knowledge a larger army will be assaulting in the NW before a strong force could destroy the southern lodgment and redeploy north.
What's the OOB of the invasion/follow up forces?
The gods do not deduct from a man's allotted span the hours spent in fishing.
~Babylonian Proverb

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 28 Nov 2019 04:00

Kingfish wrote:
19 Nov 2019 00:42
Carl Schwamberger wrote:
18 Nov 2019 06:41
With a April invasion in S France the defense acts in the south with the knowledge a larger army will be assaulting in the NW before a strong force could destroy the southern lodgment and redeploy north.
What's the OOB of the invasion/follow up forces?
Similar to the later DRAGOON operation. The US 3d, 36th, 45th ID. There were a half dozen French divisions used in August, but the secondary sources I've looked at are contradictory on how combat ready those were. They had been organized & reequipped with US material from mid 1943 with the expectation they would be used in France from mid 1944. It should be possible to redirect units headed to the UK to the 6th Army Group. Two or three US divisions to make up for unready French might not unbalance things too much. One of the tradeoffs with a ANVIL operation is several of the German mobile divisions present in France & Germany had just recently been withdrawn from combat and were not yet rebuilt to the level of early June. The 9th & 11th Pz, 1stSS, & 25th PzGdr were several.

Generally I've taken a conservative course on the Allied OB pending better information. So far thats not hindered the ability.
Richard Anderson wrote:
18 Nov 2019 17:44
Keep in mind it is the landing craft that remain the decider for when. DRAGOON was executed mid-August because that was when it was expected the necessary craft diverted to NEPTUNE could be transferred and refitted for the new operation. Working backwards from mid June means a spring ANVIL would have to be mid March.
For this I've restricted a May NEPTUNE operation to a three beach/corps attack. In simple terms the original COSSAC plan. Picking back thru Pogue, Atkinson, Perret & others I find Eisehowers choice consistently described as; any viable ANVIL operation made Montgomerys expanded January plan unworkable. Ike wanted a large maximum effort NEPTUNE or OVERLORD operation & refused to consider scaling that back. but, he wanted the ANVIL operation as well and kept SHAEF, 6th AG, & 21 AG staffers working into March trying to create a viable ANVIL Op and a expanded NEPTUNE Op.

Essentially this game scenario cuts the knot and goes with a 1943 size cross Channel attack. If I had detailed information on the numbers of AK classes of transports, LST, LCI, LCT, ect... ect.. transit times, refit schedules, and deliveries of new transport from the US all this could parsed out more accurately. For the moment I have to extaplolate from summaries of the decisions of Ike & his crew.
That means no DIADEM, no breakthrough of the Winter Line, and continued stalemate in Italy. The upside is that the German divisions in France are somewhat weaker, but the downside is there is little likelihood of a swift breakout from southern France, which likely means greater demolition of the southern French railway system, nullifying the supply advantage that eventually gave the Allies.
I've wondered about the effects on the Italian front. We did some scrap paper gaming of German vs Allied actions in Italy. The conclusion was if nothing is withdrawn from Italy then yes the front can remain stalemated south of Rome. The trade off is the defense in France could really use several more corps. Actually another army if theres one to spare. Retain Rome, or save Paris, your call. The same conundrum is more immediate on the game board depicting just France. Yes it is easy to stall the 6th AG in the Central Massif, or even south of the Durance River (look it up), but this requires a fair size reinforcement for the German Army Group G or 19th Army. Its a simple matter of robbing Hans to pay Heinrich. Every division transferred from Rommel to Blaskowitz or Sodenstern make NEPTUNE/OVERLORD that much easier. Actually I suspect its possible to stuff a cross Channel attack if the southern front is ignored & all the reserves focused on the second invasion. The reverse may be true as well. I've never tested either extreme. Hitler liked half measures and having it both ways and thats been good enough for me :D

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 2825
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Richard Anderson » 28 Nov 2019 18:49

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
28 Nov 2019 04:00
Similar to the later DRAGOON operation. The US 3d, 36th, 45th ID. There were a half dozen French divisions used in August, but the secondary sources I've looked at are contradictory on how combat ready those were.
The French forces landed as part of Seventh U.S. Army on 15 August were a detachment of Armee 'B' (later 1re Armee Francais) and consisted of 2ème Corps d'Armee with 1ère Division de Marche d'Infanterie, 1ère Division Blindée (-), 3ème Division d'Infanterie Algérienne, and the 9ème Division d'Infanterie Coloniale, Only the combat command of 1st Armored Division and 9th Colonial Infantry Division lacked combat experience. The 1st and 3d Division were as combat-experienced as the American divisions that landed and arguably better in the harsh terrain of the Vosges later in the campaign. The other divisions were equipped to American standards, albeit often with substitute standard equipment such as M3 rather than M5 light tanks and M4A2 and M4A4 medium tanks.
For this I've restricted a May NEPTUNE operation to a three beach/corps attack. In simple terms the original COSSAC plan. Picking back thru Pogue, Atkinson, Perret & others I find Eisehowers choice consistently described as; any viable ANVIL operation made Montgomerys expanded January plan unworkable. Ike wanted a large maximum effort NEPTUNE or OVERLORD operation & refused to consider scaling that back. but, he wanted the ANVIL operation as well and kept SHAEF, 6th AG, & 21 AG staffers working into March trying to create a viable ANVIL Op and a expanded NEPTUNE Op.
The problem with that is then you will likely not have either Eisenhower or Montgomery as commanders, which will likely change the overall command structure for the worse. However, worse than that would be the political ramifications that would fall out. There is a strong possibility Chuchill's reluctance to commit to the invasion would gain strength, possibly resulting in the nullification of the entire operation.
Essentially this game scenario cuts the knot and goes with a 1943 size cross Channel attack. If I had detailed information on the numbers of AK classes of transports, LST, LCI, LCT, ect... ect.. transit times, refit schedules, and deliveries of new transport from the US all this could parsed out more accurately. For the moment I have to extaplolate from summaries of the decisions of Ike & his crew.
SHINGLE was two divisions. To get the five division NEPTUNE in June required transferring about half the Med assets to England, plus getting an additional month of production and deployment from the US (thus the delay from May to June). A March three-division invasion is possible, which could be followed by a five-division southern France landing. However, you then have to deal with all the faults of a three-division landing - OMAHA, GOLD, and JUNO.
I've wondered about the effects on the Italian front. We did some scrap paper gaming of German vs Allied actions in Italy. The conclusion was if nothing is withdrawn from Italy then yes the front can remain stalemated south of Rome. The trade off is the defense in France could really use several more corps. Actually another army if theres one to spare. Retain Rome, or save Paris, your call. The same conundrum is more immediate on the game board depicting just France. Yes it is easy to stall the 6th AG in the Central Massif, or even south of the Durance River (look it up), but this requires a fair size reinforcement for the German Army Group G or 19th Army. Its a simple matter of robbing Hans to pay Heinrich. Every division transferred from Rommel to Blaskowitz or Sodenstern make NEPTUNE/OVERLORD that much easier. Actually I suspect its possible to stuff a cross Channel attack if the southern front is ignored & all the reserves focused on the second invasion. The reverse may be true as well. I've never tested either extreme. Hitler liked half measures and having it both ways and thats been good enough for me :D
Except there is a strong possibility a three-division Normandy landing isn't viable and is easily contained by HG-B...if not wiped out, forced into a stalemate worse than Anzio. The other problem is there likely may not be a AG-G to oppose a southern France landing, but rather a single command, under Rundstedt or Rommel, rather than the command mess created in May.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 29 Nov 2019 04:33

One clarification. the model I'm examining separates the two operations by 4-6 weeks depending on the weather. Not simultaneous as proposed in the OP here. The schedule I wrote up several years ago was based on the proposed schedule Ike was operating on circa January 1944.
Richard Anderson wrote:
28 Nov 2019 18:49
Carl Schwamberger wrote:
28 Nov 2019 04:00
Similar to the later DRAGOON operation. The US 3d, 36th, 45th ID. There were a half dozen French divisions used in August, but the secondary sources I've looked at are contradictory on how combat ready those were.
The French forces landed as part of Seventh U.S. Army on 15 August were a detachment of Armee 'B' (later 1re Armee Francais) and consisted of 2ème Corps d'Armee with 1ère Division de Marche d'Infanterie, 1ère Division Blindée (-), 3ème Division d'Infanterie Algérienne, and the 9ème Division d'Infanterie Coloniale, Only the combat command of 1st Armored Division and 9th Colonial Infantry Division lacked combat experience. The 1st and 3d Division were as combat-experienced as the American divisions that landed and arguably better in the harsh terrain of the Vosges later in the campaign. The other divisions were equipped to American standards, albeit often with substitute standard equipment such as M3 rather than M5 light tanks and M4A2 and M4A4 medium tanks.
Thanks. Perhaps I should dial the French capability back up a bit.
For this I've restricted a May NEPTUNE operation to a three beach/corps attack. In simple terms the original COSSAC plan. Picking back thru Pogue, Atkinson, Perret & others I find Eisehowers choice consistently described as; any viable ANVIL operation made Montgomerys expanded January plan unworkable. Ike wanted a large maximum effort NEPTUNE or OVERLORD operation & refused to consider scaling that back. but, he wanted the ANVIL operation as well and kept SHAEF, 6th AG, & 21 AG staffers working into March trying to create a viable ANVIL Op and a expanded NEPTUNE Op.
Richard Anderson wrote:
28 Nov 2019 18:49
The problem with that is then you will likely not have either Eisenhower or Montgomery as commanders, which will likely change the overall command structure for the worse. However, worse than that would be the political ramifications that would fall out. There is a strong possibility Chuchill's reluctance to commit to the invasion would gain strength, possibly resulting in the nullification of the entire operation.
Any likely players of their game scenario will not be Ike or Monty. I'm certainly not, so we are there :D
Essentially this game scenario cuts the knot and goes with a 1943 size cross Channel attack. If I had detailed information on the numbers of AK classes of transports, LST, LCI, LCT, ect... ect.. transit times, refit schedules, and deliveries of new transport from the US all this could parsed out more accurately. For the moment I have to extaplolate from summaries of the decisions of Ike & his crew.
Richard Anderson wrote:
28 Nov 2019 18:49
SHINGLE was two divisions. To get the five division NEPTUNE in June required transferring about half the Med assets to England, plus getting an additional month of production and deployment from the US (thus the delay from May to June). A March three-division invasion is possible, which could be followed by a five-division southern France landing. However, you then have to deal with all the faults of a three-division landing - OMAHA, GOLD, and JUNO.
Eh, I'm testing a updated version of what COSSAC proposed, the Riviera in April, the Calvados in May. The same sequence that Ike could not get a grip on. The dice rolls for weather in this game pretty much exclude a March adventure in Normandy. You can get a week of clear weather for a landing, but your Mulberrys get repeatedly wrecked and the follow up suffer fatal delays. I don't know what the reality there was, but the dice dictate crossing the Channel as your would a trip to Canterbury.
I've wondered about the effects on the Italian front. We did some scrap paper gaming of German vs Allied actions in Italy. The conclusion was if nothing is withdrawn from Italy then yes the front can remain stalemated south of Rome. The trade off is the defense in France could really use several more corps. Actually another army if theres one to spare. Retain Rome, or save Paris, your call. The same conundrum is more immediate on the game board depicting just France. Yes it is easy to stall the 6th AG in the Central Massif, or even south of the Durance River (look it up), but this requires a fair size reinforcement for the German Army Group G or 19th Army. Its a simple matter of robbing Hans to pay Heinrich. Every division transferred from Rommel to Blaskowitz or Sodenstern make NEPTUNE/OVERLORD that much easier. Actually I suspect its possible to stuff a cross Channel attack if the southern front is ignored & all the reserves focused on the second invasion. The reverse may be true as well. I've never tested either extreme. Hitler liked half measures and having it both ways and thats been good enough for me :D
Richard Anderson wrote:
28 Nov 2019 18:49
Except there is a strong possibility a three-division Normandy landing isn't viable and is easily contained by HG-B...if not wiped out, forced into a stalemate worse than Anzio. The other problem is there likely may not be a AG-G to oppose a southern France landing, but rather a single command, under Rundstedt or Rommel, rather than the command mess created in May.
At some point I'll make the effort to pile all the German reserves on the Normandy battle & see where the breaking point is. That requires waiving away the deception operations and 'German' thinking but it begs to be done.

As for the second part, having a single game player on each side certainly cleans up all the command messes in sight. Perfect coordination for all.
...if not wiped out, forced into a stalemate worse than Anzio.
Not actually had that occur in the near dozen tests, but came close a few times. The problem is to do that requires sending too little to the south to contain Devers French army/s. Ignore that lot for a moment & suddenly they & whatever Yanks are along for the ride are everywhere, storming Dijon, capturing Atlantic ports like Bordeaux, setting up tactical airbases in range of the Ludendorff bridge. ... Hypothetically the south France port group can supply 25 Allied divisions, Letting that happen kind of makes a Anzio in Normandy seem a hollow achievement.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 30 Nov 2019 18:12

Gooner1 wrote:
17 Jan 2017 17:07
Kingfish wrote: See my previous post.

To justify an 'Alps before Dragoon' strategy one would have to show the benefits outweigh the OTL. Just rolling up to the Alps would not suffice, even when you factor in the loss to arms / food supply to the Reich.
Surely that works in reverse too?

I don't think its a case of no Dragoon though, its a question of whether the divisions for Dragoon should have been pulled from an active theatre - and a strategically important one at that - where things were currently going very well just to open up another front when there are a whole stack of US divisions en route to Europe.

I make it fourteen US divisions leaving the States for Europe just in August and September 1944 of which just one went to Italy.
One of the questions I've not yet pursued is the shipping schedule of those and those sent from January thru July. A portion of those could be redirected to the MTO as follow on force to this April invasion. How easy that would be or the knock on effects for shipping schedules ect... I cant say.

Along with this are the usually ignored tactical air forces. A portion of the single & twin engined air wings destined for the UK might be redirected as with the ground force. & again theres a question of the effect on shipping schedules ect...

& just for color, on my game board I've reconstituted the US 2d Cavalry div as part of the follow on force for Op ANVIL.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 10 Dec 2019 10:56

Took a look at the unit movement schedules before putting the game back on the shelf. A broader look at the ground unit of both the MTO ETO suggests how there'd be a major knockon effect. Up thread there was the question of the effect on the DIADEM operation, that Executing ANVIL would mean nothing like the DIADEM offensive. I have to agree there, & suspect a lot more would be unrecognizable.

The list below is from Stauntons OB of the US Army, & some incomplete notes for the Commonwealth. Rich Andersens post 56 has most or all of the combat ready French ground units. First thing that jumps out at me is how the US 3rd, 36th, & 45th ID were heavily invested in the Anzio lodgment and the DIADEM offensive. Those & the French are not a trivial part of the spring/summer offensive in Italy. Firmly commit all that to a April attack elsewhere and not only is the DIADEM operation effectively gone, but the previous winter & spring operations would metamorph into something quite different than OTL. If in February or March Ike 'directs' the better US infantry divisions be withdrawn, & the French then Wilson & Alexander are going to be rethinking their entire strategy for the spring. Exactly where that goes I can't say, but there are several directions.

This affects both Kesselrings & Hitlers thinking in terms of what to leave in Italy & what to extract for use elsewhere.

There are some units that can be shuffled about to adjust things. The 35th & 79th Inf Div could be shipped to Marseilles vs Liverpool. the May decision to disband the 2d Cav might be mad moot by its use in France.

ETUSA - 12th Army Group
2 Armored Arrived UK Nov 43
3 Armored Arrived UK Sep 43
4 Armored Arrived UK Jan 44
5 Armored Arrived UK Feb 44
6 Armored Arrived UK Feb 44


1 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
2 Infantry Arrived UK Oct 43
4 Infantry Arrived UK Jan 44
5 Infantry Arrived UK Aug 43
8 Infantry Arrived UK Dec 43
9 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
28 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
29 Infantry Arrived UK Oct 42
30 Infantry Arrived UK Feb 44
35 Infantry Arrived UK May 44 * 12 May
28 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
79 Infantry Arrived UK Apr 44 *
83 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
90 Infantry Arrived UK Nov 43
501 Abn Arrived UK Jan 44
507 Abn Arrived UK Jan 44
2 Cav Gp Arrived UK Apr 44 *
3 Cav Gp Arrived UK Jun 44
4 Cav Gp Arrived UK Dec 43
6 Cav Gp Arrived UK Oct 43
15 Cav Gp Arrived UK Mar 44 *
102 Cav Gp Arrived UK Oct 42
106 Cav Gp Arrived UK Mar 44 *
113 Cav Gp Arrived UK Jan 44

US units in the MTO
1 Armored Remained in Italy.

3 Infantry Into 5th Army Res April 44 ?
34 Infantry
36 Infantry Withdrawn 5th Army March 1944
45 Infantry @ Anzio to June 1944
85 Infantry Arrived Africa Jan 44 > Italy Mar 44
88 Infantry Arrived Africa Ddec 43 > Italy Feb 44
91 Infantry Arrived Africa May 44
2 Cav Div Arrived Africa Mar 44 Inactivated May 44
517 Abn Arrived MTO May 44







British Ground forces Partial
Divisions
1 Inf Formed in UK prewar. To Africa March 1943.
3 Inf Formed in UK prewar. To France June 1944.
4 Inf Formed in UK prewar. To Africa March 1943
5 Inf Formed in UK prewar. To india May 1942. ME Aug 1942.
To Sicily July 1943. To NW Europe 1945
6 Inf Formed in Egypt 1939. Palestine & India March 1940.
To Egypt Oct 1941. to India March 1942. Disolved 1943.
15 Inf Formed in UK Sept 1939. To France June 1944
38 Inf Formed Sept 1939. Sept 1944 redesignated 38 Reserve
43 Inf Formed from Territorial Div 1939. To France June 1944
44 Inf Formed from Territorial Div 1939. To Egypt July 1942.
Disbanded Dec 1943
46 Inf Formed in UK Oct 1939. To Africa Jan1943. To Italy Sept 1943
47 Inf Formed Nov 1940 from 2 London div. Dispersed Aug 1944
48 Inf Territorial Div to Dec 1942. Designated Reserve to end of war.
49 Inf Reformed in UK June 1940. to France 12 June 1944.
50 Inf From Territorial Div. To Egypt June 1941. To Lybia/Tunisia
Feb 1942. To Sicily Uly 1943. To UK Oct 1943.
To France June 1944.
51 Inf To Egypt Aug 1942. To UK July 1943. To France June 1944
52 Inf In UK from 1939. To France Oct 1944.
53 Inf In UK from 1939. To France June 1944
54 Inf In UK from 1939. Disbanded Dec 1943
55 Inf Remained in UK entire war
56 Inf To Iraq Nov 1942. To Egypt March 1943. to Italy Sept 1943
59 Inf Formed in UK. 1939 to France June 1944
78 Inf Formed in UK May 1942. to Africa Nov 1942.
To Italy Sept 1943

Guards Armored Formed June 1941
1 Arm Fomed prewar. To Egypt November 1941. to Italy May 1944
2 Arm Formed Dec 1939. Used to rebuild 7th Arm Jan 1941.
Disolved 1941
6 Arm Formed Sept 1940 in UK. To Egypt Jan 1941. to Italy
March 1944
7th Arm Formed Egypt 1939. To Italy Sept 1943. to UK Dec 1943
8th Arm Formed UK Nov 1940. to Egypt July 42. Disolved Jan 1943.
9th Arm Formed UK Dec 1940. remained there & was disbanded
July 1944
10th Arm Formed in Palestine Aug 1941. to Egypt April 1942.
To Palestine Jan 1943
11 Arm Formed in UK March 1941. remained there until to France
in June 1944
42 Arm Formed in UK Nov 1941. Disolved Oct 1943
79 Arm Formed Aug 1942 as admin HQ for units of specialist vehicles.

1 Para Formed 1941. Move to Africa March/April 1943.
Two brigades returned to UK Dec 1943.
6th Para Formed May 1943. Remained in UK

1 Cdn To UK 1940. To Sicily July 1943
2 Cdn To UK 1940
3 Cdn To UK 1941
5 Cdn Arm To UK 1941

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 7142
Joined: 02 Sep 2006 20:31
Location: USA

Re: Overlord and Dragoon land on the same day

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 10 Dec 2019 19:43

It's been pointed out that delaying op NEPTUNE until June takes advantage of additional amphib production from the US, and month of crew preparation. I'd not thought to game out a 8+ week gap between ANVIL & NEPTUNE ops. This does give the defence more time to organize a attack, but at the risk of a inadaquate defense in Normandy or elsewhere.

Return to “What if”