Skip to main content

View Diary: ‘From Hell, Hull and Halifax, may the Good Lord deliver us…’ (58 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Maybe veering off course a little, SF... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    markdd, RiveroftheWest, shortfinals

    ...but did the high attrition rates of the RAF's bombing campaign truly affect British manpower availability for the Normandy/Western Europe campaign to a more-significant degree than other factors? I recall reading in the late John Keegan's excellent book Six Armies in Normandy, that after the D-Day landings, and the eventual breakouts in July/August of 1944, the British forces under Montgomery's command, unlike the Americans, had very many fewer reserves to call on in any case. Obviously, their manpower needs would have been helped had the thousands (how many, btw?) of  casualties had been available for  other assignments - but would it have been that much of a help for the ground campaign? (Monty or not?)

    •  Don't know about RAF policies (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RiveroftheWest, shortfinals, Jay C

      But if you made it into the que for the Army Air Corps at the recruiting / draft office, you were in for good.  If you can't fly, can you navigate, can you bomb, can you shoot a gun, can you operate a radio, can you fix a radio, can you load guns, can you load bombs, can you guess weather, can you fix an engine, can you count beans, can you cook beans?  Every function the AAC needed was filled by AAC personnel, no depending on regular army types.  

      I can see how filling air crew ranks and attrition would have dominated manpower requirements in 1942 and early 1943.  North Africa and Italy didn't put nearly the strain on the Army's resources that Overlord would.  Since most of the fighting in the Pacific was done by the Navy and Marines, it wasn't a direct draw on the Army.

      “that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, any more than our opinions in physics or geometry.” Thomas Jefferson

      by markdd on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 11:39:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, it really did! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RiveroftheWest, Jay C

      For example, as British Armoured Divisions suffered more than 50% casualties, they were NOT re-inforced but broken up and used as replacements themselves!

      It was dire..........not just the aircrew, but the HUGE 'tail' of support staff behind them (photographers, met. people, ATC, etc. etc.)

      'Per Ardua Ad Astra'

      by shortfinals on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 02:22:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site