OT - After Market-Garden

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Canoerebel »

Gents, I just finished re-reading A Bridge Too Far, which is truly a great book. Except one thing - it ends abruptly and never puts the campaign into context. A couple of questions that I know can get answered better here than trying to wade through the Internet to find them):

1. The Allies took the bridges up to Nijmegan but not Arnhem. I can tell from a couple of isolated sentences in the book that the Allies discontinued the campaign. Apparently, the ground units were shifted south to later continue the attack into Germany. Arnhem, for instance, wasn't finally taken until April '45 by Canadian engineers. Did the Allies continue to hold Son, Vegel, Nijmegan, etc., or did they pull back?

2. Cornelius Ryan doesn't give much casualty information. Near the end, he references losses of something over 1,000 for each side, but I can't tell if that's just the Arnhem sector or the entire campaign. However, it seems like the Allies gave a good account of themselves so that German losses were high and disruption to the German war effort was pretty steep. So, even though the Allies failed, could an argument be made that the campaign was ultimately pretty successful? For instance, did the confusion and losses allow the Allies to make good progress elsewhere? Or was it a failure no matter how you slice it?
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by KenchiSulla »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Gents, I just finished re-reading A Bridge Too Far, which is truly a great book. Except one thing - it ends abruptly and never puts the campaign into context. A couple of questions that I know can get answered better here than trying to wade through the Internet to find them):

1. The Allies took the bridges up to Nijmegan but not Arnhem. I can tell from a couple of isolated sentences in the book that the Allies discontinued the campaign. Apparently, the ground units were shifted south to later continue the attack into Germany. Arnhem, for instance, wasn't finally taken until April '45 by Canadian engineers. Did the Allies continue to hold Son, Vegel, Nijmegan, etc., or did they pull back?

2. Cornelius Ryan doesn't give much casualty information. Near the end, he references losses of something over 1,000 for each side, but I can't tell if that's just the Arnhem sector or the entire campaign. However, it seems like the Allies gave a good account of themselves so that German losses were high and disruption to the German war effort was pretty steep. So, even though the Allies failed, could an argument be made that the campaign was ultimately pretty successful? For instance, did the confusion and losses allow the Allies to make good progress elsewhere? Or was it a failure no matter how you slice it?

The frontline shifted south to Nijmegen. Son, Veghel were held and the allies started to expand to the east and the west (the Market Garden operation left a really vulnerable salient). An example of an oktober battle in Holland is the Battle for Overloon, very bitter and heavy fighting... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Overloon. The objective was to push to the river "Maas" in the east, and to clear Antwerp to the west.

Casualties were much higher then what you are saying. The Arnhem sector (1st airborne) alone left 2000 KIA and only 2000 with no or minor wounds returning over the rhine leaving about 6000 of the division wounded and captured.

Here is a link to a thread I created a year ago after my visit to Oosterbeek (about 75 minut drive from where I live)..

tm.asp?m=3185634

I visited Margraten last summer and when I walked past the crosses (about 10.000 in total) a lot of the 101st and 82nd graves showed 17-25 september... Perhaps someone else has more figures for it..

EDIT: Can't call the sources reliable but here are casualty figures for the:

101st airborne: 373 killed, 1436 wounded and 547 missing.
82nd airbore: 1700 total
Polish 1st indep. brigade: 590 total
XXX Corps: 1700 total
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
catwhoorg
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Location: Uk expat lving near Atlanta

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by catwhoorg »

The Allies pulled back some advanced units, and formed a line roughly along the Waal, so retaining Nijmegan.

The Allies then moved moved East (forming a line along the Meuse) and West along the estuaries.
Clearing the approaches to Antwerp (the Schledt Estuary) which in itself massively shortened the supply lines to the front, and arguably should have been the objective all along.

Antwerp itself later was the ultimate objective of the German armoured thrust that we know as the Battle of the Bulge, because it had so quickly become a major supply point.


Given there were at least 8000 casualties for the 1st airborne division, and over 1000 for XXX corps, I'm not quite sure what Ryan is referencing. The Germans for sure lost fewer men in the campaign than the Allies, and the supplies burnt off meant that other possibly better operations did not go ahead at that time. (such as said clearing of the Estuary)

Supply was coming up from France, and burning valuable fuel by the truck full.


Arnhem was 90% of a success. However, anything less than 100% success was a mission failure, a daring move that classically was a Bridge too far.

(Though with better planning it really could have succeeded. Misplaced drop zones etc being just part of the issue)
Image
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by KenchiSulla »

The objective was to break through into the German Industrial heartland and that didn't work out. The operation was a failure no doubt. If the germans had had stronger reserves it could have ended in drama but luckily there were no real reserves after Bagration and Cobra.

In the end it ofcourse contributed to atritting and straining German resources..

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
KenchiSulla
Posts: 2956
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: the Netherlands

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by KenchiSulla »

OT: Just to indicate the situation in the area, remains are sometimes still found and identified

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... field.html

And a short movie of the burial ceremony

http://nos.nl/video/425300-britse-solda ... rbeek.html
AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.”
¯ Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by HansBolter »

Ridgeway's memoirs did a good job of covering events flowing MG as the 18th Airborne Corps under his command remained attached to Monty's army group for the remainder of the duration of the war.

I have a copy at home and believe the title is Ridgeway's Paratroopers or something close to that IIRC.
Hans

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Canoerebel »

I knew I'd get more concise and interesting information quicker this way! Thanks, gents.

I'll go back and re-read the final chapter of the book. I suspect Ryan might have been referencing just British airborne KIA in the Arnhem sector when he references the number (it was something like 1,300). I'll post later.

Were any of the officers involved in MG reprimanded? Ryan, without explicity pointing fingers, seems to assign a good bit of blame on Thomas (43rd Wessex, IIRC) for being slow. Also, as I read I wondered if he had some criticism of Urquhart for getting separated form his command for two days, but ultimately decided not to give voice to his criticisms. What say you?

What I really, really like about the book is that Ryan did such a thorough job in tracking down and interviewing veterans from both sides. That is a truly massive undertaking. In my experience, many writers don't enjoy interviewing (like everybody else, they tend to gravitate to the easy way, which means finding info in books and on the Internet). Ryan's work was spectacular, coming as it did just 25 years post battle. In that way it remids me of Hal Moore's We Were Soldiers Once, though that book is even better since the writer was present at the battle he's writing about.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by geofflambert »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Gents, I just finished re-reading A Bridge Too Far, which is truly a great book. Except one thing - it ends abruptly and never puts the campaign into context. A couple of questions that I know can get answered better here than trying to wade through the Internet to find them):

1. The Allies took the bridges up to Nijmegan but not Arnhem. I can tell from a couple of isolated sentences in the book that the Allies discontinued the campaign. Apparently, the ground units were shifted south to later continue the attack into Germany. Arnhem, for instance, wasn't finally taken until April '45 by Canadian engineers. Did the Allies continue to hold Son, Vegel, Nijmegan, etc., or did they pull back?

2. Cornelius Ryan doesn't give much casualty information. Near the end, he references losses of something over 1,000 for each side, but I can't tell if that's just the Arnhem sector or the entire campaign. However, it seems like the Allies gave a good account of themselves so that German losses were high and disruption to the German war effort was pretty steep. So, even though the Allies failed, could an argument be made that the campaign was ultimately pretty successful? For instance, did the confusion and losses allow the Allies to make good progress elsewhere? Or was it a failure no matter how you slice it?


Are you saying he was casual about that? [:'(] I am often described as a casualty. [;)] Yes, the words are related in their etymology.

rev rico
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 12:01 pm

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by rev rico »

There was some fierce fighting after Sept 25. The Nijmegen front facing the Reichswald was a stalemate; the 82nd Airborne reinforced with British armor kept the Germans at bay. The Allies kept the bridgehead over the Waal River north of Nijmegen in what was dubbed "the island". Meanwhile they expanded the corridor east and west from Veghel & Eindhoven. Two US divisions were given to Monty to do this as his forces were worn and weak.

Some battles included:
On Sept 30 the aforementioned battle of Overloon took place as the US 7 Arm Div & British 11 Armd Div expanded eastward toward Maastricht. There were large tank battles with the 107 Pz Bgd.
On Oct. 1-3 Model was able to get what remained of three mobile divisions (10th SS Panzer, 116th Panzer, 9th Panzer) to attack the bridgehead from the north and east. The 43rd Wessex & Gds Armd Divs fended off the attacks.
On Oct. 4 the new 363rd Volksgrenedier Division attacked the same bridgehead from the west. By that time the 101st Airborne was shifted to that position and bore the brunt of that attack.
On Oct 27 the 9th Panzer & 15th PzGr Divisions surprised the US 7 AD with a spoiling attack in the Peel Marshes (south of Overloon, west of Venlo).

Hope that west the appetite more...

Bob
User avatar
Symon
Posts: 1885
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:59 pm
Location: De Eye-lands, Mon

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Symon »

cannonfodder has a good take. Mine is very similar.

I think it was an utter failure. It was supposed to be a leap over the Rhine. But it didn't work. Because it didn't work, the whole backup thing just shoved units into a cul de sac, where they were just targets. Just think of a thumb in your brown spot and what you might do to alleviave the pressure.

Monty didn't seem to care, since he did his Plunder ops way our east, and weeks after the US crossed the Rhine, but he needed some press, so hootz gazoots.

From a fundamental US appreciation, it was a piece of utter doo-doo.

Ciao. John
Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by warspite1 »

As soon as I saw the title I was just waiting for the Monty bashing. Didn't have long to wait.....
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by JeffroK »

I suppose the USians have to bash Monty to make up for the total stuff up in the Hurtgen Forest.

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by JeffroK »

Market-Garden could have succeeded.

The mad rush across Northern France and through Belgium left the British at the far end of a long LOC, as mentioned above clearing the Scheldt should have been given a higher priority. But at this stage "victory fever" was setting in. Who wanted to make a firm base when The Ruhr was just a river away??

As a number of planned drops had been cancelled as Allied forces advanced, planning got weaker and weaker, its like being prepped for a landing only changing the landing point a number of times, in WITPAE they had a prep of 5.

The landing area for 1st Airborne was too far from the bridge, RAF fear over AAA closer to the bridges had a big say, maybe they were wrong.

IF ALL OF THE ABOVE WORKED PERFECTLY

They still underestimated the ability of the Wermacht and Waffen SS to form effective Kamfgruppen from the shambles after the retreat from Normandy, something the Western Allies had yet to face but which the Red Army had seen repeatedly. these forces where able to limit the advances on the limited from caused by the road net and wet/soft terrain.

And I recall someone named Eisenhower was in charge of all this?

His report to the Combined Chiefs of Staff give a far more balanced view of the operations

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/SCA ... ort-9.html
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 41896
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by warspite1 »

Whatever Monty was or wasn't, to suggest he "didn't care" is just ridiculous.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17442
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Whatever Monty was or wasn't, to suggest he "didn't care" is just ridiculous.

I don't like Montgomery but totally agree with Warspite on this one.
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Encircled »

I must have played "Arnhem" on the old Spec 48k to death when I was kid.

Its fascinating to speculate what might have happened. One thing is for sure, the bridge at Arnhem would have been taken and held if it wasn't for the refitting 9th & 10th SS Pz Divisions being present.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Canoerebel »

Yeah, Ryan does focus on the distance from the drop zone. Also, two other factors he mentions:

1) The failure to bottle up and destroy the German Army (17th, I think) that had been cut off on the islands on the coast. In fact, that's probably the biggest reason MG failed. Had that Army not made it back to the lines, the corridor would have been undefended and XXX Corps would have steamrolled right up to Arnhem. Then the battle would have been between XXX Corps and Bittrich's Panzer Corps and the Allies likely would have prevailed.

2) Ryan also includes many quotes nad comments about the RAF declining to fly, both to support the troops on the ground and to bring in supplies and reinforcements.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Lecivius
Posts: 4845
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 12:53 am
Location: Denver

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Lecivius »

If I recall correctly, there was a marked and dramatic increase in production & distribution of the Panzerfaust MKV. This little jewel was the 1st serious man portable AT RPG. It had recently been modified and improved to counter Russian T-34's. The new model was cheap, and absolutely deadly to tanks. This dramatically decreased the rate of advanced as planned by allied command, and was a major contributor to the failure to link up at Arnhem.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by Canoerebel »

Cannonfodder's comments are most interesting because he seems to be saying that MG had some healthy dividends. By creating such a large salient in the front it allowed the Allies to more effectively handle the campaign for Antwerp. That's what I was looking for - despite it's ultimate failure and many problems, can it be said that MG was a success or successful? Cornelius Ryan never addresses this in the book, which is a shame (neverthless, the book is fabulous).
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: OT - After Market-Garden

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Whatever Monty was or wasn't, to suggest he "didn't care" is just ridiculous.

I don't like Montgomery but totally agree with Warspite on this one.


I'll add a third voice to that one.

I absolutely detest Monty....almost worse than Dougout Doug, but I'll certainly give him his due on this count.
Hans

Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”