ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
Maybe they can, and perhaps in the Pacific they did. However, my impression is that at Anzio et al, while the heavy cruisers flattened German counterattacks that got to within a couple of kilometers of the beach, they weren't exerting the same effect 20 km inland -- although in OPART they would.
That's the point. Speaking generally, ships' guns seem to have been very effective right on the coast: this was true in Syria (in 1941), in Sicily, at Anzio, and at Normandy. However, and for whatever reason, they don't seem to have exerted a similar effect inland up to anything like their theoretical range -- or even their OPART range.
I know we're all infallible historical gods here, but this amounts to taking absense of evidence as evidence of absense. And I'm not ready to make that leap. I want some hard proof that they couldn't support at their full ranges. Just because we in this group don't have an example of them doing so isn't enough for me.
Well, look at Anzio. The Allies were unable to make progress inland, and the great German counterattack rolled them back quite nicely -- until the Germans advanced to within a couple of kilometers of the beach. Then -- and only then -- ships' guns blew the attacking columns apart, and the situation was reversed. Same thing in Sicily. In Normandy as well -- why didn't Montgomery just use ships' guns to take Caen?
You talk about an 'absence of evidence' -- but what evidence could we find to prove a negative? How can there be attacks where ships' guns played a major role inland if there never were any such attacks?
The only logical inference is that most times and places, the effectiveness of naval firepower was greatly attentuated as one moved inland. On the other hand, no such effect exists in OPART. Pending further data, the conclusion is not that everything is just fine: the conclusion is that there is a flaw.
Put it this way. Suppose the system did attentuate ships' firepower inland. Is there anything to suggest such an effect would be incorrect and should be eliminated?
< Message edited by ColinWright -- 11/17/2007 12:17:27 AM >
I am not Charlie Hebdo