• A book "Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies"

    From a425couple@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 8 10:26:19 2022
    XPost: sci.military.naval

    I recently got a book -

    Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies, June 1944
    by Peter Tsouras

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01G51Q0PQ/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

    Looks like one can do the Kindle for $2.99 or
    get the hardcover delivered for $6.79.

    "The editor of Hitler Triumphant combines history and fiction to craft
    an alternative history of the Normandy landings on D-Day.

    It is June, 1944. The Allied armies are poised for the full-scale
    invasion of Fortress Europe. Across the Channel, the vaunted Wehrmacht
    lies waiting for the signs of invasion, ready for the final battle . . .

    What happens next is well-known to any student of modern history. The
    outcome could easily have been very different, as Peter Tsouras shows in
    this masterful and devastating account in which plans, missions, and
    landings go horribly wrong.

    Tsouras firmly bases his narrative on facts but introduces minor
    adjustments at the opening of the campaign—the repositioning of a unit,
    bad weather and misjudged orders—and examines their effect as they
    gather momentum and impact on all subsequent events. Without deviating
    from the genuine possibilities of the situation, he presents a scenario
    that keeps the reader guessing and changes the course of history.

    Praise for Disaster at D-Day

    “A brilliant and interesting book. The author has pulled off a great
    feat of imagination and research.” —Military Illustrated

    “This should find a place on the shelves of anyone with an interest in
    the period and would be invaluable background reading in preparation for
    a battlefield tour of Normandy.” —The British Army Review"

    one review is
    "Change a couple of factors and Operation Overlord ends in a failure for
    the Allies. Few people realize just how close the operation actually
    was. The changes were not major, but quickly snowballed as Dame Luck
    came into play. A disasterous situation at Omaha Beach closes that area
    off. The capture of an Allied secret map convinces Hitler that this is
    the main thrust and frees up the reserves at Pas de Calais for defense.
    Had this happened, it would have been a true disaster from the British,
    who were already scraping the bottom of the manpower barrel. Good
    alternate history is interesting. This one is fascinating. The only nit
    to pick is that it's VERY detailed and that occasionally bogs down the
    story, but it's pretty much a minor point."

    another
    "Like most other reviewers I give this book four stars. Most of it I
    liked, a couple of points I didn't.

    The good points: First, and most important is how a relatively
    few,relatively minor changes might have indeed reversed the outcome. In
    reality Rommel had only one Panzer division near the beach, in the book
    Hitler had allowed him to move another division into the area. Second,
    von Rundstedt is able to convince Hitler that this is the real invasion
    and get the release of many more divisions to be sent to Normandy. In
    reality the Germans held these divisions elsewhere until too late.
    Third, and the final one I'll mention is that the guns at Pointe-du-Hoc
    were installed with their supporting forces and the Rangers didn't quite
    make it to the top because of the additional troops up there.

    There are other good points as well, but there's no point in telling the
    whole story in a short review. If you want to know, read the book.

    Let's get the bad out of the way. First, it is written like a lot of
    military history: The US 18th Armored was here doing this. The British
    24th Infantry was there doing that. The 29th SS Panzer was somewhere
    else doing something else. It even has fictional references to books
    published after the war on the actions of these divisions. As such, I
    sometimes had problems keeping the overall picture in mind (as I do with
    some real history). The story doesn't come through as easily as some
    other approaches such as that which Turtledove uses. Second, this
    shouldn't be the first book you read on D-Day. If so, you might never understand what really happened. Third, he repeats the claims made by Montgomery after the war that the battle turned out just the way he had
    planned it in advance. Actually, the author quotes this point from one
    of his fictional references, but finding this requires a pretty close
    reading.

    The biggest overall thing that I brought away from the book is
    realizing, like Wellington talking about Waterloo, that the D-Day
    invasion was "a very nearly run thing." It could indeed have gone the
    other way."

    or, one can also read what the readers at Goodreads write:
    (Their rating is only 3.73!) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1619710.Disaster_at_D_Day

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Wilkins@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jul 8 18:54:56 2022
    XPost: sci.military.naval

    "a425couple" wrote in message news:ZMZxK.444287$zgr9.277169@fx13.iad...

    I recently got a book -

    Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies, June 1944
    by Peter Tsouras

    -------------------------

    What if SS Das Reich had guarded more effectively against sabotage and
    arrived in Normandy within a few days by rail as they had planned and
    equipped themselves to do?

    One proposed change is reasonable, a chain of them doubles (or more) the possible outcomes with each added link, until the intended result becomes
    very unlikely. Maybe the Allies quickly take Falaise, or von Rundstedt is riding with Rommel when strafed?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to Jim Wilkins on Sat Jul 9 08:10:53 2022
    XPost: sci.military.naval

    On 7/8/2022 3:54 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
    "a425couple"  wrote in message news:ZMZxK.444287$zgr9.277169@fx13.iad...

    I recently got a book -

    Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies, June 1944
    by Peter Tsouras

    -------------------------

    What if SS Das Reich had guarded more effectively against sabotage and arrived in Normandy within a few days by rail as they had planned and equipped themselves to do?

    That is a good point.

    from
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_SS_Panzer_Division_Das_Reich

    March of Das Reich
    In April 1944, Das Reich took up a new base near the city of Montauban
    in southern France. The location was chosen so that the division could
    respond quickly to the anticipated Allied invasion of France on either
    the Atlantic Coast or the Mediterranean Sea. In May the division
    received 37 Panzer IV and 55 Panther tanks, well below the official
    complement of 62 of each, but a full complement of 30 Sturmgeschütz III assault guns. Fuel and truck shortages hampered training and movement
    and many of the more than 15,000 men in the division were recent
    recruits and inadequately trained.[23]

    The Allied Normandy landings took place on 6 June 1944. On 7 June Das
    Reich was ordered to move to Normandy to reinforce the German units
    contesting the Allied invasion. An unopposed movement of men and
    equipment by railroad would have taken three or four days over
    approximately 700 kilometres (430 mi). However, the option to move by
    rail had been preempted by the Special Operations Executive (SOE). The
    rail cars to be used for transporting the tanks and equipment were
    unguarded. In the days before 6 June French operatives of the SOE's
    Pimento network, headed by Anthony Brooks, sabotaged the rail cars by
    draining the axle oil and replacing it with an abrasive powder that
    caused the axles of the cars to seize up. The powder had been parachuted
    in by SOE. The perpetrators of the sabotage were a 16 year old girl
    named Tetty, her boyfriend, her 14-year old sister, and several of their friends.[24][25]

    As a consequence of the sabotage of the rail cars, Das Reich left
    Montauban on 8 June with 1,400 vehicles and proceeded northward by road.
    Travel by road caused the steel tracks of the tanks and assault guns to
    wear out; vehicles broke down frequently; and fuel was in short
    supply.[25] Pinprick attacks by groups of resistors, called Maquis,
    killed 15 Germans on the first two days of the movement. More than 100
    French were killed, many of them unarmed civilians. Das Reich was
    ordered to suppress the Maquis during its journey; "to break the spirit
    of the population by making examples." The division carried out the
    order by massacring hundreds of civilians on 9 and 10 June in Tulle and Oradour-sur-Glane.(see below) Attacks by resistance forces mostly ended
    on 12 June as Das Reich moved into less favorable territory for
    ambushes.[26]

    Air attacks hindered the progress of the division in the last phases of
    its northward journey. On 11 June British bombers attacked and destroyed several railcars full of much-needed gasoline at Châtellerault. The air
    strike was directed by the Special Air Service (SAS) group called
    Operation Bulbasket. After its advance elements crossed the Loire River
    on 13 June, the division was under constant air attacks during the day.
    As a result, Das Reich arrived only piecemeal to the Normandy
    battlefield between 15 and 30 June, its arrival delayed at least several
    days by the resistance attacks and air strikes. Rather than going on the offensive to try to push the Allies back into the sea, Das Reich
    initially found itself mostly plugging gaps in the German defenses. The division was not reunited until 10 July.[27]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Wilkins@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 9 13:00:09 2022
    XPost: sci.military.naval

    The Germans wrongly assumed the British couldn't do anything they didn't,
    such as use Chain Home as a radar, locate U-Boot millisecond burst transmissions or invade at low tide in bad weather.

    https://www.stmweather.com/blog/history/d-day-weather-and-history-intersect "Their [German] forecasts for this time periods were that gale-force winds would arrive on June 5 and continue for several days, which likely
    contributed to their lack of anticipation of the attack."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jim Wilkins@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 9 22:33:36 2022
    XPost: sci.military.naval

    "a425couple" wrote in message news:ZTgyK.448347$J0r9.375762@fx11.iad...

    March of Das Reich

    ------------------
    Part of the delay was too incredible to suggest as alternative history.

    From "Das Reich", by Max Hastings, my copy:

    "Worse still, to the fury of the unit transport officers who had
    requisitioned vehicles on their own initiative, they were now ordered to
    return these. The local commander, desperate to maintain some modus vivendi with the local population after the Panzers had gone, insisted that no transport was to be arbitrarily commandeered. To the SS, it was another
    example of the feeble attitudes of local garrisons. They complied sullenly,
    and divisional headquarters began the difficult struggle to reorganize its formations for movement."

    My technical + military library has become too full to easily search. Last
    year I sawed enough knot-free 12" wide by 12' long planks from a fallen oak tree to add a wall of shelves. They should be dry enough to edge and plane
    by next summer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)