Here is the one from the video:
And here is another silhouette from another picture:
Posted on 01/04/2017 2:10:07 PM PST by Robert DeLong
Ah, thanks.
If your boots were soaked with seawater, you might take an opportunity to replace them.
The fields were studded with telephone poles,
they were called Rommel’s asparagas.
I’m just glad people are finding it worthwhile.
Bttt.
5.56mm
Then I watched a film on the "great" German soldiers and invincible tanks. Then I watched a long piece of the French Foreign Legion. I am totally militarized at this point, and they won't let women in the FFL. Bummer. (Thanks RD)
In a lifetime of movies, videos, documentaries about D-Day the majority of the video is new footage. Very informative.
Good job!
I really enjoyed the plane sequences. Are the close-ups B-26 Marauders?
Saw a couple of Lancasters, some B-17’s and P-51’s.
ping
Btt
Ah...thank you. I freepmailed you...this is a real find.
I thought those were Manchesters, not Lancasters...I will have to go back and check. Amazing footage! Some of the best I have ever seen.
May very well have been. The twin tail makes me think of Lancasters.
One thing that jumped out at me was at ~ the 7:00 minute mark the narrator states “Our losses were not as heavy as expected.”
Makes you wonder what the expectation was.
Here is the one from the video:
And here is another silhouette from another picture:
Made me think about that too. I did occur that this was done so quickly after that perhaps the full extent of the losses weren’t known yet. Probably not, though.
Check out the link provided by Robert DeLong-they actually mention that there.
It is probably true there is so little footage of the American beaches for just that reason, and because perhaps the fighting was so fierce there that it was impossible.
Another poster talked about the leisurely way the British solders were exiting...I think on some of the other beaches, it really was that leisurely. I had read accounts where some of them said it was like going on holiday. But that said, it certainly wasn’t that way for all of them.
An essay I wrote about Eisenhower and D-Day caused me to come across a reference, which I used to guess at what would be the best case for D-Day losses, based on the British experiences of WW I. Here is that reference.
Top 10 Deadliest Battles of World War I
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-bloodiest-battles-of-world-war-i.php
Battle of Messines (1917)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Messines_(1917)#Casualties
Invasion of Normandy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Normandy
“This example helps one appreciate the anxieties aroused from memories of Gallipoli, the Somme and Passchendaele, where the British suffered catastrophic losses for gains of only yards. By some historian assessments, the most successful attack by British forces in WW I was the Battle of Messines in 1917. The battle lasted June 1-12, and involved 216,000 men of whom 24,562 became casualties. They attacked on a five mile front and penetrated 10 miles.”
“Taking this battle as a starting point, the Normandy invasion from five beachheads established a lodgment about 10 miles deep on a 40 miles front. The effort required 50 days. Therefore, a WW I veteran could make an optimistic estimate of about 400,000 casualties, given he completely disregarded the fact that the D-Day landings were significantly more hazardous than any offensive attempted on the Western Front. In fact by July 24 there were 120,000 casualties.”
Thank you ! My dad “Rebel”, went onto easy red on d+1 with the 1st div hq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.