|
Posts:
297
From:
USA
Registered:
4/26/08
|
|
(1 of 8)
Over Training and Lack of
Nov 1, 2009 9:27 PM
|
I got Stephan Ambrose's book 'Citizen Soldiers' recently, and I'm amazed at how utterly lacking in training the Allied troops were in fighting in the Hedgerows. But not specifically hedgerows, but semi-close quarter combat with little room to maneuver kind of combat.
They were trained highly in taking the beach I get that, but my impression is is that they expected to be fighting in open fields after the beaches, but very little when there is no room to maneuver.
IMHO, if it was hedgerows from Normandy to Germany, the Germans would have outlasted the Japanese.
Any other examples of over training or lack of it?
--
Why join the Army and sleep in the dirt and eat MREs when you can sleep in a bunk and get steak and eggs in the Navy?
|
|
|
Posts:
2,606
Registered:
7/24/06
|
|
(2 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 2, 2009 8:11 AM
|
|
THE U.S. has 1 tactic, the holding attack, one units holds the front another unit manuevers around. It worked in the Pacific and Europe. The hedgerows were a case of U.S. dependance on overwhelming firepowere not working. Once a method was found to get through the brush then manuever was restored again. THe issue was the failure to understand the physical properties of hedgerows which I think was Monty's only ommission in DDayA real good book is "a war to be won" that talks about what it took to build the U.S> army.
|
|
|
Posts:
107
From:
California
Registered:
8/26/09
|
|
(3 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 2, 2009 11:39 AM
|
From what I've read, there was very little or no training for hedgerows but there was a great amount of training for beach landings, scaling cliffs, and attack tactics. Some US infantry were over there almost 2 years. In my case, thousands of us were sent to Italy before D Day with only 3 to 4 months of basic infantry training.
My division, the 36th, was pulled off the front after the Rapido River Fiasco and trained in mountain warfare. Experts from the Mountain Division in Colorado Springs were flown over to teach us how to scale steep cliffs with ropes and cross rivers. The division also took in over 1000 replacements who knew next to nothing so the training was needed.
In early July, Rome had fallen and we were pulled back to Salerno for 6 weeks of amphibious training prior to landing in Southern France. In our landing in So. France, we had no casualties. In the training in southern Italy, about a dozen lost their lives when their Higgins boats hit sand bars and the men jumped out in deep water. The smart ones dropped their rifles and packs and swam to shore. (then got chewed out). Those who followed orders to a T drowned. Even so, training was very necessary! The French would say, "C' est le Guerre. The Russians would say "tough shisky" (GI slang)
|
|
|
Posts:
1,718
Registered:
2/12/03
|
|
(4 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 3, 2009 8:04 AM
|
As the two previous posters noted, (1) We had only one attack pattern. (2) While the original divisions were well trained, raw recruits often were not. On the other side, the Germans were trained to see every tactical situation as unique, with its own somewhat unique solution. When we started thinking "outside the box" we started moving again. There were several other times when the US Army units finally threw away our one play, play book so as to be able to move ahead.
Re. Replacements: The Germans would wait until the fighting was over and the front was quiet (or they were moved out of the line) to integrate new replacements. Then the newbies and vets TRAINED TOGETHER. This led to realistic training and the bonding of the new men to the unit. Only in the last 10 months of the war did this system break down. Too often in American units, replacements were left to fend for themselves or even shoved out front to protect the old-timers.
Fortunately for ww2vetttt, his division was given the German pattern of replacement and training. It certainly seemed to help.
The Germans were past-masters at using terrain for defense. It must be mentioned in all fairness that much of the German use of terrain, tactics, and camoflage that caused us so much trouble, the Germans learned from the Soviets.
Harold
|
|
|
Posts:
107
From:
California
Registered:
8/26/09
|
|
(5 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 3, 2009 9:53 AM
|
<<Too often in American units, replacements were left to fend for themselves or even shoved out front to protect the old-timers. >>>
This was so very true. The old timers in a rifle squad were well bonded: They drank booz together, partied in towns together, chased women together, played cards together, etc. The new comer replacement was the one to lead the next attack. If he got killed or wounded, the enemy line of defense was discovered and artillery or air power was used. The new comer didn't need a lot of training if he were used only to draw enemy fire.
|
|
|
Posts:
107
From:
California
Registered:
8/26/09
|
|
(6 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 3, 2009 10:11 AM
|
The above post explains the exact position I was in as a WW2 replacement.
My squad sergeant chose me to lead 4 attacks in a row. I complained to the Co. Comander (Captain) and asked to be transferred to the Machine gun section because they had been wiped out by an artillery barage. To my great surprise, my request was granted and I survived. A machine gun is a defensive weapon and you don't lead attacks. Also, I was never ordered to go out on any more patrols. Its all about fairness and survival!
|
|
|
Posts:
2,606
Registered:
7/24/06
|
|
(7 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 3, 2009 3:40 PM
|
|
A major complaint was that men were not returned to their units if injured, but sent to a new unit. The main reason for the lack of training in 1944 was the realization that not enough men were available to replace combat losses. APx 90% of the losses were in infantry yet they had the last claim on men. There was a big rush to get men into the system. It was one of the few failures of MArshall that the replacement system was not thought through well enough and the need for combat replacements was vastly underestimated.
|
|
|
Posts:
5,015
From:
Seattle Area
Registered:
5/6/03
|
|
(8 of 8)
Re: Over Training and Lack of
Nov 4, 2009 11:39 AM
|
Everything I've read, from WWII to Vietnam, said that veterans didn't bother to get to know the "new guys" until they had been around for a few weeks (or months). They didn't want to develop any emotional bonds for a guy who would probably be dead within a few days.
One account I read said that when a new recruit was placed on the line, he often had a tendency to want to remain "anonymous" by keeping his head down and not firing his weapon. The squad commander would solve that problem by putting him into a position, taking his rifle and firing off a clip in the direction of the enemy, hopefully drawing some fire in response. They seemed to think that got the new guy over his initial shyness and improved the situation.
My own father (in Korea) complained that one new guy kept talking about how he was happy to get his chance to kill the Chinese. The first night on the line, his outpost was attacked. he was found dead the next morning, his machine-gun in place with a full belt of ammo inserted. Despite almost a half-hour of combat, he hadn't fired his weapon once. He may have been taken out in the first shots, but my father was convinced he had 'frozen", right up to the point where he was killed.
|
|
|
|
|
