Good discussion of battleship fire support at Normandy

[John Kettler]

This should be of both general interest and of real interest to scenario designers. The pic of what Pointe du Hoe/Hoc looks like even now is most impressive. Unfortunately for the bombarding vessels, the German guns weren't anywhere in that lunar landscape.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=3450

A Ranger sergeant and his underling found and destroyed the guns using thermite grenades.

Regards,

John Kettler

[PLM2]

I've been there and it's true it's like that. However I would think that was from air bombardment. I know most, if not all, of the bombs targeting beaches like Omaha missed completely. But i think they used air to hit Point du Hoc. I wouldn't think a ship could get a shell there from that trajectory but maybe I'm wrong. Unless the terrain sloped downward towards the ocean? I don't recall that it did. This photo is from Wiki and implies there was special effort made to knock it out by air.

[Nidan1]

This should be of both general interest and of real interest to scenario designers. The pic of what Pointe du Hoe/Hoc looks like even now is most impressive. Unfortunately for the bombarding vessels, the German guns weren't anywhere in that lunar landscape.

http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=3450

A Ranger sergeant and his underling found and destroyed the guns using thermite grenades.

Regards,

John Kettler

More like, "fortunately" they were no longer there, John. They may have gotton some lucky shots on the invasion fleet before being destroyed.

[dieseltaylor]

I've been there and it's true it's like that. However I would think that was from air bombardment. I know most, if not all, of the bombs targeting beaches like Omaha missed completely. But i think they used air to hit Point du Hoc. I wouldn't think a ship could get a shell there from that trajectory but maybe I'm wrong. Unless the terrain sloped downward towards the ocean? I don't recall that it did. This photo is from Wiki and implies there was special effort made to knock it out by air.

I have no doubt the linked accounts are true. Battleships could fire 20 miles or so in which case there is more than plenty airspace to get plunging fire. I see at least some US ships had an elevation of 45 degrees for the 16" turret.

[YankeeDog]

I see at least some US ships had an elevation of 45 degrees for the 16" turret.

... But none of these were off Normandy. Actually, the U.S. didn't have any 16" guns off of Normandy at all. The largest guns off of Normandy for the U.S. were on the USS Texas, and her main battery was 14". Being an older design, max. elevation of her main battery was also fairly limited. I don't remember the exact figure, but IIRC it was 25 degrees or something like that. Later during Overlord, as the front moved inland, they actually flooded the bulkheads on one side of the Texas to give her a slight list and increase the elevation (and therefore range) of her main battery.

But other naval batteries in the U.S. fleet had much better elevation. Most of the Destroyers, in particular, had dual-role 5" main batteries with very good elevation so that they could be used in the AA role -- these were quite capable of plunging fire. IIRC, some of the newer cruisers had much better elevation, too.

(As a side note the Texas most definitely did fire at Point du Hoc -- suppressing the Point du Hoc was one of her primary D-Day missions, and she commenced fire on this target at 5:50am, firing 255 14" shells. That's a lot of craters.)

[dieseltaylor]

Yes if I had the precise figures for the Texas from Wikipedia I would have quoted those.

However the concept remains the same : )

[YankeeDog]

Yes if I had the precise figures for the Texas from Wikipedia I would have quoted those.

However the concept remains the same : )

Being a museum ship, there's lots of good info on the Texas out there on the web; much better than what's on Wikipedia. A quick Google will get you a full day's reading.

Looked through my bookmarks on her, apparently as she was originally built in 1914, the max. elevation of her main battery was only 15 degrees. ISTR that she was modified sometime before June, 1944 to increase this somewhat. Her main battery was definitely updated several times through her service life, but I couldn't quickly find confirmation of an elevation increase.

At any rate, I think you'll find that large naval rifles (8"+) capable of high-angle plunging fire was actually a pretty rare thing amongst the ships supporting the Normandy landings. Many of the larger ships off Normandy were, like the Texas, older designs. In general, BBs and CAs built up through the 1920s did not have very good elevations on their main batteries because the fire control technology of the day was limited to direct line-of-sight -- not much point in building a gun mount that can shoot further than you can target it. Later, as radar-ranging came in and they also began to appreciate the usefulness of high-angle ship-to-shore bombardment, turret designs changed to allow higher angle fire -- you see this come in especially with the Iowa-class BBs, Baltimore-class CAs, etc.

[Michael Emrys]

I've been there and it's true it's like that. However I would think that was from air bombardment. I know most, if not all, of the bombs targeting beaches like Omaha missed completely. But i think they used air to hit Point du Hoc.

I make no claim to know exactly what the truth is on this issue, but I recall reading over the years several times that the craters were caused by aerial bombardment a few days prior to the invasion. Could that have been a factor in prompting the Germans to move the guns?

Michael

[evo6tme]

Here is a page from one of my books about Hms warspites bombardment at Normandy

Also 2 photos i took a couple of years ago when out there. An 8 inch naval shell passing through a bunker without exploding !