I know there are probably a ton of WW2 experts on this forum so it seems like a good place to ask it. Were there any realistic alternative landing sights to Normandy and Calais? Most things in both history classes and other sources I have seen only mention the two possibilities of Normandy and Calais and that they went for Normandy because it was the unexpected route of attack. Why was it just those two ports though? There seems to be a bunch of other ports near by like Le Havre between the two and beyond them to the east there are the very good ports in the Belgian, Dutch, Danish and German Coasts or to the west those near Britany and in the bay of Biscay.
Were there any other realistic D day landing sights then Calais or Normandy?
- Thread starter West234
- Start date
-
- Tags
- normandy invasion ww 2
The availibility of aircover was important. Belgium would have been close enough, the tohers you mentioned are to far away (transittime are longer, which means you can get fewer sorties and there is less fightecover available because not all the fighters would have ranges big enough).
I'm not sure why Belgium wasn't considered more seriously. I think the beaches are very narrow there, but I'm not sure.
I'm not sure why Belgium wasn't considered more seriously. I think the beaches are very narrow there, but I'm not sure.
It wasn't really 'unexpected'. Normandy was always on the short list, for both the Allies and the Germans.
Sorry I'm going be lazy and quote some chap from Quora
question: Why didn't the Allies in World War Two invade from Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany or Denmark for D-Day?
answer
This has been asked before on different forums. It all comes down to two things - shipping and air cover. Please bear in mind that planning for D-Day started properly in 1942 and was partly guided by the unmitigated disaster that was the Dieppe Raid of that year. A lot was learnt from that disaster, at least in terms of what not to do. You had to make the maximum use of air power, you had to not land tanks on shingle (the pebbles jammed the treads and the bogies) and you had to not assault the frontal defences around ports.
The logical place for Overlord was to land on the Pas de Calais. It's a (relatively) short distance from there to the German border and the industrial centre of the Ruhr from there. Unfortunately by 1944 if there was one place where Hitler's Atlantic Wall matched his demented imagination, it was the Pas de Calais. A frontal assault would have been suicidal.
There is another element involved - sea lanes. An attack on the Pas de Calais would only have a few British ports that could be used to supply such an attack on a regular basis – Dover and Folkestone being the main ones. That’s one of the reasons why Normandy was chosen – there were ports all along the South Coast of the UK that were used to store the huge armada of ships used and to then supply the beachheads, such as Plymouth, Portsmouth and Southampton (the latter two being very major ports).
In addition there were airstrips the length of the South Coast that were used to supply the aircover required for the Normandy landings.
Put the last three points together – the fact that Normandy was not as well defended as the Pas de Calais, the plethora of ports and the fact that so many aerodromes were in range – and that’s why Normandy was chosen. In addition the beaches were mostly sandy, shelved in the right areas and didn’t have large amounts of mud.
Now let’s look at the alternatives. Belgium sounds like a good idea but suffers from numerous problems – Dunkirk was very well defended, there weren’t many ports that could be used in the UK and not as many aerodromes were in range.
Holland has the same problems, and the airpower issue gets even worse. The main UK fighter at that time was still the Spitfire (albeit upgraded to the point where the 1944 Spitfire had many times the firepower of the 1940 version and was also significantly faster), which was designed as a short-range interceptor and as such had short legs.
I’d like to make a very important point here. The ground force commander at this stage was Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery. He was an almost fanatical believer in the use of airpower. Insufficient application of airpower = an instant no from him. He knew that the Allies would have to blast their way onto the mainland of Europe and carve out a beachhead that could not then be destroyed easily. Airpower was one of the strongest cards that the Allies could play.
Beyond Holland then the options narrow considerably. The Eastern Coast of the Netherlands and the North-West coast of Germany is hemmed in by the Frisian Islands, beyond which is a morass of mud and sand – as anyone who has ever read the classic book The Riddle of the Sands by Erskine Childers will know. Airpower options here are very limited for Spitfires, plus there’s the fact that the Germans had the rocky little outcrop of Heligoland in the middle of the area very well fortified.
The South-West coast of Denmark suffers all of the above problems, but was even further away.
So there you have it. Normandy may not have been perfect – but it was the best of all the possible options.
(Marc Jones BA History Swansea University)
This map will answer your question.
Geography, in yellow long beaches, in purple rocky beaches or cliffs.
From this site :
Les côtes de la France - petit guide
Petit guide de la côte française - les caractéristiques du littoral de la Mer du Nord à l'Atlantique et à la Méditerrannée
Belgian coast is very short and the hinterland is very swampy. Coast between Calais and Dunkerque is also very swampy. While Dutch coast is full of polders walls and canals making the defense very easy.
Something the British and French used in 1940 to keep ahead of the Germans IIRCThis map will answer your question.
Geography, in yellow long beaches, in purple rocky beaches or cliffs.
From this site :
Les côtes de la France - petit guide
Petit guide de la côte française - les caractéristiques du littoral de la Mer du Nord à l'Atlantique et à la Méditerrannéeabout-france.com
Belgian coast is very short and the hinterland is very swampy. Coast between Calais and Dunkerque is also very swampy. While Dutch coast is full of polders walls and canals making the defense very easy.
there's another couple of points I'd make as well
1). even if you land in Belgium you risk getting pincered by troops from the north and troops from France, which were concentrated in northern France (there were troops in southern France but not that many so the same risk is less in Normandy). Plus Normandy if you can take it allows you a geographically secure foot hold and if you break out geography protects your flanks
2). Take Normandy and you can get to Paris, and if and you take Paris you likely take France. That is a big deal
Last edited:
To add about the Baie de la Somme and the beaches between the cliffs of Haute Normandie and of Boulogne-Calais (Cap Gris Nez and Blanc Nez), it is even more swampy that the coast from Calais to the Dutch Flanders. Today it is mostly only two small ports, Saint Valery sur Somme and Le Crotoy and at low tide, most of the Baie de la Somme is just sand...
In the 80's, my family had a small sail boat (6.5 m long) in the port of Le Crotoy, if you don't use the high tide to go to the highsea, you risk to run aground and spend the next 10 or 12 hours in a boat surrounded by sand.
In the 80's, my family had a small sail boat (6.5 m long) in the port of Le Crotoy, if you don't use the high tide to go to the highsea, you risk to run aground and spend the next 10 or 12 hours in a boat surrounded by sand.
Last edited:
Ahem...
Stake it then burn it then nuke it from orbit....its the only way to be sure.
*Screams in mortal terror*Ahem...
NO! Bad Steamboy, bad! Let me smite you with this rolled up Private Eye, which is the only weapon I have at hand!
TDM's post 6 is a good find.
Monty's view is completely reasonable given Britain's view when under invasion threat was that air defence was the primary defence - and that was with a powerful navy that could have shredded an invasion fleet and denied supply after landing.
Monty's view is completely reasonable given Britain's view when under invasion threat was that air defence was the primary defence - and that was with a powerful navy that could have shredded an invasion fleet and denied supply after landing.
People tend to forget that the first things that Monty did when he took command of 8th Army was move his HQ to next to the RAF HQ by the shores of the Med. A) It was vital for co-ordination and b) they had the better location, everyone could bathe and there were fewer flies.
I'd suggest an additional factor to support Normandy over the Pas de Calais - searoom. You need space offshore to organise a multi-wave assault, and that space isn't available off Calais. You could try and split the concentration area either side of the straits, but that would amplify the complexity of what is already a very difficult operation. Off Normandy, in pretty much the widest part of the Channel, you've got all the searoom you could want.
There's also the fact that the Pas-de-Calais has some quite strong currents - in both directions, twice a day, being tidal. It's one of the points that would have complicated the Unmentionable Sea Mammal.