German intelligence on operation Overlord

[2RHPZ]

German intelligence on operation Overlord

One of the most interesting questions of WWII history is whether the Germans could have taken measures that would lead to a defeat of the Allies in the West. Many authors and historians claim that the Germans had huge forces in the West but were prevented from moving them to Normandy because of a deception plan. I have criticized this belief. The problem is that the positioning of German divisions in the West does not correspond with that theory.

....

Why did the Germans place new units in Normandy? Why did they position powerful mobile units close by? Weren’t they expecting an Allied assault against the Calais area?

It seems that by May ’44 their attention had definitely shifted towards the Normandy-Brittany areas.

Hitler in a talk with Japanese ambassador Oshima on 27 May 1944 said that diversionary attacks would take place in Norway, Denmark, the Southern part of Western France and the coasts of the French Mediterranean. A major allied assault would come in either Normandy or Brittany. This would be a serious operation but once the Allies had consolidated their position it would probably be followed by the main invasion in the Calais area.

Follow the story @Christos Intel Blog

[TheKiwi]

Interesting analysis, but it ignores a number of factors. If the Germans were so sure about Normandy, why did they keep major forces in the Calais region until well into July.

Hitler liked to hedge his bets on these things too, one day saying "Calais" and the next "Normandy" so that once it happened he could say "I told you so".

In short, while it appears that some parts of German intelligence suspected Normandy, there were other parts that still thought Calais and no-one was able to make up their minds. So the diversion worked.

[James]

Interesting analysis, but it ignores a number of factors. If the Germans were so sure about Normandy, why did they keep major forces in the Calais region until well into July.

Hitler liked to hedge his bets on these things too, one day saying "Calais" and the next "Normandy" so that once it happened he could say "I told you so".

In short, while it appears that some parts of German intelligence suspected Normandy, there were other parts that still thought Calais and no-one was able to make up their minds. So the diversion worked.

You hit the nail on the head.

[paspartoo]

The Germans could not be sure that the Normandy landings would be the only ones as indeed they were not . If you go to Axis history forum you'll see a discussion we had last summer about the German units, their situation and their movements. The idea that some strong force was kept in Northern France is a fairy-tale.

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtop...?f=54&t=179393

[DS73]

O my.
the germans placed some unites in Normandy for garrison duties. Ooooo.
the germans sent infantry unites for police actions around submarine bases. Oooo.

The author should stop smoking pipe and start reading historical materials. Anti invasion preparation can be traced by following tank unites. German preparations were intended to protect Flanders. It's really silly to see people looking for some "alternative" "a new look" in well documented and studied historical topics.

[Piirka]

It's really silly to see people looking for some "alternative" "a new look" in well documented and studied historical topics.

I disagree, even the firmest beliefs should be able to be challenged without scorn, because that is how you keep it accurate. If not enough support for the new theory, move on. New data is still being found, some might alter the writing of history.

[paspartoo]

O my.
the germans placed some unites in Normandy for garrison duties. Ooooo.
the germans sent infantry unites for police actions around submarine bases. Oooo.

The author should stop smoking pipe and start reading historical materials. Anti invasion preparation can be traced by following tank unites. German preparations were intended to protect Flanders. It's really silly to see people looking for some "alternative" "a new look" in well documented and studied historical topics.

I wish I understood what you are trying to say. The standard version in Anglo books is that the Germans were tricked into keeping the bulk of their forces in the 15^th army. This allowed the Allies to win in Normandy.
Assuming you have functional eyes and can take the time to look at the units stationed in France then you can see that it is not true (although you’d also need the ‘Normandy 1944’ book by Zetterling). There’s nothing ‘alternative’ about that, just plain logical thinking. There were big concentrations in Calais, Normandy and Brittany. It was Normandy that had received the three Pz divisions closeby plus several small units plus last minute movement of units close to the shore. Who do you think stopped the Allies the French bushes? (actually many authors believe that)
Also I thought that the Germans were expecting an invasion in Calais but according to you they were afraid for Flanders? What a groundbreaking historical discovery!
The problem with the standard account of the Normandy fighting and the Fortitude deception is that the Allies had a completely unrealistic assessments of German strength and capabilities. They expected German units to move faster than they did and when that did not happen they thought it was because of disinformation. In reality it was because they had zero mobility.
There were many Allied misconceptions: 3,000 tanks in France, German divisions have 300 tanks each, the Panther was going to be used in separate detachments like the Tiger, German infantry div had 15,000 men etc etc
For anyone who wants to explore what really happened buy the Zetterling book and the official British intelligence history ‘British intelligence in the Second World War vol3 part2’.

[James]

Who do you think stopped the Allies the French bushes? (actually many authors believe that)

Er, actually nobody stopped the Allies. Six weeks after D-Day they broke out of Normandy, a month after that Paris was liberated, and a month after that, and a month or so after that they were approaching Germany itself.

[Leaper]

The Americans suspected the Japanesse to attack/invade Pearl Harbor too but didn't move forces there.
Does that mean that they were tricked by the Japanese?

About the Germans and Normandy;
The enemy always have eyes on you and one or two back-up plans. If you move huge forces to a certain area prior to an attack, he won't make his move.
Besides, you always wanna keep your flankes secured.

[TheKiwi]

The Americans suspected the Japanesse to attack/invade Pearl Harbor too but didn't move forces there.
Does that mean that they were tricked by the Japanese?

No-one expected a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The Phillippines yes, Pearl Harbor no. The thought that "it couldn't happen here" was one of the main reasons why the attack was as successful as it was.

[paspartoo]

Er, actually nobody stopped the Allies. Six weeks after D-Day they broke out of Normandy, a month after that Paris was liberated, and a month after that, and a month or so after that they were approaching Germany itself.

Invasion – 6 June
St Lo breakout – 25-31 July
That’s two months of fighting. Losses for the Allies were ~230,000 casualties ( KIA,MIA,WIA), ~4,000 tanks, ~4,000 planes. A walk in the park...
Keep in mind those results were achieved with crushing numerical superiority.
The reason for all this bloodshed was that the Allies attacked at the worst area possible. That's what happens when the enemy is able to deduce your plan and takes measures to counter it.

[James]

Invasion – 6 June
St Lo breakout – 25-31 July
That’s two months of fighting. Losses for the Allies were ~230,000 casualties ( KIA,MIA,WIA), ~4,000 tanks, ~4,000 planes. A walk in the park...
Keep in mind those results were achieved with crushing numerical superiority.
The reason for all this bloodshed was that the Allies attacked at the worst area possible. That's what happens when the enemy is able to deduce your plan and takes measures to counter it.

I never said it was a walk in the park. You said that the Allies were stopped, and I was pointing out the fact that they were not.

If the Germans were so sure that the invasion was taking place in Normandy, as you seem to believe, why did they leave any combat units anywhere else in France?

[Leaper]

Paratroopers. They knew the allies would drop thousands and thousands of paratroopers all over France

[paspartoo]

I never said it was a walk in the park. You said that the Allies were stopped, and I was pointing out the fact that they were not.

If the Germans were so sure that the invasion was taking place in Normandy, as you seem to believe, why did they leave any combat units anywhere else in France?

I wonder how many times do i have to repeat the same things over and over? If you check the blog for ‘Normandy 1944’ tag and read the essays plus go through the AHF thread you’ll learn alot about what really happened.
The Germans could not know if the Normandy operation would be followed by more landings (as indeed it was). Units were stationed all over Western Europe. Powerful mobile units were close to Normandy not Calais.
If you read the Zetterling book you can check by yourself which units were moved to Normandy and when.
As for your question that is the reasoning of an adult? The Germans would leave no units in an occupied country at the same time that the Allies had the ability to land anywhere? It’s not as simple as that.

[DS73]

I wish I understood what you are trying to say. The standard version in Anglo books is that the Germans were tricked into keeping the bulk of their forces in the 15^th army. This allowed the Allies to win in Normandy.
Assuming you have functional eyes and can take the time to look at the units stationed in France then you can see that it is not true (although you’d also need the ‘Normandy 1944’ book by Zetterling). There’s nothing ‘alternative’ about that, just plain logical thinking. There were big concentrations in Calais, Normandy and Brittany. It was Normandy that had received the three Pz divisions closeby plus several small units plus last minute movement of units close to the shore. Who do you think stopped the Allies the French bushes? (actually many authors believe that)
Also I thought that the Germans were expecting an invasion in Calais but according to you they were afraid for Flanders? What a groundbreaking historical discovery!
The problem with the standard account of the Normandy fighting and the Fortitude deception is that the Allies had a completely unrealistic assessments of German strength and capabilities. They expected German units to move faster than they did and when that did not happen they thought it was because of disinformation. In reality it was because they had zero mobility.
There were many Allied misconceptions: 3,000 tanks in France, German divisions have 300 tanks each, the Panther was going to be used in separate detachments like the Tiger, German infantry div had 15,000 men etc etc
For anyone who wants to explore what really happened buy the Zetterling book and the official British intelligence history ‘British intelligence in the Second World War vol3 part2’.

I have no time to address in details all these claims about "misconceptions", "receiving" etc.
I will just remind few simple facts.
Most important one:
Mailly-le-Camp had Tank Training School and M.T. Assembly which were based on the ground of French tank Training School.
There is no need to imply anything extra.

21 tank division which was garrisoned in the "Caen" had anti-airdrop duties. It's unites were spread over extensive area and were pretty scarce supplied either by tanks or ammunition. Their position and equipment wasn't intented for tank vs tank battles (with notable exception of having 12 pak43/41).

Calais belongs territorially to the chain of flemish ports culminating by Antwerp. Germans had no idea about american plans to build "movable ports" and having their own quite pessimistic experience with fuel transportation had no clue that americans have balls to pull Red Ball Express.
In actual documents Hitler and K. were talking about protection of ports with good access to rail roads. Exclusively. Normandy and the rest were considered as places for possible diversions and sabotage.