Now I have seen many articles written about this raid where the Canadians suffered some very loses and although the raid did not achieve it's objectives, was it a total failure. From out of this failure came the successful D Day operation.
Now just what did they learn from this raid,
The need for secrecy, as many Officers had been going around London talking about this raid. So on D Day most people where not told until the day they went.
The need for harbours to unload the equipment hence the massive Mulberry Harbours.
The need to get huge amounts fuel ashore hence the undersea pipe line known as Pluto
There was a need for a whole range of of specialised tanks that became known as Hobart's funnies.
There was the DD type that swam ashore and this worked well when it was not asked to swim 12 miles to the shore like they did at Omaha beach.
There was the Flail Tank that would clear the mines and the barb wire.
There were tanks to destroy strong points by firing a huge mortar type round the size of dustbin a couple of hundred yards.
There were bridging tanks and other that carried cassions to fill in trenches or bridge flooded ditches.
There were flame thrower tanks which towed a large container of fuel behind them, the Germans would shoot the crews of these tanks if captured.
There was also the Sherman Firefly with a 17 pounder gun that could deal with a Tiger Tank.
The Americans refused all offers of this type of equipment except for the DD type of tank which they then total mis used by trying to get it to swim some 12 miles ashore in a heavy swell, I often wonder just how they would have got on if these had got ashore at Omaha beach.
So although the Canadian Raid was failure as such it did lead to a successfully D Day and saved thousands of lives

Moved to the appropriate forum, and off-topic posts deleted.
No personal attacks will be tolerated!

Now let's continue on-topic.

Thanks

Originally Posted by LeEnfield

Now I have seen many articles written about this raid where the Canadians suffered some very loses and although the raid did not achieve it's objectives, was it a total failure. From out of this failure came the successful D Day operation.
Now just what did they learn from this raid,
The need for secrecy, as many Officers had been going around London talking about this raid. So on D Day most people where not told until the day they went.
The need for harbours to unload the equipment hence the massive Mulberry Harbours.
The need to get huge amounts fuel ashore hence the undersea pipe line known as Pluto
There was a need for a whole range of of specialised tanks that became known as Hobart's funnies.
There was the DD type that swam ashore and this worked well when it was not asked to swim 12 miles to the shore like they did at Omaha beach.
There was the Flail Tank that would clear the mines and the barb wire.
There were tanks to destroy strong points by firing a huge mortar type round the size of dustbin a couple of hundred yards.
There were bridging tanks and other that carried cassions to fill in trenches or bridge flooded ditches.
There were flame thrower tanks which towed a large container of fuel behind them, the Germans would shoot the crews of these tanks if captured.
There was also the Sherman Firefly with a 17 pounder gun that could deal with a Tiger Tank.
The Americans refused all offers of this type of equipment except for the DD type of tank which they then total mis used by trying to get it to swim some 12 miles ashore in a heavy swell, I often wonder just how they would have got on if these had got ashore at Omaha beach.
So although the Canadian Raid was failure as such it did lead to a successfully D Day and saved thousands of lives

Excellent post LeEnfield. The Dieppe experience certainly helped with the planning for Normandy.

Interesting that in some sources Montgomery has been blamed for the Dieppe debacle. (Montgomery of Alamein by Alun Chalfont).

Originally Posted by Strongbow

Excellent post LeEnfield. The Dieppe experience certainly helped with the planning for Normandy.

Interesting that in some sources Montgomery has been blamed for the Dieppe debacle. (Montgomery of Alamein by Alun Chalfont).

Mountbatten should have been blamed for the debacle, not Montgomery.

Originally Posted by papasha408

Mountbatten should have been blamed for the debacle, not Montgomery.

But then again the Soviets were pushing for a second front, despite being told the Western Allies were not yet ready.

At a meeting with Stalin Churchill and FDR, Stalin asked Churchill if the British were afraid to fight. Churchill was far more polite then I would have been. I would have reminded Stalin that he signed the non aggression pact with Germany, stole half of Poland, congratulated Hitler when his forces reached Dunkirk, that he wanted to join the Axis, sending of supplies to Russia by sea and that he should be damn lucky that the Western Allies don't leave Hitler to finish the job.

I think the Germans should have allowed the allies to take Dieppe and disembark 200,000 men and some equipment and then use them to train their green troops and encircle them and sink a lot of allied ships thanks to air superiority. The prisoners would have been a good bargaining chip.
The captured trucks, etc, would have been valuable in the USSR.

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

I think the Germans should have allowed the allies to take Dieppe and disembark 200,000 men and some equipment and then use them to train their green troops and encircle them and sink a lot of allied ships thanks to air superiority. The prisoners would have been a good bargaining chip.
The captured trucks, etc, would have been valuable in the USSR.

I don't know what makes you so stupid, but it really works!

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

I think the Germans should have allowed the allies to take Dieppe and disembark 200,000 men and some equipment and then use them to train their green troops and encircle them and sink a lot of allied ships thanks to air superiority. The prisoners would have been a good bargaining chip.
The captured trucks, etc, would have been valuable in the USSR.

How dare you make such a remark. It was men who fought to rid the world of Nazi tyranny. And you will treat them as guinea pigs. Your comment is a slap in the face to all who wear or have worn a uniform. You have no honor .!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by samneanderthal

I think the Germans should have allowed the allies to take Dieppe and disembark 200,000 men and some equipment and then use them to train their green troops and encircle them and sink a lot of allied ships thanks to air superiority. The prisoners would have been a good bargaining chip.
The captured trucks, etc, would have been valuable in the USSR.

Originally Posted by BritinAfrica

I don't know what makes you so stupid, but it really works!

Originally Posted by Julie

How dare you make such a remark. It was men who fought to rid the world of Nazi tyranny. And you will treat them as guinea pigs. Your comment is a slap in the face to all who wear or have worn a uniform. You have no honor .!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, looking @ it from the German point of view(what he's doing in this "what if")...An Anzio or Gallipoli situation would have worked for the Germans vs a fully developed invasion in '44

I still think it´s a rude remark.