North Pincer to the Falaise Gap

German campaigns and battles 1919-1945.

Moderator: sniper1shot

User avatar
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:17 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by Imad » Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:31 pm

Good observation there Spinechicken. However I would take D'Este's evaluation with a pinch of salt, as "Decision in Normandy' is actually a highly tendentious work. The author has a hard time believing that the main thrust of Monty's plan was to draw crack German armour towards the British/Canadian sector in order to facilitate a U.S breakthrough, which made total sense in view of superior American mobility. Anyway I am digressing as this thread is actually about Falaise. Another point I would like to make is that the ferocious resistance put up by HJ seemed to have been another factor behind Allied "slowness" in closing the gap. Anyone disagree with that?
Cry 'havoc' and let slip... the dogs of war

User avatar
Deiter Hollenstein
Posts: 166
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:26 pm

Post by Deiter Hollenstein » Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:28 pm

Reb wrote:The failure to close the gap may be traced to two reasons. One - the Americans sent a boy to a man's job. (Bradley) and two, so did the Brits (Monty).

Monty was way ahead of Bradley on the this but his reach exceeded his grasp.

So we have Monty - quite bright, and Bradley, not so bright, as our two highest ranking subordinates to Ike. I'm often surprised we won the war at all. But the net result was very high allied casualties - as is usually the case with cautious generals.

Every time I think of Huertgen Forest or Brest I get annoyed with Bradley all over again. What a joke that man was. But we didn't have much going for us at the time. Perhaps Collins in charge of First Army, Patton with Third and we clone somebody for Army Group commander - taking say, Monty's brain and Patton's heart! :wink:

Agreed. Bradley's greatest success was in remaking his image after the war.

User avatar
Alex Coles
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 9:50 am
Location: England

Post by Alex Coles » Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:47 am

But Monty was always too cautious.

Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Toronto

Post by PaulJ » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:46 pm


Many interesting comments all around, but if I could -- the thread has veered a bit from my original question.

Was it tough to close the gap? Obviously, and many posters have given various reasons for why that was so.

But my question wasn't why did it take so long to push south and south-eastwards to close the gap in the face of the German defences. My question was -- why push southwards into the teeth of 1 SS Pz Korps in the first place? (Given that inevitably doing so would be tough slogging.)

Why not push east or east-south-eastwards, into the area of the German line held by 272 ID?
17 SS Panzer Grenadier wrote:But Monty was always too cautious.
Except at Arnhem? :wink:

Paul Johnston
Per Ardua ad Astra

User avatar
Posts: 86
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 3:40 pm
Location: Cheshire, UK

Post by Spinechicken » Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:43 pm

PaulJ wrote:My question was -- why push southwards into the teeth of 1 SS Pz Korps in the first place? (Given that inevitably doing so would be tough slogging.)
I would suspect primarily because this was the only real route through to linkup with the Americans, and that Falaise and the surrounding area had been an Anglo-Canadian objective for some time. Difficult one though.

17.SS Panzer Grenadier wrote:But Monty was always too cautious.
May I refer you to Operations Perch, Epsom, Charnwood, Goodwood and Bluecoat.

Ahh, but several were costly failures, I hear you cry. May I then refer you to the six SS Panzer Divisions with superior armour which the Anglo-Canadian forces were facing.

That's my 2-penneth worth.


User avatar
Posts: 6138
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2005 5:42 pm
Location: Argentina

Re: North Pincer to the Falaise Gap

Post by tigre » Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:13 am

Hello to all :D; a little complement speaking about SS troops..............................

Counterattack of SS-Der Führer to open the bag of Falaise 1944.

The American and Polish units that entered Chambois on the night of August 19, 1944 had found the city weakly defended. However, the skirmishes continued during the night, exploding sporadically: some German units, oblivious to the union that had just taken place between Poles and Americans, entered the city seeking to take advantage of the bridge. The 2. SS-Panzerdivision "Das Reich" had been left out of the bag thus formed.

On August 20, 1944, the struggles of the different units began to open a passage in the Allied siege in the sector south of Trun. The German attacks resumed in the morning, more systematically: their objective was to seize the city to capture an additional bridge in the Dives. Little by little, as the day progressed, the attacks were less and less organized, involving less motivated units.

The 2nd SS-Pz Div "Das Reich", regiment "Der Führer" in the lead, supported by heavy mortars, attacked the Western salient Polish positions established around the manor of Boisjos. Near Boisjos, the attack of the Der Fuhrer regiment was repulsed in one hour by the heavy fire provided by the battalions of hunters and the divisional artillery but accentuated the scarcity of ammunition which then affected in an increasing way the Poles.

Even as the paratroopers' attack weakened, the 2nd SS-PzD resumed its assault. This time, the Poles concentrated on the defense of their southern flank were overwhelmed and the SS infantry managed to jostle them, opening the way for the paratroopers: around noon, the junction was established, opening the pocket and allowing the imprisoned units to withdraw in the direction of Vimoutiers.

Sources: ... /2SSPD.htm ... 1_135.html ... -1945-1962

Cheers. Raúl M 8).
Counterattack of the SS-Das Reich in Falaise, August 20 and 21, 1944.........
image030.jpg (38.8 KiB) Viewed 772 times
Serás lo que debas ser o no serás nada. General José de San Martín.

Post Reply