st. Lo losses

liuanru · Post by **liuanru** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:54 am

what are the losses of both sides at ST. lo?

Spinechicken · Post by **Spinechicken** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:02 pm

I've only got two exceedingly general and rough figures for the casualties on June 30th, about a fortnight before the actual fall of the city, if that helps at all.

Appox. 80,000 German Casualties, 30,000 US Casualties.

-SC

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:27 pm

Spinechicken (I won't ask where that came from!

)

German losses of 80,000 are most certainly high - may include losses from Cherbourg. The 80k would have wiped out the defenders three times over at St. Lo!

By the time Cherbourg had fallen US losses were about 40k as I recall.

The problem in computing losses for battles like this is that Normandy was a series of small battles rolled into one large compaign - commentators can count the numbers any way they choose, and have, creating much confusion.

cheers
Reb

Spinechicken · Post by **Spinechicken** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:02 am

Reb wrote: Spinechicken (I won't ask where that came from! )

German losses of 80,000 are most certainly high - may include losses from Cherbourg. The 80k would have wiped out the defenders three times over at St. Lo!

By the time Cherbourg had fallen US losses were about 40k as I recall.

The problem in computing losses for battles like this is that Normandy was a series of small battles rolled into one large compaign - commentators can count the numbers any way they choose, and have, creating much confusion.

cheers
Reb

Heh, yes those figures are totally wrong. They are the combined figures for Wehrmacht losses in the US sector by June 30th (apparently-I think I got that lot from The Battle of The Hedgerows, will have to double check now.) It was the closest thing I could find to any sort of indication of casualties around St. Lo. I would agree that computing true losses in Normandy is an almost impossible task. Such is military history...

-SC

Rich · Post by **Rich** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:13 am

Spinechicken wrote:
Reb wrote: Heh, yes those figures are totally wrong.

Well, these should be pretty accurate at least for the US side and are drawn from the original unit ELRs. For the German side they are basically best guesstimates, based upon total losses reported for the period and upon US POW accounting. Note that the only units included are the 29th Division and its attachments and their German opponents, mostly elements of 3. FJD, i.e., only those units directly invilved in the attack and defense of St. Lo and its immediate environs. (Data are from The Dupuy Institute Division-Level Engagement Database.)

11 July - 390 US, 59 German
12 July - 415 US, 398 German
13 July - 300 US, 53 German
14 July - 150 US, 7 German
15 July - 305 US, 284 German
16 July - 280 US, 126 German
17 July - 272 US, 33 German
18 July - 220 US, 456 German
Total - 2,332 US, 1,416 German

Hope that helps.

PaulJ · Post by **PaulJ** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:10 am

Rich -- good data (as usual). Just a quick question -- are those numbers KIA or KIA + WIA?

Cheers,

Rich · Post by **Rich** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:35 pm

PaulJ wrote:Rich -- good data (as usual). Just a quick question -- are those numbers KIA or KIA + WIA?

Cheers,

Killed, wounded and missing, i.e., total battle casualties.

PaulJ · Post by **PaulJ** » Sat Apr 29, 2006 5:33 pm

Rich wrote:Killed, wounded and missing, i.e., total battle casualties.

Ack.

Spinechicken · Post by **Spinechicken** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:06 pm

Rich wrote:Well, these should be pretty accurate at least for the US side and are drawn from the original unit ELRs. For the German side they are basically best guesstimates, based upon total losses reported for the period and upon US POW accounting. Note that the only units included are the 29th Division and its attachments and their German opponents, mostly elements of 3. FJD, i.e., only those units directly invilved in the attack and defense of St. Lo and its immediate environs. (Data are from The Dupuy Institute Division-Level Engagement Database.)

11 July - 390 US, 59 German
12 July - 415 US, 398 German
13 July - 300 US, 53 German
14 July - 150 US, 7 German
15 July - 305 US, 284 German
16 July - 280 US, 126 German
17 July - 272 US, 33 German
18 July - 220 US, 456 German
Total - 2,332 US, 1,416 German

Hope that helps.

Blimey, fantastic (if that's the right word) stuff. You wouldn't happen to have specific figures for what was left of the 352. Division?

-SC

Rich · Post by **Rich** » Mon May 08, 2006 2:22 pm

Spinechicken wrote:Blimey, fantastic (if that's the right word) stuff. You wouldn't happen to have specific figures for what was left of the 352. Division?

-SC

Hard to say. The division strength was reported as 12,734 plus 335 HiWi as of 1 March 1944. It seems unlikely that the strength was much more than that as of 6 June. And there are two sets of casualty data for it. 7. AOK dekade reports give a total of 3,763 battle casualties for the period 1 June-20 July 1944. But other reports by 7. Armee indiacte that total losses to the division were 7,886 for 6 June-11 July 1944. Likely that includes losses of the division and attachments such as 30. Schnell Brigade, KG Heintz and KG 343 ID, which added about 7,378 men. So it seems likely the total strength of the division as of about 12 July was still around 12,561. But even with that strength and possibly a few replacements it seems unlikely that any of the 17-odd Infanterie, Pionier and Fuesilier battalions could have averaged much more than one or two hundred each, at least in terms of Gefechtsstaerke.

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Tue May 09, 2006 9:18 pm

Many of the casualty figures I've seen for Normandy are scarcely helpful in understanding the individual battles such as St. Lo.

The various battles that make up the larger picture end up totaled in with the debacle at Falais which skews the picture of the smaller battles.

cheers
Reb