Was Normandy really the best point for an invasion?

>>2074777

How are you defining "best point"?

It was a pretty good point for a variety of factors, including easy air access, ability to strike out of it in several directions forcing the Germans to guard all possible breakout zones, and relative lack of defenses.

>>2074777
Well, it definitely worked.

What I don't fully understand is why they chose Normandy. Why not the relatively undefended west coast of France? It was further away but it's not like all the troop carries would run out of few and sink because of a few extra miles. They would likely lose some element of surprise before landing but it's not like the boats would be so slow that any appreciable amount of German reinforcements could be deployed.

Were they more uncertain about the German counterattack that would come days later than they were of the D-Day itself and thus wanted to control as many bridges into and population centers as soon as possible regardless of losses?

>>2074823
Open a dictionary.

Look up "logistic" and "supply chain".

>>2074777
>Was Normandy really the best point for an invasion?
no, and that's why they chose it. The obvious landing point was Calais, and because of that it was significantly better fortified than Normandy, which was still within an easy striking distance, but wasn't ideal

>it can't be the person I most suspect, that's too obvious
>it can't be the person I least suspect, because that is also too obvious
>it must be the person I most medium suspect
if Hitler had followed Dwight Schrute's wise words, all of Europe would be speaking Russian by now

>>2074823
>Why not the relatively undefended west coast of France?


Normandy was relatively undefended. Places like St Nazaire and Bordeaux, which had harbors that you needed to seize to support any sort of breakout, had much larger garrisons than anywhere in Normandy.


>Were they more uncertain about the German counterattack that would come days later than they were of the D-Day itself and thus wanted to control as many bridges into and population centers as soon as possible regardless of losses?

No.

They wanted an LZ that ideally had all of the following.

1) Coverable by as heavy air cover as possible from England itself; given the short operational range of most Spitfire variants, that limited options to the northern coasts of France.

2) Easy beach for scaling

3) Near to some ports that could be seized so troops and supplies for reinforcement didn't have to be dumped on a beach with smaller landing craft instead of larger less flexible transport.

4)away from large concentrations of German troops, thus enabling them to expand the beachhead quickly and seize infrastructure before the Germans blew too much of it up.

>>2074840
>if Hitler had followed Dwight Schrute's wise words, all of Europe would be speaking Russian by now


Not OP, but I doubt it. Let's not forget that Allied intelligence is enormously better than German intelligence, meaning that they're not picking blindly and hoping that the area they hit is relatively undefended, but they're actually looking at German troop deployments and taking that into consideration for their planning.

Then you have the fact that with the Transport Plan leading up to Normandy, it's actually very difficult for the Germans to move their troops and equipment around from place to place to keep up with Allied indications they pick up on.

If the Germans fortify Normandy (assuming they even can) the Allies hit somewhere else instead as soon as they notice, which will be long before the invasion date. And even if Normandy fails, Anvil/Dragoon is almost certain to give the Allies a presence in France.

>>2074777
>the best

Sophomoric

>>2074871
>Sophomoric
Underage, the post.

>>2074777
>Was Normandy really the best point for an invasion?
Yes, and as it's already been exhibited by other anons, operation Fortitude distorded enough what the German high command thought they knew of the invasion for them to reel back on their wish to strengthen either Calais or Normandy, and instead compromise for a concentration of their forces to be dispatched near Paris. Adding to that, Normandy has always been of the more railway-serviced regions of France, being the Parisian elite's former vacationing site, and the Germans believed it to be to their advantage should they require hastening their troops over to Normandy. What they failed to rzalize though is that railways are some of sites most prone to partisan activity, and the French resistance wrecked them enough for reinforcements to be delayed by almost a week.
Lastly, Normandy, by its virtue of being a bay, soothes the waters on its coast, and therefore the artificial ports of Arromanches survived and fared better than could've been hoped for.

Let's not dimiss the fantastic timing of D-Day though:
>Rommel on leave in Berlin
>no u-boots patrolling the Manche on account of the storm on the 5th of June
>coincides perfectly with the 22nd of June ass-whopping of Bagration

Its mistakes though:
>Montgomery being a pussy and not capturing Caen
>Shermans not knowing how to maneuver between Normandy hedges
( and during the Battle of Normandy, as it made progress against the German defenders difficult.[3] In response, the Rhino tank was developed; a modification added to the front of tanks to aid them cut a hole through the bocage. American personnel usually referred to bocage as hedgerows. The German army also used sunken lanes to implement strong points and defenses to stop the American troops on the Cotentin peninsula and around the town of Saint-Lô.[4])
>flooded areas customary to Normandy in the summer leaving the Germans very weel-defended

>>2074846
>Normandy was relatively undefended. Places like St Nazaire and Bordeaux, which had harbors that you needed to seize to support any sort of breakout, had much larger garrisons than anywhere in Normandy.
Normandy was very well defended relative to the west. Also D-Day didn't give them a port. That's why they constructed one. That was one of the major feats of D-Day.

>coverable by as heavy air cover as possible
That is the most compelling argument, personally.

>>2074871
/his/ is sophmoric. Calling something out ias if it is a deviation from a high standard instead of explaining why it is bad makes you an asshole.

File: 1450234076681.gif (833KB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

833KB, 200x150px

>>2074840
>if Hitler had followed Dwight Schrute's wise words, all of Europe would be speaking Russian by now