D-Day

[False Prophet]

Why was the battle at Omaha beach so much bloodier than the other beaches on Normandy?

Did the U.S.A. know this beforehand? If so couldn't they just leave Omaha beach alone and attacked the other beaches?

[Cosmo16]

I believe that battle at Omaha was bloodier because it had always been considered a trouble spot by the Germans. And yes, I believe that the US did know that but, I thiink their was somthing crucial about it's location. (Don't know what though)

[MattF]

If you ever look at pictures of Omaha beach you can see that the terrain is very suitable for defense. There were 100 ft. cliffs with only five exits. Omaha was defended by a crack German force, while other spots were manned by troops with less training, sometimes very little at all. Also, artillery at Pointe du Hoc was able to fire on this particular beach.

[selfAdjoint]

I suppose the army didn't want to bypass this strong position and then have it in their rear. On the other hand, the "indirect approach", which was favored by some of the most effective generals (Guderian and Patton for two) would have suggested bypassing it to get in ITS rear.

[tumor]

Simillar situation happened at Monte Cassino, where 15 thousands allied soldiers died while conquering one stupid hill.
Even Russians(not the most brilliant tacticians) did not do such a things,they just left strongholds for later anihilation or waited till defendants surrender.

[motai]

In Omaha, part of the reason was because they had no fire support and no cover. The ships were supposed to fire rockets to crater the beach, but the rockets fell short. Another reason was the boats let the buoyant DD Shermans out too early, they ended up sinking.

So now the infantry had no armor support to clear the strongpoints and they were landing on completely flat, untouched beach. Without the critical armoured support, they were defenseless against the machinegun arrays. IMO the ships should have bombarded the shore from the sea for a lot longer than what they should have done.