- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 6/6/16 at 9:59 am to Sparkplug#1
quote:
about? Those Higgins boats proved invaluable to the war effort.
It's not babble, it's a fact. They were made out of plywood and very poorly constructed. Ask anyone that was there. Some sunk as soon as they hit the water.
I'm not putting them down, just giving a little info on where they were made, and that they weren't made very well, but did the JOB.
My grandfather was there and he bought a Higgins boat when he returned from the war.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Did it sink as soon as he put it in the water?
They were designed to be primarily made out of wood, just like PT boats. There was a big war going on and wooden tanks wouldn't work very well.
about? Those Higgins boats proved invaluable to the war effort.
It's not babble, it's a fact. They were made out of plywood and very poorly constructed. Ask anyone that was there. Some sunk as soon as they hit the water.
I'm not putting them down, just giving a little info on where they were made, and that they weren't made very well, but did the JOB.
My grandfather was there and he bought a Higgins boat when he returned from the war.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Did it sink as soon as he put it in the water?
They were designed to be primarily made out of wood, just like PT boats. There was a big war going on and wooden tanks wouldn't work very well.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:05 am to jlu03
quote:
Couldn't imagine what these guys were thinking at that exact moment.
I'm sure they aren't cowering for a safe space.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:06 am to auggie
quote:
Did all that he could possibly do,yet didn't feel like it was enough
I kills me to think that this nation doesn't have that in it anymore.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:08 am to Wolfhound45
Thank God for the U.S. Army.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:08 am to ColoradoAg03
quote:
One of the most, if not the most alpha as frick picture you could ever find.
quote:
I'd says it's 1A and 1B with the picture of the soldiers raising the flag on Iwo Jima.
While the Iwo Jima picture is awesome...the fact that the popular picture is a reenactment drops it down a bit.
Here are some other awesome pictures.
Paratroopers during d-day invasiion
Walking through the Champs de Elysse (after kicking Kraut arse)
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:08 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Darth, I would add to your point, that LCVPs were cheaper to produce than AmTracs and they could carry more troops.
And I think that's the key fact to using the Higgins boats instead of AmTracks at Normandy. The number of troops being landed simply made using AmTracks not a viable option. An Amtrack could only hold 18 troops while a Higgins boat could carry 36.
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure the terrain was a component as well. There were no coral reefs to crawl over or sloped beaches to crawl up. AmTraks at Normandy would have been forced to negotiate the few choke point exits from the beach, or remain on the beach/shingle as another target.
As you stated, a Higgins boat had twice the troop carrying capacity, plus it also returned to the troop ships to load another platoon of men and made multiple trips back to the landing beaches.
Darth, I would add to your point, that LCVPs were cheaper to produce than AmTracs and they could carry more troops.
And I think that's the key fact to using the Higgins boats instead of AmTracks at Normandy. The number of troops being landed simply made using AmTracks not a viable option. An Amtrack could only hold 18 troops while a Higgins boat could carry 36.
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm sure the terrain was a component as well. There were no coral reefs to crawl over or sloped beaches to crawl up. AmTraks at Normandy would have been forced to negotiate the few choke point exits from the beach, or remain on the beach/shingle as another target.
As you stated, a Higgins boat had twice the troop carrying capacity, plus it also returned to the troop ships to load another platoon of men and made multiple trips back to the landing beaches.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:10 am to NoNameTiger
quote:
I've always wondered how many of the men in that pic never even made it to or off of the beach.
There are many times I look at photos from the war and wish I could know more about the story of the people.
This is a photo that I own. The sailors in the pic are from the crew of the submarine Amberjack. The back of the photo has all the names and is dated July 31, 1942. This would have been when they were on their way to the Pacific theater. By February of 1943 every sailor in that photo was dead with the exception of 1 man.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:11 am to White Roach
quote:
I'm sure the terrain was a component as well. There were no coral reefs to crawl over or sloped beaches to crawl up. AmTraks at Normandy would have been forced to negotiate the few choke point exits from the beach, or remain on the beach/shingle as another target.
As you stated, a Higgins boat had twice the troop carrying capacity, plus it also returned to the troop ships to load another platoon of men and made multiple trips back to the landing beaches.
It was also a little bit faster than the AmTrac as well.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:16 am to terd ferguson
I don't think I'd want to tangle with #10. He looks like trouble.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:18 am to ColoradoAg03
quote:
One of the most, if not the most alpha as frick picture you could ever find.
It's not D-Day, but along the lines of awesome photos, here is a picture of my grandfather in N. Africa...
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:20 am to Darth_Vader
LVT's were better suited for the Pacific island hopping because of the coral reefs. That wasn't a problem at Normandy.
As mentioned, LVCP's (Higgins boats) were faster and held more troops... they also presented a smaller target. LVT's were also highly unreliable. I know at one point in the Pacific theater they were literally replacing them after every landing.
As mentioned, LVCP's (Higgins boats) were faster and held more troops... they also presented a smaller target. LVT's were also highly unreliable. I know at one point in the Pacific theater they were literally replacing them after every landing.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:22 am to Brodeur
quote:
here is a picture of my grandfather in N. Africa...
It was nice of him to show those white men around the pyramids.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:25 am to Wolfhound45
Can't fathom the balls it must've took to willingly run into the meat grinder
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:25 am to terd ferguson
quote:
It was nice of him to show those white men around the pyramids.
Haha! I always make the mistake of saying he's on the far left.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:27 am to White Roach
quote:
I'm sure the terrain was a component as well. There were no coral reefs to crawl over or sloped beaches to crawl up. AmTraks at Normandy would have been forced to negotiate the few choke point exits from the beach, or remain on the beach/shingle as another target
I started thinking about this after my reply and I think another aspect of using the Higgins over the AmTrac at Normandy was the fact the Higgins didn't sit down in the water as deep as the AmTrack. This was key due to the massive number of underwater mines and traps designed to rip the bottom out of landing craft Rommel had placed just off shore.
While the Amtrac's tracks gave it the ability to cross sandbars and coral reefs, they would have been little use against the underwater obstacles at Normandy. And the fact they sat down in the water more than the Higgins means using AmTracks would have lead to higher losses.
Bottom line, AmTracs were great under the right conditions. But those conditions did not exist in Normandy.
This post was edited on 6/6/16 at 10:29 am
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:30 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Bottom line, AmTracs were great under the right conditions. But those conditions did not exist in Normandy.
Those conditions existed in the Pacific. Where a Higgins boat would get caught on the reefs the LVT could just keep on going.
LVT's = great for the Marines island hopping through the Pacific
Higgins boat = great for the beaches of Normandy
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:35 am to terd ferguson
quote:
him to show those white men around the pyramids.
Here's to those brave men that hit those beaches that incredible day. The Longest Day is one of my favorite books.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:39 am to White Roach
quote:
If it makes you feel any better, something like 440,000 Anericans were killed over our ~45 months of involvement in WWII.
That doesn't make me feel better at all. As I said before, I wasn't trying to make slight of the number. Just thought it was much higher than that.
Posted on 6/6/16 at 10:39 am to Darth_Vader
Gotcha, thanks Darth.
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News