Question: Armor in the Normandy Bocage

Windspruce · Post by **Windspruce** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 7:44 pm

I have been told that Allied tanks in the Normandy bocage had to over run infantry (read run over infantry) to head off German armor. I am very skeptical of this actually happening on purpose as I have never read one account nor heard it mentioned in any documentary.

Has anyone ever heard of this happening where an Allied tank would run over their own infantry in the confines of the hegderows to prevent encirclement?

Mike

corpbob · Post by **corpbob** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 2:46 pm

As confining as the bocage was, I'm sure it happened sometimes. But I've never read any accounts of it being anything but a rare occurance anywhere in the war.

Post by **aferguson** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 5:34 pm

i can't imagine it would be a deliberate act. Pretty cowardly if it was.....run over your mates to save your own skin. But as said above there may have been the odd example of it...lots of craziness happens in war.

Post by **aferguson** » Tue Jun 21, 2005 5:35 pm

you may want to ask that question on the missing lynx board. A lot of knowledge over there......someone may know of this.

www.missing-lynx.com

binder001 · Post by **binder001** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 11:43 am

First, no Allied tankers ran over their own troops on purpose. It probably happened by accident. A tank a VERY noisy and in WW2 Normandy tank-infantry tactics were poor. The US had to learn the hard way, but originally there was NO way for a ground trooper to talk to a closed-up tank except to climb aboard and bang on the turret or holler. Remember, also - you can't see squat from a buttoned up tank. They are even hard to see from with the drivers' head out - that's why the military uses "ground guides" in motor pools, etc. Given all that, and the fear of being shot at, you can see why someone could easily get run over. In fact one of the rules around real tanks is that you WILL be run over if you don't stay alert. Sort of like trains - you have to avoid them - they can't stop for you!

lightning2000 · Post by **lightning2000** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:09 pm

Hi,
I have to agree with Binder. I cant imagine any army authorizing doctrine that would call for running over their own troops. Besides Binder's comments, keep in mind one very important point: the Norman bocage was thick and at points several feet high. This would force a tank, trying to make a breakthrough, to manuever wildly, oftentimes exposing its belly to anti-tank guns. Now any driver that's looking up towards the sky instead of ahead of him is bound to hit something they didnt plan to run into, including friendly infantrymen that might be lying prone alongside the vehicle.

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.bigstep.com

Post by **aferguson** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:36 pm

"" I cant imagine any army authorizing doctrine that would call for running over their own troops""

I bet the Russians would have in WWII..they committed evey other afront to their poor infantry.

lightning2000 · Post by **lightning2000** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:41 pm

You have a point there. Any army that would machine gun their own retreating troops would surely look the other way when the armor came barrelling through...

Lightning2000
www.themotorpool.bigstep.com

Hoverbug · Post by **Hoverbug** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:58 pm

This may just be a question of mis-interpretation - e.g. a veteran was noting that the armor had to drive over their dug in positions to move out. Running over a foxhole can be terrifying for the person inside, but it's ussually a bit less fatal than being run over in open ground. I could definitely seeing that happening and then the commentary being taken out of context to mean the guys were actually getting squashed.

jrs · Post by **jrs** » Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:12 pm

I would only add that Tanks look like a safe place to be behind when bulletts are flying at you. So I would imagine many infantry men took the cover they provided. ( guess they could look like big targets as well?) If your too clsoe the chances of it happening are that much greater?

As many have already said, sure it happend but not as a policy, or standing order.

Windspruce · Post by **Windspruce** » Thu Jun 23, 2005 7:30 am

Some good insight by everyone. I posted this on a World War II forum and the general consensus was the same. Allied tankers would not intentionally run over their infantry to gain position, but that infantry sheltering behind them were run over as the tank reversed to avoid being destroyed.

Mike

Darrell · Post by **Darrell** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:50 am

there were specific tactics used in in the bocage. Engineers would blow a hole in the hedge, then the tank would move into the hole, only enough to use its guns all sides, trying to wipeout machin, only then did the infantry move in to clear the field. In that tactic there is no reason for infantry to be any where near the tank. Then its time to do it all over with the next hedge. The Germans had tanks in the bocage, maybe thats what you heard of. There are several good books on the fighting in the bocage. As for the message, I would forget about it, There is plenty to learn about, that is good information. Darrell

Small Scale Military Headquarters

Question: Armor in the Normandy Bocage

Question: Armor in the Normandy Bocage

Hit and Runs!

Hit and Run

Normandy bocage