The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I split the article on US logistics in Overlord into two. This is the second part, covering the Northern France campaign - the breakout from Normandy and the pursuit to the German frontier.
Hawkeye7(discuss)02:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Image review
File:Red Ball 1944 september 20-fr.svg the source website looks like copyvio, unless the map is public domain. Is there another source that could be cited?
The one I'm concerned about is the second source (gmccckw.nl) which has an image of a different map with no original publication information or indication that they are reprinting with permission. (
t ·
c) buidhe01:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)reply
in the lead, the Allied invasion of northwest Europe during World War II that commenced on D-Day, 6 June 1944. On 25 July 1944, the First United States Army began Operation Cobra. Perhaps, "the Allied invasion of northwest Europe during World War II that commenced on D-Day, 6 June 1944. After the Allies secured a beachhead in Normandy, on 25 July 1944, the First United States Army began Operation Cobra..."
in the lead, Senior commanders subordinated logistical imperatives to operational opportunities. Perhaps, "Throughout the campaign, senior Allied commanders subordinated logistical imperatives to operational opportunities."
Y That is too harsh. Re-worded to "At critical junctures in the campaign, senior American commanders subordinated logistical imperatives to operational opportunities."
Hawkeye7(discuss)22:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)reply
The 5,000,000-US-barrel (600,000,000 l) of storage tanks were...: this seems a little awkwardly worded. Perhaps "The storage tanks had a capacity of 5,000,000-US-barrels (600,000,000 l) and were..."
railway lines, which had been badly damaged by the Allied Air Forces. Perhaps, "railway lines, which had been badly damaged by the Allied Air Forces during earlier interdiction operations"?
partially trained units in the hope of their being able to complete their training in the UK --> "partially trained units in the hope they would be able to complete their training in the UK"?
fourteen African-American truck companies had their personnel transferred to other African-American units. The intention was to replace them with Caucasian personnel: I don't quite follow here. Why wouldn't the existing trained African American transport personnel just be bolstered by a small number of Caucasian personnel from other units, rather than be replaced entirely? Was this a consequence of segregation? Seems counterproductive to say the least
Y Yes, counterproductive to say the very least.
Racial segregation in the United States Armed Forces created a myriad of problems. It would have been far more efficient to assign personnel without regard to race, but the idea of living in close quarters with African-Americans was repugnant to many white Americans. I have noted that the Army was segregated, and added a link to the article on racial segregation in case the reader is unaware of this. If you're interested, the Army published a whole book on the subject, which you can downlaod for free
here.
Hawkeye7(discuss)22:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)reply
sources: all appear reliable to me based on authors or publishers and all information in the article appears to be referenced (no action required)
Support from Gog the Mild
Whew! Heck of an article. Ping me once all or most of AR's points are cleared - so I won't be repeated issues already picked up - and I'll have a look at it.
Gog the Mild (
talk)
16:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)reply
"Bradley fixated on Brest, which was only intended to be a port of reception for troops, and Saint-Malo, a minor port, whereas Patton focused on Lorient and Quiberon Bay." It may be worth at this point briefly indicating out what Lorient and Quiberon Bay were to be used for, as you have with Brest and Saint-Malo.
"because the approaches were not cleared." "not cleared" → 'could not be cleared' may make things clearer for the reader. (By avoiding begging a question.)
"from the beaches to Laval, 135 miles (217 km) distant, and then to Le Mans, another 175 miles (282 km) away." Is there a typo in there? Le mans is barely any further from the beaches than Laval.
"Breaks in the line on 29 August forced truck units to draw MT80 from Saint-Lô, 80 miles (130 km) further away." Further away from where? At the last mention in the text the pipeline had only reached St Lo.
"in July 1943, the Army Service Forces ordered 67,000 to be produced in 1944. The Truman Committee considered this wasteful, unnecessarily reducing the number of civilian trucks that could be built. Despite the adverse political pressure, the Army pressed on with the production program, but only 2,788 heavy-duty trucks came off the assembly lines in January 1944." This doesn't really explain the shortage. If "the Army pressed on with the production program" for "67,000", how come "only 2,788 heavy-duty trucks came off the assembly lines in January 1944."? Also 2,788 a month is an annual rate of 33,000, or half the required rate, which may be worth explicitly stating for the hard of math.
"SHAEF made available an allocation of air transport capable of delivering up to 2,000 long tons (2,000 t) per day to the Le Mans area" Is it known where the supplies were flown from?
"named after Junior Van Noy, an engineer posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor in the Battle of Finschhafen". This seems not to meet "It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail" to me.
"It could be supported by ports that were captured" Possibly 'It could be supported by ports that had been captured', to make it clear that this was the case?
"Historian Roland Ruppenthal". 'The historian Roland Ruppenthal' avoids
false title.
Y Done. Normally false titles like "Vice President Joe Biden" are acceptable in American English, but forbidden in British English, where they are considered an Americanism.
Hawkeye7(discuss)22:15, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
"and unable to berth vessels drawing more than 14 to 15 feet (4.3 to 4.6 m) at high water" - Link to
Draft (hull) or something similar, as draft is a bit of a technical term.
That's all I've got, I guess I caught most of my points in the GA review. Excellent article, and none of these three points keep me from supporting now.
Hog FarmBacon02:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.