Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign
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.
Article promoted by Hog Farm (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list
American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign[edit]
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Featured article candidates/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign/archive1
- Featured article candidates/American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign/archive2
| Toolbox |
|---|
This article takes up where American logistics in the Northern France campaign leaves off, covering the period from September 1944 to January 1945. The volume of material was considerable, so I split the article into two parts; one about transportation, and one about supply. In this phase, the American armies remained largely static through September and October for lack of supplies, particularly ammunition. Initially this was because the rapid advance across France and Belgium created lengthy supply lines; the rehabilitation of railways could not keep pace, and the use of motor transport was a stopgap that caused longer term problems. Then, as the weather deteriorated, the beaches became unusable, and the lack of port capacity became a problem because the ports in Brittany that had been intended to supply the American forces had not been captured. Shipping piled up offshore, unable to discharge, and the resulting shortage of ships threatened the entire Allied war effort. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Comments/Source review from AustralianRupert
Support: G'day, Hawkeye, this is just a quick run through at this stage -- I will try to take a better look sometime in the next few days. Here are a few minor points: AustralianRupert (talk) 14:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
- "outmanoeuvered" --> "outmaneuvered"
- "short term" --> "short-term"?
- "An accumulations of idle shipping" --> "An accumulation of idle shipping"
- "deep water berths" --> "deep-water berths"?
- "cannibalising" --> "cannibalizing"
- "formalised" --> "formalized"
- "dischaged" --> "discharged"
- "It rehabilitation was" --> "Its rehabilitation was"
- "USAPRS Thomas F. Farrell Jr., a Baltic coaster converted to an engineer port repair ship" --> italics for the ship's name?
- "Le Havre Harbor" --> "Le Havre harbor"?
- line of communications is overlinked
- "Channel, Army stevedores unload" --> "Channel, US Army stevedores unload"?
- "Ardennes Offensive" --> lower case for consistency
- "Cherbourg Harbor" v. "Cherbourg harbor" (consistency)
- spot checked citations 56, 68 and 84 -- all support the text they are listed against (no action required)
- references appear to be reliable based on authors or publishers (no action required)
- all information appears referenced (no action required)
Continuing the review below: AustralianRupert (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- "On 24 August, Eisenhower decided to continue the pursuit of the retreating" --> as with the supply article, suggest clarifying the other option here
- "twelve divisions could": link division
- "removing mines": link mine
- " 625,000 deadweight tons (635,000 deadweight tonnes) of coasters" --> while I understand that each ship's weight will vary, I think it is a little difficult for the average reader to conceptualise what 625,000 deadwieght tons of ship equates to. Is it possible to clarify how many actual ships this equated to?
- Regrettably not. I consulted several sources without success. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for checking. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
- Regrettably not. I consulted several sources without success. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- "and
theby time the Battle for Brest ended" -- typo - "cuts to UK Import Program" --> "cuts to the UK Import Program"?
- "several MTVs and store ship were" --> "several MTVs and store ships were"?
- "Over 200 ships in European waters awaiting discharge" --> "Over 200 ships were in European waters awaiting discharge"?
- "The shipping crisis in ETO escalated" --> "The shipping crisis in the ETO escalated"?
- "175 in January and February" --> perhaps add the year here
- "using Army lighters" -- link lighter
- "The first four Liberty ships entered": move the link to the first mention of Liberty ships
- "The Darse Transatlantique was not cleared of mines until 21 August, but the access channel was not cleared until 18 September" --> "The Darse Transatlantique had been cleared of mines by 21 August, but the access channel was not cleared until 18 September"?
- "Advance warning ship of arrivals" --> "Advance warning of ship arrivals"
- "and improvisations such as propeller shaft strut bearings from applewood and replacement rudders from scrap metal. [71]" --> and improvisations such as constructing propeller shaft strut bearings from applewood and replacement rudders from scrap metal. [71]" (also, suggest removing the space between the full stop and the citation)
- "Nonetheless, the port exceeded their expectations" --> who is "their" here?
- "The German had demolished the cargo" --> "The Germans had demolished the cargo"
- link platoon
- "with a Landing ship, infantry (LSI) on" --> earlier you use "Landing Ship, Tank" -- suggest consistency in capitalisation (I'd tend towards Landing Ship, Infantry but potentially the house style is to decaps - although that looks very wrong to me)
It looks wrong to me too, and the articles are titled Landing ship, infantry and Landing Ship, Infantry. Changed to match the MOS. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- "It was situated on Scheldt River some" --> "It was situated on the Scheldt River some"
- "with its port facilities large intact thanks to the" --> "with its port facilities largely intact thanks to the"
- "to hammer out the details": possibly a little informal
- "The Americans forces would" --> "The American forces would" or "The Americans would"
- "from the American freighter Blenheim" --> italics for the ship name
- "Before the war, Antwerp had been a transit port, and it did not possess large amounts of covered storage space" --> some of this has been said earlier, suggest: "Antwerp did not possess large amounts of covered storage space..."
- I think that was in the lead. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- Quite right, sorry, not sure what I was
drthinking there. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
- Quite right, sorry, not sure what I was
- I think that was in the lead. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- "which had previous been engaged" --> "which had previously been engaged"
- "dispatched 8,209 long tons (8,341 t)in 1,542 trucks" --> typo (space required before "in")
- "most famous of express highway delivery route" --> "most famous express highway delivery route"
- "the Little Red ball Express" --> "the Little Red Ball Express"?
- "still more trucks available at the NYPE" --> has NYPE been introduced formally yet?
- "Tires were the most critical" --> move the link for tires to the first use of the term
- "for First Army" and "for Third Army": definite article?
- "These were augmented by captured rolling stock. [110]" --> remove the space between the full stop and the citation
- "in for bomb bay tanks" --> "in bomb bay tanks"
- "were withdrawn at the end of September": do we know why? One assumes there was an operational need -- could this be clarified, potentially?
- "what was required with winter clothing and equipment" --> "what was required was winter clothing and equipment"
- "A second attempt the following day was scrubbed" --> probably best to just say cancelled as the average reader might not know what scrubbed means in this context
All points addressed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, added my support above -- great work as always. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Support from Vami[edit]
Both Ruppenthal 1959 have a "extra text in |volume=" error.[...] the World War II campaign in northwest Europe that ran from the end of the pursuit of the German armies from Normandy in mid-September 1944 until December 1944, [...]
This would be a good place to link the Allied advance from Paris to the RhineAdditional port capacity was obtained through the development of the ports of Rouen and Le Havre, and in November, Antwerp was opened.
Recommend rough dates for Rouen and Le Havre as with Antwerp; also recommend "and the opening of Antwerp in November".
- Background & Shipping
In the first seven weeks after the Allied invasion of Normandy [...]
Would a link to Operation Overlord here be excessive?[...] Lieutenant General Omar N. Bradley [...] Brigadier General John M. Franklin
Link rank?When the Germans were outmaneuvered and then driven into a chaotic retreat, [...]
Can you add a when and where here?[...] fell during September because it had to handle [...]
Recommend "the port" in place of "it".Not until December, with the opening of the port of Antwerp [...]
Link Port of Antwerp?Conway enlisted Harry Hopkins [...]
Introduce Hopkins.
- Ports
[...] the minor ports in Normandy and Brittany.[21] The minor ports in Normandy and Brittany [...]
Recommend replacement of second half with "These".Granville, Cancale, Saint-Brieuc, and Morlaix should be linked."train ferries" and "stevedores" too.[...] whose name was pronounced (and sometimes spelt) "ducks".
I am not sure how pertinent this is the topic at hand.The Darse Transatlantique was cleared of mines until 21 August, [...]
What happened on 21 August?This was slower and more manpower intensive than quayside unloading due to multiple handling.
Is there a missing word here?By then it was evident that while the target of discharging 20,000 long tons (20,000 t) might be achievable, port discharge was only half the battle; [...]
Ditto.[...] but on departure on 25 September it navigated the inner and outer harbors and cleared the block ships, but then struck a mine and sank.
Two buts.At this point nine berths were available [...]
Recommend past-tense.[...] and 51,111 passed through [...]
Recommend addition of "soldiers" or "personnel" after the big number there.Some of the burning cars contained bags mail from home, [...]
Huh?By 4 January there were nearly 3,500 railroad cars were lying fully loaded but idle at the port; thousands more were at the Advance Section (ADSEC) depots around Liege, where they were not unloaded.
Huh?
- Railways
[...] fighting had passed through and the network restored.
Missing "was"?[...] but a major factor was a decision to ship bulk supplies directly from the ports to the ADSEC and army depots in to reduce shipping congestion.
Huh?The forward railheads at the forward railheads [...]
Huh?
Reading completed. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Support Comments from Iazyges[edit]
- Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:45, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Lede[edit]
- but before the war it had been a transit port, and it did not possess large amounts of covered storage space. These seem to be related but not outright said; that it didn't posses large covered storage space because it was a transit port, I would simply say but before the war it had been a transit port, and therefore did not possess large amounts of covered storage space. I think this is covered by sources, especially for it had been of p. 111, but I understand if you view this as straying too far from the sources.
Background[edit]
(First three are stolen from my previous review.
- Operation Cobra, which commenced on 25 July, effected a turnaround in the operational situation suggest When the American Operation Cobra, launched on 25 July 1944 as in the British article.
- Another army, the Ninth Army, suggest removing Another army
- Railways could not be repaired and pipelines constructed quickly enough suggest Railways could not be repaired and pipelines could not be constructed quickly enough
- but there was a shortage of suitable vehicles owing to political interference this could probably use a spot of elaboration. Perhaps but there was a shortage of suitable vehicles owing to political interference from [x] because of [y],
Shipping[edit]
- The delay in capturing and opening Cherbourg meant that Cherbourg, the minor ports and the beaches would have to handle far more daily tonnage than originally planned. I think Cherbourg is accidentally used twice, so I've changed it to The delay in capturing and opening Cherbourg meant the minor ports and the beaches would have to handle far more daily tonnage than originally planned; please revert that if I'm misreading it.
- The Utah and Omaha beaches were closed for good on 13 and 19 November respectively. suggest changing for good to permanently
Ports[edit]
- Granville had been subject to systematic demolition, with quays cratered, cranes tipped into the water, and the harbor blocked with sunken craft. should specify who did this if possible, I'm assuming not the Americans, probably the Germans? Perhaps Granville had been subject to systematic demolition by [German occupiers/retreating German forces], with quays cratered, cranes tipped into the water, and the harbor blocked with sunken craft.
- workers elsewhere demanded the same the hallmark of any true MilHist article (no suggestion).
- @Hawkeye7: That is all my suggestions, apologies for taking so long. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
CommentsSupport from PM[edit]
Great to see all these loggie articles coming through, Hawkeye. A few comments from me:
- Lead
- a brief mention of air and inland waterways would be a useful inclusion
- Background
- suggest "on D-Day – 6 June – determined"
- Operation Overlord is duplinked in successive sentences, Granville, Saint-Malo and Antwerp are also duplinked
- suggest "the US 12th Army Group", as you've just talked about Allied forces more generally
- suggest "but also Lieutenant General John C. H. Lee's US Communications Zone (COMZ)"
- suggest "Bradley had exercised control over the COMZ" and "between the armies and the COMZ"*suggest "COMZ headquarters also functioned as the headquarters of the European Theater of Operations, United States Army (ETOUSA)"
- suggest "to take advantage of the disorganized German retreat"
- suggest "for under the Operation Overlord plan, the ports of Lorient and Quiberon Bay in Brittany"
- the link to "developed" is a bit eastereggy, could you widen it?
- Just a question about the reliance on Dick for the assessment of the issues with waste, disorder etc. It is not a question about Dick's reliability, but more about whether this a widely held view? Could it be strengthened with citations from another authoritative source?
- Shipping
- suggest "the Omaha and Utah landing beaches"
- suggest adding a sentence fragment explaining what coasters were. Perhaps introducing them as coastal trading vessels?
- suggest "It was planned that after the first six weeks, the allocation to Overlord would be reduced to 250,000 deadweight tons (250,000 deadweight tonnes)."
- deadlining is an unusual term, some explanation might be useful
- suggest "From September onwards, it was planned that an increasing volume of supplies would come directly from the United States"
- "By the end of September, 219 ships would require discharge on the continent, which was 44 more than the theater said it required" doesn't make sense to me. If the theater did need them, why were they coming?
- "equinoctal gales" is an unusual term (and I understand a popular misconception) that could do with a bit of explanation. Also, isn't it "equinoctial gales", or is this the American spelling?
- link classes of supply
- what was the UK Import Program?
- the meaning of "considered the ETO's estimate that 260 would be unloaded in October to be "fantastic"" would probably be clearer by rewriting without using the quote
- "combat loader" is obscure. Why not go with Amphibious cargo ship?
- suggest "As ships failed to return on time, supplies began piling up at the ports, depots and railway sidings in the US" if this is what is meant?
- is "Somervell proposed eliminating the American contribution UK Import Program" missing a word or two?
- suggest linking Liege at first mention in the body
Down to Ports. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:01, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- Ports
- I believe the full names are 16th Major Port and 5th Major Port. This applies to later mentions too. You could add that they were part of the Transportation Corps (and link)
- say where Granville is (ie Normandy)
- suggest "The task of rehabilitating the Brittany ports of Cancale, Saint-Brieuc and Saint-Malo"
- link Morlaix and say it was also in Brittany
- what were the "Seine ports"?
- suggest "and Saint-Brieuc, and the Normandy ports of Barfleur, Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue, Carentan, Grandcamp and Isigny"
- "The minor ports of Brittany" doesn't flow, as you have just described the closure of minor ports in both Brittany and Normandy
- the use of the French names for features of Cherbourg harbor without explanation isn't optimal. Perhaps a brief explanation after each when first mentioned? ie the Jetée du Homet (a one-kilometer-long stone pier at the entrance to the inner harbor)
- "just 38.4" percent?
- "stake boats" is jargony, needs explanation
- isn't "Signal Corps Radio" actually a misnomer? Perhaps just "a small army radio"
- "With the opening of ports further north"? Wouldn't east be more useful to the reader?
- "Two artificial piers
thatwere made from Phoenix breakwaters salvaged from the Mulberry harbour project"? - how was the crossover of the main supply route from Le Havre with the British MSR managed?
Down to Rouen. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'll finish this up over the weekend, bit pressed for time today and tomorrow. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:58, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
- suggest "51,111
of themtroops" - suggest "which connected to the Meuse River that ran through Liege" to avoid the "which... which" repetition
- suggest changing the piping to "Operations to clear the Schelt"
- who used Bassin Albert?
- suggest "Ghent had not been badly damaged"
- suggest "and the British agreed to ship 150 locomotives in December"
- suggest "Between 23 and 27 December, 850"
- perhaps explain what a sea mule tug is? Effectively a motorised barge made of pontoons
- Added a bit, with a reference. [1]
That's me done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:10, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Nice work, Hawkeye! Supporting. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Image review - pass[edit]
- Apologies for taking so long, will take up the image review as well. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- File:Unloading of the 500,000th long ton at Le Havre.tif unable to find the first name of "Klosterman", but since its a direct quote from the Gov source, not much can be done about that.
- File:Barges on the Albert Canal.jpg Can't access the book itself but the image doesn't exist anywhere else I can find, so no issues.
- Have found access to book and added link on Commons. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- File:Bastogne resupply1944 sm.jpg Can't track down Gov source that labels this as army produced, but website source makes the claim and certain US army elements have subsequently used the image and confirmed it as authentic, and I can't imagine a lot of non-military people were hanging around Bastogne at the time. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:16, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- At the bottom right of the image there is the US Army Signal Corps image number: 415376. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Well, I feel stupid... Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
- At the bottom right of the image there is the US Army Signal Corps image number: 415376. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- No issues, pass. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
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.