Talk:Ranger Assault Group

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Articles for creation (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article was created via the article wizard and reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Note icon
This article was accepted on 30 September 2008 by reviewer MSGJ (talk · contribs).
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.


I am sure that there's another article that links to 'Ranger Assault Group' because I found a link in red text on another page called 'Ranger Assault Force'. I changed the name to 'Ranger Assault Group' after I did research, and came up with this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

If you look at this list, you'll see that only links from Wikipedia pages point here, not from other articles. So the best thing to do is to find some appropriate articles to link this article. MSGJ 10:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I've now redirected Ranger Assault Force to this article, so you have one link from 5th Ranger Battalion (United States). MSGJ 11:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for redirecting Ranger Assault Force to Ranger Assault Group. (talk) 01:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

A Number of Points[edit]

LTC Schneider did not decide to take his Force C into Dog Green, as stated in this article. In one of the best examples of heads-up judgment, LTC Schneider recognized how bad conditions were on Dog Green during his run in, and diverted his force to Dog White, which was not effectively covered by German defenses. As a result, his 5th Bn made it from the landing craft, across the beach and to the sea wall with the loss of but 5 or 6 men. It was the shrewd direction of this battalion, ensuring it landed at a vulnerable point in the German defenses, with the battalion's strength intact, that made the subsequent decisive assault off the beach possible. The two remaining companies of the 2d Ranger Bn that were part of Force C (Cos A and B) unaccountably continued on to their original beach sector (Charlie) but landed to the east on Dog Green and suffered much the same fate as Force B's landing. The reports of the two Ranger battalions differ as to how this split of Force C's landing craft came about.

By the way, BG Cota actually arrived on the beach at 0730 hrs, shortly before the 5th Ranger Bn did. He directed the initial assault of Co C, 116th Inf Regt over the promenade and up the bluffs, and then ordered the 5th Ranger Bn to follow Co C's attack. Some Rangers were intermingled with the Co C, 116th Inf attack, and the 5th Rangers did make a separate breach in the wire, but were clearly ordered into the assault right after C/116th. This does not exactly fit with the Rangers' "Lead the Way" mythology - and being a Ranger myslef, I'm fully aware this may set off a flame war - but we ought to address this POV issue. Do we want to merely repeat the Ranger version, or do we want to address the actual events on the beach? And there are a few different accounts of just how the famous order was given. Another version of the "Lead the Way" story can be seen here:

It may be a minor point, but I do not believe I would agree with the statement "The acclaimed 1998 film Saving Private Ryan opens with a realistic view of Force B's assault at Omaha Dog Green." Actually, it was not very accurate.

First of all, the survivors of Captain Goranson's C Company, 2d Ranger Bn, who made it across the beach (about 30 men of the original 65) took shelter at the base of 90 foot cliffs, not in front of a masive pill box atop a sand dune. His unit then shifted 300 yards west (i.e., away from the Vierville Draw. Exit D-1) where they found a point to scale the cliffs without opposition. From this point, Captain Goranson's element, and a section from B, 116th Inf Regt, turned back east to approach the Vierville Draw. They then ran into a strong point consisting of a maze of trenches, and engaged in a day-long battle to clear this strongpoint, which they finally accomplished late that afternoon. So the actual battle did not match the movie's plot at all.

A secondary point: one cannot really understand the losses suffered here unless you realize that the troops landing here came in on LC(A)s - not LCVPs. The LC(A) had an exit ramp wide enough for just one man to exit at a time, and the two outer troop benches were covered by partial overheads. The narrow ramp accounted for the ease with which German MGs covered these choke points. The partial roofs meant that the troops had a very difficult time trying to exit over the sides. They were, in short, virtual death traps when landing under direct fire. The movie of course, did not portray the correct landing craft, or, therefore, how/why these units were so badly cut up just trying to debark. From Hollywood's point of view, this may be a small point, but from a factual, historical point of view, it was a key point. Sectors Charlie and Dog Green were the only beach sectors on Omaha Beach in which LC(A)s were supposed to be used. The units that landed there in LC(A)s (1st Bn, 116th Inf Regt and the three companies of the 2d Ranger Bn) all got badly chewed up trying to off-load. Only the 5th Ranger Bn, which as noted above came in on the virtually undefended Dog White sector, survived the landings in these craft intact. This may not be a suitable article for a discussion on the merits of LC(A)s, but I rasie the point to address the 'realistic' comment that the article does include.

A good description of these actions can be found in 'The American Forces In Action Series; Omaha Beachhead (6 June - 13 June 1944)' published by the War Department's historical section.

By the way, the War Dept's official history seems to refer to the Ranger command as 'the Provisional Ranger Group'. I have not found any references in these documents to a 'Ranger Assault Group'. Does anyone have an official Army source for the name? (talk) 23:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC)