Hmmm.. maybe I should pick up Ripley's other volume...

Another note, along the lines of the point Erich makes about range- this was even further an advantage for the Germans if one looks at optics. As far as I know, throughout the war the Germans generally had the best sights/optics for their guns. This meant that not only could german tanks engage enemies at longer ranges than most, but there was also a much better chance of the first shot actually hitting the target without needing an adjusted second shot.

I would also have to imagine that many, or at leats some, of the german tank crews in Normandy had much better/more gunnery training and practice than their allied counterparts.

I'd also have to agree with Erich's point on wondering about the apparent lack of tactical air support. Bombing behind the lines, hitting assembly areas, knocking out communications- all of that is certainly useful and effective. But considering the air superiority the allies enjoyed in Normandy, I am rather suprised that it seems like the air support was limited to the start of the operation. As mentioned, in bocage-type country, massed tank attacks really would not work against a well-positioned, well dug-in german tank- very little room to maneuver.

Kai- does Ripley make any mention in the armor numbers about operational status? Often tank and AFVs would be listed as part of a unit's strength despite being in short or long term maintenance. I wonder how many of those tanks were actually available and ready for action during Goodwood?

__________________
Seriously, all today is missing is free cotton candy and the annual Bay State Hooker Parade to make it any better.