Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Largest number of casualties / single battle.

Discussion in 'WWII General' started by Poppy, Jun 16, 2010.

  1. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,740
    Likes Received:
    820
    Curious as to the most costly battle ever fought in 1 day. Both sides had to be in action, so fire storms - atomic bombs- etc don't count.... To think that a battleship's complement could be over 2000 men , all lost in a matter of minutes is mind boggling. Were casualties higher on the sea rather than land battles?.... Hope we never see the type of warfare that allows such loss again.
     
  2. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Fatalities were often higher at sea. A fair number of ships were lost with all hands.
    For naval battles Letye Gulf and Jutland are going to be pretty high on the list but not up to the land battles. Some of the WWI battles had huge casualty figures but many lasted multiple days. There's also a problem in some cases of when to assess the casualties. For instance some of the Japanese sailors who lost their ships at Surigao ended up making it to shore only to be captured by islanders who were not particularly enamored of the Japanese except in some cases as cousine. The question of how to count them and when they died is rather problematic. Similarly there were a fair number of US sailors adrift after the battle of Samar and many died before they could be rescued but that was hours or days after the battle.
     
  3. Icare9

    Icare9 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    20
    For WW2 you'd have to include D Day, some of the Pacific Island battles, Monte Cassino, The Battle of the Bulge, then there has to be inclusion of the Russian Battles, firstly against Finland where I believe they had shocking casualties, Stalingrad, Kursk, Moscow and then pushing the Germans back to Berlin.

    WW1 has to include Verdun, 1st July on the Somme, Passchendaele, some of the battles in the East against the Russians had huge losses.

    The French sustained heavy losses in the early stages of WW1, throwing wave after wave against the Germans. Jutland was a costly naval battle, but there were 3 cruisers sunk Hogue, Cressy and Barfleur.

    I'm sure some English and American Civil War battles had huge losses, plus the Japanese killed thousands, not just soldiers but civilians in Nanking and elsewhere.

    The more you look, the more you find.... Carthage and the Punic Wars, Greece, Rome, Egypt.... and who knows what scale of killings went on in South America, Aztecs, Incas etc etc.... Babylon, Mesopotamia, Hittites.... Goths, Vandals, Huns, Tartars..
    Get any large bunch of humans together and things can kick off!!
     
    Radar4077 likes this.
  4. Chef des Todes

    Chef des Todes Flight Medic

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    432
    Likes Received:
    40
    I would think either D-Day or Battle of Midway. Im not to sure, just a guess! :p
     
  5. Spaniard

    Spaniard New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    58
    OK the Largest number of Casualties in a Single Battle. Only God Knows in many cases

    For Both Sides Total Count in a Battle or one side?
    Do we add Civilian Casualties to the List?
    The count according to which world renowned historian or s? since they've been all wrong many times. And proven through the years!
    The counts According to Which country?

    As example the US Government Cover-ups in WWII, Nam, The Contra Affair+++. Lets See according to all historians ++++++ casualty counts for D-Day on Omaha Beach was estimated at 2,000 few years later 2,500 and that count stood for many years we now know it's more then 5,000 US Casualties, and was not a great victory as Claimed by many but plagued by Failures, if not for being in the wrong place at the Right Time, Omaha would of been a complete Disaster, as proved by New Archive information recently found.

    http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/42561-bloody-omaha-beach-all-historians-were-wrong.html


    The counts in many battles of The Great War as WWII The "Vietnam Conflict" ++++many of the accounts are incorrect or documents have been altered. Case and Point;) Canadian Forces Guy Simonds hows not even fit of the rank of General altered and falsified Report 150.++++ In WWII as for the Slaughter in Operation Atlantic and Spring as many other Operations in WWII. The Bottom report was ordered altered by Report 168 and report 150 was ordered destroyed by Simmonds RP #150 put all the blame on his actions and of his commanding Generals. And blamed it on the Regiments as the men who served in them and Especially on a Major. By Divine intervention Report 150 was saved from a burning Fire, and to tell what really happened. He Sent Many Brave Canadian Soldiers to their deaths Needlessly and almost annihilating many Regiments in the Process. My Source: Sir Terry Copp. And Mr. David O'keefe.


    Type:
    CMHQ Report
    Title:
    The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regt) of Canada in OPERATION"SPRING", 25 Jul 44.
    Report #:
    150
    Date of Publication:
    Feb 12 1946
    Author:
    Stacey, C.P.


    Sorry to Digress, You can never say which Battle for sure Remember Japan and China was also part of WWII.

    One thing I can safely state the Battle of the Bulge in WWII for the US was Sheer Carnage and probably the Highest casualty counts the US suffered in WWII. And believe the counts are much Higher then what historians ++++ have estimated. The Russian Front Pick one almost all casualty Counts Military or Civilian are incorrect, As many of the British as German accounts of Casualties.
     
    Radar4077 likes this.
  6. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan

    What does this have to do with the topic at hand?
    A few years later 2,500 and that count stood for many years we now know it's more then 5,000 US Casualties,
    [/quote]
    Some documentation PLS and is this for the first day or a longer period? Including the airborne behind the beach or not?
    There may have been failures but it was still a victory and it's not unreasonable to call it a great one.
    ??? what are you talking about? What info?
    From what's posted there I didn't see anything particularly new.

    And this is relevant to the question at hand how?
    That is an assumption/opinion on your part and is very likely incorrect.

    You seem in love with that word.
    US casualties were approximately the same as German ones. About 90,000 over a period in excess of a month. US losses in Normandy were ~120,000.
    Why the pluses? And of what import is it to us that you don't trust the historical counts?
    For some defintions of incorrect. Certainly they will be off in most cases when you get to single digits or even 10s. After that it rather depends on how the statistics were collected and for what purpose. Some are certainly good enough to attempt to answer the question asked.
     
  7. JTF-2

    JTF-2 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    490
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Ottawa Valley
    [FONT=. The Bottom report was ordered altered by Report 168 and report 150 was ordered destroyed by Simmonds RP #150 put all the blame on his actions and of his commanding Generals. And blamed it on the Regiments as the men who served in them and Especially on a Major. By Divine intervention Report 150 was saved from a burning Fire][/FONT]

    That same book also states that this operation (operation Spring) was the 2nd biggest casualites behind D-day
     
  8. Spaniard

    Spaniard New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    58
    Yes thats correct But remember there also conservative estimate numbers, and believed to be higher.

    If it wasn't for the sacrifice of Canadians in Operation Spring, Operation Cobra would of been a disaster, when it was Postponed US had already suffered an estimated 5,000 casualties.

    If you want to read this its not bad from Copp "The Toll Of Verrières Ridge: Army, Part 26"

    http://www.legionmagazine.com/en/index.php/1999/05/the-toll-of-verrieres-ridge/
     
  9. surfersami

    surfersami Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    33
    All of this bantering back and forth is kind of off topic, if I read it right the question was single day battles, that would be very hard to pinpoint. Is all of the Normandy invasion counted as a single battle on June 6th, that would probably be a very high number when you count all of the allied forces together as one battle unit trying to accomplish the same goal of successfully establishing a beach head. Is there data from some of the Eastern front battles for single day losses, or of Japans attacks on some of the Chinese cities. This would be very difficult to classify for losses in a single day.
     
  10. efestos

    efestos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    26
    Losses in a single day ... in the whole history... it excludes Verdun ... Nanking ... Stalingrad ... and all the "modern " battles.

    What about the Battle of Borodino? arround 70.000 casualties .

    Cannae , Arausio and Adrianople.

    The Seven Warring States in China ... The Mogols and India probably have the most bloody battles ever fight, but I have not the knowledge.
     
  11. Tomcat

    Tomcat The One From Down Under

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,048
    Likes Received:
    267
    Lets keep it ww2. Obviously ww1 would probably be the 'winner' for the question but this is a ww2 forum so lets discuss ww2 answers.
     
  12. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,740
    Likes Received:
    820
    Thanks for everyone's input. I'm a little surprised there isn't more of a consensus on one actual battle. Sad to think there were so many great battles with high losses.
    There was Operation Bagration, which I'd never heard of.... After checking wikipedia- maybe Barbarossa could be close as well.
     
  13. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Problem is those are "operations" not single day battles and they were composed of many such. The day the Germans surrendered at Stalingrad should rank up there with the single day battles. That's if you count POWs as casualties.
     
  14. brndirt1

    brndirt1 Saddle Tramp

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Single day in WW2 makes for a tough call, I personally would imagine that the days of the Battle of Berlin would have one or two in there that were horrendous. By the time the death-toll really got nasty in Stalingrad, most of the non-combatants had managed to flee. This wouldn't be the case at Berlin. I know the rule "excluded" civilians, but good grief when two militaries are battling around a populace which cannot do anything but try to live through it why wouldn't they count?
     
  15. syscom3

    syscom3 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,240
    Likes Received:
    183
    The naval battle of Guadalcanal cost the USN 1,732 killed and the IJN 1,900 killed.

    The battle of Savo island cost the USN 1,077 killed

    Pearl Harbor cost the US 2,402 military killed
     
  16. Spaniard

    Spaniard New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    58
    Sorry I read your Post Quickly, and last week I left to Ottawa to spend a week at the Canadian Archives. I got So many Great Pictures from Second World War, That can't be found on Any Site. :cool: will Post soon on My Picture Gallery.

    The Book is 110% Wrong! Not the 2nd Largest Casualties since D-Day :confused:

    "Operation Spring" was the Second Largest Casualties for Canadians Since "Dieppe" AKA Operation Jubilee.
     
  17. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    IMO opening day of Barbarossa, Kursk or Bagration are are good candidates, but can't find figures for them D-Day, was a couple of orders or magnitude smaller, as far as ground tropps that took most of the losses were concerned, than those battles that involved millions of men so even a small casualty rate would give pretty high totals.
    I would guess the opening day was the worst because of the greater concentration of firepower stockpiled ammo allowed.

    For naval battles I would say either Leyte or Philippines Sea but the losses were spread over several days.
     
  18. Spaniard

    Spaniard New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    58

    It's to be remembered like Some have stated that some battles took Months and even years. Kursk was the Largest Tank Battle and had the 3rd or Fourth highest casualty count, Barbarossa is up there also.

    The largest of all since the Japanese and Chinese casualty counts will never be Known.

    The battle for Stalingrad, Germany had 100,000 Casulties and Soviets lost 250,000 killed and 600,000 wounded and the destruction of 50% of their tanks.


    But the Battle for Battle of Prussia, Germany lost 800,000 and Soviet Union lost 1,300,000 killed and wounded


    http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/40312-world-war-iis-30-greatest-battles.html
     
  19. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Ставка

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,321
    Likes Received:
    460
    Not quite sure what time frame you are speaking off when mentioning Stalingrad, but at the end of the battle total casualties were much higher; for both sides.
     
  20. surfersami

    surfersami Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    33
    If you were one of the casualties of any of those battles I suppose it would be one too many. It is a shame we can even have this post when you think these numbers represent someone's father/brother/mother/sister. Staggering numbers!
     
    TiredOldSoldier likes this.

Share This Page