Ref: Arnhem - 1944: The Airborne Battle by M. Middlebrook
The battles in the woods by the 4th Parachute Brigade just described, together with the earlier described failed attempts by the battalions in west Arnhem to reach the road bridge, epitomise the basic and fundamental weaknesses of the Arnhem plan. These airborne units were dropped too far from the Arnhem bridge and so failed to gain their objective (the bridge). Not only that, they were so weakened in the fighting to try to capture it, they reached the point at which they became incapable of further offensive action.
The whole purpose of deploying an airborne unit was to exploit its ability to descend almost anywhere. By surprise, it could seize almost any vital objective quickly, but had then to be prepared to defend that objective until relieved by ground forces.
The defence of the seized objective should have been the unit's main battle, not the initial buttault on it (compare Arnhem with the Pegasus Bridge 6/6/1944 operation near Caen).
In addition, in this case, the division landed piecemeal because of the shortage of available transport. There was a failure to deliver the whole division to action in one day.
Not only that, but the air force planners refused any ‘coup de main’ on the bridge and opted to ‘play-safe’ (of suspected flak positions) for the transport aircraft, by adopting a policy of utilising distant dropping and landing zones away from these suspected flak batteries, some of which did not actually exist.
As a result, seven of the 1st Airborne Division's nine battalions were reduced to skeleton units by fighting the wrong battle in the wrong place. Instead of seizing the objective and then fighting the intended defensive battle, they had to march miles to reach their objective and fight hard to even reach it. They also had to defend their landing/supply zones at the same time.
In short, the airborne division had been robbed of its one great advantage and used almost like a ground division making a conventional attack from a distant Start Line (but without as many heavy weapons as an infantry division). Even this analogy breaks down however, as a completely surrounded infantry division (like the paras were) would be more likely to dig in and defend, rather than attack in this way.
I shall return to Frost at the bridge, to show how his gallant 2nd Battalion force, with some extras (a few hundred men in total, maybe less than 10% of the division?), put up a very good fight, but was ultimately too weak to perform a task which had been allocated to most of the division.
Meanwhile, the Germans had internal lines of communication, so could reinforce to Arnhem quickly and powerfully.
