Bagration versus Overlord

Seeing the question raised about the emphasis on Overlord over Bagration this week got me thinking. There seems to be an unstated assumption that fighting in the East was more intense than in the West.
Because it is in the West people seem to underestimate the intensity of the Battle for Normandy.
I thought it would be interesting to compare the figures for three key campaigns Citadel, Overlord and Bagration.

Length of Battlefront
Citadel 550km; Overlord 100km; Bagration 2000+ km

Axis Troops
Citadel 950k; Overlord 650k; Bagration 1000k
Axis Tanks/SPAT
Citadel 3250; Overlord 2250; Bagration 1350
Axis Aircraft
Citadel 2100; Overlord 2150; Bagration 1250

Axis Losses
(I have not found good sources for material losses for Bagration)
Citadel 165k; Overlord 500k; Bagration 500k
Citadel 1200; Overlord 2000
Citadel 700; Overlord 2000
While not at the level of Stalingrad I think Overlord should be seen as one of the most intense and destructive battles in the European theatre.


I also feel that D-Day (which is NOT the entirety of Overlord) is better suited to one-day storytelling. There is a great amount happening in a very short time Iina very small area. Overlord referred to the entire 90-day plan to invade France, liberate Paris and advance across Northern France.

Bagration, OTOH was more continuous across a period of months across a wide front and is better suited to an episodic, summary format. An overall episode linking Overlord and Bagration strategy wise would be excellent.