It sounds like a plausible plan until you look at the losses Ju52s suffered just from ground fire and "operations" in Norway Netherlands and Crete. The other thing is that there isn't really a "night time" in Dover in June. Civil twilight, that is where it is light enough to do most things lasts from 4AM to midnight, it is only dark enough to give cover of darkness for about 2 hours. Floating transport planes towards the centre of UKs air and coastal defences is a great idea for someone else to try.
BoB Mathematical Modeling of Alternative Outcomes
- Thread starter NevadaK
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
glennasher
Senior Airman
First you'd have to drop paratroops to seize the airfields before beginning an air-land excursion, and Crete put that idea to death. It seldom works against seasoned troops. It works in third world countries, sometimes, Grenada comes to mind, but the overall concept usually results in disaster. Paratroops are too lightly armed to make a good go of it. (I speak as a former 82nd Abn Trooper, BTW). In addition to losing most of the Ju-52s in inventory, you'd lose the paratroops AND the troops being airlanded. That idea ain't gonna fly.
Shortround6
Major General
Unless the Germans change their parachute doctrine/tactics in 1940 instead of AFTER Crete the suggested operations are going to be a disaster.
German paratroopers dropped with a 9mm pistol and two 8 round magazines and a few concussion grenades. Rifles, submachine guns, MG-34 machine guns, light mortars(?) and such normal company weapons were in containers that the Paratroopers had to find, open, sort through. This was the first priority on landing, ahead of linking up with unit members from the same plane let alone different planes. Initial ammo supplies were also light for the these weapons.
The glider landing troops do have light weapons but number of gliders available in June of 1940? 3-4 weeks after the attack on Holland?
Same for the Ju-52s. Numbers operational in the 2nd week of June after the losses in April and May are going to be much lower than what was available in Sept. after 3-4 months of intensive work by repair organizations.
Using them up doing combat landings as done in Norway and Holland (and later in Crete) is going to leave the reinforce/supply efforts well behind what is need to even engage the Home Guard.
From Wiki on the battle for Holland
" German Ju 52 total losses in the entire battle amounted to 224, compared to 430 Ju 52s deployed by the airborne troops"
I don't know if that is final losses or if the losses include planes later repaired. However trying to stage an airborne assault on England with only about 200 JU-52s to start with sure seems like a recipe for disaster.
German paratroopers dropped with a 9mm pistol and two 8 round magazines and a few concussion grenades. Rifles, submachine guns, MG-34 machine guns, light mortars(?) and such normal company weapons were in containers that the Paratroopers had to find, open, sort through. This was the first priority on landing, ahead of linking up with unit members from the same plane let alone different planes. Initial ammo supplies were also light for the these weapons.
The glider landing troops do have light weapons but number of gliders available in June of 1940? 3-4 weeks after the attack on Holland?
Same for the Ju-52s. Numbers operational in the 2nd week of June after the losses in April and May are going to be much lower than what was available in Sept. after 3-4 months of intensive work by repair organizations.
Using them up doing combat landings as done in Norway and Holland (and later in Crete) is going to leave the reinforce/supply efforts well behind what is need to even engage the Home Guard.
From Wiki on the battle for Holland
" German Ju 52 total losses in the entire battle amounted to 224, compared to 430 Ju 52s deployed by the airborne troops"
I don't know if that is final losses or if the losses include planes later repaired. However trying to stage an airborne assault on England with only about 200 JU-52s to start with sure seems like a recipe for disaster.
Last edited:
The whole fanciful idea rests strongly on the LW taking and keeping open an airfield or just a field in Kent or Sussex and the RAF not doing anything about it, same with the army, navy and home guard. It is as if Kent is some obscure region on the north African coast, Churchill's house, Chartwell is between London and Brighton in Kent.Unless the Germans change their parachute doctrine/tactics in 1940 instead of AFTER Crete the suggested operations are going to be a disaster.
German paratroopers dropped with a 9mm pistol and two 8 round magazines and a few concussion grenades. Rifles, submachine guns, MG-34 machine guns, light mortars(?) and such normal company weapons were in containers that the Paratroopers had to find, open, sort through. This was the first priority on landing, ahead of linking up with unit members from the same plane let alone different planes. Initial ammo supplies were also light for the these weapons.
The glider landing troops do have light weapons but number of gliders available in June of 1940? 3-4 weeks after the attack on Holland?
Same for the Ju-52s. Numbers operational in the 2nd week of June after the losses in April and May are going to be much lower than what was available in Sept. after 3-4 months of intensive work by repair organizations.
Using them up doing combat landings as done in Norway and Holland (and later in Crete) is going to leave the reinforce/supply efforts well behind what is need to even engage the Home Guard.
From Wiki on the battle for Holland
" German Ju 52 total losses in the entire battle amounted to 224, compared to 430 Ju 52s deployed by the airborne troops"
I don't know if that is final losses or if the losses include planes later repaired. However trying to stage an airborne assault on England with only about 200 JU-52s to start with sure seems like a recipe for disaster.
Unless the Germans change their parachute doctrine/tactics in 1940 instead of AFTER Crete the suggested operations are going to be a disaster.
German paratroopers dropped with a 9mm pistol and two 8 round magazines and a few concussion grenades. Rifles, submachine guns, MG-34 machine guns, light mortars(?) and such normal company weapons were in containers that the Paratroopers had to find, open, sort through. This was the first priority on landing, ahead of linking up with unit members from the same plane let alone different planes. Initial ammo supplies were also light for the these weapons.
The glider landing troops do have light weapons but number of gliders available in June of 1940? 3-4 weeks after the attack on Holland?
Same for the Ju-52s. Numbers operational in the 2nd week of June after the losses in April and May are going to be much lower than what was available in Sept. after 3-4 months of intensive work by repair organizations.
Using them up doing combat landings as done in Norway and Holland (and later in Crete) is going to leave the reinforce/supply efforts well behind what is need to even engage the Home Guard.
From Wiki on the battle for Holland
" German Ju 52 total losses in the entire battle amounted to 224, compared to 430 Ju 52s deployed by the airborne troops"
I don't know if that is final losses or if the losses include planes later repaired. However trying to stage an airborne assault on England with only about 200 JU-52s to start with sure seems like a recipe for disaster.
The Germans did change an evolve their Paratrooper tactics. The outstanding FG42 automatic rifle easily replaced both the MG34 squad machine gun and the K98 bolt action rifle and could be carried by the solider during the drop, of course they needed something in 1940, perhaps a semi-automatic carbine. German airborne forces were very innovative for their time. They could drop a 3.7cm or 5.0cm PAK by multiple parachute, they could land gliders, they could drop ammunition and fuel containers. The fuel container weighed around 250kg and featured 4 55 Litre flat drums that could easily be picked up by handles. they have 75mm and 105mm recoilless canon including hollow charge rounds, light weight aluminium 20mm FLAK and the kettenrad motor cycle half track could be transported by Ju 52 and be used as a tractor to tow artillery.
Of course dropping paratroopers on top of a fully armed soldiers that are prepared (as happened in Crete due to enigma decrypts) is also a disaster as it was when British troops were dropped on top of an SS division in Arnhem. The issue in Holland seems to have been that the Ju 52 were shot up by Dutch FLAK on the ground in many cases. The loss of pilots was devastating to the war effort as these Ju 52 pilots were also flight training instructors and may just have saved Britain it is said by Mosier. I'm not sure why do many Ju 52 were lost in Holland, it seems they just landed at defended Dutch airfields.
The Ju 52 was the best transport available in the world at the time excluding the DC3 but the Ju 52 would serve Germany poorly because of its slow speed and limited range, ineffcient because they were too short of resources to build the Ar 232 or Ju 252.
Used properly over short distances the Ju 52 was effective. I'm assuming each Ju 52 could carry about 2.5 tons or 20 troops per flight to Britain. Allowing for an optimistic 6 flights per day that's 120 troops or 15 tons of cargo per aircraft per day over short distances (100miles/160km). Some 500 Ju 52 were available for the invasion of the Low countries of which 125 were lost. One could thus potentially transport 500 x 15 = 7500 tons of cargo per day or 120 x 500 = 60,000 troops. That's with airfields established, safe from the RAF and everything tightly organised. No refuelling in UK and no loading up apart from wounded.
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
More wonder weapons from 1942/43 to show how the Germans could have won in 1940?
Yes the FG42 automatic rifle was a clever and innovative weapon, it is just two years too late to make a difference in invasion plans for 1940.
AFTER Crete the German paratroopers dropped with rifles and submachine guns in their personal kit, Crete was a disaster for a number of reasons and the British basicly handed the Island over to the Germans through several really dumb mistakes. they did drop 37mm guns in trials in 1940, most if not all of the guns were broken or damaged in the trials. Things got better later. Yes the Germans developed recoilless rifles for their paratroopers but again, first operational use was in Crete too late for this discussion.
The JU 52s were trying to take the dutch airfields or relieve the paratroops that were supposed to have taken the dutch airfields. The initial parachute assaults had failed for the most part.
The Germans actually had a rather limited number of parachutists. the scholl only graduated about 130 men per month (later there would be 4 schools? and requirements were lowered)
To get the needed number of troops into the combat areas the Germans relied on gliders and the JU 52s to land on supposedly secured airfields. Too often in the early operations the parachutists failed to totally secure the airfields and running short of ammunition and supplies desperately needed reinforcement/supply.
there is a lot of dispute about the Ju 52 losses, "Junkers Aircraft and their Engines" by Antony Kay says (page 119) that 430 Ju 52/3ms and 45 DFS 230s were used in Holland (how many in Belgium?) it also says about 2/3rds were never returned or were badly damaged. About 100 were later repaired or used for spare parts.
This is rather imprecise but does show that having even 250 JU 52s operational just after Dunkirk wasn't close to reality and having 500 in Sept wasn't going to happen either.
See above. The Germans could not have replaced the man power losses in the Dutch/Belgian operations to anywhere near full strength just after dunkirk and even late Sept was doubtful.
Some of the JU 52s that landed at one of the airfields became bogged down. The airfield was not operational yet and the water level in the area had not been lowered.
Edit, BTW in Norway it took 3,018 sorties to deliver 29,289 personnel, 2,376 tons of supplies and equipment (including artillery) and 1,170,000 liters (259,130 gal) of aviation fuel.
Yes the FG42 automatic rifle was a clever and innovative weapon, it is just two years too late to make a difference in invasion plans for 1940.
AFTER Crete the German paratroopers dropped with rifles and submachine guns in their personal kit, Crete was a disaster for a number of reasons and the British basicly handed the Island over to the Germans through several really dumb mistakes. they did drop 37mm guns in trials in 1940, most if not all of the guns were broken or damaged in the trials. Things got better later. Yes the Germans developed recoilless rifles for their paratroopers but again, first operational use was in Crete too late for this discussion.
The JU 52s were trying to take the dutch airfields or relieve the paratroops that were supposed to have taken the dutch airfields. The initial parachute assaults had failed for the most part.
The Germans actually had a rather limited number of parachutists. the scholl only graduated about 130 men per month (later there would be 4 schools? and requirements were lowered)
To get the needed number of troops into the combat areas the Germans relied on gliders and the JU 52s to land on supposedly secured airfields. Too often in the early operations the parachutists failed to totally secure the airfields and running short of ammunition and supplies desperately needed reinforcement/supply.
there is a lot of dispute about the Ju 52 losses, "Junkers Aircraft and their Engines" by Antony Kay says (page 119) that 430 Ju 52/3ms and 45 DFS 230s were used in Holland (how many in Belgium?) it also says about 2/3rds were never returned or were badly damaged. About 100 were later repaired or used for spare parts.
This is rather imprecise but does show that having even 250 JU 52s operational just after Dunkirk wasn't close to reality and having 500 in Sept wasn't going to happen either.
See above. The Germans could not have replaced the man power losses in the Dutch/Belgian operations to anywhere near full strength just after dunkirk and even late Sept was doubtful.
Some of the JU 52s that landed at one of the airfields became bogged down. The airfield was not operational yet and the water level in the area had not been lowered.
Edit, BTW in Norway it took 3,018 sorties to deliver 29,289 personnel, 2,376 tons of supplies and equipment (including artillery) and 1,170,000 liters (259,130 gal) of aviation fuel.
Last edited:
Glider
Captain
The British also learned from what happened in France. One of the changes made to the AA defences of the airfields was a requirement that the AA guns should be able to fire at ground targets.
A load of Ju52's would simply be massacred both in the air (remembering that the Luftwaffe were exhausted after the Battle for France) and on the Ground by the defences.
A load of Ju52's would simply be massacred both in the air (remembering that the Luftwaffe were exhausted after the Battle for France) and on the Ground by the defences.
-I'm just carrying out a what if analysis whose constraints are the the Germans make slightly different decisions that do not require any more resources.
-If the Luftwaffe had of continued to attack the RAF and radar it wouldn't have made a difference to gaining air superiority over the British Isles since most of Britain and therefore most of its airfield was out of reach of the German fighters.
-If the Luftwaffe had of had drop tanks fitted on all the Me 109E and Me 110 as they were produced (they had the technology and experience) it would have made a big difference. It would have cost no more resources.
The Focke-Wulf Fw 187A with Jumo 210G engines weighed 3400kg and the Me 110B with the same engines weighed 4400kg.
The latter Fw 187B with DB605 engines had a range of 1200km (744 miles) and with drop tanks 2100 (1302 miles). Assuming the operational radius is 30% of of 2100km/1302 miles is 630km/400 miles.
Pretty much all of Scotland is reachable from Calais with that range and it is also accessible from Stavanger in Norway.
All it takes is for Ernst Udet to 1 allow development of the Fw 187 with DB601 instead of Jumo 210 and 2 for him to allocate engines and allow production of Fw 187 at about the same time Ju 88 production is starting by removing a few engines allocated to the Me 110.
Last edited:
glennasher
Senior Airman
None of that matters without some heavy weapons to back up the Airborne. Even with neatest, newest wonderweapons, what happens when you can't resupply them with ammo? What happens when the lightly armed paratroopers run into armor? Airborne gets slaughtered. We're not talking about all the natural defense points like in the Ardennes, we're talking about Kent and southern England, no mountains or forests, no bridges to drop and deny the opposition. As noted, when you drop the First Airborne on to SS Panzer divisions, they're gonna lose. All the recoilless rifles and pack cannon won't change that, once you're out of ammo for them, then what? The troops will die in place. The Germans, if your numbers are right, lost a quarter of their Ju52s in the low countries, who didn't have the RAF, what would happen to them in Kent with the RAF?
This is a non-starter from the git-go.
No fevered fantasy can rival the whole silly idea.
glennasher
Senior Airman
None of that matters without some heavy weapons to back up the Airborne. Even with neatest, newest wonderweapons, what happens when you can't resupply them with ammo? What happens when the lightly armed paratroopers run into armor? Airborne gets slaughtered. We're not talking about all the natural defense points like in the Ardennes, we're talking about Kent and southern England, no mountains or forests, no bridges to drop and deny the opposition. As noted, when you drop the First Airborne on to SS Panzer divisions, they're gonna lose. All the recoilless rifles and pack cannon won't change that, once you're out of ammo for them, then what? The troops will die in place. The Germans, if your numbers are right, lost a quarter of their Ju52s in the low countries, who didn't have the RAF, what would happen to them in Kent with the RAF?
This is a non-starter from the git-go.
No fevered fantasy can rival the whole silly idea.
Unless the Germans change their parachute doctrine/tactics in 1940 instead of AFTER Crete the suggested operations are going to be a disaster.
German paratroopers dropped with a 9mm pistol and two 8 round magazines and a few concussion grenades. Rifles, submachine guns, MG-34 machine guns, light mortars(?) and such normal company weapons were in containers that the Paratroopers had to find, open, sort through. This was the first priority on landing, ahead of linking up with unit members from the same plane let alone different planes. Initial ammo supplies were also light for the these weapons.
The glider landing troops do have light weapons but number of gliders available in June of 1940? 3-4 weeks after the attack on Holland?
Same for the Ju-52s. Numbers operational in the 2nd week of June after the losses in April and May are going to be much lower than what was available in Sept. after 3-4 months of intensive work by repair organizations.
Using them up doing combat landings as done in Norway and Holland (and later in Crete) is going to leave the reinforce/supply efforts well behind what is need to even engage the Home Guard.
From Wiki on the battle for Holland
" German Ju 52 total losses in the entire battle amounted to 224, compared to 430 Ju 52s deployed by the airborne troops"
I don't know if that is final losses or if the losses include planes later repaired. However trying to stage an airborne assault on England with only about 200 JU-52s to start with sure seems like a recipe for disaster.
In Luftwaffe terminology if a assessment of a checklist determined greater than 50% damage it meant the airframe was scrapped by removing salvageable parts and then melting the airframe down. Total loss sounds too dramatic as if the aircraft and and all souls were lost. I would say this refers to 50% or greater loss however the loss of Ju 52 pilots was the real issue and it was apparently very significant
This thread and you yourself have proven something to me.
Dozens of haughty pompous pop historians have earned a living claiming that the Germans were incompetent in their implementation of planning and strategy around the battle of Britain. One of these shibboleths that has been demolished is that Changing the from bombing of airfields to harbours, docks and industrial targets (like aircraft plants) generally referred to as "London" lost the Battle of Britain for the Germans. In fact it was a strategy that was supposed to compliment the U-boat commerce war. Yes in "the fog of war" they made mistakes and had flaws in their system of assessment. Bit it seems it is simply jingoistic grand standing.
The reality is that they simply did not have the right equipment. That is all.
The procurement decisions made by the Luftwaffe in 1937, 1938 determined the battle of Britain. In order to gain air superiority the Luftwaffe would need
1 Drop tanks on all Me 109 and Me 110. Could have easily been done.
2 A long range escort. The Fw 187 could have done this in time simply by sacrificing some Me 110 production to obtain the required engines. The aircraft was flying in May 1937. Maybe only 10% of the fighter force.
That probably wouldn't be enough. A relatively long range reconnaissance bomber needs to be available to put pressure on all of Britain's coast to force her to to spread her defences and help the u-boat campaign. Something better than a few Fw 200 commandeered from the Japanese. Probably 50 Ju 89 or Do 19 powered by the 1000hp BMW radial that powered the Do 17Z. The He 177 isnt needed.
The assault on Britain seems hard to imagine not because the use of River Ships, large Rhine barges and tugs is not workable but because it couldn't be done in 1940. Operation Sea Lion would only happen from mid 1941 I suspect. I would also require keeping the US out of the war except in the form of massive military aid which is unlikely.
Regarding Coastal Artillery. It is not railway guns. Costal artillery uses tachymetric computers to compute a firing solution to aim at the target, it has special optical instruments to analyse shell splash and correct aim (there bey compensating for windage). Apart from the use of coincidence or stereoscopic range finders triangulation from remote sighting stations can be used that are connected electrically.
The Luftwaffe was probably not going to repeat the mistake of the aerial assault in Holland. That is relying paratroops to capture Dutch airfields and then land Ju 52 on them. It was an excessively risky strategy with too many moving parts.
They would just land a DFS230 with its retro rocket and ribbon parachute in a field of Barley in Kent.
Last edited:
Glider
Captain
Lets take it one step at a time
1 - Drop tanks on all Me109 and Me110 - Result The Me109 and Me110 would be hugely vulnerable when intercepted in that all important first moment of combat. The RAF had the advantage of Radar interception and German fighters had less freedom of movement. Yes they would have a good increase in range but and its a big but, they still only had 60rpg for the 20mm and the RAF fighters were well armoured against 2 x LMG so their room for combat would still be restricted.
2 - Fw 187 - Feasable certainly but with the same limitation of 60rpg for the 20mm.
50 x Ju89 would probably not equal more than 20 in front line service at any one time, 30 at a push. All you would do is give the Blenhiem IVF a job it could actually do, long range fighter missions against large, slow, unescorted, poorly defended bombers.
As long as you only have about 12 destroyers in your entire navy Sea Lion was doomed to failure. In 1941 the British defences were considerably stronger than in 1940 which brings us to the next point
I find your comment slightly bemusing. The idea that flying large number of gliders into a combat zone where you do not have control of the skies, where the defences in 1941 are far stronger in every way, where the AA guns are placed so they can fire at ground targets and are set up in such a way that they support each other, is less risky than dropping paratroopers first and then following up with the Ju52 hard to imagine. They are both as mad as each other
This is just wrong, repeatedly posting it does not make it a fact. The LW did attack shipping, coastal targets, airfields and aircraft production but that is not London. The attack on London was just that, an attack London and its docks. Planning to do something you cant do because you don't have the equipment is folly. If you postpone Sealion to 1941 you can forget any use of barges, by 1941 the RAF fighters have cannon.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
The superb German coastal guns didn't manage to hit anything till June 44. They were mostly shooting at convoys consisting of small coal carrying coasters of about 2000 tons capable of 10 knots. If you're not hitting those targets how are you going to hit naval vessels.
Shortround6
Major General
Well, I sure don't earn a living at this, I don't even make enough for a fish and chip dinner once a year
Some of the questions for me are could the Germans, with what they had available at the time, come up with a better plan or plans.
No aircraft, radars, small arms, or artillery from 1941 or later.
Cherry picking features from certain aircraft without acknowledging some of the shortcomings doesn't do more than get into long arguments.
I have a love/hate relationship with the FW 187. I like the looks, I think it was an interesting aircraft that quite possible could have contributed more if produced in numbers.
I hate it because in many of these discussions it is made of rubber and keeps changing shape/form to suit the the argument of the moment.
The Germans have several problems with this hypothetical aircraft in 1940.
They are stuck with the drum feeds on the MG/FF cannon. The 110 got around this by having the man in the back (the radio operator) change the drums, much like the first 400 Beaufighters (except that guy had to keep up with four cannon, which didn't happen much in real life.)
The Guy in the back if the 110 had the same radio as the He 111 so the 110 could communicate with it's base and with the bomber formations. At least it was possible, how much it was done I don't know. The 109 (of 1940) had a short ranged radio with limited channel options. Flying over the North sea with the same radio as the 1940 109 may not have been a very good idea? Later 109s may have gotten better or different radios, Perhaps I am wrong. But lets try to stick to 1940 guns and radios when talking about long range escort fighters.
Performance of a two seat Fw 187 with conventional DB 601 engines is certainly subject to question. It is obviously going to be slower than the prototype using experimental engines and cooling systems, It should be faster than the 109Es using the same engine as they were pretty poor aerodynamically.
Where on the spectrum does it fall? Some people want the speed and maneuverability of single seat version but don't seem to want to accept the limited ammo and communications problems.
The 110 actually could play a number of rolls in the BoB even if not very good as an escort fighter. It could carry the standard Luftwaffe recon camera/s and was going to be faster than recon versions of any of the twin engine bombers. It could play the role of light bomber at low level fairly well. A few units did do this. A few score more bomb rack sets?
The 900lb Gorilla in the room is what do the Germans do about the Royal Navy in the invasion scenarios. The German Navy in 1940 cannot challenge it as they have to sink 4-6 British ships for everyone they loose. It doesn't matter if the British loose 15-20 destroyers and smaller craft and cruiser in proportion if they stop the invasion.
Common answer is the Luftwaffe will stop the entire British Navy. But there is no evidence to back up that claim, cause losses yes, eliminate the majority of British ships in the British Isles in the summer/fall of 1940?????
The Luftwaffe also has many jobs.
1. Keeping the RAF at bay.
2. Better recon.
3. Acting as flying artillery for the invasion forces.
4. Keeping the RN at bay.
4a, in some scenarios by dropping large numbers of aerial mines.
They have to do this all at the same time.
haven't even gotten to the barges and/or logistics.
Some of the questions for me are could the Germans, with what they had available at the time, come up with a better plan or plans.
No aircraft, radars, small arms, or artillery from 1941 or later.
Cherry picking features from certain aircraft without acknowledging some of the shortcomings doesn't do more than get into long arguments.
I have a love/hate relationship with the FW 187. I like the looks, I think it was an interesting aircraft that quite possible could have contributed more if produced in numbers.
I hate it because in many of these discussions it is made of rubber and keeps changing shape/form to suit the the argument of the moment.
The Germans have several problems with this hypothetical aircraft in 1940.
They are stuck with the drum feeds on the MG/FF cannon. The 110 got around this by having the man in the back (the radio operator) change the drums, much like the first 400 Beaufighters (except that guy had to keep up with four cannon, which didn't happen much in real life.)
The Guy in the back if the 110 had the same radio as the He 111 so the 110 could communicate with it's base and with the bomber formations. At least it was possible, how much it was done I don't know. The 109 (of 1940) had a short ranged radio with limited channel options. Flying over the North sea with the same radio as the 1940 109 may not have been a very good idea? Later 109s may have gotten better or different radios, Perhaps I am wrong. But lets try to stick to 1940 guns and radios when talking about long range escort fighters.
Performance of a two seat Fw 187 with conventional DB 601 engines is certainly subject to question. It is obviously going to be slower than the prototype using experimental engines and cooling systems, It should be faster than the 109Es using the same engine as they were pretty poor aerodynamically.
Where on the spectrum does it fall? Some people want the speed and maneuverability of single seat version but don't seem to want to accept the limited ammo and communications problems.
The 110 actually could play a number of rolls in the BoB even if not very good as an escort fighter. It could carry the standard Luftwaffe recon camera/s and was going to be faster than recon versions of any of the twin engine bombers. It could play the role of light bomber at low level fairly well. A few units did do this. A few score more bomb rack sets?
The 900lb Gorilla in the room is what do the Germans do about the Royal Navy in the invasion scenarios. The German Navy in 1940 cannot challenge it as they have to sink 4-6 British ships for everyone they loose. It doesn't matter if the British loose 15-20 destroyers and smaller craft and cruiser in proportion if they stop the invasion.
Common answer is the Luftwaffe will stop the entire British Navy. But there is no evidence to back up that claim, cause losses yes, eliminate the majority of British ships in the British Isles in the summer/fall of 1940?????
The Luftwaffe also has many jobs.
1. Keeping the RAF at bay.
2. Better recon.
3. Acting as flying artillery for the invasion forces.
4. Keeping the RN at bay.
4a, in some scenarios by dropping large numbers of aerial mines.
They have to do this all at the same time.
haven't even gotten to the barges and/or logistics.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
5. The LW has to supply the bridgehead. See Stalingrad for how well that can go.
1 I think the drop tanks make you vulnerable is overstated. Otherwise the US 8th Airforce would have been massacred. There is not much of a speed drop, 10%, and they are ejected immediately on contact with the enemy which leads to an immediate acceleration.
2 The MG FF/M on the Fw 190 outer gun stations could be fitted with a 90 round magazine though it produced underside bulges. There was no space problem with a 90 or 120 round magazine in the fuselage for the Fw 187 and it probably would have been used. Big magazines are awkward to change out. (Oerlikon had a 120 round magazine) The aircraft also had 4 x MG17 rifle calibre machine guns which is still lethal for its time.
3 I'm thinking a Do 19 (or Ju 89) with 1000hp BMW/Bramo radials as per the Do 17 would produce a bomber of about 258mph (about the same as the Do 17 and 10% more than the prototypes which had 750hp). There would be an aerodynamic clean-up. No bracing struts, some curved glass etc. In 1940 the tail armament is a 20mm MG/FF with a 30 round clip.
If a Blenheim or Hurricane approaches tail gunner opens up at 600m. One second latter the rounds are at the Blenheim's range. The clip will last 3.5 seconds so the gunner has 2.5 seconds to march the tracer into the RAF fighter. The 30 round clip ejects, the gun remains cocked and a new clip is slammed in, probably takes 3 seconds. The gunner opens up again. By now the RAF fighter is at 400m, if it hasn't been hit when the gunner opens up again. The dorsal and ventral gunner are likely firing their rifle calibre weapon.
Its a lot better than a Fw 200 could do due to the tail gun and extra speed. A lone Do 19/Ju 89 could deal with a Vic of Fulmars, Hurricanes or Blenheim's at lot better due to the speed.
There might even be a few DB601 powered versions as there was the Do 215 that was much faster. I'm assuming the entire or half the Do 17 program would be sacrificed in favour of the Do 19.
I'm glad you are amused. I did say it somewhat glibly.
The DFS 230 assault glider had a steep 8 degree about 8:1 glide angle with a high 18:1 glide ratio so it could be released far away. Due to this and a high speed ribbon braking parachute that could be deployed a moment before touchdown the DFS 230 could be landed within a 20m length. Some versions (DFS-230C1) had retro rocket. Looks like about 20kg-30kg of propellant would pretty much produce 1G deacceleration for 2 seconds and bring it to a stop in another 10-20m with the parachute. The latter Go 242 had much higher capacity and could deliver artillery or a Kubelwaggen/Schwimwaggen.
The point is gliders give a lot of options and create a lot of problems that complement an amphibious assault. The DFS 230 could be towed by Ju 52, He 111 in pairs, Ju 87, Me 110 and even Me 109.
RAF Hispano Canon are nasty but if Hitler postpones Barbarossa 41 in favour of Sealion 41 and doesn't declare war on the USA over its lend lease and neutrality patrols after Pearl Harbour the the Germans might have air supremacy. Then the canon don't matter so much.
The u-boats are better supported.
Britain has to use merchant ships that cruise at greater than 15 knots or more.
A 15" gun would be capable of hitting a battleship or cruiser 30km out. Not a coaster that is 10 times smaller a target and further out.
High calibre Coastal Artillery can keep the RN capital ships about 25km from the French coast. They can still stay out of range and shell but it limits their options.
Well, I sure don't earn a living at this, I don't even make enough for a fish and chip dinner once a year
Some of the questions for me are could the Germans, with what they had available at the time, come up with a better plan or plans.
No aircraft, radars, small arms, or artillery from 1941 or later.
Cherry picking features from certain aircraft without acknowledging some of the shortcomings doesn't do more than get into long arguments.
I'm referring to Trenkel (book only in German) Well they had Wurzburg A in early 1940, they had Wurzburg C with conical scan in Feb 1941 and Wruzburg D with conical san, better range accuracy (25m) and direct connection to the FLAK predictor about 3 months after that. This means in service and dozens coming of the production line every month. Wurzburg D and Wurzburg Riesse in service in signicantly numbers by June 1941. Freya A/N with lobe switching may have been coming in at the same time as were Seetakt with lobe switching.. Lobe switching like conical scan allows blind fire. I think FuMO 27 was the first lobe switching Seetakt in late 1940 on Prince Eugen. (To late for the battle of Denmark straights)
Seetakt radars without lobe switching were still good. Narrow beam could find a target including a periscope and a conning tower, it could range accurately to better than 70m and spot shell splash. Could locate a ship to within 1 degree.
The ones with lobe switching could blind fire. The range might be 25km for a battleship and 15km-20km for a destroyer ie not quite to the horizon.
Either way in 1940 they had radar and could detect motor torpedo boats.
In 1942 the power of the Seetakt modulator was increased 16 fold to 120kW by going from grid modulation to High Voltage Anode modulation which allowed detection of any ship out to beyond the visual Horizon. However the Germans didn't get the equipment into service on ships, only on land due to issues with high voltages at sea and resources fighting the RAF night offensive. The Tirpitz probably got a one of set which is why she herself spotted the RAF raid at 150km. This is why PoW was said to have had better radar than Scharnhorst. The Scharnhorsts rear radar at 8kW likely could see PoW but not spot her own shell splash at long range.
We have the ability to compare the Me 110B with the Fw 187A with the same Jumo 210G engines and the Fw 187 is clearly much much faster and 30% lighter.
We can compare the Me 109D with Jumo engines (earlier slightly less powerful variant) but it tells us the Fw 187 was going to be seriously fast and agile. It did have a rather high wing loading.
The DB601 engine version were seriously fast. Sceptics normally criticise saying the speed was due to the steam cooling but the steam cooling still had radiators (in this version) and doesn't make that much difference between a steam radiator and a pressurised one. It was going to be very fast since radiators improved. Surface cooling was proposed for the DB605 Fw 190B but even without it it would be fast. Plus we have the Me 110B/FW 187 comparisons.
The prototypes based around the DB601 essentially used an engine the same power as the second generation DB601N2 of the Me 109F or the DB601E (same power only C3 was needed for the N) when boost rating was 1.42 ata.
As far as the Oerlikon based MG/FF is concerned I know Oerlikon Made 90 and 120 round snail drums. These I suspect were just to heavy to easily change manually but either would be perfect for the Fw 187 and they would likely be introduced. They were around a long time before the. They would be unattractive for the Me 110 since they are difficult to manhandle.
Fighter bomber, reconnaissance would be in its wheel house. With a small esternal bombload (250-500kg) still fast enough to avoid interception I suspect. A night fighter able to have a reasonable chance against the Mosquito if given the kind of lightweight radar developed for the Fw 190 single seat fighter.
The Fw 187 was likely to be the fastest of all aircraft due to its small size and it must be said high wing loading. High wing loading is not bad if it gives the Fw 187 significantly superior speed. It reduces turning circle but not necessarily turning rate. The correct tactics would need to be used. No slowing down and trying to turn with a Hurricane or Spit ala Zero/P-38
The Royal Navy is formidable.
The plan seems to have been mines and the Luftwaffe dealing with the RN during the day and mines and the Kriesgsmarine dealing with the RN at night.
Note that apart from Light cruisers, cruisers, destroyers and battleships the larger German torpedo boots had a radar that could turn +/-170 degrees or so (almost a completed turn)
1939 Type Torpedo-Boats T22 - T36 with FuMO 21 antenna on a foremast.
These units would need to detect the hundreds of motor torpedo boats the RN would send at night that might penetrate the mine fields. The problem will be the lack of IFF on German Naval radar at this time which led to the mess up in the battle of barents sea.
Last edited:
Glider
Captain
When you were young, did they have a show called Jackanory where you lived?
We now have
1) Drop tank that don't impact the aircrafts performance think climb and agility (drop tanks the Germans didn't have in 1940)
2) MGFF with 90 rounds that didn't exist in 1940 as if they had I am sure the Me110 would have had them
3) Totally redesigned Do19. Remembering that the 109E had bracing struts until the 109F which had a redesigned wing
4) a 1940 bomber that can fight off three fighters
5) Gliders that carry about 8-10 people with little space for any kind of equipment (that would be sitting ducks to AA fire) I also strongly suspect that 18/1 glide ratio with any load is wildly optimistic, I frankly don't believe it. Also you will be travelling in a straight line, unable to evade, going probably around 100 mph at low altitude, the very definition of a sitting duck.
6) All the stuff of cancelling Barbarosa and not declaring war on the USA. Can someone tell me how that impacts the war in late 1940 or 1941. Also it ignores the much stronger UK defences that would exist in 1940 both on land sea and air
7) 15in guns that were incapable of hitting merchant ships going about 5 kts (10 knots for a coaster is very fast) in a straight line, are now able to hit Naval vessels going much faster and can evade.
8) Germany had little faith in their radar for gun ranging for the good reason that they had limited performance and their optics were better. Torpedo boats generally didn't get radar until 1943,
9) The idea that the Germany Navy could control the North Sea at night is a pipedream. They didn't have the ships, men training or Technology
We now have
1) Drop tank that don't impact the aircrafts performance think climb and agility (drop tanks the Germans didn't have in 1940)
2) MGFF with 90 rounds that didn't exist in 1940 as if they had I am sure the Me110 would have had them
3) Totally redesigned Do19. Remembering that the 109E had bracing struts until the 109F which had a redesigned wing
4) a 1940 bomber that can fight off three fighters
5) Gliders that carry about 8-10 people with little space for any kind of equipment (that would be sitting ducks to AA fire) I also strongly suspect that 18/1 glide ratio with any load is wildly optimistic, I frankly don't believe it. Also you will be travelling in a straight line, unable to evade, going probably around 100 mph at low altitude, the very definition of a sitting duck.
6) All the stuff of cancelling Barbarosa and not declaring war on the USA. Can someone tell me how that impacts the war in late 1940 or 1941. Also it ignores the much stronger UK defences that would exist in 1940 both on land sea and air
7) 15in guns that were incapable of hitting merchant ships going about 5 kts (10 knots for a coaster is very fast) in a straight line, are now able to hit Naval vessels going much faster and can evade.
8) Germany had little faith in their radar for gun ranging for the good reason that they had limited performance and their optics were better. Torpedo boats generally didn't get radar until 1943,
9) The idea that the Germany Navy could control the North Sea at night is a pipedream. They didn't have the ships, men training or Technology
The Luftwaffe had drop tanks during the battle of Britain. Me 109E4/B and Me 109E7N/B came into service towards the end of the battle of Britain.
The structural work had already been done on the Me 109E1/B but it had been for a bomb. It apparently could carry a fuel tank but it couldn't be jettisoned.
I've already dealt with the other issues such as why a 15" gun might hit a Battleship or cruiser 25-30km away but not a coaster that is 5% the size and 35km-50km away and below the horizon. The channel seems to be 35km at its narrowest.
