France fights on - better or worse for the Nazi Germany?

[Admiral Beez]

Like my old Citroen.

This is a non-starter.

Thinking back to this old thread and topic, I think had the ultimatum to Admiral Marcel-Bruno Gensoul that the French fleet join the British come from a more senior leader than the Captain of HMS Ark Royal, things might have gone differently. He was a great admiral, but Sommerville or someone higher up screwed up here. Admiral Cunningham negotiated directly with the French admiral at Alexandria and successfully had the French agree to stand down and later to join the Wallies in the fight against the Germans.

So, Admiral Sommerville personally rows across to Gensoul's flagship and with a translator as necessary negotiates with the French admiral, and like Cunningham, ignores the deadlines and takes as long as it takes to get the French to agree. With this done, Gensoul will likely agree to sail for the French West Indies to join the carrier Bearn and a dozen other French warships at Martinique.

 

[SaparotRob]

Admiral Gensoul was a pompous, incompetent. He did not inform his superiors of all the British conditions. He endangered his men as well as his Allies over protocol.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Admiral Gensoul was a pompous, incompetent.

All true, but that can be navigated through good diplomacy and pomp. Sommerville should have been briefed on whom he was dealing with and acted accordingly.

If done properly the French in North Africa, Madagascar and FIC might have joined the British earlier, throwing off their allegiance to Vichy and fought on. A French battle squadron arriving at Saigon in August 1940 might have rattled Japan's plans to invade in Sept and settled the Thais in advance of their war in Oct 1940, for example.

 

[Shortround6]

A French battle squadron arriving at Saigon in August 1940 might have rattled Japan's plans to invade in Sept

A French Battle squadron would have been "showing the flag" and might have had success in a political/diplomatic role.

However in combat the French ships lost/damaged at Mers-el-Kébir might not have been as effective as they might appear without significant refits.

In 1940-41 neither the US nor the British had large amounts of AA guns and gun directors (or even dockyard space?) to refit the French ships.

The French ships make Force Z look thoroughly up to date and well armed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

A French Battle squadron would have been "showing the flag" and might have had success in a political/diplomatic role.

That's about all I had in mind. But a CV, a trio of BBs and several cruisers and destroyers, not matter how shoddy and/or obsolete arriving in Saigon for permanent, long term assignment will force Japan to consider its next move. Singapore has the largest drydock in the region and could help refit or at least maintain the French ships.

 

[Shortround6]

That's about all I had in mind. But a CV, a trio of BBs and several cruisers and destroyers, not matter how shoddy and/or obsolete arriving in Saigon for permanent, long term assignment will force Japan to consider its next move. Singapore has the largest drydock in the region and could help refit or at least maintain the French ships.

Well, the CV was beyond shoddy. Her propulsion system was a nightmare.

The trio of battleships needs a bit of refinement. The French have only got two modern ships that are suitable for such deployment. The 15in gun ships are not fully operational yet, let alone deployed 1/2 way round the world.
The WW I Left overs got new boilers and some new fire control equipment but did not get the extensive renovations than the Japanese and Italian and some British ships got.
That and the old BBs and the CV were good for 20-21kts with clean bottoms. They don't combine well with the fast modern BBs and 8in cruisers.
You can't use Singapore drydock, well you can slide the French ship in to the dock but you have no spare boilers or boiler parts or any other fittings/parts short of modifying British ones to fit. Which means tying the dock for a much longer period of time than refitting an equivalent British ship.

The French ships look good, tight up until shots are fired.
The French ships don't have enough AA guns and the ones they have very poor AA guns, whatever their capabilities in other roles.
The French 37mm guns for instance are not automatic guns, They are single loaders. They will have a rate of fire about that of 37mm AT gun.
The French 75mm AA guns are powerful but they have a poor rate of fire.
The French 130mm AA guns on the Strasbourg and sister may not have a good rate of fire and the ability to follow maneuvering targets is subject to question.

If you have a warehouse full of 2pdr pom pom guns and the like and another one full of 4in AA guns go for it.

 

[Admiral Beez]

You can't use Singapore drydock, well you can slide the French ship in to the dock but you have no spare boilers or boiler parts or any other fittings/parts short of modifying British ones to fit.

Good for a bottom scrape and lube the fittings I suppose. And a refueling.

 

[cherry blossom]

Petain was probably always in favour of an armistice if the Battle of France was lost. However, he couldn't have won that argument on his own. Wegand was critical, especially as Reynaud was worried about the effect on morale of sacking a second commander. So why not simply have the aircraft flying Wegand back from Syria crash or alternatively have the plane taking him to visit the Northern Armies (French, British and Belgian) on the 21st May crash. My problem is that I have no idea who would replace Gamelin or Wegand. The only good thing to say about Gamelin is that he did believe in democracy but his views were not that common in the French Army of 1940.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Petain was probably always in favour of an armistice if the Battle of France was lost. However, he couldn't have won that argument on his own. Wegand was critical, especially as Reynaud was worried about the effect on morale of sacking a second commander. So why not simply have the aircraft flying Wegand back from Syria crash or alternatively have the plane taking him to visit the Northern Armies (French, British and Belgian) on the 21st May crash. My problem is that I have no idea who would replace Gamelin or Wegand. The only good thing to say about Gamelin is that he did believe in democracy but his views were not that common in the French Army of 1940.

The French problem in 1940 was more sociological than organizational. The country was riven into factions and that social division had seeped into the armed forces. The Army and Navy were both split on political lines. The Air Force had not the power to overcome that state of affairs. I don't think any leader could have rallied them at the point of the German offensive.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The French problem in 1940 was more sociological than organizational. The country was riven into factions and that social division had seeped into the armed forces. The Army and Navy were both split on political lines. The Air Force had not the power to overcome that state of affairs. I don't think any leader could have rallied them at the point of the German offensive.

I think a minor war during the early 1930s may have encouraged reforms.

Italian-French War of 1933

Per Wikipedia... "In late 1932–early 1933, Mussolini planned to launch a surprise attack against both France and Yugoslavia that was to begin in August 1933.] Mussolini's planned war of 1933 was only stopped when he learned that the French Deuxième Bureau had broken the Italian military codes...

ww2aircraft.net

 

[Jagdflieger]

There is a number of 'France fights on' topics on the 'net, there is even a forum dedicated to the idea. So let's say French retreat as much of manpower and gear to the N. Africa, wreck what they cannot carry and what they have time to wreck, and continue to fight from late Spring of 1940 on.
Is this situation better for Germany or worse?

Ahh...sorry don't get it; If France decides to send most of of it's Army to e.g. Algeria and Tunesia in late Spring of 1940 and therefore has to abandon most of it's heavy gear - then who and with what are the remaining French forces in France to fight against the Wehrmacht? Since it would take weeks before to send and assemble them to Southern France.
Or is this "late Spring" supposed to be around the Dunkirk time-frame? - meaning France is already more or less beaten.
Which would in turn enable Hitler to install a Nazi friendly government (just as history) in southern France.

 

[Peter Gunn]

A French "Fleet in Being" in FIC is intriguing, especially what Imperial Japan might think of it. Like A Admiral Beez points out, Japan cannot wait too long before America's fleet program takes hold and they're looking at a dozen Essex class, the Lexington, Saratoga, Hornet, Wasp, Yorktown and Enterprise plus at least 10 modern fast BB's.

And for us aviation buffs i.e. this forum, the vaunted Zero would have much stiffer competition if the Pacific war is delayed by even a year.

 

[special ed]

The wise ones didn't see the demise of Repulse and Prince of Wales. I doubt the French would have fared better, especially in port.

 

[Shortround6]

Ahh...sorry don't get it; If France decides to send most of of it's Army to e.g. Algeria and Tunesia in late Spring of 1940 and therefore has to abandon most of it's heavy gear - then who and with what are the remaining French forces in France to fight against the Wehrmacht? Since it would take weeks before to send and assemble them to Southern France.
Or is this "late Spring" supposed to be around the Dunkirk time-frame? - meaning France is already more or less beaten.
Which would in turn enable Hitler to install a Nazi friendly government (just as history) in southern France.

Seems to be pretty much on target.
Look at google maps, it is just about 470 miles from Marseille to Algiers or a good two days one way with an 8-9kt freighter. This is not an Dunkirk style evacuation with ships making multiple trips in one day or using small boats.
As has been already mentioned, getting the armies to the evacuation ports is going to be a problem. Especially with heavy weapons (you need trains and cranes).
It is around 1100 miles from the Bay of Biscay to French Morocco. You are closer to the front but now you have a 4-5 day one way trip with a sub 10kt ship.

The Dunkirk worked because the British were retreating to their point/s of supply. Troops that came ashore with little or no weapons could be resupplied with weapons from store or from factories in short order, short is a relative term. French troops evacuated to Morocco/Algeria have very little waiting for them in the way of heavy weapons and ammunition. Even food for troops in the tens of thousands is questionable. There are no factories to make new tanks, artillery, shells, aircraft, etc. Perhaps limited small arms production was possible.

However troops around 400 miles from the Spanish/French border are not a big threat to the Germans.

France in itself can do nothing. France as a possible manpower pool to be equipped with British (Commonwealth) and American weapons at a later date does have a possibility.
But how many months off is that?
Do the Germans delay or halt Barbarossa in 1941 because the French have 100,000-200,000 poorly equipped men in Algeria?

Do the British (and Commonwealth) tool up to make parts for French equipment and French ammunition or do they start sending British standard issue equipment to the French troops in NA? America is still tooling up.

A French attack on the Italians in Libya might be possible from Tunisia. As in much of the NA campaigns, much is dependent on supply. How reliable are the French vehicles in NA and how much supply do they have (including artillery ammunition). The British can supply them through Moroccan ports.
Supply of Malta is a lot easier, at least until the Germans show up in force. British can use airfields in Algeria and Tunisia?

 

[tomo pauk]

Ahh...sorry don't get it; If France decides to send most of of it's Army to e.g. Algeria and Tunesia in late Spring of 1940 and therefore has to abandon most of it's heavy gear - then who and with what are the remaining French forces in France to fight against the Wehrmacht? Since it would take weeks before to send and assemble them to Southern France.
Or is this "late Spring" supposed to be around the Dunkirk time-frame? - meaning France is already more or less beaten.
Which would in turn enable Hitler to install a Nazi friendly government (just as history) in southern France.

France fights on from September away from the metropolitan France.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The wise ones didn't see the demise of Repulse and Prince of Wales. I doubt the French would have fared better, especially in port.

The French fleet arrives at Saigon before Sept 1940, over a year before Japan begin the war.

France fights on from September away from the metropolitan France.

Vichy France had intended to send a naval force to FIC, but the Germans vetoed it.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think a minor war during the early 1930s may have encouraged reforms.

Italian-French War of 1933

Per Wikipedia... "In late 1932–early 1933, Mussolini planned to launch a surprise attack against both France and Yugoslavia that was to begin in August 1933.] Mussolini's planned war of 1933 was only stopped when he learned that the French Deuxième Bureau had broken the Italian military codes...

ww2aircraft.net

WWII itself didn't heal those divisions.

 

[Shortround6]

The wise ones didn't see the demise of Repulse and Prince of Wales. I doubt the French would have fared better, especially in port.

A harbor/port is not a base.

A group of ships anchored in a harbor or tied to piers is not really a fleet in being.
The Germans spent a fair amount of effort maintaining their ships in Norway (supply and protection) and it really wasn't enough.

You do need some sea experience.
Ships sitting in tropical harbors are going to foul their bottoms fairly quickly.

French ships are very hard pressed to provide their own AA protection. A Base should provide land based AA guns to help protect the ships.
This is the standard French light AA gun. 13.2mm.

Rate of fire is 450rpm and the 30 round magazines run out fairly quickly.
Gunner cranks with his left hand to traverse the gun/s and cranks with his left hand for elevation.
May actually work better in harbor than at sea
Coordination needed on a rolling pitching deck?

The French Hotchkiss company developed this gun gun and sold it to a number of countries including the Japanese. There was an enlarged version in 25mm which was adapted by several counties including the Japanese but the French navy did not adopt it until after the French surrender.

So the next step up was the already mentioned manually operated 37mm gun/s which were usually installed on a scale of 3 twin guns per heavy cruiser and four twin guns per new battleship. Most destroyers had two single mounts.

Sailor on the right of the gun with hand wheels aims the gun. Soon to be one armed paper hanger on the right has his hand on the breech block lever. This posed photo does not have the full crew. When the gun fires the gun recoils in the cradle, the breech block opens and the cartridge is ejected, the barrel runs forward leaving the breech block open and the loader slams a round into the breech. As the round enters the chamber it trips a catch releasing the spring loaded breech block to slam shut. Hopefully our intrepid loader gets his hand out of way or holds his hand in such a way that the moving breech block pushes it safely aside.
Rate of fire for this thing is all over the place. From 15-21 rounds per minute to 30-42rpm theoretical to 82rpm for the twin gun. Getting 30rpm calls for a human chain of shell holders working in well trained precise movements to pass the ammo to the man actually putting the shells into the breech.

 

[Admiral Beez]

WWII itself didn't heal those divisions.

No, but WW2 accomplished what I'm suggesting a war with Italy in 1933 might have: the reformation of the French military. For starters, perhaps they'd skip having six entirely separate single-seat fighter programs enter service between 1938 and 1940.

Could France make due with just two fighters?

France had six entirely distinct single-seat, single-engine, monoplane fighter programs in production between 1936 to 1940. Bloch MB.150. Specified 1934. First flight 1937. Introduced 1939. Morane-Saulnier M.S.406. Specified 1934. (same as the MB.150). First flight 1938. Introduced 1938...

ww2aircraft.net

 

[Shortround6]

France fights on from September away from the metropolitan France.

I haven't looked up the answers.

Where were the French factories for weapons and ammunition production? In Metropolitan France or in rural France?
The majority at any rate.

Do the French abandon motor transport or cut down on it significantly?
The French were not close to being fully motorized anyway but movement of heavy weapons is a lot easier with tractors than with horses.
What is the road network in rural France?
Better than Russian but not so good as metropolitan France?
Rail net works?

A formal front line or some sort of intense guerilla operation?

you could be using up scores of tons of ammo per day per division.