Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
How many fleet assets can the RN can send for defence on the Rock in '40.
Not even close. Consider the situation in late Oct 1940 at the time of the first Hitler/Franco conference.
Naval power was still measured at this time by Battleships, and in the fall of 1940 the British had 14 BB/BC, + King George V + Prince of Wales launched and almoste complete. The Italians had 6. The Germans had not completed the Bismarck yet, and both of the Scharnhorst Battlecruisers was severely damaged by torpedoes and out of action.
The war between the UK and Germany had been describes as a battle between a Lion a Shark, very apt description. While Germany was running roughshod over all of Europe, they were getting their asses kicked in the Naval war (sorry Adler)
Germany started the war with 2 Battlecruisers, 6 light cruisers and 3 heavy cruisers + 3 "Pocket" BB's
By the fall of 1940, they have both Battlecruisers out of action, 1 pocket BB sunk, 1 Pocket BB out of action, 1 CA sunk, 2 CL sunk and 1 heavily damaged by torpedo, + about 60% of their DD's sunk .
By Oct 1940 the Germans therefore have less than half of their starting naval assets left,
In exchange, the British have lost the BB Royal Oak, and 2 carriers lost (out of 8 ) The British also have a total of 23 CA (of 9,000 tons+) and 44 CL remaining by Oct 1940, and have lost only 1 CA (Effingham) and 2 CL. This does not even include the ships of the Allied navies, Dutch, Australian, Canadian, etc
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Vincenzo
THe harbour defences are unlikely to damage the Battleships, but that was not their intention. They are intended to to break up the co-ordination of the landing forces and lighter ships operating operating inshore. And the allied experiences later in the war showed that it was the lighter ships that provided the most effective gunfire support. During the landings at Sicily, for example it was the Destroyers that prevented the Axis from succeeding at places like Gela. DDs would manouvre to very close to the shore and pump 5in shells into the attacking formations, providing heavy and direct gunfire support on demand. Battleships were good at attacking fixed defences, but not as efficient at attacking mobile targets.
Now, the Allied experiences demonstrated that it took weeks to suppress and destroy seward defences that were comparable to those at gib. The defences at Normandy, Sicily and southern France were nowhere near as formidable those at Gibraltar Dieppe Sevastopol Okinawa and the like. And the allies had radar assisted gunnery, which made their accuracy much higher. Moreover the forces employed in all these operations were specially trrained for shore bombardment work, having spent several years perfecting the techniques needed.
In order to get the defences reduced to a level that assault forces could approach the fortress, you are looking at weeks or months of continuous bombardment. The best analogy would probably be either Sevastopol or Odessa. Sevastopol took over three weeks of continuous bombardment, by the heaviest German artillery concentration of the war. Odessa took about 2 months to do the same job.
With say 3 battleships available, the italians are going to need several months of continuous bombardment to destroy the port defences of the port. In that time the RN will have -plenty of time to intervene.
To give some idea of what the Italians themselves thought, it is interesting to look at their plans for the invasion of Malta, the so called Operation "C-3" . They were planning to support several divfision (some italian, some German) for several weeks to subdue the island.
The trouble with an amphib operation is that once you are committed to the landing, you must stay there, or abandon you troops to their fate. Marine forces are totally dependant on the support fleet until they get a permanent foothold.....for places like Malta or Gibraltar, that means getting control and subduing all resistance permanently
I agree that a prolonged approach is suicide for the Axis fleets, but how are you proposing to do this otherwise. The experiences at Sevastopol and Iwo, which are both comparable, indicate a clear need for a prolonged campaign. In the case of Sevastopol it took about three months to complete the prepration and several weeks to complete the assault. In the case of Iwo it took three days of bombardment by the navy (which proved insufficient anyway), and 25 days of support afloat as the ground forces inched their way ahead. Unless the Germans are supermen, how are they going to
A) get 100000+ men to the target
B) get those men safely ashore
C) provide the necessary support to prevent those men becoming guests of His Majesty?
without the fleet hanging around??????
and Eben-Emael fell after 31 hours.
I never said anything about Germany needed to land 100,000+ men, where did you get that from??
2 out of 8 carriers lost.... by subs?
.
2 out of 8 carriers lost.... by subs?
.
Courageous was sunk two weeks after the outbreak of war (17-09-39), by two torpedoes fired from U-29. The British lost her needlessly, trying to carry out hunter killer missions in the Irish sea, when in reality they did not have the weoponry at that stage to undertake such a mission
Glorious was sunk 8-6-40, by the Battlecruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau.
Excellent find freebird!! I wonder how willing they would have been to fire on the runway with it being filled with British aircraft?
Great info Freebird... do u know if the 25 pounders are still there?
are you sure on force of garrison afaik in '40 there were only 4 infantry btl, also the artillery situation presented are for '41 and imho in 40 was almost a bit inferior
In 1940, there were some 20 3.7" guns, four 4" guns, 10 40-mm Bofors and two pom-poms, plus numerous searchlights. 1942, this complement had been increased to 30 3.7" guns and almost 20 Bofors.
Excellent find freebird!! I wonder how willing they would have been to fire on the runway with it being filled with British aircraft?
They would have fired on the attackers, with or without allied AC on the runways.
I would do an amphibious/airborne attack on Gibraltar.
The French, Italians and Germans had been bombing them so range IMO is not critical. I could not find the bases from which the Italian or Germans flew from- but obviously it was feasible.
I have to disagree with you about there being no escorting fighters.
Remember it's a captured allied ship so it's not unidentified.
That's something obviously that would need to be taken out. However you only need to open a channel wide enough to get the ships through safely.
Not sure, but if 10 large boats could drop off 5k troops, that would be great.
Originally yes, but they would be either in Spanish ports or anchored off the Spanish coast. Apparently it was not a big deal.
Hi Vincenzo
Have a look at my Post 19, which gives a lot of detail on the available forces. If the invasion occurred in 1940, the attacker would have faced 16000 defenders, of which 4 Battalions were INfantry. By the time the operation would have been ready, an additional two brigades of Infantry had been added, bringing the strength of the defence up to over 25000 men. To these 2 Infantry Brigades were added approximately 6 battalions of artillery, which I think are additional to those depicted on Freebirds map.
Gibraltar was one of the most heavily defended locations on earth. As others have pointed out, any position is capable of being taken, and Gibraltar is no exception. But the idea that the place could be taken without heavy losses, and without a long period of prepration is unrealistic iun my opinion.
Al depend what's the time of operation, in a what if active italain in mediterraneo after take malta in june, we can suppose attack on the rock in late summer so no 2 brigades more only the 4th btls, your 19th post it's like one in axis history forum. most defended maybe i 'm not a expert but i don't think so and with spain in war have little hope few weeks at best i think