How does Hitler and Germany come back from a Sealion disaster?

[Admiral Beez]

Per Wikipedia. Directive No. 16: Operation Sea Lion. Hitler's directive set four conditions for the invasion to occur:

1. The RAF was to be "beaten down in its morale and in fact, that it can no longer display any appreciable aggressive force in opposition to the German crossing".
2. The English Channel was to be swept of British mines at the crossing points, and the Strait of Dover must be blocked at both ends by German mines.
3. The coastal zone between occupied France and England must be dominated by heavy artillery.
4. The Royal Navy must be sufficiently engaged in the North Sea and the Mediterranean so that it could not intervene in the crossing. British home squadrons must be damaged or destroyed by air and torpedo attacks.

Battle of Britain goes a little different, with the Luftwaffe keeping its focus on hitting airfields rather than civilian centres, appearing to have reduced the RAF. According to the Bexhill Museum, "By August 1940 the German Navy had secured a landing force of 1,900 barges, 168 merchant ships, 386 tugs & trawlers, and 1,600 motor boats to get four divisions across the Channel on 'S-Day', and five more in the two days following day." Churchill knows of Hitler's Directive, and has the RAF and RN pull away from the southern areas to set the trap. Hitler demands that Sealion go ahead before the Channel becomes uncrossable in autumn 1940. So, on a sunny, calm morning in Sept 1940, two thousand barges and their tugs, carrying sixty thousand soldiers set across the channel. Every available Luftwaffe aircraft and KM warship, including almost all the KM's destroyers (that survive since the Narvik disaster and overall Norway campaign), and uboats is made available to defend the invasion force.

At this moment, with signals intercepts giving away the German plans and exact dates, Churchill writes in his diary, "since the days of the Spanish Armada, there is but one ultimate purpose of the Royal Navy. It is not showing the flag to friends and foes, defence of trade or empire, but is to stop any invasion of these islands. And so again our Navy shall do." And with this, a good portion of the Royal Navy (which in Sept 1940 numbered 14 battleships and battlecruisers, 5 aircraft carriers, >60 cruisers, >160 destroyers, >60 submarines and many smaller armed craft, such as MTBs) sails out of its dispersed positions to engage the enemy. I envision at least a quarter of the fleet above will take part, perhaps much more, with almost all the submarines laying off the Germany launching ports off France. Meanwhile the RAF, which has been dispersed and waiting, sends every bomber and fighter to engage.

With the British waiting until the near entirety of the invasion fleet is at sea, the day is a disaster for the Germans. The Luftwaffe and KM see the swarms of British MTBs, cruisers and destroyers approaching, while over forty Perisher-trained submarine commanders begin torpedoing everything they can see, and later the RN's slower battleships arrive. The RAF engage the Luftwaffe fighters and bombers, while RAF Bomber Command and Coastal Command tear into the invasion fleet. By the evening, the Royal Navy and RAF have taken a serious drubbing, with dozens of warships sunk or damaged and over one hundred aircraft and aircrew lost; but the only Germans arriving on British beaches are as flotsam. Over forty thousand German soldiers are drowned, hundreds of Luftwaffe aircraft destroyed, as well as much of the KM's surface fleet. In France, the sixty thousand men of tomorrow's planned 2nd wave's five divisions watch in horror, along with the officers and General Staff as the Wehrmacht is torn to shreds.

How does Hitler and Germany come back from such a disaster? What's Hitler's next move? Goering is shot, presumably. But what of the Afrika Corp, or the invasion of Greece and ultimately Barbarossa? What does Italy and Japan have to think of this? At the end of the day, forty thousand dead Germans is not huge, perhaps equal to a single encirclement's losses in the retreat from Stalingrad, but this is early days. After the disaster of Sealion, many in the OKH and OKW may not see Hitler as the all conquering man to lead them into Russia.

 

[SaparotRob]

Good thing for 'Dolf he still can rely on the Ribbentrop Pact.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Consolidate Western Europe, build up your defenses, go whole-hog into blockading the UK with subs and planes, and do not invade Russia.

 

[Snautzer01]

Consolidate Western Europe, build up your defenses, go whole-hog into blockading the UK with subs and planes, and do not invade Russia.

Add to list

1. do not help Italy anywhere.
2. Start reorganizing industry now.
3. Stop the mass murdering bastards getting into gear with deathcamps

 

[Admiral Beez]

Consolidate Western Europe, build up your defenses, go whole-hog into blockading the UK with subs and planes, and do not invade Russia.

Without invading Russia won't Germany run out of money sooner than later? Without plunder the house of cards collapses. Economy of Nazi Germany - Wikipedia.

Also, I'm not sure Hitler, with his preoccupation with Bolshevism and Jewry, his anti-Communism and anti-Semitism can drop the idea of Lebensraum at the expense of an enfeebled Russia. The Nazis aren't Nazis otherwise. But the general staff aren't rabid Nazis, so a coup may be in the works.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Without invading Russia won't Germany run out of money sooner than later? Without plunder the house of cards collapses. Economy of Nazi Germany - Wikipedia.

Also, I'm not sure Hitler, with his preoccupation with Bolshevism and Jewry, his anti-Communism and anti-Semitism can drop the idea of Lebensraum at the expense of an enfeebled Russia. The Nazis aren't Nazis otherwise. But the general staff aren't rabid Nazis, so a coup may be in the works.

Well, I gave you what they needed to do to recover from a failed Sealion. That Hitler would not do it is historical, but this is a what-if. As for Germany running out of cash, both nations were happy to barter.

 

[Shortround6]

Consolidate Western Europe, build up your defenses, go whole-hog into blockading the UK with subs and planes, and do not invade Russia.

You forgot rebuild the barge fleet as German economy craters due to lack of transport

Hummm, build U-Boats or barges? Without barges the coal and iron won't get to the steel works and then the steel can't get to the ship yards.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Hummm, build U-Boats or barges? Without barges the coal and iron won't get to the steel works and then the steel can't get to the ship yards.

And Britain will be doing whatever it can to stop iron ore getting to Germany from Sweden, AIUI Germany's primary source (Swedish iron-ore industry). I also expect the Germany-leaning/allied governments in Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Croatia might be questioning their choices heading into autumn/winter 1940. Italy had declared war on Britain in June 1940, just a few months before Germany's disaster in the Channel. Will the Italians demand that Mussolini make peace or that the King replace the government? And the French aren't going to sit back and do nothing while their German occupiers are on the back foot, so we can expect new resistance and perhaps a collapse of the Vichy government.

My guess is that before Christmas 1940, Generalmajor Hans Oster and/or other likeminded Generals have Hitler, Goebbels, Göring, Himmler and perhaps Bormann arrested and quickly executed, with Marshall Law declared thereafter. Without Hitler or Himmler, in early 1941, the SS are purposeless and are broken up and integrated into the regular Wehrmacht. Does the German General Staff recall Wilhelm II (or perhaps Wilhelm III or the Allies' preference, August) from exile in the now-occupied Netherlands?

With forty thousand or more families now receiving death notices, its allies and and foes perceiving weakness, with Britain now victorious after the Dunkirk debacle, and with the German economy in a shambles under Royal Navy blockade, Germany's new government is now in a pickle. For starters, what should Germany do in 1941?

 

[SaparotRob]

Keep up the false narratives harder. That strategy seems to work for authoritarians.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

My guess is that before Christmas 1940, Generalmajor Hans Oster and/or other likeminded Generals have Hitler, Goebbels, Göring, Himmler and perhaps Bormann arrested and quickly executed, with Marshall Law declared thereafter. Without Hitler or Himmler, in early 1941, the SS are purposeless and are broken up and integrated into the regular Wehrmacht.

German generals revolting? They didn't do that in 1938 or indeed in 1944 when the situation was far worse.

 

[Snautzer01]

Well, I gave you what they needed to do to recover from a failed Sealion. That Hitler would not do it is historical, but this is a what-if. As for Germany running out of cash, both nations were happy to barter.

Little known but good ole adolf plundered the pension funds. One cn see at least in europe that is a massive fund to dip into.

 

[Admiral Beez]

German generals revolting? They didn't do that in 1938 or indeed in 1944 when the situation was far worse.

Assassination attempts on Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think the Generals' attempt to kill Hitler in 1943 would have occurred in 1940 after much of the army is drowned in the Channel.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Per Wikipedia...

"Italian dictator Benito Mussolini ordered the Tenth Army to invade Egypt by 8 August. Two days later, no invasion having been launched, Mussolini ordered Marshal Graziani that, the moment German forces launched Operation Sea Lion to invade Great Britain, he was to attack."

The Italians are in for some bad times, I think. Rommel and the Afrika Corp will not be coming to save the Italians from their post Op. Compass disaster. By January 1941, I'd estimate the Italians have surrendered to the British across North Africa, including their bases in the Red Sea and Horn. Surely with this, Mussolini is arrested and shot? If a separate peace can be negotiated with Italy, Britain will be free to send whatever is still available from the RN's destruction of the German Armada to the Pacific to counter Japan. At this moment, in Tokyo the General Staff are looking at their rapidly depleting oil reserves, slapping their foreheads and asking, now what the #@% do we do? And of course, what is FDR and the USA thinking of all this?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Assassination attempts on Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think the Generals' attempt to kill Hitler in 1943 would have occurred in 1940 after much of the army is drowned in the Channel.

Even the 1943 attempt was amongst relatively low-ranking officers. Beck was retired and Oster never was able to win support for his positions.

 

[Shortround6]

Loosing 40,000 men was not catastrophic, look at some of the WW I battles.
And the Germans had several million men in the Army.
Sinking the first wave was not all that costly to the German army. It would have pretty much wiped out the functional German navy though.

Letting the Germans land the first wave and then sinking the 2nd wave would have roughly doubled the German casualties without a lot more losses on the British side.
German 1st wave would have to surrender in 3-5 days due to lack of supplies, like food and ammo.
German 1st wave doesn't have a lot of heavy weapons. Sort of a reverse Dunkirk, Few tanks and only light artillery.

Germans still have the bulk of their panzer divisions. Only a few battalions in the first wave and 8 or less in the second wave.
Getting rid of some of the Pz Is and IIs may have done Germans a favor?

The German expected a much harder and longer battle for France with higher causalities.
Sea Lion was another gamble, 50-100,000 men lost and winning was one thing. Loosing 60-100,000men and British still holding southern England was another story.

 

[z42]

• While losing 40k men per se isn't unrecoverable, losing most of the Navy will sting but Germany was never much of a naval power anyway. Losing a significant chunk of the Luftwaffe's best pilots might, militarily, be the biggest loss. And yes, all those barges and stuff that were needed for the industrial logistics.
• However, it's a giant PR egg-on-face moment for Hitler. Dictatorships survive by projecting an image of strength, so this is actually very bad.
• So bad, actually, that it results in a coup where Hitler and the top Nazi leadership is killed or imprisoned.
• The new leadership sues for peace, and retreats from occupied territories. Germany goes back to focusing on Hefeweizen and currywurst. With Hitler gone, Radler takes a well earned #1 spot as the worst thing to come from Germany.
• Instead of war production, German industry embarks on a crash program of agricultural mechanization and synthetic fertilizer production etc. Oh, and the VW Beetle, one of the few good ideas Hitler had.
• The big question is, with Barbarossa called off, will comrade Stalin attack anyway (as he historically apparently had planned?)? And if the new Germany is now aligned with the western powers, does this mean the west will join Germany against the Soviets?
• Very bad news for Mussolini. Without German support he's toast.
• And what about Japan. Assuming Stalin does not attack, the war in Europe is winding down, and thus the UK can deploy significant forces to the Far East. Will Japan still go ahead with their plan to attack Pearl Harbor and British Far East bases like Singapore? And if not, what will it do? Retreat from China with its tail behind its legs to get the oil taps opened again? Probably even voicing such a suggestion would have been fatal (literally!) to anyone in the Japanese regime.

 

[bf109xxl]

as he historically apparently had planned?

I am not Stalin's fan, I consider him a bloody dictator, nevertheless I guess it is necessary to use scientific approach to the evaluation of his activities. So I wonder if there is any evidence of his aggressive plans. I only know plans for a preemptive strike against the Wehrmacht during its deployment. But there is no evidence that they were put into action. The Soviets learned a brutal and very painful lesson in Finland demonstrated to the Soviet high command that the army was totally unprepared for large-scale offensive operations despite its impressive superiority in tanks and aircraft.
Perhaps such plans would have emerged after 1942, but not before. The Soviet leadership was aware of the weakness of the Red Army: the rearmament had only just begun, organization was far from optimal, and the training of officers was insufficient.
However, the first-strike improvisation in the case of the "Seelöwe" failure seemed pretty plausible to me.

 

[z42]

I am not Stalin's fan, I consider him a bloody dictator, nevertheless I guess it is necessary to use scientific approach to the evaluation of his activities. So I wonder if there is any evidence of his aggressive plans. I only know plans for a preemptive strike against the Wehrmacht during its deployment. But there is no evidence that they were put into action. The Soviets learned a brutal and very painful lesson in Finland demonstrated to the Soviet high command that the army was totally unprepared for large-scale offensive operations despite its impressive superiority in tanks and aircraft.
Perhaps such plans would have emerged after 1942, but not before. The Soviet leadership was aware of the weakness of the Red Army: the rearmament had only just begun, organization was far from optimal, and the training of officers was insufficient.
However, the first-strike improvisation in the case of the "Seelöwe" failure seemed pretty plausible to me.

I'm not aware of any primary sources, but IIRC I've read mentions of this in several books, though I haven't read about any detailed plans. Might be some general high level musings of the sort "once our army and industrial production is in shape, the Communist World Liberation will proceed to Germany", which is of course very different from detailed plans and preparations.

As for an impromptu invasion immediately following a failed Seelöwe, yes I can see it's tempting but as you say, the Soviet Army was nowhere ready then. If Germany doesn't descend into political chaos following the Seelöwe failure they can still mount a formidable army for defending their eastern flank.

 

[bf109xxl]

Might be some general high level musings of the sort

It was just rhetoric "for internal use". Stalin was a Machiavellian pragmatist and can hardly be suspected of being overly peaceful. But at that time he was still in touch with reality.
The debate on "preventive war" ended in German historical research in the late 1980s. In the 1990s, there were studies in Russia where the issue was raised again (e.g., by Mikhail Meltyukhov), but nothing substantial was presented.

 

[Shortround6]

While losing 40k men per se isn't unrecoverable, losing most of the Navy will sting but Germany was never much of a naval power anyway

The men and army material was a drop in the bucket compared to the Russian campaign.
Germany wasn't a naval power but it had some naval/maritime interests.
The RN Coastal forces fought hundred of actions in area from France to Germany/Norway and sank hundreds of small ships/craft.
With fewer Destroyers/steam torpedo boats and gun boats to contest that activity German coastal trade would be disrupted even more than it was.
The Destroyers and steam torpedo boats also acted as minelayers and caused a lot of damage to the British and later did some damage to the Russians.

These small coastal battles are easy to write off but it was a wound that would not heal. Abandoning the coastal trade routes for the Germans was no more an option than it was for the British.