If the RAF had been defeated in the Battle of Britain

[Shortround6]

That is one of the Big Questions.

If the British can keep air cover over Harwich, 120-130km (3 hours) by sea to Dover and the home of four destroyer flotillas.

Even if the British are forced out of Portsmouth are they forced out of Plymouth?

 

[stona]

Even Churchill wasn't entirely negative about fascism, Hitler his gang (just) before the war.

Churchill said and wrote many things that can be construed as pro fascist and or anti Bolshevik as well as anti semitic. I'm sure plenty of articles and quotes can be found online. He was a man of his generation.

They hardly reflect his attitude towards Nazism in the 1930/40s.

Cheers

Steve

 

[pattle]

At what point would Britain have known that the RAF had failed to deter an invasion? I suppose this could only have been when the invasion commenced? The RAF was Churchill's first line of defence, in reality its job was to deter an invasion attempt by remaining intact. Churchill had a remit to stop the Germans from successfully invading Great Britain, not to stop them from trying. Should the RAF have failed to deter the Germans from attempting invasion then Churchill would still have a had a mandate to defeat the invasion. Churchill never promised anyone he would stop the Germans from trying to invade Britain he promised the people that "we will fight them on the beaches etc and that we shall never surrender". We are taking it for granted that if Britain had lost the Battle of Britain then the Germans would have tried to invade, I think it is wrong to assume they would have done as the Germans were aware of the difficulties involved.
The German invasion barges would of had to of kept crossing the channel over and over again to resupply and reinforce, and each time this fleet set sail it would have just got smaller and smaller.
How far would Churchill have gone should the Germans have landed? would he have ordered the use of gas and chemical weapons. I have not heard this possibility talked about much in some years but it was once a popularly held belief that he would have done.

 

[redcoat]

Anyway, with illumination Ju 88s and Ju 87s could be used against the RN.

Even if they had the training to bomb ships at sea at night (which they hadn't) they still have to find them first

And E-boats, like during the D-day invasion exercises.

The E-boats tactic of choice was to sneak up to the enemy ships, fire their torpedoes, and then run away as quickly as possible....I don't think the invasion forces they are supposed to be defending would be too impressed with the 'running away' bit.

It seems to me that the Royal Navy could be destroyed from the air - just see what losses they inflicted on British ships during Battle of Crete, BUT it would take several days and the Royal Navy would have to stay in the Channel, which seems unlikely.

Kris

The RN would only need to dominate the Channel at night to defeat the invasion, they wouldn't even need to sink that many ships, just the disruption they would cause would be enough to tip the balance.

It should be noted that RN warships made regular patrols of the Channel at night throughout the Battle Of Britain

ps. Its often claimed that the Luftwaffe stopped the British running convoys through the Channel at the begining of the battle, but in fact after the heavy daytime convoys losses in the Channel earlier in the battle, the British merely re-timed the convoys to travel through the Dover Straits at night.

 

[Shortround6]

It should be noted that RN warships made regular patrols of the Channel at night throughout the Battle Of Britain

ps. Its often claimed that the Luftwaffe stopped the British running convoys through the Channel at the begining of the battle, but in fact after the heavy daytime convoys losses in the Channel earlier in the battle, the British merely re-timed the convoys to travel through the Dover Straits at night.

More room to maneuver in day light and harder to find. Even if the weather is good enough to fly, that does not guarantee 30 mile visibility from an airplane. The search aircraft have to find the British ships in time for the strike aircraft to take-off and reach them. Unless search aircraft stay with them or are relieved the British ships can move 8-24 miles in an hour depending on type.,making it hard for the strike aircraft to find them if visiability isn't the best.

Web site for weather in the English channel: Marine weather forecast for English Channel Western | Marine | United Kingdom, Coastal Areas

Right now (3:51PM eastern daylight time) it seems to be showing 1.3 meter waves and 6 mile visibility. I could be off an hour or two. You can also adjust to eastern of mid channel.

Middle of next week looks like under 1 meter waves for several days.

 

[Milosh]

What are the tides like?

how fast and how high

 

[oldcrowcv63]

I believe the hypothesis of a successful Sea Lion may be rooted in the fantasy that all one has to do to stage a cross channel invasion is run Dunkirk in reverse. Calling Dunkirk a miracle is not an overstatement. It ranks, or should, with the parting of the Red Sea. As a miracle, it is multilayered.

1st (and foremost), was the sustained combination of good weather and calm sea state. The two don't always go hand in hand.

2nd was the incredibly rapid mobilization of active support by the non-miltary component of Britain's sea-faring culture. While I'd bet the deep draft vessels carried the bulk of the evacuees, the small craft were most effective and essential as lighters to carry the troops from shore to ships. Yet the probable myth persists to the present that small boats carried an army back to English ports. I'd be shocked if the bulk of the evacuated army traveled by small craft, although from what I understand, thousands did. The importance of the deep-draft component of any amphibious operation was obviously already well understood by the RN which which had accumulated experience in the art.

3rd, The observation that the Luftwaffe couldn't stop the effort on what was essentially their own shore may have lead to an incorrect conclusion that aerial opposition to an invasion could be easily overcome. Extrapolating from this that a defeated RAF would be equally incapable of preventing a hostile landing.

We know from Dunkirk and other WW2 examples in the PTO that even a few hostile aircraft can inflict serious damage on a properly equipped invading force even if it doesn't repulse the invasion. Sea Lion did not involve a properly equipped force.

4th, as is frequently the case, the overall success of the evacuation obscured the high (but not fatal) price paid by the RN and Merchant fleet units involved in the evacuation: from wikipedia:

Six British and three French destroyers were sunk (5 by air, 2 by E-boat, 1 each by mines and U-Boat), along with nine large boats. In addition, 19 destroyers were damaged.[18] Over 200 of the Allied sea craft were sunk, with an equal number damaged.[32]

These losses were accomplished largely by the leakage of Luftwaffe strike aircraft into the evacuation area despite a strong RAF mounted aerial blockade. Luftwaffe attacks were initially weather limited so the results were nothing like an all-out effort to prevent the evacuation as would likely be instituted by the RAF to hinder an invasion of the home island. This despite the fact that the Luftwaffe's anti-ship skill was reputed as not yet as formidable as it later became.

It may be useful to compare with the German plans, specialized amphibious units, relative experience and available hardware among contemporary, future belligerent navies mounting such operations: The Japanese, British and Americans:

The Kriegsmarine seems to have operated its very small marine force as reinforced platoons or companies in typically small operations more akin to special ops than amphibious invasions.
By comparison the RN went into WW2 with what appears to be about a full division (~10,000 men) of Royal Marines which grew quickly into a fully capable amphibious ops specialty organization starting in August 1940. By the time of the BoB the royal navy had (and used in the Dunkirk evacuation) limited numbers of purpose built landing craft: Landing Craft Navigation or LCNs.

The IJN/IJA also had a number of roughly battalion-sized special landing forces trained in amphibious ops including specialized landing craft to facilitate their ops. The major amphibious operations were mounted from deep draft vessels (Like the pioneering Shinshu Maru depot ship built in the mid-30's) acting as carriers for the (Shohatsu and Diahatsu) landing craft. The Japanese were performing and perfecting amphibious ops from about the mid-1930s.

Even before WW2, the USA was deeply involved in developing amphibious ops doctrine, as well as specialized forces and equipment.

When the channel was finally crossed in June 1944, that invasion and virtually all others in the ETO and PTO were launched from deep draft vessels carrying the huge logistics required for supporting a large expeditionary force. That's what a military that is serious about such operations does. Using unseaworthy craft to mount and sustain an invasion is just putting the survival of an entire army at the mercy of natural elements. Basing invasion plans on unfounded expectations of an enemy's inability to interfere also exposes one's army to the risk of disaster (like at Midway). Sea Lion was never a serious threat. It seems to me that only after Sea Lion, did Germany begin to develop a real capability for such operations.

 

[nuuumannn]

Using unseaworthy craft to mount and sustain an invasion is just putting the survival of an entire army at the mercy of natural elements.

3,000 miscellaneous vessels and not one of them actually designed for the purpose. The British wouldn't be firing at them as the waterlogged, sea sick German soldiers hauled their bedraggled selves ashore, they'd be offering them seasickness pills, a clean towel and a stiff drink! "'Ere you go mate, 'ave this, you'll feel better in a coupla days. Shame about the weather eh?!"

 

[oldcrowcv63]

I should have added natural and often quite unpredictable elements

 

[pinsog]

3,000 miscellaneous vessels and not one of them actually designed for the purpose. The British wouldn't be firing at them as the waterlogged, sea sick German soldiers hauled their bedraggled selves ashore, they'd be offering them seasickness pills, a clean towel and a stiff drink! "'Ere you go mate, 'ave this, you'll feel better in a coupla days. Shame about the weather eh?!"

Do you think the British would have actually fired on them or would they have just sailed around and through them with cruisers and destroyers and sunk them with their wakes?

 

[nuuumannn]

Do you think the British would have actually fired on them or would they have just sailed around and through them with cruisers and destroyers and sunk them with their wakes?

The admirals would have got their deck chairs out and watched the spectacle over a glass of Pimms. "Those Jerries are keen coming over at this time of year, eh wat?! Bottom's up, Old Boy!"

 

[Shortround6]

Oh, definitely wakes............

After they ran out of ammunition, depth charges, torpedoes.....and boarding cutlasses

 

[nuuumannn]

Oh, definitely wakes............

That sort of behaviour is far too ungentlemanly, besides, the admirals might spill their Pimms' on their tunics and we can have that, eh wat! Far more sporting to watch the Germans flail about miserably in the water and discuss how they would have done it if they were in the Germans' shoes...

 

[stona]

Finally I would like to recommend a couple of books.

The Royal Navy and the Battle of Britain by Anthony J Cumming

Invasion of Engand 1940 - The planning of Operation Sealion, by Peter Schenk,

I won't spoil the surprise by revealing their conclusions

Cheers

Steve

 

[beitou]

That sort of behaviour is far too ungentlemanly, besides, the admirals might spill their Pimms' on their tunics and we can have that, eh wat! Far more sporting to watch the Germans flail about miserably in the water and discuss how they would have done it if they were in the Germans' shoes...

Any surviving German soldiers would have been given a mercyless tutting and a sound raising of the the eyebrows before being told firmly to form a que for their towels and cocoa.

 

[fastmongrel]

Interesting fact I have just come across. Axis POWs were given the same rations as the British Army as per the Geneva Convention. This meant POWs were getting more calories than the civilian population of Britain.

 

[redcoat]

What are the tides like?

how fast and how high

The Channel is noted for its strong tides, especially in the area around the Dover Strait, where the German's intended to invade.

The Dover Strait is renowned for having strong tidal flows with a large rise and fall in water from high to low tide. There are two types of tide, the 'EBB' tide and the 'FLOOD' tide.

Ebb Tide: This tide comes from the North East down the Channel towards Folkestone. It begins 4.5 hours after high water to 2 hours before high water (Dover).

Flood Tide: Travels up the Channel from the South West towards the North Sea. It occurs 1.5 hours before high tide to 4.5 hours after high water (Dover).

An important factor in tidal control is the moon. When the sun, moon and earth are aligned the tides are at their maximum strength and are known as SPRING tides. When the moon is at 90° to the earth, we have weak tides called NEAP tides. The tides alternate in a two weekly cycle. High water during spring tides is at roughly midday and midnight (GMT) and high water during Neaps is in the region of 6am and 6pm (GMT). The mean height for a high water Spring tide is 6.8 metres and a Neap tide is 5.3 metres.

-Source Channel Tides
More info
Channelswimming.com - Navigation Q&A.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

Oh, definitely wakes............

After they ran out of ammunition, depth charges, torpedoes.....and boarding cutlasses

Ah Yes: Mister Christion! Pass out the belaying Pins!

 

[oldcrowcv63]

For me, the crucial question of Sealion is not whether the Royal Navy could have defeated the Channel crossing (which I believe they comprehensively would have, purely on weight on numbers) but the logistics of the whole operation.

A German light infantry division consumed around 150-200 tonnes of supplies per day and around 400 tons while in heavy combat. A motorised/mechanised division consumed around 300 tons per day, a German armoured division consumed around 300 to 350 tons of supplies. An armoured division could consume up to 700 tons per day if it was in heavy combat.

For the Germans to supply the nine infantry and 2 airborne divisions put across in the first wave they have to land somewhere between 2200 tons per day (assuming 200 tons per day for light combat) and 4400 tons per day (assuming 400 tons per day for heavy combat).

In their anti-invasion preparations, the British thought that the Germans would have to bring across around 3300 tons per day, a round figure of 300 tons per division.

The port capacity in the Sealion invasion area was around 1400 tons per day, when at full capacity. The British plans were to wreck the port facilities in the event of a landing, which was expected to have the effect of cutting capacity to around 150 tons per week (one twentieth of estimated supply needed) in the first week, increasing to about 800 tons by the end of the second week.

Even if the German army achieves a coup de main and captures the port facilities intact (a highly unlikely scenario), it is still required to land somewhere close to 1900 tons (assuming the mean figure of 3300 tons per day) over open beaches without port facilities. Without the British Army, Royal Air Force or Royal Navy interfering. Or the weather.

To think Sealion has a reasonable chance of success, even with Fighter Command reduced to almost nothing, is wilfull denial of the evidence of the highest order.

Somehow I missed JW's earlier post. It is excellent and I believe cuts to the heart of the problem facing the German military. I believe it may show either the absence of any intention of actually carrying out an invasion or the rank amateur nature of the planning.

 

[redcoat]

Six British and three French destroyers were sunk (5 by air, 2 by E-boat, 1 each by mines and U-Boat), along with nine large boats. In addition, 19 destroyers were damaged.[18] Over 200 of the Allied sea craft were sunk, with an equal number damaged.[32]

The number of vessels sunk or lost during the evacuation was 94, of which 51 are credited in full or part to the Luftwaffe, of the remaining 130 or so losses these were nearly all small civilian vessels abandoned at Dunkirk at the end of the operation due to the risk involved in attempting to tow them back across the Channel.