If the RAF had been defeated in the Battle of Britain (1 Viewer)

[fastmongrel]

If the German High Command had a massive brainfart and went ahead with the invasion against all sanity I can see the following happening. The big blue hammer from the North wipes out a big chunk of the German supply boats and the Channel is littered with sunken barges, the RN loses 5 or 6 WWI vintage light cruisers maybe a dozen or so WWI vintage destroyers and several dozen smaller vessels. The Kreigmarine rusts gently on the bottom of the North Sea. The south east coastal area up to 10 or 15 miles inland is a smoking ruin pockmarked with the wreckage of a large chunk of the LWs Ju52 and Ju87 fleet. Several thousand Germans mostly officers are rescued in a heroic effort by the LW and perhaps 100 to 120,000 men are marched off to POW camps to spend the rest of the war digging fields.

In even the worst possible case of the Germans holding Kent winter is coming the nights are getting longer and the RN owns the Channel and what remains of the LW transport fleet is being steadily whittled away by accidents even if the RAF doesnt get involved. On the inland waterways of Europe there is a massive shortage of barges a nasty winter is coming and a lot of Europe is going to get very cold as the coal the barges usually moved is stuck at the mines waiting for the overloaded railways to shift it. Iron ore is also not getting moved and the railways begin to lose the battle to keep everything moving. Hitler the worlds worst Charlie Chaplin impersonator and his fat friend wont retreat and the LW is ground away till it is a shadow of itself. The loss of even 250,000 troops and a few tanks and guns is neither here nor there but a much weaker LW means no Barbarossa in 41 and by 42 the Soviet Union might be ready for the invasion.

 

[stona]

The Germans had a grand total of two pioneerlandungsboot type 39. This means at least two whole companies could have invaded in style .

The Allies, for Overlord on the other hand used 4,126 landing ships and landing craft, all purpose built for a seaborne invasion. The Germans seem to have viewed the Channel as a wide river, they couldn't construct a long enough pontoon so they'd requisition some river barges and set off.

Cheers

Steve

 

[pinsog]

If you were in charge of the RN, would you allow a landing on the beach and then cut off the supply lines? Or would you simply sink all of the infantry barges in the channel? (this question is for everyone)

 

[oldcrowcv63]

If you were in charge of the RN, would you allow a landing on the beach and then cut off the supply lines? Or would you simply sink all of the infantry barges in the channel? (this question is for everyone)

It is possible to calculate, using the methods of Quantum Mechanics, the finite probability that an airliner will pass through a mountain undamaged with passengers unharmed. It's just not very likely that such an event (miracle) will ever happen. The point is, unlikely events (miracles) can and do happen (Dunkirk as an example).The number of enemy troops reaching the beach should be minimized by subjecting them to as continuous a process of attrition as long and with as much intensity as possible. The goal is to enable the defending troops to deal with the survivors with minimal effort and risk. Sink everything you can, kill or disable as many of the enemy and as much of their baggage as possible and then hope for the best. When the survivors reach the beach and hopefully surrender, treat them with every ounce of humanity that can be mustered.

 

[pinsog]

It is possible to calculate, using the methods of Quantum Mechanics, the finite probability that an airliner will pass through a mountain undamaged with passengers unharmed. It's just not very likely that such an event (miracle) will ever happen. The point is, unlikely events (miracles) can and do happen (Dunkirk as an example).The number of enemy troops reaching the beach should be minimized by subjecting them to as continuous a process of attrition as long and with as much intensity as possible. The goal is to enable the defending troops to deal with the survivors with minimal effort and risk. Sink everything you can, kill or disable as many of the enemy and as much of their baggage as possible and then hope for the best. When the survivors reach the beach and hopefully surrender, treat them with every ounce of humanity that can be mustered.

Well that would be my plan also, but I wondered if anyone else had a different plan. If the RN caught this ragtag invasion in the channel, I don't think there would be any hope of any of the Germans reaching shore in any shape to fight. I think any Germans reaching shore would do so while clinging to whatever debris that was leftover from the barge they were on before it was sunk. I can just imagine RN destroyers running wild among the invasion force, driving down the length of virtually unarmed barges at point blank range after having sunk the tug boat raking the decks with AA fire and then dropping depth charges alongside the barges.

 

[fastmongrel]

There is a theory that the best thing would have been to let the Germans land as many troops as possible then shut off the supply routes. With say 150 to 200 thousand troops ashore they will be eating there boots in days.

A lot of Sealion fantasists also seem to think that Britain was defended by old men armed with kitchen knives lashed to broom handles and petrol bombs made from milk bottles. The reality was that there was very well equipped and trained Canadian div ready to roll plus going from memory in the south east corner there were 6 infantry divs, a mechanised div and an armoured div. With more than 400 tanks available and more coming the Valentine tank was starting to roll off the production lines and that was more than capable of dealing with anything the germans could have landed. Also Britain had bought for scrap value 1,000 ex US 75mm guns plus a million rounds of ammo, 1.5 million ex US rifles plus about 50 million rounds of 30.06, all the while building 25 pounders, 2 pounders, 3.7s, Bren guns and Lee Enfields as fast possible.

Its going to take some seriously bad generaling to let the Germans break out of Kent and get to London. British generals didnt exactly cover themselves in glory attacking the Afrika Korp early on but the same men who had extracted the BEF almost intact from France when the French Army was split open by politics and pure bad leadership will have to be drinking moonshine 24/7 to let the Germans get 10 miles from the beaches.

 

[swampyankee]

If you were in charge of the RN, would you allow a landing on the beach and then cut off the supply lines? Or would you simply sink all of the infantry barges in the channel? (this question is for everyone)

You obviously want to sink all the barges at sea. This has beneficial side effects: the Germans stop and rescue survivors, which would be disruptive, or let them drown, which would be demoralizing, and, unlike defeating them ashore, the British don't have to worry about caring for German prisoners.

Failing this, the goal would be to defeat the landed forces so badly that the Germans try to evacuate. Then you can attack the evacuation forces.

 

[fastmongrel]

This alternate Sealion history is well worth reading A Better Show in 1940 over 20 posts and not too badly written.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

Well that would be my plan also, but I wondered if anyone else had a different plan. If the RN caught this ragtag invasion in the channel, I don't think there would be any hope of any of the Germans reaching shore in any shape to fight. I think any Germans reaching shore would do so while clinging to whatever debris that was leftover from the barge they were on before it was sunk. I can just imagine RN destroyers running wild among the invasion force, driving down the length of virtually unarmed barges at point blank range after having sunk the tug boat raking the decks with AA fire and then dropping depth charges alongside the barges.

Ouch! That's a bit harsh... I suggested merely killing the enemy, not dismembering them. This is only war after all, not an episode of Dexter!

 

[Civettone]

And what damage is the Royal Navy doing to the invasion "fleet" in those several days?

Annihilate it ...

Once, I suggested an 'expendable' landing. A couple of divisions would be transported over the Channel, just before dawn, supported by the KM. Then the KM would retreat, while the landing troops would dig in. Royal Navy would start to pound the troops, but would be under continuous attack by the Luftwaffe. The landing troops will probably have to surrender after two-three days, but by then, the Royal Navy would have suffered enormous losses. Then, a new invasion would start, this time witht the KM+LW fighting it out with the RN. This time, troops can get supplied, although suffering horrible losses, and Britain slowly gets conquered.

All, rather blurry and wishful thinking. But unconventional thoughts have often been the most succesful

Kris

 

[pinsog]

Annihilate it ...

Once, I suggested an 'expendable' landing. A couple of divisions would be transported over the Channel, just before dawn, supported by the KM. Then the KM would retreat, while the landing troops would dig in. Royal Navy would start to pound the troops, but would be under continuous attack by the Luftwaffe. The landing troops will probably have to surrender after two-three days, but by then, the Royal Navy would have suffered enormous losses. Then, a new invasion would start, this time witht the KM+LW fighting it out with the RN. This time, troops can get supplied, although suffering horrible losses, and Britain slowly gets conquered.

All, rather blurry and wishful thinking. But unconventional thoughts have often been the most succesful

Kris

Unconventional: Ok, in the middle of the night, the British, while shelling the crap out of the Germans on shore form point blank distance, sail a dozen, or 20 or 30 old freighters around in front of the beach head and sink them end to end in 40 or so feet of water so the German barges can no longer reach the beach to unload supplies. Now the Germans are completely cut off from reinforcements and at night, British battleships sail to within 300 yards or so of the beach and shell the crap out of them before retreating.

 

[redcoat]

Annihilate it ...

Once, I suggested an 'expendable' landing. A couple of divisions would be transported over the Channel, just before dawn, supported by the KM. Then the KM would retreat, while the landing troops would dig in. Royal Navy would start to pound the troops, but would be under continuous attack by the Luftwaffe. The landing troops will probably have to surrender after two-three days, but by then, the Royal Navy would have suffered enormous losses. Then, a new invasion would start, this time witht the KM+LW fighting it out with the RN. This time, troops can get supplied, although suffering horrible losses, and Britain slowly gets conquered.

All, rather blurry and wishful thinking. But unconventional thoughts have often been the most succesful

Kris

This ignores the fact that the German Navy only had the logistical capacity to transport 3 infantry divisions on the first day, a total of 1 division each on the 3 landing zones within the 50 mile wide beach head. The remaining 6 infantry divisions of the so-called 'first wave' would be landed over the next ten days.

 

[Shortround6]

It also rather ignores the fact that the KM in Sept of 1940 would be lucky to reach the channel. Things like the Channel dash aside ( and Feb weather is a lot different than Sept/Oct.) The KM major surface ships were either at Trondheim or in Germany after escorting the Gneisenau home after she got torpedoed. Or any other ships in German home waters are either repairing/refitting, working up after commissioning or engaged in general training like the Emden.

So basically you have the invasion "fleet" scattered ( dispersed?) from Cherbourg to Anterwpen but anything larger than 600-800 ton minesweeper (or S-boat) is probably no closer than Emden at best or more likely Cuxhaven.

The Likelyhood of the KM providing any "support" from ships of even destroyer size is pretty dim.

This throws it back to the Luftwaffe. Can the Luftwaffe sink/damage enough British warships while providing support pre/during the landings and while keeping up the pressure on the remains of the RAF to keep them from trying anything.

Is the Luftwaffe strong enough to handle ALL THREE jobs at once?

 

[fastmongrel]

This throws it back to the Luftwaffe. Can the Luftwaffe sink/damage enough British warships while providing support pre/during the landings and while keeping up the pressure on the remains of the RAF to keep them from trying anything.

Is the Luftwaffe strong enough to handle ALL THREE jobs at once?

Dont forget laying mines, recce flights, bombing harbours, bombing transport links, flying in men and supplies and casualties out and on and on. Each LW plane will be flying 25 hours a day 8 days a week.

 

[stona]

Some quotes:

"I find it difficult to believe that the South Coast is in serious danger at the present time." Winston Churchill, 10th July 1940

"He told me he himself [Churchill] had never believed that invasion was possible! To which I replied to the effect that he had camouflaged it very well. He then had a go at me....however we made it up." Admiral Charles Forbes (C-in-C Home Fleet in 1940) to Godfrey Style, 6th February 1947.

"Naval Staff also appreciated clearly that air supremacy alone could not provide permanent security against vastly superior enemy naval forces in the crossing area." Admiral Kurt Assman

On flanking mine fields as protection for German convoys.

Germany had "insufficient mines for viable barriers and every eight to fourteen days the mines would break away and need replacing." General Gunther Blumentritt who represented von Runstedt at Sealion conferences.

"The flanks were poorly guarded and could provide only partial protection because of the strong tides and rise and fall." The British could simply steam over the mine fields at high water. Vice-Admiral Friederich Ruge, C-in-C Minesweepers West.

War Diary of the Naval Staff, 10th September 1940.

"It would be more in the sense of the planned preparation for operation Sea Lion if the Luftwaffe would now concentrate less on London and more on Portsmouth and Dover, and on the naval forces in or near the operation.......bombardment of London might produce an attitude in the enemy which will make the Sea Lion operation completely unnecessary."

I could go on.....and on

The idea that the Royal Navy was not already operating in the Channel is false too. Throughout September the French invasion ports were repeatedly attacked. Admiral Reginald Drax's flotillas, based at Nore, actually broke into Dunkirk, Buologne, Calais and Ostend sinking many invasion barges with short range gun fire. His colleagues from Portsmouth and Plymouth carried out similar operations. On 11th September every port from Holland to Cherbourg got entered and shelled. This continued into October. On the 11th October Calais received 45 salvoes from RN vessels.

Cheers

Steve

 

[parsifal]

Hi guys

Havent read all the pages. At the begining i notoce that great reliance was placed by some on the effects of minefields. This was certainly the plan, but it is unrealistic to expect minefields laid over a few weeks, at best, as being able to fully "close" the channel. The Germans might well start an intensive minelaying operation, but the likley response is simply that the British will move elements of their fleet, firstly to sweep the mines as they are laid, and secondly to interfere with the minelayers (if they are ships or subs). mines laid by aircraft will be harder, but more porous, as the minefields will be less dense.

Its important to note,, that the chief German offensive strategy against England in 1941, after the blitz, was an intensive minelaying operation by a full air wing, and at least 4 flotillas of minelaying craft 9operating mostly out of Rotterdam. To be sure, the Germans managed to sink a lot of ships from this effort, about 750000 tons of coastal shipping in total, but they never successed in closing thechannel, or indeed any of th other major ports of Great Britain. Germany simply lacked the wherewithall to successfully complete such a mission. Not all the LW could lay mines, and the surface capability was really quite limited.

Despite efforts stretching over severalk years, the Germans were unsuccessful at closing the channel to allied traffic. Why would they be successful all of a sudden with a couple of weeks of effort. And if the RN can penetrate these minefields, the invasion fleet was totally vulnerable.

Sea lion was a total crock

 

[nuuumannn]

Sea lion was a total crock

The Germans thought so as well. I bet there were more than a few Wehrmacht soldiers who breathed a heavy sigh of relief when the invasion was postponed, only to later find they'd be hading off to North Africa or Russia. At least they would have been in an environment they would have felt more comfortable on - land!

 

[prem895]

I guess fish and chips would have been changed to bratwurst and beer.

 

[stona]

The Germans thought so as well. I bet there were more than a few Wehrmacht soldiers who breathed a heavy sigh of relief when the invasion was postponed, only to later find they'd be hading off to North Africa or Russia. At least they would have been in an environment they would have felt more comfortable on - land!

Particularly the Navy (KM). Further entries in the diary along with the essays written immediately post war by many of the senior commanders make it quite clear that the Luftwaffe's failure in the Battle of Britain made a perfect excuse to abandon an invasion plan which they regarded as impossible and had no stomach for. They did, quite literally, blame the Luftwaffe. The Luftwaffe, or surviving officers bought in to the myth of the Battle of Britain for their own reasons. Galland used to talk about the Battle for Britain, which never happened, though in later years he let it drop.

There has been much written in the thread about the ability of the Luftwaffe to sink RN vessels, but this is not supported by the facts.

Only three of twelve capital ships sunk between September 1939 and November 1941 had succumbed to air attack alone and these were Italian battleships sunk at anchorage. Smaller ships were more vulnerable. Twenty eight RN destroyers and five of its cruisers had been sunk this way.

The sort of bomb needed to sink larger vessels was investigated by the RAF after attempts to bomb German battleships in September 1939. The so called "Job 74 Trials" were carried out and a report made by the Ordnance Board. Essentially GP bombs exploded outside the vessel and were relatively ineffective. A delay fuse to allow them to "bounce around", maybe entering a hatch or falling over the side to create a near miss which was damaging was one solution which sounds ridiculous today. SAP bombs with a short delay were really required. Unfortunately the Luftwaffe did not have many such bombs in late 1940. The Sprengbombe Dickwandig (SD) ordnance only went up to 500Kg in late 1940. The Panzerdurchslags Cylindrisch (PC) ordnance was used against Illustrious in January 1941, but results for the 1,000Kg bomb were disappointing and the 1,400Kg version was developed later.

How were these large bombs to be delivered? By far the most accurate ship bomber was the Ju 87. It needed a cloud base at around 10,000ft for a typical attack profile, fine in the Mediterranean but not a daily occurrence in the English Channel in September. The Ju 87 B equipped the units operating from France. The B-2 could supposedly could carry a 1000kg bomb, though not according to the loading plan I have. This wasn't really big enough for sinking really large ships with any certainty, given the limited chance of scoring significant hits. Compare it with what the RAF dropped on Tirpitz!
We can forget the torpedo bombers, the He 111s of KG 26 were the only ones trained to do this, and their record even later, was woeful. It wasn't helped by the unreliability of the German torpedoes. The one thing that the RNs anti aircraft defences could hit was something coming in low (below 40 degree elevation) straight and slow.

As for hitting small ships the debate from the RN side centred on whether the smaller vessels should manoeuvre to dodge the bombs or maintain a study course. Rapid manoeuvre threw off the High Angle Control system for the ship's anti aircraft control system. The "Air Defence Instructions, 1939" did not permit fast evading action against dive bombers, despite admitting the limitations of the current anti aircraft defence systems. Luckily RN Captains are allowed considerable latitude and almost all small ships, and cruisers, did "dodge" the bombs. Rear Admiral L H K Hamilton wrote to Admiral Forbes from the cruiser Aurora in May 1940, having been subjected to continuous high level and dive bombing for thirty six hours.

"From my experience, I think that provided one has sea room and independence of manoeuvre in a ship of this size, one is most unlikely to be hit."

An enquiry established that HMS Ghurka was sunk by aircraft in the Norwegian campaign because she had "detached from screen to improve arc of fire", losing the protection of mutual covering fire from other ships. Also her Captain, a gunnery officer who believed in the efficacy of the AA system had deliberately chosen to "keep a steady gun platform without weaving."

There is an idea promulgated by some that even the best anti ship aircraft, the Ju 87, could simply swoop in and the ships were doomed. This is patent nonsense, not supported by the facts.

Alec Dennis was serving in the destroyer HMS Griffin of Crete. He remembers the Ju 87s attacking Force B.

The JU 87s came down in "groups of three, one after another........it was a classic attack, technically interesting, physically terrifying and, actually, ineffective."

All the bombs missed as Griffin weaved at top speed whilst the accompanying cruisers (Gloucester and Fiji) threw up a terrific barrage.

The light cruiser Naiad finally sunk after sustaining numerous hits over a two hour period, having dodged thirty six near misses in one ten minute period.

It took thirteen hours of attacks to do for Fiji. She had run out of AA ammunition and had resorted to firing practice ammunition (solid shot) at the incoming bombers.

HMS Kipling survived eighty three attacks in a period of a few hours. HMS Kandahar survived twenty two attacks in a four and three quarter hour period.

Aircraft did not have the ordnance to sink the large battleships and whilst they could sink smaller vessels it took a tremendous effort over prolonged periods and even then success was by no means guaranteed.

The mine fields didn't work and the KM knew it. Neither the Luftwaffe, nor the KM could not keep the RN out of the Channel and the Luftwaffe and KM knew it. If any troops got ashore they could not be reinforced or resupplied in the face of concentrating resistance from the British Army and Royal Navy and the Luftwaffe, KM, Heer and OKW all knew it.

The only reputable historian I've read (and for whom I have the utmost respect) who seriously believes that the Germans would have attempted an invasion, successful or not, is Richard Overy. He is one of those who has always promoted the Anglo-American myth of the Battle of Britain, which more or less ignores any contribution from the Royal Navy, and in this case I beg to differ.

Cheers

Steve

 

[stona]

I guess fish and chips would have been changed to bratwurst and beer.

I spend a lot of time in Germany and quite like a wurst and beer, but I wouldn't give up my fish 'n' chips for it

Cheers

Steve