If the RAF had been defeated in the Battle of Britain

[buffnut453]

I don't think that Hitler would have relied on a friendly British government; he would have demanded an occupation. I don't think any British government would tolerate that.

And Hitler may well have moved forward with occupation...but it wouldn't have required an opposed seaborne landing as per Operation Sea Lion. The requisite personnel could have been brought in piecemeal to achieve the objective over time. The most important component would not be military troops but Gestapo representatives to "encourage" the new British Government to comply with ALL Germany's demands, to include arresting dissenters and commence the rounding up of "untermensch", just as was done in Vichy France.

 

[stona]

The figures always vary a little.

Pretty typical would be total aircraft losses, 1,023 RAF and 1,187 Luftwaffe. A score draw in the numbers game.

Fighters, well, almost all the RAF losses were fighters for obvious reasons, the Luftwaffe lost a combined total for Bf 109s and Bf 110s of 873, which is why you can argue that fighter for fighter they did better.
Of course the Luftwaffe was targeting RAF fighters whereas the RAF was targeting any Luftwaffe aircraft, but the bombers were supposed to be the primary target.

The biggest deficit for the Luftwaffe is in airmen killed, 2,662 against 'just' 537.

Cheers

Steve

 

[parsifal]

It was not the germans who rounded up the jews in Vichy, it was the Vichy, who then handed them over to the germans. It was within the power of the Vichy to resist this, at least for a while, but by then rmp regime was being run by members of the wacko right who supported many of the racial laws the germans had enacted. They did not need a lot of encouragement by the germans to get on board


in comparison the danes either passively, or overtly resisted, the German attempts to round up the 7500 Jews sheltering in Denmark. Unlike the French police, Danish police never collaborated to do the germans dirty work. Hardly any Danish Jews were killed. I would like to think an occupied britain would act more like Denmark than the corrupt and broken Vichy regime

 

[parsifal]

the problem with steves figures is that they are more or less the immediate, losses. there are other losses arising from the aircraft damaged, and eventually scrapped that push the figures of both sides up considerably.

For the LW, some of the airframes that had suffered this sort of damage were not scrapped for months, thus artificially inflating the numbers of aircraft available. I expect the british played similar games but the british were given the opportunity to recover, whilst the bulk of the LW were not.

 

[parsifal]

This is one summary I found on LW losses which shows their losses to be considerably higher than 1200. They suffered about 1200 from enemy action, but other immediate losses (operational and non operational, which are still immediate write offs) is over 2000. A further 953 were damaged. Any aircraft with over 50% damage will almost certainly be scrapped, whilst aircraft with below 30% damage aren't included in LW quartermaster reports from which these figures were drawn. I don't know for sure the exact numbers of damaged aircraft damaged that ended up being written off, but one can expect the figure to be at least 60% of the damaged aircraft.

German losses from all causes are in the order of 2600 a/c. British losses too greatly exceed the 1000 mark though I don't have a nice ready to post list for the british. I'm not trying to say british losses were significantly less than the germans. I'm saying both sides lost far more aircraft than the usual published lists

This list comes from

Luftwaffe Losses in the Battle of Britain (July-October 1940)

which in turn is derived from the "Narrow margin"


These loss numbers cover July to the end of October. November through to March are not included

 

[pbehn]

The figures always vary a little.

Pretty typical would be total aircraft losses, 1,023 RAF and 1,187 Luftwaffe. A score draw in the numbers game.

Fighters, well, almost all the RAF losses were fighters for obvious reasons, the Luftwaffe lost a combined total for Bf 109s and Bf 110s of 873, which is why you can argue that fighter for fighter they did better.
Of course the Luftwaffe was targeting RAF fighters whereas the RAF was targeting any Luftwaffe aircraft, but the bombers were supposed to be the primary target.

The biggest deficit for the Luftwaffe is in airmen killed, 2,662 against 'just' 537.

The numbers were actually closer because generally losses by Bomber Command are not included, although with raids such as ports with invasion barges are obviously part of the same battle.

 

[buffnut453]

It was not the germans who rounded up the jews in Vichy, it was the Vichy, who then handed them over to the germans. It was within the power of the Vichy to resist this, at least for a while, but by then rmp regime was being run by members of the wacko right who supported many of the racial laws the germans had enacted. They did not need a lot of encouragement by the germans to get on board


in comparison the danes either passively, or overtly resisted, the German attempts to round up the 7500 Jews sheltering in Denmark. Unlike the French police, Danish police never collaborated to do the germans dirty work. Hardly any Danish Jews were killed. I would like to think an occupied britain would act more like Denmark than the corrupt and broken Vichy regime

I suspect you're right...but my main point is that there were other ways to achieve Hitler's objectives without trying to force an opposed landing across the Channel. The key problem lies with Hitler's inability to follow Clausewitzian theory about selecting and maintaining a single objective.

 

[pbehn]

German losses from all causes are in the order of 2600 a/c. British losses too greatly exceed the 1000 mark though I don't have a nice ready to post list for the british. I'm not trying to say british losses were significantly less than the germans. I'm saying both sides lost far more aircraft than the usual published lists

]

How much the figures matter depends on how many new aircraft are being made and damaged aircraft returned to service. By the time the height of the battle arrived the RAFs only concern was for pilots, They were producing fighters faster than they were losing them and certainly faster than the RAF could find / train experienced pilots.

 

[parsifal]

The damaged aircraft, and aircraft requiring overhaul within the LW mattered to the LW, far moreso than the equivalent damaged airframes in the RAF. unlike the RAF, they (the LW) were never really given the chance to recover. I'm not saying they didn't repair damaged aircraft. they did, and the LW crossed into Russia with the best part of 2600 a/c on hand. However they lacked the spares to keep readiness rates up, and this can be traced to the over-use the LW had been subjected to the previous year. not just their experiences over Britain, but the fighting over britain dragged on for months and robbed the LW any real rest period before their next big fight in the east.

As far as pilots are concerned, in the immediate battle, pilot losses were critical, especially for the RAF, but the british in a long drawn out fight were going to win a battle of attrition over their own territory, although at great cost. The battle did not end in October, it was still being fought until the following May, with daylight raids continuing right until the end. but with the defeat of the "big pushes" of August and september, the LW was forced into a corner from which it could not win.

 

[pbehn]

It is hardly surprising that the LW serviceability rates dropped quickly. They were in France and Belgium on mainly newly constructed airfields, their factories were in Germany. The ground crews may have had most tools but few hangars with cranes. Also they had many different planes to supply Me 109 and 110, Ju 87 and 88 Heikel 111 and Do17.

 

[Stig1207]

whilst aircraft with below 30% damage aren't included in LW quartermaster reports from which these figures were drawn.

It's damage below 10% that was not included.

What is remarkable, to me, at any rate, is why a similar breakdown of RAF losses is not available.

 

[stona]

As far as the British were concerned the BoB ended on 31st October 1940. All the British statistics for what they saw as a battle respect this date. It didn't begin until 10th July. The British see the overlapping but ongoing Blitz, and the preceding Channel battles as separate entities.

The Germans took a rather different view, not distinguishing between the early attempts to close the Channel, the Blitz and the RAF's lean into France in 1941. For them it was just one long campaign.

Since the BoB is an entirely British construct it lasted for the dates that they chose for it, 10th July to 31st October 1940.

Cheers

Steve

 

[stona]

It's damage below 10% that was not included.

What is remarkable, to me, at any rate, is why a similar breakdown of RAF losses is not available.

The RAF did have a five tier classification of damage to aircraft, from A to E.

A Damage repairable on unit by squadron personnel.
B Damage repairable on unit by Station workshop personnel.
C Damage repairable on unit by RAF specialist team or Manufacturer's personnel, or at a Maintenance Unit.
D Damage repairable at manufacturer's works only
E Damaged beyond economical repair.

It would be a huge job to even attempt to go through the records of every damaged aircraft, but it could be done. If it has been I've never seen it published.

There is a good chance that category A and B damage would be repaired and the aircraft returned to service overnight. Given the strength of the civilian repair organisation the same might apply to some category C damaged aircraft.

This was definitely one area of the BoB in which the British had and maintained a decisive advantage.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Stig1207]

Thanks Steve, but what I meant was rather a breakdown of RAF losses similar to the LW, in operational losses with and without enemy action and in non-operational losses. Sorry, I should been clearer.

 

[stona]

That could be done by going through something like 'The Battle of Britain Then and Now', day by day and collating all the information.

I'm not sure I'd fancy it!

Cheers

Steve

 

[pbehn]

That could be done by going through something like 'The Battle of Britain Then and Now', day by day and collating all the information.

I'm not sure I'd fancy it!

Cheers

Steve

There was a similar discussion on here a while ago. The issue is one where each answer raises at least one more question. Battle damage on a Spitfire and Hurricane were different issues, generally the Hurricane was easier to repair in the field. Once planes are sent to a centre to repair then some get cannibalised with (for example) undamaged wings on one being fitted to an undamaged fuselage. The organisation of repair facilities changed and improved throughout the battle as did new production.

 

[Stig1207]

That could be done by going through something like 'The Battle of Britain Then and Now', day by day and collating all the information.

I'm not sure I'd fancy it!

Cheers

Steve

I would fancy someone else doing it

 

[stona]

Battle of Britain day, 15th September. Fighter Command losses.

25 aircraft destroyed by enemy action, 2 aircraft written off (Cat E), 27 aircraft damaged but repairable (Cat A-D, not specified)

1 aircraft destroyed not on operations, 1 aircraft written off in non-operational accident (Cat E).

Figures may vary slightly in different sources. This could be done for every day for the entire Battle, but not by me!

Cheers

Steve

 

[fastmongrel]

That could be done by going through something like 'The Battle of Britain Then and Now', day by day and collating all the information.

I'm not sure I'd fancy it!

Cheers

Steve

I started going through The Battle of France day by day recently trying to parse out the effort the French air force put into the battle. I was off sick in bed and bored with daytime telly, after 2 days I was up to May the 18th I had a pile of notes and the start of a spreadsheet but I had lost the will to live. Then the Cat knocked the notes off the bed and I realised Doctors was about to start on telly.

 

[Stig1207]

A daunting task for sure; not one I'd throw myself at either, even if I was fortunate enough to have BoBTN.