Exactly.
For the Germans, the fundamental problem was that the British still retained command of the sea in Western Europe and no amount of planning, barge loading or Siebel innovations could overcome that.
Cheers
Steve
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You should also recall that part of the attack on the barges RN warships including battleships sailed up and down the channel without any problem
Because that was what it was called for a short time, during the war ships from the Irish Republic had Eire on the side to denote a neutral vessel. I remember seeing it on maps at school in the sixties and seventies.( I don't know why Americans refer to the Republic as 'Eire'!)
PSI
There is a huge difference between warships firing at approx. 20,000 yds travelling at 25 - 30 knots and a totally defenceless tug towing two loaded barges at 2-3 knots at a range thats likely to be down to 100 - 200 yards where the AA guns would simply decimate the targets.
You should also recall that part of the attack on the barges RN warships including battleships sailed up and down the channel without any problem
There are a number of scenarios where Germany having troops in Ireland would be beneficial...but I just don't see it happening, nor do I see it being sustainable. Certainly it's not a good starting point for an invasion of the GB mainland.
On the plus side, one could imagine Hitler offering reunification as a carrot to encourage active aggression by Eire against Britain. That reunification could remove airfields in Northern Ireland that were used for long-range maritime reconnaissance, which would be a boon for the U-Boat fleet. It would also send a powerful message to counter the "Britain standing alone" propaganda...because a significant part of the UK would have fallen to the enemy.
Despite these potential positives, I don't think any such operation would be sustainable, nor do I think the Irish Government would be duped by any such offer from Hitler. Eire had far too much to lose to countenance such an operation.
German troops beneficial? Beneficial to whom? Certainly not the Irish! Possibly a benefit to the nazis, but when -- and they would -- the Irish-Americans start hearing about German atrocities against the Irish -- and those would happen, too, as they had in every country Germany occupied -- the US would probably get more actively involved, sooner.
Fighting on after a significant part fell to the enemy could form a good basis for propaganda.
I'm sure the Irish would see that sort of unification, under nazi rule, to be worth even less than reunification would be under the British.
The guy is not listening I'm afraid.
Highspeed dash by destroyers? .
Not to mention that the British just might (as in probably) violate Irish neutrality under the doctrine of hot pursuit to go after any German ship in an Irish port/harbour.
What destroyers?
I've just read through (over a few days, that is) the entire thread, all 28 pages. It hasn't moved on by much since it first began. There's been one guy (at a time) who doggedly believes the Germans could have gone ahead with Sealion and succeeded, whereas every other poster uses logic and a better understanding of the situation to prove that it wouldn't. Yet that one guy still refuses to accept it, after 28 pages of it! I don't know if PSL and Dogwalker are one and the same (or go to the same bierkellar/internet forums), but the latter was well antagonistic at times!
HMS Hotspur was my fathers ship for a while, though after Narvik. My mother still has a fading picture on her living room wall.DDs HOSTILE and HOTSPUR had been detailed to neutralize nonexistent coastal btys on the nth shore of Narvik. Upon finding no btys, the DDs entered the harbour fight. DD HOTSPUR fired torps at numerous merchant ships in the harbour and HOSTILE went into a gun action with DKM DD ROEDER damaging her so severely that the order to abandon ship was given by the German skipper.
As the DDs withdrew, DDs HOSTILE and HOTSPUR laid a smoke screen and HOSTILE fired her torpedoes against merchant ships in the harbour. DesFlot 2 thus far had fought an excellent fight, in the finest RN Destroyer traditions, at this point the flotilla began its withdrawal out of the fjord. During this battle,
.
You are absolutely right, and offer a steadying hand to the frustration that is slowly building in me with this guys obstinance and outright lies.
I'm going through my notes and checking on the battles he has quoted, and most of them are misrepresented
Doesn't read much like the account being fed to us by the other side does it. Doesn't support the notion that merchant shipping in near stationary condition could not be easily hit either.
You are absolutely right.....snip.
Pretty much most posters on this thread are unashamedly biased posters commenting on this theoretical clash , which NEVER HAPPENED!. No one here is remotely qualified to offer anything other than a passing opinion. Therefor you will never be able to establish with any certainty what may or may not happen.
.
Course It doesn't , its meant to dissolve the clash down to basic elements, the DATA. Your attempt is embellishment the narrative that only clouds any judgment.
Such battles are ALWAYS misrepresented the more embellishment is heaped on one side- instead of the other. This is called bias and if left unchecked , removes any value from the comment.
The only way to give equal treatment in a battle , is to religiously avoid any bias and dissolve every thing down to as simple as possible -neutral statistics.
Pretty much most posters on this thread are unashamedly biased posters commenting on this theoretical clash , which NEVER HAPPENED!. No one here is remotely qualified to offer anything other than a passing opinion. Therefor you will never be able to establish with any certainty what may or may not happen.
Simplify and inform.