If the RAF had been defeated in the Battle of Britain
- Thread starter DogFather
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
Standing to information above, at mid september the Germans had "over 3,000 miscellaneous craft".
But didn't
So 7000 yards were a long distance
Bingo.
"Light cruiser ORION sustained some damage to her bridge from pom pom fire from cruiser DIDO. Two men were killed and nine were wounded."
Hunt for Bismarck and sinking, May 1941
It seems to be only your crass ignorance.
In general, maybe. But a torpedo boat is a torpedo boat.
The RN stand for two days, dit it?
Surely not from the London Gazette.
oldcrowcv63
Tech Sergeant
Didn't somebody try something like this on Britain about 350 years earlier? Seems like the river barges would have been at least as vulnerable as the sea-going Galleons of the Armada. It's quite possible the invasion could have been defeated (and perhaps thousands drowned) by just one day of a high sea-state, without a bullet or shell being fired. the probability of such a day in the English channel would be difficult to predict (see below) especially absent the meteorology reports from many western weather stations in British control. Unknown is not an acceptable probability for any invasion plans that call for embarking 8 divisions in low freeboard vessels. Churchill, Ike and company called it a calculated risk. and I would expect them to have considerably better data than the Germans possessed in the summer of 1940.
D-Day: the secret of swell and surf forecast
Quote from: How the Storm that Destroyed D-Day Harbor Inspired Innovation | WWII | Command Posts
"The problem was that one could never predict wave heights and in the battle between Man-made structures and the ocean, the ocean invariably won.[/I"
I should add that I've read that wave heights of about 10 meters have been recorded in the channel. I assume they aren't common, but that's not the point. I expect it wouldn't take anything like a 10 meter wave to swamp a barge.
Waves during the late June 1944 storm were about 4 meters in height, while those on June 6 were about 1 meter, with occasional waves twice that height which are not unusual.
D-Day: the secret of swell and surf forecast
Quote from: How the Storm that Destroyed D-Day Harbor Inspired Innovation | WWII | Command Posts
"The problem was that one could never predict wave heights and in the battle between Man-made structures and the ocean, the ocean invariably won.[/I"
I should add that I've read that wave heights of about 10 meters have been recorded in the channel. I assume they aren't common, but that's not the point. I expect it wouldn't take anything like a 10 meter wave to swamp a barge.
Waves during the late June 1944 storm were about 4 meters in height, while those on June 6 were about 1 meter, with occasional waves twice that height which are not unusual.
Last edited:
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
Uh, another wiew of the cliffs! Wow! How white they are!
So were are the difficulties this time? Not in the terrain you show for sure.
Were are the difficulties in those shallow hills? Europe is full of this kind of terrain. Or are you saying that there could be some hidden difficulties that we can't predict?
Surely Allied had problems with hedge rows in Normandy. This was a a difficulty that was not anticipated. But you can't say that, since in Normandy there were problems with hedge rows, then the terrain of south east England must be impractical.
Last edited:
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
As incredible it may seems, any kind of terrain has it's "problems".
Kryten
Senior Airman
you really cant get your head around how utterly unsuitable barges and light craft are for the English Channel can you?
Luckily for the German infantry the Kreigsmarine certainly did!
Luckily for the German infantry the Kreigsmarine certainly did!
Kryten
Senior Airman
Uh, another wiew of the cliffs! Wow! How white they are!
So were are the difficulties this time? Not in the terrain you show for sure.
Were are the difficulties in those shallow hills? Europe is full of this kind of terrain. Or are you saying that there could be some hidden difficulties that we can't predict?
Surely this is just being obtuse?
You think advancing up that valley, in plain sight, with high ground commanding the only road , obviously mined and registered for artillery and mortars, is just a walk in the park?
you cannot move up that valley, its dominated by high ground, anyone on the road is a sitting duck with no cover and no escape, this "debate" is becoming ridiculous!
Do you have any military experience?
Shortround6
Major General
Most of which were barges that had to be towed at about 2knots, and had to way to land except by being pushed ashored.
And the Axis and Italian navy didn't land any troops until the late afternoon of the 28th, and then only because the RN was otherwise occupied.
7000 yds is a lot longer than 700 meters.
The RAF is not going to disappear even if it suffers a defeat, and even if the RAF pulled back from the coast it could still fly fighter patrols over the channel. In any event, the German invasion forces are so slow that the RN can still intercept at night with no fear of Luftwaffe attack.
That happened at night during thefirst convoy engagement, and was almost certainly an accidental over while engaging a close range target not a deliberate engagement of Orion by Dido - not that a few 40mm hits was a serious threat to a light cruiser. From the same source:
Italian "torpedo boats" would be classed as destroyer escorts in the RN and USN, as they had a full load displacement of over 1000 tons.
The RN didn't have to go back during daylight because there was nothing to engage.
.
The London Gazette (The London Gazette - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) is a official publication of the UK government and is used for posting official notices and despatches, including, in this case, Admiral Cunningham's official report of the Battle for Crete.
Last edited:
silence
Senior Airman
I could be reading things wrong, but it seems to me that Hitler's post-France peace feelers indicate that he wasn't really interested in either invading or occupying Britain, that he was perfectly happy to let them keep their overseas Empire while he built his own continental empire. He admired and respected the British and their accomplishments. I get the feeling that had there been a non-Churchillian gov't that didn't want to continue the fight after France - for whatever reason - that hostilities would have ended. As we especially now know it would not have been the "moral" option (for lack of a better word), but I think it could be viewed as the pragmatic political option. That is, assuming Mussolini is kept on a tighter leash than historically and Japan is left to fight for her empire herself, much as she did to Germany historically.
Wheels within wheels.
Wheels within wheels.
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
From your part surely is.
Have I ever said it has to be?
Then no one has ever moved up from a valley in history. That valley has nothing special. Is full of valleys in the world, and often battles were fought there. Every of them has hig ground around, and what you have shown is not particularly step.
Surely is.
And you? What experience you have to not have ever seen another valley?
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
And what of them is normally a match for a force of destroyers and cruisers?
Have you ever seen a horse try and climb a cliff using a rope or grappling hooks?
oldcrowcv63
Tech Sergeant
Do I detect the rattle of commonwealth chains being pulled here?
Dogwalker
Senior Airman
This change the fact that the Force C didn't pursued the second landing force?
700 meters were in the first engagement (Force D - Lupo), as I stated and you obviously didn't understand.
And so? Have I ever said that it wasn't in the firts engagement? Have I ever said that it wasn't accidental? Have I ever said that were more than a few hits, or that they were a serious threat?
I said that "the RN ships even shoot themself".
You stated that it was "a fantasy".
So? It was my fantasy or your ignorance?
Actually only three of the shells exploded, and the damages were light. Two sailors were killed (as those abroad the Orion for the friendly fire).
And they are normally a match for a force of three cruisers and four destroyers (by night, having the force of cruisers and destroyers the radar, and the torpedo boat not)?
So, when Cunningam reported to his superiors that it was no more possible to operate in daylight, he was lying. Interesting...
No one has mentioned yet the landing in the Romney Marsh area.
Some quotes from this link, Problems with German Plans for Operation Sealion
The standard argument that if the Germans had gained air superiority they would have been able to sink the British vessels does not really stand up to much scrutiny. During the Dunkirk evacuation, despite having control of the air for long periods, and despite the ships spending a lot of time stationary in the harbour (loading), the Luftwaffe was able to sink only 4 of the 39 Royal Navy destroyers which took place in the operation.
Lacking purpose-built invasion craft, the Germans planned to use barges from the Rhine and elsewhere to carry their landing force to England. However, these craft were flat-bottomed and unsuitable, liable to sink, in even slightly rough seas: in fact, many of the craft could have been sank by merely be the wake of passing fast destroyer!
Crewing the barges was also a major problem. The Kriegsmarine estimated at least 20,000 extra crew would be required to man these barges. After stripping men from its warships (which surely would have damaged their operational efficiency), as well as finding every other person with nautical experience in other military branches, or in civilian life, they were able to rustle up 16,000: 4,000 less than the minimum required.
The Germans concluded that they would be unable to bring heavy equipment (such as artillery) with them, and would have to improvise. Nevertheless, since the army used horses for a variety of purposes, they planned to bring 4,000 horses with the first wave of the invasion fleet. To avoid the difficulty of loading horses on barges, they planned to place the horses on rafts towed by the barges (despite the fact that many of the rafts sank during tests). The barges themselves would be towed by tugs (two barges per tug), at would take up to 30 hours to cross the Channel.
Even this was not the end of the problems: the Germans planned for the barges to cross the Channel in columns, then for them to sail parallel to the coast until in a line formation, and then for the barges to turn again and advance towards the coast all at the same time. All of this was supposed to happen at night coordinated by loud hailers, without any rehearsals, and within insufficient numbers of crew with nautical experience.
Some quotes from this link, Problems with German Plans for Operation Sealion
The standard argument that if the Germans had gained air superiority they would have been able to sink the British vessels does not really stand up to much scrutiny. During the Dunkirk evacuation, despite having control of the air for long periods, and despite the ships spending a lot of time stationary in the harbour (loading), the Luftwaffe was able to sink only 4 of the 39 Royal Navy destroyers which took place in the operation.
Lacking purpose-built invasion craft, the Germans planned to use barges from the Rhine and elsewhere to carry their landing force to England. However, these craft were flat-bottomed and unsuitable, liable to sink, in even slightly rough seas: in fact, many of the craft could have been sank by merely be the wake of passing fast destroyer!
Crewing the barges was also a major problem. The Kriegsmarine estimated at least 20,000 extra crew would be required to man these barges. After stripping men from its warships (which surely would have damaged their operational efficiency), as well as finding every other person with nautical experience in other military branches, or in civilian life, they were able to rustle up 16,000: 4,000 less than the minimum required.
The Germans concluded that they would be unable to bring heavy equipment (such as artillery) with them, and would have to improvise. Nevertheless, since the army used horses for a variety of purposes, they planned to bring 4,000 horses with the first wave of the invasion fleet. To avoid the difficulty of loading horses on barges, they planned to place the horses on rafts towed by the barges (despite the fact that many of the rafts sank during tests). The barges themselves would be towed by tugs (two barges per tug), at would take up to 30 hours to cross the Channel.
Even this was not the end of the problems: the Germans planned for the barges to cross the Channel in columns, then for them to sail parallel to the coast until in a line formation, and then for the barges to turn again and advance towards the coast all at the same time. All of this was supposed to happen at night coordinated by loud hailers, without any rehearsals, and within insufficient numbers of crew with nautical experience.
buffnut453
Captain
I was talking about the valiant defence of the British Isles that many are proposing the RN would achieve against Operation Sealion if there was no RAF around. Being ironic...
buffnut453
Captain
So how does your comment square with Hitler's offer that Britain would retain it's Empire? Vichy France held onto its empire so why not Britain. As for painting this purely as a Tory issue...again, I disagree. There were plenty in the Labour party who didn't want war. They weren't necessarily on the side of Nazism but they were in favour of reaching an accommodation with Berlin because war ended up with "the people" killing each other...that would be a bad thing.
Jabberwocky
Staff Sergeant
No-one in this thread has so far demonstrated how the Germans are going to overcome the following:
The crossing and transport problems: How will they achieve surprise? How will they protect the transports - some of which will take more than 30 hours to reach their disembarkation points - from the Royal Navy? How will they land the troops? How will they provide protection for the flotilla and fire support?
The follow-on transport problem: How will Germany supply its land forces, both the seaborne and airborne infantry? How will it protect the supply convoys?
The land combat problem: How will Germany make its planned broad-front advance against an opposition that has superiority in availability of men and materiel and is fighting from prepared positions, in depth? How will it advance with less than 200 armoured vehicles in the first wave, as well as reduced organic artillery levels? How will will it maintain its beachheads for the nine days required before the second wave of divisions arrive?
The air combat problem: How will it defend the beacheads and ports from night bombing?
The crossing and transport problems: How will they achieve surprise? How will they protect the transports - some of which will take more than 30 hours to reach their disembarkation points - from the Royal Navy? How will they land the troops? How will they provide protection for the flotilla and fire support?
The follow-on transport problem: How will Germany supply its land forces, both the seaborne and airborne infantry? How will it protect the supply convoys?
The land combat problem: How will Germany make its planned broad-front advance against an opposition that has superiority in availability of men and materiel and is fighting from prepared positions, in depth? How will it advance with less than 200 armoured vehicles in the first wave, as well as reduced organic artillery levels? How will will it maintain its beachheads for the nine days required before the second wave of divisions arrive?
The air combat problem: How will it defend the beacheads and ports from night bombing?
Last edited:
oldcrowcv63
Tech Sergeant
DW, this is a place called Cemetery Ridge, the rise is long and steady over a distance of some miles from a similar ridge seen in the distance over the stone wall. In 1863, 5,000 men are believed to have died advancing on this defended 'high' ground (no automatic weapons here). I doubt it is nearly as steep as what you were shown in the photo above of the terrain leading out of the landing beach. The second photo is a small low hill called Little Round Top. Less than 400 infantrymen in an understrength battalion-sized regiment essentially repulsed attacks and devastated five regiments in a matter of a few hours of fighting over this rather low high ground which is what a defender would call Good Ground) (which seems considerably lower than the ground in the photos posted by Shortround6) Without actually walking it, it seems to me, Shortround6 showed you photos of what appears to be Very Good Ground. A more modern analog might be the bluffs above Omaha Beach during the Normandy Invasion also pictured here:
Attachments
Last edited:
