Possible End of the ww2

I too dont think it would work. The Germans would have required more Landing craft and good ones. Here are the Landing craft they did have and when they were made. The first type MFP would have been good eneogh for the job however it did not enter service fast eneogh.

Marinefährprahm

The Naval Landing Crafts - called "Marinefährprahm" in German were the largest landing craft used by the Kriegsmarine. Although required for Operation Sealion (Invasion of England) in 1940, the first of this transport ships were delivered in 1941. The development of this ship went through several Types (A-D), whose size and armament grew from class to class.

They were mainly used for transport and supply duties and not for their initial invasion role and could transport 200 Soldiers or 140ts of equipment, including Tiger tanks.

Marinefährprahme were used in almost all Kriegsmarine operational areas, the British Channel, the Mediterranean and the Black Sea.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/mfp/index.html

Click to expand...

Type A

Dimensions

Size (Max): 200 t
Length (Total): 47,04 m
Beam: 6,53 m
Draft: 1,45 m
Payload: 105 t
Crew: 17
Weapons
7,5 cm: 1
2 cm MG: 1 (3 in the Med. and Black Sea)
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 390 shp
Speed: 10,5 kn
Range: 1075 miles at 7,5 kn


Type B

Dimensions

Size (Max): 220t
Length (Total): 47,04 m
Beam: 6,53 m
Draft: 1,45 m
Payload: 105 t
Crew: 17
Weapons
7,5 cm: 1
2 cm MG: 1 (3 in the Med. and Black Sea)
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 390 shp
Speed: 10,5 kn
Range: 1075 miles at 7,5 kn


Type C

Dimensions

Size (Max): 220t
Length (Total): 47,04 m
Beam: 6,53 m
Draft: 1,45 m
Payload: 105 t
Crew: 17
Weapons
7,5 cm: 1
2 cm MG: 1 (3 in the Med. and Black Sea)
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 390 shp
Speed: 10,5 kn
Range: 1075 miles at 7,5 kn



Type D

Dimensions

Size (Max): 239 t
Length (Total): 49,82 m
Beam: 6,59 m
Draft: 1,35 m
Payload: 140 t
Crew: 21
Weapons
8,8 cm: 1
2 cm MG: 2
8,6 cm RAG: 2
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 371 shp
Speed: 10,3 kn
Range: 1066 miles at 7,3 kn

Marine Nachschub Leichter

While the bigger Marinefährprahm was originally designed to transport heavy equipment like tanks over the British Channel, the smaller Naval Supply Lighter (Marine Nachschub Leichter - MNL) were constructed to the use in rivers, limiting their size.

Designed in 1943/44, their dimensions were to fit the rivers and channels in the southern part of France, since it was also planned to transfer them to the Mediterranean via those waterways and use those crafts there. But when they got operational, the Allied landings in Normandy and Italy prevented to do so and they operated at the German coastline and rivers
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/mnl/index.html

Click to expand...

Dimensions

Size (Max): 216 t
Length (Total): 38 m
Beam: 5 m
Draft: 1,3 m
Payload: 90 t
Crew: 9-14
Weapons
3,7 cm: 1
2 cm MG: 4
Engines
Shafts: 2
Engines: 2
Type: truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 250 shp
Speed: 10 kn
Range: 560 miles at 10 kn

Marine Artillerie Leichter

With a length of nearly 35 meters, the Marine Artillerie Leichter (MAL) were the smallest landing craft in Kriegsmarine services. Designed after the requirements of the German Army, those small vehicles should be used during Operation Barbarossa, the attack on the Soviet Union. Their projected operational area was the Caspian Sea where the MAL should be used to attack Soviet oil transports from Baku to Astrakhan. Therefore the MAL must have been able to be transported by land which was impossible with the bigger MNL or AFPs.

With the progress of the war, the Marine Nachschub Leichter operated in other areas like the Black Sea or the Mediterranean.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/nal/index.html

Click to expand...

Dimensions
Size (Max):
Length (Total): 34,60 m
Length (Waterline):
Beam: 8,60 m
Draft:
Crew:
Weapons
8,8 cm: 2
2 cm MG: 8
Engines
Shafts:
:
Type:
Performance
Total Performance:
Speed:
Range:

Artilleriefährprahm

Based on the Marinefährprahm Type D, those Artillery Ferries were used for several different kind of operations. Although being first though as a provisional design, they took over the role of gunboats in various operational areas, including the British Channel, Mediterranean and the Black Sea.
Besides their use as escort vessels, they were also occasionally used for shore bombardments and mine laying, they proved to be very usable crafts.

The ferries had a light armor protection, 20 mm armor steel and up to 100 mm concrete armor at the superstructures and ammunition stores.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/afp/index.html

Click to expand...

Type A

Dimensions

Size (Max): 300 t
Length (Total): 47,04 m
Length (Waterline):
Beam: 6,55 m
Draft: 1,7 m
Crew: 48
Weapons
8,8 cm: 2
3,7 cm MG: 1
2 cm MG: 8
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: Truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 387 shp
Speed: 10,2 kn
Range: 412 miles at 8,7 kn
Type D

Dimensions

Size (Max): 255-381 t
Length (Total): 49,80m
Length (Waterline):
Beam: 6,61 m
Draft: 1,3-1,4 m
Crew: 57-65
Weapons
10,5 cm: 2 (or 8,8 cm)
2 cm MG: 8
15mm MG: 1
Engines
Shafts: 3
Engines: 3
Type: Truck diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 368 shp
Speed: 8 kn
Range: 1075 miles at 8 kn

Siebel Fähre

During the preparation for Operation Seelöwe - the invasion of England - it soon got clear, that the Kriegsmarine needed a high number of landing crafts. Therefore all branches of the German Army made proposals for such a craft - the Luftwaffe proposal was is known as the Siebel-Fähre (Siebel Ferry) named after its inventor, Oberst Siebel.

The Siebel-Ferries were constructed from existing material, pioneer pontoon originally used ot build auxiliary pontoon bridges. Two of those pontoons were connected side-by-side, a propulsion unit with BMW aircraft engines was added in the back and a large platform mounted on top of the pontoons was used to carry the payload. Vehicles could enter or leave the craft over a ramp on the bow of the ferry.

There were multiple version of those crafts build, from transport crafts over artillery ferries to staff command ships or hospital ferries. The drawing shows one version of a transport ferry.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/siebel/index.html

Click to expand...

Transport Hydrofoil VS 8

Germany experimented with various hydrofoil designs since the late 1938, most of them being design studies for fast attack craft. One remarkable exception was the Fast Hydrofoil Transport VS8 and its sister ship, the VS9 .

Being able to transport one small or medium tank, (Type 38T or IV) which was stored on a special designed pontoon in the back of the ship, the VS8 was build as a prototype for experimenting with this kind of transport method. To load or unload the tank, the bay in the back of the ship was flooded and the pontoon, equipped with two 40 hp engines, could be removed or loaded on the ship. Experiments showed that loading the pontoon took less then two minutes, unloading less than one.
Besides its task as a fast transport, it was also discussed to use the ship as a fast mine layer, capable of laying 15-20 mines.

The VS8 was ordered in 1940 and commissioned on 01.03.1943. It got soon clear that the engines were not powerful enough to let the ship operate in moderate seas, it also was not able to archive its projected top speed. On September 1944 the ship beached after a total engine failure and broke into two pieces during rescue operations.

A second prototype, the VS9 , was ordered in 1941, but construction never started.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/landingcrafts/vs8/index.html

Click to expand...

Dimensions
Size (Max):
Length (Total): 31,90 m
Length (Waterline):
Beam: 10,26 m
Draft: 2-4,25 m
Crew: 22
Weapons
15 mm MG: 4
Engines
Shafts: 2
Engines: 2
Type: Daimler Benz 20cyl MB 501 diesel
Performance
Total Performance: 3660 shp
Speed: 45 kn
Range: 200 miles at 45 kn


So as you can see only 2 landing craft existed for Operation Sealion and only one was avialable. They needed more and better designs.

wow they even had hydrofoils............

But never reached full production or service.

oh

well the rest just look booring........

3rd from the bottom looks pretty good.

second from top looks better...........

Thanks all

After reading I would have to agree that Sealion would have been very difficult, but I still wonder if he would have stayed out of Russia and focused every thing on England?

As for Romel, he was a great planner and as said if he would have been turned loose as he planned, it would have been very bad for the lands. That and the poor weather that held up air cover, I think the landings might have gone bad. But Hitler never seemed to think for more then one battle at a time.

well you all know of the reception the allies were expecting before the invasion of Japan?? well the british people had the same spirit as the japaneese, after nearly 1000 years of not being successfully invaded we don't like lightly to being invaded and like i said, everyone able to fire a gun would be on the cliffs waiting for the germans.........

Yas Lanc, the Japanese would have been waiting with spears. I do not think the British would have been any less is fighting. but now think if the envsion would have happened how would it have efected the rest of the war?

well there were plans in place for britian to carry on the war from Canada, so baisically we'd need lots of huge long range bombers, or operate out of russia or even north africa.........

I'm not so sure about the British carrying on the war from Canada Lanc so much as the Royal family and the British Government buggering off and leaving all the rest off the population to stew. If as you suppose MP the invasion had succeeded I think the war would have gone on for at least several years longer as the only front would have been the far east having said that the Royal navy would still be a sizable force that could have been concentrated alongside the US and Commonwealth forces and they would not be tied up with convoy duties in the Atlantic an additional 10 or so carriers in the pacific fleet would have helped things a bit I'm sure

From what I can recall, and I can't find the sources at the moment to back this, Halifax (Nova Scotia) was to be the fall-back point for the Royal Navy in the event that Britain fell. Half of the convoys were already marshalling here anyway, so we could certainly handle the ships.
Also, Canada was already the training ground for Commonwealth aircrews and we were turning out our share of the war materials too.

I do believe we were to be the new HQ, if things had turned for the worst for Britain. It's just a good thing that it never came to that, eh?

you know i reckon we could pull it off, you know, carrying on the war..........

The Canadian material input I think is too often over looked Skim
Tanks, Planes,Ships, Arms ect excluding the man power.
My old man was issued with Canadian Ross rifle when he spent a few months in the home guard before joining the RN, he even had five rounds of ammo. He told me that he asked his Sargent what he was supposed to do with five rounds and the Sargent said "Kill one German, as there's 60,000 home guard if everyone does as I say the invasion will be over in bleeding double quick time".

true british-ish spirit..........

Can't argue with that logic!

Love it! If you only need to get one, then 5 should be sufficient!

but you see if that was a british seargent, he'd expect atleast 4 dead germans outta your five bullets, the extra bullet would be your one and only practice round.........

The British would never have given up the fight even if they had to base out of Nova Scotia. But the point still remains that withouth better Logistics even a master tatician like Feld Marschal Erwin Rommel "The Desert Fox" could have pulled off the invasion of England. The proper logistics were not in place nor could they have been and remember the Battle of Britain was won by the British and withouth air supiriority Rommels army could not have won on the land or the beaches. I am not even sure that Rommel would have commanded the invasion.

Excuse me I just reread what was posted and I see that you did not mean Rommel commanding the Invasion but rather commandind the defending forces. I too agree with you that if Rommel had full command of everything at his disposal he may have been able to stop the invasion. As for bad weather and the Luftwaffe, it would not have mattered. Most of the Luftwaffe pilots were on leave back in Germany hence only 2 sorties were flown on D-Day by Oberst Josef "Pips" Priller (not sure if he actually was one of the pilots but I think so).

Speaking personally fellas, I don't know if Rommel would have stopped the invasion or not had he been allowed full use of the Panzer forces but the slaughter would have been horrific like all landing beaches most are not that big (Omaha beach was 7000 yards but a lot of that was not easy to negotiate) so it tends to funnel the fighting into smaller pockets to avoid strongly defended areas of contact, or areas with better cover for the invading forces rather than maintain extended lines. I dread to think what it would have been like with Panzer units holding the high ground looking down on the landing fields.

Sorry to back track a bit lads the Seargent I referred to was a time serving WW1 vet and he had a son in the paras when my old man went home on leave one time he met him in a pub and the old boy was in a terrible state it turned out his boy had been killed at Arnhem. He took the news really badl. He never did get over it and died a couple of years later.