"The Royal Navy, Not the RAF, Won the Battle of Britain"

[Messy1]

I wondered that myself NG!

In regards to my previous post, I was wondering basically the same, because it took the Allies years to get everything in order for D-Day, from plans, to training, to tactics, to ships to pull off the landing at Normandy. I doubt Germany had the means to do anything even close to that kind of preparation. Or even to keep their forces properly supplied if the managed to gain a foot hold in the UK.

 

[Marcel]

Marcel?, wasn't Taranto in 1940? 2 Swordfish lost while crippling the Italian fleet, would seem to indicate the British (RAF/FAA)were pretty good at anti-shipping airborne strikes in the early war. And lets not forget the Bismark in early 1941.

That's just two examples. The Bismark was indeed a lucky shot after first attacking (and totally missing) HMS Sheffield and it was in 1941. Taranto is just one of the very few examples where the British were successful in attacking ships. There are many examples in the years 1939-1940 of British bombers attacking ships of the coast of Germany, hitting nothing and being shot to pieces instead. The technique to effectively attack enemy ships still had to be developed in those early years, both sides not having much experience.

 

[Waynos]

Yes NG, they were being literal. they were river barges, totally unsuited to a channel crossing.

 

[syscom3]

We discussed this issue in depth in another thread from a couple of years ago.

The near unanimous conclusion was the Germans had little chance for success under any circumstance or scenario.

 

[Messy1]

Agree.

 

[Vincenzo]

in Taranto attack the ship were stopped in harbour, it's not a classical ship attacking versus ship in sea

 

[cherry blossom]

Crete, not relevant - by then the Lw had larger bombs, that were not available in 1940. Moreover, by then the Stuka pilots had had more training in anti-ship attacks.

Merlin's point is even stronger than he knows. The RN did stop the attempts to send German troops by sea to Crete. The loses were severe (three cruisers and six destroyers were sunk with seventeen ships damaged) but that is not a large fraction of the total RN and did not even cost the RN control of the Eastern Mediterranean. Note also that Formidable was damaged attacking German airfields and that many of the RN loses occurred during the evacuation as at Dunkirk.

 

[Glider]

The technique to effectively attack enemy ships still had to be developed in those early years, both sides not having much experience.

This is the key point that applied to both sides. No one would doubt that at Crete the Germans proved that they were very effective at atacking ships and in the Med the British proved that they also were very dangerous.
They each used diffferent tactics abd equipment but both worked. If I remember correctly at one point Rommel was losng over 60% of the supplies sent to him by sea and we know how much that limited him tactically.

However in these early days, they were still learning.

 

[merlin]

Cherry Blossom: Thanks for that.
The other point about Norway, Dunkirk even Crete, it didn't stop the RN doing what needed to be done. For example in Dunkirk - Allied 56 Destroyers Torpedo Boats accounted for 102,843 troops - of these 9 were lost to enemy action (not just to air attack).

To repell the invasion, as at 16th Sept. the RN had - in brackets is the steaming time from the Straits of Dover.

Harwich (3.5 hrs) 6 Destroyers.

Portsmouth (3.5 hrs) 1 Light Cruiser, 14 Destroyers.

Southampton (3.5 hrs) 2 Destroyers.

Sheerness/Chatham (4 hrs) 2 Light Cruisers, 18 Destroyers.

Plymouth (8hrs) 1 Battleship, 1 Town Class Cruiser, 1 Light Cruiser, 11 Destroyers.

The Humber (10 hrs) 3 Town Class Cruisers, 5 Destroyers.

Also these locations had numerous MTB available, and the bigger warships available at Rosyth (18 hrs), and Scapa Flow (26 hrs). Probably they would stay there - faulty intel led them to believe the the Kreigsmarine had heavy units available.

Fortunately in the 'battle' it was the British who were the professionals, with the Germans the amateurs.

 

[syscom3]

Great info Merlin!

Do you know if the RN had installed (sunk?) any blockships at likely beaches or ports during this timeframe?

 

[Gnomey]

Syscom, I haven't read any accounts of blockships being sunk although I'm sure they had some ready if the needs required. However there were numerous other defensive measures that were in place in addition to the fighting forces (Army/Navy/Air Force etc). Wikipedia has a good summary article on it: British anti-invasion preparations of World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[merlin]

Syscom3:
Thanks - my source was Hiler's Armada The Roysl Navy the defence of Great Britain April - October 1940 by Geof Hewitt
ISBN 978-1-8415-785-3

 

[Vassili Zaitzev]

Thanks for the info Gnomey, looks like the British pulled out all the stops.

 

[slaterat]

I suppose the RN probably could of stopped a large sea borne invasion of Great Britain in the summer of 1940, however does that diminish the significance of the BoB ? I don't think so.

What do you think the Luftwaffe would do after destroying Fighter Command, if it managed to do so? Go home, take a holiday ? Do you think they might of destroyed things like steel mills, factories, dry docks, fuel reserves ect?

It appears obvious to me that if Fighter Command had been destroyed that the Luftwaffe would of gone on to target and destroy all the infrastructure Great Britain needed to fight a war. A RN without fuel isn't very useful. I thoroughly believe that if the RAF lost the air war over Southern Englnd in 1940, what is referred to as the Battle of Britain, then absolutely Great Britain is knocked out of the war. It was a hell of a lot more than a propaganda victory.

Slaterat

 

[syscom3]

If the Germans hadn't started their invasion by October, they wouldnt have been able to do so because of the deteriorating weather as fall and winter approaches.

 

[Freebird]

Personally, if the Germans had launched an invasion, I doubt the Royal Navy could hold back the Kriegsmarine, and the Luftwaffe. Without fighter cover, the ships would be subjected to attack from Stukas, Ju88s, etc.

Here is one of the critical factor almost everyone has overlooked. At the start of the war the RN had as many, if not more subs than Germany. The Axis would need to clear the channel of British subs to prevent them from torpedoing the invasion barges. What do you need to do that? Destroyers!

a) With only 10 destroyers Germany was in no condition to invade anyone

d) The German plans for the moving of troops were simply dreadful. Tugs towing barges loaded with troops across the channel, it would never work.

In fact the Germans may have had only 8 operational in Aug/Sept, + a few e-boats. The destroyer debacle Norway {vs Warspite in Narvik!} cost the Germas over half of their rather limited DD force.

 

[Vincenzo]

Here is one of the critical factor almost everyone has overlooked. At the start of the war the RN had as many, if not more subs than Germany. The Axis would need to clear the channel of British subs to prevent them from torpedoing the invasion barges. What do you need to do that? Destroyers!.

need asw ship, and for channel small ship, and brits need small subs, for true i think that channel it's not good place for a sub

 

[BombTaxi]

If the RN had been forced to fight without RAF air superiority, they may not have failed entirely to hold the KM back, but they would have struggled. RN AAA systems were of inferior quality in the early stages of the war , and the FAA's fighter force was composed of very second-rate machines, so defending major surface assets from air attack would have been very difficult. On the other hand, we have already discussed the fact that Luftwaffe anti-shipping tactics were not at their most advanced, so it is possible that the RN would have survived to attack the barges, which would almost certainly been a massacre of German infantry.

On a side note, I'm not sure subs would be all that effective in the Channel and the southern North Sea. Picture the scenario:

1. The LW has total air superiority, meaning surfaced movement (and therefore battery charging) can only take place at night.

2. These seas are VERY narrow. With a lot of traffic moving about, it would only be a matter of time before contact was made with a sub moving in the area. (Conversely, of course, this a benefit as it means you should have no trouble finding a target)

3. Which brings me neatly to the next question... DO subs have the right weapons for the targets involved? The barges and lighters were of extremely shallow draft. I have read that during WW1, German subs struggled to torpedo RN monitors because they were of shallow draft and torpedoes went right under them. I am no torpedo expert, but I would imagine that this might also apply to RN subs attacking lighters. If this is the case, you have no weapon - you can't surface to use your gun because the LW has air superiority and even a geriatric civilian vessel has a chance of successfully ramming a surfaced sub, never mind the KM escort.

4. Assuming you survive all of this, you cannot return to a base to re-arm and refit because all of your bases and depot ships are within reach of LW bombers.

So basically, IMHO, a sub operating under the conditions we have surmised wouldn't have much luck.

 

[Waynos]

I suppose the RN probably could of stopped a large sea borne invasion of Great Britain in the summer of 1940, however does that diminish the significance of the BoB ? I don't think so.

I absolutely agree and I posted my reasons why much earlier in the thread, but as no-one replied I am left tp presume that no9body agrees with what I wrote, actually, nobody disagreed either so it seems to been merely dismissed

I thoroughly believe that if the RAF lost the air war over Southern Englnd in 1940, what is referred to as the Battle of Britain, then absolutely Great Britain is knocked out of the war. It was a hell of a lot more than a propaganda victory.

Slaterat

Again, spot on. The outcome of the BoB was crucial to the future outcome of the entire war

Bomb Taxi, your scenario above seems to envisage a sky constantly full of Luftwaffe bombers pounding the hell out of the RN Destroyer fleet and Naval bases. This is a tad unrealistic. During the entire BoB, even when the RAF was the prime target the LW failed to knock out the radar screen or any fighter stations, other than Biggin Hill and then only for a few hours. Why would this have been any different against an RN fleet outnumber the KM by about 10 to 1? Where are the German ships in the middle of all this carnage? Not there? So no invasion then.

The fighter cover would not have disappeared altogether, 12 Group were never even used very much so there were still plenty of reserves, despite the myths.

 

[claidemore]

Doesn't matter what we think after the fact. What matters is what German commanders thought and what their plans were.

Step 1 of plan: Gain air superiority over Britain.

Never got it, never went to Step 2.

What was Step 2? That could have been either invasion or forcing Britain to capitulate and sue for peace. Because they did not achieve Step 1, they got neither.