Operation Sealion

Discussion in 'NW Europe' started by spidge, Dec 13, 2005.

  1. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    Then bring the objective historical facts.

    1) that the British would have relied on WWI type defenses like the RN
    And nevermind the fact that the RN proved to be a formidable WW2 type asset in the MTO.

    2) that the Germans would not have altered their strategy with the proper plans that were proven to be effective in the new war
    And what changes would they have made based on what was available historically ? Answer is none.

    3) that it has been forgotten how dominant the Luftwaffe was in France
    And how inefficient it was against the RN during the Crete Campaign, during Dunkirk. And not to mention the RAF.

    4) that the courage and resolve of the British people and remaining forces would have been sufficient to counter such vast tactical disparities as those between the two nations
    A courage and resolve that wouldnt have been challenged at all since the Invasion fleet would have been sent to the bottom of the Channel.

    Most of the counterarguments have not been logical but rather sentimental.
    Most of your arguments have nothing to do with historical facts for sure.
     
  2. redcoat

    redcoat Senior Member

    I like the nerve :D
    We're not the one who's using tactic's that were never used in real life, and weapons that didn't exist at the time


    Its not us who's claiming that, in fact its you who's claiming it for the Germans.
    We're merely pointing out that the Royal Navy was too strong for the German invasion to succeed
    You seem to think that all the Luftwffe had to do was wave a magic wand, and they would defeat even the most powerful navy in the world.
    Well guess what, as the Battle of Britain proved, they didn't have a magic wand.
     
    smokey stover likes this.
  3. Glider

    Glider Senior Member

    A little background
    1) Yes I am a pilot and have flown gliders since I went solo shortly after my 16th birthday, was awarded my Silver C at 17 and was an AEI at 18
    2) I have served in the Fleet Air Arm as an Artificer and have flown as P2 in a Hunter on a couple of occasions against Warships that are working up.
    3) My son’s girlfriend is a sailing instructor; we live on the Essex coast and sail in the Channel.
    4) I think I can claim to have some background in this area.

    To claim that you are the only person who has looked at this objectively I find a brave statement.

    To say that a ship alongside in a peace setting with its watertight doors open doesn’t make any difference cancels the objectivity claim. I can assume that you haven’t had to do damage control exercises in a ship countering flooding. If you had you would know how wide of the mark your statements are.

    Level Bombers
    I have not said that if hit the bombs will not do the damage, I have said that a level bomber will not hit the target and never did hit a ship that was able to manoeuvre. You claim otherwise as is your right and all I have done, is ask you for examples. After all, there were hundreds of attacks by level bombers against naval targets, if you are right you should be able to find one example. Your comments about percentages and spreads are very impressive but it never happened.
    Your latest example is Midway where the damage was done by Divebombers against aircraft carriers surely the most vulnerable capital ships of the war. We can safely assume that the RN wouldn’t send the Ark Royal to attack the invasion fleet.

    The RAF
    I was willing to go along with your plan without the RAF should they have lost the BOB. However your plan now relies on no RAF all the way up to the middle of 1941 which is pushing it a bit.
    Its worth pointing out that the UK out produced Germany in the production of aircraft all through this period, which makes the presumption even worse.

    MFP in the Channel
    Almost certain not to survive the journey. I repeat it isn’t a river, it’s almost worse than a sea as the water is forced into the neck of the channel and it gets rough. Plus it gets rough quickly. I don’t know how to convey this to you but if you know any sailors then ask them what happens if a major sea such as the Atlantic is pushed through a stretch of water 20 miles wide. Sure it has quiet days such as last Saterday where it was a flat calm, but Monday was back to normal. The Japs certainly had the type of ships that you want but they didn’t join in until the end of 1941.

    Defending a port
    Fighters and bombers only hinder an attack on a town or port.plus they make it almost impassable to tanks so I don’t see how that helps.

    E Boats
    I am afraid that your logic doesn’t work. At night the British MTB’s would dominate by Day the Germans can do what they like as we wouldn’t be around.to attack. By the way the enemy of the MTB is the destroyer. Its bigger, faster in any kind of sea, is much better armed and is a better gun platform.

    Radar
    In 1940 Germany didn’t have radar in aircraft that could be used as a search radar. What was called ground clutter stopped them working. So your aircraft will not spot the RN.
     
  4. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    Quite impressive, I must agree. I withdraw my insinuation of your ignorance. But that doesn’t make it any easier to believe you have that kind of faith in ships. In fact it makes it even harder to understand. You of all people ought to know a good pilot could run a medium bomber up a ship’s butt-hole and drop a bomb down his smokestack especially one that can fly 350 mph. I can see the other folks thinking ships are impervious to sinking from bombing, but not you. Do you have an idea how slow a large ship turns? It’s like trying to stop a train, the inertia on it is incredible. And how would a captain even know which way to turn and exactly when (the bomber will be tracking and countering his every move until bomb release. He is not evading a torpedo that he can see from a distance. He wouldn’t know if he was turning in to it or away from it. He is a dead duck. This is why ships NEVER operate near air bases. An airbase had a great deal of more destructive power than an aircraft carrier and we all know that battleships are scared pissless of carriers.

    If it hits the magazine, fuel store or boiler, it can break the ship in half. I guess you are going to tell me that doubles the number of ships available to the RN?

    A ship cannot maneuver out of the path of a formation of bombers. The picture I showed you of the Hiryu showed the bombs of those untrained 9 half-loaded planes hit within 20 yards of that ship. You could almost see the butt puckered on that Captain. A medium bomber can carry the same bombs a dive bomber can only it can carry about four times as many. If your only salvation is your belief that the enemy will miss with a lot of bombers in formation and will continue to miss to prevent you from losing your dwindling fleet, then you have dubious future as an admiral. If you are going to run the gauntlet or play Channel roulette, then you better keep her tight to the shore because your men are going to need to not have to swim very far. But then again, maybe the land bomber talk is tangential. Hitler had plenty of dive bombers. Perhaps he simply uses the bombers to take out factories. The Spitfire factories were in southhampton. I would have take those out first. Don't need that headache.


    Again, now that you have told on yourself, you have no excuse here. It was not the loss of planes that the RAF, it was the loss of qualified RAF pilots. Even the 10 from the US couldn’t make up the shortfall. Germany focused on Tank production rather than aircraft and pilot production. But then again we are talking about Hitler’s benevolence to Britain by idiocy. Remember, Germany gave up the fight when they failed to make progress against Britain by bombing London. This loss of focus could have allowed them to bomb with relative impunity in which they could set up bases in England and bombed the factories in the north. Besides, the Spitfire was a nice plane. It would have complemented the ME-109 and the FW-190 in the Luftwaffe very well.

    Well, I don’t see the issue with calling the Channel “not a river”. It was a small body of water when it comes to hiding. Now the Japs would have gladly traded weapons with Germany. They had an alliance. From the Repulse and the Prince of Wales, I don’t get the idea that the Japanese favored the British.

    Not if you have armor, artillery (of any kind) or supply trucks there. They do a really good job of strafing. The idea is to protect the Paratroops so they can get armor ashore and then move across Britain with relative ease.

    The German schellboats were capable of 40+mph. There is no destroyer that I know of that can move that fast especially in 1940.

    Well, the radar that Germany had was not a real issue. Channel patrol planes and subs could track the movement of any ships. I told you that three planes can scan the Channel in 2 hours. Radar on a battleship is not going to help it avoid bombers. It’s in the channel, where’s it going to hide?

    Sorry to “dis” you. Anyone that flies can’t be all bad!
     
  5. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member


    Because its obvious you dont know anything at all about the Luftwaffe anti-ship records during WW2. Or shall I say you dont want to know, since it would spoil your hidden phantasms of a winning Wehrmacht. What-Ifs are indeed very revealing about some people's agendas.
     
  6. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    I thought the very nature of counterfactuals were antithetical conjecture. But since you operate under some “phantasm” that the Luftwaffe didn’t sink ships, take a look the sinking of ships at Dunkirk. In fact the Luftwaffe sunk 116 ships in April 1941 alone. So as Jack Nickolson said “Sell crazy somewhere else. We’re all stocked up here”.

    As far as agendas, if you think I have an affinity for the Germans in WWII you are beyond delusional. In case you didn’t realize it, men in my country fought and died to destroy their war capability. There’s no love lost between most Americans and the Nazis nor the Wehrmacht that supported them.
     
  7. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member


    And both at Dunkirk, and in Crete, even taking into account that 116 ships figure, which is dubious to say the least, the Luftwaffe could not prevent the RN from doing its job. In fact, I never said that they didn't sink ships, but its painfully obvious that you have quite some trouble with other people's posts.
     
  8. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    Ok, you win. The RN could have won WWII without the RAF. Don't know what I was thinking. Consider me corrected.
     
  9. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    I might ask for a quote of mine saying that "The RN could have won WWII without the RAF". But Im quite sure that you will never find one. Seems obvious you're not really interested in intellectual honesty.
     
  10. Glider

    Glider Senior Member

    Jimbo
    Can I ask what your military and associated experience is?
     
  11. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    I have no military service. There was no war on in my "draft age" and I certainly would not want the military as a career. I am a private pilot.

    May I ask you why you asked me that?


    I am just tired of chasing my tail here. The subject has gotten a little boring don't you think?
     
  12. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    I guess that posting the same unsourced mantra again and again might have that effect.
     
  13. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    I would like to thank the participants in this thread for throwing open quite a few possibilities on this event that never happened. There are some areas I feel are yet to be detailed (e.g. where and what were the material defence positions? Has this ever been placed into the public arena?)

    There seemed to be quite a bit of "Devil's Advocating" that presented some possibilities with both realistic and unsubstantiated views within the hypothetical array. Local knowledge of the English channel and subsequent behaviour of this treacherous "Eye of the Needle" waterway (North Sea & Atlantic pull and push, was/is IMO, the major telling factor for the eventual devastation that would have befallen the invasion through October.

    I had read previously to the war games link provided by Redcoat that British meteorologists had forecast that good weather in early October was very doubtful, descending to appalling weather for 5-7 days with unusually low cloud cover. (This was read a few years ago so somebody may be able to confirm or dispute)

    This weather would have cleary negated a large percentage of the "air supremacy" enjoyed by the Germans and increased two or threefold the effectiveness of the RN in "own waters".

    On a personal note for what it is worth, there is a difference between playing Devils Advocate (believed or purposely) to achieve the correct and relevant data from debate without reference to agenda.

    There seemed to be some strong invective on both sides in some posts however I would hope that thoughts of "agenda" would be laid to rest.

    We have had a few "flamers" however they do not hang around or are banned. On this forum they are a rarity and definitely not the norm.
     
  14. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    Well Spidge,

    I agree with you that the Channel was already definitively too much for an ill-suited German invasion force. Add to that the RN, then the RAF, then the Allied forces and the whole plan looks suddenly like a blueprint for a disaster.

    About What-Ifs: like I said, they are quite revealing. Its obvious that when someone gives all the benefits to one side, even non-historical ones, and refuse to take into account the benefits of the other side (even the historical ones), that same person is not really trying to seriously debate at all.
     
  15. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Spidge,

    I cannot believe that the invasion of England was EVER high on Hitler's agenda, at least in 1940. there was no way that the German High Command expected France to fall in 4 weeks. The preparations for an invasion were not thorough at all and the fact that they ever formulated a plan in such short a space of time is astounding. To even attempt an invasion whilst still trying to achieve air superiority would be extremely foolish and in bombing London whilst Fighter Command was a credible force shows how Hitler's foolishness could change the course of a battle for the worst.

    by the way an extremely good debate and a great thread. well done!
     
  16. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    I agree that it was a strange situation to debate an operation that did not occur. We tend to analyse operations that were good or bad with the benefit of hindsight and sixty years of historical "toing and froing".

    Nollaig Shona Dhuit
     
  17. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Your level of Irish is indeed impressive sir!!! I salute you!! :D
     
  18. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    I am a good student of the internet!

    Slán go fóill
     
  19. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    I also found the thread quite interesting although there were still details (defensive) that were not definitive.

    I meant to post this at the end of the thread however Christmas intervened. There is some interesting information in the piece. The writer (Dan Cruickshank) is not a war historian however in the context, it is a quite concise interpretation of what occurred.

    I have included the first chapter, with the other (6) available at the link.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwtwo/invasion_ww2_01.shtml


    The German Threat to Britain in World War Two
    By Dan Cruickshank

    After the surrender of France to Germany in 1940, Britain was the Third Reich's next target. But was invasion imminent or was this part of a strategy? Dan Cruickshank describes the British effort to defend her shores during World War Two.

    No surrender

    When France fell with such rapid speed in June 1940 ten months after the outbreak of World War Two and six weeks after German invasion, Germany believed it had achieved an unprecedented triumph in the most extraordinary conditions.

    To a large degree, of course, it had. Traditional enemies and apparently strong opponents had fallen with ease and dramatic speed - not only France, but Poland, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and Luxembourg had been over run and Britain's army had been outflanked and ejected in late May from Europe with the loss of most of its heavy weapons and equipment.

    But to Germany's surprise, Britain, although apparently defeated and certainly painfully exposed and isolated, did not surrender. It did not even seek to come to terms with Germany.

    'I have decided to begin to prepare for, and if necessary to carry out, an invasion of England...'

    This was a puzzling state of affairs for the Germans who now had two options: to lay siege to Britain and to wear it down physically and psychologically through limited military action and through political and propaganda warfare, which would include the threat or bluff of invasion; or to actually invade.

    Both these options demanded that preparations for invasion be launched, whether a real or bluff invasion only time would tell.

    So, on 16 July 1940 Adolf Hitler issued Directive Number 16. It read, 'As England, in spite of the hopelessness of her military position, has so far shown herself unwilling to come to any compromise, I have decided to begin to prepare for, and if necessary to carry out, an invasion of England... and if necessary the island will be occupied.'

    The Germans, surprised by the speed of their military success in Europe, had no detailed plans for an invasion of Britain with the man made responsible for the venture, General Franz Halder, now having to start from scratch.

    But this absence of a plan did not prevent Hitler from announcing on 16 July that an invasion force would be ready to sail by 15 August. The operation was given the codeword Sealion.

    2. Operation Sealion
    3. Ironside
    4. A revised invasion plan
    5. The ultimate target
    6. German defeat
    7. Find out more
     
  20. sapper

    sapper WW2 Veteran WW2 Veteran

    Interesting. I recall the atmosphere at the time as one fraught with danger. My old Div after acting with great gallantry at Dunkirk, was brought back to England and was re-equipped, and became the only fully battle ready Division on GB.

    The idea being that the. Third British Infantry Division ("Monty's Ironsides") would return to France almost immediately. That was quickly changed when France capitulated. But at that time it was the only fully equipped fighting Division in GB. To re-arm them, the Country was scoured to find enough equipment to make them a "fighting unit"

    A long time ago. After, they were employed mainly on preparing coastal defences, Then later, on the preparation for the invasion of Europe.

    Last out ...First back.
    Sapper
     

Share This Page