Author Topic: Re: Operation Sealion (Read 873 times)

macleod01 · « **on:** May 06, 2008, 05:31:26 PM »

Now that I didnt know! I was under the impresion it WAS up and running in a few days

Tilt · « **Reply #1 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:08:18 PM »

The Royal Navy has always held the opinion that just a couple of cruisers let loose amongst the Whermacht invasion barges would have scuppered any invasion attempt.

Not only did the LW fail to achieve air superiority over the channel and SE England. It also failed to close the Royal Navy channel ports. All of which (including Portsmouth) were fully functional throughout WWII even if the bulk of the fleet was held safely out of range of most of the LW

TUXC · « **Reply #2 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:08:33 PM »

Even if they had air superiority, the Germans were ill-equipped to carry out or support an amphibious assault of that magnitude. Look at the massive invasions in 1944-1945 like Normandy, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa and then imagine them attempted with what Germany had available near the English Channel in late 1940.

Tilt · « **Reply #3 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:29:37 PM »

Quote from: Greebo on May 06, 2008, 12:54:51 PM

When the Luftwaffe launched their first attack on a radar station they managed to knock it out for weeks but at a very heavy cost in aircraft.

IIRC Ventnor was the only station to be knocked out for more than part of a day..it was back up after 2-3 days. The cost to the LW was heavy as it was taken out as part of a massive Ju87 cross channel raid also targetting Portsmouth and Southampton. The RAF got amongst the Ju87s whilst they were without any top cover. It was a massacre that led to the JU87 being withdrawn from front line service in the West.

The LW were in termoil re the actual plan.........

Kesselring knew that the airfields had to be totally taken out in SE England.

Goering was convinced his LW could shoot the RAF out of the air.

Hitler thought the whole thing a distraction from his Eastern European ambitions and eventually just wanted London bombed into submission.

All ignored the Radar stations for differing reasons, none fully understood the command and control system as pointed out above.

In actuality GB was out producing Germany in terms of fighter production by June 1941. British net fighter pilot attrition was lower during the BoB whilst fighter losses were broadly matched. GB would win the numbers game regardless of whether losses were high or low across both sides.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #4 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:35:23 PM »

Quote from: Tilt on May 06, 2008, 06:29:37 PM

IIRC Ventnor was the only station to be knocked out for more than part of a day..it was back up after 2-3 days. The cost to the LW was heavy as it was taken out as part of a massive Ju87 cross channel raid also targetting Portsmouth and Southampton. The RAF got amongst the Ju87s whilst they were without any top cover. It was a massacre that led to the JU87 being withdrawn from front line service in the West.

The LW were in termoil re the actual plan.........

Kesselring knew that the airfields had to be totally taken out in SE England.

Goering was convinced his LW could shoot the RAF out of the air.

Hitler thought the whole thing a distraction from his Eastern European ambitions and eventually just wanted London bombed into submission.

All ignored the Radar stations for differing reasons, none fully understood the command and control system as pointed out above.

In actuality GB was out producing Germany in terms of fighter production by June 1941. British net fighter pilot attrition was lower during the BoB whilst fighter losses were broadly matched. GB would win the numbers game regardless of whether losses were high or low across both sides.

In addition to the fact the RAF could have moved their entire air force to the western and north part of England out of range of the Luftwaffe. Then if the Germans did invade, the RAF could sortie out of their bases untouched to meet the invasion force.

ack-ack

DPQ5 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 06, 2008, 06:45:36 PM »

well sealion probly would not have worked. They might of tryed to invade but probly after a mounth of fighting they probly would of been sent back to the beach. Plus the eastern front was realy draining the german resources. Even thow they were beeting the ruskies at the time it was still very costly

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #6 on:** May 06, 2008, 07:50:18 PM »

Quote from: DPQ5 on May 06, 2008, 06:45:36 PM

well sealion probly would not have worked. They might of tryed to invade but probly after a mounth of fighting they probly would of been sent back to the beach. Plus the eastern front was realy draining the german resources. Even thow they were beeting the ruskies at the time it was still very costly

The invasion of the Soviet Union took place after the Battle of Britain.

ack-ack

E25280 · « **Reply #7 on:** May 20, 2008, 06:04:40 PM »

Quote from: Yarbles on May 20, 2008, 11:05:03 AM

Despite being a light cruiser it was actually one of the heaviest Cruisers in the RN. I suspect these idiosincracies were caused by The Washington Treaty.

But dont quote mo on this LOL

If I am not mistaken, the designation of light or heavy cruiser is given based on the size of the main battery, not the displacement of the ship. Thus you could have a very large ship sporting many 6" guns and still be classified a "light" cruiser while a smaller ship with 8" guns would still be classified as a "heavy."

Yarbles · « **Reply #8 on:** May 21, 2008, 05:33:57 AM »

Yep seems likely

Angus · « **Reply #9 on:** June 05, 2008, 03:50:26 AM »

Quote from: Ack-Ack on May 06, 2008, 06:35:23 PM

In addition to the fact the RAF could have moved their entire air force to the western and north part of England out of range of the Luftwaffe. Then if the Germans did invade, the RAF could sortie out of their bases untouched to meet the invasion force.

ack-ack

13th group was completely outside LW range (if you skip the luftflotte in Denmark and Norway, but out of 109 range) and a good amount of both 12th group and some part of 10th group.
11th group bore the brunt of the fight as well as some of the 10th, and later when the LW ventured inland to London, 12th group was finally close enough to join the fight.

Angus · « **Reply #10 on:** June 05, 2008, 01:50:27 PM »

Oh, that actually means that the Fighter Command fought firstly some 2/3 (?) of the LW with 1/1/2 group or so, then fought close to entirely the LW with the brunt of 2 groups. (That is when the LW had collected their western forces and co-ordinated the attacks on London. the raids topping with some 1000+ aircraft).
Yet, the RAF had fighters in Scotland, Yorkshire, Ireland, Cornwall, N-Wales etc etc.
In short, the RAF fought the LW with one arm behind the back.

spit16nooby · « **Reply #11 on:** June 05, 2008, 05:59:11 PM »

The Brits had plenty of aircraft but a severe lack of pilots. IIRC each pilot was worth 200,000 dollars or punds can't remember which.

stephen waldron · « **Reply #12 on:** June 06, 2008, 02:18:46 AM »

You hear lots of "what if" scenarios about Germany if you're a WWII history buff. What if Germany had built more submarines ? What if they had built more planes ? What if they had not attacked Russia and only fought on one front ? The truth is, Germany never had enough resources to build MORE of anything without losing a WHOLE LOT of something else. The whole idea of a ONE front war without Russian involvement is also a fantasy. Germany would still have had to fight the allies in Africa and Italy had they been stronger and been able to hold the allies at bay. So it would have been a TWO front war regardless. Also, by all accounts, The German defense in France on the coast was never really completed. Again a shortage of resources.
Most military historians agree with this assessment. German production and the military never were up to the task of carrying out Hitlers grandiose plans for conquest. The outcome of WWII was decided by the overwhelmingly gargantuan industrial capacity of the United States, even before the first shot was fired. That's not just my opinion..
Only an Atom Bomb could have saved Germany from destruction. We know now Japan was probably closer to developing one than Germany was. The Japanese may have even successfuly tested a small yield atomic device on an island off the coast of North Korea during WWII. If this story turns out to be true, the Japanese were light years ahead of Germany on atomic bomb development.. and apparantly they weren't sharing that particular research with Germany.
So if you're speculating about "what if" scenarios and hypothetical outcomes.. Japan seems to be a stronger candidate than Germany. That's just my opinion. I could be wrong. What do you think ?

Squire · « **Reply #13 on:** June 06, 2008, 02:50:28 AM »

Well, a few things. The Japanese atom bomb thing is bunk, they had no capacity for an industrial undertaking of that magnitude, although I know the story you are reffering to. It belongs in an Indiana Jones movie.

...Secondly, it was also the industrial capacity of the Soviet Union, which was immense, coupled with the USA, Britain and Canada combined, that did in the axis.

Germany had a slim chance of victory in Europe, if they had been able to defeat the Soviets quickly (or on the other hand, not invade at all), whereas Japan had really no hope in a war of attrition vs the USA, in any scenario.

If Germany did not invade the Soviet Union, they could easily have swept through N.Africa in 1942, there would have been no "two front war" with the Allies. What do you think they would do with all those unused Army Groups, send them home on holiday? Without an invasion of Russia, Germany could have consolidated its gains in Western Europe, and the Med, its invasion of Russia was its undoing from the first weeks. It was a fatal mistake.

As for Sealion...I agree with most of the opinions expressed, save you need to take into account the unprepared nature of the British Army in 1940 in the UK. It had few heavy units, and was hampered by a lack of transport, and anti-tank guns. It was nowhere near as formidable a force as the German Army in France in 1944, and any comparison is erroneous. The Germans on the other hand, were flush with heavy equipment, artillery, AFVs, and a sizable air transportable/para force.

stephen waldron · « **Reply #14 on:** June 06, 2008, 06:23:54 AM »

There are a couple of historical problems with your Soviet "What If". The Soviet production capacity was IMMENSE.. your right about that. But Hitler didn't have any "choice" about attacking the Soviet Union. Stalin was already mobilizing that industrial capacity for WAR with Germany. In point of fact. The other Allies did very little to save the Soviet Union from Germany. The Soviets basically fought the Germans on their own.
Afterwards Stalin was asked what was the greatest contribution made by America during the War ? Stalin replied "SPAM". The Soviet troops loved the stuff. They couldn't get enough of it. But the Soviet Army would have destroyed the Germans even if they had to eat potatoes.
You see the German army was obsolete when it invaded Poland. At the time 45 % of German equipment was horsedrawn. And just about everybody has seen those pictures of German troops entering France and Holland on bicycles. Correct me if i'm wrong.. But i don't recall any of the Allies invading a country on bicycles in WWII.
No. Even without the BOMB, i think the Japanese "What if" is far more plausible. I can't think of any single engagement or battle that would have changed the outcome of the war for Germany. But "What If" our carriers had been sitting in Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7 ? I think that would've changed the outcome of the WAR for Japan.