Theoretical invasion of England

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"Idea was tested, say it again, RN operated in the Channel for days during Dunkirk Evacuation, whilst the Luftwaffe was specifically tasked to stop them. Goering had promised Hitler, but they still failed."

I think that this is the most relevant post: Goering had promised that the Luftwaffe would stop the evacuation and it failed miserably when it had all the advantages.

Thanks, just to emphasis the point, this 'test' included pleasure steamers, paddle ships, fishing boats, etc.. Apart from the RN and French DDs the rest were slow and unarmed. In the combat area they were tied up loading in harbour, or stopped off the beaches. It doesn't get any easier than that and still the Lufwaffe couldn't stop them. This is not to denigrate the Luftwaffe, they were excellent flyers and very competent, but they were asked to do a job they were not trained for. The RN warships heading in to attack an invasion fleet would have been much more committed, dangerous and probabily working at night.

[:)]

This is a subject I need to read up on more. It's inaccurate though to say that Stukas utterly failed. IIRC the RN lost half the DD 40+ DDs committed to the operation, of course Stuka losses were also heavy IIRC.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

An easier breakout would have been from the beaches of East Anglia, inland was flat,with fewer defences and they would have been nearer to the industrial heartland, but then the landing would have had to happen without fighter support. I reckon the battle inland from the sea into SE England would be interesting had it happened, and by no means a forgone conclusion either way.

This thought occurred to me, but I think realistically, the only way to pull off an invasion for Germany would be over the shortest part of the channel. What little I have read though tell me they planned on landing upwards of 9 divisions, including armor. Of course, they would be bottled up. I would almost be tempted to split my landing force. Send a force across the channel and around to East Anglia. Any favorable outcome for Germany would have to rely on speed. If the German army became bogged down I think it would be a blood bath....assuming the crossing wasn't one already.

I talked about this earlier. Problem is that with what the German's were planning to use as "landing craft" they couldn't risk anything but the shortest crossings. A river barge is a very unseaworthy craft, and even an hour of bad weather such as the Allies landed in in 1944 would have drowned most of the landing force. Channel weather being what it is, their choice was get over quickly, or don't get over at all.

It is clear that the German landing craft were a major problem, which goes to the lack of amphibious landing doctrine, which goes to the fact that I don't think the German's ever got THAT serious about a landing. If they had, they probably would have started finding a solution to the lack of reasonable sea lift capability.

[Splinterhead]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005


... IIRC the RN lost half the DD 40+ DDs committed to the operation, of course Stuka losses were also heavy IIRC.

Six British and three French out of a total of 41DDs were sunk. 19 more were damaged, however.

[bradfordkay]

"It's inaccurate though to say that Stukas utterly failed."

I never said that they "utterly failed", I said that they "failed miserably". There's a big difference between the two - the first implies that there was no minor success at all in the attempt, whilst the second just indicates that there was nothing close to final success in the attempt.

I should know... I'm quite the expert on failure...[;)]

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Splinterhead

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005


... IIRC the RN lost half the DD 40+ DDs committed to the operation, of course Stuka losses were also heavy IIRC.

Six British and three French out of a total of 41DDs were sunk. 19 more were damaged, however.

Damaged and out of service IIRC.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"It's inaccurate though to say that Stukas utterly failed."

I never said that they "utterly failed", I said that they "failed miserably". There's a big difference between the two - the first implies that there was no minor success at all in the attempt, whilst the second just indicates that there was nothing close to final success in the attempt.

I should know... I'm quite the expert on failure...[;)]

I stand corrected. [:)]

Actually, my apologies, didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

Clearly the Dunkirk evacuation was much more a success than most probably dared hope.

[Japan]

ah..The British proved their combat abilety (or lack of) in Afrika over and over aigan...  Rommel tied down huge number of britts with a small German and large incompetent Italien force...
The Britts also proved their poor combat abilety in Norway, were 3500 Germans held off 20 000+ of British and French at Narvik, untill they Germans managed a land line to it...
Not untill they had huge numbers and American help in Afrika did they have offencive sucsess.  
At Monte Casino a small German Paratroper Force held off huge numbers of British and American troops for ages, and at the Gustaf Line as well.
In france they also proved their lack of combat abiletys in 44 during Market Garden.

The reason to why they could not strike the RN at Dunkirk was ofcourse due to the RAF... but if the RAD got destroyed the RN would been destroyed in its ports.

So all in all, I personaly think that if the Air Suprimecy could been secured, and then the RN destroyedi in its ports...   The German Army could transported over its army (as much as needed) and run over the Brittish without to much struggle.  [:)]

[Kull]

With few exceptions, this has been a great thread. My thanks to the knowledgeable folks who've enhanced my understanding of this topic. That said, much of this discussion is speculative, and must remain so as Sealion was never carried out. But it does seem that one fact is paramount. Successful amphibious invasions don't happen on a whim. Forgetting for a moment all the factors mitigating against success (an historically aggressive RN , an unbeaten RAF, and questionable German sealift capability, to name just a few), history shows that planning and preparation are a MUST when you are talking about moving divisions worth of troops across a large body of water - and then supplying them after they reach their destination. And what was the German plan? There was none. All the pre-war Wehrmacht plans involved mainland Europe. Poland? France? Sure, and these had been war-gamed for years. But a cross-channel invasion of Britain? That popped up on the screen in June 1940. And to be even theoretically successful, it would have to occur immediately, while the British were still suffering the effects of Dunkirk and before winter set in. So this plan would have to be created from scratch AND implemented in two or three months. There isn't a military planner in any staff college in the world who'd take that one on AND promise it would work. Although the analogy is poor, the Allies put more time and naval assets into the Dieppe Raid, and that was.....a great learning opportunity.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Clearly the Dunkirk evacuation was much more a success than most probably dared hope.

That's actually a nice segue into my second point. Since this is all speculation and "what-if" anyways, I'd posit that any true hope for Sealion success was lost when 338,000 British troops were evacuated back to England during Dunkirk. Sealion was a pipedream, but a crippling British defeat in Belgium was there for the taking, and the Germans just threw it away. And if that had happened, it's hard to see how a British army composed entirely of Territorials could have done much to slow the Germans down. Of course, my earlier analysis still stands, and it's hard to see how a plan conceived and executed in 3 months would have been able to transport enough troops and supply to get the job done against even a kindergarten class.

So put me in with the guys who say, "Sealion? No way in hell!"

Edit: Further research shows that the Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe, and Kriegsmarine had developed independent plans as early as November 1939, however all were done in isolation, and existed purely on paper. Only in July 1940 did Hitler direct the three services to develop an integrated plan for implementation in mid September. So the point stands.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Iridium

Canal Barges, is that even feasable? I just picture them getting tossed about at sea and possibly capsizing in large numbers.

That's all they had.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: turkey

Pretty much like the real thing then?

Command at Sea is a naval miniatures system that attempts to get it right.

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Japan

ah..The British proved their combat abilety (or lack of) in Afrika over and over aigan...  Rommel tied down huge number of britts with a small German and large incompetent Italien force...
The Britts also proved their poor combat abilety in Norway, were 3500 Germans held off 20 000+ of British and French at Narvik, untill they Germans managed a land line to it...
Not untill they had huge numbers and American help in Afrika did they have offencive sucsess.  
At Monte Casino a small German Paratroper Force held off huge numbers of British and American troops for ages, and at the Gustaf Line as well.
In france they also proved their lack of combat abiletys in 44 during Market Garden.

The reason to why they could not strike the RN at Dunkirk was ofcourse due to the RAF... but if the RAD got destroyed the RN would been destroyed in its ports.

So all in all, I personaly think that if the Air Suprimecy could been secured, and then the RN destroyedi in its ports...   The German Army could transported over its army (as much as needed) and run over the Brittish without to much struggle.  [:)]

Please, for the love of all that is good and holy, if you feel you really have to troll use a spellchecker...


EDIT: I'm beginning to suspect you are deliberatly spelling things wrong. [&:]

[Howard Mitchell]

ORIGINAL: Japan

So all in all, I personaly think that if the Air Suprimecy could been secured, and then the RN destroyedi in its ports...   The German Army could transported over its army (as much as needed) and run over the Brittish without to much struggle.  [:)]

Having skimmed through the thread here, I think your view is very much in the minority and that you have offered no convincing arguments to back it up.

There have been some great contributions here folks, and even in a 'hot' thread this is a generrally polite, knowledgable and informed community.

[turkey]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

My tuppence worth for what its worth

Could the Luftwaffe have forced figther command out of south of England - YES
Could the Luftwaffe have destroyed the RAF - NO (Unless Dowding makes a catastrophic error)
Could they have landed 2 - 3 Divs (minus heavy equipment) and a couple of Para Divs in SE England - MAYBE IF THEY GOT LUCKY AND ACHIEVED SUPRISE
Could they have kept them supplied and landed heavy equipment in face of RN and RAF retaliation - ALMOST NO CHANCE IMO BUT OTHERS MAY DISAGREE
Did they have the shipping to sustain the supplies even if they managed to keep some afloat - NO

The British Deployments below the Thames in Summer of 40 had major ports covered by 3rd, 4th and 50th Divs (being brought up to strength quickly - 3rd was in good shape the others less so but they were in defence mode in and around major ports almost no mobility other than by foot but they were their and dug in)

1st London and 2 or 3 other Territorial Divs were on the coast as well in less critical areas as they had not been in Frnace they had some heavy equipment left - not TOE and obsolete - hated Hotckiss MG's rather than Brens but still MG's, 18 Pounders rather than 25 Pounders but still Arty, very few AT Guns but its unlikely they will be facing armour, 3" AA Guns rather than modern 3.7" but still AA guns - the British Army may have been denuded of MODERN equipment but it was not defenceless.

In reserve below the Thames in Corps reserve the rebuilding 1st Armoured (some tanks and A/C not many even in July 40) and the Australian Bde Gp and NZ Bde Group neither of which were in France

North of the Thames - 1st Can Div was concentrated and about 3 or 4 other Divs in various states of rebuilding and recovery

I agree 99.99% ! [;)]


But what do you exactly think under "Could the Luftwaffe have destroyed the RAF - NO (Unless Dowding makes a catastrophic error)"?

What is destruction of the RAF? Fighter Command? Bomber Command?


IMHO the RAF would be very very seriously hit if Germans had attacked just a few factories: Rolls Royce Merlin, Hurricane and Spitfire!

There were just a few of those factories, extremely vulnerable and all were in range of German bombers which had necessary equipement, accuracy and could attack at night when nothing RAF had could have stopped them!


Leo "Apollo11"

The probem was that the Nazis didn't have the equipment to launch daylight raids over the industrial areas of the UK. With the exception of the Supermarine factory at Southampton and I think some Hawker production at Brooklands, the fighter and the engine plants were for the most part out of range of the Me 109. The RAF war diary for Sept 27th 1940 outlines the Lufwaffe's problems in an attack on the Brisol engine plant at Filton (near the city of Bristol) with the following summary:

"At 1120 hours two formations consisting of about 25 bombers escorted by 45 Me110s and some Me109s, crossed the coast near Swanage and flew to Filton. At Frome, [edit - about 30 m iles short of the target] the Me109s turned back. Eight Squadrons were despatched to meet the attack, one of which intercepted and dispersed the enemy formations before they reached the Bristol Aeroplane Co's Works, but Filton RAF Station was attacked from 11,000 feet. Formations were also intercepted on their return journey."

As for the Supermarine plant and the factories they could reach, my family is from near Southampton and my grand parents recalled the raids (towards the end of the BoB my grandfather was responsible for turning on lights at a decoy airfield to draw German night attacks). During a raid the employees would go into shelters and once it was over would come out,"tidy up" (their words) and get back to work. As the allies found later in the war it is very hard to destroy machine tools with bombing. Production at Supermarine was never stopped.

Also worth mentioning that by Aug 1941 Merlin production had started in Detroit at the Packard car plant and Hurricanes were being produced by Hawker in Canada and of course the port of entry for these war materials - Liverpool was out of the range of the Me109.

There were no simple answers for the Nazis. Invading or even suppressing the UK (and the British Empire and Commonwealth) would have been a very tricky job.

The RAF diary of the BoB http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/ is worth a read to get an idea of how inefferctive even daylight bombing was at this point in the war. A "large formation" might only get half a dozen bombs on an airfield, let alone an individual factory in a built up area and the idea of hitting an individual factory at night is just not on. The massed British bomber raids (1000 Lancasters etc) toward the end of the war couldn't hit pinpoint targets at night despite Pathfinders and radar guidance. Thats one of the reasons they opted for area bombing. Even the US 8th Airforce dayight raids, despite all the courage and horrendous losses, could not shut down critical Nazi war industries for more than a few days, if at all cf Schweinfurt.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: turkey

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

My tuppence worth for what its worth

Could the Luftwaffe have forced figther command out of south of England - YES
Could the Luftwaffe have destroyed the RAF - NO (Unless Dowding makes a catastrophic error)
Could they have landed 2 - 3 Divs (minus heavy equipment) and a couple of Para Divs in SE England - MAYBE IF THEY GOT LUCKY AND ACHIEVED SUPRISE
Could they have kept them supplied and landed heavy equipment in face of RN and RAF retaliation - ALMOST NO CHANCE IMO BUT OTHERS MAY DISAGREE
Did they have the shipping to sustain the supplies even if they managed to keep some afloat - NO

The British Deployments below the Thames in Summer of 40 had major ports covered by 3rd, 4th and 50th Divs (being brought up to strength quickly - 3rd was in good shape the others less so but they were in defence mode in and around major ports almost no mobility other than by foot but they were their and dug in)

1st London and 2 or 3 other Territorial Divs were on the coast as well in less critical areas as they had not been in Frnace they had some heavy equipment left - not TOE and obsolete - hated Hotckiss MG's rather than Brens but still MG's, 18 Pounders rather than 25 Pounders but still Arty, very few AT Guns but its unlikely they will be facing armour, 3" AA Guns rather than modern 3.7" but still AA guns - the British Army may have been denuded of MODERN equipment but it was not defenceless.

In reserve below the Thames in Corps reserve the rebuilding 1st Armoured (some tanks and A/C not many even in July 40) and the Australian Bde Gp and NZ Bde Group neither of which were in France

North of the Thames - 1st Can Div was concentrated and about 3 or 4 other Divs in various states of rebuilding and recovery

I agree 99.99% ! [;)]


But what do you exactly think under "Could the Luftwaffe have destroyed the RAF - NO (Unless Dowding makes a catastrophic error)"?

What is destruction of the RAF? Fighter Command? Bomber Command?


IMHO the RAF would be very very seriously hit if Germans had attacked just a few factories: Rolls Royce Merlin, Hurricane and Spitfire!

There were just a few of those factories, extremely vulnerable and all were in range of German bombers which had necessary equipement, accuracy and could attack at night when nothing RAF had could have stopped them!

The probem was that the Nazis didn't have the equipment to launch daylight raids over the industrial areas of the UK. With the exception of the Supermarine factory at Southampton and I think some Hawker production at Brooklands, the fighter and the engine plants were for the most part out of range of the Me 109. The RAF war diary for Sept 27th 1940 outlines the Lufwaffe's problems in an attack on the Brisol engine plant at Filton (near the city of Bristol) with the following summary:

"At 1120 hours two formations consisting of about 25 bombers escorted by 45 Me110s and some Me109s, crossed the coast near Swanage and flew to Filton. At Frome, [edit - about 30 m iles short of the target] the Me109s turned back. Eight Squadrons were despatched to meet the attack, one of which intercepted and dispersed the enemy formations before they reached the Bristol Aeroplane Co's Works, but Filton RAF Station was attacked from 11,000 feet. Formations were also intercepted on their return journey."

As for the Supermarine plant and the factories they could reach, my family is from near Southampton and my grand parents recalled the raids (towards the end of the BoB my grandfather was responsible for turning on lights at a decoy airfield to draw German night attacks). During a raid the employees would go into shelters and once it was over would come out,"tidy up" (their words) and get back to work. As the allies found later in the war it is very hard to destroy machine tools with bombing. Production at Supermarine was never stopped.

Also worth mentioning that by Aug 1941 Merlin production had started in Detroit at the Packard car plant and Hurricanes were being produced by Hawker in Canada and of course the port of entry for these war materials - Liverpool was out of the range of the Me109.

There were no simple answers for the Nazis. Invading or even suppressing the UK (and the British Empire and Commonwealth) would have been a very tricky job.

The RAF diary of the BoB http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/ is worth a read to get an idea of how inefferctive even daylight bombing was at this point in the war. A "large formation" might only get half a dozen bombs on an airfield, let alone an individual factory in a built up area and the idea of hitting an individual factory at night is just not on. The massed British bomber raids (1000 Lancasters etc) toward the end of the war couldn't hit pinpoint targets at night despite Pathfinders and radar guidance. Thats one of the reasons they opted for area bombing. Even the US 8th Airforce dayight raids, despite all the courage and horrendous losses, could not shut down critical Nazi war industries for more than a few days, if at all cf Schweinfurt.

I was suggesting massive NIGHT attacks!

All British factories were in range of German bombers and night attacks negated the need for fighter escort (i.e. limited Me-109 range).

Also the Germans possesed very good navigation / bombing equipement already installed in all bombers (plus some special equipement for one "pathfinder" bombre group) and all crews were night certified as integral part of their training.


Let me explain (copy & paste of my post on page 2 of this thread):

Use the Kampfgruppe 100 to be a "pathfinder" and then use all available other bombers to bomb at night the few British Rolls Royce engine factories and few Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft factories!

The Kampfgruppe 100 possesed both "X-Gerät" and "Knickebein" and was accurate to 100m (this was more than enough).

All other Luftwaffe bombers had "Knickebein" for basic navigation and could then use the initial attack of Kampfgruppe 100.

The RAF had NOTHING to stop Germans at night!


Leo "Apollo11"

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: bradfordkay

"Idea was tested, say it again, RN operated in the Channel for days during Dunkirk Evacuation, whilst the Luftwaffe was specifically tasked to stop them. Goering had promised Hitler, but they still failed."

I think that this is the most relevant post: Goering had promised that the Luftwaffe would stop the evacuation and it failed miserably when it had all the advantages.

I think that we should not try to compare the Luftwaffe operations during the "Battle of France" when Luftwaffe bases were still in Germany (or in some temporary captured allied airbases when some units "leapfrogged" behind the army).

Those days were hectic and huge war was going on in France with frontlines everywhere (north and south)!

Also the blame is on Goering and not Luftwaffe - Goering made promisses that were political and not military... [;)]


The "Battle of Britan" is something completely different - the Luftwaffe was based in permanent bases at the coast for several weeks at they were prepared (as they could be) with all maintenance and supplies.


Thus, IMHO, trying to judge and/or simulate possible Luftwaffe action against RN in case of possible German sea invasion against England should NEVER be based upon the Dunkirk evacuation performance!



Leo "Apollo11"

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

I was suggesting massive NIGHT attacks!

All British factories were in range of German bombers and night attacks negated the need for fighter escort (i.e. limited Me-109 range).

Also the Germans possesed very good navigation / bombing equipement already installed in all bombers (plus some special equipement for one "pathfinder" bombre group) and all crews were night certified as integral part of their training.


Let me explain (copy & paste of my post on page 2 of this thread):

Use the Kampfgruppe 100 to be a "pathfinder" and then use all available other bombers to bomb at night the few British Rolls Royce engine factories and few Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft factories!

The Kampfgruppe 100 possesed both "X-Gerät" and "Knickebein" and was accurate to 100m (this was more than enough).

All other Luftwaffe bombers had "Knickebein" for basic navigation and could then use the initial attack of Kampfgruppe 100.

The RAF had NOTHING to stop Germans at night!


Leo "Apollo11"

Night attacks, especially early in the war, were lucky to hit the same county, let alone the right city. Hitting a factory at night was not feasible. The RAF bomber offensive was trying to hit the worker's homes, not the factories.

[turkey]

Andy. I'm intrigued by your loction of the 1st Canadian Div. I've seen the Canadian flag in the town hall at Petworth (West Sussex) and the local history has this as 1st Canadian. (posibly WW1?) We also have 2 gun emplacements within a short walk (Hotchkiss 6 lb) and the old lady that owns one of them told me it had been built by "Americans" (which I took to mean Canadians in 1940 - she was only 6 at the time). Our local history has the Canadians based in and arround Farnham - Elstead - Thursley and Pepper Harrow. There is the remains of a huge camp on the common at Thursley aledgedly Canadian and another at Headley Down dating from 1941. The hard references are patchy but I found this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stor ... 9517.shtml. Any info? - Maybe support troops? I'd never been prompted to question this local legend before.

[herwin]

My technical publications are at the office so I can't quote them, but the operations research studies of the matter indicate that night bombing--by both sides--was ineffective against point targets--even factory-sized.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

I was suggesting massive NIGHT attacks!

All British factories were in range of German bombers and night attacks negated the need for fighter escort (i.e. limited Me-109 range).

Also the Germans possesed very good navigation / bombing equipement already installed in all bombers (plus some special equipement for one "pathfinder" bombre group) and all crews were night certified as integral part of their training.


Let me explain (copy & paste of my post on page 2 of this thread):

Use the Kampfgruppe 100 to be a "pathfinder" and then use all available other bombers to bomb at night the few British Rolls Royce engine factories and few Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft factories!

The Kampfgruppe 100 possesed both "X-Gerät" and "Knickebein" and was accurate to 100m (this was more than enough).

All other Luftwaffe bombers had "Knickebein" for basic navigation and could then use the initial attack of Kampfgruppe 100.

The RAF had NOTHING to stop Germans at night!

Night attacks, especially early in the war, were lucky to hit the same county, let alone the right city. Hitting a factory at night was not feasible. The RAF bomber offensive was trying to hit the worker's homes, not the factories.

Very true - but that wasn't true for all participants! [;)]

We should not forget that Germans had their bombers staffed with extremely skilled crews at the begging of the war - they were all night certified and all bombers were serially installed with special navigation / bombing aids!

Those devices were "X-Gerät" (only available for Kampfgruppe 100) and "Knickebein" (available in all bombers) and were extremely precise!

The British did manage to foul them but it happened later - the initial sudden attack when their existence was unknown to the British would be devastating!

BTW, later in war British made their own (albeit different) devices for long range bomber accuracy - for example "Oboe" and "Gee"...


Leo "Apollo11"

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: herwin

My technical publications are at the office so I can't quote them, but the operations research studies of the matter indicate that night bombing--by both sides--was ineffective against point targets--even factory-sized.

This is true only for the Allies - the Germans had some special equipement serially installed in their bombers. Those devices were "X-Gerät" (only available for Kampfgruppe 100) and "Knickebein" (available in all bombers)!

The "X-Gerät" was accurate up to 100m.


Leo "Apollo11"