The Italian Spear

[Jagdtiger14]

September 1940:

Fighter Squadrons:

G.C. I/3 Oran-La Senia (Algeria) Dewoitine 520
G.C. II/3 Alger-Maison Blanche (Algeria) Dewoitine 520
G.C. I/5 Rabat-Sale (Morocco) Curtiss H-75
G.C. II/5 Casablanca (Morocco) Curtis H-75
G.C. III/6 Alger-Maison Blanche (Algeria) Dewoitine 520
G.C. II/7 Sidi-Ahmed (Tunisia) Dewoitine 520

Bomber Squadrons:

G.B. I/11 Oran-Saint-Denis-du-Sig (Algeria) Liore et Olivier LeO 451
G.B. I/15 Thelepte Farman F 222
G.B. I/19 Setif (Algeria) Douglas DB-7
G.B. I/23 Meknes (Morocco) Liore et Olivier LeO 451
G.B. II/23 ""
G.B. I/25 Tunis-El Aouina (Tunisia) Liore et Olivier LeO 451
G.B. II/25 Bougie (Algeria) Liore et Olivier LeO 451
G.B. I/32 Camp Cazes (Morocco) Douglas DB-7
G.B. II/32 Agadir (Morocco) Douglas DB-7
G.B. II/61 Blida (Algeria) Douglas DB-7
G.B. II/63 Marrakech (Morocco) Martin 167F

French West Africa:

Fighter Squadrons:

G.C. I/4 Dakar-Ouakam (Senegal) 19 Curtiss H-75

Bomber Squadrons:

G.B. I/62 Thies (Senegal) Martin 167 F
G.B. II/62 ""
G.B. I/63 ""

[Jagdtiger14]

Vichy France was permitted 55,000 men in Morocco, 50,000 in Algeria, Syria to just under 40,000. Later, 15,000 men were allowed in Tunisia by the Italians.

"The Vichy army was deprived of tanks and other armored vehicles and was desperately short of motorized transport especially in the cavalry units which were supposed to be motorized." There is a 1942 OOB for Morocco and Tunisia available.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

That's not how I see things. I see a "Suner-Ribbentrop" pact with a secret clause in it. Than I see Franco offering Petain the support of Spanish forces against the British attacks at Dakar and the French Fleet. I see Petain accepting this offer, because he has no choice (German diplomacy involving Mr. Laval...). No Hitler in Vichy, but Franco...

And no more than a couple of weeks later Spain DoW's the CW. About a year later, the secret clause is used, to sack Petain, disarm the French Army in both Vichy and North Africa, the French Fleet gets scuttled, which makes Morocco and Algeria Spanish controlled (and perhaps Dakar too). Mussolini gets Nice, Tunesia and Corsica as a bonus for keeping quiet...

warspite1

Okay, that is how you see it and that is fine. However, there is just the small problem that what you propose is NOT what Franco would accept. That is not my interpretation - that is factually what was put to Hitler by Franco. UPFRONT delivery of their terms BEFORE war is declared by Spain.

Hitler, realising the value of the Vichy regime to defend its own empire, refused to accept Franco's demand, and Spain stayed out.

Each of us has our own ideas about what makes what-if fun and/or interesting. If you want to take forward your proposal for the Med strategy, I have absolutely no problem with that - be my guest, but in my view there are some things that you cannot change without making the whole scenario so ahistorical that it is no longer interesting.

[brian brian]

I have really been considering everything over the long-term, not the short-term. JagdTiger14 points out the short-term problems for the Allies upon loss of Gibraltar, Warspite points out the short-term problems for the Axis on the gain of Gibraltar. But over a span of 18 months things would be much different than history for each side. A Spanish entry into the war wouldn't win the war for the Axis in a year but would have been extremely serious. The U-Boat "Happy Time" in the second half of 1940 into the first quarter of 1941 would remain the same as history but the Axis would gain advantages compared to history after that time.

How would the dynamics of Free France operate (total recruitment, amount of naval vessels) after Hitler betrayed Vichy in this manner is as unanswerable as how French citizens in the Empire would have answered such questions in the absence of the Mers-el-Kebir attack, which surely would have helped DeGaulle's cause a great deal.

I think in creating a Purchase Spain optional I would include the terms "In a Production Step after Vichy has been installed or France has been incompletely conquered, Germany may..." and "on the next Axis impulse, Germany must collapse Vichy if it exists."

Perhaps Franco could have only been persuaded to join _after_ the Axis had taken Morocco _and_ agreed to the economic demands, another un-knowable from history. With the French Empire in Franco's neighborhood in German hands such negotiations would get quite a bit easier for the Germans to complete successfully. That would have been a very difficult campaign for the Axis as Warspite notes and would have to come at the expense of other historical Axis operations starting with the Battle of Britain; one can not presume Axis success in such a campaign, though their military advantages over the western Allies were significant on the ground and somewhat in the air in 1940, the situation was largely reversed at sea, particularly in the Western Mediterranean. I think the WiF system makes an Axis campaign in NW Africa in 1940 a little too easier than it would have been; Italy would not likely have made it as far into the Mareth line in SE Tunisia (why doesn't France get a fort hexside in those colonies at set-up?) as it did advancing into Egypt on it's own and I have serious doubts about their probable capabilities to launch any type of amphibious operation anywhere (which is why the French don't need a Fort hexside in the game as it it not very good play to set up their at-start INF in Mareth). Though if the Axis reached Morocco Gibraltar would have been very seriously imperiled already.

I think because the game allows the Axis to pursue a completely ahistorical take Gibraltar strategy, up to and including an Axis attack on Spain that could not have happened in history, the game then allows Gibraltar to function on the defense well above it's true historical capabilities. Seize all possible airfields near Gibraltar and the place falls quite quickly in the age of air warfare —put the Luftwaffe on Moroccan airfields and the historical Royal Navy losses around Crete would be minor in comparison if Gibraltar was defended seriously. And then Franco is moving towards increasing participation in the war fairly soon even if not as a WiF-style active minor ally.

[brian brian]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

in my view there are some things that you cannot change without making the whole scenario so ahistorical that it is no longer interesting.

This is somewhat my view of the whole idea of an Axis attack on Spain at all. It is a very powerful strategy in the game, particularly in combination with some nice "Hitler Weather" in the fall of 1939 in the Low Countries and Italian amphibious invasions of the Spanish Coast and/or Morocco (Spanish or French). I don't think Hitler had any realistic option to attack the Low Countries _before_ the fall of Warsaw nor would Mussolini have ever gone to war with Spain, and indeed may have ultimately broken the Pact of Steel if Hitler had suggested and then pulled the trigger on the Germans launching such a war on their own.

A German decision to attempt to completely subdue the French and enough of their colonies to bargain for and receive Spanish assistance of some type, more thoroughly securing their rear flank before Barbarossa, does seem a lot more plausible to me than an actual Axis DOW on Spain. And thus the Gibraltar<>Spain rule in the game.

[Jagdtiger14]

Brian: Concerning "Happy Times" '40-'41...with the German fleet in Gibraltar and operations on-going in the central and eastern Med, do the CW dominate the eastern Med?...they could do that if they desired to commit the necessary naval and air units, but that would take away from convoy protection in the Atlantic, and any hope of hunting down any surface raiders. "Happy Times" would be extended for quite a while, and its impact would be much greater. On the reverse, the CW could defend their convoys and form hunter groups to knock out the German surface raiders if they dare come out to the Atlantic, but at the price of losses in the eastern Med. That's what Gibraltar does in the short term (12+ months?). Faced with this possibility, I'm curious what CW's decision would have been. I think their decision would probably be forced on them with the entry of Japan into the war.

Battle of Britain...if Germany conducts this beyond phase one (against the advise of commanders in theater)...this political decision dooms Germany. Forget about Spain/Franco, forget about any Med strategy. I think it forces Germany into a historical situation.

I agree with you concerning Tunisia...that is kind of stupid in WiF...fort hex sides there would be good in WiF.

Why do you say a German attack on Spain could not have happened. Well, Hitler didn't do it...not because he couldn't, but because he decided he didn't want to. But as I mention, and I think most would agree, that the Battle of Britain beyond phase one doomed Germany...not only by the material loss, but also the pilots they couldn't get back, and the loss of time.

[brian brian]

I think it would have been hard for the U-Boats to improve on the results of the "Happy Time". There were only so many U-Boats, and they were already devastating during that period. A Spanish entry into the war would have positive knock-ons for the U-Boats later when there were more of them, and Hitler certainly built a lot of them, more even than WiF players will. Operating from Ferrol would increase their safety from Allied land-based air as they transited into and out of port - where many were lost historically. They were safe in the "pens" but not transiting the Bay of Biscay. Access to ports such as Ferrol, Cadiz, and possibly the French Moroccan ports would also increase their patrol times on the southern convoy routes and in the Caribbean (once the Type IX boats went operational), and more patrol time would mean more success.

That would leave the possibility of better German surface raids, of which there were several during this time period. Home Fleet would still be Home Fleet; if anything Home Fleet might be stronger in this scenario and it would not be completely simple for German surface assets to transfer to Gibraltar, especially en masse. I would say some would make it just fine; those that historically docked in Brest (2 BB, 2 CA) could be presumed to possibly reach Spain safely but not all of them (X on Bismarck), and Hitler would still have raging paranoia about Norway. But once in Spain they also gain additional protection from Allied air, as compared to French bases, where they could not stay.

And in WiF when the Axis get to command the pink ships, they tend to appear on the South Atlantic convoy routes pretty quickly as the Spanish have some nice enough CA counters for surface raids. All this flying and sailing around probably still doesn't leave much fuel for the Italians (or anything hypothetically captured from the French - the 20/20 historical hindsight that makes Mers-el-Kebir all the more tragic) to be out sailing around however.

With the historical pressure developing as a result of the U-Boats operating from Brittany (Happy Time), the British without Gibraltar might well have been forced to stop regular convoy routing between the UK and South Africa at some point, and the operational range of convoy escorts would also become an issue - probably resulting in Britain renouncing the treaty with Portugal and seizing the Azores. All of this would lead to more routing through South American waters and the Caribbean and every WiF player knows more sea zones transited means more Convoy Points needed. (Actually a good CW strategy in general in the game already)

A Spanish entry into the war would force anything based at Gibraltar to go ... somewhere. Thus Mediterranean Fleet might have been reinforced as well. The Royal Navy would still be quite strong in the eastern Mediterranean I think; they would still attempt to interdict Axis supply and would still be effective at that, though in direct correlation to distance from Alexandria most likely (Tripoli / Tunis a little safer, Bardia / Tobruk not so much). Cunningham would still be Cunningham and perhaps a loss or evacuation of Malta might have actually given him a little more freedom of action as he couldn't use Malta as much of an offensive base at many points anyway, though the RN did have to keep it in supply. The German moves we are projecting might have also resulted in the UK leaving Greece on their own, which changes little from history except making Cunningham (and Egypt) stronger.

What would suffer would be the combat effectiveness of the Royal Air Force in that theater, with supply links to the UK now longer and under more pressure (still an Allied Air Bridge across Central Africa?) Fliegerkorps X was already fairly successful in the theater historically, in terms of hurting the Royal Navy and getting Axis supply to Africa _sometimes_ if not all the time. Same would be true for the Army, as noted no Tiger convoy would be possible and everything would arrive via the Cape route. Though perhaps the South Africans might not have committed as many troops to Egypt.

I kicked around the idea of a new ground theater in NW Africa but I think with so many dynamic events already occurring in History in this period (Egypt / Libya, Yugoslavia / Greece, Syria / Iraq) I think any forces involved would be small on each side and then any result is possible. The Free French could have likely held onto Dakar themselves (as Warspite notes any Spanish move on a French colony would instantly end the fiction of Vichy and then "France" = DeGaulle) but I'm not so sure they could have threatened to re-take an Axis/Spanish Morocco.

So in short a Spanish entry into the war would give the Axis some solid advantages in the eastern Med but not a slam-dunk victory. Home Fleet and Mediterranean Fleet would still both be strong checks on Axis desires. The Italian forces would still be the same and there wouldn't be enough Germans to do everything...

...because ultimately Hitler basically took over the nascent Nazi Party in that Beer Hall on the premise that Germany's destiny lay in the East. The Nazis' first opponent in the realm of armed violence was the German Communist Party. Hitler was going to attack Russia and not Spain. Italy invested more in Spain than Germany I think but the Condor Legion was not an insignificant thing either. Hitler may have wished for a simple alliance with Spain on his side but I just don't see any way he would green-light an attack on the country. I wouldn't say he "didn't want to", I would say the thought never even crossed his mind. He expected Churchill to eventually fall out of power and the British to ask for Peace as they hated the Communists too.

I think the game should allow this line of play, but I don't find it all that appealing to play myself (DoW on Spain, though other ideas about the Med, yes), just as I think the Ukraine optional is pretty much a farce. Posit some sort of restored monarchy / General Staff cabal now running the German war effort with no SS brutality everywhere and the Germans probably do win WWII in a short war (not much of a game), because they would sensibly end the war, satisfied with a very large Reich (Austria, Alsace, Lorraine, Bohemia, bits of Slovenia, the Courland, possibly a rump Polish state now moved in to the Ukraine, and an array of vassal states through all of the Balkans and Baltics) and German Honor restored; the Allies would feel the same. Maybe this would even have shown the Japanese racial militarists the light as well, who knows.

[warspite1]

...do the CW dominate the eastern Med?...they could do that if they desired to commit the necessary naval and air units, but that would take away from convoy protection in the Atlantic, and any hope of hunting down any surface raiders.

I do not understand why so much of these conversations are so black and white here? X does Y therefore Z is guaranteed. Life ain’t like that…..
The British had possession of the Eastern Mediterranean. The taking of Gibraltar does not alter that. Yes, it makes things more difficult, but the whole war was ‘difficult’ for the CW.

but that would take away from convoy protection in the Atlantic, and any hope of hunting down any surface raiders.

Why? Take away any hope? What surface raiders? The Axis naval position has not altered. They still have the same number of ships. The Italians need to keep the bulk of their fleet in the Mediterranean and the bulk of the German fleet (what remains after Weserubung) is in the repair yard.

If the Germans are serious about a Med strategy, the British would go on the defensive. There is no Battle of Britain – do you know how many aircraft the Germans thought necessary for Gibraltar? 800!

British fighter aircraft can be transferred to Egypt along with some coastal command aircraft. The Eastern Mediterranean can be bolstered. Those sentences do not mean the Home Fleet disappears and there is no fighter cover left in southern England!

The units available for convoy defence do not change – the North Atlantic remains no.1 priority. As said, the taking of Gibraltar does not suddenly give Donitz more submarines!

On the reverse, the CW could defend their convoys and form hunter groups to knock out the German surface raiders if they dare come out to the Atlantic, but at the price of losses in the eastern Med.

?

Battle of Britain...if Germany conducts this beyond phase one (against the advise of commanders in theater)...this political decision dooms Germany. Forget about Spain/Franco, forget about any Med strategy. I think it forces Germany into a historical situation.

Why would Germany go for a ‘Battle of Britain’? With what purpose? I could understand them doing limited attacks in the Channel to close down convoys – but why else? And please don’t say the radar towers. We have given Hitler the power to understand the importance of a Mediterranean strategy – we are surely not now giving Goering a brain too? The Germans did not understand their significance.

Why do you say a German attack on Spain could not have happened?

Because, as has been said, if it was politically difficult for Hitler – it could well have been the end for Mussolini. Have a look at what the Spanish Civil War cost Italy in men, equipment and Lira. Between October 1940 and February 1941 Hitler grew increasingly frustrated with Franco’s uncompromising position (hence why I personally reject Centuur’s option) – but, despite mutterings of frustration, at no point did Germany prepare forces for taking the matter into their own hands. It is just too much of a leap.

[Jagdtiger14]

What naval assets did CW have in the eastern Med Nov. 1 '40? What German surface combat ships were still in the repair yards in October '40?

CW cant do everything. With more Axis assets in the Med, CW has choices to make. If the CW beef up the eastern Med (taking away from elsewhere) to the point the Axis can not be successful there, then the Italian Kraken can be released from Gibraltar too. But as you say, the Atlantic remains CW's top priority (which I also agree with)...so, do the CW keep the same naval assets in the eastern Med as they historically had? If some frogmen altered the balance of power in the eastern Med for 6 months, how can you then say that the CW maintains control of the eastern Med regardless of increased Axis assets, that its just more "difficult". I contend that if the Axis increase their assets, and the CW do not increase theirs, they could lose control...especially the further away from Alexandria.

I think you mis-understand my Battle of Britain comment. I think this discussion would be limited to closing down the English Channel to anything but Axis shipping. The Germans didn't know what the radar towers were, but they did know there must be some kind of military purpose for them. In my discussion I am only limiting the German operation to the Brit shoreline, no further. A fully historical Battle of Britain dooms Germany.

[Jagdtiger14]

So, you ask "I do not understand why so many of these conversations are so black and white here?". I asked the question of Brian: "why do you say a German attack on Spain COULD NOT have happened? (a black and white statement by Brian)". Then you defend Brian's black and white statement, but only give reasons why it would be unlikely (and I agree with your reasoning if taking Hitler into account (which I am not in this general discussion)).

[warspite1]

That's quite a shopping list!

Right, first off the Germans:

Tirpitz - Not ready operationally until January 1942
Bismarck - Not ready operationally until May 1941
Scharnhorst - Possibly ready
Gneisenau - Repairs completed December 1940
Graf Spee - SUNK
Scheer - Operational October 1940
Lutzow - Repairs completed March 1941
Blucher - SUNK
Hipper - Operational October 1940
Prinz Eugen - Not ready operationally until May 1941
Leipzig - Not ready operationally until December 1940
Koln - Never fully operational again
Nurnberg - Operational October 1940
Karlsruhe - SUNK
Emden - Reduced to training ship

In terms of attacking trade, that means Scharnhorst, Scheer and Hipper.

[warspite1]

Royal Navy in the Eastern Mediterranean in November 1940. The list of course may not be definitive and I will do further work on this, but the final nos. will not be that different:

Carriers: Eagle and Illustrious
Battleships: Barham, Warspite, Valiant, Malaya and Ramillies
Heavy Cruisers: Berwick and York
Light Cruisers: Gloucester, Glasgow, Newcastle and Coventry

[brian brian]

I do think a loss of Gibraltar would lead directly to a loss of Suez; it just wouldn't be a quick process. 8th Army may not have even reached beyond Benghazi initially, depending on when exactly Ribbentrop could get all the Spanish ducks in a row. Perhaps instead Tobruk would have fallen on Rommel's first go. Removing Force H as a swing force that could aid either the Med or the Atlantic would decrease Royal Navy flexibility greatly but they wouldn't just quit the fight in the eastern Med. The loss of Gibraltar and the stationing of German surface assets in Atlantic ports beyond the range of the RAF would steadily increase the pressure on an already quite stretched historical CW logistical system; from which Axis advantages would accrue steadily. The Tiger Convoy was not a guaranteed success, it was a risk taken because of the already difficult logistical situation in Egypt.

I answered your question on the idea of Hitler attacking Spain after a life-time of studying the man, including a course on the inter-war period at the Graduate level, and it is not a black & white answer. Although Hitler would have had far more political capital to execute such a decision than Mussolini (for whom it would have been impossible), I don't think Hitler had unlimited amounts of that political capital within his regime and within his General Staff. Ordering your soldiers to risk their lives for a regime would be difficult to square with then ordering your soldiers to attack that regime - this could have also cost him a fair bit of leverage among the other Axis Minor Allies, whom he needed for campaigning in the East.

Hitler's mind was obsessed with Lebensraum and righting historical wrongs he thought Germany had suffered, and he built his support on those to a large degree. Those were his War Aims, putting Germany on par with the British Empire via expanding eastwards, not via defeating the British Empire. Britain and France's resistance to that idea had to be dealt with but that was not his goal or desire at all. Spain had nothing to do with either issue ("Mein Gott! Ist der Fuerher verrückt?" would be the whispers), though helping Franco in the 30s gave him a perfect outlet to tweak all of his eventual enemies and further the development of his Re-Armament program.

He could have ordered and executed a long-term strategy of defeating the United Kingdom first but I think he would have had to do so via some other strategy than attacking Spain, even a Battle of Britain 2.0 in 1941 would be more likely than launching a ground war in Spain in my opinion. The strategic significance of Gibraltar was considered by few in Germany aside from Raeder and Canaris, neither of whom truly had Hitler's ear.

[warspite1]

CW cant do everything.

But the Axis can apparently!

With more Axis assets in the Med

Why? Who? Where do all these units come from all of a sudden?

If some frogmen altered the balance of power in the eastern Med for 6 months....

We've covered this? When was the first successful attack? What happened in November 1940 at Taranto? What did that do for the balance of power? How is Mussolini going to authorise the RM to sail off into the Atlantic when their battleships have just taking a pasting at Taranto?


There is another important point to make. The fact that the British have to hunker down and go onto the defensive actually may help their position.

Just how many ships were sunk or damaged in the bid to keep Malta alive - or assist the evacuations from Greece and Crete?

Without thinking - and just off the top of my head we have:

Illustrious (damaged) Eagle (sunk) Ark Royal (sunk) Indomitable (damaged) Warspite (damaged) Gloucester, Manchester, Cairo, Southampton, Coventry (Sunk) Nelson, Orion, Ajax (damaged).

How many aircraft (and pilots) died in the defence of Malta?

No Malta, possibly no Greece and that's a lot of losses that do not happen. It's not a case of taking what happened and adding to the toll - a lot of the RN losses will not happen. Okay they may happen in a different way, but that is to be explored.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

...that its just more "difficult".

warspite1

It's not 'just' more difficult. The loss of Gibraltar and a proper Axis focus on the Mediterranean is serious and it may, ultimately, have meant the British exiting the Mediterranean theatre.

I am not seeking to down play just how serious this would have been. But equally I am frustrated that we have the fall of Gibraltar and suddenly we have Panzers trekking through Mauretania on their way to Senegal, we have Donitz and a thousand U-boats all over the globe, we have an unstoppable German surface fleet rampaging across the Atlantic, joined by the Regia Marina - despite the loss (temporary and otherwise) - of three battleships at Taranto and a strong British fleet in Alexandria. We have Italian Pigs suddenly becoming successful (totally ahistorically for the time) and sinking British battleships galore. There is no home fleet left, I don't know what has happened to the RAF but apparently the weakened Luftwaffe (thanks to Spain and the Med) are still going to kick bottom in the Channel and the south of England.....

Okay, I exaggerate for effect, but the general gist is the same [;)]

[Jagdtiger14]

You can add CL Nurnberg to the German assets making their way to Gibraltar.

I never said the Axis can do everything...perhaps you are jumbling up what everyone is mentioning and therefore it seems that way. I'm trying to make the best moves for each side in this discussion, not just the Axis. I guess my next question is, where would the CW assets at Gibraltar go?...and I guess that would depend on if the Spanish question is a German invasion or alliance?

I think we already discussed how the German assets would get to Gibraltar?

We did cover the frogman issue, but I was referencing not the actual event itself, just that it was a possibility that it was not that difficult (with an increase of Axis assets) to gain the advantage in the eastern Med...you made it seem like the CW automatically keeps the advantage and that its only a matter of difficulty. I'm arguing that the CW can keep the advantage if they increase assets.

I agree with you that hunkering down could be advantageous to the CW.

I also agree with you that no Malta and no Crete equal those assets available in the Egyptian/Middle East/eastern Med theater with the appropriate time schedules.

I don't have panzers trekking to Senegal at all. In fact I think there is a possibility that the Axis lose Libya while they are busy at Gibraltar/Spain if you think its possible CW can do it by/during October '40.

I mentioned the Germans had 27 ocean going subs dedicated to Atlantic operations (whether out of Gibraltar, Spain, Portugal, or France) by November 1. Germany had about 50 coastal subs that could have been used to effect in the Med...probably stationed in Malta/Italy then maybe Crete, of course all at the appropriate times to assist with operations in the eastern Med.

Concerning the air war over the channel, I think it would/could be contested vigorously by both sides later (some time in 1941?), but with Germany having the advantage in numbers, no worry over ranges of aircraft, downed pilots having the chance to be picked up by friendlies instead of being POWed on British soil, and the possibilities that CW pilots being picked up by Germans and POW'ed in Germany (and vise versa for German pilots). I also think that the best move for Germany would be to prioritize air assets (and small naval craft) for the English Channel...making sure they keep the numerical advantage (air superiority, rather than parity or supremecy)...of course Germans guessing at RAF strength... Although I think the Germans would have supremecy by default (at least 1940, probably early '41) since Dowding decided not to use fighter command to respond to German attacks on British merchant shipping (curious: why the hell did the Brits sail shipping through there anyway???...I assume they hugged the British coast and had the advantage of AA from the shore?)

I didn't say there was no Home Fleet...I assume they are in the Atlantic hunting down the Germans and protecting convoys. Will the home fleet venture into the English Channel if the Germans maintain air superiority/supremecy (fighters and bombers)? I wouldn't do that.

I think the Italian fleet sits home until needed (perhaps Malta (October?), perhaps Crete) operating under heavy Axis air cover. If CW dedicates enough to guarantee eastern Med dominance (which they could), then why not use the RM in the Atlantic? The Axis would have the same flexibility the CW had with Gibraltar.

Brian: I agree with you if Hitler is Germany's leader. The Spain/Gibraltar discussion at least with me is irrelevant if: 1. Hitler is alive, 2. Battle of Britain is taken beyond the first phase. I think most everything goes fairly historical if the two above exist.

[brian brian]

The fun part of counter-factuals is this - each one can be met with another counter-factual. Although I would note the term "counter-factual" never has made much sense to me.

So in an alternative history where Germany is dedicated to defeating the UK but Hitler is now out of power, what is keeping Germany in the war? A good portion of the German people expected peace after June 22, 1940. One answer to that question would be: Churchill. But what kept Churchill determined to defeat Germany? The existence of the Nazi regime. Could Churchill have come to the Peace table if Germany was no longer ruled by Nazis? Could an alternative British leader?

Just a few ponderings of history to chew on there.

What I understand about the Luftwaffe and Channel shipping is this: the Luftwaffe began attacking coastal shipping off England as early as July 1940 and I think this is sometimes considered the first beginnings of the Battle of Britain. Even before the Luftwaffe had bases on the Channel Coast the British had lost a fair amount of shipping on the east coast to aerial delivered mines, longer range air attack, and U-boat attack. Stukas were quite effective against shipping but Stukas were infrequently within range of shipping. Nevertheless, the British soon had to suspend maritime operations within range of the Luftwaffe. They were at this time still organizing the convoy system in a general sense, so simply running coastal merchant convoys with strong fighter escorts wasn't a simple option. It did hurt the British economy some to not have this shipping method available as it had some efficiencies over rail transport inside England and it was given up reluctantly after losses.

But all that is a relatively minor factor in anything; I'm not really sure what questions you have about changes to the Battle of Britain. If Germany attacks Spain in the second half of 1940, there is no Battle of Britain I would think. If Germany manages to purchase Spain's allegiance in the second half of 1940, probably Luftwaffe history mostly stays the same, as Goering gave that battle it's own inevitable momentum and I don't think Ribbentrop could talk Franco into going fast, presuming Franco did say yes.

I think a ground war in Spain would have focused each side's attention and resources ... several other minor historical campaigns are then less likely to happen at all.

[warspite1]

You can add CL Nurnberg to the German assets making their way to Gibraltar.

Well you could. Not sure that Hitler - or any sane person - is going to denude Germany of any and all ships larger than a destroyer in home waters??

I mentioned the Germans had 27 ocean going subs dedicated to Atlantic operations...... by November 1. Germany had about 50 coastal subs..... that could have been used to effect in the Med...

I would like to understand where these nos. come from please?

At this time Donitz never had this number available for operations at any one time. December 1940 as one example? He had 6 ocean going boats available. Typically there were significantly less than 20 boats on patrol at any one time.

The 50(!) coastal boats seems waaaay to high - even if you include taking every single training boat from the Baltic into account. But then why would you do that if you are trying desperately to increase your U-boat arm? That kind of shoots yourself in the foot in the medium and long term...

Will the home fleet venture into the English Channel if the Germans maintain air superiority/supremecy (fighters and bombers)? I wouldn't do that.

Why are the Home Fleet going anywhere near the Channel?

I think the Italian fleet sits home until needed

But the Regia Marina IS needed, and for the same reason as historically. The taking of Gibraltar (and probably Malta) doesn't stop the need to supply the army in Libya. Those convoys still need protecting.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The fun part of counter-factuals is this - each one can be met with another counter-factual. Although I would note the term "counter-factual" never has made much sense to me.

So in an alternative history where Germany is dedicated to defeating the UK but Hitler is now out of power, what is keeping Germany in the war? A good portion of the German people expected peace after June 22, 1940. One answer to that question would be: Churchill. But what kept Churchill determined to defeat Germany? The existence of the Nazi regime. Could Churchill have come to the Peace table if Germany was no longer ruled by Nazis? Could an alternative British leader?

warspite1

Counter-factual - I hate that word [&:]

Re Hitler. I agree 100%. WWII is Hitler's war. We need him in charge - albeit in this scenario he has a 'Road to Damascus' type conversion and believes that, in order not to repeat the mistakes of Napoleon, he must defeat Britain before he can attend to his raison d'etre - Drang nach Osten. He cannot do this directly, because Sealion is a no-no. He therefore needs to play the long game and devote his energies to the Mediterranean.

[brian brian]

I can see him adopting that conclusion, particularly as he had the Pact with Stalin, sort-of securing his east flank for operations vs. England. Fortunately he wasn't that deep of a thinker. There would be multiple options to put more of a Full Court Press on England, other than attacking Spain to reach Gibraltar. Put a few extra Fighter Wings in Brittany and Brest is basically as good of a naval base to squeeze CW logistics/economy as Spain is. Ignoring the Petain option and ordering the Panzers to the Mediterraneam coast ASAP is another (part of the game already). Then maybe Kurt Student receives orders to drop on Bône instead of Crete. Ditto for sending an extra Fliegerkorps (one on Sardinia could cut W. Allied use of the West Med just as well as taking Gibraltar would - Stukas still deadly at short range) and an extra Rommel to the Mediterranean instead of pulling the trigger on June 22, 1941. (Why the 22nd each year? Never noticed that before, after all these years).

The one option I don't think he could take would be reaching Gibraltar via attacking Spain first. That idea flows to the players of World in Flames out of the victory conditions, and it is a very good one in that context. Hitler wasn't playing to hold the most possible Objectives on a fixed date after a big inescapable dust-up with Uncle Sam.