Russian surrrender

[aspqrz02]

Malta, yes. I think this was probably the most realistic option. I think the Axis actually could have taken it.

However, to do it, well, there are consequences.

The early victories against Yugoslavia, Greece and in Crete, and, indeed, in North Africa, were done with the assistance of two entire Luftflottes ... one of which was earmarked for Barbarossa.

We've discussed this on shw-i and the problem is that, to ...

a) make invading Malta doable

and

b) make taking Malta worthwhile

... you have to keep it in theater.

I forget the percentage, exactly, but, IIRC, that was about 1/4 of the planes eventually committed to Barbarossa.

Now, with Uber-Panzers, this may not be a problem [;)] but in the real world it would have been.

Gibraltar, well, I've discussed the real world constraints elsewhere.

Alexandria ... well, maybe, if you keep the second Luftflotte in the Med AND strip one of the three German Armies that invade Russia of all the truck units that kept the Panzers supplied as they forged ahead of the railheads (most people don't know that the DAK has as many trucks committed to its Lines of Communications as an entire Army in the invasion of Russia ... and that it wasn't enough to get them Alexandria) ...

Can Barbarossa go ahead successfully with 1/4 of its air strength and 1/3 of its panzer mobility stripped away ... sure, but only with the 50 strength Uber Panzers ... maybe.

And what do you actually get if you take Alex?

No Oil. Nothing much but Arabs and sand.

By the time you get to where the oil is, as I've also pointed out, it's all in ruins and, indeed, rebuilding the wells and refineries and then shipping the oil back to anywhere its worth spit won't be happening in less than 5-10 years, if ever.

One thing that may have happened is that, with more forces arriving on the Eastern Front sooner than historically, there is no pro-Allied Yugoslav coup? Not that that does much, as it didn't actually delay Barbarossa (that was entirely due to the weather) ... not for the Germans. It may make the Italians less likely to take on the Greeks. Which, paradoxically, probably means the Italians lose all of North Africa before the Germans can get the DAK over there.

There's not really a lot they can do that's going to have a better return on investment than Sealion, actually.

Phil

[Greyshaft]

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

Alexandria ... well, maybe, if you keep the second Luftflotte in the Med AND strip one of the three German Armies that invade Russia of all the truck units that kept the Panzers supplied as they forged ahead of the railheads (most people don't know that the DAK has as many trucks committed to its Lines of Communications as an entire Army in the invasion of Russia ... and that it wasn't enough to get them Alexandria) ...

Can Barbarossa go ahead successfully with 1/4 of its air strength and 1/3 of its panzer mobility stripped away ... sure, but only with the 50 strength Uber Panzers ... maybe.

And what do you actually get if you take Alex?

Suppose the Axis concentrate on taking Malta and Alexandria in mid 1940 (and perhaps push on to occupy Palestine as a buffer to protect Egypt). With the majority of the Sealion forces reallocated to Africa I'd guess they can conquer Egypt by Christmas 1940. Your point about supply constraints in Africa is valid but it wasn't easy for the British either. Rommel had a good time invading Egypt on a shoestring - imagine what he could have done with the whole shoe!

Taking Malta/Alexandria has the following effects:

* closes the Suez Canal and makes the Eastern Med into an Axis lake. Allied subs need to operate from Gibraltar and therefore must pass Sicily to interdict Axis transport to/from Africa. After the fall of Alex/Cairo the Axis forces in Africa can be reduced to garrison status (DAK + air force redeploys to prepare for Barbarossa).

* makes Allied air deployments in the Iraq region irrelevant. There's no Allied advantage in an air war that's not followed by a land offensive to retake Egypt and if Britain has been pummeled in Egypt then they don't have the local ground strength to mount that offensive. Iraq becomes a backwater. Why does the Axis need airpower in Africa now? Maybe the Italians can handle the air defence by themselves.

* The Italian Navy can now raid into the Red Sea. Oil prices go up in London.

* The political/prestige cost to Britain of the fall of Egypt would be immense. India is under threat (not a realistic threat but then again, neither was Sealion) but the Indian National Congress starts getting restless and the British must find more troops to reinforce the Indian garrison. FDR starts listening to Kennedy's ideas that "Britain is finished".


Ok ... that's enough Red Flags for now. Release the Bulls!