Matrix Games Forums

how good it is ? i readed that he claim that jerrys should have succsfuly complete invazion t uk and conquer mainland. If they decided to.
How good that claim is ? how much bulletproof ?

ORIGINAL: czert2

how good it is ? i readed that he claim that jerrys should have succsfuly complete invazion t uk and conquer mainland. If they decided to.
How good that claim is ? how much bulletproof ?

warspite1

czert2, there are few things in life that are certain. Death - check, taxes - check, Spurs won't win the Premiership in my lifetime - check. I will never get it on with a playboy model - check.

There is one positive item you can add to that depressing list - a successful Operation Sealion was simply impossible. It would have been a complete and utter disaster for the German armed forces - shame in a way they didn't attempt it. I suspect there would have been no question of Barbarossa in 1941 if they had...

well, why it shoudl be comlete disaster ? so that authors claims are totaly wrong ? can you more elaborate pls.

ORIGINAL: czert2

well, why it shoudl be comlete disaster ? so that authors claims are totaly wrong ? can you more elaborate pls.

warspite1

Sure. The English Channel - narrow though it is - is a notoriously dangerous stretch of water - storms in the channel are not that uncommon (as the Allies found out just after D-Day). This was NOT the river crossing that some claimed it would be.

After the Norwegian Campaign the Kriegsmarine - that would be needed to escort the barges - were down to a handful of surface vessels.

The Germans did not have air superiority. The slow moving barges (assuming they were not swamped by water) would have been strafed by the RAF and attacked by as many small craft (and there were a lot) that the RN could muster.

Sure the opposition meeting them on the beaches would have been relatively light BUT the German problem would have been landing their troops in the first place, re-supplying those that did make it, and reinforcing those units thereafter.

Apollo 11 (Leo) has a really interesting link on this subject - hopefully he will see this and provide.

Wrong thread!!!!

There was a wargame at Sandhurst Military Academy after the war - its short summary can be found here:
http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/seelowe.txt

ORIGINAL: Barb

There was a wargame at Sandhurst Military Academy after the war - its short summary can be found here:
http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/seelowe.txt

warspite1

I think that is the one - thanks Barb.

It depends about who was the British leader. With Lord Halifax or other appeaser, maybe it could pulled off. Politics matter.

On paper France also could not be defeated like it was by Germans, a stalemate would be the most expected result. We know how that ended.

ORIGINAL: Dili

It depends about who was the British leader. With Lord Halifax or other appeaser, maybe it could pulled off. Politics matter.

On paper France also could not be defeated like it was by Germans, a stalemate would be the most expected result.

warspite1

The comment that is was impossible is based on the actual situation at the time it would have been launched - a weak Kriegsmarine weakened further by Norway, air supremacy not achieved, the BEF not having been destroyed and the sheer size of the RN.

If other counterfactuals are brought in then yes, there may be a different result - although I struggle to see what could have changed the situation sufficiently to allow a successful operation. The deficiencies in German equipment (to enable a successful amphibious landing) were not something that could be fixed overnight and the Germans would have needed to plan for such an eventuality well before 1939.

It could be argued that if Halifax had succeeded Chamberlain then there would have been no Fall Gelb - let alone a Sealion!

Germany might have succeeded with a landing without major losses. But such quick, surprise, invasion would have had to be done without heavy equipment. The Royal Navy would surely block the attempts to reinforce the German landing force with heavy equipment.

And Germany had not the capacity to land those tanks and artillery pieces, fuel and ammunition on the beach. So that means that they needed to capture a port fast as well. And that the port remained fairly undamaged. And the port must be open for transport ships. And that means sea and air superiority and Germany had neither.

And lets not forget that the summer would have been over before Germany could have attempted such an invasion. The weather would have made a formidable opponent to the ad-hoc force that Germany could put together. It simply could not have been done in 1940.

Edit: And while Home Fleet did not operate in the English Channel they surely would have done so after the invasion was a fact. And they might have lost a battleship or two but the Royal Navy would have made mincemeat to the German second wave and support fleet. Then they would have pulverized the invasion force with shore bombardment.

It is public psychology more than anything else. A defeatist attitude can change everything. It can transform a victory in a defeat and a defeat into a victory.
After the first bombs in British cities the people could be claiming for peace instead of stiff upper lip depending on "public opinion = aka: what major journalists think = what political current dominates the newspapers".

Over English cities the British had air superiority, but not over the channel, that was contested.

ORIGINAL: Dili

It is public psychology more than anything else. A defeatist attitude can change everything. It can transform a victory in a defeat and a defeat into a victory.
After the first bombs in British cities the people could be claiming for peace instead of stiff upper lip depending on "public opinion = aka: what major journalists think = what political current dominates the newspapers".

Over English cities the British had air superiority, but not over the channel, that was contested.

warspite1

Exactly - it was contested. They NEEDED air superiority. The slow moving river barges would have been sitting ducks to aircraft, MTB's destroyers and anything else thrown at them.

Here's a thread that discuss it: tm.asp?m=3087002&mpage=1&key=Operation% ... n&#3087002

I will never get it on with a playboy model - check.

C'mon Warspite it could happen.[:D]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I will never get it on with a playboy model - check.

C'mon Warspite it could happen.[:D]

warspite1

Well I guess there is more chance of that than there was of Sealion succeeding [;)]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I will never get it on with a playboy model - check.

C'mon Warspite it could happen.[:D]

warspite1

Well I guess there is more chance of that than there was of Sealion succeeding [;)]

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

Here's a thread that discuss it: tm.asp?m=3087002&mpage=1&key=Operation%2CSealion�

warspite1

Thanks for finding that Footslogger - made for good re-reading [;)]

ORIGINAL: Dili

It is public psychology more than anything else. A defeatist attitude can change everything. It can transform a victory in a defeat and a defeat into a victory.
After the first bombs in British cities the people could be claiming for peace instead of stiff upper lip depending on "public opinion = aka: what major journalists think = what political current dominates the newspapers".

warspite1

On that we can agree. Fortunately by the summer of 1940, with Winston S Churchill at the helm any defeatism was kicked into touch - fortunately the likes of the pathetic and cowardly Joseph P Kennedy (US ambassador who fled to the countryside during the Blitz) were few and far between.

ORIGINAL: Barb

There was a wargame at Sandhurst Military Academy after the war - its short summary can be found here:
http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/seelowe.txt

I think Sandhurst might be just a little bit of a biased source in regard to Sealion.

What's more, they assumed that the Germans didn't yet have control of the airspace, which is a fairly big assumption concerning the topic. There are various other issues that you can nickpick (like the Royal Navy not commiting major surface ships - the RN destroyers are just going to beat the KM heavy surface units on their own?), but that's the main issue.

Was it possible for Sealion to succeed? Yes.

Was it likely to suceed? That would depend on who won control of the airspace.

@ Warspite: while the odds were stacked against the Germans, the British were far from in the best position to repell an invasion.

Plenty of regular troops, but little artillery, few shells, and hardly any tanks. There was the Home Guard, but what actual military use they would be is questionable. The fact that they were considering schemes like Operation Banquet shows the extent to which Britain really wasn't prepared to fight off a determined invasion.

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Barb

There was a wargame at Sandhurst Military Academy after the war - its short summary can be found here:
http://mr-home.staff.shef.ac.uk/hobbies/seelowe.txt

I think Sandhurst might be just a little bit of a biased source in regard to Sealion.

Was it likely to suceed? That would depend on who won control of the airspace.

@ Warspite: while the odds were stacked against the Germans, the British were far from in the best position to repell an invasion

warspite1

Re your first point above - it may be better to read the summary before commenting. Yes those at Sandhurst may be a little biased - if they were all British. The study was HELD at Sandhurst - the panel of umpires were German and British and the results were unanimously agreed.

Re the second point, no sorry. Firstly its is almost certain that even WITH air superiority (let alone just contested) Sealion would still have been a disaster for the Germans. The excruciatingly slow, poorly protected, low in the water, river barges would have been torn to shreds - nothing bigger than a cruiser required. However, even if you chose to believe that air superiority was the only important element, there is still rather a big problem..... The Germans have to gain it. Given that this was something they had been trying to do for many weeks - and utterly failing to achieve - why would it suddenly be possible?

Repel a properly planned, co-ordinated and executed invasion? I quite agree - in no way were the remnants of the BEF, some green Commonwealth troops + whatever else we could throw together - in an ideal position against the cream of the Wehrmacht. Only problem for the Germans was that was not what the British would be facing. Those "lucky" sods that managed to get onto the beaches would have been disorganised, lacking in heavy weapons and have little to no chance of re-supply. Relief at landing would quickly turn to fire, frying-pan type territory......