WW2 Battle for Britain

[Thanas]

You know what I'd love to read?

The story of Sea Lion, as it 'would' have happened had the Germans been fool enough to execute it as planned. All impossibilities (German generals not resigning rather than carrying it out) should be lampshaded, all difficulties illustrated... parachutists landing on golf courses and getting brained by retirees with golf clubs while their pistols are tangled up in their harnesses...

That would make a fun short story.

It wouldn't, because one-sided stories never make good ones.


Also, I am going to lock this shortly because this stuff has already been discussed over and over again. Unless somebody can come up with an amazing point that has not been considered before.

[Captain Seafort]

Not particularly amazing, and more of a question than a point, but how likely is it that Sealion, had it been launched, would have ended the war? Given that the inevitable result would have been the loss of at least tens of thousands of men, plus severe damage to the German economy due to the loss of so many Rhine barges, would it have been enough to either a) persuade Hitler to sue for peace (highly unlikely, I know) or b) lead to an Army-lead coup and subsequent peace?

[Isolder74]

Let's just say that it would make the assault on Crete look like an amusement park ride in comparison. The only real difference would be that with the bases in France, air support of the landings would be easier. The only way Sealion would work even remotely as planned on paper would be to have already eliminated the RAF and the RN. Without absolute sea and air superiority there isn't a ghost of a chance of the invasion even reaching England.

[Captain Seafort]

Without absolute sea and air superiority there isn't a ghost of a chance of the invasion even reaching England.

The staff college evidently felt differently when they wargamed Sealion in 1974 - their prediction was that even without air superiority, the first wave would be able to get ashore, and do well enough to convince Hitler to launch the second wave. Of course, the second wave promptly ended up on the bottom of the Channel, and the majority of the first wave were either killed or captured. My question wasn't about who was going to win the battle, but whether the victory would be enough to win the war.

[Sea Skimmer]

Its no question that a German invasion force would reach the shores of England, it’s just not possible for strong enough RN forces to react quickly enough to prevent that as they must steam 100 miles or more to do so. But once the cruiser and destroyer forces did appear they’d have slaughtered everything even in broad daylight. British land forces are more then strong enough to crush even several divisions getting ashore; but more likely only the infantry of several divisions would make it with almost no artillery or supplies. Maybe a little armor, the Germans did have a very limited number of not half bad tank landing craft thrown together.

As it was the Luftwaffe couldn’t even inflict particularly heavy damage on channel convoys making the run in daylight at six knots with some fighter cover. Losses of fighters rather then losses of ships forced the runs to become night only. I forget how many sorties the Germans had to fly to sink three cruisers and five destroyers at Crete, as well as damaging some dozen other vessels but it was pretty massive, and far too slow to prevent an invasion force from being annihilated once engaged. I do know they flew about 1,800 bombing sorties against Dunkirk and sank about 90 vessels, most of them small and stationary but including fourteen allied destroyers, mostly hit while loading troops. You’d figure the RN is going to loose 15-20 major warships opposing an invasion, maybe more, but the Germans would loose the battle and just about all remaining surface warships they had.

[Simon_Jester]

Could this have triggered the lingering specter of the 'German Army Coup?' The one that we often hear about almost having happened at various crisis points in the '30s when Hitler made major strategic gambles over the objections of his staff?

My guess would be "no," though I can't really say with certainty. Because it took the disastrous situation of 1944 to create an actual, no-bullshit coup attempt against Hitler, and the mere defeat of Sealion would not be a disaster on that scale- it would spell a permanent stalemate with Britain, but wouldn't really weaken the German grip on Western Europe materially, though it would probably be very damaging to the German economy (all those river barges lost) and prejudicial to launching Barbarossa (losses of men and aircraft).

Or am I missing something?

[Captain Seafort]

It would also, I suspect, be a more emphatic refutation of "Adolf Hitler: military genius" than the historical battle was, since he wouldn't be able to pin the blame for this one on Goering.

[CaptHawkeye]

Doubtful, Hitler's popularity and opinions on the Nazi party were high after the invasion of France ended. Sealion would be a miserable disaster but doubtful it would be much worse in scope than Kursk or the Afrika Korp which Germany could stomach albeit roughly. They would still remain in power but the myth of the unstoppable blitzkrieg would be shattered.

What it does mean however is that the prospect of war against the Soviet Union is pretty much out of the question. Difficult to imagine considering Hitler's obsessive desire to claim the target of his infamous Lebensraum.

[PeZook]

Its no question that a German invasion force would reach the shores of England, it’s just not possible for strong enough RN forces to react quickly enough to prevent that as they must steam 100 miles or more to do so.

Is it all that impossible? Rhine barges would take some 30+ hours to cross the channel (and God knows how long to sortie from their ports). If they are detected halfway, then the reacting warships will have 15 hours to sortie, form up and steam to the area. And that's provided no delays on the German side: with such a massive invasion force coordinated via bullhorn, I wouldn't count on them moving out on schedule.

Then again, the Sanhurst wargame had the RN reacting only a couple days after the initial landings, and I guess the officers doing the game know better

[Sea Skimmer]

Is it all that impossible? Rhine barges would take some 30+ hours to cross the channel (and God knows how long to sortie from their ports). If they are detected halfway, then the reacting warships will have 15 hours to sortie, form up and steam to the area. And that's provided no delays on the German side: with such a massive invasion force coordinated via bullhorn, I wouldn't count on them moving out on schedule.

The longest routes would take 30+ hours, the shortest would take far less. Remember many barges only had to make a trip of under 25 miles. I'd expect a German invasion to arrive as a big disorganized mass of shipping, but since the British had such weak beach defenses such a force could still make a shallow beachhead anywhere it attacked, then it'd be like Gallipoli... if the Turks also had control of the sea.

Then again, the Sanhurst wargame had the RN reacting only a couple days after the initial landings, and I guess the officers doing the game know better

If the Germans had a high enough level of air control it could well take that long to bring up a major force with cruisers and battleships; as such ships could not be based full in the south of England for obvious reasons related to being sunk at anchor. Once the Battle of Britain began historically I don't believe the RN had anything bigger then a destroyer based anywhere on the channel coast except when staging for bombardment operations against Cherborg and other ports. IIRC 29 destroyers were kept along the channel coast and mouth of the Thames river for anti invasion duty.

[bz249]

Doubtful, Hitler's popularity and opinions on the Nazi party were high after the invasion of France ended. Sealion would be a miserable disaster but doubtful it would be much worse in scope than Kursk or the Afrika Korp which Germany could stomach albeit roughly. They would still remain in power but the myth of the unstoppable blitzkrieg would be shattered.

What it does mean however is that the prospect of war against the Soviet Union is pretty much out of the question. Difficult to imagine considering Hitler's obsessive desire to claim the target of his infamous Lebensraum.

Or indeed the attack against the Soviet Union would be even more pressing than ever before. From strategical point of view a failed Sealion means that the British Empire is still at war and offer a good staging point for an invasion against the continent. Meanwhile there is a fucking big army east of the German territories which represents the single greatest threat to Germany (BTW: what would Stalin react to such a spectacular German failure? If he is in the agressive mood, then it means war against the USSR is not really optional... though the failures against the Finns might cool down the Stavka). There is a chance that Hitler decides that it is a good time to form an alliance with Stalin against the British, without that however there is a really instable situation on the continent, and really big question mark about what Stalin would do if the situation of Germany turns worse.
Also the Wehrmacht badly needs some morale boost. So why not to attack the Soviet Union and re-establish the pride of the Wehrmacht, after all there is only land between Brest Litovsk and Moscow, something tanks can easily handle. As IRL any other year than 1941 makes the things only worse for a Russo-German war, since England will only turns stronger with time.

[Thanas]

Yeah, this thread offers nothing except more and more ridiculous what-ifs.