How Hitler could have won

1) My point was , that simply using the word "stink" is completely impotent as an argument.
2) Kon Tiki sailed for many weeks, even more than month if I'm not mistaken. In the discussed scenario such effects are completely irrelevant.
I suggest you take a piece of balsa wood and place it in water, then wait a couple of days and check how much it sunk.
3) My plan is OK. Nothing I mentioned is unplausable. 80 000 tons of cork is 1/4 of the annual yearly production. All of it was produced in Europe so no blockade could affect that.
Any additional stocks of the other types of wood would be a bonus and there would be such for sure.
By using dried pine wood + cork the amount is halved with insignifficant effect on my prior calculations.
By adding small wooden casks + pine + cork the amount is quartered with little to no effect on the safety of the vessels.
4) Why should I admit to something if I know it's not true??

 

Sorry, but I assumed that you were of the opinion that the British wouldn't be able to counter the German minefields, otherwise your scenario doesn't make any sense

The German first wave was to be landed over a ten day period, so there's no rush.

Even from their base in the Scottish Islands (well out of range of Bf 109's even with drop tanks) it could take a destroyer from the Home Fleet less than a day to reach the invasion area.

If the invasion supply chain is not maintained over a full 24 hour period the invasion will fail.
The RN will not patrol, it will enter, sink everything it can, bombard the invasion beaches, and if necessary leave before daylight.

You come on !
Why would they have to clear the whole minefields if they knew where the cleared paths through them were ?

The RN sent out patrols into the Channel every night during the period of the Battle Of Britain, how many did the Luftwaffe sink in this period.... I'll give you the answer, Nil.

They were hit while picking up troops, they were stationary. Not something that would occur during any action against the invasion.

Now you are just being silly

 

The Scharnhorst and Gneisnau both hit mines laid by the RAF.

The Gneisnau never sailed again as she was further damaged by a bomb while under repair for the mine damage

 

1) In a well though strategic scenario LW is poundind all UK ports and vessels for a month - month and a half prior to the invasion.
Ergo - smaller navy craft mostly dispersed to nortern ports or sunk.
Sinse the smaller crafts had speeds significantly less than the DD's they wouldn't be available much during the first landing wave.
2) Nope.
3) German destroyers at Narvik were without ammo, without fuel and their crews were used as a simple infanryman in the defence of the city. Hence that wasn't a naval battle at all.
But even without this consideration still the losses of the Germans and Allies (UK + France + Norway) were in the balance for the Germans.
In addition the german U-boats suffered greatly by flawed torpedoes, a problem that was later fixed.
The following 2 facts should help evaluation of Germany's performance in Norway:
a) Germany won the campaign
b) The UK goverment was voted a vote of non-confidence as a result of the campaign.

 

1) Yes it does. Read my posts.

2) Hmmmmm, the german barge fleet is estimated to reach british shores in 12-30 hours. How did that become 10 days?

3) Wrong. Check the distance from Norway to Scapa Flow.

4) Sure

5) Hmmmmm, so what will it sink if there's nothing floating in the channel?
And leave to where? Closest ports would be bombarded for the last month and a half. Wouldn't it need to resupply at some point?

6) Are you seriously saying that the RN can navigate accross mined waters at night as if there are no mines there?

7) I agree. All I'm saying is that LW had the tools and training to perform night anti-ship attacks over the channel.
The decision to do it would have depended on a well thought out strategic plan.

8) I gave the example of HMS_Delight previously.
In addition, warships need to resupply and repair damages. For this they need ports and at ports
they become stationary.

9) I'm still waiting for your counter-argument.

Btw. It appears that some people here think I somehow "wish" that the Sealion scenario I propose could come true.
I guarantee that's not the case.
I'm interested only in the truth. In the sense of wheather my hypothesis would be plausable.
So rest assured that I give credit to your arguments where it's deserved.

 

That was just the first elements of the first wave.,3 infantry divisions with a few tanks and no heavy artillery, the total of 9 infantry divisions in the first wave would take 10 days to land

In May 1940 the destroyer HMS Codrington sailed the 530 miles from Scarpa Flow to Dover in 23 hours

If it takes the German fleet 12-30 hours just to get to the invasion area's how are they going to unload and return to base in time to avoid the RN. To get the amount of supplies needed to the invasion force the supply route will have to be in operation around the clock.

The furthest port in the UK is just 23 hours away, the RN could be out of the effective range of the Luftwaffe in a few hours

They are fully capable of finding their way through the cleared paths at night

I'll be kind and say it might be possible for the Luftwaffe to sink or damage a couple of ships at night, but stop an anti-invasion force... not a chance.

I could come up with the claim that the RAF might engage in kamikaze attacks as well, its just as plausible

 

1. So the Luftwaffe is going to be pounding the ports & vessels for a month to a month & half prior to invasion right? They presumedly,if they're smart enough , will be trying to put finis to the RAF right before that right? How long will the latter take? Now I don't think the French Campaign was over before June and historically they didn't seem to have the RAF on the ropes before what late August or early September? Even if early August if it then takes another 1-1 1/2 months to damage the ports(unless you think they could do both at the same time which historically they couldn't) and knock out the vessels thereof(and the smaller vessels could use much smaller ports and estuaries that bigger ships can't use and it also multiplies the number of targets for the Luftwaffe) you would have it still being middle-late September before the invasion starts ,awfully late in the year especially their needing good weather to conduct Sealowe or have you forgotten the problems the Allies went through in getting Overlord going? Eisenhower took a big gamble going on with Overlord with just a window of fair weather conditions furthermore he made that decision based on expierence the Allies had with Operations Torch,Husky ,invasion of Madagascar,the Operations in the Pacific, and Anzio . He knew just what his troops could accomlish because they had done it before.

2.Ok I'll take your word for it BUT the Germans never ever attempted anything like this before and no Norway doesn't count because as I stated previously that was against a nation with just a 15,000 man army,no airforce and navy to speak of.

3. Oh??? They weren't out of ammo when the 5 RN DD's came into Narvik against 10 much larger ,more powerful vessels did they? I brought this operation around Narvik up to showthe RN's night fighting capabilities compared to the Kriegsmarines and to show that the RN wasn't above sending a very expensive/valauble BB up restrictive Norweigion Fiords to further their purpose. If they'll risk a BB in that situation it makes you wonder just how aggresive the RN would be in repulsing an invasion in the English Channel . The RN certainly didn't know if the German DD's had torpedoes or not when they sent the Warspite up that fiord did they? All in all a very ballsy move on part of the RN. The balance of losses were not in favor of the Germans either not when considering the Germans didn't have any BB's left in service after the campaign, their DD force was down to 10 vessels, all 4 of their CA's were out of service or sunk due to that campaign and their CL force was decimated . What they lost they couldn't afford to loose while the RN could afford and when you take the capabilities of replacing the losses into account it's even worse for the Kriegsmarine.

I don't get how you can state that Chamberlien's government getting a vote of no confidence during the Norweigion Campaign and being replaced by Churchill's government was a "strategic victory" for the Germans quite the contrary. Hitler may have been able to negotiate with Chamberlein's government but with Churchill's government?? Not a chance and Churchill rallied the British peoiple to the point that Hitler was going to have to BEAT THEM not just come to some type of understanding.

 

For Pete's sake, not Sealion again! They were going to try to pull off an amphibious assault on England with fishing boats to carry three half-divisions without air superiority? One wish they tried, the war might have ended a lot sooner if they did.

 

This debate is completely pointless. I have had this discussion on another forum moderated by a former NATO S-3 (that's Operations Officer in a division HQ for you). His response: Not a chance in hell!

 

No, the government won the vote.
Chamberlain resigned because of two reasons, the reduced majority for the government in the no-confidence vote showed him that he personally had lost the support of a large number of MP's, and secondly, he felt that due to the threat facing Britain, all the major parties should form a coalition government, but both Labour and the Liberals indicated they would refuse to serve in a coalition while he was leader.

 

Read winnies own sarcasm on the matter... Prime minister to general ismay for c.o.s. Committee and commander in chief home forces. 30 march 1941... In the invasion exercise victor,2 armoured 1 motorised and 2 infantry divisions were assumed to be landed by the enemy on the norfolk coast in the teeth of heavy opposition. They fought their way ashore, and were all assumed to be in action at the end of 48 hours. I presume the details of this remarkable feat have been worked out by the staff concerned. Let me see them. For instance how many ships and transports carried these 5 divisions? How many armoured vehicles did they comprise, how many lorries, how many guns, how much ammunition, how many men how many tons of stores? How far did they advance in the first 48 hours how many men and vehicles were assumed to have landed in the first 12 hours what percentage of ships while the first 48 hours of fighting was going on? Had they completed emptying their cargoes, or were they still laying inshore off the beaches? What naval escort did they have? Was the landing at this point protected by superior daylight fighter formations? How many fighter aeroplanes did the enemy have to employ if so to cover the landing places? All this data would be most valuable for our future offensive operations. I should be very glad if the same officers would work out a scheme for our landing an exactly similar force on the french coast at the same extreme range of our fighter protection. And assuming that the germans have naval superiority in the channel. Such an enterprise as this accomplished in 48 hours would make history and if the staffs will commit themselves definately to the adventure and can show how it is worked out in detail. I should very much like to bring it before the defence committee for action at the earliest moment.

 

The Germans had not a chance in hell to execute Sealion successfully. The operation hinges on an air battle they did not win and ships that they did not have. Taking the wild assumption that the Germans somehow "won" the battle over Britain. The British response would be to move their air bases further north out of German reach but still put the channel and the beach head within striking range. Then the Luftwaffe would be caught between THREE missions: 1. Protect the fleet 2. Fight RN or 3. Fight RAF. If they fail ANY one of those missions, they were lost.

The Germans did not have the strategic depth or skill to invade England, period. As for the RN's supposed incompetence in tracking down ships, it does not take much brains to locate the wake of hundreds of ships in the channel. Not at all.

 

Thanks my knowledge of British politics is putting it charitably very limited. However IMHO the Norweigion Campaigh,if that is what did it, forcing a change in the British government and more importantly a change in the populations attitude towards the war was the last thing the Germans wanted. Hell Churchill should have sent Hitler a case of beer and flowers for helping put him in office.

 

If they were trading off one plane for one DD you would be correct. However that's far from the case. Without knowing the exchange ratio you really can't draw any reasonable conclusions.

I disagree but even if it did there's a lot of difference between a high speed run up the channel and a very slow crossing followed by several days of sitting off the British coast.

That's not what the reference I posted suggested.

 

You have produced no convincing argument why it wouldn't? Maybe if you posted some more details. Indeed I believe the prefered way of advocating a what if here is to choose a reasonable point of departure (POD) and then argue what would logically follow from that. I'm not even sure what your POD is here indeed there seem to be multiple ones all of them calling for things to go just right for the Germans and the British not to react to them. All signs of a very weak "what if".

Who said they needed to completely clear the mines or would even try. It is worth noteing that the Germans were much shorter on mine sweeping vessels and in a more precarious postion in regards to them.

That they did it in Spain against a relativly undefended port doesn't mean that they can do it with any success against Britain.

In 1940? and against targets over the channel?

Which were mostly sitting ducks in a port closer to thier bases and with at best an inpromptu AA defence.

How is this going to help at night? Not at all sure you will get German pilots to agree to this. Goering is going to fight it unless Hitler makes a real strong point of it and by then it will be too late.

 

I take no credit for the passage posted; it is written by Bigfella from World Affairs Board.

 

Not really. They couldn't put the mine fields in they hoped to even if things went really well. If things went badly they would have been even shorter of neeed vessels.

No it was at least three.
Axis History Factbook: Order of Battle for Unternehmen Seelöwe (Sep 1940)
shows at least 4 some of the other sources even more. Even if all goes well and they can make 6 knots the crossing is going to take 12-14 hours along the shortest path. Some may well take more than 24 hours. The British can sail counter clockwise from Scapa and still arive at the invasion beaches before the Germans.

It's a number that was posted on the discussions over on the axis history forum. Here are some that address the unloading issue although they may not state that exact figure.
'Operation Sealion' - was it possible - Page 829 - Armchair General and HistoryNet >> The Best Forums in History
This thread has some mention of unloading and turn around times and includes some more references:
Axis History Forum • View topic - Operation Sea Lion - thoughts
There is a reference of the original German plan suggesting 3 days unloading for the first wave. Resupply and follow on waves would of course take more time if they were attempted. US amphibious assaults in the Pacific usually took several days to get things ashore as well.
Axis History Forum • View topic - Operation Sea Lion - thoughts
Suggest that some of the barges would have taken 3 days just to get to the beaches.
German plans for the invasion of England 1940 (Operation Sealion)
Is a very intersting document and mentions at one point the km proposed the second wave being 10 days behind the first (Pages 19-20).

Hand waving is not addressing.

I read it I don't believe it's possible. Just because this is a what if doesn't mean we suspend our belief in what's possible and what's not. Especially if it's not part of the initial POD.

Documentation PLS.

Then that's not the warning one would expect at most ports.

What appology?

Many if not most fighers that were shot down never saw thier attacker. Having to to take a few extra seconds can be critical. Also consider that if they engage in a dogfight early on they are burning a lot more fuel and may well loose contact with their bombers.

How do you come by that? and how much of it is useable? And of course the Germans didn't control the whole of Europe.

Compared to the GDP perhaps. Compared to the available foreign exchange I suspect not.

 

Really? How do you know? And how much would be accessable?

 

The green log started getting water logged pretty quickly but I agree irrelevant to this scenario. They wouldn't have had any green balsa and probably no appreciable amount of balsa at all. Not to mention nobody experianced in working with it as a full scale structural material.

Actually a lot of it is not plausable as we've shown and most of the rest is up in the air.

Most not all was produced in Europe. But that doesn't mean it's available in the time frame required.

And have their own problems. As it was they were busy modifying these barges as fast as possible now you are committing even more resources and requireing even more workers and by the way the economy is suffering a significant dislocation because the barges aren't performing their intended function.

 

You haven't produced any compelling evidence that the LW would be able to do this indeed there is reason to think there would be little left of the LW if they tried to do so by the end of the month.

Actually if you look in the pdf I posted earlier you will see that there were some problems in this regard. One of them was the varriation in when the tides occured.

That seems to describe the second battle said situation resulted from the first. See:
Battle of Narvik ww2 Naval Battles Royal Navy

The KM as a surface force was essentially destroyed during the invasion. And that was atacking a contry at peace by surprise that was far weaker than Britain.

But not in time for this scenario and operating in the channel is a rather dangeroud proposition for subs any way. While we're at it lets point out that the British also have some subs with working torpedoes and that the Germans have almost nothing with any ASW capability at this point.