Your defence of Norway 1940, April 10th

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Given the forces provided historically and any squadrons that you can find airfields and logistic support, what would you do? Assume that you can make the armed forces communicate and co-operate (a bit ASB so don't over use this).

The 'state of play':

Roger Keyes is a good place to start. Good luck.

Norway has the world's fourth largest merchant fleet at this time, so supply shipping shouldn't be a problem.

OTL Norway Campaign Map
OTL Flanders early 1940
OTL Flanders Campaign Map (You aren't allowed to expect this, but you do have to leave all forces shown in defence here)

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Objectives

I'd be aiming for:

Trondheim Force South (TFS):
Melhus (and Hyttfossen) aiming for Ler then Storen
Borsa (and Malmsjoen/Anoya isthmus) aiming for Orkanger and Fannrem

Trondheim Force North (TFN):
1) Stjordal (Hold)
2) Malvik & Hell aiming for Selbu
3) Namsos (supported by landing)

Trodheim Force Centre (TFC):
Trondheim and support Force South

Narvik Force (NF):
Narvik (plus Fagemes and Rombaken bridges)

Trying to get as many Hurricanes into Trondheim that I can support

Try to bomb airports in the southern half of Norway.

Grimm Reaper · Jul 17, 2009

Are we defending only with Norwegian forces or do we control the British as well?

arctic warrior · Jul 17, 2009

Why wait till April 10???
Seems like April 9. would be a day of important decisions.

Your map only show sea movement; how about air? Aalborg Airfield was damn important to the Germans to fly in assault troops and reinforcements. Get it out of action and the early days seems much better for the defenders.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

You are the French and British (CW) forces. You have limited lines of communication with Norway's defending forces. April 9th has happened as OTL. Lucky for the allies that things are going to change from April 10th as they were really messed up OTL.

I quite agree that the airfields in Denmark and Germany are a problem too. Can you solve that problem with the resources available to you? I think you would get shot out of the sky (really badly) if you attempt to deny Germany airfields in Denmark and Germany. Overlapping air cover and supply lines are too good.

Order of battle (you can add from reserves in north of Britain)

Grimm Reaper · Jul 17, 2009

The problem is that the Anglo-French plan was woefully inept, assigning battalions or, rarely, a brigade, while the Germans started with entire divisions. If you can't get several divisions in fast there isn't much hope.

Best best is to load up as many troops as you can, sail at night and arrive off either Bergen or Trondheim at dawn and force your way in. Meanwhile have a battleship or two blast Stavanger air field.

Assign a carrier to each of the two operations.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Revenge is sweet

Or should that be slow and poorly armoured?

I'm going to use Revenge class battleships to force Trondheim fjord. A good a place to sink them as anywhere. Running on coal means that the crews and any embarked forces won't burn in the water if they are sunk in the fjord.

It seems that Resolution was the only one available. Any left at home (Scarpa Flow)? No, although HMS Ramillies is in Gibraltar and could be recalled and Revenge is in the North Atlantic Escort Force and could also be transferred. They will have to lead a line of troop transports.

wiki/HMS_Royal_Sovereign_(05)
At the outset of war in September 1939, Royal Sovereign was with the Home Fleet. By mid 1940, she had moved to the Mediterranean Fleet,

So maybe HMS Ramillies is too much.

Grimm Reaper said:
Assign a carrier to each of the two operations.

Which aircraft carriers and when?

When the invasion of Norway occurred in April 1940, she was recalled to home waters. On 23 April, she and HMS Ark Royal arrived in Britain, and sailed the next day for Norwegian waters. She conducted a series of strikes on German positions in Norway with her Skua and Gladiator aircraft. On 27 April, she was detached to return to Britain to refuel, and returned to Norway on 1 May for further attacks. On this return trip, she brought some Gloster Gladiators to Norway to operate off of a frozen lake, but these were soon destroyed by the Germans. On 28 May, she delivered a squadron of Hawker Hurricane fighters to Bardufoss, which provided cover for the evacuation. On this voyage, she sailed without escort because there were no destroyers available. On 2 June, her aircraft assisted in providing cover in the Narvik evacuation. Starting on 5 June, Glorious took part in Operation Alphabet, the evacuation of Allied troops from Norway.

Oddball · Jul 17, 2009

perfectgeneral said:
Or should that be slow and poorly armoured?

I'm going to use Revenge class battleships to force Trondheim fjord. A good a place to sink them as anywhere. Running on coal means that the crews and any embarked forces won't burn in the water if they are sunk in the fjord.

You would be in for a nasty surprise as the Germans have seized the Norwegian costal fortreses intact at the mouth of the Trondheimsfjord.

And the Germans intend to use them, contrary to what the Norwegians did

Btw: here is an excellent source for the Battle of Norway: http://hem.fyristorg.com/robertm/norge/

Grimm Reaper · Jul 17, 2009

The forts will be very poorly manned, given barely 2000 Germans for the entire city/port/forts/airfield/etc, and if the ships can get past them Trondheim awaits.

LightInfa · Jul 17, 2009

Oddball said:
You would be in for a nasty surprise as the Germans have seized the Norwegian costal fortreses intact at the mouth of the Trondheimsfjord.

And the Germans intend to use them, contrary to what the Norwegians did

Btw: here is an excellent source for the Battle of Norway: http://hem.fyristorg.com/robertm/norge/

Well the Norwegians did bag the Bluecher with one of their coastal forts (but that wasn't at Trondheim).

arctic warrior · Jul 17, 2009

Oh, gah; replying to a thread and then it gets edited out of recognition!!!

Well the Norwegians did bag the Bluecher with one of their coastal forts (but that wasn't at Trondheim).

Oslo; April 9.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

LightInfa said:
Well the Norwegians did bag the Bluecher with one of their coastal forts (but that wasn't at Trondheim).

11 inch guns at close range and static torpedo tubes. Blucher didn't stand a chance. Trondheim has good coastal forts, but not that good. Add to that the the poorly armoured Revenge class put 'too much' armour against flat trajectories and not enough against falling line of shot. Ideal for forcing entrance past forts. Their slow top speed will never be reached in the confines of a fjord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namsos_CampaignRetired Admiral of the Fleet Sir Roger Keyes, MP, repeatedly urged Churchill to seize Trondheim from the Germans, using obsolete battleships if necessary, and offered to lead the attack.
It was planned to force the entrance to Trondheimsfjord with battleships knocking out the Norwegian coastal artillery forts at the entrance, recently captured by the Germans. Then an amphibious landing would take the city. It was also decided to land forces north and south of the fjord for a pincer attack on the City. The military officers responsible for these decisions were the chiefs of staff of the armed forces, Sir Dudley Pound of the Royal Navy, General Sir Edmund Ironside of the Royal Army and Air Chief Marshal Sir Cyril Newall of the Royal Air Force. But the Chiefs of Staff of the British armed forces got cold feet. The forcing of the narrows was reduced to a demonstration, with the main thrust being the two pincers. This eliminated the immediate use of the Trondheim airfields by the RAF. It also meant that the military forces would face German naval units in the fjord as well as Luftwaffe units in the air. Churchill was very disappointed, but faced the combined opposition of his naval advisers as well as the heads of the army and air force. He had to back down. Keyes was apoplectic, and this event, more than any, convinced him to join in an attack on the Government at the end of the Norwegian Campaign. See the Norway Debate for particulars.

arctic warrior · Jul 17, 2009

perfectgeneral said:
You are the French and British (CW) forces.

I quite agree that the airfields in Denmark and Germany are a problem too. Can you solve that problem with the resources available to you? I think you would get shot out of the sky (really badly) if you attempt to deny Germany airfields in Denmark and Germany. Overlapping air cover and supply lines are too good.

Aalborg is crucial. But you don't have a snowballs change in hell of taking it out.

It really demand a pre-war POD.

Ok, allied action:

U-boats as OTL and lots of them to sewer the surface supply line from Denmark to Norway to keep the advance elements from being reinforced.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Air cover is the weakest link

If Trondheim is taken, then that gives you 'airfields' (evidence?) that you can transfer Hurricanes to using HMS Furious.

Norway lacks decent AAA. Can we scrape together any?

Communist Wizard · Jul 17, 2009

Sabotage the British effort.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Communist Wizard said:
Sabotage the British effort.

Cryptic. Is this supposed to work towards the stated aim of the thread or are you being pointlessly partisan? Four words isn't enough to make your intent clear.

Leaving Norway to defend itself isn't an option with this thread, although it was a big ask of already strained resources.

stevep · Jul 17, 2009

perfectgeneral said:
Or should that be slow and poorly armoured?

I'm going to use Revenge class battleships to force Trondheim fjord. A good a place to sink them as anywhere. Running on coal means that the crews and any embarked forces won't burn in the water if they are sunk in the fjord.

perfectgeneral

I think you will find that the Iron Duke's and Tiger were the last British capital ships to be coal fueled. The R's like the proceeding Queen's were oil fueled.

I would also be less worried about the defending batteries and more about U boats and a/c, especially since subs had already given the RN some nasty shocks and I think the Germans committed quite a number to the campaign. Putting Warsprite into Narvik was a hell of a risk that paid off handsomely but that was a good bit further north and away from the main German effort.

Steve

Communist Wizard · Jul 17, 2009

perfectgeneral said:
Cryptic. Is this supposed to work towards the stated aim of the thread or are you being pointlessly partisan? Four words isn't enough to make your intent clear.

Leaving Norway to defend itself isn't an option with this thread, although it was a big ask of already strained resources.

The stated aim of the thread is to see how people would defend Norway with French or British troops. I would basically screw up as much as possible while making it look like ineptness on the British part. That's what I would do. That means withhold or slow supplies and troops, make sure the navy is really weak to the surface fleet and subs, and so on. If asked about it, I'll ask why I was put into such a position of power with no warning.
(And shouldn't this be in ASB?)

Snowman23 · Jul 17, 2009

I would go all or nothing. Commit the Naval Forces, that's my main advantage. Use the carriers to scout and provide all important air cover, protected by my heavy cruisers and AA cruisers. Form Battle Groups out of my 6 Capital Ships (4 Battleships, 2 Battlecruisers) protected by my Destroyers and modern Light Cruisers. I think a fast squadron with the battlecrusiers would be assigned to try and find and kill Scharnhorst and Gneisenau (Renown fought of both together, so i think both Renown's stand a good chance against them). The Battleships will be used in groups of two with escort, one will force Trondheim with most of my available forces, French Alpine troops and the Polish Mountain Brigade, land in the city after the fjord is safe, and then secure the town and airfield to allow hurricanes to fly in, and bombers to try runs at Danish airfield. The other Battlegroup will land British troops in the North around Narvik to support the Norwegian forces and take Narvik and its port. The Battle group will then rush south to meet with the second and help with bombardment and ship hunting. The plan seems it will either succeed beyond all doubts, or be a dismal failure. Then again, one must take risks. It relies on quick, decisive action.

perfectgeneral · Jul 17, 2009

Communist Wizard said:
The stated aim of the thread is to see how people would defend Norway with French or British troops. I would basically screw up as much as possible while making it look like ineptness on the British part. That's what I would do. That means withhold or slow supplies and troops, make sure the navy is really weak to the surface fleet and subs, and so on. If asked about it, I'll ask why I was put into such a position of power with no warning.
(And shouldn't this be in ASB?)

This is a discussion of how history could have been different with a change of approach from April 10th 1940 (a sudden change of chain of command, say, due to a crisis of confidence in the previous conduct of the campaign). How is that ASB? To assume that one could get away with 'pretending' to obey orders is a bit ASB, in my view. I did consider dictating a formal time line from a POD where an exasperated Churchill gets Roger Keyes put in charge. However it is a discussion forum. So I felt that putting it out to a tender of ideas was reasonable. The discipline of the 10th of April start prevents a complete re-jigging of the order of battle and forewarned preparations. If you take all year about it you will get caught up in a competition for resources with the battle for Flanders (or something else unexpected).