Operation Sealion Fails

Landshark · Feb 21, 2005

What would have happened if Operation Sealion failed?

Suppose the Kaiser had allowed his generals to divert 60% of Germany's tank strength from France to The Netherlands like they wanted to. Would that have been enough to stop the BEF landing successfully? And even if it was would the remaining German forces on the Western Front have been enough to hold the French back or would the French guerre de foudre have ripped through a German line as yet unmenaced from behind?

Would a failed Sealion see the Great War dragging on for several more years, maybe even until the 1930's?

If the Germans hadn't surrendered in 1927 what would have happened?

Would some sort of armistice be negociated when the combatants eventually exhausted themselves?

Would a German surrender after an extended slugging match lead to a "harsh peace that can only sow the seeds of future wars"?

Would a German victory cause a revolution in France and lead to that nation's third experiment with republicanism?

Could heavy losses during a failed Sealion even cause America, Australia, South Africa and India to break away from the British Empire?

Gamingboy · Feb 21, 2005

HE SAID SEALION!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

AND HE HAD IT IN WWI!

AHHHHHHHHH!

Othniel · Feb 21, 2005

(OOC: When was the POD on this one? Doubleblinds that far into the future...oi....)

hans · Feb 21, 2005

Operation Sealion is on 1940!

Anyone has forgotten history !

Well, Operation Sealion fails on 1940 because Battle of England was lost by Germany!

Grey Wolf · Feb 21, 2005

As Othniel says this is a double-blind

Therefore forget what you know of history and focus on the data given to you

Suppose the Kaiser had allowed his generals to divert 60% of Germany's tank strength from France to The Netherlands like they wanted to. Would that have been enough to stop the BEF landing successfully? And even if it was would the remaining German forces on the Western Front have been enough to hold the French back or would the French guerre de foudre have ripped through a German line as yet unmenaced from behind?

- This says to me that it is NOT WW1. The question of whether or not it is a later analogue or a repeat match would seem to be answered by the existence of the tank which is ahistorical to a non-WW1 timeline. Thus, WW1 has been fought and ended with some other result than OTL. IMHO its ended 1917 or after in order to allow for the development and deployment of the tank.

Now, I have seen double-blinds like this in the past, where the actual data of the POD is irrelevant because the point is to take the data given and construct your own (as a reader) POD/ATL in your reply.

Seems the readers so far have not come across this way of doing things

Grey Wolf

Landshark · Feb 21, 2005

Grey Wolf said:
As Othniel says this is a double-blind

Therefore forget what you know of history and focus on the data given to you

Suppose the Kaiser had allowed his generals to divert 60% of Germany's tank strength from France to The Netherlands like they wanted to. Would that have been enough to stop the BEF landing successfully? And even if it was would the remaining German forces on the Western Front have been enough to hold the French back or would the French guerre de foudre have ripped through a German line as yet unmenaced from behind?

- This says to me that it is NOT WW1. The question of whether or not it is a later analogue or a repeat match would seem to be answered by the existence of the tank which is ahistorical to a non-WW1 timeline. Thus, WW1 has been fought and ended with some other result than OTL. IMHO its ended 1917 or after in order to allow for the development and deployment of the tank.

Now, I have seen double-blinds like this in the past, where the actual data of the POD is irrelevant because the point is to take the data given and construct your own (as a reader) POD/ATL in your reply.

Seems the readers so far have not come across this way of doing things

Grey Wolf

Thank you, now I won't have to go on that killing spree.

However some of your suppositions can be argued against GW.

The idea of an "armoured war car" had been considered well before WW1 so their presense without WW1 is possible though I do admit the name "tank" is something of a butterfly - I did consider using a new term and the more I think of it the more I regret not doing so.

There are two salient points about the prehistory of this:

Would a German victory cause a revolution in France and lead to that nation's third experiment with republicanism?

I think Grey Wolf should be able to guess the French head of state here.

And then there's this:

Could heavy losses during a failed Sealion even cause America, Australia, South Africa and India to break away from the British Empire?

Grey Wolf · Feb 21, 2005

Landshark said:
Would a German victory cause a revolution in France and lead to that nation's third experiment with republicanism?

Ah, bollocks no Third Republic.... Hmm three possibilities or two ? Chambord as King Henri followed by Louis Philippe and the rest of the Orleans line. Or a Bonapartist continuation with no 1870 but without 1870 how do you get a German EMPIRE and a Kaiser. So, the Chambord-Orleans compromise seems likely, or perhaps the OTL situation but with Chambord dying in the early 1870s when support for the monarchy is still strong and retrospectively the interegnum is seen as part of Louis Philippe's reign ?

Grey Wolf

Landshark · Feb 21, 2005

Don't tell me this is going Off Topic by turning into a regular timeline rather than a Double Blind

Anyway the 1870's Bourbon/Orleans restoration is correct however some aspects of European history would be affected by greater changes on the other side of the Atlantic.

Grey Wolf · Feb 21, 2005

Landshark said:
Don't tell me this is going Off Topic by turning into a regular timeline rather than a Double Blind

Anyway the 1870's Bourbon/Orleans restoration is correct however some aspects of European history would be affected by greater changes on the other side of the Atlantic.

Oh, I hadn't really uinderstood that before. Serves me right coming at this from the top and only now digging down towards the bottom

Sheesh, if you change the ARW then you could change everything so that any and all of the 19th century as we know it vanishes

Maybe France does engage in the war, but in this timeline loses so the money expended is spent but in vain. Gives a boost to revolutionaries etc

But how much would the possession of N America alter British finances, strategic imperatives, etc ? Massively I'd think

Not really sure what you have planned then... Oops thats being negative... Um ? Clues ???
Grey Wolf

Landshark · Feb 21, 2005

Grey Wolf said:
Oh, I hadn't really uinderstood that before. Serves me right coming at this from the top and only now digging down towards the bottom

Sheesh, if you change the ARW then you could change everything so that any and all of the 19th century as we know it vanishes

Maybe France does engage in the war, but in this timeline loses so the money expended is spent but in vain. Gives a boost to revolutionaries etc

But how much would the possession of N America alter British finances, strategic imperatives, etc ? Massively I'd think

Not really sure what you have planned then... Oops thats being negative... Um ? Clues ???
Grey Wolf

Or maybe not.

After all it's not called Alternate History for nothing.

Okay then.

I think even absent an ARW France is heading for a revolution in the late 17th century and that if you give a man like Napolean an opening he's going to take it. So if we speculate a similar to OTL Napoleanic War with a sideshow (in 1812?) where French troops and American troops class in Louisiana.

The period after the restoration of the Bourbons raises problems. What will Britain do between 1815 and 1851 and how will that affect the continent?

Possibly the easiest and most interesting solution is to accept that history between 1776 and 1927 is completely altered from OTL, that France may well have had republics in the 1800's and 1860's and no empire period of any sort, that Germany unified under radically different circumstances and that the Monarch of Britain isn't George V but William VIII or Edward IX or Mary IV.

The main point of a Double Blind is however to produce your own ideas rather than the thread starter giving his so there's really no fixed rules on how it should look in the end.

Othniel · Feb 19, 2006

Maybe this could be turned into a good regular history rather than a double blind....

Landshark · Feb 20, 2006

Othniel said:
Maybe this could be turned into a good regular history rather than a double blind....

Bloody Hell! I just happened to take a look at this while searching for something else and it's been bumped in the last 24 hours!

Othniel · Feb 20, 2006

Landshark said:
Bloody Hell! I just happened to take a look at this while searching for something else and it's been bumped in the last 24 hours!

The thread Chingo spawned reminded me of this...I'm sorry if its bumping did offend...wait, no I'm not...I'm glad I bumped this thread.

Landshark · Feb 20, 2006

Othniel said:
The thread Chingo spawned reminded me of this...I'm sorry if its bumping did offend...wait, no I'm not...I'm glad I bumped this thread.

It's always nice when someone bumps one of your old threads. It massages the ego while still giving one a spurious air of modesty.

Landshark · Apr 28, 2007

I happened to come across this double blind while searching for something else and thought I see if anyone had any ideas about it?

hypern · Apr 30, 2007

Well I know that my grandfather with serving with the Infantry core when England was invaded. Well I wish history was different but then again I wouldn't have existed and learnt how to speak German.

You see if Germany had failed to invade the UK, then evanually it would have starved out due to the blockade. Put it this way the UK navy at the time was a load of crap. My books that I have read which where from the Company Berlin Books say that the UK navy was a joke. The leadership was incompetent and further more the Germans were going to win the war Inevitably.

I don't read book like the ones by Winston Alfred who suggest that Germany could have lost. Pah get your facts staright.

Anyway I am to Germany next week to see my uncle who is going to show me a future in the German air force so if you have anything more to say, then say it.

( This is DBWI COMMENT K)