Never mind Sealion here is the attack on the Radiostation Helgoland
- Thread starter oberdada
- Start date
Earling said:
The Luftwaffe could have attacked England instead of Poland.
In the Sealion discussion, somebody stated, that once German troups landed on the Island, the British would be in big trouble, only problem (unsolvable too) was getting there in the first place through the Britisch home fleet.
So why not hide German soldiers in civilian Ships bring them to southern England and start a war.
Air supply could held.
I don't think this is absolutely impossable...
Provided a differnt German foreign policy in 1939
oberdada said:
To successfully invade you need so many improbable conditions that it rapidly approaches ASB status. (NOTE: No sea mammals were annoyed or harmed in the construction of this message!
)A short list:
1. German Air Supremacy - Completely destroy the RAF as a fighting force.
2. Control of the Seas - Wipe out the Royal Navy. Even a few heavy cruisers in the Channel will spell the end of any invasion force.
3. Hard to fight when you are starving - Win the Battle of the Atlantic by the end of 1940.
4. No USA involvement - Keep the United States totally out of the conflict (icluding Lend-Lease).
5. One Front at a time - No attacks against the USSR or any other sideshows.
6. Get to the beach - Develop an actual landing capacity.
7. Finish fast - If you wait too long the USSR will be ready to break the non-aggression pact when they find it most favorable.
Items 1 through 4 are just about impossible; item 5 requires Hitler to a) actually be sane & b) be willing to set his dream of Lebensraum aside ; item 6 seemed to have completely slipped German planners mind's; & item 7's a wild card.
Put it all together & you have a better chance of finding a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Happy St. Patrick's Day!
It would be absurd for the germans to invade GB without defeating the french first. The french were seen as the most powerfull army in 1939 and had borders with the Reich. A surprise Luftwaffe mission against the Royal Navy, Pearl Harbor style, is the only thing that could be done, of course, with a very different Luftwaffe.
That, or a POD so early that Sealion won't be Sealion. But a German Invasion could happen... Just have Hitler be a bit more navy-oriented, building up the Kriegsmarine in addition to the Wermacht (might be accomplished if they get someone smart like Speer to run the economy), and making it's central force a modernized force (probably with 1-3 carriers) that can guard the transports directly, while a stronger U-boot arm can guard the approaches.CalBear said:
Redbeard
Banned
luakel said:
But Hitler NOT being navy oriented was a main reason for the British letting him have his way for so long. If he for instance refuses to the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935 UK will instantly see him as a threat to the Empire (and not just to some obscure continental countries not big enough to swing a cat around in). So when the French ask for support for an intervention (could be the Rhineland event) the British will not say "easy now" as in OTL, but: "go get him!".
Regards
Steffen Redbeard
Tough going
It would be difficult, I think, for Hitler to violate the naval agreement significantly. Sure, he could cheat a bit more on displacement etc, but I expect more battleships would be noticed--Europe is a far more difficult place to hide ships than Japan.
Subs might be easier--they come in large numbers anyways.
Discovering a secret construction program would make Britain want to jump all over Hitler.
Invading England might result in the Irish Free State requesting--and getting--American support "to help preserve neutrality." How would Hitler react to American forces in his backyard?
luakel said:
It would be difficult, I think, for Hitler to violate the naval agreement significantly. Sure, he could cheat a bit more on displacement etc, but I expect more battleships would be noticed--Europe is a far more difficult place to hide ships than Japan.
Subs might be easier--they come in large numbers anyways.
Discovering a secret construction program would make Britain want to jump all over Hitler.
Invading England might result in the Irish Free State requesting--and getting--American support "to help preserve neutrality." How would Hitler react to American forces in his backyard?
King Thomas
Banned
The only way he could do it with a chance of success would be to secretly convert several liners into troopships, and sneak them in at Dover and Folkstone. Then however, they would start running out of ammo as they would not be able to bring in supplies. They might cause short term chaos, but the Royal Navy would seal off the sea behind them and the Army and RAF along with any possible armed police units would trap them and either slaughter them or force them to surrender.
King Thomas said:
I had something like that in mind, when I started this thread.
But a larger Panik is neaded, causing Chamberlin ( is he written like that? )
to seek terms, for peace.
Something like: No British intervention on the European Continent for 5 Years, would have meant a lot in WWII.
Afaik, Hitler deliberately only planned for a land war. He didn't really take a war against Britain in his account. With a little bit more sanity, he'd have known from the time he took office that his expansionist policies might lead to a war against the West, and he'd have allowed his generals and admirals to prepare accordingly.
With Germany not such a big country, winning such wars is only possible with lots of allies, the best available tactics, the most modern equipment, the most effective usage of the available ressources (soldiers, equipment...), and so on.
Germany wasn't able to match the industrial capacity of Britain, even France and Russia were out of German reach at the time afaik, though Germany caught up a lot until wwii started. Germany had some advantages in quality and was good in terms of technology (slightly below Britain, but above France and Russia).
Obvious conclusion is that Germany would need to develop effective and cheap new weapons able to defeat potential enemy tactics, without being regarded as too much of a threat.
They did partly: Their tanks (at the beginning of wwii) were mobile, able to surprise the enemy by crossing terrain not considered suitable for tanks until then, and they were used to deeply penetrate enemy lines to disrupt resupply, military units, and infrastructure far behind the front lines. Their Stukas were also pretty effective at the beginning of the war. Using radios in large numbers was also pretty new for continental Europe. U-boats were pretty effective (despite their high losses), but far too few.
By cutting back on some of the production especially of the very expensive weapons, Germany could easily have had a lot more of their most effective weapons available: More subs, more cannons, earlier and better assault rifles, more night vision sights/goggles, more torpedo boats, and so on.
While from 1933 to 1935, a good defense plan was all that was necessary, as Germany didn't have much offensive capacity then, beginning in 1936, it would have been necessary to make realistic plans for forward "defense" on the territory of any potential enemy - and to equip the military accordingly. That also includes different kinds of landing abilities by sea and air.
Everything together, Germany should be able to launch lots of functioning torpedos by boat and air (the Japanese could do it - Germany should also be able to), to gain sea control in any desired area (not everywhere - just where needed), to land sizable armies on any coast, and so on. Germany should also have spies in every country, able to sabotage transportation and military whenever necessary.
For wwii that means, after winning over France, there is no need to attack Norway. Instead, Germany sinks lots of British ships with subs, torpedo bombers, torpedo boats, mines, and so on. Then, when the British Navy is pretty much unable to counter it, the landings start. Lots of decoys, fake landings, and so on, keep the British busy. The real landings quickly establish a bridgehead somewhere south of London. The air superiority of the British causes Germany lots of problems and losses, but Britain has to surrender after a few weeks or months.
With Germany not such a big country, winning such wars is only possible with lots of allies, the best available tactics, the most modern equipment, the most effective usage of the available ressources (soldiers, equipment...), and so on.
Germany wasn't able to match the industrial capacity of Britain, even France and Russia were out of German reach at the time afaik, though Germany caught up a lot until wwii started. Germany had some advantages in quality and was good in terms of technology (slightly below Britain, but above France and Russia).
Obvious conclusion is that Germany would need to develop effective and cheap new weapons able to defeat potential enemy tactics, without being regarded as too much of a threat.
They did partly: Their tanks (at the beginning of wwii) were mobile, able to surprise the enemy by crossing terrain not considered suitable for tanks until then, and they were used to deeply penetrate enemy lines to disrupt resupply, military units, and infrastructure far behind the front lines. Their Stukas were also pretty effective at the beginning of the war. Using radios in large numbers was also pretty new for continental Europe. U-boats were pretty effective (despite their high losses), but far too few.
By cutting back on some of the production especially of the very expensive weapons, Germany could easily have had a lot more of their most effective weapons available: More subs, more cannons, earlier and better assault rifles, more night vision sights/goggles, more torpedo boats, and so on.
While from 1933 to 1935, a good defense plan was all that was necessary, as Germany didn't have much offensive capacity then, beginning in 1936, it would have been necessary to make realistic plans for forward "defense" on the territory of any potential enemy - and to equip the military accordingly. That also includes different kinds of landing abilities by sea and air.
Everything together, Germany should be able to launch lots of functioning torpedos by boat and air (the Japanese could do it - Germany should also be able to), to gain sea control in any desired area (not everywhere - just where needed), to land sizable armies on any coast, and so on. Germany should also have spies in every country, able to sabotage transportation and military whenever necessary.
For wwii that means, after winning over France, there is no need to attack Norway. Instead, Germany sinks lots of British ships with subs, torpedo bombers, torpedo boats, mines, and so on. Then, when the British Navy is pretty much unable to counter it, the landings start. Lots of decoys, fake landings, and so on, keep the British busy. The real landings quickly establish a bridgehead somewhere south of London. The air superiority of the British causes Germany lots of problems and losses, but Britain has to surrender after a few weeks or months.
Redbeard
Banned
oberdada said:
Even Pearl Harbour was just a dent in a navy at the size of USN or RN. But the thought of the Germans having prepared a large scale raid on Scapa flow is indeed interesting. So instead of just letting Günther Prien and his U47 trying out their luck we have a large number of midget subs entering the base combined with long range bombers attacking. The slightest leak about the Germans preparing such an operation will have security at Scapa Flow be increased though.
I believe however the main problem is that unlike in WWI the major part of the RN rarely stayed in Scapa Flow at any one time.
Regards
Steffen Redbeard
I assumed by sneak attack we were refering to a landing.
A landing which didn't happen at Pearl Harbour.
Getting a fleet into position and launching a bombing raid is one thing, providing the transport for thousands of men and their equipment is quite another.
Even then there are conspiracy theories claiming that FDR and co knew about the Pearl Harbour attack in advance.. but I don't believe them.
A landing which didn't happen at Pearl Harbour.
Getting a fleet into position and launching a bombing raid is one thing, providing the transport for thousands of men and their equipment is quite another.
Even then there are conspiracy theories claiming that FDR and co knew about the Pearl Harbour attack in advance.. but I don't believe them.