Operation Sealion by Air??

Let’s say that during a more well though out strategy the Germans decide to focus less on navy and more on air power. So instead of building the Bismarck, Tirp, Graff Spree, etc they have HC and destroyers and a higher quantity of U-Boats.

Any way there focus is on the Luftwaffe. They refocus and instead of 3000 + planes have 5,000 aircraft with a corresponding growth among air transport. Including in this scenario is the increase in airborne from 2 to 5 divisions.

After the fall of France they drop 2 -3 divisions in a closely grouped number of airports. Once the airports are secure they operate there Me109’s and ground support aircraft out of these fields. They begin a very intensive air transport of traditional forces as well as light – med tanks in there large transports. From there a possible expansion to certain ports.

As the Brit army as reeling from Dunkirk and with a lack of wepons could they have achieved success?

Maybe if they build an amphibious landing force and a Luftwaffe with a naval air arm that a) can work with the navy and b) can sink ships as well as the Japanese before they lost all their good pilots.

A couple-3 airborne divisions aren't going to cut it, even assuming the whole second-order counterfactual thing is true and events proceed as per OTL except with a better Luftwaffe and a different navy. i.e. the Germans still have to kick off their Ardennes operation after losing their Belgium invasion plans, with what? 5 or 6 years divergence at this point the odds are slim indeed that things turn out the same.

Resupply by air?

Stalingrad ring any bells?

The lift isn't there, even if you double the planes available.

It's the same as the regular version, just a bit less costly to the Germans (3 divisions lost vs. 6)

Let’s say that during a more well though out strategy the Germans decide to focus less on navy and more on air power. So instead of building the Bismarck, Tirp, Graff Spree, etc they have HC and destroyers and a higher quantity of U-Boats.

Click to expand...

This requieres an awfull lot of foresight given that the Panzerschiffs (Deutsland, Spee, Scheer) were planned from around 1928 and were launched between 1931 and 1934.

Any way there focus is on the Luftwaffe. They refocus and instead of 3000 + planes have 5,000 aircraft with a corresponding growth among air transport. Including in this scenario is the increase in airborne from 2 to 5 divisions.

Click to expand...

As usual there is no mention of the likely responces by the British Empire, France, etc. It would be safe to say that any such increase in numbers is met by the poms and frogs increasing their airforces by a similar margin.

After the fall of France they drop 2 -3 divisions in a closely grouped number of airports. Once the airports are secure they operate there Me109’s and ground support aircraft out of these fields. They begin a very intensive air transport of traditional forces as well as light – med tanks in there large transports. From there a possible expansion to certain ports.

Click to expand...

First no mention of an air battle over England so either this is mass suicide by the Jerries or we presume the guts of the RAF has been commited to the Battle of France... both of which seem unlikely.
You may be able to maintain the initial landings by air but I doubt you can both expand and reinforce this force without seizing a port.
On the issue of airtransportable tanks I am afraind you will either have to make do with Gliders carrying light Tanks or wait for the Messerschmitt Me 323 to appear in 1941.

As the Brit army as reeling from Dunkirk and with a lack of wepons could they have achieved success?

Click to expand...

An airborne landing would have a powerful moral effect which could bring the poms to their knees. However the chances of an airborne invasion actually militarally destroying Britain is simply absurd.

Cockroach said:

On the issue of airtransportable tanks I am afraind you will either have to make do with Gliders carrying light Tanks or wait for the Messerschmitt Me 323 to appear in 1941.

Click to expand...

WW2 airborne forces were essentially defensive in nature: in most operations they dropped in a area which they proceeded to defend until conventional forces arrived to relieve them. That is why they were hot on anti-tank weapons. Without tanks the Germans are going to be easily boxed in by the British, ground down and destroyed.

However there is one solution to the tank problem and that is going to take even more foresight than an airborne Sealion. Helicopter gunships!

If the uprated Fw61 is developed as an Army scout helicopter and has a couple of rockets fitted to it, it might just do the job. It is certainly not going to be any Apache. There is no way that cannon or yet-to-be-invented missiles could be fitted to it. It is going to take one almightly leap of imagination though!

For more details see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_61

WI the Germans drop two divisions, one, or even a half in the SE exactly at the time of Dunkirk? The British are unable or unwilling to send or receive shipping and the flotilla of little boats, and in the melee & confusion, for the sacrifice of 2-10,000 fallschirmtruppen, the British lose the BEF. Does it cost them the war?

Remember, at the time of Dunkirk
One third of the BEF was still in France after Dunkirk and was evacuated later.
Essentially all the British tanks were still in Britain. They still hadn't got around to sending them to France. Let alone the Canadian armored division that would have come in so handy at Sedan.
Now if the Germans had built blimps instead of dirigibles, and sent them on a one way mission to Britain at night, then maybe they could have landed tanks. Light tanks, anyway.

Michael B said:

However there is one solution to the tank problem and that is going to take even more foresight than an airborne Sealion. Helicopter gunships!

If the uprated Fw61 is developed as an Army scout helicopter and has a couple of rockets fitted to it, it might just do the job. It is certainly not going to be any Apache. There is no way that cannon or yet-to-be-invented missiles could be fitted to it. It is going to take one almightly leap of imagination though!

For more details see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_61

Click to expand...

A few small problems: (data taken from here)
1. Range:124 nm/230 km... In other words it needs to fly to the very limit of its range (note range NOT combat radius) to get to the likely battle front... so you better hope the Paratroopers remembered to bring some fuel.
2. Max. speed :
66 kts
122 km/h

Cruising speed :
49 kts
90 km/h

Too slow... easy lunch for a Hurricane, Spitfire, Blenheim or even a Sopwith Camel.
3. Armourment... results in degredation of the above performance. Also I don't think there was any consideration of the use of Rockets as AT weapons yet...

WI the Germans drop two divisions, one, or even a half in the SE exactly at the time of Dunkirk? The British are unable or unwilling to send or receive shipping and the flotilla of little boats, and in the melee & confusion, for the sacrifice of 2-10,000 fallschirmtruppen, the British lose the BEF. Does it cost them the war?

Click to expand...

Fighter Command vs a couple of hundred Ju-52s? The Germans are lucky if any orginised force larger than a platoon reaches the ground.
I also doubt there is much chance that this would shut down Operation Dynamo (aka Dunkirk evacuation). Also somewhat off topic the "flotilla of little boats" is rather inaccurate, if fact most troops were evacuated by RN Destroyers, various Cross Channel Ferries and Irsh Sea Ferries.

Cockroach said:

A few small problems: (data taken from here)
1. Range:124 nm/230 km... In other words it needs to fly to the very limit of its range (note range NOT combat radius) to get to the likely battle front... so you better hope the Paratroopers remembered to bring some fuel.
2. Max. speed :
66 kts
122 km/h

Cruising speed :
49 kts
90 km/h

Too slow... easy lunch for a Hurricane, Spitfire, Blenheim or even a Sopwith Camel.
3. Armourment... results in degredation of the above performance. Also I don't think there was any consideration of the use of Rockets as AT weapons yet...


...

Click to expand...

49 knots?

Send some pheasant hunters with buckshot rounds!

I think that the act of FIRING a rocket would have been a fatal decision for this ship.

one thing I've often wondered is just what would have happened if the Luftwaffe had beaten the RAF? It could have been done.... drop tanks, better strategy, etc. But what then? The Germans still have no real landing craft, not enough of a navy to take on the RN, and the Luftwaffe alone isn't going to take out the RN. So, I wonder if the Germans would have had few choices other than to research longer ranged aircraft (and maybe those jets) while the RN rebuilds itself comfortably in the north....

I once read a book by Judith Kerr about her life in WW2's Britain where she writes how many Brits feared a German paratrooper's attack after the fall of France. Many of the stories people told were about those paratroopers disguised f.e. as nuns and that they only were discovered because they wore jackboots under their habits

IMO the potential assets of focussing on airpower instead of seapower concering Sea Lion will not be in the invasion itself, but in gaining control of the crossing and landing zone.

For many reasons it wasn't realistic for Germany to build a navy to match the Royal Navy, but a Luftwaffe capable of doing the same in a crossing and landing zone might not be impossible.

Most important will be doctrine and training, allowing the Luftwaffe to be subordinated a tactical situation on the sea. That would be contrary to most airgeneral's visons of airforces winning wars, and probbaly requires Göring changing personality or the Luftwaffe changing commander.

Next a lot could be achieved by training as many crews as possible for attacking sea targets. Stukas need a heavy AP bomb too and the twin engine bombers torpedoes. The idea of level bombers being a threat to moving sea targets must be given up early.

In December 1941 80 Japanese bombers, not all with torpedoes overwhelmed two fast British battleships - i.e. 40 pr ship. In this context the total medium bomber force committed in the BoB (roughly 1000 planes), if trained/equipped for seaattack, ought to be able to match at least 25 capital ships - the RN total was 15. Far from all were in the home fleet, which also included other shiptypes, but 1000 sea-attack bombers will IMO be more than enough.

Traning 1000 planes for seaattack will indeed not be a small task, but it is much smaller than building a equivalent navy, and could to a very large degree be kept clandestine. The allies anyway thought the Luftwaffe was far more numerous than it actually was.

The biggest cost would be those planes not being capable of supporting both the army and the navy at the same time. That ought not to be a problem in a Sea Lion, but they couldn't know that when planning it all years ahead. So I guess an attention to naval target will need an expansion in numbers too. Using British calculations from the early 40's the cost of keeping 40 twin engine bombers operational was roughly equivalent to keeping one battleship operational. So if we start by giving up the four German capital ships that will "pay" an expansion of 160 bombers, and next the 3 heavy cruisers should pay for at least 40 more. The Panzerschiffe and the lighter forces are probably the minimum required, and there was only 57 Uboats in service by the outbreak of WWII. I guess you will need at least 10 subs. to pay for a battleship, but perhaps the best alternative would be going for a greater number of the small coastal types, which would be ideal for ambushing in the North Sea and the Channel.

A force of 200 well trained naval bombers will be able to inflict very heavy casualties on the RN, losses heavy enough to have UK seek peace, but will need good luck to keep a determined RN from interferring in the crossing zone. With 400 odds are beginning to look good here too, and with 600 I think the British Isles begin to look doomed.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Operation Airlion?
no way!

Very good points - the maintence cost of the BB for the 40 Bombers is an intresting point - just a quick question - I assume this does include the cost of the crew and the initial cost of the BB vs the planes

trajen777 said:

Very good points - the maintence cost of the BB for the 40 Bombers is an intresting point - just a quick question - I assume this does include the cost of the crew and the initial cost of the BB vs the planes

Click to expand...

I haven't seen the actual calculation (it is mentioned in Chuchill's memoirs, and DK Brown quotes him in "From Nelson to Vanguard") but from the context I understand that the construction cost is included. I assume that it also include replacing lost planes from attrition as well as refitting a battleship.

It anyway puts into perspective what huge effort keeping up the strategic bombing effort was. AFAIK Bomber Command alone peaked at about 1000 bombers - most of them four engine (the calc. is for twin engine) and to that can be added even more in the USAF.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Re: Fw61

Cockroach said:

1. Range:124 nm/230 km... In other words it needs to fly to the very limit of its range (note range NOT combat radius) to get to the likely battle front... so you better hope the Paratroopers remembered to bring some fuel.

Click to expand...

I knew that I was scraping the battle when I suggested it and you are perfectly right about Paratroopers having to re-fuel it. I always assumed that if it were included, it would operate from English soil.

However, when one thinks when today's helicopter gunships can do to tanks, it seemed a pity not to suggest a Neanderthal version for Operation Airlion.

I did some quick checking on the BB vs Aircraft costs - just kept in back of mind

the Bismarck was built at 10.6 mm Gold Marks and an opeating cost of 80% where is the cost of a JU88 was 30,000 Gold Marks and a 45% opeating cost over its life. so the formula is

Inital cost BB 10.8 mm
Cost of 360 planes = 10.8 mm
Maintence over life bb= 8.5 mm
Maintenc over life 360 air = 3.2 mm
Savings of 5.3 mm of 360 aircraft over 1 bb

SO if you eliminate the 4 german BB & BC + the 3 PBB you end up with 2520 aircraft + 36 mm savings for investing in Eva Browns mountain house or Goring paintings

I think knocking out the airfields would be the first step. You would need more divisions, but I would offer a peace treaty as soon as possible. In the long run the Nazi's would lose, not alot of ships for transport, and an island of people against them for the most part. This would have to occur close to the fall of France.

The inital shock of the Nazi's landing I think would be enough for a quick peace treaty. You must remeber at the time most thought of the Germans as near superhuman soldiers.

Would it have made any diffrence if they had finished work on the Zepplein??Also assuming that they had planes to fly off it to.

The_Leader said:

Would it have made any diffrence if they had finished work on the Zepplein??Also assuming that they had planes to fly off it to.

Click to expand...

I doubt it. It would have been a waste of resources. Zeps move slow, and can't turn all that quickly. Plus one good burst from armor peircing would make it go into flames.