Glossary of Sealion Threads

[Garrison]

Sorry Garrison I totally disagree ...

Sea Lion is still a legitimate topic of discussion as evidenced by the fact that so many still start threads on the subject. Guiding people towards this sticky IS a good starting point, however mocking people and claiming that the only reason that a person has an interest is because the person asking the questions must be a closet Nazi is not right.

The threads highlighted within this sticky are very useful but they still leave some unanswered questions and plenty of room for discussion.

Sorry but the reality is that these endless new threads largely exist because people haven't read the sticky and just keep repeating the same stale old ideas. The one that prompted my ire(I was going to call it the newest one but we've had at least one more in the day since it was started) was the classic example; it threw in all the well worn POD's that have been raked over time and again.

And the discussion in them always ends up in the same place; Poster A says X is impossible; Poster B says it isn't and it goes round and round in circles.

BTW I have been just as critical on threads where Britain spontaneously decides to build jet fighters in time for the BoB as I have been on Sealion threads.

 

[American Enigma]

Pardon me for asking, but........

......isn't everything on this forum subject to individual interpretation? AH means going back in time (without the benefit of a fully-functioning Delorean with a flux capacitor) to imagine what our world would look like if one (or several) PODs had taken place. Imagine all the people on Earth during a given point in time. Each of us makes decisions every single day (some big, some not so big, some we don't even think about when we are making them). And any one (or several) of these decisions can influence the course of history in ways that the human mind is utterly incapable of wrapping itself around. An oversimplified example is in the Star Trek: TOS episode City on the Edge of Forever.

As far as how this relates to Sealion, any number of decisions (blunders) the Nazis made during the Battle of Britain effectively nullified any chance they might have had to invade the islands. However, what if the Nazis had knocked out Britain's radar system along the east and southeast coastline? That might have enabled the Luftwaffe to gain air superiority, destroy the RAF and make an invasion at least possible, if still highly improbable. That is just one example of a possible POD that might have changed the course of history and, thus, the world we live in today.

One last point and then I will shut up. If Sealion is 100% impossible, then why wasn't Operation Overlord 100% impossible? Sure, the D-Day landings did not go off without problems and the whole mission could very well have failed. But it did not fail, which makes me think that crossing the channel with an invasion force is not as impossible as some people think. Germany had smart, innovative people just like the western allies did and it is entirely possible they would have come up with solutions to the problems of moving equipment and people across the treacherous waters of the channel. We'll never know because we live in the here and now, not in the 1940's. But that is part of the allure of AH and why we all spend huge chunks of our precious free time reading and writing timelines.

ASB should not serve as a euphemism for "I don't agree with you".

 

[Ian Hathaway]

ASB should not serve as a euphemism for "I don't agree with you".

Agree completely

 

[sharlin]

Thing is most sealion threads are DOA. They are either a case of pie in the sky nazifanboy wanks:

the Germans can headbutt through concrete walls and catch bullets in their teeth whilst the RN has all its ships detonate their magazines with all their crews on board 'just because its funny'.

Or the more realistic ones that boil down to one thing

Getting across the channel. And before anyone bleats on about air supremacy a Stuka at the time was no good against an armoured ship and the RN would have gladly suffered any losses and rammed everything that could float into the channel if the Germans were actually invading.

You can go 'Oh so now the germans have a larger navy' this is usually without any changes in the british OOB which would have been unlikely to say the least and unless the High Sea's Fleet has a miraculious resurrection and conversion to nazism, any enlarged Kriegsmarine is not going to be able to touch the RN or hold it off to defend invasion convoys.

Most Sealions rely on A. Nazi foresight that would shame nostradamus. B. The British being a bunch of paint thinner sniffing idiots. Or the favorite C. These are NOT the Nazis, even if they have the same equipment, tactics, methodoligy, leaders etc. They are rational germans the nazi's just became a laderhosen appreciation society! No. They are the nazi's. Stop trying to show them in a positive light.

 

[Michele]

......isn't everything on this forum subject to individual interpretation?

Yes. However, there is interpretation that is based on knowledge of actual historical facts, and interpretation that is based on ignorance of actual historical facts (often accompanied by a childish desire for a virtual revenge of the "team" one is rooting for).

The former trumps the latter.

For instance:

However, what if the Nazis had knocked out Britain's radar system along the east and southeast coastline? That might have enabled the Luftwaffe to gain air superiority, destroy the RAF and make an invasion at least possible, if still highly improbable.

...for instance, sure, things would have changed without radars - even though not enough for what you wish, and even though making an attempted invasion possible is not exactly the same as making a successful invasion possible.

But the question would be, with what would the Germans wipe out the radar network? And here is where knowledge of actual historical facts would come in handy to you, because if you knew those facts, you'd also knew the answer, and you'd realize that it is much easier said than done (look up older threads about Seelöwe, there are a ton; they deal with this, believe me).

One last point and then I will shut up. If Sealion is 100% impossible, then why wasn't Operation Overlord 100% impossible?

Uh, years of preparations and experience?
Actual, functioning landing ships?
Total air supremacy?
Total naval supremacy?
Total supremacy in material assets?
The capability of air-landing three whole divisions in a few hours?
Superiority in intelligence (look up Enigma, Ultra, the XX System)?
Logistical assets that had not even been invented in 1940, such as Pluto and Mulberries (look these up), and that even if they had been invented, the Germans would be unable to build in time?

Pick one or two and you should be all set.

Sure, the D-Day landings did not go off without problems and the whole mission could very well have failed. But it did not fail, which makes me think that crossing the channel with an invasion force is not as impossible as some people think.

Some people think you can cross the Channel with all the above, but not without all the above. Guess who was without all the above?

Germany had smart, innovative people just like the western allies did and it is entirely possible they would have come up with solutions to the problems of moving equipment and people across the treacherous waters of the channel.

Yes, and contrarily to what you believe, we know exactly, in the here and now, what the smart Germans had come up with to cross the treacherous waters: Rhein river barges, not all of them motorized, able to do maybe 5 knots at a time when the cross-current would be some 3 knots.
You should also look up the features of the beaches those smart Germans wanted to land. You'll be appalled.

ASB should not serve as a euphemism for "I don't agree with you".

Well, sure. Save that, in this case, it usually also means "you don't know what you are talking about" - as seems to be the case here. Therefore, the ASB label is more than deserved.

 

[sharlin]

What michele said. Just..that...

 

[American Enigma]

Just to be clear.....

What michele said. Just..that...

......I wasn't taking sides in this "debate". I was just playing a little Devil's Advocate. I do appreciate the feedback, though.

 

[sitalkes]

Hey, American Enigma, don't let the apostles of Alison Brooks shut you up by repeating their gospel over and over again- the gospel has no references, has mistakes, and was written many years before new information became available from German sources and elsewhere. You have every right to question the gospel without being branded an unbeliever (or worse, an heretic) who deserves to be burnt at the stake.

If the Germans had launched sealion without changing anything (e.g. without air superiority and without the attacks on the RN in its ports as specified in the plan), then it was going to fail and the Germans didn't do it. However this is alternative history, so you have to allow some changes that are feasible by September 15 1940 that don't cost too many extra resources. You can't have a later date than that because the British army would have been rebuilt by the following year. You can't have a date much more than a few weeks earlier than that because then you have to change too much and the invasion fleet would not have been ready in time.

1. The Germans did breach the Radar fence, putting a few key stations out of action for a few days, but they didn't know they had done it or see any effect, so they didn't bother to try again. Yes, German intelligence during the Battle of Britain was awful.

2. The Home Fleet wasn't going further south than Rosythe - Admiral Dudley Pound stated this more than once, he wasn't going to let his capital ships be sunk by aircraft and he thought his ships were needed to stop a breakout into the Atlantic (he didn't know he only had the Hipper to worry about). Hence the only armoured ships involved would be one old battleship and some lightly armoured light cruisers. The rest of the RN force would have been unarmoured destroyers and wooden boats. - a total of about 40 warships and 2-300 smaller boats.

3. The Kriegsmarine doesn't have to magically be made larger - you just have to read later books that say that there were about 200 escorts in the fleet and that every transport vessel was armed, some quite heavily. Now that's not going to be enough by itself, but if other aspects of the plan had been followed, it might have been.

4. I think the only way to prove that a barge could have made it across is to get (a) get it tested in a marine laboratory and (b) to hire a real barge and make a documentary film about it crossing the Channel for the 75th anniversary of the Battle of Britain etc. How can I be so sure it will make it? Three things:
1. One formerly commandeered German river barge is preserved at Henrichenburg (in north-west Germany) as a floating museum. Built in 1929, the Franz Christian has a 200hp diesel engine and capacity of 289 tonnes. After conversion into landing craft B 8 Pmot she stood-by in Boulogne for the invasion of England, before seeing active service in the Baltic from 1942 to 1945.

2. 1,000 ‘dumb’ (i.e. un- powered) Thames barges or lighters, roughly similar to the continental river barges, were requisitioned in April 1942 …. The British barges were to be fitted with stern ramps, and, like the German barges, towed and beached by tugs or launches. Some [like the German barges] were reinforced internally with concrete. Subsequently 400 of these vessels took part in OVERLORD, largely as specialist craft and fitted with engines, wheelhouses and rudders. Landing Barge Vehicle (LBV).37, formerly the barge Zulu, even crossed to Normandy using sweeps (oars) and an improvised sail, following an engine failure. Barges were particularly valued because of their shallow draft, tough construction, and ability to rest on the bottom in tidal waters while still loaded. Barge variants included: Landing Barge Flak (LBF), Landing Barge Gun (LBG), Landing Barge Vehicle (LBV), Landing Barge Engineering (or ‘Emergency Repair’, LBE), Landing Barge Oil (LBO), Landing Barge Water (LBW), Landing Barge Kitchen (LBK), and Landing Barge Cable (LBC).)
.

3. Barges were also used for the Dunkirk evacuation in 1940 (Operation Dynamo). 40 Dutch Schuits (shallow-draft powered barges of 200-500 tons) evacuated 22,698 men from Dunkirk. At the same time, 48 British lighters/barges evacuated 4,726 men.​

 

[Michele]

If the Germans had launched sealion without changing anything (e.g. without air superiority and without the attacks on the RN in its ports as specified in the plan), then it was going to fail and the Germans didn't do it. However this is alternative history, so you have to allow some changes that are feasible by September 15 1940 that don't cost too many extra resources.

...

Yeah, and all of that has been done in old dead threads. To me, at least, this is a thread for pointing people who have this inclination at those long interred threads, not a thread for flogging dead horses anew. So I'll beg your pardon, but rather than rehash all that old dead stuff here, just because you want to zombify it, I'll point you once again in the direction of the cemetery. Have a good digging.

 

[teg]

2. The Home Fleet wasn't going further south than Rosythe - Admiral Dudley Pound stated this more than once, he wasn't going to let his capital ships be sunk by aircraft and he thought his ships were needed to stop a breakout into the Atlantic (he didn't know he only had the Hipper to worry about). Hence the only armoured ships involved would be one old battleship and some lightly armoured light cruisers. The rest of the RN force would have been unarmoured destroyers and wooden boats. - a total of about 40 warships and 2-300 smaller boats.

This is the fundamental problem with the Sealion apologists IMO. You are claiming that the Germans can react but the British cannot. If Pound did not send his fleet south when the Germans tried to land, he would be very lucky not to get shot and would certainly be replaced, and so would his successor until somebody did agree to sail the fleet south. The British are not going to be stopped sending the Home Fleet south by the threat of a breakout into the Atlantic; any competent naval officer would know invasion is a worse threat than that. The Germans do have a window of opportunity to both land and attack the Home Fleet before it arrives but they don't have the equipment to attack a large formation of warships successfully, either on the surface or in the air.


teg

 

[sitalkes]

Have you read Churchill or Alan Brooke? Pound stated his position in committee and got it approved by the Churchill and the other chiefs. Pound is not going to get shot. The RN has enough ships in the south of the UK to handle the invasion threat without having to use the heavy ships.
General Alanbrooke was in command of the Home Forces meant to meet any invasion and he recorded his thoughts during the summer of 1940.

Of the R.N. he wrote "the attitude of representatives of the Naval Commander brought out very clearly the fact that the Navy now fully realises that its position on the sea has been seriously undermined by the advent of aircraft. Sea supremacy is no longer what it was, and in the face of strong bomber forces can no longer ensure the safety of this island against invasion" and later "I soon discovered that the Home Fleet, in the event of an invasion, had little intention of coming farther south than the Wash. As destroyers were also being drawn off to protect Western Approaches, the naval defence in the Channel and southern waters did not appear to be ..... able to offer the required interference with German landing operations".

Churchill
The Second World War, Volume II, Penguin, 2005
Page 257 – 15 July 1940 it was decided that the Royal Navy’s heavy ships will not go south to oppose the invasion unless the invasion force included similar large ships.

So the RN can react - if the Germans send heavy ships, but there weren't any to send.

 

[sitalkes]

Yeah, and all of that has been done in old dead threads. To me, at least, this is a thread for pointing people who have this inclination at those long interred threads, not a thread for flogging dead horses anew. So I'll beg your pardon, but rather than rehash all that old dead stuff here, just because you want to zombify it, I'll point you once again in the direction of the cemetery. Have a good digging.

So what you are saying is that the great prophet Alison Brooks has spoken and all has been revealed. Anybody who says otherwise is a BLASPHEMER and shall be burnt at the stake! No further discussion shall be allowed (other than endless repetition of the gospels) lest the followers of the light be fouled with their stench!!

 

[Garrison]

So what you are saying is that the great prophet Alison Brooks has spoken and all has been revealed. Anybody who says otherwise is a BLASPHEMER and shall be burnt at the stake! No further discussion shall be allowed (other than endless repetition of the gospels) lest the followers of the light be fouled with their stench!!

I think what they're saying is that this is a thread about Sealion threads and that if you used it to look up old threads you would see that your points have almost certainly been raised time and again. Oh and FYI I personally have never read Alison Brooks and hadn't heard of her until her name came up in a Sealion thread.

 

[teg]

Have you read Churchill or Alan Brooke? Pound stated his position in committee and got it approved by the Churchill and the other chiefs. Pound is not going to get shot. The RN has enough ships in the south of the UK to handle the invasion threat without having to use the heavy ships.
General Alanbrooke was in command of the Home Forces meant to meet any invasion and he recorded his thoughts during the summer of 1940.

Of the R.N. he wrote "the attitude of representatives of the Naval Commander brought out very clearly the fact that the Navy now fully realises that its position on the sea has been seriously undermined by the advent of aircraft. Sea supremacy is no longer what it was, and in the face of strong bomber forces can no longer ensure the safety of this island against invasion" and later "I soon discovered that the Home Fleet, in the event of an invasion, had little intention of coming farther south than the Wash. As destroyers were also being drawn off to protect Western Approaches, the naval defence in the Channel and southern waters did not appear to be ..... able to offer the required interference with German landing operations".

Churchill
The Second World War, Volume II, Penguin, 2005
Page 257 – 15 July 1940 it was decided that the Royal Navy’s heavy ships will not go south to oppose the invasion unless the invasion force included similar large ships.

So the RN can react - if the Germans send heavy ships, but there weren't any to send.

The mere that the British were happy to keep their main battle fleet away from a fight unless big ships enter the fray should tell you how unlikely the British government though an invasion of Britain was. If the Germans seem to be establishing a foothold [and even this seems unlikely as several exercises indicate the Germans couldn't have supplied their beachheads even the RAF and Royal interfering], then there could very easily be a change in tune. Like I said, the success of Sealion in most timelines on the subject depends on the British almost allowing themselves to be defeated.

teg

 

[sitalkes]

So you are saying that about 40 destroyers and light cruisers plus hundreds of smaller boats are not enough to stop the invasion? As far as the logistics is concerned, I will publish a paper soon that demonstrates that logistical problems would only occur after the arrival of the second wave and only then if a major port is not captured. As for the British not taking the invasion seriously - they built 28,000 pill boxes and the like just for fun? They issued the Cromwell code word on September 7 (and one man died) just so they could ring some church bells???

General Brooke frequently confided his concerns to his private diary. When published, he included additional annotations written many years later:

“...I considered the invasion a very real and probable threat and one for which the land forces at my disposal fell far short of what I felt was required to provide any degree of real confidence in our power to defend these shores...."

 

[sitalkes]

I think what they're saying is that this is a thread about Sealion threads and that if you used it to look up old threads you would see that your points have almost certainly been raised time and again. Oh and FYI I personally have never read Alison Brooks and hadn't heard of her until her name came up in a Sealion thread.

Most probably you have read Alison Brooks since she was the first to write a complete "Sealion is impossible" thread, and since then it has endlessly been repeated in part or in whole by her acolytes (usually without checking any of the sources, none of which are mentioned anyway). No, I won't find that my points have been raised time and again otherwise I wouldn't bother.

A better way might be to list all the arguments on a web page of some sort - there ought to be a Sealion Wiki so you can add all the new arguments as they appear and have them easily accessible. The major problem with saying "it has all been done before, go read the threads," is that it takes a long time to get through all of them and searching them may not help if you use the wrong search term. It would be better to direct people to a web page where all the arguments are laid out in an easily searched/browsed format. Perhaps this thread glossary should include a list of the ideas in each thread listed, not just the thread link, so you know which threads are relevant. Then right at the beginning you put a directory link to all the threads as well

You can't stop discussion just because some people don't agree with you or because you think nothing new is possible. Here's a new idea: let's get a model barge floated in a coastal/marine engineering lab and see who is right about the barge problems. Anybody know of a lab where this could be done? Next step: Lets get some crowd funding, hire a barge, and sail it across the English Channel.

OK, so I guess what is needed is for every person who posts a sealion thread in the glossary, to copy and paste something like this:

------------------
1. Thread title -
2. Thread URL -
3. Thread ideas -
------------------

 

[Evan]

A better way might be to list all the arguments on a web page of some sort - there ought to be a Sealion Wiki so you can add all the new arguments as they appear and have them easily accessible. The major problem with saying "it has all been done before, go read the threads," is that it takes a long time to get through all of them and searching them may not help if you use the wrong search term. It would be better to direct people to a web page where all the arguments are laid out in an easily searched/browsed format.

You called?

(Okay, let's go improve it!)

 

[sitalkes]

I got a reply from the Newcastle University Hydrodynamics Lab, it seems it might be possible to get the whole barge situation tested with some crowd funding and some model building:

"Our Towing tank would probably be suited for such model tests, we can tow a model through that is free to heave and pitch and various fixed yaw angles with and without waves. The resulting measured drag forces would give an indication of engine power and propeller efficiency required; seakeeping would become self evident (suggest the model be covered to stop it sinking though!!)

The budget cost of hiring the tank is around £1000 plus VAT per day including a full time equivalent technician; depending on length and scope of test programme I may be able to tweak the amount of technician time required but a typical one to two week programme involving 2 days’ set up and 3 or 8 days’ testing respectively would fall roughly into that ballpark.

These rough costs do not include any analysis, but purely the provision of data for your own analysis.

The cost of the model is another significant cost, this can be of the order of £1500 to £2000 per linear metre length (roughly). We do not have a model building capability in house for this type of model but could point you in the right direction. Materials of construction could be fibreglass or machined direct from rapid prototyping foam (from a 3D CAD drawing). Obviously this would need some discussion. The model should be about 1.5m long.

Timing is something that would also need to be discussed, there are certain pinch points where the tank is booked for student projects and other research activities, but we can normally find a window."

So if we can get a model made, what would you like to see tested?
Which barge types would you like to be tested (bearing in mind the model cost we can probably only test 1-2 models unless we get a keen model builder who is willing to do it cheaply)?

Where do I put a thread about this? I have created a powerpoint presentation about it at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_JIBYcrqYoOcjVvQlJ3ZjJqdUU

Utube videos of river barges crossing the English Channel


http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=ubm4UuGJYyg – the Dutch barge Spica goes through Dutch canals and across the Channel to Portsmouth

65ft barge towed through heavy seas off Dover http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kg_QweiLy0
“50 ton of ballest would have helped the cavitation and steadyed her”

Dutch barge Anna at sea on a trip from Ely to Wisbeach in the Wash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q6M1z6kS-U

Spits Barge crossing the Channel from Belgium to Leigh on the Thames http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X8FXTji5-g

And http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGlgvpM-SUU

“Motoring across the channel in our Belgian spits barge 'Madorcha', september 2007, at this point just going over the sandbanks leaving Nieuwpoort Belgium, next anchorage; Liegh small ships, on the Thames. The crossing took us 15 hours, and then another 5 hours to Barking.

Our Belgian spits is standard guage at 38m x 5.05m, with a 6-71 series detroit diesel/gray marine engine, we averaged 40l of diesel an hour on the sea at full throttle, compared to 20-25l p/h on the inland canals, thats pushing 65 tonnes of ship with 55 tonnes of ballast (125 tonnes gross), only just enough to avoid cavitation with the larger swells.

From Bocholt in Limburg, Belgium to Barking London, we used 1,500l of diesel!.. maybe time to consider a more efficient propulsion system, but the detroit makes a lovely growling scream, with massive torque for 165hp engine.

Proof it's possible to cross with safe precautions, to all the Belgians and Dutch who thought we'd never make it!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0GSuSUAJc and http://www.flickr.com/photos/simoncoggins/sets/72157601768054705/ Sailing the Dutch barge Cosmos across the Channel

 

[LestWeForget]

If the Germans had won the battle of Britain, and pressed their advantage in maintaining air superiority why couldn't they have just bombed the royal navy into oblivion? If ww2 taught us anything it's that air superiority decided the fate of navies. Or even brought up the italian navy to assist with whatever was left of it after the air campaign.

Wouldn't that have cleared the way for sealion?

 

[The Kiat]

Agree completely

Unfortunately, it usually does. Either that or it means said person simply doesn't like the concept/execution.