ATL - Successful OP Sealion campaign

Hmmmmm

I think it is time I rolled up my sleeves and waded into this one:
DMA said:
More importantly, there isn't any RN ships within the invasion zone, but outside of it.
So there are RN ships scattered everywhere BUT[ Ramsgate. Darn bad luck I'd say. Is this supposition on your part or based on factual evidence of RN dispositions at the time of the supposed invasion? Not being rude, just like to know these things. Any invasion from the North would be hampered by the lack of fighter cover. If you put drop tanks on the fighters, this would be noticed- "hey, those fighters have come a long way, wonder where they got the huge range boost from?" The effects of this I'll let others discuss.
I've also got a couple points I think have been only skimmed over.
1- If Germany starts moving merchant ships, Danish ferries and other assorted vessels into position, do you really think the British won't notice? From my reading (I can look for sources later if so requested, I'm trying to get this done before I burn my dinner) Bomber Command were busy carrying out nightly bombing raids on the barges held ready for SEALION. They weren't overly successful, but against larger craft I can't see these odds getting any better.
2) A quick point about naval battles in the Channel etc. The RN would be fighting for the very survival of the UK. They would be concentrating on the shipping, not the KM. I think this should be factored into these what ifs a great deal more than has been done so far in this lively discussion. Also, the RN doesn't have to survive long in the channel- just long enough to sink enough shipping to make the beachhead untenable for the Germans. The Army may be outclassed by the germans, but against the lightly equipped forces from the 1st invasion wave they would have a far better chance.
3) Finally, the point I think would be most important. There are a squillion different POD floating around this, but the main problem in creating a feasible SEALION is this. The changes to the German military that are necessary would also be noticeable to the British. Move greater shipping to the Channel would result in more destroyers in the invasion areas and greater attacks on said shipping. Move naval units into position and you get the Home Fleet on 12hour readiness for barge sinking duties. The more changes you make to Germany to make SEALION more plausable, the more changes would take place in the UK to counter them- a sort of historical inertia maybe.
Anyway, this will probably be ripped to shreds by those with more time/knowledge than me. At least I get to eat my dinner while its hot :D :D
 
knightyknight said:
Hitler spared them? Wow, we must be reading completely different history books. I've read that (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, great book by the way) Hitler was afraid that his spearhead must get enveloped because his flanks were exposed near Dunkirk. And Goering promise that his Luftwaffe can stop any evacuation that the British can pulled off. The "sparing the British so they will negotiate a peace with Germany" theory is rubbish. That's almost saying that a kidnapper gives up the kidnappee and still hope for the ransom. The Germans tried but their bombers were no good against ships.


Well if you say it wasn't for peace negotiations, fine. Have it your way. You missed my point totally. It's as clear as the summer's sun that the germans held back for whatever reason. Furthermore, it's obvious that level flying bombers, like the Heinkel 111 or the Junkers 86, wouldn't be great against shipping. But then again the flak coming from the beachhead at Dunkirk, combined with that from the ships, would have ensured that the Luftwaffe bombers would have to stay high. The higher you go the less accurate is your aim.


knightyknight said:
Why is the Home fleet being in Scapa Flow such a big deal? It doesn't not take may a few days to sail from there to meet the German fleet, and a few more days for the Mediterrian fleet to lend even more help to the British. And then, there'll just be stranded troops with no supply stranded on England.

I never said it would take the Home Fleet a few days to get to the battle zone. I said Force-H would coming from the Med. That's all. I haven't got a clue what you mean in your last sentence.

Last thing, & I'll repeat one more time, The Germans ONLY have a chance at a successful Sealion if they drop all their OTL plans. Now I can't see that happening, so like everyone else, I totally agree that Sealion will be a German defeat. Yes the Kriegsmarine must be at full strength to deal with the RN. But the Germans must land at the beaches south of Ramsgate. Only under these circumstance do they have a chance of success. But I can't see them actually conducting such a strategy.

Anyway, isn't this discussion thread supposed to be about looking at different possibilities in how Sealion may have succeeded? Because that's what I'm exploring even though I'm convinced that the Germans would not have changed their OTL plans.
 
Paulo the Limey said:
I think it is time I rolled up my sleeves and waded into this one:

So there are RN ships scattered everywhere BUT[ Ramsgate. Darn bad luck I'd say. Is this supposition on your part or based on factual evidence of RN dispositions at the time of the supposed invasion? Not being rude, just like to know these things. Any invasion from the North would be hampered by the lack of fighter cover. If you put drop tanks on the fighters, this would be noticed- "hey, those fighters have come a long way, wonder where they got the huge range boost from?" The effects of this I'll let others discuss.
I've also got a couple points I think have been only skimmed over.

As far as I know there were no RN ships at Ramsgate. I could be wrong to be fair. Mind you, even if there were say five destoryers, what are they going to do to the likes of Bismarck, Scharnhorst & Gneisenau etc? Anyway, what's this "invasion from the North" part? Ramsgate is only about 30kms north of Dover. The same ports & airfields that the Germans may use for OTL Sealion can likewise be used for the Ramsgate option.



Paulo the Limey said:
1- If Germany starts moving merchant ships, Danish ferries and other assorted vessels into position, do you really think the British won't notice? From my reading (I can look for sources later if so requested, I'm trying to get this done before I burn my dinner) Bomber Command were busy carrying out nightly bombing raids on the barges held ready for SEALION. They weren't overly successful, but against larger craft I can't see these odds getting any better.

I'd expect the British to do all of this & then some. I never said the Germans would get it easy.


Paulo the Limey said:
2) A quick point about naval battles in the Channel etc. The RN would be fighting for the very survival of the UK. They would be concentrating on the shipping, not the KM. I think this should be factored into these what ifs a great deal more than has been done so far in this lively discussion. Also, the RN doesn't have to survive long in the channel- just long enough to sink enough shipping to make the beachhead untenable for the Germans. The Army may be outclassed by the germans, but against the lightly equipped forces from the 1st invasion wave they would have a far better chance.

Again I'd expect the RN to fight with desperation. The RN backing off sounds like something out of Macksey's rubbish. But to get to the shipping, they'd have to get through the Kriegsmarine. So expect a major battle worthy of Jutland. Then there'll be a lot of destroyer action as well. I would say that German losses at sea could be high, especially if they keep the barges in operation. But landing at a single place at Ramsgate, capturing the port, opens the way to using only commerical shipping etc. This makes life a lot easier for the Germans. Plus their defensive perimeter is much stronger.

Paulo the Limey said:
3) Finally, the point I think would be most important. There are a squillion different POD floating around this, but the main problem in creating a feasible SEALION is this. The changes to the German military that are necessary would also be noticeable to the British. Move greater shipping to the Channel would result in more destroyers in the invasion areas and greater attacks on said shipping. Move naval units into position and you get the Home Fleet on 12hour readiness for barge sinking duties. The more changes you make to Germany to make SEALION more plausable, the more changes would take place in the UK to counter them- a sort of historical inertia maybe.
Anyway, this will probably be ripped to shreds by those with more time/knowledge than me. At least I get to eat my dinner while its hot :D :D

As I've been saying all along, I can't really see the Germans dumping their entire plans for OTL & applying the strategy that I'm suggesting here. So I totally agree on your point here. I've been merely suggesting how Sealion may have had a chance of succeeding.

I hope you didn't spoil your dinner. What was for dinner anyways? :cool:
 
Yeah. 'Sealion' would only have had a chance to succede if the Germans had dropped all their OTL plans......They would need to.

I'm sure it wasn't Mr.Montgomerie's piece, but I do remember reading somewhere that Sandhurst has, on various occasions tried to get the invasion to work by first 'magicaly' ridding the Invasion beaches of the RN and RAF presence, (ASB style!).

'Sealion' was still a cock up, with two small isolated Wehrmacht beachheads being faced by a steadily mounting defense...

The WHOLE of the Third Reich's might would have had to be brought to bare on the UK, with enough naval support to protect the appropriate landing craft (ie not flat bottomed barges) and air power to protect the troops on the beaches....

So the Battle of Britain would have had to be a German victory.

With better long distance escort fighters and a constant hammering of RAF fighter Command instead of a switch to built up areas at the moment of collapse, the Germans could have gained air superiority in the South.

I just think the plans and equipment (especially landing craft and long range escort fighters) would have had to have been on the table a long time...

Also, the German Navy, Army and Airforce would have had to have been more intergrated. Weren't they all constantly backstabbing one another?

If you want 'Sealion' to succede, you would definately need to completely rethink the Third Reich's overall political and military objectives, and you would have to go back possibly to pre-Poland Campaign planning...
 
Steak and Chips

In a Jack Daniels glaze. :D
Anyway. DMA- I see the way your acting as devils advocate, I just wanted to highlight the fact that the more you stretch things to get a situation where SEALION is remotely feasible, the more you have to ignore the highly likely responses the UK would HAVE to take. We have never ignored a European power building up a navy that could challenge the RN, so changes to German rearmament in this way would have forced a different rearmament schedule. And yes, Chamberlain was an appeaser, but look at the orders for arms that his Government made- if the KM was to field a real amphibious capability, and the UK found out, things would have turned out a LOT differently. Maybe there is a POD- Hitler goes for Plan Z recognising that to secure the Continent the UK would also need to be subdued, or at least more threatened than in OTL. Because of the need to spend resources on the RN, the RAF gets less Hurricanes/no Spitfires, does worse in the BoB, so that Hitler orders SEALION? Just off the top of my head, but at least its something positive to add to this thread! :D
 

Ian the Admin

Administrator
Donor
MattRice said:
I'm sure it wasn't Mr.Montgomerie's piece, but I do remember reading somewhere that Sandhurst has, on various occasions tried to get the invasion to work by first 'magicaly' ridding the Invasion beaches of the RN and RAF presence, (ASB style!).

'Sealion' was still a cock up, with two small isolated Wehrmacht beachheads being faced by a steadily mounting defense...

Probably from a post by Alison Brooks, who also wrote a "Sealion" essay at the address below.

http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm

This is a very good essay. It takes a different tack from mine (which was mainly about fundamental reasons Sealion wouldn't likely succeed even if you come up with an AH that screws around a lot with history). It focuses more on the details about what Sealion would be like with few historical divergences.

Some of the interesting bits of the actual "plans" that were discussed:

- After the first wave of the invasion was landed (9 light infantry divisions), the Kriegsmarine wouldn't commit to a second wave of reinforcement/resupply until 8-10 days later

- In the actual landing zone they were considering at one point, the RN had 3 light cruisers and 17 destroyers. However, the Kriegsmarine had thought of this, and decided that the barges would be adequately protected if the soldiers on the barges (travelling at night) "Fired at unidentified ships".

- The Germans carried out exactly one amphibious landing exercise involving 50 barges. In this exercise, carried out in good visibility, with no enemy, in good weather, after travelling only a short distance, with no navigation hazards or beach defences, half the barges failed to get their troops ashore within an hour of the first landing, and 10% failed to reach the shore at all. In one case, a barge overturned because the troops rushed to one side when another barge "came too close".
 
Paulo the Limey said:
In a Jack Daniels glaze. :D

Oh I know what you mean this morning, although mines more beer related than JD. Anyway, why aren't you drinking Johnny Walker instead of JD? lol



Paulo the Limey said:
Anyway. DMA- I see the way your acting as devils advocate, I just wanted to highlight the fact that the more you stretch things to get a situation where SEALION is remotely feasible, the more you have to ignore the highly likely responses the UK would HAVE to take. We have never ignored a European power building up a navy that could challenge the RN, so changes to German rearmament in this way would have forced a different rearmament schedule. And yes, Chamberlain was an appeaser, but look at the orders for arms that his Government made- if the KM was to field a real amphibious capability, and the UK found out, things would have turned out a LOT differently. Maybe there is a POD- Hitler goes for Plan Z recognising that to secure the Continent the UK would also need to be subdued, or at least more threatened than in OTL. Because of the need to spend resources on the RN, the RAF gets less Hurricanes/no Spitfires, does worse in the BoB, so that Hitler orders SEALION? Just off the top of my head, but at least its something positive to add to this thread! :D

Yes I agree with the above, but I'd like to point to two areas. The first is, I'd doubt that the UK land forces could have done much more than that which they were doing in the period July-Oct 1940. Dunkirk really did make a mess of things. To be fair, though, the RAF were holding their own, but that was more so over London than over the Channel. So it makes it hard for Britain to know the exact location of the invasion until after the fact. Clearly the obvious location was between Dover & Hythe & this is where the main UK defences were located. And obviously, the Germans must keep the element of surprise in regards to the invasion location in a manner similar to what the allies did with Normandy. Using Ramsgate gives you that chance.

But, & I'll fully admit this, yes the naval action(s) will be fundamental to German success. I doubt that not. So I spent a little time going through my stuff & put together the following naval forces. It's not exact, but I'd say it's close enough. I'll only include capital ships as I'm anticipating a naval battle akin to Jutland.

RN Home Fleet

HMS Hood
HMS Renown
HMS Repulse
HMS Warspite
HMS Rodney
HMS Nelson

Kriegsmarine

Bismarck
Scharnhorst
Gneisenau
Admiral Scheer
Deutschland / Lützow
Schlesien
Schleswig Holstein

Now you can problably swap HMS Nelson for one of the Revenge class if you wish, but in Sept 1940, when I see Sealion going ahead, this is pretty much what is available to both sides. And although the RN ships appear impressive, they actually have major drawbacks. The battle cruisers are the obvious weak points, but the 16 inch guns of the Rodney & Nelson aren't too crash hot from what I've read. The 11 inch German guns are tried & tested. For whatever reason the Germans liked them. But the 15 inch guns of Bismarck are probably the best, although to be far the 15 inch British guns are tried & tested as well. Speaking of the best, it's interesting to note that both Schlesien & Schleswig Holstein have the best deck armour at 240mm, although their belt is only 40mm. In comparison, Bismarck's deck armour is between 80-120mm, whilst her belt is an impressive 320mm. Of course, for the Germans, the pocket battleships are their weakest link. Having said all that, the 3 RN battle cruisers are likewise a problem & we all know what happened to Hood in the OTL. I dare say Repluse & Renown won't do any better either. It'd be an interesting naval battle to say the least. My view is that the naval battle will be a draw.
 
Last edited:
Trying to find an old book of mine, a historical novel based on a mid-70s actual wargame of Operation Sea Lion, including officers that would actually have faced each other in 1940, Adolf Galland of the Luftwaffe perhaps the most distinguished. Let you know when I find it all, but I do remember what killed the invasion, the slow and steady loss of shipping. By the time the Germans are sending the next part of the FIRST WAVE over, all of the forces west of the Isle of Wight(two of nine) have been written off while the concentration on German forces approaching Dover and already in possession of Folkestone is forcing the central landings into a holding operation. The result is that by the time of the decisive day of Sea Lion, the Germans have lost over half the invasion fleet, and are still trying to land elements of the first eleven divisions!(Plus the two small airborne divisions).

Incidentally, Folkestone proves capable of unloading TWO ships at a time, subject to RAF Bomber Command approval. Likely Dover would be smashed even harder had it fallen.

Incidentally, in the fascinating history The Nine Days of Dunkirk many historical fallacies are disproven. One of them is the claim that the Germans allowed the British to escape. The Germans were in terror that a counterattack might cut off the panzers from the main body, and the brief counterattack by British 1st Tank Brigade in the north and De Gaulle in the south convinced them the nightmare was happening. When you consider that no less than Rommel estimated the British counter at roughly TEN times its actual strength...(one battered brigade does not equal five armored divisions!). As a result, they never considered operations beyond reaching the sea.

A good think too. If Raeder and Doenitz had gotten an appraisal months earlier of how the attack would have gone, and emphasized subs, raiders, and landing craft...I do not recall whether it was Guderain or von Rundstedt who informed Raeder to give thanks to God if the Germans reached the sea IN SIX MONTHS.

The result was that the Germans lost the momentum at the worst possible moment, in an area filled with natural anti-tank ditches. As a side note, an examination of the German forces that were on the Dunkirk perimeter makes it difficult to see how they could have crowded more units in, and 25% of all German casualties in the fall of France actually occured on this perimeter.

As a REALLY nasty addition, the book also establishes a strong case that the RAF was a failiure at Dunkirk! :D

As for the grand naval battle, even ignoring that the RAF and RN were far more effective in torpedo attacks than the Luftwaffe, the ACTUAL strength of the RN in September in 1940 IN HOME WATERS was seven capital ships, not six PLUS two in Portsmouth. Even had the figures been correct, that leaves Germany with two antique ships roughly the size of some heavy cruisers, two pocket battleships(cruisers with nice guns who's sister ship got beaten by three cruisers/two with only 6" guns), two battlecruisers(smaller than any other in that class with only 11" guns and the G. was undergoing repairs by the way). Bismark not available til 1941.

In fact, the S. and G. had been specifically ORDERED to avoid combat against British capital ships, at 2/3 the size of such and only 11" guns, they really were not up to it.

Throw in the screening cruisers and destroyers and we have a massacre in the making. I would predict a clean sweep for the British and doubt that any of their own capital ships would be lost. Also, the Germans had a total of ONE heavy cruiser available(if they finished repairing that magnet for damage Admiral Hipper) and THREE light cruisers. Oh, I believe it was 8 destroyers also and if the destroyers(and torpedo boats? armed yachts?) are brought in then who or what is protecting the invasion force?
 
Grimm Reaper said:
A good think too. If Raeder and Doenitz had gotten an appraisal months earlier of how the attack would have gone, and emphasized subs, raiders, and landing craft...I do not recall whether it was Guderain or von Rundstedt who informed Raeder to give thanks to God if the Germans reached the sea IN SIX MONTHS.

Actually in the OTL, I think Raeder thought Sealion was a joke. You can tell by his conduct throughout the planning sessions for Sealion. He gave it no consideration whatsoever. Interestingly he turned up for one meeting on Sealion & left early. After that we hear little else out of the Kriegsmarine during the planning for Sealion & up to mid-Sept 1940.

I'd dare say von Rundstedt said your quote as he said something very similar when informed of Hitler's plan for the Ardennes in 1944.



Grimm Reaper said:
As for the grand naval battle, even ignoring that the RAF and RN were far more effective in torpedo attacks than the Luftwaffe, the ACTUAL strength of the RN in September in 1940 IN HOME WATERS was seven capital ships, not six PLUS two in Portsmouth. Even had the figures been correct, that leaves Germany with two antique ships roughly the size of some heavy cruisers, two pocket battleships(cruisers with nice guns who's sister ship got beaten by three cruisers/two with only 6" guns), two battlecruisers(smaller than any other in that class with only 11" guns and the G. was undergoing repairs by the way). Bismark not available til 1941.

Granted the RAF/RN is better at torpedo attacks. But Swordfish aren't going to last five seconds against Bf 109s. I can't see anything that the RAF can put up will last any longer either. Don't forget, such battles are going to take place in the Channel. So we have the RAF at the end of their fuel range, whilst the Germans are operating from air fields not far away & well within fuel range.

The Graf Spee wasn't as badly damaged as RN propaganda would have us believe. Furthermore, Graf Spee only had two turrents against three enemy ships. Also, Exeter had 8 inch guns, not 6 inch. Finally, Graf Spee had no support. Completely different story come a fleet action.

Bismarck was fully commissioned on 24 August 1940. Although with a green green crew, in desperate times one does desperate things.

Grimm Reaper said:
Throw in the screening cruisers and destroyers and we have a massacre in the making. I would predict a clean sweep for the British and doubt that any of their own capital ships would be lost. Also, the Germans had a total of ONE heavy cruiser available(if they finished repairing that magnet for damage Admiral Hipper) and THREE light cruisers. Oh, I believe it was 8 destroyers also and if the destroyers(and torpedo boats? armed yachts?) are brought in then who or what is protecting the invasion force?

Yes the Germans had limited cruisers & destroyers. But overall, when one examines the combat effectiveness of the OTL Kriegsmarine, I'm not going to dismiss its abilities just like that. Such a suggestion is just as bad as Macksey's rubbish about the British losing all the time & the Germans being successful all the time. Now back up the large Kriegsmarine force (see previous posting along with a brief analysis of ship strengths & weaknesses)with four squadrons of Stuka's & the balance slightly, slightly mind you, changes in favour of the Germans. As I say the battle will be a draw with the supply lines still open.

Now the RN units to the south of Dover are actually the dangerous ones - not those of the Home Fleet coming down from Scarpa Flow. If the Portsmouth squadron waits for Force-H & other ships from the Med to arrive, & then sails around Britain, picking up reinforcements along the way, it can then attack from the north, as the Scarpa Flow task force did. If they do, instead of charging into the Channel Balaclava style from the south, I'd say it's game over for Germany. Their invasion army will have their supply lines cut. But it'll take time for the RN to conduct this manoeuvre. As such, it becomes a race against time. The Germans have the chance to knock Britiain out of the war, but they have to do this before their supply lines are cut.

Of course this entire AH scenario demands that the Germans land at Ramsgate. As I've siad before, forget landing at Dover, Folkstone & Hythe. Not only is the southern flank open to a major naval attack by the RN, one which I can't see being stopped, the German troops won't last long enough on the beaches to begin with.
 
First, likely that the fight would be closer to UK than to Germany.

Second, any RN carrier equals torpedo planes on the spot.

Third, the ability of the Luftwaffe to do anything on top of all the other requirements is debatable.

Fourth, Graf Spee had three turrets and I noted that only two of the three cruisers were light(6"), sorry if the implication was made clear that the third was not.

Fifth, sending in the Bismark would not only have raped German tradition but would also have been ridiculous. Send your mightiest and newest ship into battle with an untrained, therefore unfit, crew?

Sixth, Stuka dive bombers. The Luftwaffe had less than 350 in total. A day or two into an invasion, maybe half are still available. Also, that means less than 100 Stukas and no fighters, even the oldest fighters in UK could take out the Stukas under those circumstances. Oh, and their range would have been hopelessly inadequate, unless the RN was actually along the coast of France.

I doubt Force H is even needed. Even if we throw in the Bismark, and momentarily forget any escorting cruisers and destroyers with the Home Fleet, any British battleship could likely take down the two antiques AND two pocket battleships, as they charge to engage the RN battleships with superior firepower AND superior range, not to mention endurance. The S. and G. are only 2/3s the size of the battleships, and THEIR 11" guns means probably both are hurt before they can even return fire. Lastly the Bismark with its novice crew. Alone against the entire Home Fleet very soon.

The grim truth is that the cruisers and destroyers of Home Fleet alone would likely put paid to all except the S. and G., and the Bismark if it appears.

And given that the battleships weren't being sent into the channel, except in extremis, the chance to give UK naval supremacy in terms of battleships would be worth a risk. Imagine the effect on Italy and Japan, if UK lost a battleship or two, meanwhile the Kriegsmarine is reduced to a yachting club with U-boats, while the defeat of the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe guarantees a long war with an enemy whose fighting ability has been proven clearly.
 
Grimm Reaper said:
First, likely that the fight would be closer to UK than to Germany.

The naval battle is more than likely to take place somewhere north-east of Ramsgate - say at a distance of 50nm. As a result, German planes based in Belgium are much, much closer than any RAF ones.

Grimm Reaper said:
Second, any RN carrier equals torpedo planes on the spot.

That's if the aircraft carrier survives long enough to use it's Swordfish, which I highly doubt. See OTL HMS Glorious.

Grimm Reaper said:
Third, the ability of the Luftwaffe to do anything on top of all the other requirements is debatable.

The Stuka's did ok thoughout France & Poland. Although, to be fair, against ships maybe a different story. But I've never said that I see them as the major player.

Grimm Reaper said:
Fourth, Graf Spee had three turrets and I noted that only two of the three cruisers were light(6"), sorry if the implication was made clear that the third was not.

Graf Spee only had two triple turrents. The movie is seriously flawed on this technical aspect. See this link: http://www.kbismarck.com/gwarships.html

Grimm Reaper said:
Fifth, sending in the Bismark would not only have raped German tradition but would also have been ridiculous. Send your mightiest and newest ship into battle with an untrained, therefore unfit, crew?

So use instructors instead of a totally green crew. Are we talking about one of the most important battles in history or not?

Grimm Reaper said:
Sixth, Stuka dive bombers. The Luftwaffe had less than 350 in total. A day or two into an invasion, maybe half are still available. Also, that means less than 100 Stukas and no fighters, even the oldest fighters in UK could take out the Stukas under those circumstances. Oh, and their range would have been hopelessly inadequate, unless the RN was actually along the coast of France.?

We're talking four squadrons, not all 350 Stukas. Why no fighters? There are plenty of Bf 109s around. So the Stukas obviously get an escort keeping the RAF fighters at bay. Considering the RN ships are limited to no more than 30knts, the Stukas are within their range, speed & capabilities when operating out of Belgium.

Grimm Reaper said:
I doubt Force H is even needed. Even if we throw in the Bismark, and momentarily forget any escorting cruisers and destroyers with the Home Fleet, any British battleship could likely take down the two antiques AND two pocket battleships, as they charge to engage the RN battleships with superior firepower AND superior range, not to mention endurance. The S. and G. are only 2/3s the size of the battleships, and THEIR 11" guns means probably both are hurt before they can even return fire. Lastly the Bismark with its novice crew. Alone against the entire Home Fleet very soon.


H-Force would be the first group recalled for obvious reasons. I am not prepared to dismiss the ships of the Kreigsmarine as quickly as you. As I've said before, such in idea is as silly as the events outlined in Macksey's book. The OTL operations of the ships of the Kreigsmarine suggests the exact opposite of what you suggest here.

Grimm Reaper said:
The grim truth is that the cruisers and destroyers of Home Fleet alone would likely put paid to all except the S. and G., and the Bismark if it appears.

That's if the cruisers & destroyers don't get sunk first themselves in the process.


Grimm Reaper said:
And given that the battleships weren't being sent into the channel, except in extremis, the chance to give UK naval supremacy in terms of battleships would be worth a risk. Imagine the effect on Italy and Japan, if UK lost a battleship or two, meanwhile the Kriegsmarine is reduced to a yachting club with U-boats, while the defeat of the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe guarantees a long war with an enemy whose fighting ability has been proven clearly.

Actually getting rid of the surface ships of the Kreigsmarine might be exactly what the doctor ordered. German U-Boats were always the real threat, not it's surface fleet. And I've not even mentioned them so far in this version of Sealion. So you can add say at least 30 U boats to the madness of battle taking place in the Channel. Then there are all the German E-Boats out there as well. I haven't mentioned them yet either.
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
Some things to note about the British and German heavy units facing off in this battle:

As for Hood being easy to destroy, it must be considered that she was not in her immune zone when she was hit by a *very* lucky shot. Golden Twinkees (warships1 slang for magazine hits) are very rare things. If she can stay in her immune zone and avoid plunging fire, she should be OK since her belt is quite thick. She was actually reasonably well armoured in many respects (apart from her deck), a fact that is frequently overlooked and overshadowed by her spectacular and tragic loss. It is true her deck armour was quite weak, but the only real threat to her in this scenario is the Bismarck, or a very well placed bomb. The 11'" ships are not a very big threat to her, since she can outrange them. If she decides to close the range to avoid Bismarck's plunging fire (assumming that B isn't too busy dealing with Rodders and Nelsy), then she will be vulnerable to 11" fire until she gets close enough to avoid it. That could be dangerous for her. However, after that the 11" ships are in deep trouble. Her 8 15" guns in 4 twin turrets are very reliable and accurate. Her TDS is reasonable. She has a high speed around 29 knots (credited with 30, but slower due to extra stuff added during the wars) thus being able to dictate range against the pocket BBs and maintian distance from S & G. If you want to debate this with those who know, head over to the Battleship vs Battleship board at www.warships1.com. Her design is reckoned to be not as bad as people keep saying. However 15" shells will prove dangerous and could GT her until she reaches her immune zone where theoretically they should be defeated by her armour.

Renown and Repulse are the weak links in the British line-up, pretty much vulnerable to everything. Don't forget that Renown was modernised. Their 6 15" guns in 3 twin turrets are also very accurate and reliable. They have a weak TDS. They are both fast, Renown being capable or nearly 30 knots, and Repulse being capable of around 28 (due to overweight), and can dictate range to the pocket BBs. In heavy seas, Renown faced off against both Scharnhorst and Genisenau in OTL and knocked out Gneisenau's gunnery director disabling her main armament as well as scoring other hits that caused a lot of damage before the German ships broke off following orders not to engage major British units. Even with speed reduced to 25 knots, Scharnhorst could not operate 'Anton' turret due to the wash over her bows caused by the heavy seas. Renown had problems with the sea and had to reduce speed as well, but she was able to keep firing from all her turrets. Renown suffered some main shell hits, but they caused little damage. The 'avoid fighting' order for the Germans would most likely be rescinded for Sealion, so they should put up a stiffer fight. However, hits by 11" guns could get the Renowns into serious trouble. The less said about 15" shell hits from Bismarck, the better. But Bismarck will be too busy elsewhere methinks....

Rodney and Nelson's 16" guns were not fantastic, but they could give a ship a very bad day. A single 16" hit from Rodney appears to have knocked out both of Bismarck's forward turrets in Bismarck's final battle. They have a good armour scheme, protected against 16" shellfire, and a fairly good TDS. They are quite slow, only being capable of 23 knots, so could be left behind if the faster German ships decide to try and draw the other British ships away...something which the British may not be tempted to do since they want to stand their ground and prevent the invasion after all. Bismarck's 15" shells should not be a very large worry, but will cause significant trouble if they hit in the right places.

The Warspite was a modernised and capable ship. Don't forget that the British 15" gun used in these ships is regarded as perhaps the most accurate and reliable heavy gun in any navy. Her armour is more than adequate protection against 11" shells...only Bismarck's shells pose a real threat. Her TDS is reasonable. She has a slow speed of 23-24 knots. Bismarck and Warspite can hurt each other. Warspite can hurt the 11" ships without suffering too much in return. As an aside, Warspite is probably one of the luckiest ships ever built, given all the scrapes she got into and survived! But luck is a very fickle lady...

Bismarck is a modern and capable ship, but she carries the only really heavy guns the Germans have. You can bet the British will lob their heaviest shells at her from the start. She is fast, capable of around 30.5 knots, probably faster than anything on the British side given that Hood and the Renowns are not as fast as they were in the past due to extras being added on. Her amour layout was not very good in many respects, leaving vital systems above the main armoured deck exposed, although she had excellent optics for fire control. However the accuracy of these tended to fall off over time since operating them was very physically demanding on the crew involved because of the nature of their design. She has a fairly good TDS but given her size, it could be better. Her stern, as is common with other large german warships of this period suffered from a design flaw that made it structurally weak...a lucky hit here could cause serious problems. Her 8 15" guns in 4 twin turrets have a good rate of fire, but her turrets are comparatively lightly armoured for a ship her size, and could be penetrated by the British shells. Her control tower is also vulnerable, facilities supposed to be proof against 15" shells were knocked out by an 8" shell. She can hurt all the British ships present, but once she is gone, she is gone, and judging by her historical record, she is not too difficult to put out of action once hit, although she is difficult to sink. Being difficult to sink is not an advantage if one's guns are already out of action as historical. Her crew would be green in this scenario, so she would not be operating at peak efficiency. However, if handled well, she could be a real threat, and is the ace in the German deck (please forgive the pun). She can hurt (to varying degrees) all the British ships.

Scharnhorst and Gneisenau each have a rapid rate of fire from their 9 11" guns in 3 triple turrets. The also have excellent optics, but with similar restrictions as those used by Bismarck. These could prove deadly to Repulse and Renown, although Renown did show that she could shrug off damage when she encountered the Twins. The 11" should pose little threat to Hood is she stays out of range...plunging hits could hurt her. They will not be able to penetrate vital areas on the other three British BBs. They are fast, capable of around 30 knots (credited with 32, but they were very overweight, were poor seaboats, meaning turret 'Anton' was unable to fire in heavy seas, and the overweight was serious enough that a good portion of the belt was underwater...not where it should be). They have a very bad TDS, so if destroyers land torps, they are in trouble (evidence being what HMS Acasta achieved with her torp hit on Scharnhorst, and other mine/torpedo hits as historical). Also the terrrible 'boiler hump' design flaw means that penetration of shells into the vital areas is much more likely. This is what happened when Scharnhorst was hit by a 14" shell from Duke of York. Also, German ships seem to have a weakness in their turret design, since Scharnhorst also lost the use of her forward turrets fairly easily in the final battle with Duke of York, although 'Bruno' turret managed to get back in action for a while before it went silent again. Bismarck and Scharnhorst suffered from this. One wonders what the problem was. Anyway, 15" and 16" shells will be very dangerous for the Twins.

The 2 pocket BBs are armed with 6 11" guns in 2 triple turrets each. They have a high rate of fire and excellent optics. The are vulnerable to any major British shell that hits them. 8" shells are capable of penetrating their armour. Their TDS is reasonable for their size. They are not really much more than armoured cruisers with larger guns. Their speed is 26 knots (credited with 28, but maybe slower due to additions), meaning that they will be at a disadvantage versus faster ships who can dictate the range. However, they could make life very nasty for the Renowns, and could be a threat to Hood. If they get hit by 15" or 16" shells they are in very serious trouble. They do have an advantage in being smaller targets.

The two pre-dreadnoughts, Schlesien and Schleswig-Holstein are armed with 4 11" guns in 2 twin turrets each. These old guns will only be a threat to Renown and Repulse, and be limited against Hood. Their TDS is not great. Their armour will be vulnerable to all the British shells, and the other big disadvantage is that they are both very slow ships with a maximum speed of 18.5 knots. Due to this they will be at a big disadvantage and a liability tactically speaking. 15" & 16" shells will kill them pretty soon. They are small targets so that is a plus.

British:
18 x 16" guns (AP broadside weight 36,864lbs) 28 x15" guns (AP broadside weight 54,264lbs)

Germans:

8 x 15" guns (AP broadside weight 14,112lbs) 38 x 11" guns* (AP broadside weight 25,250lbs)

*Twins shells 727lbs, Pocket BBs shells 661lbs, Pre-dreads shells 529lbs)

The Germans are at a big disadvantage in terms of heavy guns and weight of shells being lobbed into the air, although the Germans have a chance to make more hits with greater numbers of lesser shells in the air. The German pre-dreads might be left out of the battle altogether since they are too slow to keep up. The pocket BBs and the Renown class will probably end up fighting each other. The Hood and Warspite will likely take on the Twins, and Bismarck will be double teamed by Nelson and Rodney who are hardly likely to steam in the opposite direction and will seek to close the range. Bismarck will be in trouble since 'N' squared law will apply to her. The British are defending their island, they will not retreat. The Germans have to hold off the British long enough to protect the inavsion fleet, so they are unlikely to retreat until the fleet is safe.

The Germans' best ship has a green crew. She will be under fire from 2 16" BBs...mediocre shells or not, those BBs are probably going to give her a very bad day...putting her out of action I guess. 'N' squared law should mean that both Rodders and Nelsy survive with Bismarck out of it, and then the rest of the German fleet is in real trouble. The worst result would probably be one of them sunk or out of action, but going by 'N' squared, and barring lucky hits or GTs, this looks like not being likely...but you never know.

The Pocket BBs vs the Renowns... probably both panzerschiffen are sunk or out of action, one of the 'R's possibly sunk or out of action, the other damaged.

Hood & Warspite vs the Twins, both twins badly damaged and retreating, or 1 sunk and other damaged. Warspite damaged, though not badly, Hood could be moderately to heavily damaged, or even sunk if she's unlucky enough to receive a GT depending on how she's handled.

Rodders and Nelsy (if both have survived, otherwise just one) join the fray and mop up anything left, or conversly speaking, if Bismarck is still there, and the other German ships are accounted for, then the remaining British ships will concentrate on whatever is left.

Light forces, crew training, experience and weather also a factor. Light forces could cancel each other out, but there could be stray shell hits knocking out directors, radar, AAA etc. Secondaries and tertiaries on the major warships will be engaging the light forces...that is what they are there for. Torps in the water could could swing some of the ship battles if they hit. German air strikes will probably have limited effect...their bombs don't really threaten the large ships much, especially since they will be manoevering a lot, and German air attacks against ships were not always very effective. However, they could score a lucky hit on the British BCs. The channel is not good territory for U-boats to operate in with strong currents, shoals and shallow waters. Anti-submarine vessels would have a big advantage, and the subs are not likely to play a big part in the surface battle. Hitting fast moving and wildy manoevring ships that are making unpredictable course changes to avoid shellfire and possibly air attack is not easy at all. The British will fight tooth and nail to prevent invasion, so they will be cautious to use their ships to their best advantages, but at the end of the day they will NOT be retreating.


Verdict: Probably a considerable German defeat, depends how ships are handled and occurance of lucky hits and GTs for the Germans.

Sargon
 
Last edited:

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
I've just been thinking some more about the naval battle above. Specifically, I have been thinking about how to improve the German chances. I have come up with the following:

Bismarck must use her speed advantage and her excellent initial shooting to try and get some early hits against Rodney and Nelson at long range, and try and keep them at long range If she can wear them down before they manage to get too close, then she has a chance to swing the battle towards better odds. It won't be easy though, and she has to hope she doesn't get hit by any 16" shells plunging in from long range....it'll *really* hurt a lot otherwise...

As historical, maybe Bismarck can fire at Hood first and repeat the feat of OTL, before the other slower ships make it into range. Needs a big amount of luck though. As I said before, GTs are very rare. It also assumes that the British will be willing to send Hood against Bismarck when they have 3 battleships that can do the job.

Scharnhorst and Gneisenau keep their distance from Warspite using their superior speed. Then maybe they only need to face Hood. However, this also assumes that the British play ball and send Hood after them alone. They might not risk it, and decide to keep Warspite with Hood.

Not much to be done to improve the battle against the Renowns...if the Germans get the pre-dreads into the battle with their panzerschiffen, then it could help. An extra 8 11" guns would be useful. Might be enough to bring about better results. They could use the strategy the British use with Warspite and Hood, and keep the panzerschiffen and pre-dreads together as a unit. This loses a lot of speed though and restricts tactical deployment.

It still looks quite hard for the Germans to even get a draw out of it though, but could just about be possible with lots of luck. They need some very lucky hits and a GT or two. Chances are slim though....still looks like the Germans are going to lose...but hey, anything is possible in war I guess.

Those are the things I thought about that could be done at the time of the battle without any other changes, such as altering bulding plans. So next I thought about what if certain things had been done differently before the battle took place?

Tirpitz laid down earlier, ready same time as Bismarck. An extra BB would be good, but then the British would react by having more BBs available in home waters.

Rearm S & G with 15" guns as planned. Do this earlier, and you could have 2 medium BBs instead of BCs. They could deal with Hood and Warspite (as well as other ships) on much more even terms. Again the problem of the British reacting by retaining more heavy units in home waters.

Still, there are possibilities there.

By the way, I love the look of the German warships in this scenario. They look like real warships, very menacing and powerful looking. I think the Scharnhorst, despite her faults, is a very aggressive and good looking ship, bristling with guns. I have a nice model of her in my home, very pleasing to look at. Bismarck is a very powerful looking and handsome ship too. She had her faults, but she also had many good points too. As for British ships. Rodney looks solid, but is not pleasing to my eyes. Hood is very beautiful, like a greyhound of the sea, and Repulse is nice looking too. I've always preferred tripod masts to those 'Queen Anne Mansions' they added to the inter-war rebuilds...however I do like the look of th KGV class and Vanguard. Now if the British had built the 'Lion' class, and the Germans had built the 'H' class, (not the crazy later designs, the more do-able and sensible ones) then we'd be cooking on gas :)

Sargon
 
Sargon,

A worthy analysis of the fighting ships in question. There are three things I wish to say in critique of your essay, before I suggest a few things which you've missed about this AH naval engagement near Ramsgate. But first to my three points:

The first is the RN battlecruisers. I don't really think you can claim Hood's sinking as a lucky shot. There is a long & unhappy history of the British Battlecruisers & it all centres around one feature - that come a battle they aren't very good taking punishment. Lion was crippled at Dodger Bank, whilst two, Indefatigable & Queen Mary, exploded in a fashion similar to Hood at Jutland. If it was merely one battlecruiser, I'd say lucky shot, but after two I'd say this was unfortunate, but loosing three the same way looks more than careless. So I wouldn't be as certain as you come the gun battle for the outcome of Hood, Renown & Repulse. I'd consider all three sunk &/or put out of commission.

The next is the power of the 16 inch guns of the Nelsons. I too hang around Warships1. It's a pity that the site owner has had to reduce his site. It was a fantastic resource place for naval information. Now I think it was there were I read up about the drawbacks of the RN 16 inch guns. How great they were, well I can't really compare, but they aren't as good as Bismarck's. To be honest, I have no idea whether the 11 inch guns of Scharnhorst & Gneisenau can compete, but I can hardly accept that the German 11 inch guns are next to useless.

My third point is about the ships themselves. Now you mentioned about the age of the pre-dreadnoughts, fair enough, but you fail to mention all of the RN capital ships are old too. Four are WWI vinage whilst the two Nelson's are newer, but again they were built in the mid 1920s. All of the capital German ships, save Schlesien & Schleswig Holstein, are less than ten years old. This must count for something.

Now onto two other important points, & I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but you did ignore them:

Contrary to popular opinion, the Stukas were capabile of anti-ship operations. Illustrious was put out of action for a while as was Formidable by Stukas. Later on the Russian convoys would also suffer greatly due to the Luftwaffe as did the Malta convoys. They also had success against other RN surface ships such as the Southhampton. So it's not as if the Luftwaffe is totally useless. Furthermore, Prince of Wales & Renown ended up at the bottom of the sea due to air attack, although that was, of course, thanks to the Japanese.

My other point, which I haven't, to be fair, mentioned much at all, are the U-Boats. You can bet your bottom dollar, pound, euro or whatever, that they'll be around as well. And I'm not prepared to accept that they'll be no good either. Courageous was sunk by U-29 on the open seas early in the war, & we all know Ark Royal went that way as well. There's no reason why the U-Boats couldn't get a few RN ships in this Channel battle as well.

There's also the aftermath to consider. If Schlesien & Schleswig Holstein do miss the major battle, as you claim, then they'll be around for the clean-up. Considering the captial ships of the RN are either sunk, out of commission &/or limping home to port, the Germans are left with two undamaged capital ships to keep the remnants of the RN Home Fleet at bay. There'll be a few Kriegsmarine cruisers & destroyers still around as well, I'd say, so we end up with a draw - which I've been saying all along.

Thus combining the Kriegsmarine surface & U-boat assets, along with 50 Stukas from the Luftwaffe, an immediate attack by the RN Home Fleet will fail, even if fought with much courage & determination. This is the naval battle I see being fought, not only a surface battle, although the RN isn't left with much choice if they decide to attack right away. There is, however, the possibility that the RN could win & win big. But they have to wait about a week for the Portsmouth squadron & Force H to arrive. Naturally these two groups must sail around Britian & rendezvous with the Home Fleet in the North Sea. When combined they could attack the Kriegsmarine & the supply lines using overwhelming numbers. But that means waiting a week, by then the Germans have well & truly established themselves & are halfway to London. Churchill my not give the RN a week to prepare, but if he doesn't then there's no guarantee that the RN can win the naval engagement - and win it they must.

In the end, however, this AH depends upon a lot of changes to the OTL as I've always stated. The OTL German plans for Sealion won't work in a million years. The one I've suggested here gives Germany a chance, but only a chance. As others have said, & I agree, the naval engagement is important as is the invasion location. I guess we'll have to differ over the result of the naval battle. But even I will entertain variations, as I've posted, to what the RN can do to counter the Kriegsmarine - either wait & ensure the RN enjoys total ship supremacy; or after their initial defeat, don't go charging from the south into the Channel, but sail around Britain to Scarpa Flow, with Force H & reinforcements, & then enter the Channel from the North Sea with little German opposition.
 
Opppsss!

Hey Sargon, you beat me before I could respond! lol :)

Anyway, yes your new scenario for the Germans I can fully go along with. All I can suggest in addition is the use of the Luftwaffe & the U-Boats.

Now I must agree, I too have a interest in seeing a gun only engagement, but the Germans can't really win that way. They need those Stukas & U-Boats & even then I only see a draw.

Interesting idea about Tirpitz though. Now of she was there it'd be a different story I think. Still, even with Tirpitz present, the Luftwaffe has to be involved too. They may only sink one capital ship, but that's all they'd have to do I'd dare say. And if the U-Boats get one captial ship the RN won't be in any condition to continue the battle. Thus it's a draw.

Cheers! :cool:
 
Last edited:

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
A very interesting and thought provoking post DMA :) Thanks!

I take your point about the WW1 RN BCs however their losses were in a large part down to very volatile and unstable cordite, and inadequate flash protection internally. Maybe one BC was lost to a direct magazine hit, but the others likely were not since they were seen as being on fire a while before they exploded. A GT would typically result in instant destruction. Cordite issues, and flashtightedness (is that a new word??) had been solved by the time WW2 came about, and we must not forget that Hood incoporated several lessons learnt from Jutland into her design. Yes, her deck armour was still inadequate, but it seems she was lost as a result of a magazine explosion caused by Bismarck's 5th salvo. A GT in other words. You have to be very lucky to hit a magazine, after all you need to hit in the right place and penetrate first, and doing it on the 5th salvo is remarkable to say the least. Nevertheless, I already allowed for the fact that Hood could be lost, even being done in by 11" shells.

As for Repusle, yes, she is a tinder box waiting to explode, and I think I mentioned that one of the Renowns could be lost. Repusle did not receive much modernisation at all when compared to her sister, so she is likely going to be a casualty. I should have made it clear that I expected her to be the casualty rarther than Renown, which had received extensive modernisation, and had in fact had her deck armour upgraded. Her performance against 11" shells in OTL shows that she might well have survived, although of course she is most likely not immune to them. I would like to add that Renown was considered one of the most successful modernisations and was highly regarded in the fleet for her well trained crew and modern equipment. That she was of WW1 vintage is offset in a large part by her very thorough modernisation.

As for the 16" guns, they may be mediocre, but 2048lbs of shell is going to hurt no matter what. Bismarck's were good, they were 1764lb shells, however it has been speculated that they did have a high dud rate...possibly due to sabotage when the shells were being made. Not really a problem with the shells if that is rectified. Nelson's armour is resistant to 16" shellfire, is of very good quality, and is well distributed. Whilst it is true that the 16" guns did have some problems, many of these (but not all) were worked out before WW2. I would still not like to be on the receiving end of them, especially considering what they actually did to Bismarck in OTL. The KGV's 14" shells seemed quite effective against her too, although this could be argued that this was because they were more modern. Bismarck's shells are good, and I did say they could cause a lot of trouble. But you have 2 BBs facing off against one, that is a serious disadvantage, great guns or not.

As for the modernity of the ships, you do have a point, but I would have thought it was well known that all the RN ships are old. Hood and Repusle are certainly old, and only received token modernisations. However, I have already covered Renown, and Warspite was a very thorough modernisation as well which also offset her WW1 vintage to a large extent. Both Rodney and Nelson had modern equipment as well, and have received modernisation. The German ships' modernity does count for something, but you need to remember that some of their design concepts are outdated as well, not due to lack of effort by the Germans, but more due to a lack of experience because of restictions placed on them after WW1. I actually think they did rather well given all the things they had to contend with, but there were still outdated concepts, and design flaws. So both sides have problems in some regards., but the modernetiry of the German ships does offer some advantages.

As for 11" guns, how are you going to penetrate the armour of a ship that is protected against 15" (Warspite) and 16" (Nelson) shells? Renown could be vulnerable, but she's not as vulnerable as she was. I already said that Hood and Repulse could suffer, but if Hood is within her immune zone, then those 11" shells are not going to do much. You have to penetrate to have a real result. You can start fires and knock out equipment, so you are right that they will have an effect, but if you don't penetrate the turrets or magazines, you have still got the guns to deal with, and if you can't penetrate the machinery spaces, then you aren't going to slow them down much either, barring a lucky hit near the props. All the while the other ships are vulnerable to the 15" and 16" shells heading towards them. And British fire control was no slouch either.

Stukas could well make a difference, I did not discount them causing trouble for the BCs, so I did not ignore them. They will have a harder time with the BBs though. I would say that they did improve their performance during the war, but at this stage they might not be as effective as they were later on. So the jury is still out on that, there could be possibilities there, but they could still louse up. Anyway, I do not discount the Stukas achieviing something.

The U-boats may well be there, but their effectiveness is going to be limited. The channel is difficult U-boat territory because of the shallows and curents. You cannot discount that, it is nature. By the way, I did not ignore this point about submarimes, it was in my post if you read carefully :) And if they are so great, how come they did not sink more ships in other surface battles? Some ships may be lost, but you're going to have to get through those escorts first, and there will be quite a lot of them, not just destroyers, there will be smaller sub-chasers too, ideally suited to channel work. However, they could well put some torps into something important, I don't discount that, but it is not going to be easy, and I would be surprised if is going to be large scale.

Reagarding, Schleisen and Schleswig Holstein, I did not ignore them deliberately, I just did not think about that or consider it since I was concentrating on the naval battle and not covering the invasion flotilla. You make a very fair point that they will be there for use after the battle, and they could well be useful. However, I think they might be better used to support the panzerschiffen and give Repulse and Renown a hard time. If they are not with the panzerschiffen, then the pocket BBs will attract more fire perhaps, and that is not a good thing. The more targets the Renowns have to fire at, the better for the Germans. The pre-dreads will be very useful assuming there is a draw. However, if there is not a draw, and that happened because the Renowns are not beaten up enough, then the pre-dreads are probably going to be toast later on. It is probbaly in their own interests to team up with Lutzow and Scheer.

You will note that I have not discounted the possiblity of a draw previously, I in fact came back to it, and made a point about how the Germans could improve things, so there is a possibiliy of a draw, although I feel it is a slim one, so please don't feel that I'm saying that your scenario won't work, it does have a chance, albeit a slim on in my view, but a chance, nevetheless :) So it is not impossible.

You are right that it is probably all too late for the RN if it is a draw that Force H won't make it there in time to be of much use. If it is a draw, there's going to be serious problems on land for the British. I agree with that. As you say there are all sorts of things that can happen, and nothing is certain in war. The RN could even be defeated, and the Germans have a victory instead of merely a draw, it is not imposiible. But a draw is all the Germans need, you are right about that. You'll have no disagreements from me there :)

I don't take anything you say as rude at all, this is a very interesting and worthwhile discussion, and I am enjoying it :) Thanks for posting stimulating material and ideas, I appreciate it, as I'm sure does everyone else :) I don't post much here, I tend to lurk, but your discussion tempted me out, so it must be good :)


Sargon

P.S. Yes it is a pity about the information being presently unavailable at warships1, but when it is back online, I have been told it will be even better than it was before :) So it is something to look forward too. I'm thinking of contributing some pics of my own to the ship sections as well, that I hope people can appreciate.
 

Sargon

Donor
Monthly Donor
Doh! I'm guilty now as well! You've posted whilst i've been writing, hehe :D

Glad you liked my second post, yes, I wanted to see how I could help the Germans out since I wanted to give them at least a chance there, and I felt that a draw could be within reach, and I did not want to sink your scenario :) After all this is about an invasion succeeding. Maybe we have been too sidetracked by why it wouldn't happen!

You could be right about the U-boats, it'll still be tough though, but a well placed torp in something important as I just mentioned would help, and could tip things. And Tirpitz would be invaluable.

Cheers! :)

Sargon
 
But whatever the naval assets, Germany still needs to win the Battle of Britain for Sealion to even be considered a 'go'...


"The strength of the Luftwaffe at the point of Sealion was about 750 bombers and 600 Me109 fighters. The Germans estimated the strength of Fighter Command at 300 planes, of which 100 were not available to the RAF.
In fact, 11 Fighter Group had 672 planes, of which 570 were Spitfires and Hurricanes."

'Why Sealion is not an option for Hitler to win the war.' Alison Brooks


As we know from OTL, the Germans' underestimation of RAF forces led to their overestimation of the losses they were inflicting...

You can just imagine the disaster Sealion would have been if it had gone ahead after 'Eagle Day' against an RAF which hadn't been defeated.


On the other hand, if the southern air bases HAD been flattened, as Goering had promised, Brooks continues;

"Dowding had made preparations to pull 11 Fighter Group back to the Midlands in order to preserve an effective fighter opposition to an invasion proper.

This would have placed the RAF fighters out of the range of the German fighters. Given the disasters that the Luftwaffe bombers suffered when they undertook unescorted daylight missions, we can see that while Kent and Sussex could have had a lot of bombs dropped on them, the industrial heartlands and the RAF and the RN ports and the British Army concentrations would have been pretty much untouched."
Ibid.


Brooks has listed the Luftwaffe's objectives during 'Sealion' as;

• Act as artillery for the landing forces
• Keep the RN out of the Channel
• Win total air superiority
• Prevent British Army reinforcements from getting to the zone by bombing railway lines
• Make a mass attack on London to force the population to flee the city and choke the surrounding roads

The Luftwaffe had to cover all these objectives, plus keep an edge over the RAF, because as Brooks states;

"When Sealion starts, 11 Group has had chance to rest and recover and build up its strength, while the Luftwaffe have had to carry out a lot of sorties. On Sealion, 11 Group, in addition to 10 and 12 Group can re-enter the fray. They won't have so long over the area of operations, but against that, they have a huge number of potential targets - barges and landing beaches and transport aircraft. The Luftwaffe fighters have equally limited time over target, and they have a huge number of things they have to protect. If any target is damaged severely, Sealion is made unworkable. Thus the RAF need to succeed only once, while the Luftwaffe need to succeed everywhere and every time."
Ibid.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


All quotes;
Alison Brooks, 'Why Sealion is not an option for Hitler to win the war.'
Copyright (©) 1998 alison@flin.demon.co.uk and david@

http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/sal1.htm
 
DMA said:
Sargon,

Contrary to popular opinion, the Stukas were capabile of anti-ship operations.


But not, i suspect, with a squadron of Hurricanes waiting to turn them into so much mince meat.

The Stuka really wasn't any match against a fighter plane. The reason they did so well in Poland and France was due to the lack of assertive allied air power.
 
Truly, the Stuka rapidly became a disaster once proper fighter defenses began intercepting them. At least one during the Battle of Britain they actually had to be withdrawn as the RAF was going out of its way to get the easy prey.

Two points:

First, unlike the moronic Yamamoto at Midway, the British are not sticking the carriers IN FRONT of the battleships of Home Fleet so any planes will get off, thank you very much.

Second, how big do you think the Kriegsmarine is that you think they can find experienced instructors to fully man the Bismark.

Oh, and I don't think you're being rude. I'm enjoying this topic.

Incidentally, were U-boats fast enough to keep up with surface ships without surfacing themselves, or do they choose between one volley, hoping to hit and/or survive the RN destroyers, or racing to the surface and hoping for the best? Also, had the German torpedo problem been resolved yet, and had all u-boats had their torpedos fixed?

Why must the battle take place where you suggest? Seems to me that the Brits have every advantage. They need to break through the Germans ONCE and smash the invasion fleet. The Germans must protect it for one to two weeks of use bare minimum. And the idea of the German heavy ships in/near the Channel, given the target they would be and the Luftwaffe's miserable record of support would have alarmed Admiral Raeder badly.
 
Top