Beating a Dead Sea Mammal: How can a non-ASB Operation Sea Lion thread be created?

SsgtC

Banned
Err, didn't we settle this the last time we had a thread on this? As far as I recall, even the mighty CalBear descended to point out that the whole thing was totally impossible.
Yes, but it keeps cropping up. That's why there's an entire pinned post listing all the Sealion threads.
 
The Navy would not have been gutted, even by a catastrophic failure of Dynamo. They would have lost some forty destroyers and a cruiser, and maybe some auxiliaries. Even the RAF would not be gutted by catastrophic losses. Yes, it would hurt, but not enough to cause an invasion. I believe only 14 squadrons of aircraft were committed.

I read it as sailors and airmen being transferred to the Army rather than the RN and RAF being gutted by losses in combat, to be honest.
 

James G

Gone Fishin'
Err, didn't we settle this the last time we had a thread on this? As far as I recall, even the mighty CalBear descended to point out that the whole thing was totally impossible.

That happened. Then, in revenge, the OP went on the attack on the AANW thread.
 
Just off the top of my head, the problems the Germans have in 1940 include;

1. The RN is several magnitudes larger than the KM and infinitely more experienced in pretty much every facet of naval warfare. This is still an era where Britons can legitimately claim to rule the waves (although you're right at the tail end of that era).

2. Although the British Army is much smaller than the Heer, the British have a very large reserve of manpower - the Home Guard or 'Dad's Army'. Although these men are relatively old for military service they often have more military experience than the young German conscripts they'll be facing thanks to several years in the harshest Darwinian environment available in the trenches of WW1.

3. The RAF have spent a number of years planning for this exact scenario and thanks to visionaries like Dowding, Robertson-Watt, Mitchell and others they have the first integrated air defence network in the world and some of the finest fighter aircraft available to any air force as well as a large number of light, medium and heavy bombers which will all be unleashed against the invasion beaches when CROMWELL is called.

4. None of the branches of the Wehrmacht have any experience of amphibious warfare or any of the specialised equipment required.

5. The Luftwaffe is essentially a tactical air force alone, lacking heavy bombers, torpedo bombers and effective long range escort fighters.

6. The UK will always back Europe's No.2 nation against the No.1 (this has been British/English policy for pretty much as long as modern nation states have existed) to make sure no nation ever gets powerful enough to threaten the UK. This isn't a major issue in 1940 since we're already at war but it is an issue from 1871 to 1939 when Germany has to try and become Europe's No.1 without forcing the UK into a corner where she has to fight.

7. The Channel is a really, really horrendous stretch of sea to try and conduct an invasion over.

8. Much of the British coastline and the land immediately inland is almost custom made for defence - cliffs, shingle beaches, and plenty of rivers, canals and other natural barriers and choke points.

I honestly don't see a way for Germany to build her armed forces up to the point where they can achieve a successful invasion without either provoking a war with the UK or leaving themselves too weak to defeat France and put themselves in a position to invade the UK, no matter how far back towards 1871 you go for your POD (unless an ASB intervenes).
 
Last edited:
My 2 cents. ROOSEVELT. If Sealion looks like a go and is active, then America sends Britain material help. It may not be very good help at the time, but anything that comes across the Atlantic (2 weeks transit time) will be a British morale boost (We're not alone anymore.) and who knows? Some of the material aid to replace British equipment losses might just be the right stuff at the right time. I do not see that as an ASB by the way, despite Joe Kennedy and the isolationists.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Just off the top of my head, the problems the Germans have in 1940 include;

1. The RN is several magnitudes larger than the KM and infinitely more experienced in pretty much every facet of naval warfare. This is still an era where Britons can legitimately claim to rule the waves (although you're right at the tail end of that era).
Agree with you on that.
Leaves one to think of a workaround this problem, of somehow avoid such a doomed confrontaton (i.e.: mines, subs, torpedo-bombers, StKa, etc.)

2. Although the British Army is much smaller than the Heer, the British have a very large reserve of manpower - the Home Guard or 'Dad's Army'. Although these men are relatively old for military service they often have more military experience than the young German conscripts they'll be facing thanks to several years in the harshest Darwinian environment available in the trenches of WW1.
Something I always ... wonder about.

When this arguement is brought up against Entente armies invading/violating/raping Germany in 1919 or 1923/24, it's handwaved away as "sheeps walking to their slaughter against the mighty Entente-Armies.
But,
"Dad's Army" together with the barely rescued remnants of a beaten Expedition Corps are able to easily fight off war-proven Wehrmacht-veterans, morally boosted by vistories rendered ASB even in their time but already scored by them.

J3. The RAF have spent a number of years planning for this exact scenario and thanks to visionaries like Dowding, Robertson-Watt, Mitchell and others they have the first integrated air defence network in the world and some of the finest fighter aircraft available to any air force as well as a large number of light, medium and heavy bombers which will all be unleashed against the invasion beaches when CROMWELL is called.
Agree with you on that regarding OTL. Lack of longrange escorts and "proper heavy bombers" on the germans side have already been mentiond here also (though I don't know, what the last category would be usefull for in an invasion/landing scenario).
However, there are several, possible changes, that could/would alleviate these problem : i.e. Fw 187, no cutting off radae R&D (first, that come to my mind).

4. None of the branches of the Wehrmacht have any experience of amphibious warfare or any of the specialised equipment required.
About the "experience" ... May I remember you of Operation Albion in 1917 ? ... amphibious landing on the Estonian Isles ?
(would recommend also the german wiki-site, perhaps with google-translate, much more info).

5. The Luftwaffe is essentially a tactical air force alone, lacking heavy bombers, torpedo bombers and effective long range escort fighters.
See above

6. The UK will always back Europe's No.2 nation against the No.1 (this has been British/English policy for pretty much as long as modern nation states have existed) to make sure no nation ever gets powerful enough to threaten the UK. This isn't a major issue in 1940 since we're already at war but it is an issue from 1871 to 1939 when Germany has to try and become Europe's No.1 without forcing the UK into a corner where she has to fight.
Lack to see the relevance here.
A landing/invasion of the Britain main island would not be attempted, if not every other european opponent has been silenced ... or "allianced" (Molotov-Ribbentrop).

7. The Channel is a really, really horrendous stretch of sea to try and conduct an invasion over.
Only so true. But ... (has also already proposed IIRC) therefore are airborne troops usefull to capture "proper" harbourS as a possible, at least partial workaround.

8. Much of the British coastline and the land immediately inland is almost custom made for defence - cliffs, shingle beaches, and plenty of rivers, canals and other natural barriers and choke points.
True, if you stick to the channel coast proper only.
Also : see above.
 

SsgtC

Banned
Something I always ... wonder about.

When this arguement is brought up against Entente armies invading/violating/raping Germany in 1919 or 1923/24, it's handwaved away as "sheeps walking to their slaughter against the mighty Entente-Armies.
But,
"Dad's Army" together with the barely rescued remnants of a beaten Expedition Corps are able to easily fight off war-proven Wehrmacht-veterans, morally boosted by vistories rendered ASB even in their time but already scored by them.
Here's the thing though. These 40 and 50 somethings, would be fighting from fixed fortifications, not asked to engage in mobile warfare and unlikely to be asked to launch any counter attacks or offensives. That's what the Regular Army was for. Not to mention, those old fuckers are fighting for their homes and families. That's one hell of a motivator.

The other thing to remember is that the BEF in France was NOT the entirety of the British Army. The British still had entire DIVISIONS in the UK. A number of them armored divisions. So while the Home Guard was in all honesty not much more than a speed bump, they were a speed bump that would let regular army forces get in position to utterly destroy any German forces in the UK.
 
In addition, while the Brits might have been short of heavy equipment, there was no way at all that the Germans would have been able to land their own heavy equipment over the beaches. Most of the barges would have been sunk or disabled before they got to the beaches. Most of the beaches on the south coast are shingle. Horses can't walk on shingle. The Panzer III has a higher ground pressure than a Churchill, therefore they cannot cross shingle either. Just look what happened at Dieppe. The German army didn't even conceive of any problems here.

Really. We have been through this a hundred times. Just go back and read any of the last couple of major threads we had on it. We came up with a score or more of insurmountable obstacles for the Germans. It just isn't possible.
 
The thing with the homeguard that those who criticise it always forget is that the goal of the homeguard wasn't to win a battle in the field.

It was to provide defense of fixed positions and to atttrit an invasion force and to force the Germans to expend supplies.

If Germany lands an invasion force it will take a lucky break. They wont be able to supply an invasion for a sustained period. The suggestion that they could is ludicris. Every bullet and shell they fire is a bullet and shell that they wont have the next day. Any German invasion will be on a logistic shoestring.
 

FBKampfer

Banned
Err, didn't we settle this the last time we had a thread on this? As far as I recall, even the mighty CalBear descended to point out that the whole thing was totally impossible.


He's a Moderator, that doesn't inherently mean he has the slightest clue what he's talking about (which is not to assert that he doesn't).
 
I wonder, should this go in ASB....
3. The Germans (somehow) decisively defeat the Home fleet. This may be helped if we assume the surface fleet is not catastrophically destroyed invading Norway in 1940. Also might be possible if we give the KM 2 Graf Zeppelin Aircraft Carriers with lobbying from Raeder.
Yup, this goes in ASB. That crashbox called Graf Zeppelin is never go beat the RN's own carriers. And if it gets completed, you can BET the RN will have their own carriers in position to fuck it up.
 
I wonder, should this go in ASB....

Yup, this goes in ASB. That crashbox called Graf Zeppelin is never go beat the RN's own carriers. And if it gets completed, you can BET the RN will have their own carriers in position to fuck it up.

Crashbox is just about right. According to Der Flugzeugträger by Wilhelm Hadeler, she was fundamentally flawed as an operational carrier. He may be a bit biased, though, because he designed her.
 

FBKampfer

Banned
The Home Guard style of militia has proven to be horrendously ineffective in modern warfare. Hell the Germans regularly had to stiffen the Volksturm Abteilungen with regular Heer infantry, or even Panzers, just to keep them together as a cohesive unit for more than a day.

Without the stiffening, they regularly came to pieces, and were just absolutely slaughtered. The same would happen to the Home Army. Germans get even one Panzer division across and the Home Army turns into a speed bump about as effective as Luxemourg was.


If anything stops a German invasion already in progress, it will be logistics, not the British military.
 
Agree with you on that.
Leaves one to think of a workaround this problem, of somehow avoid such a doomed confrontaton (i.e.: mines, subs, torpedo-bombers, StKa, etc.)

There are obviously quite a few workarounds, you can even make the KM stronger than OTL. Germany's problem though is the same as it faced pre-WW1 and pre-WW2 - no matter what point you go back to all the way back to 1871 the RN is much, much stronger and any obvious German naval buildup can only be aimed at one opponent.

Something I always ... wonder about.

When this arguement is brought up against Entente armies invading/violating/raping Germany in 1919 or 1923/24, it's handwaved away as "sheeps walking to their slaughter against the mighty Entente-Armies.
But,
"Dad's Army" together with the barely rescued remnants of a beaten Expedition Corps are able to easily fight off war-proven Wehrmacht-veterans, morally boosted by vistories rendered ASB even in their time but already scored by them.

Germany in 1918 was a broken nation - her people were starving, she was short of materials and she was starting to run short of manpower while facing the British Empire (with the Empire's manpower barely used), the vast untapped strength of the United States (not a perfect army but with the sheer weight of numbers and industrial strength to make up for their lack of experience) and a French army thirsting for revenge. I don't think 1919 would have been a total walkover but it would have ended in an Allied victory.

In 1940 the German army wasn't *that* experienced - Hitler demobilised quite a few divisions after the French surrender for a start and the troops had only actually been in action for a few months at the very most. Many of them were young conscripts. What they achieved in Poland and France was truly remarkable (although with some fairly big caveats on Polish weakness and two decades of French mistakes and British penny pinching) and I'm taking nothing away from the Heer but it wasn't a truly battle hardened force of veterans like, for example, some of the later German armies or the Red Army/British 8th Army of 1945 (for example).

Dad's Army is always portrayed as a bit of a joke but you have to remember that many of them were veterans of World War 1. They actually are much more experienced as soldiers than the Heer. They are out of date tactically but you don't need them to launch sweeping mechanised assaults, you just need them to dig in at a selected point and shoot at Germans until they're either ordered to retreat to another position or they're dead. Any WW1 veteran can dig and shoot.

On top of that they have the advantage that their supply lines (assuming the RAF can keep the Luftwaffe from breaking them of course) are secure and they are defending their homes and families with Churchill's cry of 'the hour has come, kill the Hun' ringing in their ears and the knowledge of what Germans were reputed to have done both to POWs and civilians in occupied territories in both wars.

Agree with you on that regarding OTL. Lack of longrange escorts and "proper heavy bombers" on the germans side have already been mentiond here also (though I don't know, what the last category would be usefull for in an invasion/landing scenario).
However, there are several, possible changes, that could/would alleviate these problem : i.e. Fw 187, no cutting off radae R&D (first, that come to my mind).

There are, of course, changes you can make with the Luftwaffe just as there are with the KM. You have problems when you start changing things though - the Heer relies on CAS as a substitute for their slow moving artillery to support the mechanised forces on their quick advances so you need to build a large number of Stuka/He111/Do17/Ju-88 equivalents no matter what (assuming that whatever changes you might have made still leaves the Germans using combined arms/Blitzkrieg type tactics of course).

Lack to see the relevance here.
A landing/invasion of the Britain main island would not be attempted, if not every other european opponent has been silenced ... or "allianced" (Molotov-Ribbentrop).

At some point between 1871 and 1940 Germany has to start building her combat power and become Europe's No.1, because they need to be able to invade France and secure their northern ports before they can plan an invasion of the UK - as soon as Germany begins to look like Europe's top dog the UK will begin to support any German enemy, just as we did when we were supporting Russia, Austria, Denmark, Spain, Portugal and various German states against Napoleon's France and before that we supported the Netherlands against Spain.

Only so true. But ... (has also already proposed IIRC) therefore are airborne troops usefull to capture "proper" harbourS as a possible, at least partial workaround.

Airborne troops are only useful when the enemy's air force is completely suppressed and we're back to the problem of how we change it so the Luftwaffe is strong enough to do that without losing either naval or ground power.

True, if you stick to the channel coast proper only.
Also : see above.

Actually most of the British coastline is fairly bad for amphibious operations, either because of the coastline itself or the land behind it. There's a reason we haven't been successfully invaded for 1,000 years and it's not just the navy. We're an immensely difficult place to land an army.
 
The Home Guard style of militia has proven to be horrendously ineffective in modern warfare. Hell the Germans regularly had to stiffen the Volksturm Abteilungen with regular Heer infantry, or even Panzers, just to keep them together as a cohesive unit for more than a day.

Without the stiffening, they regularly came to pieces, and were just absolutely slaughtered. The same would happen to the Home Army. Germans get even one Panzer division across and the Home Army turns into a speed bump about as effective as Luxemourg was.

The Volksturm was just grabbing anyone left in Germany after they'd called pretty much every military aged man with the right number of eyes and limbs up. The British hadn't got down to the desperation levels Germany had in 1945 by 1940. The equivalents of the 1940 Home Guard in 1945 Germany had already been called up and were fighting the Allies somewhere. They were not a replacement for a proper army but they would have been a very effective defensive force of experienced soldiers (for the most part) if they had been called upon. These weren't old men and school kids, they were men in their 40s and 50s who had already fought in one World War, who were already experienced (if out of practice) with their weapons and they weren't facing either the logistic problems Germany had in 1945 or the overwhelming force that either the Soviets or the western Allies were putting into the field against the Volksturm.
 
Top