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

Nope... another bs map that shows nothing of relevance.

It should be simple to answer, what does RAF Henlow, Bedford, 13 MU or the link you provided have to do with anything?
 

Onlooker

Banned
The Germans sneaked in several tens of thousands of men across the Med through air and sea into Tunisia at the close of the North Africa campaign. What happened to them? Captured because the RN was able to prevent evacuation by sea. Now the British at Dunkirk and the Germans at Messina were able to evacuate through contested air space by sea, because airpower does not have the ability to stop transit on the water. For THAT, you need ships which were not present to stop those evacuations by sea. Those ships if present can float there for weeks and blockade continuously. Airplanes cannot stay on station more than their flight time allows. We've gone through ten pages (^^^^) explaining this simple fact about TIME.

Mediterranean is a wastly greater combat care than English channel.

Second mistake you make is that you assume all or nothing total combat presence. There wouldn't be need for more than 20 planes or some radar stations to detect ships trying to force their way trough the channel and then dispatch sufficient force to deal with it. There wouldn't be thousands of German planes flying 24/7 or all of them flying at same time and then returning to rest then fly again.
Instead airports of Northern France, Bretagne, and Netherlands would be stacked with planes ready for combat on detection of enemy.

Otherwise you might as well say Aircraft carriers are useless due to way they do battle.
 
Mediterranean is a wastly greater combat care than English channel.

Aircraft have time in air limits. You in effect have totally misunderstood the nature of the battlespace. Bigger battlespace dilutes airpower. Ships don't have that problem; especially aircraft carriers.

Second mistake you make is that you assume all or nothing total combat presence. There wouldn't be need for more than 20 planes or some radar stations to detect ships trying to force their way trough the channel and then dispatch sufficient force to deal with it. There wouldn't be thousands of German planes flying 24/7 or all of them flying at same time and then returning to rest then fly again.

RTL Operation Dynamo. Your argument is NSA.

Instead airports of Northern France, Bretagne, and Netherlands would be stacked with planes ready for combat on detection of enemy.

RTL. Time in air.; Not enough ground support establishment, not enough runways, incompetent LW air traffic control, radar horizon limits, not enough aviation fuel, not enough pilots, etc.

Otherwise you might as well say Aircraft carriers are useless due to way they do battle.

Aircraft carriers combine ship and plane. They CAN stay on station, dodge and weave, hide under weather, and apply airpower opportunistically at a time of their choosing in the form of flying artillery. In that sense, they are floating interdictors who CAN blockade, though their intended use is as raiders.
 

Onlooker

Banned
Aircraft have time in air limits. You in effect have totally misunderstood the nature of the battlespace. Bigger battlespace dilutes airpower. Ships don't have that problem; especially aircraft carriers.



RTL Operation Dynamo. Your argument is NSA.



RTL. Time in air.; Not enough ground support establishment, not enough runways, incompetent LW air traffic control, radar horizon limits, not enough aviation fuel, not enough pilots, etc.



Aircraft carriers combine ship and plane. They CAN stay on station, dodge and weave, hide under weather, and apply airpower opportunistically at a time of their choosing in the form of flying artillery. In that sense, they are floating interdictors who CAN blockade, though their intended use is as raiders.

Stay on station? Distances involved in Pacific's carrier battles greatly surpass the distances of English channel. I dont think I'll discuss this with you further since to you having 100 or 100000 planes patrolling that area presents the same problem but carriers don't. Jesus
 
Stay on station? Distances involved in Pacific's carrier battles greatly surpass the distances of English channel. I dont think I'll discuss this with you further since to you having 100 or 100000 planes patrolling that area presents the same problem but carriers don't. Jesus

Suits me. Obviously you did not understand and do not understand that aircraft carriers were not what I was talking about in the English Channel as far as Sealion. In the Mediterranean HOWEVER...

In other words, you don't understand how these things actually work.
 

SsgtC

Banned
Second mistake you make is that you assume all or nothing total combat presence. There wouldn't be need for more than 20 planes or some radar stations to detect ships trying to force their way trough the channel and then dispatch sufficient force to deal with it. There wouldn't be thousands of German planes flying 24/7 or all of them flying at same time and then returning to rest then fly again.
Instead airports of Northern France, Bretagne, and Netherlands would be stacked with planes ready for combat on detection of enemy.
Because having 20 planes over the Channel won't do Jack to stop RN operations. Look at the hit rates of dive and torpedo bombers in WWII. It's very low. Particularly when the ship is manuevering.

You're also ignoring the fact that aircraft in WWII cannot dive bomb or drop torpedos at night. They don't have the required equipment (and wouldn't for some time to come).

Airpower does not operate in a vacuum. For the LW to keep the RN out of the channel with airpower alone, would require complete and total air dominance for the Germans. They did not have that.

Oh, one other factor to think about. If you're totally reliant on airpower to carry out Sealion, you doom it to failure. From the air, it is nearly impossible to tell friend from foe on the surface. This is true even today with modern communications and tech. In WWII, all the RN would have to do is get in close to the invasion flotilla, and the LW would not be able to press home their attacks for fear of sinking their own vessels.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the obsession for larger German navy. Aircraft were proven to be kings of naval warfare in WW2. Sufficiently large luftwaffe could keep the channel open for essentially free landing and resupply of troops indefinitely, or cause unsustainable casualties to the RN if it interferes, which it would.
Cause unsustainable casualties sure, but the RN doesn't have to sustain them long, all the RN forces have to do is remain combat effective long enough to reach the battle area and destroy the German barges and landing craft after dealing with their escorts. It is unlikely that the Luftwaffe could manage this with a reasonable POD. Most of the big Pacific theater carrier battles didn't sink all that many ships after all, sinking a ship with WWII era aircraft is very hard. And to protect a SeaLion you need to outright sink enough of the British Navy that German forces would have a fighting chance to protect the barges, or else the invasion fails, this is not jousting over some important but non vital islands of the pacific but do or die for the UK, they are not going to stop just because they take unsustainable losses
 

SsgtC

Banned
Agreed. The RN will happily sail to it's destruction if it means saving the home isles from invasion. They have a tradition of doing exactly that multiple times in their history. The RN would literally send everything from their newest battleships to the smallest launch armed with only a machine gun to stop an invasion. There would be absolutely zero concern for saving their strength for another day.
 
It's out of BF 109 reach and a perfect example of why your argument is NSA.
So... because Henlow is out of range for a Bf109, Henlow - home to a maintenance unit, that means that Fighter Command wouldn't withdraw beyond Duxford, which is a good 60 miles closer than to the Luftwaffe fighter airfields than Henlow.

And this proves that what I'm saying has no sugar added... or maybe is in line with the Norwegian Shipowners Association... or the National Scrabble Association or whatever else NSA might stand for (I've found 131 listings for NSA and got bored after the first 30 or so trying to work out which was the most appropriate).
 
What case, I have no case...

I have an opinion based on what I have read that any withdrawal of Fighter Command would have to be beyond Duxford if the aim is to be out of range of the Bf109.

But even if I did have a case, as you put it, I don't see how a none FC airfield that is clearly outside the range of the 109 has any relevance at all.
 
I have an opinion based on what I have read that any withdrawal of Fighter Command would have to be beyond Duxford if the aim is to be out of range of the Bf109.

This is called restating a thesis after a case has been demolished. If you remember, I stated that it would be unlikely as in suicidal for a BF 109 then in use during the BoB to appear over the Midlands or 20 minutes north of the Thames as it would lack RTB fuel. Then you trotted out Duxford and a couple of splashers to negate my statement. Now 10 pages later after we've gone through the RTL reasons why the BF 109 had 10-15 minutes over London from its frontline bases on the French and Belgian coast, you want to claim that the RAF had to retreat past Duxford. No. Duxford is in the gray zone, at the extreme limit. A BF 109 caught there is very likely not going home for the many reasons explained exhaustively above; running out of fuel being a major one in many cases (pilot mismanagement of aircraft.).

Face it. The BF 109 was what is called a target defense interceptor. A local defense fighter. For the kind of offensive fighting the LW tried during the BoB, it needed the P-38 Lightning. It was stuck with the BF-110.
 
If the Germans could last to the 1950 mark (and the US doesn't get involved), the Germans will have aircraft with specs like the MiG-15, meaning that the UK is no longer safe harbor for the RN, or even RAF
 
If the Germans could last to the 1950 mark (and the US doesn't get involved), the Germans will have aircraft with specs like the MiG-15, meaning that the UK is no longer safe harbor for the RN
So will the UK, and by that point it is far more likely that Tube Alloys has yielded results than its German equivalent, and the embarkation ports for SeaLion go up in artificial suns

Of course by 1942 the USSR will be asking pointed questions about when all that stuff Germany promised them in exchange for raw materials will be delivered
 
Top