British land at Tripoli in January/February '41

Yes, very high risk. And you can't count out the Italian Navy or German U-Boats. Lucky subs or motor torpedo boats sink a few critical transports and the whole operation would be crippled.
 
Last edited:
I can see Greece being written off but not Malta, but it depends on how badly the Mediterranean Fleet is hurt in the attempt.

Exactly, if the Mediterranean Fleet and Force H take heavy losses, there may not be a choice.

Ironically a hosed British attempt to land troops near Tripoli could also butterfly away the Afrika Korps. Hitler may decide that despite the Italians' problems in eastern Libya, they have a handle on things and can take care of the problem on their own and don't need German help.
 
I don't see why Greece would not be doable ITTL, barring some improbably-high naval losses, which did not happen OTL and would be even less likely here - the ground forces used would not come from Wavell's command anyway

Unless it was because the Brits decide to reinforce success and focus on mopping up Libya, which they should have done anyway
 
The Luftwaffe was arriving in Sicily December - Mid January, plus whatever Italian air, against whatever is on Malta and on British carriers. The Axis air would have superior numbers, (has any sea invasion been pulled off in the face of superior air??)

The Italians are still in Benghazi so even distant air support is not possible. Bresica, Pavia, Bolonga, Italian infantry divisions were near Tripoli at the time. The British would have a hard time getting their heavy equipment ashore. Tripoli itself has minefields and guns.

This seems like a British disaster.
 
AIUI, if Western Desert Force had better logistics, and hadn't been gutted for Greece, they could've pushed on to Tripoli IOTL
 
AIUI, if Western Desert Force had better logistics, and hadn't been gutted for Greece, they could've pushed on to Tripoli IOTL

Yes but could they have taken it or would they have been stretched out? The British captured El Agheila on9 February while the first German units started arriving in Tripoli on 14 February. It's still over 400 miles from El Agheila to Tripoli with supply lines getting longer and more difficult to sustain. It's possible they could have gotten too Tripoli in time to be repulsed by German and Italian forces and then counterattacked by Rommel and in a bad position due to their lengthy supply lines.

That said, stripping them and sending everything to Greece was really dumb. A strong and well supplied British force at El Agheila may keep Rommel from recapturing Benghazi and heading further west which alone changes the whole nature of the desert war.
 
What forces did Italy have in and around Tripoli at this time?
I had this ready before I saw that @Catspoke had ninja'd me.

This is from Page 14 of the Mediterranean and Middle East Volume II on the Hyperwar website.
General Rommel reached Tripoli on 12th February, two days ahead of the first flight of his combat troops. He found in Tripolitania the Italian Ariete Division, nominally an armoured division but very incomplete, and four infantry divisions mostly without any artillery. The Commander-in-Chief, General Gariboldi, successor to Marshal Graziani, had ordered a stand to be made at Sirte, and the Ariete, Pavia, and Bologna Divisions were moving there from Tripoli, to be followed by the Brescia and Savona Divisions as soon as transport could be made available. It was hoped that the British would not continue their advance before these moves were completed, and that the French in Tunisia would remain quiet.
 
Yeah, I don't know about this.

If you want a better outcome in NA in this timeframe, then just stay out of Greece, continue Operation Compass to the logical conclusion, and all of a sudden you control North Africa 2 years early.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Yeah, I don't know about this.

If you want a better outcome in NA in this timeframe, then just stay out of Greece, continue Operation Compass to the logical conclusion, and all of a sudden you control North Africa 2 years early.
Except the logistic reach from Alexandria is limited. Starting another front from a port closer to the action would be needed to reach Tripoli anyway.
 
Ok, but did 50 Division have sufficient forced entry/amphibious capability?

I understand that Wavell may not have been able to immediately occupy all of NA, but without ripping away much of his combat power he could certainly have largely destroyed the 5th and 10th Armies.
 
Ok, but did 50 Division have sufficient forced entry/amphibious capability?

I understand that Wavell may not have been able to immediately occupy all of NA, but without ripping away much of his combat power he could certainly have largely destroyed the 5th and 10th Armies.

I think if he hadn't been stripped he might have been able to hold the line at El Algheila or at least Benghazi. Not only does that change the whole nature of the North Africa campaign - the fluid front will be between Tripoli and Benghazi as opposed to stretching from Benghazi to El Alamein but it might also prevent the myth of Rommel from taking shape the way it did OTL.
 
(has any sea invasion been pulled off in the face of superior air??)
We have their OTL performance VS Op. Excess to compare against, as I outlined before. While they could and did bloody the British fleet, they had neither the numbers, nor the amount of bombs required, to be anything more than a glorified nuisance
 
Top