German victory at the Battle of Britain

In 1940, during World War II, Germany and the United Kingdom fought the Battle of Britain.
Do you think there is a way in which Germany could have won the campaign?
And what consequences do you think a German victory in Britain would have had in the war?
I picture this scenario: Germany defeats the United Kingdom (in 1940 or 1941), Italy occupies the British colonies in Libya and Egypt. As there is no need to help Italy in the Mediterranean, Germany executes Operation Barbarossa in 15 May 1941, as originally planned, reaching Moscow and Leningrad before September.
 
In 1940, during World War II, Germany and the United Kingdom fought the Battle of Britain.
Do you think there is a way in which Germany could have won the campaign?
And what consequences do you think a German victory in Britain would have had in the war?
I picture this scenario: Germany defeats the United Kingdom (in 1940 or 1941), Italy occupies the British colonies in Libya and Egypt. As there is no need to help Italy in the Mediterranean, Germany executes Operation Barbarossa in 15 May 1941, as originally planned, reaching Moscow and Leningrad before September.
You would have to make the British woefully under prepared and or politically unstable and have the Luftwaffe be stronger, and better prepared.

As usual with these things its often on the opponent not struggling as much as they did OTL

Short answer very improbable with out a hefty POD or 10
 
Curious to see how Germany defeats Britain even if the BoB is lost.
Sealion is still toast. Piniped-flavoured toast.

As for better tactics, read A Better Show by Michelle, the best 'how well can the LW do without ASB help' story
 
I'm going with the consequences being the same as the last god knows how many times this POD was discussed. Is the search function on the board really that bad or did you actually think FernandoPerla that this hadn't been discussed before?
 
In 1940, during World War II, Germany and the United Kingdom fought the Battle of Britain.
Do you think there is a way in which Germany could have won the campaign?
And what consequences do you think a German victory in Britain would have had in the war?
I picture this scenario: Germany defeats the United Kingdom (in 1940 or 1941), Italy occupies the British colonies in Libya and Egypt. As there is no need to help Italy in the Mediterranean, Germany executes Operation Barbarossa in 15 May 1941, as originally planned, reaching Moscow and Leningrad before September.
Not really with the forces and leadership both sides had as at 1 July 1940. The RAF could do worse than OTL but not be so utterly defeated that SeaLion could work. The Luftwaffe simply isn't strong enough to dominate the Channel and stop the RN destroying the supply convoys and second/third echelons. At the cost of heavy losses sure but the damage to the German economy from losing so many barges and tugs needed on inland waterways is very severe too.

The only way to knock the UK out of the war in 1940 is to break the morale of its leadership and population. Which the LW couldn't do on its own. Any more than the much more devastating Allied Combined Bombing Offensive did in 1943-45
 
Last edited:
Can Gemmany win a Battle of Britain

As in can Germany win local air superiority in the south of England to the extent that the RAF retreat from bases in the South of England to regroup for a number of weeks.

Yes. Get some good luck and have a decent point of divergence. Yes it's doable.

Can Germany get anything worthwhile with this? No! They can achieve superiority for a few weeks convince themselves that it's time to fail at Sealion throwing away a few divisions of the army.
 

Jessicajess

Banned
I'm going with the consequences being the same as the last god knows how many times this POD was discussed. Is the search function on the board really that bad or did you actually think FernandoPerla that this hadn't been discussed before?
You really don't need to make comments if you don't have anything of useful to add to the topic, u know?
 
Take out the Home Chain RADAR system and it can be done. Germany had an idea of its importance but did not follow through.

The real question is what difference does it make...?
 
You really don't need to make comments if you don't have anything of useful to add to the topic, u know?
I do have things to add to the topic, I've added them the last several times someone decided to flog this dead horse. Sorry to be blunt but when we've been through the same loop multiple times with the same arguments I think it is useful to point out that the OP could have found all the arguments already laid out multiple times. The 'useful' responses will be the exact same as they always are. People will ask what kind of victory the OP means, if its limited you will get the back and forth about how much actual impact that has on the war, with no one likely to change their minds since last time. If its a total victory there will be the pointing out of how implausible that is rebutted with various technical and tactical fixes for the Luftwaffe and the chances of any of it being new. We will wind up with the thread dying a death after 20 or 20 pages of the same old same old being dusted off yet. If the OP has some new idea or original perspective then let them present it, otherwise this has about as much point as someone announcing they are going to reboot the 'Halloween' franchise again.

Frankly I think its time we have a sticky for BoB threads in the same way as we do Sealion threads.

ETA: just to illustrate the point:


Which began in the ancient past of 20th April 2020
 
Last edited:

Geon

Donor
First we need to define what it would mean to "win" the Battle of Britain.

From the German perspective the Battle of Britain had two goals.
  1. The first goal was to gain air superiority over the southern part of the UK preparatory for Sealion. But from what I understand Hitler's heart was never truly in Sealion. He hoped that the destruction of the British RAF as well as their losses in the Battle of Atlantic would compel them to come to the peace table.
  2. The second goal was to demoralize and destabilize the political/economic/military system of the UK by denying the skies to the RAF and then systematically destroying their ability to replace their losses. Again the goal was to bring the UK to the peace table.
Assuming a more competent Air Marshall than Goering it is possible that the Germans could have achieved temporary air superiority in southern England to allow Sealion to go ahead. Unfortunately, as already mentioned it is a virtual certainty that said invasion operation would be a complete disaster.

As to demoralizing and destabilizing the UK. The answer is simply - no. In order to win a war you have to have feet on the ground. And that wasn't going to happen in the U.K.
 
Take out the Home Chain RADAR system and it can be done. Germany had an idea of its importance but did not follow through.

The real question is what difference does it make...?
The defence system fell back to using the observer corps, as happened once or twice. Snag for the LW is, if its good weather the OC reports on them, if its bad weather they cant, but then they have a much harder time hitting their targets.
In any case, it doesn't matter as the British didn't actually need the RAF to destroy SeaLion
 
The Germans winning the Battle of Britain is possible depending on how you define 'The Battle of Britain' if you mean can the Luftwaffe so damage Fighter command and the RAF that The Royal air Force lose Air superiority over southern England , perhaps as far north as London. Then, yes with the resources available to the Luftwaffe in the summer of 194 if employed correctly within the circumstances of the time then such a situation could be achieved for a short time, If you mean could the Luftwaffe on it's own force the British Government and people to seek and armistice, highly unlikely. Or if you mean could the Germans have staged a successful invasion having gained this temporary air superiority, then the answer is baldly: No.
Now using historically viable POD's to illustrate and explore how the Luftwaffe could achieve temporary air superiority over southern England is an exercise that I have indulged in, in order to better understand why the Luftwaffe failed so measurably to do in OTL.
 
In 1940, during World War II, Germany and the United Kingdom fought the Battle of Britain.
Do you think there is a way in which Germany could have won the campaign?
And what consequences do you think a German victory in Britain would have had in the war?
I picture this scenario: Germany defeats the United Kingdom (in 1940 or 1941), Italy occupies the British colonies in Libya and Egypt. As there is no need to help Italy in the Mediterranean, Germany executes Operation Barbarossa in 15 May 1941, as originally planned, reaching Moscow and Leningrad before September.
Minor correction required here - Libya belonged to Italy at the start of WWII, as otherwise Italy had no jumping off point to invade Egypt.
As for the BoB, what would be the POD? Why does Germany win the campaign and does it then launch the Unmentionable Sea Mammal?
 
What's a German victory? They already had superiority over the Channel but would need superiority over southern England and supremacy over the Channel. I'm not one of those that thinks the Luftwaffe did an awful job I actually think they did as well as they could have done given the circumstances which is why it's such a tricky one to alter in Germany's favour. They underestimated Fighter Command, their tactics and the people in charge.
 
What's a German victory? They already had superiority over the Channel but would need superiority over southern England and supremacy over the Channel. I'm not one of those that thinks the Luftwaffe did an awful job I actually think they did as well as they could have done given the circumstances which is why it's such a tricky one to alter in Germany's favour. They underestimated Fighter Command, their tactics and the people in charge.
Fair points. The Luftwaffe won the Kanalkampf, which did cause the UK problems of getting supplies unloaded and distributed.

It could dispute control of the air over southern England, south of the Thames and east of the Solent. And perhaps with better intelligence and a more focused strategy gain a measure of superiority for a few weeks there. With RAF fighter squadrons pulled back to airfields north of the Thames and the command and control system disrupted. But not destroyed, only downgraded.

That's not good enough for the USM to be successful. IF it tempts Hitler gave the go ahead it will be a bloody disaster for the KM and German economy. Expensive for the RN too but defeating an invasion is what it's there for. And the morale boost will be tremendous.

That if course is with the starting point of OTL up to the Fall of France.
 
Last edited:
I should qualify my last post by saying I meant that it is impossible for the Luftwaffe to achieve a decisive victory with the forces available to it by means of its own actions.

It would certainly be possible to envisage the British making far more mistakes than they did. Replacing Park and Dowding with Leigh Mallory and (?) leading to unworkable Big Wing Tactics. Failing to adapt tactics as Parks did or rotate squadrons and personnel. Not have Beaverbrook kicking Nuffield up the arse and taking over Castle Bromwich etc. Etc.

Such a Black Comedy of Errors could work as a novel but doesn't really meet the criteria to be real AH. IMHO . Though a possible earlier POD would be Dowding being overruled on sending more fighter squadrons to France?

A real Britscrew would see Bomber Command given the priority that in OTL was given to Fighter and Coastal Command. Leading to no Chain Home Network, no command and control system and fewer fighters. But that would be a different WW2 altogether.
 
Last edited:

NoMommsen

Donor
...
A real Britscrew would see Bomber Command given the priority that in OTL was given to Fighter and Coastal Command. Leading to no Chain Home Network, no command and control system and fewer fighters. But that would be a different WW2 altogether.
If I may aske :
By whom was this decision made when ?​
 
As I'm sure has been pointed out before (sorry) even it were possible for the luftwaffe to defeat the RAF over Southern England, all the British need to do is limit their fighter commitment in the area until the invasion fleet actually appears. The reserve fighter and bomber forces can then be committed along with the navy to defeat Sea Lion. Unless the Germans have the equivalent of the mustang in larger numbers than OTL fighter forces they cannot prevent the RAF simply refusing to be bled dry before the actual invasion. Assuming the British aren't stupid of course.
 
If I may aske :
By whom was this decision made when ?​
By Baldwin's government in 1936, I think. Endorsed by Chamberlain and his administration.

An Air Defence Committee was set up to develop a system using radar and the ROC . Successive expansion plans gave emphasis to fighter squadrons over bomber ones. Even Coastal Command had more squadrons than Bomber Command in 1939 and 1940.
 
Top