Glossary of Sealion Threads

WTF is all this talk of sealions?
Sealion, Seelowe... The planned German invasion of Britain in 1940. A popular subject of pop-AH fiction (usually of "teh Nazi R WINZ" kind), but draws considerable blow back here as the evidence puts it in technically possible but solidly batshit territory.
 
Sealion, Seelowe... The planned German invasion of Britain in 1940. A popular subject of pop-AH fiction (usually of "teh Nazi R WINZ" kind), but draws considerable blow back here as the evidence puts it in technically possible but solidly batshit territory.
I was starting to think of that operation, but some posts were suggesting otherwise. Thanks.
 
WTF is all this talk of sealions?
Operation Sealion was the planned naval invasion of Britain by Nazi Germany, often is used by rookie TL authors as a way to knock Britain out of the war despite how much it's been proven that the operation would be the essential suicide of the Kreigsmarine.
 
the operation would be the essential suicide of the Kreigsmarine.

The Kriegsmarine would probably have survived an attempted Sealion fairly easily, albeit mainly by virtue of being in dock getting stuck back together after various run-ins with the Royal Navy off Norway. The real victims would have been the Heer, who would have had the unpleasant experience of trying to cross the Channel in towed barges in the face of large numbers of RN destroyers, and the German economy, which would have been relying on said barges coming back to continue functioning.

I'm of the view that those who say Sealion could have ended the war in a decisive victory 1940 are absolutely right. It's those who say the Germans would have been the winners who are wrong.
 
Last edited:
The Kriegsmarine would probably have survived an attempted Sealion fairly easily, albeit mainly by virtue of being in dock getting stuck back together after various run-ins with the Royal Navy off Norway. The real victims would have been the Heer, who would have had the unpleasant experience of trying to cross the Channel in towed barges in the face of large numbers of RN destroyers, and the German economy, which would have been relying on said barges coming back to continue functioning.

I'm of the view that those who say Sealion could have ended the war in a decisive victory 1940 are absolutely right. It's those who say the Germans would have been the winners who are wrong.
Oh I agree it would have certainly shortened the war by a few years, probably would have gone to 42 in Europe at least.

I disagree on the Kreigsmarine marine getting away intact, considering this would be pretty soon after Norway, which despite being a German victory, incredibly mauled the surface fleet, an attempted Sealion would have been the death blow to what was left of the surface fleet, they might then attempt to seize what was left of the Vichy France Fleet which would I turn bolster the forces of the free french early. They'd be stuck with just the Uboats basically.
 
Hey! Maybe we should start a new Sealion discussion thread. We haven't had the opportunity to poke holes in the whole half baked mess of a plan for ages.
 
I disagree on the Kreigsmarine marine getting away intact, considering this would be pretty soon after Norway, which despite being a German victory, incredibly mauled the surface fleet

The mauling they got in Norway is precisely why they'd suffer minimum losses in Sealion - as I said, they're all in drydock getting stuck back together.
 
Hey! Maybe we should start a new Sealion discussion thread. We haven't had the opportunity to poke holes in the whole half baked mess of a plan for ages.
Do a version in which the Germans are given some naval advantages (like the destroyers they lost OTL in Norway survive and the Bismarck and the Tirpitz were started earlier and can be sent into action, albeit before they are fully worked up). Maybe more losses of Spitfires in the buildup to Sealion. The Germans would still lose but it would be interesting to explore how the Brits would extend themselves to win. Perhaps they could manage via commando missions or firebombing to destroy 25 percent of the German canal boats (as opposed to 10 percent OTL) prior to the invasion. Compensate the Brits by having the Germans NOT concentrate so much on bombing London.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if you could get any mileage out of a story where a Nazi travels through alternate timelines, convinced that Sea Lion would win Germany the war and tries the variations suggested in past threads to secure the outcome. Each time ends only in utter catastrophe for the Germans though and he moves onto another timeline to try again.
 
I wonder if you could get any mileage out of a story where a Nazi travels through alternate timelines, convinced that Sea Lion would win Germany the war and tries the variations suggested in past threads to secure the outcome. Each time ends only in utter catastrophe for the Germans though and he moves onto another timeline to try again.
If you don’t write it I’m tempted

The epilogue naturally revisits all these timelines to show how every single one turned out better than OTL lol
 
If you don’t write it I’m tempted

The epilogue naturally revisits all these timelines to show how every single one turned out better than OTL lol
Yes

Given the disastrous consequences of a failed USM for the German economy due to loss of the essential barges. . . . .

It's likely the war could be over by 1942.
 
The epilogue naturally revisits all these timelines to show how every single one turned out better than OTL lol
Including ones where Germany is the dominant force of a peaceful, democratic European Federation that includes Britain.

Nazi (Homer in the time travel Halloween episode): ...close enough.
 
I've just had a discussion with a person, outside of this forum, who stated categorically that (are you ready) "Dunkirk proved that Sealion could work cause if the brits could sail 100k+ troops in small boats in a rush, so could the germans."... took me a bit for my brain to recover of this stupid before drowning him in facts...

Anyone seen this one before, or is it a new one?
 
I've just had a discussion with a person, outside of this forum, who stated categorically that (are you ready) "Dunkirk proved that Sealion could work cause if the brits could sail 100k+ troops in small boats in a rush, so could the germans."... took me a bit for my brain to recover of this stupid before drowning him in facts...

Anyone seen this one before, or is it a new one?
The idea that Dunkirk is a reverse Sealion is an intriguing one - extraction from hostile, insertion in friendly is Dunkirk. Sealion is extraction from friendly, insertion in hostile.

The key though is still going to be why the British could do the first, and whether the Germans could.

Dunkirk was a salient under attack from land and air. The British were able to evacuate because they could challenge the air domination and could provide naval domination for the evacuation force

Turn it around for Sealion. The Germans INTENDED to have achieved air dominance, rather than challenge for it, and to be able to use it to make up for naval inferiority.

The question then resolves to - how vulnerable were major British warships to Luftwaffe attack? If we assume is not going to be launched until air dominance over Britain has been achieved, then this is the key point.

Major British warships have AA defences and carrier defence. The question then is whether the Luftwaffe is capable of overcoming these.
 
The idea that Dunkirk is a reverse Sealion is an intriguing one - extraction from hostile, insertion in friendly is Dunkirk. Sealion is extraction from friendly, insertion in hostile.

The key though is still going to be why the British could do the first, and whether the Germans could.

Dunkirk was a salient under attack from land and air. The British were able to evacuate because they could challenge the air domination and could provide naval domination for the evacuation force

Turn it around for Sealion. The Germans INTENDED to have achieved air dominance, rather than challenge for it, and to be able to use it to make up for naval inferiority.

The question then resolves to - how vulnerable were major British warships to Luftwaffe attack? If we assume is not going to be launched until air dominance over Britain has been achieved, then this is the key point.

Major British warships have AA defences and carrier defence. The question then is whether the Luftwaffe is capable of overcoming these.
Intriguing take.

The answer is that major British warships were not required. Destroyers and light craft (several hundred) were all that would have been needed to wreak havoc with the landing forces and reinforcement or supply efforts.

They could operate freely at night. And the Luftwaffe never gained the supremacy necessary to prevent them sailing in daytime either IMHO.
 
Intriguing take.

The answer is that major British warships were not required. Destroyers and light craft (several hundred) were all that would have been needed to wreak havoc with the landing forces and reinforcement or supply efforts.

They could operate freely at night. And the Luftwaffe never gained the supremacy necessary to prevent them sailing in daytime either IMHO.
There's also the small problem that all the BEF soldiers were carrying nothing but their rifles, if that. And that the small boats that came for them were actually more seaworthy than river barges. And that they were crossing in June, not September/October... just to mention these...
 
There's also the small problem that all the BEF soldiers were carrying nothing but their rifles, if that. And that the small boats that came for them were actually more seaworthy than river barges. And that they were crossing in June, not September/October... just to mention these...
Good points

Getting horse down artillery and tanks across in barges or small boats is . . . A more difficult problem.
 
There's also the small problem that all the BEF soldiers were carrying nothing but their rifles, if that. And that the small boats that came for them were actually more seaworthy than river barges. And that they were crossing in June, not September/October... just to mention these...
Not to mention most of the men were taken off on steamers or destroyers and smaller warships, not the courageous small civilian craft that get hyped up so much.
 
Top