I know I'm risking unleashing the hordes of hell

... The danger is to be complacent.

Admittedly, on a snaller scale, but:

1) Franco and his merry men (from Morocco, etc) were flown into Spain. The Republicans dominated the sea, so Germany avoided that.

2) Crete: air was a better route

3) To some extent Norway (a bit muddled, but not insignificant)

I do know the British admiral (who was it again?) who said: "I am not saying that they can't come, I am saying they can't come by sea".

Very good, but how about air? And now we are not talking parachute jumps and light divisions.

The berg division flown into Crete was what was needed. And that settled it.

If BEF had not been evacuated there would have been a bit of a shortfall here and there. Armour in UK after Dunkirk? not impressive I believe. I have some numbers out of Brooke's book which I shall look up later.

Still, luck and a lot of things must have happend prior to 1940. Doubt it could have been done with the shabby planning in 1940.

Ivan
 
ivanotter said:
Very good, but how about air? And now we are not talking parachute jumps and light divisions.

The berg division flown into Crete was what was needed. And that settled it.
How many Ju-52s would it take to supply 8000-10000 tons/day?:eek: (Did Germany even have that many?:rolleyes:) How many would be shot down/day?

How many more Polish & Czech aces would there be by the time it was over?

How crippled would Luftwaffe's training program be?:eek:
 
I think you need to think about it and read that text you posted a jpg of.... A division in intense combat uses artillery. And tanks actually start to move. And soldiers will insist on firing weapons. Like the quotes says. the figure does NOT include "ordinance" or anything need for "even a short campaign"!
If you read what I have posted paragraph 1 states that a British Division under normal conditions requires 200 tons and in combat 350 tons. Paragraph 2 then states that it is estimated that a German division on a short campaign (i.e. the first ten days) would require 300 tons per day including the requirements for engineering and support staff ... that is not to say that more might be required for a longer campaign. If it is expected that 9-10 Divisions were to be landed in the first wave they would require 3,000-3,500 (being generous) tons of supplies for the first 2-3 days and this would be to replace the 2-3 days worth of supplies they carried into battle initially.

You have to assume as a worst case that the Germans would not capture an intact port facility in the first few days, and that repairs would not be complete for at least a week even if they do. So lets say that for the first 10 days they are reliant on beached supplies. To get the required tonnage of supplies, 3,500 tons, the Germans only need to successfully land 14 river barges rated at 500 tons but expected to carry 250 tons or equivalent. In other words they could send over 30 and lose more than half and still have the supplies they needed. Obviously as time goes by they will need more and more as more troops are landed but by then they would have captured a port or two easing the burden on the beaches.


This is your opinion. Why do you expect anyone to care? Rather than saying "Anyone who thinks that a sabotaged port can handle logistics for 30 divisions is insane." Really you are making an extraordinary claim and expecting everyone to believe it simply because you say so. No. Just - no!

(Oh - and Southampton wasn't one of the primary objectives for Sea Lion - i.e. it was to be taken later, not at the start of the operation. So it doesn't solve the German's problems of how they supply their forces in the first place at all.)
I should have provided the attachment here at the same time as the last one, taken from the same document. It shows the British figures for each of the ports that could be available to the invasion forces. After establishing the initial beachhead the first German operational objective was to establish a line from Southampton to the mouth of the Thames making Southampton one of the primary objectives.

The Brits further state that even a sabotaged and damaged port can be utilised provided that the transports have their own derricks for unloading, however the tonnage would only be 10-15% of a working capacity until repairs can be made. Therefore the capture of Southampton would give the Germans an additional worse case capacity of 2,500 tons improving over time. The British also estimate that the initial tonnage of supplies coming through the most likely ports to be captured early in the invasion, Ramsgate, Folkestone and Dover would be just 350 tons rising to 1,600 tons after 7 days.

Ports.jpg
 
What proponents of Sealion usually neglect is the fact that the Germans never planned to find themselves in a position to execute it. Literally never planned for it. What happened is that they had a stroke of luck and defeated France in a heartbeat. They expected that Allies would sue for peace wholesale. Yet, they didn't.

Furthermore, try comparing Overlord and Sealion. In comparison to Overlord, Sealion barely qualifies to be considered 'theoretical study'. It lacks almost all preconditions for a succesful operation.
 
What proponents of Sealion usually neglect is the fact that the Germans never planned to find themselves in a position to execute it. Literally never planned for it. What happened is that they had a stroke of luck and defeated France in a heartbeat. They expected that Allies would sue for peace wholesale. Yet, they didn't.

Furthermore, try comparing Overlord and Sealion. In comparison to Overlord, Sealion barely qualifies to be considered 'theoretical study'. It lacks almost all preconditions for a succesful operation.
As I've said before ... think less Overlord and look more at Husky and you get a better comparison.
 
As I've said before ... think less Overlord and look more at Husky and you get a better comparison.

According to a quick check the Allied OOB was 160,000 men, 14,000 vehicles, 600 tanks, approx 20 squadrons from the Med area and another approx 60 squadrons from Desert Command, all with naval support including Battleships down.

I'm not convinced that those numbers are any more SeaLion friendly than D-Day.
 
According to a quick check the Allied OOB was 160,000 men, 14,000 vehicles, 600 tanks, approx 20 squadrons from the Med area and another approx 60 squadrons from Desert Command, all with naval support including Battleships down.

I'm not convinced that those numbers are any more SeaLion friendly than D-Day.
Think we might need a three way comparison at some stage :D:)
 
Think we might need a three way comparison at some stage :D:)

Torch was over 100,000 men, and was backed by Battleships, Cruisers, Aircraft carriers and Destroyers.

No even accepting the Allies generally relying on firepower, I still think there's a fairly large gulf between the successful Allied Amphibious operations and the proposed SeaLion.

The closest I can see is the Anzio invasion with some 40,000 men and 2300 vehicles, backed by 5 cruisers and 24 destroyers, and perhaps this is an example of how a SeaLion would play out?
 
The closest I can see is the Anzio invasion with some 40,000 men and 2300 vehicles, backed by 5 cruisers and 24 destroyers, and perhaps this is an example of how a SeaLion would play out?

With a distinction that Anzio, ultimately was semi-failure. Allies tied up enough German forces there to enable them to make breakthrough elsewhere. Sealion would resemble Anzio, only without anything else that might divert British forces. Plus without the ability to supply the forces and without any perspective of relief. Ever.

In all the aforementioned cases the Allies at least had sine-qua-non for an amphibious operation - naval supremacy. Germans would never have it, even if we be charitable and allow some measure of air superiority (not supremacy, IMHO, that is truly beyon realm of reality). Even if due to temporary air superiority they manage SOMEHOW, though with their 'plan' I don't see this somehow coming to pass, to land a few divisions on the coast of Britain, their fate is as certain as that the Sun rises in the East. KIA or POW listed on the AAR in OKW sometime in late September.

PS In this light, the closest comparison I see is Jubilee aka Dieppe raid. Only bigger.
 
Last edited:
And on top of everything else it's also the case that Hitler personally admired the British and was quite eager to make peace with them. So if the Axis actually ever were in a position to launch a successful invasion. Say a combination of:
- 1930s turn US UBERIsolationist staying not only neutral, but also never Lend and Lease
- Germans get Japanese torpedo technology for the Subs
- Japan joins the Axis in 1940 after Dunkirk and does it's OTL conquests one year earlier with the US just watching from the sidelines
- Spain also joins. It takes a lot of effort but eventually Gibraltar falls.
- USSR falls apart in 1941
- 1942 sees a string of defeats for Britain in it's Empire including the fall of the Suez
- Japan willing and able to send the bulk of it's Navy to Europe
- Vichy cuts a deal which involves joining the Axis adding another fleet
- and some more Axis boosts verging on but not quite ASB level

Then an invasion might be possible, but it wouldn't be necessary anymore as Britain would be willing to come to terms.
 
With a distinction that Anzio, ultimately was semi-failure. Allies tied up enough German forces there to enable them to make breakthrough elsewhere. Sealion would resemble Anzio, only without anything else that might divert British forces. Plus without the ability to supply the forces and without any perspective of relief. Ever.

In all the aforementioned cases the Allies at least had sine-qua-non for an amphibious operation - naval supremacy. Germans would never have it, even if we be charitable and allow some measure of air superiority (not supremacy, IMHO, that is truly beyon realm of reality). Even if due to temporary air superiority they manage SOMEHOW, though with their 'plan' I don't see this somehow coming to pass, to land a few divisions on the coast of Britain, their fate is as certain as that the Sun rises in the East. KIA or POW listed on the AAR in OKW sometime in late September.

PS In this light, the closest comparison I see is Jubilee aka Dieppe raid. Only bigger.

I fully agree that it's a case of Germany throwing away some of their best division's in a forlon hope of defeating Britain. There's no chance and given that it would be the first major amphibious assault against a fully prepared force it would be a disaster.

The Allies had the "learning" experience of Torch, Husky, Avalanche all to work out large scale combined air/amphibious assaults and in each somethings went wrong and had to be improved. Germany won't have such a situation.

The RN would love to see the German's try it, and apart from the already discussed ramifications of freeing up naval assets, and land forces for Med operations, post war the Navy might see more support as the "ones that saved the nation"

Is a successful invasion of the UK possible, yes.
Is it possible 1940's Germany with OTL forces could do it, no.
 
And on top of everything else it's also the case that Hitler personally admired the British and was quite eager to make peace with them. So if the Axis actually ever were in a position to launch a successful invasion. Say a combination of:
- 1930s turn US UBERIsolationist staying not only neutral, but also never Lend and Lease
- Germans get Japanese torpedo technology for the Subs
- Japan joins the Axis in 1940 after Dunkirk and does it's OTL conquests one year earlier with the US just watching from the sidelines
- Spain also joins. It takes a lot of effort but eventually Gibraltar falls.
- USSR falls apart in 1941 ASB
- 1942 sees a string of defeats for Britain in it's Empire including the fall of the Suez
- Japan willing and able to send the bulk of it's Navy to Europe ASB
- Vichy cuts a deal which involves joining the Axis adding another fleet If Spain joins, ASB. Otherwise fleet of marginal value and dubious loyalty, holed up in the Med for the duration of the war. Besides Axis does not have enough fuel to enable them to operate.
- and some more Axis boosts verging on but not quite ASB level

Then an invasion might be possible, but it wouldn't be necessary anymore as Britain would be willing to come to terms. Exactly the point of many Sealion criticists. The same set of circumstances that make theinvasion possible, also make it unnecessary.

I highlighted in red the comments on bolded points.
 
Top