Luftwaffe wins the BOB

backstab

Banned
Barry Curran said:
The RAF had a number of advantages over the Luftwaffe. Firstly, it was backed by an air defence system ( radar, the Observer Corps, the plotting rooms etc) well equipped for winning a defensive air battle. Secondly, as I pointed out in earlier post, the RAF had excellent leadership in the form of Dowding and Keith Park who, as I also pointed, out gave the Luftwaffe another beating in 1942 when he took over Malta's air defences.

The RAF achieved an overall kill ratio during the battle of 1.8:1 , so the narrow margin was actually wider than many peolpe think. It also worth noting that when the Luftwaffe intensified its efforts during the battle, the kill ratio remained in favour of the RAF or was even. For example:

11/08/40 RAF losses 17 Luftwaffe losses 20 RAF's kill ratio 1.2:1
30/08/40 RAF losses 23 Luftwaffe losses 23 RAF's kill ratio 1:1
15/09/40 RAF losses 28 Luftwaffe losses 56 RAF's kill ratio 2:1

So increasing its efforts in the air led to even heavier losses for the Germans.

As for taking out airfields, even at the height of the Battle, the only Sector Station to go down was Biggin Hill and that remained non-operational for a few hours only. Even if the Luftwaffe had concentrated more of its efforts against the airfields, the difficulty of knocking these out for a significant period of time has to be taken into account plus the losses incurred in doing so( see kill ratio data above).

Turning to the threat against the radar network, the Germans only enjoyed limited success in taking these out, partly because of the difficulty involved in doing so and partly because the Germans did not concentrate their effort to destroy radar stations to any great degree. Even if they did, the British had mobile radar and would have been able to improvise repairs as they did during the Battle. Moreover, the RAF would have devised strategies to cope with gaps in the radar coverage because they had winners in the form of Dowding and Keith Park.

Taking all of the above into consideration, a Luftwaffe victory over the RAF is just too far-fetched for a serious debate,


Still dont think your right. Luck played more part than the skills Dowding and Keith Park ( Dont forget in malta they were fighting the incompetent Italians). The Germans were also hamstrung by Goering. Cut the deadwood and things would have gone better. I do not beleive in any case that the Germans could of pulled off Sea Lion but they could have smashed the RAF.
 
backstab said:
Still dont think your right. Luck played more part than the skills Dowding and Keith Park ( Dont forget in malta they were fighting the incompetent Italians). The Germans were also hamstrung by Goering. Cut the deadwood and things would have gone better. I do not beleive in any case that the Germans could of pulled off Sea Lion but they could have smashed the RAF.

In the summer of 1942 it was the Luftwaffe which was posing the most serious threat to Malta, not the Italians. Park put an end to the bombimg by employing the same strategy as he had in 1940 - that is, to intercept the bombers before they hit the airbases ( so reducing the amount of damage done to aircraft and installations etc) .

To achieve air superiority, they would have had to turned the RAF's kill ratio from 1.8:1 to 1:4. The Luftwaffe actually achieved a 4:1 kill ratio in 1941 but only when the RAF attacked the Luftwaffe's air defence system in France, in a bid to releive the pressure on the Soviets after Barbarrosa. The tactics used by the RAF did not help matters,though.( By this time, Park and Dowding had both gone to pastures new.)

The fact is that the Luftwaffe sinply did not have a big enough advantage in numbers or tactics to achieve such a kill ratio over the skies of South -East England.
 
getting a 1.5-1.7:1 kill ratio is basically air parity not airsuperiority.

“These worries would become critical as the Luftwaffe shifted its attention across the English Channel. At first, things went well for the Luftwaffe. After the beginning of the Battle of Britain on 13 August 1940, the Bf-109s were allowed to range freely and engage British fighters at will, using the fluid tactics devised by Moelders in Spain. The British were trained in traditional inflexible formation tactics that put them at a disadvantage, but the RAF quickly adopted the Luftwaffe tactics. “

“While the Bf-109s ranged freely, the job of protecting the bombers fell to the twin-engine Bf-110s. It didn't work. The Bf-110s were slaughtered, and so by early September the Bf-109s were ordered to operate as bomber escorts. Forced into a defensive posture, the Bf-109 was at a disadvantage relative to Hurricanes and Spitfires.”

“The limited range of the Bf-109 was also proving a liability, as it could not stay over the battle area for long before having to return home. After the bombings campaign was switched from British airfields to British cities, the RAF began to gain the upper hand. “

“The last action of the Battle of Britain was on 31 October 1940. The British had lost 631 Hurricanes, 403 Spitfires, and 115 Blenheim fighters, for a total of 1,149. The Luftwaffe lost 610 Bf-109s, along with 235 Bf-110s and 937 bombers, for a total of 1,782. Worse, many of the British pilots who had to bail out returned to battle the next day. Luftwaffe pilots who bailed out went to prisoner of war camps…”


http://www.worldwar-2.net/timelines/war-in-europe/european-air-war/european-air-war-index-1940.htm

Going from the breakdown listed above the first phase of the German air attack up to Sept 9 , registered roughly 600 [292+308] Luftwaffe losses compared to about 440 [170+270]RAF losses or about 1.3:1 kill ratio. In the first weeks of September this would reach 1.14:1 kill ratio for the RAF, or effectively 1:1 [308 Luftwaffe losses compared 270 RAF losses]. Between mid September and the end of October the RAF would lose an additional 709 planes while the Luftwaffe losses amounted to ~ 1180 planes or a bout 1.7:1 kill ratio. During this period the RAF would claim 2,762 Luftwaffe planes shot down against 780 RAF fighters.

In many instances claims were grossly exaggerated on both sides, with the RAF claiming 271 shot down Luftwaffe planes for the loss of only 81 RAF fighters in three separate engagements. That’s a whopping 3.35:1 kill ratio. In actuality the figures were 128 Luftwaffe planes lost to 84 RAF losses, a 1.5:1 kill ratio. Later the claimed Luftwaffe calculate kills, should mean no RAF planes fly at all! This underscores a reality in war history, that while one sides accounts of their own losses are usually reliable, their reporting of the enemy figures are often more than twice reality.

So broadly speaking the 11 72 x Me110/bombers were lost for ~ 500-600 Hurricanes & Blenheim’s, while about 600 Spits and Hurricanes were lost at the cost of ~ 610 Me-109 fighters. That’s 1:1 fighter on fighter and 2:1 fighters on bombers. If the shoot down on bombers was 3:1 or more [as some British sources claim] , then the 1172 German bombers and escort fighters would be lost at the cost of 300-400 RAF fighters leaving 750-850 RAF fighters to shoot down 610 ME-109s.Sounds like the Me-109 was at least as good if not better than the RAF fighters.



Its instructive to note that USSBS puzzled over the german war economy and exclaimed that the Germans could have doubled production of planes tanks and vehicles right away just by rearranging the way they ordered weapons. Speer made the same observation that 1944 levels of out put could have been reached by 1941 had war economy measures been put into effect from the start [ as other countries did]. Thus an alternative history could have the germans producing 2000 aircraft a month during the BoB.
 
Last edited:
How about you get your facts straight. Without Hitler and Goering sticking their noses in, the Germans would have curbstomped the RAF.
Well, no. Luftwaffe intelligence was incompetent. It had no idea FC was being controlled from Sector Stations, nor where they were, nor the exact role CH/CHL played. It was unaware of how the radar coverage worked. There was no systematic attack on radar (without Goering or Hitler ever saying word one about it). KO the CH/CHL towers was damn near impossible, as the Germans discovered when they tried bombing them; open frameworks are extremely blast-resistant. (The Germans had no idea they only had to KO the power stations nearby, or the control vans. Attacking the landlines to the Sector Stations never occured to them...) Neither did Luftwaffe intelligence have any idea how many aircraft RAF FC actually had, or how many it was receiving. In fact, it didn't even know where Merlins were produced... A single raid on the Rolls plant could've crippled FC aircraft supplies.
The German pilots were better trained and had better aircraft.
Questionable. More to the point, Luftwaffe was so arrogant, it refused to equip the Me-109s with drop tanks, which were available; as a result, the 109s couldn't fight more than, what, 15min over Britain? More German pilots came down in the Channel than needed to; they called fear of it "Channel sickness". (Of course, the Germans were better prepared for it; they had SAR aircraft, rafts, life vests, dye markers, none of which RAF FC did, for reasons that mystify me...)
If they kept up the bombing of the Airfeilds and radar stations then the RAF would have been in trouble.
In that, we are in agreement. Thank Winston & Peirse for thinking to bomb Berlin, & Hitler for being Hitler & ordering retaliation on London. Now, if Peirse had a lick of sense, he'd have used his Blenheims against the German bases in France...

As for Dowding being removed, fat chance. He was winning. Britain only had to hold on. What would've been a disaster was for Leigh-Mallory to get his way...
 

Markus

Banned
How about you get your facts straight. Without Hitler and Goering sticking their noses in, the Germans would have curbstomped the RAF. The German pilots were better trained and had better aircraft. If they kept up the bombing of the Airfeilds and radar stations then the RAF would have been in trouble. The biggest advantage that the RAF had was that if a plane was shot down then the pilot (If he had survived the combat) could just jump into another plane the next day.

Nope, they would not and the reason is ... range! A Me109 had a combat radius that went as far as London, so in case the LW is knocking out too many airfields in south England the RAF will withdraw to bases north of London which can not be reached by escorted bombers and since nobody was sending in unescorted bombers in daylight the RAF will have a 100% safe heaven from which it can continue the Battle. Throw in the higher English fighter production and the fact that shot down English pilots bail out over friendly territory and the RAF can not loose.


Questionable. More to the point, Luftwaffe was so arrogant, it refused to equip the Me-109s with drop tanks, which were available; as a result, the 109s couldn't fight more than, what, 15min over Britain?

IIRC drop tank were not available yet. Anyway the use of external tanks in combat was a fairly novel idea. Even one, two years later Malta based Hurricanes had no drop tanks, just non-droppable ferry tanks. USN fighters were just starting to get them in late 41 and numbers were so low that some squadrons made them themselves.
 
Michelle had a good TL on this. Anyone know where to dig that up?

Otherwise, if you want the most plausible scenario for a Nazi curbstomp in the UK, read the second link in my sig. ;)
 
IIRC drop tank were not available yet. Anyway the use of external tanks in combat was a fairly novel idea. Even one, two years later Malta based Hurricanes had no drop tanks, just non-droppable ferry tanks. USN fighters were just starting to get them in late 41 and numbers were so low that some squadrons made them themselves.
Could be. IIRC, Germany developed drop tanks in '36, but never deployed them. Whether they were actually useful....
 
As for Dowding being removed, fat chance. He was winning. Britain only had to hold on. What would've been a disaster was for Leigh-Mallory to get his way...

Unfortunately Dowding did get removed - though granted it was after the Battle had been one. His removal more to petty jealosies, and internal 'politics', rather than any operational reasons.
Agree about Leigh-Mallory, he feft snubbed that Park was given 11 Group. He, Douglas and others were amongst those who arranged Dowding's re-deployment! He showed what a disaster he would have been, with recreations of raids on 11 Group using 'wings'. Later too, with his failed aircove over Dieppe.

It is a pity Dowding didn't get rid of Leigh-Mallory over their inability to cover the 11 Group airfields, who would replace him - 11 Group SASO?
 
Here we go: A Better Show in 1940 by Michele.

A very well researched and detailed account of a Germany-victorious BoB and featuring (gasp) a certain universally beloved sea mammal.

The end result is
not good for the Reich
.
 
Dowding under the RAF rules was meant to retire just as the BoB started. It was very sensibly decided that he should use the weapon he had forged. This he did with great success.

He was over-retirement age once the BoB was over and others were keen to take his place
 
Dowding under the RAF rules was meant to retire just as the BoB started. It was very sensibly decided that he should use the weapon he had forged. This he did with great success.

He was over-retirement age once the BoB was over and others were keen to take his place

He would have retired in '39 but Courtney his replacement was ill. Some take the view that Churchill 'fired' him because Dowding said No to more Hurricanes to France! But that is not tenable by - Churchill's reaction to his going. Indeed Churchill, insisted on him being found other duties/assignments rather than being just 'retired'.

Moreover, if it was just an 'age thing' then why oh why wasn't he made Marshall of the Royal Air Force, many of lessor accomplishments were made so! So I think your last comment is the crucial one "others were keen to take his place".
 
Unfortunately Dowding did get removed - though granted it was after the Battle had been one.
I did know that. I mean in connection with the BoB itself. His dismissal (it can only be called that) is one of the pettiest acts I've seen; he was even denied a Baronetcy, which he richly deserved. If Winston was responsible, this was beneath him.
Agree about Leigh-Mallory, he feft snubbed that Park was given 11 Group.
Didn't know that. I'm not surprised...
It is a pity Dowding didn't get rid of Leigh-Mallory over their inability to cover the 11 Group airfields, who would replace him - 11 Group SASO?
That's beyond my knowledge. I'd say whoever was senior among the Group SOs at the time was 1st in line, with the senior deputy "fleeting up" to his slot: say it was SO 10G getting 12, with XO 13G being #1 deputy, for instance. Who they'd be...?
 
Top