Operation Sea Lion (1974 Sandhurst Wargame)

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Now it's down to Stalin's Anglophile sympathies? I think Britain might want a better plan than that, don't you?

Which they have. Why are the British bombing Germany when they will bomb the ports where the invasion force is? You set up false arguments that Hitler and the British must do either your preferred action, or fail. Britain did better bombing the invasion fleet than cities, and it took until 1942 to even realize that bombing sucked. But aerial bombing was new. The RN had not had a peer opponent since what, the Napoleanic wars? The RN has a comparative and absolutely advantage overy Germany, Italy, and Vichy France due to the time it takes to train sailors and build ships. In the air both were more equal, and the Heer was unbeatable (as long as within supply, of course) but this advantage was only comparative and not absolute. How does a lion kill a whale? You blithely ignore any valid criticism of your positions. How would the KM mount a Sealion in 1941 when Britain has more destroyers and cruisers than 1940? After all, if the KM is going full steam into Sealion, no battle of the Atlantic to distract the RN.
Edit: Carl said it better than I could!

 

[Orcbuster]

The Germans made 4 attempts in Russia before too weak to try again - Barbarossa, Typhoon, Blue, and Kursk. Each of them failed at a cost far beyond a failed Sealion. That's the idea - once a strategy is set, a real Great Power continues on that course regardless of losses until it fails or its exhausted.

Those operations actually achieved something and the failed ones tried to build on previous successes. In sealion there is nothing to build on and nothing to be achieved. Just Complete losses of entire units which morale wise is far worse than anything else. Barbarossa casualties were considered acceptable at times because they were spread out and actually had results. Sealion is plain instant waste with no result and is thus unacceptable. They could simply shoot all the troops involved themselves and it would not make any difference on the overall strategic military situation and if you don't understand that there is nothing I can do to help you.

 

[Jellico]

There are two things keeping Stalin out.

1. Germany keeps paying its bills. Part of the reasoning for Barbarossa was that Germany was running out of things to pay the Soviets with. Eventually it will run out of assets and with it the ability to wage war. But until then why would Stalin be willing to give up his position of economic dominance over Germany?

2. Germany is smashing up capitalist states that would otherwise be focusing on the Soviet Union. And half the booty is heading to the being onsold to the Soviets. Yay. Where is the downside?

The only win situation for Stalin stepping in is if he does so as a savior. Otherwise the Soviets look like opportunist vultures. It is a possibility in the medium term but not likely. OTOH when Germany's economy collapses in a puddle well... Who's up for a little civil war and hammers and sickles for everyone?

 

[Garrison]

Interesting slip on your part - the use of the word 'gambit'. That means you do understand how little strategically was at stake in undertaking such a venture as an attack on IOW.

You can try and spin as much as you like. I was simply trying to be polite and not call it 'absurd', 'nonsensical' or 'deluded'.

Time enough to do what, launch multiple Sealions? Is that what are you talking about?

No that appears to be your personal fantasy.

We know for a fact that the American public 1.5 years after the fall of France historically was still OK with neutrality in the European war.

No they were in favour of supporting Britain short of joining the war and Roosevelt was working to create a casus belli to draw the USA in.

We also know that had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor that it easily might have gone past 2 years from the fall of France without the US in the war in Europe.

Unlikely with the escalation in the Atlantic war and Roosevelt doing everything he could to provoke them.

That's Sealion 1940, 1941, 1942, then after that, who knows, right?

Or fail, fail and fail while the Soviets complete their build up and upgrade their industries with German machine tools, and just in case your uncertain, yes I think your suggestion is absurd

 

[Garrison]

And I realize that yet again this thread has turned into another round of people explaining to our resident sealionista why flogging what is now the skeleton of a dead horse is a pointless activity.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Its been a useful exercise. Even I got involved, & I usually avoid these. But hey, ask the mods to lock it if you feel strongly enough.

 

[Garrison]

Its been a useful exercise. Even I got involved, & I usually avoid these. But hey, ask the mods to lock it if you feel strongly enough.

No your right, there has been some interesting stuff, it's just that it's gotten a little diverted in the last couple of pages.

 

[Killer in]

No your right, there has been some interesting stuff, it's just that it's gotten a little diverted in the last couple of pages.

I think that's because we've gotten to the point where we've said all that should be needed to be said and it's just not going in.

 

[Aber]

I think that's because we've gotten to the point where we've said all that should be needed to be said

Yes, what needs to be said, has not yet been said by everyone, so we might as well keep going.

 

[Derek Pullem]

The Germans made 4 attempts in Russia before too weak to try again - Barbarossa, Typhoon, Blue, and Kursk. Each of them failed at a cost far beyond a failed Sealion. That's the idea - once a strategy is set, a real Great Power continues on that course regardless of losses until it fails or its exhausted.

Rubbish.

Did Germany try large scale airborne landings after Crete
Did UK try large scale raids after Dieppe

After a major failure or even a costly success you do not repeat what you have already done. Barabarossa, Typhoon, Blue and Kursk were different types of operational strategies. Barbarossa, Typhoon and Blue all had some success

A failed Sea Lion has no partial success

 

[nbcman]

And I realize that yet again this thread has turned into another round of people explaining to our resident sealionista why flogging what is now the skeleton of a dead horse is a pointless activity.

Flogging a skeleton of a formerly sea sick horse that has washed ashore on a shingle beach.

 

[sonofpegasus]

I do not have my copy of Dr. Cox's book on the 1974 wargame to hand, however IIRC not a single one of the Germans taking part in the exercise, many of whom were involved in the real "Sealion scenario" in 1940, was under any delusion that had the invasion gone ahead as planned it would have been anything other than an unmitigated disaster for the German Military unequalled in their history.
Anyone unconvinced (if not delusional) should at least read "invasion 1940" by Dereck Robinson, though some will decry his credentials as a serious historian, he sets out, whilst debunking the perceived Myths of the BoB, exactly why Sealion would fail and just how disastrous it would be for the Germans in an easy to read and logical way.

 

[Major Major]

Classic fan proposition here. The Germans get to change their strategy, but there is a implicit assumption the enemy does not adapt, but has to follow a historical decision with no allowance for changed circumstances. In this case the German AF is continuing a bombing campaign against the UK, but the Brits must ignore that and mount their historical action however irrelevant it is to the changed situation. Whats really silly in this is a implication that the readers here are so dim witted they will accept frequently repeated examples of this technique, they can't see simplistic and obvious ewpwated presentations.

I call this Victorious German Arms Syndrome, after Gary Gygax's booklet where the Germans make massive changes to their strategy, production, and so on, and the Allies throw themselves against the all-conquering Wehrmacht using the same operations, procedures, and equipment they had in our time-line.

Except at the end, where the Combined Allied (US, UK, & Japan(!)) Fleet takes on the Combined Axis (Germany, Italy, France, and Spain) Fleet in a great battle off the shores of England which the Axis wins decisively.

 

[Killer in]

A battle where the Allied line has KGVs, Yamatos and Iowa's would be a site to see.

 

[Major Major]

I must admit the Longships intrigue me as a non-strategic material fix for the barge problem. Admittedly they would be two years too late given that any wooden landing ships/craft need to be built from scratch. But then I am a sucker for out-of-the-box thinking like this or the aerial mining campaign thread.

There was the infamous poster on s.h.w-i who had proposals for something like this. This would be a simple wood-built design capable of being assembled by carpenters and semi-skilled labor in small river ports. They could be fitted as landing craft, anti-aircraft ships, or escorts.

Believe it or not that was one of the more sensible of his proposals. The others included things like S-boat raids into the Irish Sea and attack against agricultural facilities ("strafing cows and bombing hop fields").

He would be driven away and six months later come back with the same proposals. People got to mangling his name, lest he do a search for it.

 

[Major Major]

A battle where the Allied line has KGVs, Yamatos and Iowa's would be a site to see.

It would be. But the opposition is not so impressive. Even assuming you could get it all together.

 

[Cymraeg]

There was the infamous poster on s.h.w-i who had proposals for something like this. This would be a simple wood-built design capable of being assembled by carpenters and semi-skilled labor in small river ports. They could be fitted as landing craft, anti-aircraft ships, or escorts.

Believe it or not that was one of the more sensible of his proposals. The others included things like S-boat raids into the Irish Sea and attack against agricultural facilities ("strafing cows and bombing hop fields").

He would be driven away and six months later come back with the same proposals. People got to mangling his name, lest he do a search for it.

That's getting into The-Islands-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named territory.

 

[nepcotevalley]

Good Lord. This thread is 18 pages long already. When will this nightmare end !

 

[Alanith]

So by your own numbers and his numbers combined, that's between 7.5 and 25 failed Sealions, correct?

I see quite literally no possible way it gets that far without someome staging a coup and disposing of the obvious madman.

 

[marathag]

That's getting into The-Islands-That-Shall-Not-Be-Named territory.

No, believe me, far, far worse.