Sealion paper

Despite Sealion being commonly derided as impossible, this paper claims that it was, in fact, possible (although requiring [gasp!] an intelligent Hitler).

Could Sealion actually have been pulled off using the methods described?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Actually, that isn't what the paper says. It clearly concludes that the Luftwaffe had to prevail in the BoB, have a much stronger navy, and extrapolates that a fascist Spain would join in, or at the very least, provide unfettered access to Wehrmacht forces to act against UK interest in the Med. It further notes that the Reich would have needed to have capture of the UK as an operational goal no later than the planning for the Invasion of France.

It has always been agreed that if all these factors existed that See Lowe could be done. The issue has always been, and will continue to be, that there is no way to get all of these factors aligned while having the British, in turn, sit around and wait for the Germans to invade.

I would be interested to see how the authors defended the paper, especially the USN author, given the assumptions regarding movement of naval units from the Med.
 
I would be interested to see how the authors defended the paper, especially the USN author, given the assumptions regarding movement of naval units from the Med.

I was going to say, I'm not a naval expert but the Regia Marina having the will or capability to take an Atlantic holiday is almost as bad as Sea Lion itself.
 
For a military Staff College report, I would have expected at least a few primary sources to be listed in the bibliography. Not in this case, though. Even the secondary sources are not the ones that would be generally quoted today since there are many more recent sources that are much better researched. Certainly some of the figures they used do not match more recent works.

I wonder what kind of evaluation the authors received for this work at the Staff College? I hope they would do better today.
 
I've cited that paper a few times myself on this board. The impression I got was that the Axis might have been able to pull off Sea Lion if they'd cooperated more. With the Mediterranean in Axis hands, Japan could take care of the Royal Navy in the Pacific as long as they don't do the idiotic thing on Dec. 7, 1941. I did notice, though, that the paper glossed over the barges that would have been used once Sea Lion would be carried out. I've also read conflicting accounts on whether the British would have moved their fighter planes north if the sector stations in the south had been destroyed.
 
Actually, that isn't what the paper says. It clearly concludes that the Luftwaffe had to prevail in the BoB, have a much stronger navy, and extrapolates that a fascist Spain would join in, or at the very least, provide unfettered access to Wehrmacht forces to act against UK interest in the Med. It further notes that the Reich would have needed to have capture of the UK as an operational goal no later than the planning for the Invasion of France.

It has always been agreed that if all these factors existed that See Lowe could be done. The issue has always been, and will continue to be, that there is no way to get all of these factors aligned while having the British, in turn, sit around and wait for the Germans to invade.

There's more. The paper includes the old red herring that if the Germans had continued to attack the airfields, the Luftwaffe would have won the air battle. This ha sbeen debunked so often here and elsewhere that it's very surprising it still circulates at that level.

There's more. The paper correctly sees that the Kriegsmarine was totally outclassed by the Royal Navy, and goes on to recruit the Regia Marina to make things vaguely less desperate for the Axis. Naturally this means that the res tof the summer of 1940 has to go to Gibraltar, and even if assuming that falls (big if), it means that Sealion can't come to pass until 1941 - when the window of weakness of the British Army and fixed fortifications has long gone.
Additionally, it's not just that the Royal Navy outclassed the Kriegsmarine; it's more like the Home Fleet outclassed the Kriegsmarine.
You want to add the Regia Marina? Fine, then let's add the Royal Navy forces in the Med, and counting only battleships, battlecruisers and aircraft carriers you have, on September 15, the: Warspite, Valiant, Malaya, Ramillies, Resolution, Renown, Illustrious, Eagle and Ark Royal. To face this, the Italian heavyweights are: Littorio, Vittorio Veneto, Cavour, Cesare, Doria and Duilio. 6 - 6 as to capital ships, 3 - 0 as to carriers.

The bottom line is that the paper has its own points to make, which, mind you, are correct points - but it will shoehorn facts into the framework in order to make them.
 
Top