Which is more ASB: Sealion or D-Day failing?

More ASB: Sealion or D-Day?


  • Total voters
    228
Perhaps I am too sanguine about German capabilities - but if the Germans hit with all their strength in mid-late June, while Allied supply and reinforcement are paralyzed by the Great Storm of June 19-22...

By that point the allies are to built up on the beaches and the weather will effect the Germans just as bad as the allies. Also two things. One is that no PoD to get D-Day fail must happen AFTER the first ships start leaving England for the beaches. Second off weather PoD's are by definition considered ASB on the forums.


As for the Criteria i'm asking for basically is it more ASB for Sealion to do something good for the Germans(basically anything to make the British more likely to surrender) OR D-Day failing AFTER the ships have started leaving for the beaches?
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Even if everything went right for the Germans and wrong for the British, there's really no way for Sealion to be successful. On the other hand, if everything went right for the Germans and wrong for the Allies, the Normandy invasion could have been repulsed. Therefore, Sealion is the more ASB of the two.

And while I hate to nitpick, "ASB" means impossible. Grammatically speaking, something can't be "more impossible" than anything else. Things are either possible or impossible, so AH scenarios either are ASB or they aren't.

And who I am kidding? I love to nitpick.
 
Even if everything went right for the Germans and wrong for the British, there's really no way for Sealion to be successful. On the other hand, if everything went right for the Germans and wrong for the Allies, the Normandy invasion could have been repulsed. Therefore, Sealion is the more ASB of the two.

And while I hate to nitpick, "ASB" means impossible. Grammatically speaking, something can't be "more impossible" than anything else. Things are either possible or impossible, so AH scenarios either are ASB or they aren't.

And who I am kidding? I love to nitpick.

Indeed, neither is ASB, they simply require a vast array of unlikely things to happen - but such is history. Sealion is the less likely to succeed (as can be noted from its never being attempted whereas D-Day was tried and worked) but neither are truly ASB.

Now Hitler showing up on a whitehorse and forcing a British surrender after a duel with Churchhill, now that would be ASB.
 
Indeed, neither is ASB, they simply require a vast array of unlikely things to happen - but such is history. Sealion is the less likely to succeed (as can be noted from its never being attempted whereas D-Day was tried and worked) but neither are truly ASB.

Now Hitler showing up on a whitehorse and forcing a British surrender after a duel with Churchhill, now that would be ASB.

I think the consensus on the board is that Sealion is truly ASB. The extreme maximum extent of Nazi conquest, one which borders the realm of ASB but just barely not there, would be the Nazis conquering the USSR west of the Urals.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Sealion by a mile.

If the weather wizards had been wrong, D-Day could have been a complete FUBAR. There was little chance that they would be that wrong, but one did exist.

Sealion, on the other hand, would require almost literal divine intervention to even become remotely plausible (not successful mind you, plausible). Something like a couple months of true Arctic weather (-20F for a couple months, enough to freeze the Channel solid enough to allow a Lake Ladoga "Road of Life" style series of pathways) something that hasn't been seen at those latitudes since the end of the Devensian glaciation.
 
I am going to put my head in a noose. It depends how you define a successful Sealion! If you now accept that a successful cross channel assault in June 1940 was impossible (that is 20/20 hindsight) at the time that was not really the concensus among the military and political leaders of Great Britain,her remaining allies and friends at the fall of France, There was a short period when just a few changes in The political landscape and a couple more Naval or Military reverses might of seen Britian seek terms. In those circumstances history might view the preparations fo Sealine as vital point of pressure which tipped the balance. Whether ASB or not Sealine existed and might even have been more successful in achieving Hitlers strategic aim of removing Great Britain as belligerent prior to turning east if it had been set up a bluff or deception from the first. One difference from a failed D day is that in the long term it would have no real effect on the out come of the war, the allies would prevail in the end. Not so with Sealion, the failure of Germany to remove Great Britain as a belligerent could be argued as being the first nail in the Nazi coffin
 
Just as a reminder the PoD for success for Sealion or D-Day happening can't happen until AFTER the operations begin. So the BoB for Sealion and the moment the ships start leaving the shore for D-Day.
Which is a rather unfair comparison, if you're giving Sealion a POD of the start of the BoB, you should give D-Day one of Christmas 1943, which is when the deception plans for the run-up to D-Day were signed off on.
 
Isn't this an ASB/plausibility comparison??

Again though aren't weather based PoD's ASB?
I'm too much of a novice here to be sure of the rules but maybe that holds only for initial PODs for TLs :confused:

I think this discussion is more about how implausible Sealion succeeding (for values of success) is versus D-Day failing. IF so, then the view seems to be it would take really serious ASB intervention to make Sealion work while D-day might just have gone wrong had a number of plausible but improbable events occurred. In this context a wrong weather forecast is something believable and hence not ASB in itself. Unlike a force field that prevents RAF aircraft taking off on S-day or direct ASB action to sink British ships before they come into contact with the Sealion invasion flotilla. Even that might not be enough as you have to do something to make the Germans feel they can launch it.

Short form - there would have to be visible ASB 'miracles' for Sea Lion, D-Day failure could be done with plausible deniability

So, like the different types of infinity, there are different levels of ASB implausibility. :D
 
Last edited:
Again though aren't weather based PoD's ASB?

what could have happened is that the meteorologist had predicted wrongly, in other words they could have predicted the short break in the weather that was D-day, to fall on C-day or E-day. turning the whole thing in a mess.
so it isn't a weather based pod, but a human err pod
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Again though aren't weather based PoD's ASB?

Yes and no. A fogbank that prevents WAllied air power from engaging or even an unexpected storm can be seen as a random real world event, weather forecasting was not close to an exact science at the time. An Ice Age is a different matter.

This is actually why I chose them as the examples. One is a very low probability, but possible event, the other is impossible.
 
If that choice was available i would chose "Neither", of course.

I think the consensus on the board is that Sealion is truly ASB. The extreme maximum extent of Nazi conquest, one which borders the realm of ASB but just barely not there, would be the Nazis conquering the USSR west of the Urals.


I vehemently disagree with such blanket statements regarding "consensus", which to me, like i said several times before is nothing but trying to shove one's particular opinions onto others, and bullying those who have a different opinion on the subject. I have seen a fair number of posters who correctly define what Sealion is: an operation with a poor/very poor chance of success. Very poor does not mean impossible, and certainly it's not "ASB" - again the abuse of this concept - entirely broken for what is possible in the real world - to donwplay/ ridicule opinions and ideas that does not corespond to one's view is quite infuriating.

I also do not agree with the concept that in order to have a successful Sealion you must have nazis not be nazis, which butterflies Sealion in the first place (or something along those lines). Relatively simple PODs could theoretically bring a succesful Sealion, for instance more attention prior to mid-1940 to possible operations against the UK, drop tanks on Bf-109 and Bf-110 earlier, a disaster at Dunkirk for the UK and France resulting in the loss of most british troops (mostly made prisoners) as opposed to them being evacuated, maybe an even faster fall of France, continued attacks against RAF airfields as opposed to switching to London attacks, better attention and emphasis on war production as opposed to contemplating peace after the fall of France, and the list goes on and on. Could Sealion fail even with all these PODs? Absolutely, perfectly possible. But improbable does not mean impossible.

Constructive arguments of why Sealion could fail are certainly very welcomed and educative, attempt to forces one's pet opinion and censor interesting and engaging discussions on this subject are certainly, definitely not.
 
Any German invasion of Britain with the situation in 1940-41 was virtually doomed to failure.

Although unlikely, the Normandy invasion could have failed for a number of not inherently ASB reasons.

Also, for the long term strategic outcome, if Sealion failed, Germany would never be able to attempt another invasion. However,if Normandy failed the Wallies could have mounted another invasion attempt in a year (although for political reasons they might not).
 
I also do not agree with the concept that in order to have a successful Sealion you must have nazis not be nazis, which butterflies Sealion in the first place (or something along those lines). Relatively simple PODs could theoretically bring a succesful Sealion, for instance more attention prior to mid-1940 to possible operations against the UK,

Requires the German high command to possess more strategic foresight then they did at any time in the first half of the 20th century. In other words, you have to have the German high command not be the German high command.

drop tanks on Bf-109 and Bf-110 earlier,
Inadequate.

a disaster at Dunkirk for the UK and France resulting in the loss of most british troops (mostly made prisoners) as opposed to them being evacuated,
Inadequate

continued attacks against RAF airfields as opposed to switching to London attacks,
Myth. The attacks against RAF airfields were dismal failures and Fighter Command solidly won the air battles over southern England.

better attention and emphasis on war production as opposed to contemplating peace after the fall of France,
Myth.
 
Last edited:
D-Day failing after the ships are leaving port is more ASB. Lots of things can happen between 1940-07-10 and 2015-11-05.
 
By that point the allies are to built up on the beaches and the weather will effect the Germans just as bad as the allies.

Um, no it won't. Railroads don't founder in storms; ships and boats do. German supply arrangements are on land. The Great Storm has very little effect on them, but completely shuts down Allied supplies.

Also, the Great Storm neutralizes Allied air supremacy.
 
Um, no it won't. Railroads don't founder in storms; ships and boats do. German supply arrangements are on land. The Great Storm has very little effect on them, but completely shuts down Allied supplies.

Also, the Great Storm neutralizes Allied air supremacy.

Wasn't talking about the supply situation(which the allies had built a decent stock of up on the beaches already) No the storm would prevent a German counter attack as well. They'd attack AFTER it'd pass by which point allied air can fly. Plus unlike the Germans at Stalingrad if they are desperate for supplies to stop one the allies can actually supply the army with enough from air drops.
 
Top