WI: Germany manages to keep the French fleet in 1940?

had thought for a long time they might be able to convert submarines to their own use (since they were already in the Med as against the journey of their own u-boats there past Gibraltar?) but @Carl Schwamberger convinced me otherwise for practical reasons he has reiterated in this thread.

the most plausible ships were merchant ships, easy (easier) to arm with standard German guns and operate. would not discount the value of KM having some of the faster transports prior to Nov. '42

if the Germans had pursued collaboration they might have allowed French to use their super destroyers around Syria

On the other hand the 6 destroyers would have been a useful addition to the Axis naval strength in the Mediterranean. Firstly because the Italian destroyer building didn't keep up with losses and second because they were the fast and heavily armed large destroyers of the contre-torpilleur type.

IIRC from the British official history of the war in the Mediterranean and Middle East it was touch and go whether Vichy France would declare war on Great Britain.

Another thing - if the French ships in Algeria get handed over to the Axis in some capacity or worse Vichy France joins the Axis, I would expect the US to move on French colonies in the western hemisphere very quickly.

strange as it sounds a "better" result for the RN might be best case for the Axis? if the Dunkerque was total loss in harbor and Strasbourg sunk while fleeing? a forced scuttling of French ships at Alexandria?

the resulting outrage (and loss of their main bargaining chips) might result in greater collaboration?
 
I suppose you could have the organization of the Vichy regeime (Or at least the shifting of the alignment/readiness of the French Navy) go somewhat more smoothly/quickly and thus have the fleet be combat-read to defend itself when the British attack. If we consider Petain's government a puppet of Germany, one could say that if they managed to save the fleet and declared war on GB as a result it would be "Germany" getting those ships. Would that qualify?
I had a look at the copy of the Mediterranean and Middle East Volume I on Hyperwar. I couldn't find the part where it said that for the week after Mers-El-Kebir it was touch and go whether Vichy would join the Axis, but I did find this interesting paragraph
The decision that, if all else failed, the French capital ships were to be attacked was as serious as it was repugnant, seeing that it might have driven France to war against us. Had this occurred, the naval situation, especially in the Mediterranean, would have become graver still. In all there remained under the Vichy Government's control one battlecruiser, one aircraft carrier, four 8-inch and ten 6-inch cruisers, thirty destroyers and seventy submarines. Numerous bases would have become available to the Axis. French air forces had flown in large numbers to North Africa, where there were now believed to be 180 French bombers and 450 fighters. Attacks could have been made on Malta and Gibraltar and any of our naval forces that might be in the Central or Western Mediterranean. Malta would have become more isolated than ever. Shipping bound for the Middle East by the Cape route would have been liable to attacks from naval and air bases on the west coast of Africa and from Madagascar, while the defences of the important convoy assembly port of Freetown would have required strengthening urgently. Various other defence commitments would have arisen in consequence of threats from neighbouring French territories, while in Egypt a large number of hostile French residents and officials would have been an embarrassment. Finally, if German and Italian action had compelled the withdrawal of the fleet from the Eastern Mediterranean, the transport of Axis forces to Syria could no longer have been prevented and this might have produced a very serious situation indeed.
Edit

30 destroyers seems too low. The MN had 70 at the start of the war. By early July June 1940 had lost 11 to enemy action, 8 had been taken over by the British in Operation Catapult and 3 were at Alexandria. That would leave the Vichy Navy with 48.
 
Last edited:
30 destroyers seems too low. The MN had 70 at the start of the war. By early July June 1940 had lost 11 to enemy action, 8 had been taken over by the British in Operation Catapult and 3 were at Alexandria. That would leave the Vichy Navy with 48.

counting only what was in the Med? as others would not get past Gibraltar?
 
There was a small Asiatic squadron based in French Indo China.

The Bearn & a escort were in Martinique. There may have been a light cruiser at Dakar. A few others were in UK ports and unable to leave.
 
There was a small Asiatic squadron based in French Indo China.

The Bearn & a escort were in Martinique. There may have been a light cruiser at Dakar. A few others were in UK ports and unable to leave.
I've already allowed for the 8 French destroyers captured by the British in Operation Catapult.
 
counting only what was in the Med? as others would not get past Gibraltar?
No because the paragraph says Vichy had 4 heavy cruisers and 10 light cruisers and only 10 of them were in the Mediterranean at the time.
There was a small Asiatic squadron based in French Indo China.

The Bearn & a escort were in Martinique. There may have been a light cruiser at Dakar. A few others were in UK ports and unable to leave.
The MN had 7 heavy and 12 light cruisers at the start of World War II. Only one ship was lost before France surrendered. This was the light cruiser Pluton which blew up on 13th September 1939 (exactly 60 years before another accidental explosion blew the Moon out of Earth orbit - Fantastic sets and special effects, pity about the scripts and some of the acting).

The light cruiser Duguay Trouin and the heavy cruisers Duquense, Tourville and Suffren were with Force X at Alexandria along with the old battleship Lorraine and the 1500 tonne destroyers Le Fortuné, Forbin and Basque.

This left Vichy with 4 heavy and 10 light cruisers, but only the 4 heavy cruisers and 6 of the light cruisers were in the Mediterranean, which on 3rd July 1940 were deployed as follows:
Mediterranean
4 heavy cruisers (probably at Toulon) Colbert, Foch, Dupleix and Algérie
6 light cruisers at Algiers - La Galissonnière, Jean de Vienne, Marseillaise, Glorie, Montcalm and Georges Leygues​
Elsewhere
1 light cruiser at Dakar - Primaguet
2 light cruisers in Martinique - Jeanne d' Arc and Emile Bertin in a squadron which also included the aircraft carrier Béarn
1 light cruiser in French Indo-China - Lamotte-Piquet​

Therefore I think that the quote includes Vichy destroyers outside the Mediterranean. As it's the transcript on Hyperwar rather than the actual book thirty could have been a typo for fifty.
 
Last edited:
This is another quote from the transcript of the British official history on Hyperwar. It seems that the British War Cabinet took the possibility of the Germans and Italians incorporating French warships into their navies a lot more seriously than the contributors to this thread (including me).
The departure of French warships from ports on the north and west coasts of France during June was in keeping with the assurances given by Admiral Darlan, Marshal Pétain, and others, that in no circumstances would the French Fleet be allowed to fall intact into enemy hands. Two old battleships, with other vessels, proceeded to Plymouth and Portsmouth. The recently completed battleship Richelieu sailed from Brest for Casablanca on the 18th, followed next day by the partially completed Jean Bart from St. Nazaire. But the main portion of the fleet was in the Mediterranean, having been based on North African ports since April. Admiral Godfroy's Force X was at Alexandria; six cruisers were at Algiers; a few units remained at Toulon; while at Mers-el-Kebir, the naval port adjacent to Oran, was Admiral Gensoul with the two modern battlecruisers Dunkerque and Strasbourg, two battleships, a seaplane carrier, and six fleet destroyers. At Oran itself were four submarines and a number of torpedo boats.

The War Cabinet was deeply concerned lest the most powerful ships should become available to the enemy, for it was thought that this might alter the whole course of the war. The armistice conditions as known to the British on 23rd June stipulated that the French Fleet was to be demobilized under German or Italian supervision in its normal home ports, to which ships were to be recalled. The Germans (and later the Italians) declared that they had no intention of using French ships for their own ends except for coastal protection and minesweeping. The French were known to have protested against the recall of their ships to home ports, but with what success the British Admiralty was as yet unaware.
 
Therefore I think that the quote includes Vichy destroyers outside the Mediterranean. As it's the transcript on Hyperwar rather than the actual book thirty could have been a typo for fifty.

navypedia.org has them with 58 in 1940, a quick tally of that same source shows 10 sunk in 1940 ... to further confuse the issue
 
navypedia.org has them with 58 in 1940, a quick tally of that same source shows 10 sunk in 1940 ... to further confuse the issue
From Post 22
30 destroyers seems too low. The MN had 70 at the start of the war. By early July 1940 had lost 11 to enemy action, 8 had been taken over by the British in Operation Catapult and 3 were at Alexandria. That would leave the Vichy Navy with 48.
The 11 lost to enemy action were:
French Destroyer Losses to 30th June 1940.png


The 8 destroyers captured by the British in Operation Catapult were:
French Destroyers Captured in Operation Catapult.png


The 3 destroyers at Alexandria from June 1940 to June 1943 were:
French Destroyers at Alexandria June 1940 to June 1943.png


The first Vichy destroyer to be sunk was the Chevalier Paul on 16th June 1941 during the Syrian Campaign. They didn't loose any more until November 1942 when they lost 7 at Cassablanca, 4 at Oran, 2 captured by the Italians at Bizerta and 34 at Toulon (including 8 Le Hardi class that were incomplete in the summer of 1940).

It's possible that the British official history was only quoting the ships that were operational and that 18 of the 48 Vichy destroyers were under repair. The source does not include Richelieu and Jean Bart which were not completed, Provence damaged at Mers-el-Kebir or Dunquerke damaged at Mers-el-Kebir
 
Last edited:
Surely the RAF would bomb them over and over and over and over and over again until they were all sunk. There is no way those ships would be allowed to be of use to the Nazi. That is before you work out how the ships would be crewed, fueled and somehow sailed through the channel to Germany.

The RAF may well bomb them repeatedly but I doubt they would hit much in 1940. One Bomber Command crew attacked Belfast by accident. More likely the RN dusts off Judgement and executes it a bit further West than expected.
 
The RAF may well bomb them repeatedly but I doubt they would hit much in 1940. ...

Very True, but persistence paid and as 1941 spun out they made the French Atlantic ports to hot for the German Navy.

This is another quote from the transcript of the British official history on Hyperwar. It seems that the British War Cabinet took the possibility of the Germans and Italians incorporating French warships into their navies a lot more seriously than the contributors to this thread (including me).

That make sense if French crews are used. If Petains government is replaced by a pro Axis group then it is possible to find French crew for a sizable portion of the French ships. Where I have trouble is with the assumption the Germans can conjure up average cows in three, six, or even twelve months. & of course keeping this fleet in fuel oil.
 
Surely the RAF would bomb them over and over and over and over and over again until they were all sunk. There is no way those ships would be allowed to be of use to the Nazi. That is before you work out how the ships would be crewed, fueled and somehow sailed through the channel to Germany.
The possibility of the RAF doing that is even more remote than the Germans being able to find the crews and fuel.

Mers-el-Kebir was beyond the range of RAF Bomber Command. Even if it's Hampdens, Wellingtons and Whitleys had the range they would receive a warm welcome from the Luftwaffe as they crossed northern France if they tried to attack in daylight and as pointed out in another post it's unlikely that they would have found the target had they attacked at night.

Attacks form Malta and Gibraltar are more feasible, but there were no heavy bombers there in July 1940. I doubt that Churchill would send any there from the UK as July 1940 is during the invasion crisis. Every available bomber in the UK needed to be kept there to make Operation Sealion ASB. However, RAF Bomber Command did bomb The Twins at Brest from March 1941 to February 1942 they did do some damage but not enough to prevent them returning to Germany. IIRC the most damage was actually done by a Coastal Command Beaufort torpedo bomber, which torpedoed Gneisenau, but the RAF didn't have any torpedo bombers in the Mediterranean in July 1940.

However, a torpedo strike by Ark Royal's Swordfish might do the trick.

The Germans wouldn't want to sail them through the Channel to Germany. It's likely that they would go to Toulon (which admittedly would be more feasible to bomb from the UK, but there are still the Luftwaffe fighters in northern France and poor night navigation to contend with) for a refit and to pick up the German crew. Once the ships were operational with their German crews Raeder wouldn't want to send them through the Strait of Gibraltar into the North Atlantic to attack the convoys and when the sortie was finished they ships would return to one of the French Atlantic ports. So the real problem is getting past Force H and the seven 9.2" coast defence guns at Gibraltar. That's only feasible if Franco can be persuaded to let Spain enter the war.

Also of the French ships at Mers-el-Kebir I think that the Germans wouldn't want Provence and Bretagne in the first place. They'd only want Dunquerke and Strasbourg for their potential as commerce raiders and possibly the 6 contre-torpilleurs to replace the Z-type destroyers lost in Norway and use them in the English Channel. However, as I've also written they aren't going to get past Gibraltar unless Spain joins the Axis.
 
That make sense if French crews are used. If Petains government is replaced by a pro Axis group then it is possible to find French crew for a sizable portion of the French ships. Where I have trouble is with the assumption the Germans can conjure up average cows in three, six, or even twelve months. & of course keeping this fleet in fuel oil.
My guess is that the Germans wouldn't want the whole MN in the first place. I think that they would want the MN ships that would be useful as commerce raiders. That is French Twins to complement the German Twins and the 10 French cruisers that were in the Mediterranean. However, even if they find the fuel and the crews to make them operational in a reasonable amount of time they're not getting into the Atlantic unless the British are removed from Gibraltar, which isn't happening unless Spain joins the Axis, which as has been discussed many times before on this board is highly unlikely with a POD of June 1940. Therefore commissioning French warships into the Kriegsmarine would be a waste of resources.
 
My guess is that the Germans wouldn't want the whole MN in the first place. I think that they would want the MN ships that would be useful as commerce raiders. That is French Twins to complement the German Twins and the 10 French cruisers that were in the Mediterranean. However, even if they find the fuel and the crews to make them operational in a reasonable amount of time they're not getting into the Atlantic unless the British are removed from Gibraltar, which isn't happening unless Spain joins the Axis, which as has been discussed many times before on this board is highly unlikely with a POD of June 1940. Therefore commissioning French warships into the Kriegsmarine would be a waste of resources.

Meanwhile on the other side of the Atlantic, FDR exploits the specter of the French Fleet in German hands to the fullest extent possible.
 
The OP states that the French warships at Mers-el-Kebir are acquired by the Germans before the OTL attack by Force H.
It's also possible a few more French crew take their ships over to the DeGualles Free French group.
The French warships in British ports might go over to De Gaulle so no need for Operation Catapult. The French squadron at Alexandria might join De Gaulle too. Furthermore the vast majority of the French soldiers evacuated from Norway and Dunkirk asked to be repatriated IOTL. More of them might join De Gaulle because Vichy was co-operating more closely with the Axis and there was no Battle of Mers-el-Kebir ITTL.
 
I suppose you could have the organization of the Vichy regeime (Or at least the shifting of the alignment/readiness of the French Navy) go somewhat more smoothly/quickly and thus have the fleet be combat-read to defend itself when the British attack. If we consider Petain's government a puppet of Germany, one could say that if they managed to save the fleet and declared war on GB as a result it would be "Germany" getting those ships. Would that qualify?

This is an extract from a quote from the British official history of the war in the Mediterranean and Middle East about the Vichy naval strength in the aftermath of the OTL attack on Mers-el-Kebir.
In all there remained under the Vichy Government's control one battlecruiser, one aircraft carrier, four 8-inch and ten 6-inch cruisers, thirty destroyers and seventy submarines.
If Vichy had joined the Axis in the week after the OTL attack the 70 French submarines are going to make the Happy Time of OTL even happier for the Germans ITTL.

The German surface raiders will be able to use Casablanca and Dakar. OTL The Twins got within a few hundred miles of Dakar and Casablanca was less vulnerable to bombing by the RAF than Brest although it might be vulnerable to an aircraft carrier attack.

With the Axis in control of the western Mediterranean Malta is written off by the British War Cabinet by September 1940 although it might be several months before the colony surrenders.

Gibraltar would be under constant bombardment from aircraft operating from French Morocco. That would make it untenable as a naval and air base. IIRC the plan after June 1940 was to provide it with enough supplies to withstand a siege of 6 months, which suggests that had it been isolated in June 1940 the colony would have been forced to surrender well before the end of 1940.

Then we have the possibility of Richelieu and Jean Bart returning to a French Mediterranean port for completion while the Dunquerke and Strasbourg go into the Atlantic to support the German Twins in Operation Berlin.
 
That make sense if French crews are used. If Petains government is replaced by a pro Axis group then it is possible to find French crew for a sizable portion of the French ships. Where I have trouble is with the assumption the Germans can conjure up average cows in three, six, or even twelve months. & of course keeping this fleet in fuel oil.
As an off the wall idea Bismarck, Tirpitz had a combined crew of 6,200 compared to the combined crew of 6,000 for Dunkque, Strasbourg and 4 La Galissonnière class light cruisers. Hipper's crew was equal to 2 La Galissonnière class light cruisers. My guess is that the fuel consumption of the 8 French ships wasn't significantly more than that of the 4 German ships. Furthermore, the 6 French cruisers probably had more endurance and more reliable machinery than the 2 German cruisers making them more suitable for commerce raiding.
 
According to Couhat's "French Warships of World War II" the MN has 70DD and 12 "Light Destroyers" (TB) before any losses.
Going back to Bad@Logic's question, just how is the KM going to accomplish this? The French have a large number of combat aircraft in theater, even this portion of the MN would have given a complete shellacing to the KM, let alone with the land based airpower nearby, and the additional units at Toulon. I simply don't see this as even remotely possible.
Secondly, the question of crews has been addressed, but to reiterate, again, how will they crew these ships? ITTL there would seem to be no attack on Mers el Kebir, so no long term antipathy to the British. IOTL the Germans couldn't recruit any sizeable units for the SS from France, and that was after the RN attacks. How are they supposed to garner crews without that negative impetus, especially when it is the Germans who are occupying France? I just don't see it guys. More likely is that the MN will sail from Toulon, or do as Darlan had promised, and scuttle.
 
According to Couhat's "French Warships of World War II" the MN has 70DD and 12 "Light Destroyers" (TB) before any losses.
Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 1922-46 and Whitley's Destroyers of World War II give the MN 70 destroyers of all types at the outbreak of World War II as follows:
32 large destroyers of the contre-torpilleur type
26 medium size destroyers of the 1500 tonne type
12 small destroyers of the 600 tonne type which are the 12 "Light Destroyers" (TB) referred to in the quote above.
According to both sources 30 destroyers were building or on order
4 large destroyers of the 2930 tonne type - ordered in 1938 but not yet laid down
12 medium size destroyers of the Le Hardi class - ordered 1932-39 and laid down 1936-39
14 small destroyers of the 1010 tonne type - ordered 1937-38 - only 6 of the 14 had been laid down by September 1939
Anthony Preston's An Illustrated History of the Navies of World War II says the MN had 78 destroyers in September 1939 as follows:
32 large destroyers of the contre-torpilleur type
26 medium size destroyers of the 1500 tonne type
8 medium size destroyers of the Le Hardi class
12 small destroyers of the 600 tonne type​

He also said that 27 destroyers were under construction or on order, but did not give a breakdown of the classes. That gave the MN according to Preston a total of 105 destroyers of all types completed, building or on order, compared to the 100 according to Conway's and Whitley.
 
Top