WI: RAF major deployment in France in 1939/40

Under 'major deployment', I mean all Hurricanes, Battles and Blenheims; Lysander is supposedly under Army control so they also go. Deployment is more or less completed before April 1940. Obviously, defense of the UK is done by Spitfires, Defiants, while the Gladiators are in Scotland. Big bombers also stay in the UK.

What might be the odds that German anslaught is halted in Belgium, or around Sedan, or at both locations? RAF losses? Other pros and cons?
 
Since there was no early warning apparatus in place, a few D0-17s fly over on a cloudy day marking targets, and most of the RAF is a smoking ruin shortly after.
 
Are we ro assume that all British aircraft will siting idly on any given day? IIRC the Germans didn't wiped out Polish AF during the 1st week of combat, let alone during the 1st day of operations.
Can Luftwaffe catch FAF, RAF on the continent, Belgians and the Dutch with their pants down during a single day?
 
No, not a 'single day' but the next day and the next day after that, each day, the rudimentary airfields bombing and strafed leading to a steady erosion of aircraft and facilities. While, in the air, Hurricanes with their two blade props, will be at a disadvantage with the 109s.
Yes, some more Lw aircraft may be shot down, but will it change the Battle of France - IMO - no.
 

Archibald

Banned
I smell it is inspired by the Sedan bridgehead thread :)

Not a good idea.

All Hurricanes ? really ?The fighter command would blow a fuse and hit the roof. Hurricanes represented something like 60% or more of fighter Command strength at the beginning of BoB.

The AASF was the result of a very late Anglo-French agreement & compromise (1938-39) and was really the maximum effort the RAF could do to help the French. The British government had some clear idea what they needed to defend their home country.

Plus logistics would have been a nightmare. It is not a matter of sending entire RAF squadrons above the Channel. There is also the issue of sustaining them once there.

Throwing more Battles or Blenheim at the Sedan bridgehead won't help, because they are not adequate for the job.
 
Last edited:

Wimble Toot

Banned
The RAF will lose nearly half its aircraft in one go, apart from the few stragglers that make it back to Britain

Britain is incapable of adequately defending its airspace July-Dec 1940.

Dowding resigns in Oct 1939.
 

Redbeard

Banned
The French and British expected an attrition war in the air - ie. keeping a limited number of aircraft constantly in action over long time and the Germans to go all in at a time and place of their choice. A contributing factor to this was not just the Lw being stronger than the combined French and British air forces by 1939-40, but also that the British and French had an exaggerated image of the Lw strength. That would make a British "all-in" decision very unlikely and if it was taken and implemented, the actual strength of the LW would probably be enough to inflict crippling losses to the RAF.

But a greatly increased presence of light AAA at the British and French army units would be very expensive for the Lw and improve allied morale.
 
Any estimates on how much the LW losses will go up in case they also have now a sizable part of the RAF to deal with?
 
Any estimates on how much the LW losses will go up in case they also have now a sizable part of the RAF to deal with?

Not high enough. The Hurricanes wouldn't last long vs the Me-109, and more Battles and Blenheims would just be more easy targets. 10-20% more, maybe, far from enough; the loss of all those aircrews would hurt the RAF far more.
 
Considering the lack of Hurricanes to provide air cover, I'd say a failed Dynamo is not out of the question...
True. Or, if you favour a chaotic view of the universe, the alterations in the aerial activities cause a change in weather patterns and the evacuation is disrupted.
 
Top