Would Operation Sealion shorten WWII?

[TDM]

So could this scenario been good for Germany in the end??? Barbarosa in 1942 with Rusia still full of internal problems and more time without rain and snow

OK while I think it will take a bit longer than a year for the red army to solve all it's problems, it will have solved some of them in a year and yes it's certainly more of the better tanks.

On the rain and snow point. yes 1941/42 was a particularly bad winter in terms of temperature, but it's not like 1942/43 was lovely and mild. Also you have conflicting issues here and both bring problem for invading army. The rain and early snow makes mud, but the concerted low temperatures harden the ground again. But of course moving an army in -20C isn't easy even with that for lots of reasons but also as soon as you start moving columns of vehicles on snowy roads they liquify the snow and thus the surface of the roads again (and god help you if you get stuck and can't free yourself quickly because the night time temps will re-harden the aground around you ). Also since the 194142 snows had been so bad and lasting, the 1942 spring thaw was thus worse and longer than usual as well.

We tend not to hear such horror stories about the 1942/43 winter as 1941/42 winter because yes it was less severe but also because a lot of the more famous fighting on the eastern front was further south. Is winters in Stalingrad are not as severe as they are in the outskirts of Moscow or Leningrad. But we're all also pretty familiar with images of Germans freezing in Stalingrad and the captured lines of them marching in the snow

 

[Dan]

So using Overlord as an example, what was the highest rank of officer to go ashore in the first wave ? By first wave, I mean literally among the first boots to hit the ground.
My gut feel is probably Company level.
In terms of the first day, I would expect a senior officer, maybe lt General/General and staff to have come ashore. I think once the sea link is cut, an airlift of senior officer ala Stalingrad is likely.

The discussion has been interesting for me - thank you to all who have contributed.

 

[Post]

I don't think it will delay Barbarossa by year. After all the german assumption was that with a kick the whole russian army would collapse anyway. They didn't plan a campaign into the winter, they thought it would be over long before that. It may delay it with a few weeks. Originally they were ready to attack earlier, but the weather led to delay. So in fact it may occure roughly at the same time as OTL.

 

[Post]

In terms of the first day, I would expect a senior officer, maybe lt General/General and staff to have come ashore. I think once the sea link is cut, an airlift of senior officer ala Stalingrad is likely.

They need an airfield for that. I doubt they're going to have that. They can evacuate some people with a Fieseler Storch though.

 

[mattep74]

IF Germany tries Sealion they need every warship they have, from the smallest torpedoboat to half build Bismarck along with every u-boat they have to guard the transports. They would need every fighter they have overhead so that RAF do not get through and bomb the transports.

The RAF would allow the paratroopers to get through, they are a minor nuisance and every RAF plane that can carry bombs will head for the transports. Luftwaffe have bombers, but bombs are not winning the war on their own so Stukas will be mostly left alone to bomb. The ground troops defending will know this

The Royal navy will send everything that floats and head for the transport. The Kriegsmarine would be a minor problem considering how many ships they already had lost.

During D-day in 1944 the allies landed 156,000 men during the entire day, but they had a lot of transports and controll of the air and sea. Sure, the first wave at Omaha failed, but if Omaha failed the troops waiting on the ships had not been casualities. Same would be for the Germans still in Holland and France.

The war might shorten since Luftwaffe would lack the strengh to support operation Barbarossa. Every u-boat lost in the battle would be one not hunting convoys anymore.

 

[TDM]

I don't think it will delay Barbarossa by year. After all the german assumption was that with a kick the whole russian army would collapse anyway. They didn't plan a campaign into the winter, they thought it would be over long before that. It may delay it with a few weeks. Originally they were ready to attack earlier, but the weather led to delay. So in fact it may occure roughly at the same time as OTL.

You are right they didn't plan on still doing any serious fighting into winter, but they did know winter "was coming" (ahem, sorry I seem to have a pop culture reference stuck in my throat). The 8-12 weeks plan is not only making a virtue of necessity in terms of what they could maintain supply for, but also the autumn rains bogging everything down. So basically you have to go June/July or you risk your initial assault hitting the rains. They also couldn't go much earlier because they again needed to wait for the roads to properly recover from the spring thaws. Like you say teh weather, but the weather going to happen anyway and OTL Barbarossa was launched with the extra weeks of build up as it was.

In many ways the invasion of Russia was like a much earlier campaign where the campaign season was really limiting, and issues with maintaining sieges and/or supplying besieged forces over winter etc!

Also while I agree the manpower loses etc won't be that great in a failed sealion, they already did Barbarossa with very little reserve. It won't be so much the missing infantry, but the planes etc. More importantly the economic hit to the German economy of the barges will make preparing for Barbarossa which was already tight even harder.

I also think the German army going into OTL Barbarossa coming off a string of big wins vs. doing Barbarossa after a loss against a "defeated" opponent, will have an effect. There's also the mood at home as well, the problem is that when you've got everyone used to you providing victories you kind of have to keep doing it especially if you have a habit of pre-announcing your next one before it actually achieved (see Goebbels's recognising the issue of reporting back about Barbarossa from Sep/Oct onwards)

KM loses will likely be large, this doesn't directly effect Barbarossa of course, but it's another resource draining loss, especially if Germany is going to try and starve Britain from then on. And if they don't replace KM loses, less KM gives the RN more freedom as well! Depending on the KM loses and/or what gets damaged even replacing losses and repairs might take time anyway

Then you get the possible less direct effects, stuff like a more confident Britain might be making different moves in 1941 that may impinge on Barbarossa planning and time line

Don't get me wrong none of the above makes it impossible for Germany to invade Russia in some way in 1941, but despite* the 8-12 week plan OKH knew OTL Barbarossa plan was going to be tight in terms of time and supplies. I can't help but think put a few more ATL difficulties into the mix and they could easily decide to wait another year**. So Ok they know that gives the red army another year to improve but one of the big issues with Barbarossa's planning is that they had already dramatically underestimated both the size of the red army and how quickly it could mobilise reserves of manpower within the greater population in 1941. So it will be very likely they further underestimate it's increased size in 1942. Similarly the few T34s they hit in 1941 were a nasty surprise, so another years production of them in 1942 will be even worse!




*or rather because of it

**maybe use 1941 to recover from the embarrassment of a failed Sealion by concentrating more on British forces in the Med and N.Africa and trying to get a victory there (also ties into a possibly of a more confident Britain in the area making bolder moves)

 

[Post]

On the other hand more focus on the Med and NA by the British, could lead to a swift beating of the Italian and mean no Africa Korps. Which kinda cancels the lost troops (and planes) in Sealion for Barbarossa. I think that's more likely than the Germans more focussing on the Med. For them it was always a sideshow which the Italians drawed them into. Now the Italians might think twice to attack there, and may instead be attacked by the British.

For the economy: yes, this will be a setback. Most likely the conquered territories will be screwed more to compensate.

 

[TDM]

On the other hand more focus on the Med and NA by the British, could lead to a swift beating of the Italian and mean no Africa Korps. Which kinda cancels the lost troops (and planes) in Sealion for Barbarossa. I think that's more likely than the Germans more focussing on the Med. For them it was always a sideshow which the Italians drawed them into. Now the Italians might think twice to attack there, and may instead be attacked by the British.

For the economy: yes, this will be a setback. Most likely the conquered territories will be screwed more to compensate.

Right but if Germany lets Britain win in the Med and N.Africa not only is that bad for Italy immediately and Germany medium term, as it potentially has impacts on Eastern Europe, Greece, Yugoslavia, Romanian oil fields, the Mid east, Syria the Levant, Communication/transport lines between Britain and empire, what does Turkey do etc all things that may well lead to needing planes and troops to deal with. But it's another embarrassing British victory going unanswered. I don't think Hitler and Co will be keen on that.

Also there limit on how much you can screw the occupied territories for (both in amounts and how quickly in terms of getting 1941 back on track), plus the barges economic role was largely transport*, so more resources aren't that useful if you can't get them to the were you want them to run your economy efficiently gain with that mid 1941 deadline in mind.


*Sealion already involved commandeered barges from the lowlands IIRC so they might be out the picture as well

 

[Cryhavoc101]

The units in the first waves would have been stripped down 'fighting' elements of the slated divisions - so the core of each division sent would be preserved (Logistics and artillery units etc which would have followed on - which would not happen here).

And if the Germans followed British practice of retaining a core of NCOs, Specialists and officers 'Left out of Battle' in case of a unit being completely wiped out - there would be a cadre to build from

So while they would suffer heavy losses among the combat units of each division - Infantry and Engineers etc - those units could be rebuilt - but obviously with green infantry and having to rebuild the officer and NCO around the left out of battle Cadre.

Obviously this would only impact those units slated for use in the first wave but I would expect that those represented some of the better Germany army formations, light infantry and mountain units.

So while this would not massively impact say Barbarossa - those units would be less effective in 1941 given the negligible losses of AFVs artillery and transport

The Air dropped units which in Sept 1940 is not going to be more than 2 Brigades worth due to losses in both JU52s and the Paratrooper Regiments which suffered heavy losses in April - June - are likely to be complete with further heavy losses to the JU52 units - which has a knock on effect as I understand that many of the Pilots used were Instructors - so this impacts the LWs ability to produce pilots in 41-42 and beyond.

So subsequent use of the Fallshirmjeager units would be again constrained into 1941

I would imagine in the higher intensity ops of such an invasion LW losses would also be higher among their Fighter and bomber units

Losses to the KM, German Merchant marine as well as the loss of Barges is going to cause issues into 1941 and beyond with the crews taken from across the KM and German Merchant Marine.

The losses to trained crews would constrain KM expansion in 1941 and beyond

Losses to Barges will in the short term be made good by stripping occupied Europe - which given the motor and many horse drawn transport already taken by Germany will have serious consequences to the economy and ability to feed/distribute food too, the populations in those countries.

The total defeat of the German invasion would ally invasion fears in the UK and massively improve morale

So we would see less impact to development of Aircraft, tanks and weaponry due to the invasion scare which went on into 1941

This would allow far more units to be released for service abroad - principally North Africa with possibly more tanks released as well and less hording of Spitfire units by fighter command.

It would also play well internationally

 

[edgeworthy]

We should all just watch the movie the BBC made about the outcome of Operation Sealion.

Spoiler

 

[Hammerbolt]

We should all just watch the movie the BBC made about the outcome of Operation Sealion.

Spoiler

Damn it, for a moment you got me good, I rushed to click to see the movie!

 

[naraic]

IF Germany tries Sealion they need every warship they have, from the smallest torpedoboat to half build Bismarck along with every u-boat they have to guard the transports. They would need every fighter they have overhead so that RAF do not get through and bomb the transports.

I would not be surprised to see the twins (and perhaps a very rushed Bismarck) on a diversionary sortie instead of getting down and dirty in the channel. The twins go a few days before Sealion and elements of the home fleet will be concentrating upon them in the mid Atlantic somewhere instead of being in the channel.

If it goes badly in the channel it will be seen as cowardice though.

 

[ChaosNDiscord]

What would be interesting is if a sealion catastrophe draws Hitler away from his Russian aspirations, making him realize he can't simply ignore the island of "shopkeepers" operating unmolested while he starts a new war.
Imagine a Germany that instead decides to focus on the Med theater and Africa trying to knock out Britain. Occupies southern France and tries to grab the French fleet. Meanwhile the soviets are busy selling to both sides and proving to be the better capitalists... right up until Hitler can't stomach stains demands anymore, attacks in 42-43 and hits a wall instead of plowing through disorganized soviet forces.

 

[Sarthak]

What would be interesting is if a sealion catastrophe draws Hitler away from his Russian aspirations, making him realize he can't simply ignore the island of "shopkeepers" operating unmolested while he starts a new war.
Imagine a Germany that instead decides to focus on the Med theater and Africa trying to knock out Britain. Occupies southern France and tries to grab the French fleet. Meanwhile the soviets are busy selling to both sides and proving to be the better capitalists... right up until Hitler can't stomach stains demands anymore, attacks in 42-43 and hits a wall instead of plowing through disorganized soviet forces.

Soviet military reforms were still in their early stages in 1941. By late 1942 the reforms would have ended leaving Stalin with a much more formidable army with more than 7000 T-34s and KVs along with more than half of the air force modernized by the end of 1942. German would not plow through Soviet ranks I late 1942 much less 1943. Make gains? Sure. But wreak the Soviets like otl? Heck no.

 

[Hammerbolt]

Imagine a Germany that instead decides to focus on the Med theater and Africa trying to knock out Britain. Occupies southern France and tries to grab the French fleet. Meanwhile the soviets are busy selling to both sides and proving to be the better capitalists... right up until Hitler can't stomach stains demands anymore, attacks in 42-43 and hits a wall instead of plowing through disorganized soviet forces.

Germany only went to the Med because of Italy, and Italy went to the Med because Germany was on a winning spree. With this kind of "punch in the face", and the obvious losses this meant, Mussolini might very well think twice before going it. And, if he does, Htitler may have no one to spare to help him...

As for Stalin, he was quite happy to do business with Germany, literally right up to the day before Barbarossa. I don't see this changing much.

 

[ChaosNDiscord]

Soviet military reforms were still in their early stages in 1941. By late 1942 the reforms would have ended leaving Stalin with a much more formidable army with more than 7000 T-34s and KVs along with more than half of the air force modernized by the end of 1942. German would not plow through Soviet ranks I late 1942 much less 1943. Make gains? Sure. But wreak the Soviets like otl? Heck no.

Uh... thats what I said.

 

[tigercat]

The Home Guard gets some nifty German Kit to play with .

 

[TxAggie]

So the part that interests me is when the initial wave of landings start going badly, does the German high command fish or cut bait. I'm leaning towards the latter, as their OTL reactions towards Sea Lion were basically "NopeNopeNope", so it depends on how they get overruled in ATL. If they pull back quickly after say the first wave fails, they can get away with a pretty light loss of troops, although with severe beatings to the KM and Luftwaffe. But if they double down, it could really turn into a meat grinder.

I'm also of the opinion that any kind of setback from Sea Lion, mild or severe, would push back Barbarossa a year. If you want to drive to Moscow and St. Petersburg before the fall rains and winter freeze sets in, June is about the latest you can step off. It's probably too late as it was. So say we get a two month delay and you're looking at an August '41 launch date for Barbarossa; you either bank on your panzer armies being able to drive 800 miles in about 8 weeks before their roads crap out, or you push it back till spring/summer '42. Maybe Hitler is aggressive and paranoid enough to demand a late-summer offensive anyway, but my guess is the guys in OKH would prefer to wait. If they did step off later in '41, with a few less Panzers and Messerschmitts along with them, the invasion wouldn't go any better than OTL.

So let's say Barbarossa is pushed back till mid '42 - what does everyone do in 1941?

Germany has almost all of Europe under its thumb and Britain has no way to contest them there. Sea Lion has proven the Nazis can't reach across the Channel and touch them, but they're in no position to touch the Nazis. So you're looking at a stalemate as far as Europe is concerned; this may turn into a Phony War round 2.

One of the biggest butterflies from this is that Germany will have time to stockpile oil. With the Soviet Union still glad to sell that oil to them and no blitzkrieg armies chewing through barrels of it, Germany may be able to avoid the shortages that plagued them in OTL.

The US is probably going to get more aggressive with Germany after A. they tried to invade our ally, and B. they look beatable, after a huge blowout in France is followed a couple months later with a wipeout in the Channel. You might even see a 1940 declaration of war, although that's not going to do anything in the short term b/c see above.

My guess is the US approaches war in 1940 a little more casually than they did in OTL 1941. In OTL, Japan had stabbed them in the back, the Soviets were on the brink, and Britain was being bombed and blockaded, so there was definitely some sense of urgency as the Allied cause looked to be at a low ebb. In ATL, there's no Pacific war (although anyone can see that things are likely heading that way), the USSR isn't the "enemy of my enemy" yet, and Britain doesn't look to be in any imminent danger. So the Americans are probably going to slow-play any type of Lend Lease or proto-D Day build up.

The USSR is only going to keep building up; I'm not sure if the Winter War was enough of a kick in the ass to get their army in shape. My guess is the green post-Purge officers of OTL 1941 are going to just be green post-Purge officers in ATL 1942. But materially, they're going to be on stronger footing. I don't know if Stalin had any other adventures planned like Finland, but throughout his career, he was usually less focused on expansion than on holding what he had. So my guess is he stays back on the defensive, tightening his grip on Poland and amassing his army.

Italy - could a failed Sea Lion be enough of a butterfly to get Mussolini to sit the war out? That would only be a net positive for Germany, not to mention Italy itself. You'd have hundreds of thousands of young men still alive, rather than dying in faraway places like Stalingrad for some very questionable benefit to the nation.

Southeast Asia - the Royal Navy is going to be a lot more free to redeploy after I'm assuming the KM surface force is gutted in Sea Lion. Force Z might arrive with some friends, for example.

 

[Dave Howery]

Germany only went to the Med because of Italy, and Italy went to the Med because Germany was on a winning spree. With this kind of "punch in the face", and the obvious losses this meant, Mussolini might very well think twice before going it. And, if he does, Htitler may have no one to spare to help him...

yeah... the timing of all this is pretty crucial. Italy didn't invade Greece until October, and I assume this failed Sealion would be well before that. So, maybe no sideshow in the Balkans here. But.... aren't the UK and Italy technically still at war? Might Taranto and the British strike in NA still happen?

 

[Hammerbolt]

yeah... the timing of all this is pretty crucial. Italy didn't invade Greece until October, and I assume this failed Sealion would be well before that. So, maybe no sideshow in the Balkans here. But.... aren't the UK and Italy technically still at war? Might Taranto and the British strike in NA still happen?

Technically yes. But, since all that happens after the "real" shooting starts in the Med... if Italy decides to rein in and played it safe, then I'd bet the UK would take advantage of that. If Italy just "rattles it's sabbers", the UK doesn't have do divert so many men and resources there.