YOU are the most influent Hitler adviser.

ADAM
"Unfortunately, after Crete, Hitler wasn't in the mood for anymore airborne ops. That was an understatement. He was completely put off by the idea for the rest of the war."
True as far as it goes, but in Feb '42-- 8 months after Crete-- Hitler did plan the airborne invasion of Malta. That's what we're discussing here.

If they had gone for Malta instead of Crete, yes, that would be a different matter. BUT this is after Crete, where as Gen. Student himself records, "Hitler was most displeased with the whole affair, having told him that 'Crete proves that the days of the paratroopers are over'."
 

Graehame

Banned
True as far as it goes, but in Feb '42-- 8 months after Crete-- Hitler did in fact plan the airborne invasion of Malta.
 
True as far as it goes, but in Feb '42-- 8 months after Crete-- Hitler did in fact plan the airborne invasion of Malta.

He did. He just lacked the faith in it and, when coupled with a changing strategic picture and the fact said units could be better used elsewhere, dropped it entirely.
 

Graehame

Banned
So you're saying that after reconstituting the 7th Fsjr & 5th Gbjr divs, transferring Luftflotte II from the Russian Front to Italy, using Luftflotte II along with the Italian Regia Aeronautica to bomb the hell out of Malta for 6 weeks in prep for the invasion, talking his pal Mussolini into raising the Folgore Parachute & La Spezia airlanding divs, setting aside 70,000 reinforcement infantry, arranging aviation transport for the airborne & sea transport for the rest, setting up the BBs Vittorio Veneto, Littorio, Andrea Doria, Caio Duilio, & Julio Caesare to provide naval gunnery support, & stockpiling supplies-- & more importantly, fuel for all this-- Hitler just suddenly changed his mind & admitted it was all a mistake?
No, Adam. You're right that Hitler lost his confidence in parachutes after Crete-- but he knew full well that a landing force of 120,000 men with unopposed air & naval supremecy would overwhelm an isolated island defended by 14,000 to 20,000 men with all of their aircraft shot to pieces & every friendly ship either sunk or driven away. He dropped the idea-- probably with relief, since it's perfectly true that he was no longer enamored of the airborne branch-- after Rommel launched his 1942 invasion of Cyrenaica, demonstrating a complete lack of concern about supplies, confidence that he'd get into Egypt, & incidentally creating a demand for the fuel & other supplies that had been stockpiled for the invasion of Malta. Thru Apr '42 the Malta option was still open. After that it was too late, as it was necessary to divert supplies back to the Russian Front for the summer offensive.
 
So you're saying that after reconstituting the 7th Fsjr & 5th Gbjr divs, transferring Luftflotte II from the Russian Front to Italy, using Luftflotte II along with the Italian Regia Aeronautica to bomb the hell out of Malta for 6 weeks in prep for the invasion, talking his pal Mussolini into raising the Folgore Parachute & La Spezia airlanding divs, setting aside 70,000 reinforcement infantry, arranging aviation transport for the airborne & sea transport for the rest, setting up the BBs Vittorio Veneto, Littorio, Andrea Doria, Caio Duilio, & Julio Caesare to provide naval gunnery support, & stockpiling supplies-- & more importantly, fuel for all this-- Hitler just suddenly changed his mind & admitted it was all a mistake?
No, Adam. You're right that Hitler lost his confidence in parachutes after Crete-- but he knew full well that a landing force of 120,000 men with unopposed air & naval supremecy would overwhelm an isolated island defended by 14,000 to 20,000 men with all of their aircraft shot to pieces & every friendly ship either sunk or driven away. He dropped the idea-- probably with relief, since it's perfectly true that he was no longer enamored of the airborne branch-- after Rommel launched his 1942 invasion of Cyrenaica, demonstrating a complete lack of concern about supplies, confidence that he'd get into Egypt, & incidentally creating a demand for the fuel & other supplies that had been stockpiled for the invasion of Malta. Thru Apr '42 the Malta option was still open. After that it was too late, as it was necessary to divert supplies back to the Russian Front for the summer offensive.

Of course, and risk what - diminishing the Ostfront, which was always Hitler's priority, or losing the island and the forces there when the Western Allies launch a counter-invasion?

Not saying its not possible, but the strategic gain this late in the war (and after the entrance of the United States into the picture) makes it less worthwhile. They would have been much better off carrying this out in 1941, even better if its in lieu of Crete.
 
The reason Malta in '42 doesn't help is several fold

1. Rommel was getting the most supplies of the entire campaign at around that time and was still 10 percent short of his minimum monthly demand... Tripoli just couldn't handle enough cargo, and Bengazi had been severely damaged so that it could only handle 800 tonnes a day...even having malta (which does improve the security of those two ports) doesn't address this problem... supplies will just pile up at the dockyard... and having malta doesn't improve axis internal transport capability or the quality of the via balbia highway

2. at minimum it postpones gazalla allowing the british to finish their build up and attack him first

3. Even having Malta the Regia Marina isn't going to send convoys into Mersah Matruh or Tobruk closer to the front where it could actually help

4. Operation torch is only a matter of a couple of months away so even if Rommel drives through to Alexandria, he is going to have his back door kicked in shortly

Malta is so small that such an invasion is likely to have very high and potentially overcostly casualties...ie you can only cram so many troops onto the island and the British only have to defend so much square footage...also as much as the British didn't actually have their battle wagon's serviceable... was as much as the Axis didn't know that to be the case... the british maintained an elaborate cover operation to make Queen Elizabeth and Valiant look like they where in working order... also; the home fleet or force H might decide to make an appearance and contest the landings
 

Graehame

Banned
ADAM
"Not saying its not possible, but the strategic gain this late in the war (and after the entrance of the United States into the picture) makes it less worthwhile."
Basically agree, with the proviso that Hitler didn't know about Torch, so that wouldn't have entered into the decision.
"They would have been much better off carrying this out in 1941, even better if its in lieu of Crete."
Totally agree, especially considering that the 15th Pz Div hadn't even arrived yet.
BLAIRWITCH749
"...supplies will just pile up at the dockyard... and having malta doesn't improve axis internal transport capability or the quality of the via balbia highway"
Having Malta allows you to ship more trucks to N Africa & fuel them, so it DOES improve Axis transport. Not the highway, though-- but Rommel was able to supply his forces at a minimal level even over the Via Balbia. Had he been able to supply a larger force at similar levels, then he could have won 1st Alamein-- which was a close-run thing anyway.
"...at minimum it postpones gazalla allowing the british to finish their build up and attack him first."
I don't concede this. The Brits at that time had no intention of invading Libya. But even if they had, Rommel's signature tactics were to lure Brit tanks within range of his Flak-88s & pulverize 'em. This is easier to do in a fighting withdrawal than in the attack because you need the enemy to come to you. So if the Brits DO invade Libya, then conduct a fighting withdrawal until your supply situation gets cleared up, then turn around & chase 'em all the way back to the Suez.
"Even having Malta the Regia Marina isn't going to send convoys into Mersah Matruh or Tobruk..."
Possibly true, but only marginally relevant. Rommel was able to supply his force at given levels even thru Tripoli & Bengazi. Had he been able to supply a larger force at those same levels, then he wins @ 1st Alamein. No Malta means more trucks, more supplies, & a larger force. (Probably 22d Pz Div, which had just been raised, & 60th Motor, which was in the Balkans.)
"Operation torch is only a matter of a couple of months away so even if Rommel drives through to Alexandria, he is going to have his back door kicked in shortly."
My calculations show that Rommel wins @ 1st Alamein by the end of Aug & takes Cairo & the Suez by the end of Sep, or mid-Oct at the latest. That's 3 to 6 weeks before Torch. Question-- would the US have gone ahead with the Torch invasion if the Brits had already lost Egypt? I think it's possible they would have called it off, but let's say they go ahead. Rommel fortifies the Suez with mainly Ital inf divs & sends his pz force W, now numbering 3 German pz divs, 2 motor divs, 2 Ital tank divs, & 3 to 4 motor divs. He meets the US somewhere W of Tunis. Rommel's equipment is worn down from the long road march & his men are tired; but historically he won @ Kasserine Pass under similar conditions, so let's say he wins here too. Von Arnim was unable to exploit his victory at Kasserine Pass, in part because he had the Brit 8th Army nipping at his heels; but in this scenario, with a larger force & less of a problem with his rear, there's a good chance he can exploit. 50-50 he drives the US out of Africa. That wasn't even possible historically because of the 8th Army. I don't say that it WILL happen in this scenario, but it's possible.
"...the british maintained an elaborate cover operation to make Queen Elizabeth and Valiant look like they where in working order.."
Correct, but the Italians had promised to commit their BBs because Malta was so close, their BBs could retire if challenged. So you fly maritime recon to detect a Brit fleet sortie from Alex, & you don't find 'em. The op goes forward & Malta gets pulverized.
"...also; the home fleet or force H might decide to make an appearance and contest the landings..."
Against German & Italian land-based air? I seriously doubt it. We're talking about an invasion in Feb-Apr '42. On 10 Dec '41 the Repulse & the Prince of Wales got clobbered & sunk by Jap land-based air. Ever after, Allied doctrine was not to risk capital ships within range of enemy land-based aircraft. Even the Ark Royal & the Wasp, when they delivered fighters to Malta, flew 'em off from ferrying range & then got the hell out of Dodge.
 
ADAM
"Not saying its not possible, but the strategic gain this late in the war (and after the entrance of the United States into the picture) makes it less worthwhile."
Basically agree, with the proviso that Hitler didn't know about Torch, so that wouldn't have entered into the decision.
"They would have been much better off carrying this out in 1941, even better if its in lieu of Crete."
Totally agree, especially considering that the 15th Pz Div hadn't even arrived yet.
BLAIRWITCH749
"...supplies will just pile up at the dockyard... and having malta doesn't improve axis internal transport capability or the quality of the via balbia highway"
Having Malta allows you to ship more trucks to N Africa & fuel them, so it DOES improve Axis transport. Not the highway, though-- but Rommel was able to supply his forces at a minimal level even over the Via Balbia. Had he been able to supply a larger force at similar levels, then he could have won 1st Alamein-- which was a close-run thing anyway.
"...at minimum it postpones gazalla allowing the british to finish their build up and attack him first."
I don't concede this. The Brits at that time had no intention of invading Libya. But even if they had, Rommel's signature tactics were to lure Brit tanks within range of his Flak-88s & pulverize 'em. This is easier to do in a fighting withdrawal than in the attack because you need the enemy to come to you. So if the Brits DO invade Libya, then conduct a fighting withdrawal until your supply situation gets cleared up, then turn around & chase 'em all the way back to the Suez.
"Even having Malta the Regia Marina isn't going to send convoys into Mersah Matruh or Tobruk..."
Possibly true, but only marginally relevant. Rommel was able to supply his force at given levels even thru Tripoli & Bengazi. Had he been able to supply a larger force at those same levels, then he wins @ 1st Alamein. No Malta means more trucks, more supplies, & a larger force. (Probably 22d Pz Div, which had just been raised, & 60th Motor, which was in the Balkans.)
"Operation torch is only a matter of a couple of months away so even if Rommel drives through to Alexandria, he is going to have his back door kicked in shortly."
My calculations show that Rommel wins @ 1st Alamein by the end of Aug & takes Cairo & the Suez by the end of Sep, or mid-Oct at the latest. That's 3 to 6 weeks before Torch. Question-- would the US have gone ahead with the Torch invasion if the Brits had already lost Egypt? I think it's possible they would have called it off, but let's say they go ahead. Rommel fortifies the Suez with mainly Ital inf divs & sends his pz force W, now numbering 3 German pz divs, 2 motor divs, 2 Ital tank divs, & 3 to 4 motor divs. He meets the US somewhere W of Tunis. Rommel's equipment is worn down from the long road march & his men are tired; but historically he won @ Kasserine Pass under similar conditions, so let's say he wins here too. Von Arnim was unable to exploit his victory at Kasserine Pass, in part because he had the Brit 8th Army nipping at his heels; but in this scenario, with a larger force & less of a problem with his rear, there's a good chance he can exploit. 50-50 he drives the US out of Africa. That wasn't even possible historically because of the 8th Army. I don't say that it WILL happen in this scenario, but it's possible.
"...the british maintained an elaborate cover operation to make Queen Elizabeth and Valiant look like they where in working order.."
Correct, but the Italians had promised to commit their BBs because Malta was so close, their BBs could retire if challenged. So you fly maritime recon to detect a Brit fleet sortie from Alex, & you don't find 'em. The op goes forward & Malta gets pulverized.
"...also; the home fleet or force H might decide to make an appearance and contest the landings..."
Against German & Italian land-based air? I seriously doubt it. We're talking about an invasion in Feb-Apr '42. On 10 Dec '41 the Repulse & the Prince of Wales got clobbered & sunk by Jap land-based air. Ever after, Allied doctrine was not to risk capital ships within range of enemy land-based aircraft. Even the Ark Royal & the Wasp, when they delivered fighters to Malta, flew 'em off from ferrying range & then got the hell out of Dodge.


Point 1: The Germans will not ship more trucks to africa because they simply didn't have more... there was this big thing going on you know; Case Blue that was absorbing more or less all new mechanized production... Rommel had a standing request for 8000 more trucks at all times that was never provisioned... so like I said the supplies pile up at the dockyards (which happened in otl)

Point 2: The British where halfway into Libya allready, and Churchill was agitating for an offensive... Ritchie and crew had worked out a plan to swarm around to the south and head towards the rear of the axis line (not unlike Rommel's plan itself)... it was only a matter of time before they gave in

Point 3: Rommel repeatedly asked for more divisions... 22nd panzer was critical to Manstein clearing the Crimea and given Hitler's obsession with eliminating that as a base area that could threaten ploesti wasn't going to be siphoned off for a safari... even when supplies where getting through in the largest numbers when Malta was totally supressed the africa corps and Italians where lucky if they had 10 days of supplies... in effect adding more mouths to feed was impossible unless they could make use of the forward ports which the Italians where dead set against using

Point 4: Even if Rommel reaches and captures Alexandria... how on earth does he cross the various waterways of the nile... he had no bridge building units AND they where in enourmous demand on the eastern front... it would necessarily take many weeks for such units either Italian or German to be sent to him and mated with their equipment... Rommel cannot gallop from Gazalla to the Alexandria without a significant pause... he has to bring forward the infrastructure of his airforce and reorient his supply net... plus his troops will be exausted and in need of reinforcements (which with Stalingrad going are not readily available)... Torch likely comes before he can even renew his offensive

Point 5: Force H and the home fleet could hug the vichy french coastline and approach the island at night for bombardments and fire support missions and withdraw out of stuka range before the sun came up...Malta is a very small place... a single battlewagon and a couple of heavy cruisers could shoot up most of the island in the course of a few night missions and generally make life hellish on those occupying.... Hercules abosrbs a whole crap load of supplies and fuel at a time when the German supply net was strained both by Rommel and Case Blue... having Tripoli and Bengahzi be safter is only of slight help... especially as longer ranged American bombers start to be given to the British which can prowl on his shipping lanes with ultra intel from Egypt direct
 
Top