Your defence of Norway 1940, April 10th

[Bill Cameron]

Ahh, there it is. I assumed all the relevant rules would be in the first WI-posting. Since the POD is the 10th, the Norwegians have already screwed up the situation BIG TIME.

Markus,

I have to agree. The April 10th POD ties the Allies' hands too much. All the major mistakes have already been made and there's no real chance of salvaging anything without the German's suddenly becoming stupid or falling victim to accidents on a near-ASB scale.

I thought they may have been a chance at Narvik, but after checking I realized Britain disembarked the troops aboard the R4 cruiser force on the 8th in order to reinforce the Home Fleet. Again, with a POD of the 10th, that grave mistake still takes place with the cruisers involved are now at sea and harder to recall.


Bill

 

[Markus]

I thought they may have been a chance at Narvik, but after checking I realized Britain disembarked the troops aboard the R4 cruiser force on the 8th in order to reinforce the Home Fleet. Again, with a POD of the 10th, that grave mistake still takes place with the cruisers involved are now at sea and harder to recall.


Bill

Narvik IMO shows why Norway is a lost cause. A US military magazine gave the Allies a high chance of retaking Narvik had they used their naval supremacy to land troops close to Narvik and attacked quickly. But they did land at a save distance and slowly build up their forces.

 

[stevep]

Bill

Steve,

What of it? The ship was at anchor in an allegedly protected harbor. The Brits were so oblivious that Prien had time to fire his bow tubes, turn around and fire his stern tubes. Hell, the ship's captain was on deck looking over the side after the first hit because he thought a paint locker had exploded.

Still a capital ship in a [partially] protected port. If the Germans can sink a ship there then the RN has to have concerns about the loss of more and more valuable ships off Norway.

Again, what of it? Two weeks into the war, escorts still learning their job, and U-29 only able to fire because the carrier turned into the wind to launch aircraft at the last moment.

Are you suggesting that the carriers aren't committed? One of the weaknesses of them is that to work they must do this, at least before powerful steam catapults, which will give lurkers opportunities.

That's the key IMHO. If you can keep the airfields out of German hands, the Allies have a chance. Otherwise it's over. HMS Glorious and that moron D'Oyly-Hughes aside, it was Luftwaffe that truly hurt the RN. Even ships specifically designed to work in an AA role were put under by the Luftwaffe.

On that we're definitely in agreement. However as Markus says with a 10-4-40 POD that's virtually impossible. You can do better, win some time and possibly increase German naval losses further but you risk markedly greater losses if things go wrong.

Steve

 

[Oddball]

I still think Bergen is a viable option.

A short proposition from holliday memory:

- build a temporary airbase at Bømoen, Voss (East of Bergen)
- Commit Brittish airassets heavily to this base
- continuousley harassl Sola airbase with naval assets to rend it unoperativly (probably costly )
- accieve airsuperiority around Bergen/Western Norway
- evict Germans from Bergen

You now have a "secure" base in western Norway, forcing the Germans to redirect forces from the eastern Norway and the drive towars Trondheim. From Airbase Bømoen you can also contest German airassets based at Fornebu, Oslo.

This makes for a whole new ballgame in Norway!

Just to repeat myself: the war in Norway was desisivly decided from controll of the few airfields and thus airsuperiority in OTL.

 

[Markus]

- build a temporary airbase at Bømoen, Voss (East of Bergen)
- Commit Brittish airassets heavily to this base
- continuousley harassl Sola airbase with naval assets to rend it unoperativly (probably costly )
- accieve airsuperiority around Bergen/Western Norway
- evict Germans from Bergen

Hmm, can you build a relatively powerful base fast enough, especially when the Germans have air superiority?

This makes for a whole new ballgame in Norway!

But only until May 10th.

Under the conditions outlined by "perfectgeneral" the course of the campaign will be different but not the outcome.

 

[Oddball]

Hmm, can you build a relatively powerful base fast enough, especially when the Germans have air superiority?

Yes I think so. It was done OTL, but in a relativly smaller scale. Sadly no Brittish assets operated from it. Everything went further north.

But only until May 10th.

Under the conditions outlined by "perfectgeneral" the course of the campaign will be different but not the outcome.

Sure, but perhaps if the situation in Norway looks mutch better at the time, the decission to abandon Norway could change???

Probably not, but anyway...

 

[Bill Cameron]

Still a capital ship in a [partially] protected port. If the Germans can sink a ship there then the RN has to have concerns about the loss of more and more valuable ships off Norway.

Steve,

Those concerns, and Forbes had them in spades, didn't stop the RN from sending nearly the entire Home Fleet into Norwegian waters during the first week of April.

Renown and 4 destroyers left on April 5th to cover three separate mine laying forces comprised of 7 layers and 8 destroyers. Forbes followed with Rodney, Valiant, Repulse, Sheffield, Penelope, a French CL, and 10 destroyers on the 7th. When evidence of German fleet movements began to grow, the already embarked troop contingents were removed from the several cruisers and those vessels dispatched along with Warspite and many others.

Are you suggesting that the carriers aren't committed? One of the weaknesses of them is that to work they must do this, at least before powerful steam catapults, which will give lurkers opportunities.

Forbes didn't even both to take Furious, his only available carrier, with him because she had no fighters embarked. Ark Royal and Glorious didn't arrive from the Med until April 22nd and when they did arrive they were sent to Norway without hesitation. The only carrier loss was due to gunfire and it occurred because D'Oyly-Hughes was such a great hurry to get back to Scapa so he could begin court martial proceedings against his air commander that he wouldn't change course to allow the launch of scout planes.

The loss of Courageous in '39 obviously didn't make the RN gun shy with regards to U-boats and the dozens of U-boats dispatched to Norway didn't manage to do a goddamn thing anyway. As I already pointed out, there was a U-boat in the Narvik fjord and yet Warspite waltzed in and out with nary a care.

On that we're definitely in agreement. However as Markus says with a 10-4-40 POD that's virtually impossible.

Agreed. Once the R4 troop contingent was disembarked on the 6th and the cruisers involved sent to sea, there's little chance of getting Allied troops to Narvik early enough and in any numbers to prevent it's eventual loss.

You can do better, win some time and possibly increase German naval losses further but you risk markedly greater losses if things go wrong.

To aircraft and gunfire, yes. Any sinkings by U-boat will depend on luck, as with Courageous off the Western Approaches in '39.

Having the RN catch the Germans would hinge on Forbes and others in the British chain of command coming to a much earlier realization that German naval assets were in the process of invading Norway and not attempting a breakout into the Atlantic. Forbes' attention was understandably fixed on his own minelaying operation off Narvik and any possible German breakout so his dispositions were made with those two things in mind.

Having Churchill and Pound uncharacteristically avoid micromanaging operations could help as their interference - especially the direct order to Forbes canceling his proposed April 9th attack on the Germans disembarking at Bergen - frittered away any chances the Allies may have had.


Bill

 

[Bill Cameron]

Gents,

For those of you wrestling with the OP's challenge, here's a list of what ships were available to the RN's Home Fleet during the first week of April 1940:

Despite losses and detachments, the Home Fleet was a formidable
force in the first week of April 1940.74 The capital ships available to
Admiral Forbes were Rodney, Warspite, Valiant, Renown, Repulse, and, on
stand-by, the carrier Furious. His cruiser strength was likewise impressive:
1CS comprised the three 8-inch gun ships Berwick, Devonshire, and York;
2CS was made up of the light cruisers Galatea, Arethusa, Aurora, and
Penelope; 18CS had four ‘Town’ class light cruisers, Sheffield, Southampton,
Glasgow, and Birmingham. In support were the anti-aircraft cruisers Cairo
and Calcutta and the 24 modern destroyers of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th
Flotillas. In addition to the 18 Swordfish that were to form Furious’s
air group, four Fleet Air Arm squadrons were based at Hatston in
the Orkneys for local air defence.

Source is "The Royal Navy’s Home Fleet in World War II" by James P. Levy published in 2003.


Bill

 

[Oddball]

Agreed. Once the R4 troop contingent was disembarked on the 6th and the cruisers involved sent to sea, there's little chance of getting Allied troops to Narvik early enough and in any numbers to prevent it's eventual loss.

This is factualy wrong.

Yes it is to late to avoid Narvik's initial loss. But Narvik was OTL recaptured by allied forces. And it was not lack of forces present that eventualy led to Narvik beeing evacuated, but political prioriticing.

To late to avoid the fall of Norway? Yes, probably...

But not to late to perhaps change history...

 

[Markus]

Sure, but perhaps if the situation in Norway looks mutch better at the time, the decission to abandon Norway could change???

With first the western front and than France collapsing? Even if the Brits do not fall for the operation that shall not be named the end of the ground war in the west releases all the troops Germany needs to turn the situation around.

 

[Oddball]

With first the western front and than France collapsing? Even if the Brits do not fall for the operation that shall not be named the end of the ground war in the west releases all the troops Germany needs to turn the situation around.

Sure, I know.

I just wonder how many assets Germany would/could deploy in Norway given need and time.

But a prolonged campaign in Norway will then have other effects.

Lastly we should not underestimate both Churchill and Hitler's obsession with the northern front

 

[Bill Cameron]

Yes it is to late to avoid Narvik's initial loss. But Narvik was OTL recaptured by allied forces.

Recaptured for no good purpose, and seized again by nearby German forces once it was evacuated.

And it was not lack of forces present that eventualy led to Narvik beeing evacuated, but political prioriticing.

The fall of France and threats elsewhere were far more important. Narvik could not have been held in the face of a Luftwaffe based in Norway.

To late to avoid the fall of Norway? Yes, probably...

Which was my actual point.

But not to late to perhaps change history...

The only real change would be to the dates during which the Allies occupied Narvik.


Bill

 

[El Pip]

What about Royal Oak? Or Courageous?

Apologies, I should have been more clear. I meant the U-boats never sunk any warship with the magnetic dets they were using during the Norway Campaign.

The early war torpedoes were more reliable, see the named ships above, the 'improved' model issued early 1940 had a magnetic detonator that didn't work and was withdrawn after the U-boat commanders finally convinced their bosses it was the torpedo not them.

So at the time of the Norway Campaign the u-boats were for all practical purposes unarmed and the RN can be deployed without fear of any submarine threat.