Reply With Quote2 questions;
what was Germans capabilities of mounting seaborn raid, ie troop cariers and such
didnt Germans realised by then the importance of air superiority and therefore postpone the whole thing till it was scrapped all together?
What if thread #1: A German Dieppe
I like playing "what if" as much as (if not more than) anyone at MP.net. I thought I might post this one to have a play with and see what people can come up with.
It has been repeatedly shown that there was no hope of the German Operation SeaLion succeeding. Although some troops could be taken accross the Channel, there was simply no way of keeping them supplied with fuel, ammunition and food. Instead let us look at a different proposition. A large scale German raid across that Channel to sieze and hold a British town for (say) 24 hours and then withdraw. The objective is purely political to demonstrate that the Wehrmacht can land when and where it chooses and defeat any British defences. If it panics the British government into surrendering so much the better.
Some thoughts of mine on the possibility of both carrying this out and doing it successfully. The first one is "the sooner the better". Shortly after Dunkirk, there were fewer than 200 tanks in the entire UK. The South East command had fewer than 20 field artillery pieces to bring to bear on an invader and the Home Guard units were mostly unarmed or armed with largely ineffective weapons. The British Army had stripped a great many civilian vehicles for operations in Franch and so were somewhat mobility restricted, although I expect that if they needed to, more could be "conscripted" for an emergency.
Second thought, it has to be very close to France. When supporting units involved in this raid, the time taken to get there will be critical. This in my mind makes an arc from Hastings to Deal the most likely location. Of course this is also the location of the strongest British defences. It is also the location of the White Cliffs, meaning that much of the coast is pretty much invulnerable to a sea landing. Capturing a major town in the time alloted from the sea is highly unlikely. I've chosen (largely out of the blue) the town of Rye. (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...09692&t=h&z=13) It is very close to the sea (close enough to have a small harbour more about which below), the surrounding countryside is largely farmlands which are easier to land on. Which leads to my third thought.
It pretty much has to be airborne forces that carry this out. Problems however exist with this too. The airborne forces were dependent upon the Luftwaffe's supply of Ju-52's, which had taken something of a hammering in Norway, Belgium and the Netherlands. According to the "all knowing" wiki, German losses of Ju-52's in the attack on the Netherlands amounted to 125 destroyed and 47 damaged, representing 50% of the fleet's strength. Assuming that 70% of the damaged units could be quickly repaired, that would mean approx 225 Ju-52's, each carrying 18 troops (4000) would be available to deliver Paratroopers from the 1st Parachute Division in the 1st wave. That's not many, but it would probably be enough so secure an area for a 2nd and maybe a 3rd wave of reinforcements. Which brings me to my fourth thought.
In order for the Luftwaffe to deliver the paratroopers to the invasion site, they are going to have to control the skies overhead. British Hurricanes and Spitfires would make mincemeat of the heavily laiden Ju-52's. What the Luftwaffe would probably have to settle for is domination, not total control of the skies. The nearby airfields in France mean that the range limitations are not such a big issue as they were when the skies near London were being fought over. It does mean that the nearest airfields are going to be full of Me-109's and 110's and Ju-87's, which means that the transports are going to have to come from further afield. This will delay the resupply/re-enforcing of the paratroops. The Ju-87's operating in such an environment (similar to that which prevailed during the Kanalkamf of July 1940) should be in a reasonable position to act as flying artillery for the ground troops. They will no doubt be needed. This leads me to my final thought.
How do you evacuate 4,8 or 12,000 soldiers from hostile soil without it looking like a catastrophic retreat. I am thinking that what ever is to be done, it has to be done during the daylight hours. During night hours, the Royal Navy can (and will) bring Destroyers around (and they kept 20 near the channel for just such an occasion) to bombard enemy postitions and to sink any shipping involved. My postulated withdrawal method is to bring several small freighters up to the jetty at the entrance to the Rye harbour (assuming it existed in 1940 of course). The majority of the forces embark on these (during daylight) to be taken across the channel to safety. The rearguard are taken away by Ju-52 operating out of any field that meets requirements, and covered by Ju-87's. Loads of propaganda is left behind saying in an Austrian accent that "we'll be back".
Effects of such a raid? Well it very much depends upon how well it goes. If it is a disaster, then it is a major boost to morale for the British. If it goes well, expect German morale to soar even higher but I don't expect the British to surrender. It is very clearly not the kind of act that could take and hold anything more than what it did. It may even reinforce Churchill's thoughts on the positive effects of commando raids.
That's my 30 mins of thinking over and done with. I am very happy for this plan to be shot to pieces, a better one come up with or anything else for that matter. Fire at will.
2 questions;
what was Germans capabilities of mounting seaborn raid, ie troop cariers and such
didnt Germans realised by then the importance of air superiority and therefore postpone the whole thing till it was scrapped all together?
Seabourne is where it gets difficult for the Germans. The vast majority of any Operation SeaLion type operation would have to be carried on converted river barges. These do 3-5km/h and swamp in anything except for the lightest seas. If you want to pack your soldiers into freighters and deliver them to the shore you need to have either landing craft (which apart from a few experimental models the Germans didn't have), or a harbour already captured.
And it is this more than anything else that caused SeaLion to be postponed and then abandoned. On a fine day with the Luftwaffe in control of the skies over southern England it may have been possible to deliver between 5 and 10 divisions for a landing. But as soon as the seas became rough, or the Royal Navy turned up (and they would as soon as it went dark), your divisions are cut off with no ammunition, no fuel and no food.
add to that no humint, a fiasco waiting to happen, too bad it may had shortened the whole WWII by a bit
I don't see how this would constitute a serious problem. Germany had already carried out a similar operation against Norway under arguably much more difficult circumstances.Originally Posted by TheKiwi
German supply lines to Norway were significantly more secure. It was practically impossible for the Royal Navy to interrupt them as they went via Denmark and then across the straights to Norway. Easy to cover with Luftwaffe forces and not a thing the RAF could do to counter it.
The channel on the other hand had RN destroyers, cruisers and a battlecruiser on standby for just such an event. They could steam down at dusk, intercepting resupply shipping and devistating it, before withdrawing by dawn. The very slow speed of the resupply barges meant that it would take a 24 hour a day operation to keep the invasion force supplied.
Disney had a movie about a German Raid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0rRPU_cvGg
Five words:
Treguna, Mekoides, Tregorum Saydas Dee.
If you've never seen Bedknobs and Broomsticks it's a fantastic movie. I liked it when I was 9, and I like it at age 36.
On a serious note, I find myself wondering about the feasibility of such a raid on the UK, especially why the Germans would do such a thing with the intent to withdraw. Based on your own numbers (4000 men) being dropped and withdrawn in 24 hours, even successfully, might very well tell the Brits that this was all Germany could undertake. In any case, Churchill was PM, and he'd given his never surrender speech:
"...we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
Look at a map.
Ha ha, we thought the same thing.
I was thinking as many as three waves of approx 4000 each, but I really don't have enought knowledge on how possible this was.
And I agree that it was unlikely to make the British give up, both sides propaganda services would have had a field day with it. I think the only real benefit in it for the German side would be an ability to say "even your mighty navy cannot protect you. We can strike when and where we please" (so long as it's real close to our airbases).
Well it would have been feasible for the Luftwaffe to capture an airfield and then a port. But then this raises the possibility of actually holding the town/port/airfield for longer then 24 hours and maybe use it as a beachead for a larger invasion once the Kriegsmarine can build enough transport.
Or use it as a bargaining chip for peace
I don't know. How long do you think they'd need to hold it for? Which airfield would you choose and which port?
Well you want Dover. Close enough to France for the Luftwaffe to provide proper assistence and render the Royal Navy useless. That being said the Kriegsmarine would need to literally have every single warship and submarine defending the entrence to the Channel.
But this is why the Battle of Britain happened in the first place. So the RAF was not a threat against the Kriegsmarine. Knock the RAF out, then the Royal Navy gets sent to the bottom by the Luftwaffe and U-boats when they come charging into the Channel.
But holding dover for 48 hours would be possible IMO
Destruction for most of the Heer and Kriegsmarine assets -------> possibly a harsher Battle of Britain as Hitler gives up the idea that he can convince the UK to surrender by attacking in Russia and his wounded ego needs to be soothed with pictures of London ablaze instead. Then it would be a question of, does the Luftwaffe sticks to its initial "RAF eradication" strategy, which was costly but was working, or does it go straight into "let's do terror raids" which was costly and achieved nothing.
Posting Permissions
