Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sealion Launched and Fails - What Next?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sealion Launched and Fails - What Next?

    As the title says. The Germans believe they have enough air superiority over the south coast and launch Sealion. It fails. What happens next?
    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

  • #2
    Try to throttle Brittain and attack its position in the Mediterranean.

    Comment


    • #3
      Apart form the promotion tango in the Kriegsmarine?

      It would depend on what forces have been committed, and where they were lost - in Britain or on the water, and how may got recovered. I'm positing that at least 5 or 6 divs were thrust forward, but apart from losing a complete and fully equipped Pz div (T-III and T-IV) I'm not sure of the numbers.

      Anybody else got any suggestions?

      Comment


      • #4
        Insights from the wargame just played, which at least indicated what could happen in a failed attack.

        The Germans would have lost a few hundred thousand troops, a substantial although not an insurmountable amount. The LW was devastated, and the KM lost all its capital ships. In the long run the latter did not matter, but the loss to the LW may do.

        The biggest factor in the short run may be that the Germans are no longer seen as invincible? The biggest factor in the long run may be the plans for Nazi expansion put on hold? Would Hitler have been deposed at this point?

        Britain would have had to rebuilt its RN and land forces, with priority on home defence. Morale would be very high, but other spheres may not supported. The Italians may have more luck in North Africa, especially with the loss of RN assets.

        Would the Germans have actually been better off with a defeat? Lessons would have been learned, especially concerning logistics and what is actually achievable in supply. Britain may have been kicked out of N Africa, and not needed German support? Britain may have tried to concentrate on rebuilding its capital ships, partly neglecting ships more suitable for convoy defence? The U-boats may have been more sucessful, even decisive?

        Oddly enough, a Sealion defeat may have found the Germans in a stronger position?
        How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
        Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

        Comment


        • #5
          The knives would be out all through the German command. The SS would certainly be using the blame game to improve its position.

          Hitler is certainly unpredictable, so he may decide to attack the USSR in 1941 anyway. In grand strategy attacking Britain in the Med is a dead end. Italy's entry into the war in 1940 had already severed the route to Suez, so not gain there. inducing Britain to peace negotiations will be tougher, wringing more cooperation out of France, Spain, Turkey, Switzerland,... will be tougher. America Firster will have a bit less traction since Britain is obviously not wasting the material sent.

          A defeat is a defeat & the bigger the better for the victor.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
            Insights from the wargame just played, which at least indicated what could happen in a failed attack.

            The Germans would have lost a few hundred thousand troops, a substantial although not an insurmountable amount. The LW was devastated, and the KM lost all its capital ships. In the long run the latter did not matter, but the loss to the LW may do.

            The biggest factor in the short run may be that the Germans are no longer seen as invincible? The biggest factor in the long run may be the plans for Nazi expansion put on hold? Would Hitler have been deposed at this point?

            Britain would have had to rebuilt its RN and land forces, with priority on home defence. Morale would be very high, but other spheres may not supported. The Italians may have more luck in North Africa, especially with the loss of RN assets.

            Would the Germans have actually been better off with a defeat? Lessons would have been learned, especially concerning logistics and what is actually achievable in supply. Britain may have been kicked out of N Africa, and not needed German support? Britain may have tried to concentrate on rebuilding its capital ships, partly neglecting ships more suitable for convoy defence? The U-boats may have been more sucessful, even decisive?

            Oddly enough, a Sealion defeat may have found the Germans in a stronger position?
            These discussions have certainly decided me in acquiring the Sealion game from HPS.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
              Insights from the wargame just played, which at least indicated what could happen in a failed attack.

              The Germans would have lost a few hundred thousand troops, a substantial although not an insurmountable amount. The LW was devastated, and the KM lost all its capital ships. In the long run the latter did not matter, but the loss to the LW may do.
              Agree that the loss to the LW would be devastating - would take them a long time to rebuild, re-equip, and retrain. This alone could prevent any large scale German campaign for a considerable time.

              The biggest factor in the short run may be that the Germans are no longer seen as invincible?
              Very possible. They would no longer be the "All Conequering" Germans.


              The biggest factor in the long run may be the plans for Nazi expansion put on hold?
              Without the LW to support the army - definitely.


              Would Hitler have been deposed at this point?
              Not at this point.


              Britain would have had to rebuilt its RN and land forces, with priority on home defence. Morale would be very high, but other spheres may not supported. The Italians may have more luck in North Africa, especially with the loss of RN assets.
              I don't think the Italians would have had much more success in North Africa. Operation Compass may never have gone ahead - or would have been kept to it's initial plan of a 5-day raid - but the British would have held Suez.

              Would the Germans have actually been better off with a defeat? Lessons would have been learned, especially concerning logistics and what is actually achievable in supply.
              But would they pay heed to the lessons learned?


              Britain may have been kicked out of N Africa, and not needed German support?
              I don't think Britain would have been kicked out of North Africa, but they probably would not have had the success they did. Hence, no need for German support of the Italians - if they could provide it.

              Which leads me onto - what could the Germans have done after failing at Sealion? Could they have intervened in Greece and N. Africa with the losses they would have sustained? If they couldn't, the British would not have had to send a force to Greece - the Greeks were doing very well on their own against the Italians.


              Britain may have tried to concentrate on rebuilding its capital ships, partly neglecting ships more suitable for convoy defence? The U-boats may have been more sucessful, even decisive?
              Would Britain have lost that many capital ships? The U-boats would have suffered too, in a failed Sealion.


              Oddly enough, a Sealion defeat may have found the Germans in a stronger position?
              I don't think so. The KM is left with a couple of Pocket Battleships still under buid or trials and no escorts - all lost during Sealion. The U-boats would have taken losses.

              The LW has been devastated and unable to commit to any major operation (Greece, N.Africa, Barbarossa). Germany would be on the defensive and waiting for Stalin to strike rather than planning their own strike.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by michammer View Post
                Agree that the loss to the LW would be devastating - would take them a long time to rebuild, re-equip, and retrain. This alone could prevent any large scale German campaign for a considerable time.

                ...<snip>...

                The LW has been devastated and unable to commit to any major operation (Greece, N.Africa, Barbarossa). Germany would be on the defensive and waiting for Stalin to strike rather than planning their own strike.
                Some very excellent points raised there .

                Singapore is unlikely to have been reinforced, so losses there may have been smaller.

                As for N Africa, judging just by the campaign we had fought, the RN had a real blooding, but the army fought and was used appropriately. It is the RN that could be of most concern, and how it would be rebuilt. Several major capital ships (Battleships) were lost or very heavily damaged, but could this be a Pearl Harbour (not the film) whereby the stage is set for a new era of naval organisation is set? Would it be better able to handle the U-boat menace.

                However, probably no Battle of Taranto, and thus perhaps no Pearl Harbour 7th Dec 1941. That would be a biggee.

                If the Nazis don't invade the USSR as a result, would the reverse happen. Probably not in the short term, maybe not in the long term. The Nazis may simply decide on keeping what they have, albeit a bijou version of Adolphs former dreams?
                How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                Comment


                • #9
                  I wouldn't be surprised if Stalin struck west, seeing Germany on the ropes.

                  With Britain, organising resistance forces in the occupied territories and a weakened Heer facing invasion from the East, WW2 may've ended in 1941, before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, allowing the FE to be reinforced, and Japan's defeat to come all the sooner.
                  Indyref2 - still, "Yes."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                    Singapore is unlikely to have been reinforced, so losses there may have been smaller.
                    Agreed.

                    As for N Africa, judging just by the campaign we had fought, the RN had a real blooding, but the army fought and was used appropriately. It is the RN that could be of most concern, and how it would be rebuilt.
                    It is difficult to determine what would have happened in N. Africa. Would Wavell have still pulled 4th Indian out of the Desert and sent them to East Africa? I believe yes, as the 6th Australian Div could replace them as they did historically - except in a defensive capacity, not an offensive capacity. Wavell would, probably, have stayed put in Egypt on the defensive to protect the Suez Canal. Few, if any, reinforcements could have been expected from the UK - putting paid to any offensive.



                    Several major capital ships (Battleships) were lost or very heavily damaged, but could this be a Pearl Harbour (not the film) whereby the stage is set for a new era of naval organisation is set? Would it be better able to handle the U-boat menace.

                    Would the battleships have been damaged? The whole N. Africa/Med campaign could be totally different. Would Malta have been besieged by the Italians alone? Would Crete fall? A failed Sealion would see the Fallschirmjager decimated.


                    However, probably no Battle of Taranto, and thus perhaps no Pearl Harbour 7th Dec 1941. That would be a biggee.
                    Taranto took place in November 1940 so there is a good chance it would still go ahead. Regardless of Taranto, the Japanese would still strike in the Pacific.


                    If the Nazis don't invade the USSR as a result, would the reverse happen. Probably not in the short term, maybe not in the long term. The Nazis may simply decide on keeping what they have, albeit a bijou version of Adolphs former dreams?
                    I believe that sooner, or later, either Russia or Germany would have invaded the other.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The USSR seeing a weakened west, a still occupied Poland, France the low countries, the UK trying to work out what next, a neutral USA decides to move west . HJow far they would get I am unsure . The Germans probably would have enough troops to put up a fierce resistance.
                      The in December the IJN et al attack Pearl Harbour, Singapore Hong Kong . The US is now in the war and maybe they go for a Europe first strategy. If so the Germans find themselves between a pincer.
                      But if it becomes a Pacific first strategy maybe the USSR gets to the English Channel. but thats a lot of ifs in there.

                      "To all who serve , have or will serve , Thank You"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                        Britain would have had to rebuilt its RN and land forces, with priority on home defence. Morale would be very high, but other spheres may not supported.
                        That was actually fairly unlikely. You are drawing on your game experience where the game engine gave the luftwaffe the antishipping capabilities of the 1944 USN. In reality, the LW had very little in its arsenal that could affact a RN heavy cruiser or battleship. They had no armour piercing bombs that could penetrate the RN heavies armour belt. They had a small number of torpedo planes but lacked torpedos (the KM controlled torpedos and wouldn't give the LW any). In any case they still hadn't yet solved the problems with their torpedos.

                        RN losses would have been be heaviest in the auxilliaries, MTBs, MGBs and destroyers. At most one or two cruisers would be lost/severely damaged. The lend lease destroyers are arriving and will make good losses.

                        With the KM surface fleet annihilated, the RN can transfer extra surface assets to the med.

                        The biggest impact on the British would have been on the treasury, when the war department orders replacement shells for the navy to make up for the expenditures.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Erm...

                          Them that can go back to whatever they wuz doin before?


                          On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

                          ACG History Today

                          BoRG

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            With the RN out of the Med, the Italians could have had a field-day.

                            Why both with Greece when you can land troops in Palestine?
                            Take Gibraltar, lock up the Med, and do as you please!

                            The USSR could attack Germany, but there is another option; assume the leading roll in the Axis and go south, taking Persia, India and western China for the Soviet cause and leaving the Germans and Italians to cover his right flank by mucking around in that miserable desert... which the Red Army would be able to take away from them when the time came.

                            Why attack the Nazis when they were weakened, and so many Imperialist Colonies were up for grabs?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                              With the RN out of the Med, the Italians could have had a field-day.

                              Why both with Greece when you can land troops in Palestine?
                              Take Gibraltar, lock up the Med, and do as you please!

                              The USSR could attack Germany, but there is another option; assume the leading roll in the Axis and go south, taking Persia, India and western China for the Soviet cause and leaving the Germans and Italians to cover his right flank by mucking around in that miserable desert... which the Red Army would be able to take away from them when the time came.

                              Why attack the Nazis when they were weakened, and so many Imperialist Colonies were up for grabs?

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X