turkey
Posts: 92
Joined: 3/1/2004 From: United Kingdom Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: niceguy2005 quote:
ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa The RAF could never have been destroyed, if loses were becoming critical, squadrons would have been withdrawn to bases North of London. German un-escorted bomber attacks in daylight could not succeed and night bombing would do no major damage to tactical targets. During the BoB the Germans tried one attack from Norway expecting that there could be no RAF fighters in the North, they were wrong, they didn't attempt it again. The Bf 110 failed as long range fighter escort, so no German fighter escort available North of London, until invasion captures airfields in England. Therefore, the RAF cannot be defeated, result - no airfields no invasion, no invasion no airfields. Checkmate. Although airpower became king later in the war, especially in the Pacific, this was not the case in 1940 Europe. The plain hard evidence is that the Luftwaffe, whatever they achieved later, could not stop the RN operating in the English Channel in the summer of 1940. The fact is, that nearly 350,000 men were brought across this water, in everything from DDs to rowboats and, despite inflicting loses, the Germans could not stop them completing that mission. Not assessment, not assumption, not maybe. It's a fact. Apples, oranges and other asundery of things... One can't say that airpower would not have been important over the channel in 1940 because that idea was never tested. Historically, one would suspect that air power to play a major role because it did in most other theaters at the time. Could the RAF have retreated North, probably, what does that mean? If they're based in Scotland than Spits or Hurris wouldn't have the range to provide CAP over the fleet. Whether the RAF is destroyed or merely forced to a location where they can have little impact on invasion and supply is not important. There is no correlation that can be drawn from the D-Day invasion in '44 and Operation Sealion. They are completely different points in time. The question I think to ask is could Germany scrape together enough torpedo bombers to neutralize home fleet capital ships and could Stukas carry ordance that could damage the RN. I supose North would have been 12 Group, or for that matter 10 Group in the west, anywhere beyond a line about 120 miles inland from the SE coast, 150 miles from the French coast and within operational radius of Spitfire and Hurricane plus well within range of the RAF Bomber Command bases. At the time the Nazis had the HE115 which had reasonable range, but was slow and lightly armed. Wiki says they had 3 squadrons, say 30 to 50 aircraft, and as it happens they were nearby in N orway. The torpedo was a problem. It probably sank around 7 or 8 merchantmen during 1940. (Claims were much higher). They also produced the superior DO 22, very few made all sold for export and from time to time used agianst them and they produced 12 Fi 167s designed for the Graf Zeppelin, but discontinued and used for patrol duties out of The Netherlands Very hypothetical: Its only an opinion but I reckon, that the landing and logistics would have been a nightmare to the point of imposible, is a given. However, had they got a decent force ashore with supplies, I wonder how well they would have fared breaking out across S and SE England? Assume forward air bases in Kent, but they have limited resupply capacity due to shipping losses. The terrain lends itself to defence and was prepapred in depth, not just right on the coast. An easier breakout would have been from the beaches of East Anglia, inland was flat,with fewer defences and they would have been nearer to the industrial heartland, but then the landing would have had to happen without fighter support. I reckon the battle inland from the sea into SE England would be interesting had it happened, and by no means a forgone conclusion either way. Worth adding - defending London is not the objective, Gov has gone to Scotland, industry is north or west, London is the last line of defence - the largest urbanised area in the 1940 world.
< Message edited by turkey -- 1/16/2009 8:07:48 PM >
|