Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk in 1940

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk in 1940 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/5/2015 4:47:12 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

The point I wanted to make is, it doesn't matter what the German armed forces felt they could or could not do, Hitler wasn't happy with the idea, and that was that. Really , after 1940, Hitler was the best ally the allies could have. On a daily basis he managed to "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" from his generals. Imagine if the general staff did not have to contend with Hitler? Then again , without Hitler Germany probably would have not gone to war for a long, long time (if ever).
warspite1

I think that there are plenty of examples where it was the other way around. It would have been interesting if Hitler had gone with the German Generals original plan for Case Yellow.... an attack through Belgium that would have played directly into the Allies Plans to hold the Belgian river lines.

Also there is evidence that Hitler saved the German army from destruction in the winter of 1941/42. If Rommel had obeyed orders then the desert war may have panned out differently.

Hitler was a deranged sociopath (see above ) but the German General staff were not paragons of virtue....



< Message edited by warspite1 -- 1/5/2015 5:48:24 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 91
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/5/2015 6:32:19 PM   
Dixie


Posts: 10303
Joined: 3/10/2006
From: UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

However, ammunition and supplies from the US and at home were coming in all the time and by September were appreciably greater in number in all areas.



Ah-HA! I knew it! Clearly we-the good 'ole US of freakin' A won the so-called "Battle of Britain" and defeated a nazi invasion apriori. When ze Germans heard that we were involved they hung it up. A little credit where credit is due please Warspite1.

And rightly so that ze Germans should hang it up when they did. This guy was gonna come back after 'em. And he was kinda pissed. Here he is earnestly walking the flight line dressed inexplicably for a formal gathering.









Standards must be upheld old chap, even in the middle of a warzone, although he is wearing the hat at a jaunty angle to bring an air of whimsy to the ensemble. I note that he's also popped back in time from 1942 with a Spitfire Mk IX. What a guy!

_____________________________



Bigger boys stole my sig

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 92
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/5/2015 6:56:36 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:


Operation Sealion - summary of an exercise held at the Staff College, Sandhurst in 1974.





The full text is in 'Sealion' by Richard Cox. The scenario
is based on the known plans of each side, plus previously
unpublished Admiralty weather records for September 1940.
Each side (played by British and German officers respectively)
was based in a command room, and the actual moves plotted
on a scale model of SE England constructed at the School
of Infantry. The panel of umpires included Adolf Galland,
Admiral Friedrich Ruge, Air Chief Marshal Sir Christopher
Foxley-Norris, Rear Admiral Edward Gueritz, General Heinz
Trettner and Major General Glyn Gilbert.

The main problem the Germans face is that are a) the
Luftwaffe has not yet won air supremacy; b) the possible
invasion dates are constrained by the weather and tides
(for a high water attack) and c) it has taken until
late September to assemble the necessary shipping.

Glossary
FJ = Fallschirmjaeger (German paratroops)
MTB = Motor Torpedo Boat (German equivalent, E-Boat)
DD = Destroyer
CA = Heavy Cruiser
BB = Battleship
CV = Aircraft Carrier

22nd September - morning
The first wave of a planned 330,000 men hit the beaches
at dawn. Elements of 9 divisions landed between
Folkestone and Rottingdean (near Brighton).
In addition 7th FJ Div landed at Lympne to take the airfield.

The invasion fleet suffered minor losses from MTBs during
the night crossing, but the RN had already lost one
CA and three DDs sunk, with one CA and two DDs damaged,
whilst sinking three German DDs. Within hours of the landings
which overwhelmed the beach defenders, reserve formations
were despatched to Kent. Although there were 25 divisions
in the UK, only 17 were fully equipped, and only three
were based in Kent, however the defence plan relied on
the use of mobile reserves and armoured and mechanised
brigades were committed as soon as the main landings were
identified.

Meanwhile the air battle raged, the Luftwaffe flew 1200
fighter and 800 bomber sorties before 1200 hrs. The RAF
even threw in training planes hastily armed with bombs,
but the Luftwaffe were already having problems with their
short ranged Me 109s despite cramming as many as possible
into the Pas de Calais.

22nd - 23rd September
The Germans had still not captured a major port, although
they started driving for Folkestone. Shipping unloading
on the beaches suffered heavy losses from RAF bombing
raids and then further losses at their ports in France.

The U-Boats, Luftwaffe and few surface ships had lost
contact with the RN, but then a cruiser squadron with
supporting DDs entered the Channel narrows and had to
run the gauntlet of long range coastal guns, E-Boats
and 50 Stukas. Two CAs were sunk and one damaged. However
a diversionary German naval sortie from Norway was
completely destroyed and other sorties by MTBS and DDs
inflicted losses on the shipping milling about in the
Channel. German shipping losses on the first day
amounted to over 25% of their invasion fleet, especially
the barges, which proved desperately unseaworthy.

23rd Sept dawn - 1400 hrs.
The RAF had lost 237 planes out 1048 (167 fighters and
70 bombers), and the navy had suffered enough losses such
that it was keeping its BBs and CVs back, but large
forces of DDs and CAs were massing. Air recon showed a
German buildup in Cherbourg and forces were diverted to
the South West.

The German Navy were despondant about their losses,
especially as the loss of barges was seriously
dislocating domestic industry. The Army and Airforce
commanders were jubilant however, and preperations for
the transfer of the next echelon continued along with
the air transport of 22nd Div, despite Luftwaffe losses
of 165 fighters and 168 bombers. Out of only 732 fighters
and 724 bombers these were heavy losses. Both sides
overestimated losses inflicted by 50%.

The 22nd Div airlanded successfully at Lympne, although
long range artillery fire directed by a stay-behind
commando group interdicted the runways. The first British
counterattacks by 42nd Div supported by an armoured
brigade halted the German 34th Div in its drive on Hastings.
7th Panzer Div was having difficulty with extensive
anti-tank obstacles and assault teams armed with sticky
bombs etc. Meanwhile an Australian Div had retaken
Newhaven (the only German port), however the New Zealand
Div arrived at Folkestone only to be attacked in the
rear by 22nd Airlanding Div. The division fell back on
Dover having lost 35% casualties.

Sep 23rd 1400 - 1900 hrs
Throughout the day the Luftwaffe put up a maximum effort,
with 1500 fighter and 460 bomber sorties, but the RAF
persisted in attacks on shipping and airfields. Much of
this effort was directed for ground support and air
resupply, despite Adm Raeders request for more aircover
over the Channel. The Home Fleet had pulled out of air
range however, leaving the fight in the hands of 57 DDs
and 17 CAs plus MTBs. The Germans could put very little
surface strength against this. Waves of DDs and CAs
entered the Channel, and although two were sunk by U-Boats,
they sank one U-Boat in return and did not stop. The German
flotilla at Le Havre put to sea (3 DD, 14 E-Boats) and at
dusk intercepted the British, but were wiped out, losing
all their DDs and 7 E-Boats.

The Germans now had 10 divisions ashore, but in many
cases these were incomplete and waiting for their
second echelon to arrive that night. The weather
was unsuitable for the barges however, and the decision
to sail was referred up the chain of command.

23rd Sep 1900 - Sep 24th dawn
The Fuhrer Conference held at 1800 broke out into bitter
inter-service rivalry - the Army wanted their second
echelon sent, and the navy protesting that the
weather was unsuitable, and the latest naval defeat
rendered the Channel indefensible without air support.
Goring countered this by saying it could only be done
by stopped the terror bombing of London, which in turn
Hitler vetoed. The fleet was ordered to stand by.

The RAF meanwhile had lost 97 more fighters leaving only
440. The airfields of 11 Group were cratered ruins, and
once more the threat of collapse, which had receded in
early September, was looming. The Luftwaffe had lost
another 71 fighters and 142 bombers. Again both sides
overestimated losses inflicted, even after allowing for
inflated figures.

On the ground the Germans made good progress towards Dover
and towards Canterbury, however they suffered reverses
around Newhaven when the 45th Div and Australians
attacked. At 2150 Hitler decided to launch the second wave,
but only the short crossing from Calais and Dunkirk. By
the time the order reached the ports, the second wave
could not possibly arrive before dawn. The 6th and 8th
divisions at Newhaven, supplied from Le Havre, would not
be reinforced at all.

Sep 24th dawn - Sep 28th
The German fleet set sail, the weather calmed, and U-Boats,
E-Boats and fighters covered them. However at daylight 5th
destroyer flotilla found the barges still 10 miles off
the coast and tore them to shreds. The Luftwaffe in turn
committed all its remaining bombers, and the RAF responded
with 19 squadrons of fighters. The Germans disabled two
CAs and four DDs, but 65% of the barges were sunk. The
faster steamers broke away and headed for Folkestone,
but the port had been so badly damaged that they could
only unload two at a time.

The failure on the crossing meant that the German
situation became desperate. The divisions had sufficient
ammunition for 2 to 7 days more fighting, but without
extra men and equipment could not extend the bridgehead.
Hitler ordered the deployment on reserve units to Poland
and the Germans began preparations for an evacuation as
further British arracks hemmed them in tighter. Fast
steamers and car ferries were assembled for evacuation
via Rye and Folkestone. Of 90,000 troops who landed
on 22nd september, only 15,400 returned to France, the rest
were killed or captured.



Leo "Apollo11"


Apollo11,

That was very enlightening-thank you!

_____________________________


(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 93
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/5/2015 7:08:34 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I don't have to read the thread. This has been hashed over many times before. My only point is that if Adolph really thought he had a chance he would have done it. The man was not adverse to a gamble. So, the fact that he did not should put the question to rest.


Yes and no. Hitler once said "on land I am a lion , at sea a coward". I've always felt he was queasy with all things naval (no pun intended) especially after the Norway invasion. I'd take him at his word.
warspite1

Are you sure you got that quote right? I thought it went something like:

A.Hitler: On land I am a twat, at sea I am even twattier.....


Obviously it lost something in translation!
warspite1

Ah yes, here it is. I have the full transcript from Hitler's speech to the Reichstag in September 1940.

A.Hitler: On land I am a twat, at sea I am even twattier - and when it comes to my political views I am a 24-carrot %^&*!



Thank you, Warspite1.

That truly made my day a lot brighter. Thank you.



_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 94
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/5/2015 11:38:53 PM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
Germany had a long military tradition on land, but they really didn't have much of a navy until just before WW I and the navy languished again until the late 1930s. Germany was a continental power.

The UK on the other hand had a naval tradition going back centuries. In some ways you can compensate for lack of institutional knowledge with technology, but there comes a point where the long history pays off. There are not many naval encounters between Germany and the RN to go by (aside from u-boat encounters), however the British tended to use better tactics which usually led to better results, and they had more resources to draw upon.

The Sandhurst post from Apollo11 was interesting. I think in the real world the RN may have fared even better than they did in the exercise. On the other hand it is possible the Germans may have whittled the RAF down a little further before the invasion. But lose the barges and the fleet of small freighters needed to support the invasion and the whole thing is lost. Essentially the same result in the end.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 95
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 12:09:35 AM   
Jorge_Stanbury


Posts: 4320
Joined: 2/29/2012
From: Toronto and Lima
Status: offline
Important to mention Sandhurst is an army military academy; and they wanted to play a wargame.

The starting proposition is that somehow the Germans were able to land elements of nine, yes "9" divisions.. 90,000 men on Sep 22

This can be easily challenged in real life, but not if you are planning to play a wargame. If the RN sinks the invasion fleet on turn #1, then game over, everybody, including some distinguished visitors, have to go home or to the pub. This unrealistic landing is the key assumption made to enable a wargame. This of course not to different than some WITPAE game rules like the amphibious bonus.

But then, even under that very optimistic starting point, Germany is defeated in less than one week

< Message edited by Jorge_Stanbury -- 1/6/2015 1:23:15 AM >

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 96
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 12:23:30 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
Of course military organizations wargame for different reasons than we do, but your point is valid. To get elements of 9 divisions ashore to begin with is approaching a miracle, but if the Germans can't do that it's a pretty short exercise.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 97
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 8:53:23 AM   
moonraker65


Posts: 556
Joined: 7/14/2004
From: Swindon,Wilts. UK
Status: offline
With Churchill in power I very much doubt it could have succeeded. Not to mention that we were expecting it straight after Dunkirk with preparations already underway in June almost as soon as what was left of the BEF was brought back to blighty.


_____________________________


(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 98
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 9:18:17 AM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

We all know that "Operation Sea Lion" was "pipe dream"... it was impossible to succeed... but it brought legacy that would heavily influence the Germans 4 years later... D-Day June 6 1944...


What I mean is that Germans tactical / strategic thought regarding possible Allied invasion was heavily influenced with their own "Operation Sea Lion"!


In other words German general plan (which was not at all that bad) was to fortify important harbors (i.e. make them "fortresses" and mine the harbor equipment) and try to defend the rest of open area with what they got plus reinforcements in the rear areas (this was done so much better after Rommel arrived and started to improve everything).

They simply never thought of artificial harbors (i.e. Mullberies) which were key to Allied victory in 1944 (because even in 1944 withheavy Allied supremacy in land / air / sea it took weeks to capture important harbors on French cost and more weeks to render them operational after deliberate destruction by Germans)!



Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 99
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 6:17:48 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Important to mention Sandhurst is an army military academy; and they wanted to play a wargame.

Warspite1

True, but they had the navy represented - there were at least a couple of admirals involved. I agree with your view though - it would be a pretty pointless exercise if they didn't suspend belief and allow some Germans to land


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Jorge_Stanbury)
Post #: 100
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 7:32:46 PM   
sprior


Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

We all know that "Operation Sea Lion" was "pipe dream"... it was impossible to succeed... but it brought legacy that would heavily influence the Germans 4 years later... D-Day June 6 1944...


What I mean is that Germans tactical / strategic thought regarding possible Allied invasion was heavily influenced with their own "Operation Sea Lion"!


In other words German general plan (which was not at all that bad) was to fortify important harbors (i.e. make them "fortresses" and mine the harbor equipment) and try to defend the rest of open area with what they got plus reinforcements in the rear areas (this was done so much better after Rommel arrived and started to improve everything).

They simply never thought of artificial harbors (i.e. Mullberies) which were key to Allied victory in 1944 (because even in 1944 withheavy Allied supremacy in land / air / sea it took weeks to capture important harbors on French cost and more weeks to render them operational after deliberate destruction by Germans)!



Leo "Apollo11"



It also affected the placement of the beach defences. The German plans for Sealion involved the barges beaching on a falling tide so that they would dry out on the beaches (this also meant they could only be used twice a day and had to sit on the beach all day...). The allies actually landed on a rising tide so that the landing craft could float off and pick up another load almost immediately.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.



(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 101
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 7:46:44 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronDuke


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Damned forum ate my reply. That's the second time it's happened this week

Let's find something we can agree on.

1. The German plan was poor, and had several flaws.
2. The requirements for Sea Lion (namely Luftwaffe air superiority) could have been attained.
3. The German plan had only a small chance for success, but it's success was not an impossibility.



Sorry, but it's a fantasy.


I'm sure you would have said the same if I had said that France would only last a month and a half in 1940.

(in reply to IronDuke_slith)
Post #: 102
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/6/2015 9:53:13 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

Although the "Sea Lion" was impossible I often thought that Luftwaffe might have done much much better with different/better leadership - that is some very interesting "What if?"...


Let me explain:

#1
We all know (and every man/woman/child in England knew) that there were just a few factories (with one main) that made Rolls Royce Merlin engines. The Germans didn't know (or didn't care) - this was intelligence blunder of prime magnitude.

#2
We all know (and every man/woman/child in England knew) that there was just a few factories that were making Spitfire and Hurricane fighters. Again the Germans didn't know (or didn't care) - this was another intelligence blunder of prime magnitude.


What Germans could have done is:

a)
Use the Kampfgruppe 100 to be a "pathfinder" striking force and then use all available other bombers to bomb at night the few British Rolls Royce engine factories and few Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft factories!

The Kampfgruppe 100 possessed both "X-Gerät" and "Knickebein" and was accurate to 100m (this was more than enough).

All other Luftwaffe bombers had "Knickebein" for basic navigation and could then use the initial marking attack of Kampfgruppe 100.

The RAF had NOTHING to stop Germans at night!

b)
During day use all other bombers and all fighters to continuously attack all airfields and all radar stations in England in range en masse!

c)
Never ever attack cities (this was totally unnecessary and counterproductive).


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to sprior)
Post #: 103
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/7/2015 1:37:33 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
There are a few problems with this plan. Ford was building a large number of Merlins in a suburb of Manchester, which was out of range of many German bombers.

Additionally, the Germans didn't have the aircraft to do all the things you say here. If their bomber force was used for night bombing and then again for daytime attacks against radar and airfields, the planes would be crashing right and left because the poor pilots were falling asleep at the controls. Attacking airfields and radar stations are both very difficult to keep shut down. British airfields had grass runways which were even easier to repair than just about any other kind of runway and scoring hits on the radar stations proved to be very difficult without smart missiles. When the Germans did attack the British radar stations, they scored little damage and the stations were back online very quickly.

The Germans also didn't really understand the British radar infrastructure nor did they fully grasp the significant advantage it gave them. They did some early battle attacks on the radar stations and then left them alone the rest of the battle. The brass in charge of targeting figured dropping a few bombs on the stations early on would knock them out for the entire battle.

Ultimately the German bomber force was trying to achieve a task that was beyond their capabilities. They didn't have enough planes, the planes didn't have enough payload, their fighter coverage was too short legged, and there were more targets that needed to be knocked out for success in the battle. As the Allies learned in the next few years, factories were a lot tougher to knock out by air than anybody thought before the war. The US and RAF bombing effort definitely put a dent in German production, but ultimately they were able to keep on building equipment despite the raids. In many cases factories were back in production in a week after a major raid.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 104
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/7/2015 4:43:20 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronDuke


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Damned forum ate my reply. That's the second time it's happened this week

Let's find something we can agree on.

1. The German plan was poor, and had several flaws.
2. The requirements for Sea Lion (namely Luftwaffe air superiority) could have been attained.
3. The German plan had only a small chance for success, but it's success was not an impossibility.



Sorry, but it's a fantasy.


I'm sure you would have said the same if I had said that France would only last a month and a half in 1940.
Warspite1

Isn't this now splitting hairs?

You yourself have admitted that without air superiority (which, in September 1940, the Germans most definitely did not have) there would be a 1% chance of success. Even with it, you have suggested the chance of a successful outcome increases to just 5%.

For all intents and purposes therefore we are talking "pipe-dream or fantasy".

Unless you are Japan at the end of the war when you are down to sending Yamato on her final mission - and even the Japanese knew it was a one way trip - no commander is going to launch an attack with a 5% chance of success. When does a plan become a pipe-dream? 10%, 1%, 0%? Few people would have thought France would collapse in the timescale she did (although there was 1870) but the German General Staff at least believed victory was possible.

The head of the navy told Hitler in no uncertain terms that the Kriegsmarine could not do what was being asked of it. The Luftwaffe was being bled white. Read the plan of action for how the Barges were to operate once they got to the UK (those that did) and just how long those vessels would need to be at the
beachhead then hooking up with the tugs so they can try and make it back to France. All of this - and the countless reasons given in previous posts - adds up to an impossible mission - hell even Rafe MacCauley couldn't pull this one off.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 105
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/7/2015 2:38:40 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 106
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/7/2015 7:58:42 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]
warspite1

Ben who? You mean Rafe.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 107
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/7/2015 8:55:57 PM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]
warspite1

Ben who? You mean Rafe.





Love it, love it. You guys are always good for a laugh, and on a gloomy day where I could use it.


_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 108
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 11:21:33 AM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

There are a few problems with this plan. Ford was building a large number of Merlins in a suburb of Manchester, which was out of range of many German bombers.

Additionally, the Germans didn't have the aircraft to do all the things you say here. If their bomber force was used for night bombing and then again for daytime attacks against radar and airfields, the planes would be crashing right and left because the poor pilots were falling asleep at the controls. Attacking airfields and radar stations are both very difficult to keep shut down. British airfields had grass runways which were even easier to repair than just about any other kind of runway and scoring hits on the radar stations proved to be very difficult without smart missiles. When the Germans did attack the British radar stations, they scored little damage and the stations were back online very quickly.

The Germans also didn't really understand the British radar infrastructure nor did they fully grasp the significant advantage it gave them. They did some early battle attacks on the radar stations and then left them alone the rest of the battle. The brass in charge of targeting figured dropping a few bombs on the stations early on would knock them out for the entire battle.

Ultimately the German bomber force was trying to achieve a task that was beyond their capabilities. They didn't have enough planes, the planes didn't have enough payload, their fighter coverage was too short legged, and there were more targets that needed to be knocked out for success in the battle. As the Allies learned in the next few years, factories were a lot tougher to knock out by air than anybody thought before the war. The US and RAF bombing effort definitely put a dent in German production, but ultimately they were able to keep on building equipment despite the raids. In many cases factories were back in production in a week after a major raid.

Bill


Bill, German medium bombers (He-111 and Ju-88A) had sufficient range to bomb almost all UK without any issues (they bombed Northern Ireland for example) so the Manchester was no problem at all (and it was heavily bomber during "Blitz")!

The "Kampfgruppe 100" was operational and very very capable.

All german bombers were trained for night bombing and had adequate equipemnet.

The concentrated night attacks against few selected aircraft / airframe factories would, therefore, be no problem at all!!!


Also the daily raids would be done by fighters (which would, of course, not be involved in night operations) and remaining bombers (i.e. not used for bombing raids so no overusing existing force at all). The attacks should be done the way Allies attacked German airfields in 1944 (i.e. patrolling over the bases and waiting for the opportunity to strike when enemy is landing / taking off - the attacks on grassy meadows serving as landing strips was 100% inefficient and useless.


This is, IMHO, quite feasible and achievable possible usage of German air strength (Germans had the strength - they lacked strategic vision and proper tactical usage of force)!



Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 109
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 1:07:18 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

There are a few problems with this plan. Ford was building a large number of Merlins in a suburb of Manchester, which was out of range of many German bombers.

Additionally, the Germans didn't have the aircraft to do all the things you say here. If their bomber force was used for night bombing and then again for daytime attacks against radar and airfields, the planes would be crashing right and left because the poor pilots were falling asleep at the controls. Attacking airfields and radar stations are both very difficult to keep shut down. British airfields had grass runways which were even easier to repair than just about any other kind of runway and scoring hits on the radar stations proved to be very difficult without smart missiles. When the Germans did attack the British radar stations, they scored little damage and the stations were back online very quickly.

The Germans also didn't really understand the British radar infrastructure nor did they fully grasp the significant advantage it gave them. They did some early battle attacks on the radar stations and then left them alone the rest of the battle. The brass in charge of targeting figured dropping a few bombs on the stations early on would knock them out for the entire battle.

Ultimately the German bomber force was trying to achieve a task that was beyond their capabilities. They didn't have enough planes, the planes didn't have enough payload, their fighter coverage was too short legged, and there were more targets that needed to be knocked out for success in the battle. As the Allies learned in the next few years, factories were a lot tougher to knock out by air than anybody thought before the war. The US and RAF bombing effort definitely put a dent in German production, but ultimately they were able to keep on building equipment despite the raids. In many cases factories were back in production in a week after a major raid.

Bill


Bill, German medium bombers (He-111 and Ju-88A) had sufficient range to bomb almost all UK without any issues (they bombed Northern Ireland for example) so the Manchester was no problem at all (and it was heavily bomber during "Blitz")!

The "Kampfgruppe 100" was operational and very very capable.

All german bombers were trained for night bombing and had adequate equipemnet.

The concentrated night attacks against few selected aircraft / airframe factories would, therefore, be no problem at all!!!


Also the daily raids would be done by fighters (which would, of course, not be involved in night operations) and remaining bombers (i.e. not used for bombing raids so no overusing existing force at all). The attacks should be done the way Allies attacked German airfields in 1944 (i.e. patrolling over the bases and waiting for the opportunity to strike when enemy is landing / taking off - the attacks on grassy meadows serving as landing strips was 100% inefficient and useless.


This is, IMHO, quite feasible and achievable possible usage of German air strength (Germans had the strength - they lacked strategic vision and proper tactical usage of force)!



Leo "Apollo11"
warspite1

Leo I think the concept is sound but how successful any attack would be is the big doubt here.

The Germans did get wise to attacking the British aircraft industry in September – after wasting two months through a lack of strategic vision and tactical nous as you identify.

The problems were:

1. As the Allies found, the ability to stop production (or at least slow down production) temporarily was possible – it was keeping it that way that was the issue and Lord Beaverbrook simply ordered dispersal of production to satellite factories. The Germans would need to not only find those factories but keep hitting them.

2. As I mentioned in a previous post another major advantage the British held over the Germans was in the repairing of damaged aircraft and their engines. Quite simply the Germans never got to grips with this aspect. The Civilian Repair Organisation was headed by Beaverbrook (who replaced the ineffectual Lord Nuffield). A unit – No.50 Maintenance Unit - was responsible for getting damaged aircraft to the appropriate places (based on 6 categories of damage) and from there the workshops went to work. As an example, in the last two weeks of June 1940 no less than 250 aircraft were repaired and returned either to front-line squadrons or to training units*. In relation to the number of aircraft being built and involved in the battle this is a significant number. What it also meant though was that when production was temporarily suspended or slowed down – as when the Germans finally started hitting the factories - there were always plenty of “spares” at the Maintenance Units to ensure that the loss was minimised.

*Wikipedia states almost 5,000 aircraft (no doubt not all fighters) were repaired and put back into service by the end of December 1940. Based on the 250 number for two weeks in June alone, that does not sound out of line and is a very significant number of aircraft.

Plus of course, there is always the possibility that the British do things differently too! How about Dowding was listened to and an effective method of night-fighting was developed two months earlier


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 1/8/2015 2:52:57 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 110
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 2:25:55 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

BTW, Robert, my favourite book about WWII "Battle of Briatin" is:

Fighter: The True Story of the Battle of Britain
by Len Deighton



http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-True-Story-Battle-Britain/dp/0785812083


Leo "Apollo11"



_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 111
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 2:43:12 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline
I never got to that book, though it's sitting on my shelf.

Blood, Tears and Folly has been a long time favorite of mine, with several re-readings.

_____________________________


(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 112
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 3:09:02 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

BTW, Robert, my favourite book about WWII "Battle of Briatin" is:

Fighter: The True Story of the Battle of Britain
by Len Deighton



http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-True-Story-Battle-Britain/dp/0785812083


Leo "Apollo11"


warspite1

I read this many, many years ago - I should re-read this but there are sooo many great books out there I am loathe to re-read when there are a lot waiting for reading first time around...

It's strange as I am a "Navy man" but I have found the few books I have read about the air war to be incredibly interesting and great reads, namely:

The Battle of Britain - James Holland
The Most Dangerous Enemy - Stephen Bungay
The Air War 1939-1945 - Richard Overy
The Hardest Day - Alfred Price
Fighter - Len Deighton

I would recommend any of these

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 1/8/2015 4:09:52 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 113
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 8:38:21 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]
warspite1

Ben who? You mean Rafe.


No, no. It is obviously that he referred to Ben-Hur. He was, after all, a important member of a fleet that could do it better than the German fleet could.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Orm -- 1/8/2015 9:39:12 PM >


_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 114
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 8:53:43 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]
warspite1

Ben who? You mean Rafe.


No, no. It is obviously that he referred to Ben-Hur. He was, after all, a important member of a fleet that could do it better than the German fleet could.



Warspite1



I'll tell you what mate - those barges look a damn sight more sea worthy than the ones the Germans were proposing to use - faster too


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 1/8/2015 9:56:10 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 115
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 9:27:13 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

I bet Ben could have done it

[Ducks for cover]
warspite1

Ben who? You mean Rafe.


No, no. It is obviously that he referred to Ben-Hur. He was, after all, a important member of a fleet that could do it better than the German fleet could.



Warspite1



I'll tell you what mate - those barges look a damn sight more sea worthy than the ones the Germans were proposing to use - faster too


Yep. Better than those barges so I am rather pleased with it.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 116
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 9:30:45 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

BTW, Robert, my favourite book about WWII "Battle of Briatin" is:

Fighter: The True Story of the Battle of Britain
by Len Deighton



http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-True-Story-Battle-Britain/dp/0785812083


Leo "Apollo11"


warspite1

I read this many, many years ago - I should re-read this but there are sooo many great books out there I am loathe to re-read when there are a lot waiting for reading first time around...

It's strange as I am a "Navy man" but I have found the few books I have read about the air war to be incredibly interesting and great reads, namely:

The Battle of Britain - James Holland
The Most Dangerous Enemy - Stephen Bungay
The Air War 1939-1945 - Richard Overy
The Hardest Day - Alfred Price
Fighter - Len Deighton

I would recommend any of these

Thank you for the suggestions.

I added a couple of them to my "to buy" list.



_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 117
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/8/2015 9:36:45 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

BTW, Robert, my favourite book about WWII "Battle of Briatin" is:

Fighter: The True Story of the Battle of Britain
by Len Deighton


http://www.amazon.com/Fighter-True-Story-Battle-Britain/dp/0785812083


Leo "Apollo11"

warspite1

I read this many, many years ago - I should re-read this but there are sooo many great books out there I am loathe to re-read when there are a lot waiting for reading first time around...

It's strange as I am a "Navy man" but I have found the few books I have read about the air war to be incredibly interesting and great reads, namely:

The Battle of Britain - James Holland
The Most Dangerous Enemy - Stephen Bungay
The Air War 1939-1945 - Richard Overy
The Hardest Day - Alfred Price
Fighter - Len Deighton

I would recommend any of these


Thank you for the suggestions.

I added a couple of them to my "to buy" list.


Warspite1

You're welcome - I'd put The Most Dangerous Enemy at the top of that list personally.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 118
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/9/2015 12:32:42 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

Bill, German medium bombers (He-111 and Ju-88A) had sufficient range to bomb almost all UK without any issues (they bombed Northern Ireland for example) so the Manchester was no problem at all (and it was heavily bomber during "Blitz")!

The "Kampfgruppe 100" was operational and very very capable.

All german bombers were trained for night bombing and had adequate equipemnet.

The concentrated night attacks against few selected aircraft / airframe factories would, therefore, be no problem at all!!!


Also the daily raids would be done by fighters (which would, of course, not be involved in night operations) and remaining bombers (i.e. not used for bombing raids so no overusing existing force at all). The attacks should be done the way Allies attacked German airfields in 1944 (i.e. patrolling over the bases and waiting for the opportunity to strike when enemy is landing / taking off - the attacks on grassy meadows serving as landing strips was 100% inefficient and useless.


This is, IMHO, quite feasible and achievable possible usage of German air strength (Germans had the strength - they lacked strategic vision and proper tactical usage of force)!



Leo "Apollo11"


RAF Bomber Command found that night bombing was terribly inaccurate. They gave up trying to hit individual buildings at night fairly early in the bombing campaign and switched to area bombing entire cities. By 1944, Bomber Command was the best at night bombing of any air force in history to that date, and they still couldn't hit individual buildings at night. That technology wasn't really perfected until the 1980s.

I just don't see how the Germans could have had any hope of hitting a factory building in Manchester at night in 1940 when night bombing was still in its infancy when RAF Bomber Command would be hard pressed to do it 4 years later with vast advancements in technology.

German fighters didn't have the loiter time to patrol over British airfields and wait for opportunities. Even Mustangs rarely loiter over German airfields waiting for planes to take off and land. If fighters were loitering over airfields, planes landing would usually be diverted to other fields, planes on the ground wouldn't take off, and fighters from somewhere else would be vectored in to deal with the loitering fighters.

The only place where I've read Allied fighters did loiter were over the Me-262 fields. The Me-262 couldn't be diverted to many other fields and the goal was to keep them on the ground even if it did tie down a lot of Allied fighters to achieve that.

American fighters were cut loose to sweep targets of opportunity returning from escort missions and many times they would sweep over a German airfield while planes were taking off or landing and scored some easy kills.

The German bomber force at the Battle of Britain was much smaller than what the Allies had even by mid-1943, bomber payloads were on average smaller than later war Allied bombers, their fighters had shorter range than the P-47, night bombing was in its infancy and all the predictions of accuracy from all the experts was way over what was achievable by the end of the war, and their bomber force had to serve as both tactical and strategic bombers.

I don't see where what you propose was even remotely possible for the Germans in 1940. I may be missing something, but the US Strategic Bombing Survey, done just after the war, lays out pretty clearly what was and wasn't achievable by Allied bombers with 1945 capability. Even daylight bombers were found sorely lacking in accuracy. Night bombers were lucky to just be able to hit the right city.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 119
RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk ... - 1/9/2015 7:14:59 AM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

RAF Bomber Command found that night bombing was terribly inaccurate. They gave up trying to hit individual buildings at night fairly early in the bombing campaign and switched to area bombing entire cities. By 1944, Bomber Command was the best at night bombing of any air force in history to that date, and they still couldn't hit individual buildings at night. That technology wasn't really perfected until the 1980s.

I just don't see how the Germans could have had any hope of hitting a factory building in Manchester at night in 1940 when night bombing was still in its infancy when RAF Bomber Command would be hard pressed to do it 4 years later with vast advancements in technology.

German fighters didn't have the loiter time to patrol over British airfields and wait for opportunities. Even Mustangs rarely loiter over German airfields waiting for planes to take off and land. If fighters were loitering over airfields, planes landing would usually be diverted to other fields, planes on the ground wouldn't take off, and fighters from somewhere else would be vectored in to deal with the loitering fighters.

The only place where I've read Allied fighters did loiter were over the Me-262 fields. The Me-262 couldn't be diverted to many other fields and the goal was to keep them on the ground even if it did tie down a lot of Allied fighters to achieve that.

American fighters were cut loose to sweep targets of opportunity returning from escort missions and many times they would sweep over a German airfield while planes were taking off or landing and scored some easy kills.

The German bomber force at the Battle of Britain was much smaller than what the Allies had even by mid-1943, bomber payloads were on average smaller than later war Allied bombers, their fighters had shorter range than the P-47, night bombing was in its infancy and all the predictions of accuracy from all the experts was way over what was achievable by the end of the war, and their bomber force had to serve as both tactical and strategic bombers.

I don't see where what you propose was even remotely possible for the Germans in 1940. I may be missing something, but the US Strategic Bombing Survey, done just after the war, lays out pretty clearly what was and wasn't achievable by Allied bombers with 1945 capability. Even daylight bombers were found sorely lacking in accuracy. Night bombers were lucky to just be able to hit the right city.


All you are saying is 100% correct But - but (there is always but ) it is about RAF and not Luftwaffe...


Here is interesting infor abour RAF bombing capability:


Len Deighton
Blood, tears and Folly

ISBN: 0785811141

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0785811141/104-5747265-1301546


#1
In 1941 (June and July) there was big inquiry about RAF Bomber Command capabilities at night.

During that time all 100 different RAF Bomber Command night raids were examined (using mission debriefs and 633 post attack reconnaissance photos) by D.M. Butt of cabinet secretariat.

He reported that:

"Of the two-thirds of crews who claimed to have hit the targets only one-third had come within 5 miles of the aiming point. Against the Ruhr targets this proportion fell to one-tenth. Moonlight was indispensable to the crews of Bomber Command - two crews in five came within 5 miles of their targets on full moon night while this ratio fell to one in fifteen on moonless one."


#2
Also on 9 July 1941 the deputy chief of Air Staff reported about inability of RAF crews to find their targets unless there is full moon:

"For approximately three quarters of each month it is only possible to obtain satisfactory results by heavy, concentrated and continuous attacks on large working-class and industrial areas in carefully selected towns."


This is all because the RAF, at the time, still depended on star navigation (and moon light)!


The Luftwaffe had (yep even in 1940) some excellent electronic devices which RAF didn't have for years (but when they finally got it later in the war - for example the "Oboe" and H2S radar - it was, of course, far superior to German 1940 technology):

a) All German bombers had this and all crews were trained to use it
"Knickebein"

b) KG100 had this one:
"X-Gerät"



Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: ot - Kenneth Macksey bok about nazi invazion to uk in 1940 Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.688