Wars and ConflictsΜύ permalink
did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Μύ
Posted by historymadd (U2780729) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
was part of southern england partly invaded in 1940 sawman artical about it somewhere
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 2
Posted by Pugwash Trouserpress (U1865008) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
you wouldn't be referring to the Channel Islands would you?
PeebsLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 3
Posted by historymadd (U2780729) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
no specfically just wondered if the had got in to main land
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 4
Posted by SONICBOOMER (U3688838) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
The indefensible Channel Islands were occupied in 1940, until the general German surrender in 1945.
They were not a useful or strategic target, great for PR though.
That was the extent of German occupation, even the large, feared Abwehr, the MI6 of the Nazi state, had an almost laughable record in recruiting agents/spies, getting near to being able to carry out any sabotage in the UK.
They failed dismally, the head of M15 during WW2, in perhaps a lesson to some in Washington today, acheived all this without recourse to torture, saying he would 'rather have cut his own fingers off' than stoop to that. In any case, it did not work at getting to the truth.
Whilst a German invasion in 1940 was much feared, was considered by Hitler, even the then seemingly unstoppable German war machine lacked any kind of suitable equipment to cross the Channel, would have to rely on a fleet of river barges.
Slow, needing modifications, likely to flood and sink in an even mildly choppy sea.
They did gather up a large fleet of Rhine river barges, but that was about the extent of it.
While the British Army had suffered a huge reverse in France, had left behind much heavy equipment, while there were chronic shortages in replacing equipment, the formation of the 'Dad's Army' Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Guard was a sign of near desperation, the invading German forces, even if most made it to English beaches, would have supply problems, a shortage of heavy weapons, would face a line of fortifications now rather forgotten and underrated.
Most German sarmy suppilies were still horse drawn then.
If the Luftwaffe HAD got, a degree of control over the air of Southern England, in this event, the RAF would withdraw north, regroup, before throwing everything into rejoining the battle after an invasion.
In real life of course, the Luftwaffe failed over SE England, any invasion plans (much opposed by the army and Luftwaffe), were dropped.
But there was another, bigger, threat to any German invasion.
The Royal Navy, in 1940, still the largest in the world.
Out of German bomber range, at the first sign of invasion, they would massively reinforce the lighter units in the Channel.
This would have been their most vital mission since the Spanish Armada, even in a sky dominated by the Luftwaffe, they would have pressed on, and on.
Like they had in the Dunkirk evacuation (where relatively speaking, the Luftwaffe performed quite poorly at hitting ships-they did, but nowhere near enough for them), like they would evacuating British and Commonwealth forces from Crete in 1941.
Though the Norway campaign of April 1940 had been a failure for the Allies, the RN, Fleet Air Arm and Norweigan coastal guns, had sunk and damaged a large number of the very German Destroyers and Cruisers vital for screening any Channel invasion fleet.
It would only have taken just a few RN Destroyers to get through the German mines, E-Boats, air attacks, what was left of escorts, to wreak utter havoc amongst the barges carrying the invasion force, even steaming near them would cause them to flood and sink.
And the RN force would have been a huge one, some would get through, hence the lack of enthusiasm amongst the German High Command for any invasion.
After victory in the West, with the UK seemingly boxed in, Hitler's attention was, inevitably, turning towards his true goal, Russia.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 5
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
germanshepard46,
Do you mean this?
I'll leave you to make up your own mind. Just to say I'm very sceptical about it.
Cheers AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 6
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
good post - is it true ??
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 7
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
ST,
I take it you are responding to the link I posted.
Is it true? Well, all I ask is you make up your own mind. I think it is total garbage. I could be wrong, it won't be for the first time, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Not a problem.
I posted the link so that germansheppard didn't think he (or she) imagined this story.
I ask you to examine the link, think, and then seriously question other possibilities.
You may come up with the answer that it is true. Not a problem to me. I vehemently disagree. There is room for both opinions until the facts come out in 2021.
Regards, AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 8
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
Message 4 - posted by SONICBOOMER,Μύ
I think the German U boats would have something to upset your cosy scenario with. Not to mention The German para's that would secure the required airports to land troops at will, as in Crete. What were you going to fight them with? They had just tromped the British army who left most of their kit on the beach at Dunkirk. Had the Luftwaffe continued to concentrate on the RAF air fields instead of switching to London, it was all over.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 9
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Sunday, 4th June 2006
Message 5 - posted by Arnald AlmaricΜύ
I figure i'ts nonsense. It would have been a massive moral booster coming after Dunkirk. Why keep it secret. It makes no sense.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 10
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Monday, 5th June 2006
I have read in one book that there were some German commando raids onto the east coast of the uk but have never found anything in a reliable source that would back this up. The raids were alledgedly hushed up because if America saw the uk was capable of beating them off then they might not have entered the war.
I do know that the garrison of the channel islands launched a raid onto allied occupied france in late 44 early 45.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 11
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Reply to Buckskinz
Hiya Matt
Would the U-Boats have been effective in the Channel though? They would be hemmed in by the southern and northern coasts of England and France respectively, there would have been an awfull lot of anti-submarine warfare going on and I would hazzard to say that the British subs might well be deployed within the channel. Not saying that they wouldn't strike up more than a few success' but the attrittion rate would I think be horrendus.
The German paratrooper force was decimated after Crete and never used effectively by Hitler again, what use would they be in England if the German navy could not guarantee clear seas for the troop and supply transports to follow them up. Its all well and good securing a few airport but the Luftwaffe would still not be enough to resupply a force in southern england. We might have been lacking the more up to date eqiptment left behind, but there were more than enough men and more antiquated eqiptment (ignoring the HG) to handle a paratrooper invasion if there were no serious threat to the southern coast. And as has been mentioned on the Dunkirk thread quite a while back now the British were not exactly "tromped" poor generalship and political direction yes, but there were success' in France as well as defeats (albeit not enough).
I do agree that if the Luftwaffe had concentrated on the RAF then the invasion would likely been given the green light, but without knocking out the RN then the chances of German success diminishes rapidly. Unlike Crete, in Britain we had space to play with and an internal supply line that was starting to pay dividends with regards to equiptment.
An invasion would have been serious, but not i think an imeadiate knock out blowLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 12
Posted by twilitezone (U4342388) on Monday, 5th June 2006
No,Germans did NOT land in Britain, at any place. They did manage to take over one small Channel Island before the end of the war. I can't imagine any article implying such a stupid thing. I was in the ATS during the war and am very familiar with its history.
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 13
Posted by Dirk Marinus (U1648073) on Monday, 5th June 2006
There was and still are stories that in the 1940's bodies were found at sea of the Southern England coast and on beaches in Southern England which had visible signs of having been burned.
The bodies were in military uniforms. It has even been said that many of the bodies were dressed in British army uniform.
Were they Germans dressed in British army uniforms or were they British soldiers who had been involved in some exercise what went wrong.
We have all seen documentary proof that at certain parts the beach and a small distance into sea could be set alight.
What is the true story?Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 14
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Hi Richie,
I figure the U boats would have had a Turkey shoot. Remember Crete had yet to happen. His airborne troopers will still intact. If the UK lost a handful of Airports it would have been a catastrophe. Had they continue hammering away at the RAF and had air superiority, it would be no contest. An unpleasant thought but for sure reality. You make some excellent points.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 15
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Interesting point Buckskinz, I have some doubts, the 1940 (Type VIIB) U Boat wasn't a fine piece of engineering. It would have been up against warships, not merchant vessels.
See your point about the airborne troops, however they wouldn't have any heavy weaponry with them, Britian still had a bit of artillery around.
I take your point that it would have been very nasty for the RN to intervene in a crossing, however I have no doubt they would have, taking heavy losses admittedly but inflicting at the same time enough harm to totally wreck the logisitcs of any invasion. As you know a tank without fuel becomes a pillbox.
Without a supplied airfield in Britain the ME109 didn't have enough range to be able to support an advance from southern England. Even at the height of the BoB there was an air group in Scotland for example not engaged but protecting against a threat from the German Norweigian bases, the bottom of the barrel in terms of resource, but if that's where you have to go, that's where you go.
I'll end up with this for your consideration, look at Overlord and the amount of planning and resource that went into that, even so the western allies weren't confident of success, yet you seem to think the Germans could have thrown something together ad hoc in a couple of months in 1940 that would be "catastrophic" for Britain.
Cheers AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 16
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Hiya Matt and AA
Sorry my point about the para's was slightly confusing. What I ment to mean (lol does that even read right?) was that in the invasion of Crete the para force was decimated. Yes they took the island, but at a large cost. Crete was a long long way from any sort of re-supply, and had only a limited defending force.
For the para's to try the same thing over the Uk would require the type of concentrated unifrom approach that the Germans only managed sporadically.
I see your point about a turkey shoot, but that would work both ways. U-Boats still need to surface. Warships are not merchant men, Sutherland AS planes would have shorter distances to work with, other AS platforms would have a far smaller area to work within, and the German Navy was not eqipted to aid her U-Force in the same way that the RN was able to do with her sub's.
With regard to the airfields. Which area of the UK do you want the Germans to take? If we are talking the south east then that leaves a lot of the south coast airfields still in British hands. The Germans would have to airlift in supplies to these bases once whatever had been left by the RAF had been used up. Fighter Command (and Bomber)as AA says had bases further north. The Condors range from Norway while impressive could be dealt with by smaller numbers in order for sufficent strength to be thrown at removing the air re-supply (was re-supply by air of plane fuel possible then?) Remove the Luftwaffe fuel and their air-support disapears. Para's by their nature are not a large force. Seperate them from re-supply and leave them in hard to defend spaces like airfields with the RAF able to retake air superiority (also most of the manufacturing base was in the north) then you have a failed invasion,
Sea-Lion could not work without a successful naval invasion. An aerial one might well have been an annoyance but without naval backup ultimatly foolish on the Germans part.
Now if you want to talk about the bombing of the shipping in the channel in conjunction with bombing the RAF bases and then a negoititated peace forcing Britain out of the war then I think you are onto a winner. However even then with the readoption of the convoy system then losses to shipping would (as they did) reduce and then you have a Britain able to continue to fight. Move enough bases from the south coast to force the Luftwaffe to move further inland to tackle the RAF and you still end up with egg on Goering's faceLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 17
Posted by Dirk Marinus (U1648073) on Monday, 5th June 2006
AA,
Just to mention to you that the link you gave in your reply is mentioned on the Feldgrau forum , requesting information on that side regarding an German attempt to land troops in Britain.
Thought I let you know as there might be some information coming from that site.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 18
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Hi Arnald,
Well the merchant fleet usually had a destroyer escort. The para's having secured a few airstrips could have landed enough supplies as they did later at Crete. Sealion was not at all ad hock per say. Also there is no way that the defense that the UK could muster was anything like what the Germans had on the French coast in 44. To cross the Chanell would take a couple of hours and could also be done during the hours of darkness. Many of the barges had been modified to deploy their contents from the front. Getting back to the RN for a bit. I believe in the channel they would have also been decimated by the Luftwaffe.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 19
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Buckskinz,
Indeed the merchant fleet did have an escort, whose responsibility was to protect the mercant ships. It's a bit different when you don't have a merchant convoy to worry about. If I was the Captain of an RN ship opposing an Invasion force I'd be going at Flank Speed, knowing that even if my guns didn't hit one of those invasion barges I could make a very nasty dent in it by the simple tactic of ramming.
I may lose a bit of paintwork and have to swap insurance details later but I think I'm going to win that particular arguement with several invasion barges. Speed would also be very useful in avoiding a torpedo attack from a U Boat. Add in that the early torpedoes made by the Germans had a nasty habit of not arming, hence all you got was a dull thud.
You make a point regarding the Luftwaffe, however I'd counter with the RAF, Fleet Air Arm, Luftwaffe, Regia Aeronautica and US Navy experience in the early days of WW2, that many supposed hits on ships actually missed. Those that hit did not cripple the ship.
(You'll notice I have left out from the list the Japanese, they trained to hit ships. You may also consider that generally most early successes were from torpedo planes, I'll wait for your example of the Luftwaffes torpedo plane).
I don't pretend that the RN would have saved the day unscathed, far from it, I think they would have been far more than decimated. (I use decimate here in its literal form as 10% casualties). I think however they would have all but wiped out the German available shipping, thus making reinforcement and supply impossible.
Regarding the paratroops, well Crete aside, may i just mention the failure of the Luftwaffe to supply the 6th Army in Stalingrad, also the failure of the RAF and USAAF to supply the forces at Arnhem? It's not easy to do.
Possibly they could have got ashore but to supply and equip the force needed. No.
My opinion only, AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 20
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Arnald,
Just a few comments. Stalingrad is about what? say 1000 miles from Berlin. The German torpedo plane is a Stuka dive bomber. With secure airports resupply would not be too much of a problem, or indeed any harbor whatsoever. Everything did not have to come from France. A destroyer at flank speed is an awesome weapon against a barge. If he can get near it, I’m not sure if destroyers were radar equipped at that early stage. Probably were? Finally all this during non daylight hours. I think it all would come down to the RAF. There or not there.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 21
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Monday, 5th June 2006
Buckskinz,
No problem, Stalingrad is a bit further than 1,000 miles form Berlin, I see your point, yet errm, don't think it invalidates mine.
The Stuka did attack shipping in the Channel and was very unsuccessful.
The Luftwaffe did not have an aircraft that was capable of shipping the amount of supplies the Wehrmacht would have needed, secured airfields or no. The load carrying capacity together with the numbers available was just not sufficient. Supplies would have had to come by sea.
Destroyers were not radar equipped at this stage, neither were U Boats. Okay, the initial landing is made during darkness, the RN cannot intervene as ships can't move at night.
The shipping the Germans had to make and then resupply any potential landing meant that later crossings would have to be made in daylight, so then the RN can intervene (and take heavy losses, I don't dispute) whilst still inflicting a crippling blow against the invasion force. It's not about getting troops ashore, it's about keeping them there. (E.g. Anzio).
We're no nearer to any common ground here are we.
Cheers AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 22
Posted by Mr Pedant (U2464726) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
The invaders would have to face the threat of allied subs as well.
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 23
Posted by DaveMBA (U1360771) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
There is a prog on Sky 3 about this tonight. Given the kind of thin sensationalist nonsense pushed out by Murdoch, I am sure this will look but not be "convincing".
Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 24
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
Hi AA
Firstly, ships work quite well at night. In all my time in the RN I never knew one have to park for the night
Firstly, and this seems to have slipped everyones attention in all the times cross channel invasions have been brought up. Is that the Germans, even with total air superiority are going to have to set off from the french coast early to mid morning of the day before the landings in Britan. The bulk of the barges were unmotorised, they were to be towed at a rate of two barges to one tug. This gives you a combined towing speed of about walking pace. Which means they cant sail straight acros the channel becuase the tidal currentsare moving faster than the barges, carrying them up towards holland or out to the atlantic. So they would have had to make use of the tides by basically riding up the channel till of belgium and holland then as the tides turned cutting across and coming back down to the landing beaches because of the lack of tugs the landing was to take place at low tide so thatt he barges could be recovered for the second wave. Which means an over night voyage to be able to land first thing in the am.
During that overnight voyage they are going to need escort vessels mtbs, mine sweepers, to shepherd the barges and a destroyer screen to prevent any interferance. The Germans have a grand total of 4 destoyers to do this versus over 80 destoyers in the RN trying to stop them. The germans could have used a submarine screen to sheild the flanks but, and here I have to guess as idont know the exact numbers I think there were only about 30 uboats available in total. in addition the Germans were having trouble with there torpedoes which ment that anything up to two thirds didnt detonate. In additon the top speed of a german uboat at that time was about 12 knots? may be wrong there. the average speed of a destroyer is 24 knots. only a few subs are going to be able to engage, head on shots with dodgy torpedos, some will hit but more will get past. and once their past all the uboats can do is wave bye bye.
As the action is taking place at night the germans only response with aircraft which are pretty much handicapped to level bombing, at least im not going to try dive bombing a speeding destroyer in a pitch dark night . Level bombing of a moving ship is a complete waste of time.
During the period of the battle of britain the RN shelled the channel ports and returned safely to port with all the regularity of a number 7 bus. to the point that on several occasions destryers and mtb's actually entered the harbours at calais and bourlonge, appologies for the spelling. to shoot up the barges.
Once the destroyers get in amoung the barges then the its going to be close and dirty work. the freehold on the rhine barges the germans were using is three feet loaded. the wash from a destroyer at high speed is nearly twelve feet and sometimes higher. you poke a few holes with the 4.7s add a few more with the AAA, and then leave them to drown. if your feeling especially playfull you drop a shallow set depth charge along side as you go past. once the tugs are sunk and the convoy scattered you mop up wahts left in the time you have left then return to port. at that point any surviving barges are going to be dragged down channel and onto the goodwin sands.
The only German infantry that will land from them will be POW's or drowned corpses.
The para's, well so long as they are held in place then they might be able to be supplied from the air but without heavy artillery and tanks and any kind of transport you just leave them their to rot and round up every anti aircraft gun you have to kill the transports attempting to fly in.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 25
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
The German para's managed all this quite well in Crete, and I may add they were fighting some of the best the British had to offer. It is not at all unusual to go into a village in Crete on certain days and see the flag of New Zealand or Australia flying with respect and thanks.
After Dunkirk Britain was in a major hurt. Hundreds of miles of coast were being guarded by some old guys with pretend rifles. Britain had yet to beat the Germans in anything, including at sea. The UK was near in a total blockade. The Germans were on a roll, and lets face it, darn near unstoppable. Had they invaded I and many in this forum would have never been born, but lets quit kidding ourselves. If Hitler wanted it, it was a fruit ready to pluck. Ang that gents is my last post for a while on this topic unless someone comes up with something fresh.
Cheers, Matt.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 26
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
As of July 1940 the Kriegsmarine would have had the following forces available:
2 Battlecruisers (Scharnhorst & Gneisenau)
2 Old WW1 battleships (Schliesen & Schleswig-Holstein)
1 Pocket battleship (Admiral Scheer)
1 Heavy Cruiser (Hipper)
3 Cruisers (Koln, Emden & Nurnberg)
10 destroyers & torpedo boats
34 Escorts
30 U-boats
20 E-boats
As an aside the British would only have had about 50 destroyers immediately available as 30+ were on Convoy escort duties, though that is still a sizeable force.
Two things everybody seems to have overlooked are that the Germans coastal batteries and rail guns would have supported any invasion and the Germans would also have laid extensive minefields either side of the route that the invasion fleet would have taken.
Kenneth Macksey wrote a very good book called "Invasion - The German invasion of England July 1940" in it he sets out just how it would be possible for the Germans to actually carry out Operation Sealion.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 27
Posted by clankylad (U1778100) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
The Royal Navy is the elephant in the corner in any discussion of 'Sealion'. It always seems to be ignored, but it was the navy, not the RAF that could (and would) have wrecked any German attempt to invade Britain in 1940 and it was the navy, not the RAF or any other factor that stopped the Germans from attempting it.
Buckskinz - you don't seem to have any idea of the factors that would threaten a cross-channel attack, but since you are so certain that the Germans could have successfully invaded Britain in 1940, answer me this - why didn't they?Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 28
Posted by Buckskinz (U3036516) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
You are replying to:
Message posted by clankylad
Buckskinz - you don't seem to have any idea of the factors that would threaten a cross-channel attack, but since you are so certain that the Germans could have successfully invaded Britain in 1940, answer me this - why didn't they?Μύ
That’s a fair question and deserves an answer. Unfortunately I don't have an answer for you that I can field with 100% honesty. I have heard in this forum that it was "Because Hitler liked us" My thoughts are that Hitler wanted to save his assets for the invasion of the Soviet Union. Had he anticipated the US entry into the war, he would have invaded imo. I figure he thought that he had the UK contained. That in fact the waters that defended your islands were in fact also your prison walls. I think the deal breaker was The Battle of Britain. The RAF and Luftwaffe hammered each other. Then he stupidly switched from attacking British airfields and radar sites to bombing London.
Cheers, MattLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 29
Posted by Scarboro (U2806863) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
That’s a fair question and deserves an answer. Unfortunately I don't have an answer for you that I can field with 100% honesty. I have heard in this forum that it was "Because Hitler liked us" My thoughts are that Hitler wanted to save his assets for the invasion of the Soviet Union.
Μύ
I agree that Hitler probably thought he had Britain contained, and that the USA would not be a factor.
I also suspect that the British had a hand in assisting Hitler come to this conclusion. The British "double cross" system was particularly effective in spreading disinformation. Hess thought he was meeting a high-level British cabal that was going to seize power, turf out Churchill, restore Edward to the throne, etc. Where did he get this interesting idea I wonder?
My suspicion is that the Brits "played" Hitler. Why waste troops when you don't have to?
Regards
BrianLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 30
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
Matt, Im not saying the Paras cant land. Im saying that the seaborne forces cant.
Given air superiority over the channel the airborne landing is probably the only bit that can proceed to plan.
But all that is going to result in is a "bridge to far" scenario, only without the bridgeLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 31
Posted by SONICBOOMER (U3688838) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
'Cosy' it was not in 1940.
However, though mines would have taken a toll, air attack too, fact is the RN had the resources and above all, motivation, to press home any attack in the Channel, which was not such a good place for U-Boats either.
U-Boats in 1940 were a threat, a worsening one at that, but the war had started way too early for Hitlers Admirals, not so much about the lack of a fleet of capital ships, but the 300 boat U-Boat force was, as we have seen, a tenth of the ideal size for war, including cutting off suppilies, against the UK.
If the Lufwaffe could not stop the Dunkirk evacuation-which they tried very hard to do, It is hard to see them doing the same against an RN fleet, steaming at speed.
In the even of Fighter Command coming under too much pressure, there were plans to withdraw North then throw everything (and I mean everything the RAF had), at an invasion.
It would take a short time to redeploy too, they were not idiots, they did plan for this sort of contingency.
Whilst it's amusing to hear tales of how non equipped the Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Guard were at the start, the same was not true about the regular army-in small arms that is, much else was short.
But the small arms to take on any force of German Airborne troops, who themselves would not have had anything heavier, were available.
The reason so much of the German High Command was set against Sealion, to me, says it all about what they thought of it.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 32
Posted by MB (U177470) on Tuesday, 6th June 2006
Don't forget the British had minefields as well and the English Channel is not a good place for U-Boats to operate.
Even if the Luftwaffe had concentrated on the airfields in the South East of England there were still many more in the Midlands. Much of the RAF was not involved in the Battle of Britain and so available for use against any invasion.
They are still finding demolition charges under runways in the South of England, left ovewr from WWII. I presume the fuel stocks at airfields would have been blown up as well which would make it difficult for the Luftwaffe to operate from England soon after an invasion.
I don't know muich about Crete but I suspect the airfields there did not have the fixed defences that were in place at RAF airfields in the South of England.
The German long range guns had some successes against convoys but they have the accuracy to pick out fast moving RN warships amongst many of their own vessels? Part of the British coastline was just in range of the long range gun I think it was only just in range.
MBLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 33
Posted by abrazier (U3915690) on Wednesday, 7th June 2006
The link to the Shingle Street web page is interesting but this has been thoroughly debunked elsewhere not least in a Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Radio 4 documentary which did a pretty comprehensive demolition job on the story. It might well still be available via the "listen again" feature on the web site although I'm afraid I can't remember the series title, might have been document.
As to any German landings in the UK, never happened. There are lots of rumours about invading troops being incinerated on the beaches, etc but none of them stand up to serious investigation.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 34
Posted by Ah-Mostin (U4093555) on Wednesday, 7th June 2006
"Regarding the paratroops, well Crete aside,"
Hi Arnold.
Can I just add something to that. Crete was a close run thing. Had the Creek/British Commonwealth troops been better organised then the invasion of Crete could easily have been Hitler’s first defeat.
If we assume that the German Paratroops dropped into England before the invasion of Crete then German paratroops would have had a fatal flaw. In the Crete landings the Germans dropped in without nothing more than pistols and had to pick up separately dropped weapons packs. This of course led to huge casualties.
Had the German Paras dropped after Crete and this obvious problem been remedied then we would assume the British would have learned lessons too and placed obstructions (mines etc) on aerodrome runways to hamper landings and re-supply. I have read an account of the invasion of Norway that stated that the Germans would have been severely hampered by the parking a few trucks on the runway at Bergen. I don't how true that is but given the ingenuity and effort put into the defence of Britain after the fall of France the German paratroopers would have had a tough time and the air supply routes could not have guaranteed re-supply.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 35
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Wednesday, 7th June 2006
As of July 1940 the Kriegsmarine would have had the following forces available:
2 Battlecruisers (Scharnhorst & Gneisenau)
2 Old WW1 battleships (Schliesen & Schleswig-Holstein)
1 Pocket battleship (Admiral Scheer)
1 Heavy Cruiser (Hipper)
3 Cruisers (Koln, Emden & Nurnberg)
10 destroyers & torpedo boats
34 Escorts
30 U-boats
20 E-boats
said Steelers708.
According to the figures given by Grinnell-Milne, you are wrong there. He reckoned that Salmon & Gluckstein were neither of them serviceable before September, and that Hipper was still under repair from the ramming by Glowworm.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 36
Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 7th June 2006
Well the Kriegsmarine isn't my strong point but according to my sources the Admiral Hipper began her post-repair trials on the 8th May spending the rest of May in the eastern Baltic before returning to Kiel on the 29th May, where she prepared for her next sortie which was 'Operation Juno' which started on the 4th June.
As to the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, your'e right and my original source wrong, both were damaged during 'Operation Juno' in June and were basically out of action for the rest of the year, although I suppose that if the Germans had been totally serious about 'Sealion' then they may have pushed ahead with emergency repairs and still attempted to get some use out of them.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 37
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Wednesday, 7th June 2006
Oooh, timer,
Dirk,
Thanks, I did get the link from feldgrau where I occasionally post under a different screen name, not Kibbo though.
abrazier, yes, although I posted the link I agree with your analysis.
Ah-Mostin, feel free to add whatever you like as long as it agrees with me (only joking).
backtothedarkplace, I hope you appreciate I was being somewhat (well very) sardonic with Buckskinz with my comment "ships can't move at night".
Regards all, AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 38
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Steelers :
Yes, probably could have patched up Salmon & Gluckstein, and hauled Scheer out of her refit (she wasn't available either), but Hipper's "repair" was so lousy - just plates tack-welded over a 30-metre plus gash in the hull forward - that she was assigned to the "deception" operation "Autumn voyage" - a feint attack on the north-east coast.
The thing that really puzzles me about the Shingle Street bit is - I can see why the Germans would have wanted to keep it quiet, but surely the British would be trumpeting a defeated invasion attempt from the rooftops? Even a raid could be portrayed as a "failed invasion" - Dieppe, anyone? It would have helped convince the sceptics (like Churchill, who, according to his private secretary, reckoned that a German invasion wasn't on, but he needed to build up the threat to get things moving) and as a counter to the myth of German invincibility.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 39
Posted by Dirk Marinus (U1648073) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
It is only a thought but could Shingle Street have been a some kind of story invented by Sefton Delmer?
He was after all involved in black propaganda and dirty tricks during WW2.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 40
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Dirk :
Now THERE's a thought! I'm sure he was responsible for some sort of broadcast which purported to give German soldiers a lesson in English grammer featuring the verb "to burn"
"I am burning. The sergeant is burning. The whole regiment is burning" etc.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 41
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Very tempting thought indeed though Dirk, his "I burn" broadcast (as superbly remembered by One man bucket) co-incides quite nicely with such a thought.
Cheers, will go away and think a bit, AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 42
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Found it!
take a look atLink to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 43
Posted by TS-Garp (U3557523) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Another factor to take into consideration is secrecy. With spies in France, the Double-Cross section and the breaking of the Enigma code for the Luftwaffe at this time, the Germans could never have launched an invasion in secrecy.
Crete was only taken because Major General Bernard Freyberg did not utilise the intelligence he had properly.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 44
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
TS-Garp
That's a bit harsh on Freyberg in my opinion. He wasn't given the full intelligence of ULTRA just in case the Germans realised that the Enigma codes had been cracked.
(As an aside in 1940 I don't think that ULTRA was providing much if any information, I thought the first successes were in Spring 1941, Source: Sir Harry Hinsley).
Cheers AA.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
-
Message 45
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Thursday, 8th June 2006
Some codes (notably Luftwaffe ones) were being read - not necessarily concurrently - whilst others weren't at that period. Certainly the return of the Airborne forces to readiness was noted. (they, by the way, were intended to provide flank guard positions AFTER the landings rather than pathfinders - about 3,000 men on each flank). Even if nothing was being read, though, traffic analysis would have revealed a massive spike in activity, alerting the British that "something big" was under way. Even a cross-channel crossing was estimated (by the Germans) to take 11-12 hours, much of it at night. Only illuminated guide ships could have hoped to keep unmaneuverable barge tows in the correct positions for the assault. Bearing in mind the RN destroyer patrols which were operating up to about 3 - 4 miles off the French coast, I suspect keeping an assault attempt secret would have been noticeably difficult. East Coast landings would have entailed at least a day and a night at sea.
If the British succeeded in missing that, they'd have deserved to be invaded.Link to this forum: did the germans land inengland in 1940 ??
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Μύto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.