Could Operation Sealion have succeeded(Planned Invasion of Britain by Germany)

[tonycavanagh]

This is just a look at a what if, for those interested in what ifs and those who are interested in the Second World War.

[2banana]

The answer would be no.

The Germans could have never controlled the seas. They could have achieved local control of some southern English skies for a short time.

They didn't have enough troops. The may have had a chance if they didn't let escape all those English/French troops (340,000) from Dunkirk who were then defending mother England.

And the average English citizen was ARMED at the time. A terrible guerrilla war would have taken place on any occupied English land.

My 2 cents...

[Ed Thomas]

As a fan of alternative history (indeed an essay on it got me into Cambridge), I've got to say that Sealion is one of those annoyingly persistant What-ifs that never quite die despite having gigantic amounts of stuff written on them. Put simply, it wasn't going to happen, and if the Germans had been stupid enough to try then it'd have been a massacre. Why? http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm is probably the best summary of why Sealion could never have worked. http://www.geocities.com/drammos/sealion1.html is a good take on the results of a failed landing.

Alternative history is fascinating stuff though, if you have an afternoon free then I recommend this masterpiece http://alternatehistory.com/decadesofdarkness/ . May as well plug my own efforts as well ;) - http://www.quarryhouse.free-online.co.uk/ed/Althist.htm

[tonycavanagh]

You are correct in all cases it was war gamed the Germans always lost.

But it was not because the Germans did not have enough troops, or that many British were armed.

Than as today there were strict gun laws, in fact there were not enough weapons to equip the troops who escaped from Dunkirk.

And the Home Guard in many case were relying on home made pikes.

The main problem was the channel.

The Germans did not of the capability to land enough troops on a broad enough front.

In fact there were forced to use flat bottom Rhine barges unsuited for the sea.

And the launch date was around September when the channel and North Sea was at its most dangerous.

Such a undertaking would of ended in a disaster without taking into consideration the Royal Navy.

The Royal Navy would of thrown all there MBT and destroyers at the Invasion fleet.

[Pigman]

The weather also played a part in the German's decision as the channel is not passable by troop transports in the fall or winter months.

[massgopguy]

The massing of the invasion force would have compelled Roosevelt to send U.S Naval forces to the Channel. At this point the U.S. would have been at war with the AXIS partners and the status of our forces at Pearl would have also been different. Hitler made the war longer by not invading.

[caver]

I'd say that if the invasion of Britain had taken place, then the war would have been shortened. The English would have been tough customers for the Krauts. The drain on the Germans forces would have been accelerated.

[tonycavanagh]

Thanks another good what if, was the planned invasion of Switzerland by the Germans.

A major reason it was not put into effect was the armed Switzerland citizenry.

[Little Ray]

The Germans could not have invaded - they didn't have an Andrew Jackson Higgens to design the landing craft and build a fleet of 'em!

They would have had better luck with a covert action campaign - kill Churchill and the King, and replace him a sympathizer.

[tonycavanagh]

An assassination attempt even if it would of succeeded would of fired the British more to fight back especially an assassination of the King.

[PzLdr]

The only service pushing Sea Lion [on a much smaller scale] was the Kriegsmarine. The German Army had no stomach for it, which was one of the reasons they devised a plan of such large scope [troops and area] that the Navy would be unable to support [the losses in Norway, particularly German destroyers and cruisers].

In theory, they could have done it IF the Luftwaffe had gotten control of the skies over southern England. As Crete showed, the Luftwaffe had the potential to make mincemeat of the Royal Navy in the confined area of the Channel. If the Germans had scaled back the invasion force to something more manageable, there was little in Britain to stop them [most of the British Army's heavy equipment was on the beaches of Dunkirk].

In one of the alternate history books written on the subject, the Germans used minefields on both flanks of the landing zone to slow down the Royal Navy, and Fallschirmjaeger and Mountain troops to make the initial assault, followed up by a couple of Panzer Divisions [one with Rommel as GC], and some mechanized infantry. "Leg infantry was brought in by boat and aircraft. The Luftwaffe flew from captured airfields in southern England against the Channel and the FEBA. In that scenario, the Germans won.

[jonascord]

Bump for later

[chilepepper]

Not a chance. After the RAF defeated the Luftwaffe during the summer of 1940, any slim chance they could have succeeded of overpowering the powerful Royal Navy went up in smoke. And the geography of southern England doesn't help much either - the Brits could hurl rocks from the Cliffs of Dover -- other landing sites not much better.

[Tallguy]

Back up two steps and answer this question first: Could the Luftwaffe have defeated the RAF? Maybe with better strategic direction, but we know that with the choices they made they ultimately didn't succeed at this task.

The German Navy would have needed a lot of help from the Luftwaffe to have prevented the Royal Navy from destroying their beachead. Assuming that a better handled Luftwaffe had emerged from its struggle with the RAF victorious, would they have had sufficient resources to oppose the RN? Doubtful.

[Tallguy]

Thanks another good what if, was the planned invasion of Switzerland by the Germans. A major reason it was not put into effect was the armed Switzerland citizenry.

What would the Germans have really gained by assaulting Switzerland? Switzerland's neutrality was useful in some ways.

Plus and invasion of Switzerland, depending on when it came, might have fractured the Axis since it probably would have ticked-off Il Duce.

[alfa6]

Wasn't there a Foxhole thread on this a few months ago?

I can't find it off hand, do you happen to remember when it was?

Regards

alfa6 ;>}

[Tallguy]

The massing of the invasion force would have compelled Roosevelt to send U.S Naval forces to the Channel.

In any event the Germans were massing barges in the channel ports and the RAF Bomber Command was targeting them right along. How many of these already inadequate barges would have survived to embark troops once the order had been given? Probably the first visible sign that the invasion threat had irrevocably passed was when the barges ceased concentrating.

[Redleg Duke]

I think that the Luftwaffe didn't have the "legs" to gain control over the RAF. That is what really hamstrung them during their "Eagle Attack", also known as "The Blitz". The ME-109s could get to and from the target, but didn't have the loiter time. That is needed to deal with targets of opportunity.

I have difficutly with those who say that the Kreigsmarine couldn't have handled the Royal Navy. One thing that is continually overlooked is that the Channel would limit the amount of the Royal Navy that could have been brought to bear and the real strength of the Kreigsmarine was their U-Boats and E-Boats. The Luftwaffe had a pretty effective torpedo bomber in the JU-88 and that could have put a major hurt on the heavies of the RN.

The bottom line though is that the German Army didn't believe that they could win or survive. With a mindset like that, you are defeated before you start.

[AppyPappy]

Bottom line: Hitler had to choose between Britain and Russia. Hitler voted for Russia. Russia looked like an easier nut to crack on paper.

[Steelerfan]

There is an interesting full length book on this called Invasion, I believe the author's name was McKay, that concludes the invasion could have worked. I agree with the skeptics here, I think he dramatically overestimates the speed with which the Germans could transfer working armored units across to England (think how many problems we had, with much greater resources, three years later) but the book is a good read. Main factors he emphasizes is the lack of British mobile reserves, the impact of mine warfare on constraining the British navy and the effect of the Luftwaffe concentrating on the RAF as opposed to random bombing of strategic targets.