History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum Lockedcould the nazis have invaded England?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 20:21
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Why wouldn't they be?


My point was that if they were so far better trained a far more powerful they should not have been afraid of a "weaker" enemy, which the Germans were not. They only had less numbers
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 20:25

If ther eis ever a lesson to be learned from history it is that a seamingly weaker enemy should ALWAYS be respected.  Why should the RN take any chances?  The fact that they were superior in the sea was demonstrated there is no debte there.   You are resorting to rhetoric and as such resigning yourself from fact with such statements.

Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 20:36
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

If ther eis ever a lesson to be learned from history it is that a seamingly weaker enemy should ALWAYS be respected.  Why should the RN take any chances?  The fact that they were superior in the sea was demonstrated there is no debte there.   You are resorting to rhetoric and as such resigning yourself from fact with such statements.



How much superior if they could not stop the U-boats, were afraid of few battleships? Anyway to the Germans were necessary more aircrafts, not ships, they already gathered 2000 barges and the first plan was to send 150000 troops, but then, they decided that firstly the RAF had to be destroyed. So, if RAF was destroyed there would have been an invasion, even with all the English fleet still alive.
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph

Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 2963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 21:47
Originally posted by Illirac Illirac wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

If ther eis ever a lesson to be learned from history it is that a seamingly weaker enemy should ALWAYS be respected.  Why should the RN take any chances?  The fact that they were superior in the sea was demonstrated there is no debte there.   You are resorting to rhetoric and as such resigning yourself from fact with such statements.



How much superior if they could not stop the U-boats, were afraid of few battleships? Anyway to the Germans were necessary more aircrafts, not ships, they already gathered 2000 barges and the first plan was to send 150000 troops, but then, they decided that firstly the RAF had to be destroyed. So, if RAF was destroyed there would have been an invasion, even with all the English fleet still alive.
 
 
And it would still have been a disaster.  First the 2,000 barges you speak of were Canal barges, never meant for open water use, let alone the English Channel.  Some of them had to be fitted with engines as they had originally been towed.  By the time Sea Lion had been canceled they had only been able to fit 900 for use.   They still had no clear cut plan for supporting these troops.  Fatso Goering had declared the Luftewaffe could supply them from the air. [sound familiar?] And they still hadn't come up with a solution for Fuel transport.
Considering Hitler once stated"On land I am a lion, on the sea I am a coward" I don't believe he ever was serious about Sealion.
 
 
 
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 21:54
Originally posted by Illirac Illirac wrote:


How much superior if they could not stop the U-boats, were afraid of few battleships?
 
The U-Boats could only be detected after they had attacked at this point, which made them very formidable against merchant shipping - the Germans would NOT willingly engage a warship with a U-boat because once one had been discovered its chances of survival were slim pretty at best.  And u-boats serve no purpose in an amphibious assault.
 
As the war progressed, techniques were developed for detecting and destroying U-boats such that their activities were irrelevant by 1944.
 
Quote Anyway to the Germans were necessary more aircrafts, not ships, they already gathered 2000 barges and the first plan was to send 150000 troops, but then, they decided that firstly the RAF had to be destroyed. So, if RAF was destroyed there would have been an invasion, even with all the English fleet still alive.
 
Red Clay corrected you there and also I will emphasise that these barges would have been death traps for the Germans.
 
The testament to German potential in an invasion of Great Britain is in its failure to carry it out.  Simply put: it did not have the capability to successfully launch such an operation and the Germans at the time themselves knew as much, and I suppose they would be thankful that opinions such as yours were not a positive factor in their decision making.


Edited by Zagros - 06-Apr-2008 at 22:24
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Status: Offline
Points: 965
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 22:26
2000 open top barges and 150,000 troops would have been a risk few would been willing to take, even with the RAF gone.
 
English Channel is not the Mediterranean lake, its a tidal Northern Sea, it also has the most shipwrecks per metre of anywhere in the world. The weather can change in minutes and 25ft waves suddenly appear.
 
For the allies who went in seaworthy craft on D Day it would have meant loss of the operation, for the Germans in unseaworthy craft, the loss of the whole army. Flip a coin with 150,000 troops....
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by Paul - 06-Apr-2008 at 22:27
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 11:32
Originally posted by Illirac Illirac wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

The British had more aircraft, were producing them faster

Yes, and where have they producing it? In all of its empire: India, Africa, etc. How many were they producing at home?
Most of them. However, the point is irrelevant anyway - what does it matter where they were produced?
 
I'm glad though that you recognise that Germany wasn't just fighting Britain but the whole Empire, even though it took time to mobilise it.
Quote
 
by the 1944 the German production of aircraft was double then that of the Brits, so they could easily have that production in 1940 if they were planning to invade.
Then why didn't they? What happened in 1944 was irrelevant to what was happening in 1939-40. Moreover what kind of planes were the Germans producing? Once they were on the defensive they produced advanced fighter planes but never managed to produce a decent heavy bomber.
Quote
The question was: could the nazis have invaded England?
Answer: if they would have planned it from the beginning, they would, and probably would conquer it. Since they were not planning they did not, and did not conquer it.
You might give at least some suggestion as to why a force that was outnumbered, underequipped, and underresourced, as the Luftwaffe and the German navy were, would win the battle, attacking one of the world's most difficult defensive barriers. Generally speaking the weaker side loses, especially when it has lost any advantage of suprise, and doesn't have the money to buy the weapons it cannot produce itself.
 
The German High Command didn't think they could win, and I can't see any reason to second-guess them.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 12:00
Originally posted by red clay red clay wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by red clay red clay wrote:

Originally posted by Paul Paul wrote:

Originally posted by deadkenny deadkenny wrote:

But it wasn't 'fighters' that would have been attacking German shipping in any case.  The RN would have been attacking the German invasion forces.  The Luftwaffe needed to attack the RN with their bombers.  The RAF Fighter Command would have been trying to keep the Luftwaffe bombers away from the RN ships.
 
And 6000 RAF bombers attacking the open top barges.
 
Germany needed to knock out the RAF fighters so their own fighters could engage the bombers.
 
 
6,000 RAF bombers?  Even after the 8th Air force arrived there weren't that many bombers available, let alone the RAF on it's own.
In 1940 the RAF had 6,000 Blenheims and Whitleys alone. And of course somewhere around were nearly 12,000 Wellingtons, though some of those were built after 1940.
 
 
 
Total production figures for both medium and light bombers from 1938 to late 1940 was just under 6,000.
I won't quarrel much with that since it's still in the same ballpark. I thought they had stopped building Blenheims and Whitleys by 1941. But even if there less than 6,000 of them, you have a couple of thousand Battles, 1500 or so Hampdens, a few Wellesleys to make up the number.
 
And those 12,000 Wellingtons started being produced in 1936 going on to 1945 though I'm know about year-to-year production.
 
Certainly it's enough to justify Paul's assertion that the RAF had 6,000 bombers.
Quote
 
Production of heavy bombers didn't begin until 1941, with acceptance figures at a little over 400.
 
I'm counting the Wellington as a medium bomber, in so doing I'm coming up 12,000 short of the numbers your quoting.
Which ones would they be? All I was doing was justifying Paul in claiming the RAF had 6,000 bombers available - how can you be 12,000 short on 6,000?
 
If you look up the individual planes in wikipedia you'll get all the figures I've quoted (to within a hundred or two) plus in some cases the years they were produced.
Quote  
Also, if there were as many bombers available this early on, why was it that Harris had to "scrape together every bomber available, including those of the advanced training squadrons" to put up his first 1,000 plane raid in early 42.  Of those nearly a hundred had to abort due to mechanical problems. So it really wasn't a 1,000 plane raid.  If England indeed had a total of 18,000 planes at it's disposal, it doesn't make sense.
Harris needed heavy and medium strategic bombers - primarily the Lancaster and the Halifax. What he didn't have at that point was 1,000 bombers capable of bombing Germany - and getting back.
 
For knocking out invasion barges and tactical bombing you had those Blenheims and Whitleys and Battles to make up the 6,000. Also there can be no doubt that Admiralty would have brought Coastal Command into action along with the Fleet Air Arm to defend against an invasion, whereas they refused to give any planes to Harris.
 
Defending the coast from invasion is rather different from bombing Cologne.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 7011
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 12:02
Originally posted by Illirac Illirac wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Why wouldn't they be?


My point was that if they were so far better trained a far more powerful they should not have been afraid of a "weaker" enemy, which the Germans were not. They only had less numbers
 
Where do you get the idea from that the Royal Navy was 'afraid' of the German navy? The RN spent its time seeking out German ships in the attempt to knock them out. It was the German navy that cowered in harbour.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork
Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 19:43
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by Illirac Illirac wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Why wouldn't they be?


My point was that if they were so far better trained a far more powerful they should not have been afraid of a "weaker" enemy, which the Germans were not. They only had less numbers
 
Where do you get the idea from that the Royal Navy was 'afraid' of the German navy? The RN spent its time seeking out German ships in the attempt to knock them out. It was the German navy that cowered in harbour.


Cowered oh really? Because they had no fuel?

Ok, I know that an invasion was impossible, but it's not fun if everyone agrees with it Wink
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 19:51
No, they did actually cower in harbour after the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck in the early stage of the war.  Thy stood no chance in a naval confrontation before that and conclusively lost all motive after.
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 20:02
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

No, they did actually cower in harbour after the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck in the early stage of the war.  Thy stood no chance in a naval confrontation before that and conclusively lost all motive after.


The Italians as well had a very powerful fleet, and yet it was (mostly) destroyed...
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph

Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 2963
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 20:43
Originally posted by Iliac Iliac wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

No, they did actually cower in harbour after the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck in the early stage of the war.  Thy stood no chance in a naval confrontation before that and conclusively lost all motive after.


The Italians as well had a very powerful fleet, and yet it was (mostly) destroyed...
 
 
The Italians had a fleet of "pretty ships" fast, sleek, but poorly armored, under gunned and an officer corps that needed help tying their shoes. 
 
 
Back to Top
Illirac View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 23-Jun-2007
Location: Ma vlast
Status: Offline
Points: 526
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illirac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 20:52
Originally posted by red clay red clay wrote:

 an officer corps that needed help tying their shoes. 


LOLLOLLOL
LOL
For too long I've been parched of thirst and unable to quench it.
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 20:57
They were destroyed while in harbour.  I wouldn;t say so much trouble tying shoe laces as more concerned with enjoying the finer things in life as Italians have an aversion to do.
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Status: Offline
Points: 5237
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 21:18
Originally posted by red clay red clay wrote:

The German Army had little or no experience with large scale amphibious operations. 
 


LOL if i'd get an Euro everytime soemone says "xy had no experience in amphibious operations".... the German Army in 1918 conducted two sucessfull ambhibious operations against Finland and Georgia. and how much experience did the allies had prior to D-Day? how much did the Japanese had prior to their conquest of Philippines & Indonesia? how much experience did the German Army had in "Blitzkrieg" prior to 1939?
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 21:21
Gallipoli, apart from the massive training exercises which took place for a year before D-day.
Back to Top
Temujin View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Sirdar Bahadur

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Status: Offline
Points: 5237
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Temujin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 21:25
Americans at gallipoli? history must be rewritten...
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zagros Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 21:51
Quote and how much experience did the allies had prior to D-Day?
 
Or maybe your own post should be reread - by you! Apology accepted.
Back to Top
Paul View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar
AE Immoderator

Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Status: Offline
Points: 965
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Paul Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Apr-2008 at 21:55
Originally posted by Temujin Temujin wrote:

and how much experience did the allies had prior to D-Day?
 
Pachino, Siciliy, Taranto, Salerno, Dieppe, Operation Torch........ Enough?
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.077 seconds.