Why did Britain win the BoB?

Alan Minyard wrote:

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:00:35 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

However the RAF could still have sallied forth to defend
against an invasion and the Germans simply had neither the
resources to get the invasion force across the channel or
any way of stopping the RN from chopping their force to bits.


Wouldn't the Luftwaffe be a way of stopping the RN from chopping their force
to bits?

No, not at the time. the Luftwaffe did not have "air superiority" over
the Channel, or over Britain. Would the RN have lost ships? Probably,
but not enough to deter or defeat them.

The Germans had no effective landing craft or amphibious warfare
ships, and would have been annihilated in trying to cross.

Not if the BoB had been lost.

Grantland

Al Minyard

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:


"robert arndt" wrote in message
. com...
Britain won the BoB because Churchill bombed Berlin and spoofed Adolf
into diverting the the airfield assaults onto London. EOS.

Grantland

Let me add that it was a lone German bomber that ditched its bombs
over London that caused the British reprisal raid on Berlin and change
of tactics that: relieved Fighter Command, enabled the airfields and
manufacturing plants to be repaired, and assured the Brits that the
German battle for air supremacy would fail now that civilian targets
were being hit instead of military ones. EOS indeed!

Rob

This is in fact an urban legend

The decision to switch targets to London was taken at a Luftwaffe
staff meeting in the Hague on 3rd Sept 1940. The idea came
yayayayaya

I see you're still buying the old cover-story guff, Keith. Uhh. By
"Bob" those guys were secretive!

Grantland

"Steven Vincent" wrote in message
...

If Hitler had understood that Britain would not Sue for peace in time
for him to make an assault on the SU as he was already planning then
there was only one option that actually could have done the job.

How about a German Invasion of Eire ? With enough strength maintained
in the French CHannel ports the RN would not have been able to maintain
a close blockade of the Irish ports or the Brittany coast anymore than
it was able to stop reinforcements to Norway. An Air landing / covert
sea operation into the SW or Eire would have been able to establish a
strong air head at least. If Germany can push the British out of
Ireland then they can enforce a close blockade of the rest of the UK and
starve Britain into submission. Meanwhile Britain can't afford to
direct a lot of resources away from the SE to Eire because of the
presence of significant German forces building there.

Note that the Iris Forces at that time would have been totally
ineffective while anti- british feelings would probably mean that
Britain would have had to carry out a counter invasion against an at
least partially hostile population - not a nice thought.

WOuld an unprovoked German invasion of Eire trigger a response from the
US strong enough and quick enough to make a difference ? Given the US
Isolationism and concerns in the Far East I doubt it. Once the UK has
surrendered Germany can withdraw from Eire in response to US political
pressure and both the US and Germany would have understood that.


Trouble is that the UK maintained considerable forces in Ulster
and the Germans would have to move a considerable force
in to Ireland to hold the country.

By July 1940 British forces tasked with 'assisting' the Irish Army
in the event of invasion included

53rd (Welsh) Infantry Division
601st Infantry Division
148 Infantry Brigade
plus several locally raised regiments such as the
Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, Royal Irish Rangers,
The Royal Irish Fusiliers, The Royal Ulster Rifles etc

The RAF maintained half a dozen fighter squadrons
in the province and a similar number of coastal command
units

Coastal command were flying recon patrols over the Bay of
Biscay and western approaches it seems probable
that an invasion force large enough to be useful would be
intercepted.


End result would probably be a United Ireland which quiet a few of the
US Irish lobby would be strongly in favour of :-

So can Germany get a large enough force into Southern Eire quickly
enough while maintaining the Barge threat to the SW at a high enough
level that the UK can't commit enough forces to prevent the occupation
of Eire ?


No. Germany was scraping the bottom of the barrel to
get enough transports to cross the English Channel, moving a
substantial force across the Bay of Biscay was just
not feasible.

Sea lion as the fake in the same way that the Allies convinced Hitler
that the invasion of Europe would occur in the Pas du Calais :-


Which wont work unless the threat is credible. The real worry came
from the possibility that the Irish might choose to become
allied with Germany and invite them in. This was one of the
scenarios that gave British planners sleepless nights

Keith

Keith

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:00:35 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

However the RAF could still have sallied forth to defend
against an invasion and the Germans simply had neither the
resources to get the invasion force across the channel or
any way of stopping the RN from chopping their force to bits.


Wouldn't the Luftwaffe be a way of stopping the RN from chopping their force
to bits?

No, not at the time. the Luftwaffe did not have "air superiority" over
the Channel, or over Britain. Would the RN have lost ships? Probably,
but not enough to deter or defeat them.

The Germans had no effective landing craft or amphibious warfare
ships, and would have been annihilated in trying to cross.

Al Minyard

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Britain won the BoB because Churchill bombed Berlin and spoofed Adolf
into diverting the the airfield assaults onto London. EOS.

Grantland

Let me add that it was a lone German bomber that ditched its bombs
over London that caused the British reprisal raid on Berlin and change
of tactics that: relieved Fighter Command, enabled the airfields and
manufacturing plants to be repaired, and assured the Brits that the
German battle for air supremacy would fail now that civilian targets
were being hit instead of military ones. EOS indeed!

Rob

This is in fact an urban legend

The decision to switch targets to London was taken at a Luftwaffe
staff meeting in the Hague on 3rd Sept 1940. The idea came
from the Luftwaffe themselves who believeing their own faulty
intel decided that the RAF was down to its last 300 fighters
decided that the way to destroy them was to attack a target
they had to defend , London.

All the senior Luftwaffe staff officers (except Sperrle IRC)
concurred with the decision wihich delighted Fat Hermann
as he could rush off to der Fuhrer and give him the good news.

Keith

A beg to differ. The lone German bomber ditched its bombs over London
while the Fuhrer's own directive forbid it. The German pilots were
reprimanded for their error even while Goering and the Luftwaffe
senior commanders were planning a switch in tactics.
Regardless, the German bomber incident called for a reprisal raid that
only helped Goerings position and solidified in Hitler's mind the need
to attack London. Although it seems Hitler might have been swayed by
Goering and others in the Luftwaffe, it was Hitler's choice alone and
certainly guaranteed by the reprisal raid on Berlin.
Hitler's September 4, 1940 speech to the German people is filled with
rage over the British raid of Aug 25/26 and promised the destruction
of London. Had the German bomber NOT ditched its bombs over London and
hence, NO reprisal raid thereafter, Hitler might not have agreed to
change tactics on Sept 3, 1940. RAF Fighter Command at that point was
weakened to the point that losses were outstripping replacements and
many of their forward stations and airfields lie in wreckage. It was
the Luftwaffe's opinion at the time that despite losses incurred that
the RAF was already close to defeat, so attacking London made no
difference. A big mistake. Attacking London relieved Fighter Command
at their gravest hour and won them the BoB.

Rob

"M. J. Powell" wrote:

In message , robert
arndt writes
Britain won the BoB because Churchill bombed Berlin and spoofed Adolf
into diverting the the airfield assaults onto London. EOS.

Grantland

Let me add that it was a lone German bomber that ditched its bombs
over London that caused the British reprisal raid on Berlin and change
of tactics that: relieved Fighter Command, enabled the airfields and
manufacturing plants to be repaired, and assured the Brits that the
German battle for air supremacy would fail now that civilian targets
were being hit instead of military ones. EOS indeed!

The story I found said that it was a lone bomber, aiming for one of the
Kent airfields, which decided to approach from the north-east over
London. They spotted Croydon and misidentified it as Biggin Hill(?) and
unloaded. Croydon was in the London area.

No, Croydon was mistakenly attacked (instead of Kenley) on 15 August by a
formation of Me-110s from Erprobungsgruppe 210 led by Rubensdorffer. This
isn't the mistaken attack on London: Hough and Richards "The Battle of
Britain" (while written for a general audience, it still has some useful
info) says that it was during a night bombing raid on August 24/25, and that
the City of London itself was hit, "in Fore Street, near the Barbican", as
well as some scatter elsewhere.

Guy

In message , Guy Alcala
writes
"M. J. Powell" wrote:

In message , robert
arndt writes
Britain won the BoB because Churchill bombed Berlin and spoofed Adolf
into diverting the the airfield assaults onto London. EOS.

Grantland

Let me add that it was a lone German bomber that ditched its bombs
over London that caused the British reprisal raid on Berlin and change
of tactics that: relieved Fighter Command, enabled the airfields and
manufacturing plants to be repaired, and assured the Brits that the
German battle for air supremacy would fail now that civilian targets
were being hit instead of military ones. EOS indeed!

The story I found said that it was a lone bomber, aiming for one of the
Kent airfields, which decided to approach from the north-east over
London. They spotted Croydon and misidentified it as Biggin Hill(?) and
unloaded. Croydon was in the London area.

No, Croydon was mistakenly attacked (instead of Kenley) on 15 August by a
formation of Me-110s from Erprobungsgruppe 210 led by Rubensdorffer. This
isn't the mistaken attack on London: Hough and Richards "The Battle of
Britain" (while written for a general audience, it still has some useful
info) says that it was during a night bombing raid on August 24/25, and that
the City of London itself was hit, "in Fore Street, near the Barbican", as
well as some scatter elsewhere.

A raid on the docks at night? Dodgy if you want to miss the City itself.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

Nope. At best the Luftwaffe could intervene in daylight if
they managed to win and maintain air superiority


Aren't we now working under the premise that the Luftwaffe won the BoB and
has air superiority over the channel and southern England?



BUT the
invasion force was going to take more than 24 hours to
reach the invasion beaches and the cruisers and destroyers
sortieing from Harwich cwould be in amongst them at
night in the same way the Japanese steamed down the
slot at Guadalcanal. The Germans had no equivalent naval force
to counter those raids.


Why must the German invasion force operate at night?

"Cub Driver" wrote in message
...

I'm afraid not. Had Britain (not merely England) been occupied by
Germany, there is no way that the U.S. could have gotten at Europa.
The army was green, the landing craft not yet produced, and the only
aircraft capable of attacking Europa from the U.S. was the B-36, which
couldn't have survived German air defenses and probably wouldn't have
made the slightest difference if it had.


There was no aircraft capable of attacking Europe from the US during WWII.
The B-36 didn't achieve even nominal operational status until November 1948,
it wasn't truly operational until 1952. However, had the B-36 been
operational ten years earlier, there was nothing German air defenses could
have done to stop it.

In message . net,
Steven P. McNicoll writes
"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
Nope. At best the Luftwaffe could intervene in daylight if
they managed to win and maintain air superiority

Aren't we now working under the premise that the Luftwaffe won the BoB and
has air superiority over the channel and southern England?

How do they destroy the northern Groups? The RAF can retreat out of
Luftwaffe reach, and surge back south (at a cost).

BUT the
invasion force was going to take more than 24 hours to
reach the invasion beaches and the cruisers and destroyers
sortieing from Harwich cwould be in amongst them at
night in the same way the Japanese steamed down the
slot at Guadalcanal. The Germans had no equivalent naval force
to counter those raids.

Why must the German invasion force operate at night?

To have any chance of surviving at all. Night offers at least some
concealment. Also, the Channel has vicious tides and a three-knot barge
starting before dawn will be most unlikely to arrive before dusk... and
trying to land and supply a hastily-improvised invasion in the dark is a
recipe for disaster. The invasion wants to land with a long tail of
daylight available for command, control and resupply: that means at best
an overnight crossing and a morning landing.


The German invasion force lost a tithe of its strength just tied up in
port, and had to be scattered into inland waterways to avoid British
attacks. To quote HQ Naval Group West's report to Berlin on 12 September
1940,

"The harbours at Ostend, Dunkirk, Calais and Boulogne cannot be used as
night anchorages for shipping because of the danger of bombing and
shelling. Units of the British Channel Fleet are able to operate almost
unmolested in the Channel."

Hard to launch an invasion when your ports of departure aren't even
usable in darkness...

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk