Announcement

**Fake Boris** · April 29, 2007, 14:49

Also fuel consumption was 35L/100 km on cross and 26L on road, so even a 1400km return Tripoli-Alexandria trip would take at worst 950L, or roughly 40% of a 3-tonners, assuming some loss due to the metal tanks themselves. So you see that Rommel's problem was that he didn't have enough trucks and fuel, not that he couldn't.

**ElTigre** · April 29, 2007, 15:11

Tripoli-Alexandria along the coastal road is more than 1800 km on my map. Also keep in mind that trucks in the desert have to carry a considerable amount of lubricant and cooling water with them.

So you see that Rommel's problem was that he didn't have enough trucks and fuel, not that he couldn't.

Undoubtedly. But keep in mind that more motorized transports require more fuel, lubricant, spare parts and tires, too.

**ElTigre** · April 30, 2007, 15:24

Found a large German forum about the Afrikakorps. It has subforums for 'Logistics/Transport' and 'Trucks'.

http://www.afrika-korps.de/forum/index.php

One thread deals with the ratio between fuel-consumed and fuel-delivered, but without precise answer. Someone cites a book called "Iron Hulls, Iron Hearts" as reference for the following rule of thumb: 1/3 of the fuel is consumed for ever 1000 km on a very good road. Dunno if the coastal road qualifies as 'very good'.

I found some road distances on the forum, too:

Tripoli - Tobruk: 1500 km
Tripoli - Sollum: 1750 km

So Tripoli - Alexandria should be well above 2000 km.

Average transport capacity of a German truck: either 3 tons (15 barrels, ??? liter) or 1.5 tons. No dedicated tank trucks.

All German trucks used benzine, not diesel, and had massive problems with overheating.

**lord of the mark** · April 30, 2007, 16:10

Originally posted by ElTigre

LOTM, I was just pointing out a gap in your line of argument. Now you've closed it. I, too, think that a German offensive towards Gibraltar through Spain would have been quite risky.

And youve filled out a lot of the details on fuel usage on the coast road, which Id forgotten. Thanks.

I hope we've put this one to bed.

**Fake Boris** · May 1, 2007, 15:14

Originally posted by lord of the mark

I hope we've put this one to bed.

Yeah, sure.

1. if the Germans are attack at, or past Alex, the Brits certainly do have radar and airfield advantages.

I don’t recall Axis to Allied air losses being particularly high in the North African campaign. Do you have any cite to support this? And radar was a new technology that was still being deployed in Britain in September ’40. Any source of Egyptian airfields being equipped with radar at the same time, or are you spouting drivel as usual?

2. The problems at the minor Libyan ports were not easily solvable. They hadnt solved them by 1942, despite a much larger force of Italian infantry, and hence greater need to do so.

Fine. Did you even bother to read my argument? I have shown you that non-improved port capacity was still sufficient to provide 2,800 tons/day, enough for 8 divisions on the offensive.

Now, do you know what ‘offensive’ means? It means that the involved units are launching a large-scale assault against strong defensive units. Most of the time, units in Africa were either pursuing each other, or recomposing (either for the next offense or defense, following who had the momentum). A unit only expending fuel and food while on the move does not need nearly as much supplies as a unit on a large-scale offensive (because ammunition is by far the heaviest thing to carry).

So a pursuing unit, according to numbers I have provided, needs roughly one fourth of the supplies it expends on an attack.

So, you can easily see that 2,800 tons/day is ALREADY complete overkill, provided you send in a sufficient number of trucks (which they can, since they don’t need them in Russia). Are your maths of grade school ability?

3. Rommel could not have restarted a couple of weeks after reaching Alex. He would have needed to completely restock, replace tank treads, etc. I also dont believe that the brits would have left the airfields intact. Nor that the Germans would have managed the air supply, over a much longer distance than in Russia. Where are they flying from? Remember, in 1940 the Germans arent in Greece or Yugoslavia.

Again, you haven’t even bothered to read my argument. I have already stated that Germany attacks Yoguslavia and Greece in fall ’40, and provided you with a detailed rundown of the troops involved.

Now sweety, how does one ‘destroy’ an airfield built on an unpaved surface? You could possibly destroy the landing field with bombs or mines, but arguably this kind of damage can be repaired in two weeks by Rommel’s engineers (he had some). And incidentally, why has no airfield ever been destroyed during the North African campaign?

What are the air miles from southern Italy to Alex? what is the range of a fully loaded German transport? o they take their own fuel for the return flight? Theres no fuel in Alex, except what the axis manages to truck in from the Libyan ports.

Remember, Crete is under Axis control and can be used as an intermediate base. A Ju-52 has got a 900km range. It can also carry several tons of cargo, enough to sneak in a gasoline tank for the return flight.

I dont know all the details off the top of my head.

You couldn’t say better.

One of the definitive works on the topic is Martin Crevalds "Supplying War" which has a chapter on the Libyan campaign. Its also been discussed in detail on SHWI.

Yes, and the numbers I have given were taken from a webpage quoting this very same book. You either prove my quotes wrong, or admit defeat on the issue of supply.

1. Why would the brits wait and be crushed? They would delay him at the Canal, then retreat to Palestine, then if necessary retreat via Syria or Jordan to Iraq.

How many British troops in Egypt in September ’40? 30,000. Where’s the rest? In Britain, void of any heavy equipment (they left everything at Dunkerke).

So now, you explain me how Rommel, a decorated general (from WW1), who crossed the Meuse (deemed impassable by the French command), against more numerous French defenders, who reached El-Alamein while being undersupplied AND undernumbered by the British (in ’42), can possibly lose a battle with numerical superiority?

2. How many Italian infantry? They need supplies as well. You cant just supply Rommels divs.

Infantry on garrison doesn’t need jack. Even assuming 2,800 tons/month, I have already shown there’s plenty of room for everyone. Italian garrison in Western Lybia can also rely on Tunis.

3. Spanish troops will defend Morocco no better than the French did, but that doesnt matter, Torch isnt happening yet anyway.

call names if you like. Youve minimized the port problems, neglected all the fuel to move the fuel for the trucks (dont ask me for numbers, its all in Crevald) and have assumed an air resupply that the Germans never managed over a long distance.

I have given you every number you need, most of them coming from the book you claim ‘proves’ your point. I have given the tonnage capacity of German trucks, their fuel consumption, and North African road distances. I have provided a reasonable estimate of the capabilities of air supply. Welcome to your deluverse, leave reason at the entrance.

Why not? Theyre hardly going to be able to supply the port cities with grain to avert starvation, or to supply their troops approaching Gib.

Why? The Subs will operate from Britain, not from the Med. That is until the Brits have taken the Azores.

British long-range submarines were not suited to the Mediterrenan, while short-range ones couldn’t operate from Britain.

As for the Azores, I think it has been explained that infantry is deployed there just a few days before the invasion. You’re probably about to tell me “how are they going to be supplied”, but what you don’t realize is that you don’t need that much to defend against an amphibious assault, provided you have sufficient infantry to interdict the shores in the first place. You can easily stockpile enough in peacetime.

Irrelevant. Will the Japanese rely on a piece of paper, signed by Stalin of all people, to protect their rear?

That’s what they did, so I assume that’s what they’ll do. What happened is that Japan kept a 40 divisions garrison in Mandchukuo throughout the war. They signed the treaty mostly to gain some diplomatic assurances on their flank, but they weren’t stupid enough to rely on the word of Stalin alone. In case you didn’t know, too, the Transiberian railroad is very limited. It took the USSR 3 months to recall troops from the Eastern front to Siberia, after German capitulation, in order to launch an attack against Japan, as agreed with America.

They could gradually move up better commanders, as every peace time army does. IIUC its widely held that the Soviet officer corps was better in 1941 than it would have been in 1939, and less good than it would have been in 1943.

You’re completely wrong. Both the French and British armies had experienced commanders from WW1, and yet they were badly surprised by new German tactics. France fell in a month, even though the men and material involved in the war were roughly equal on both sides. The Germans had the following advantages: 1) dive bombers (who scared the hell out of ground troops, with their frightening dive and debilitating sirens), operating with a direct radio link to divisional commanders (a Panzer general could talk with airforce officers while they were in-flight, and direct them accordingly).
2) a unique command system, where tank officers were granted generous autonomy, and a flexible supply system that was designed to be able to follow an armored thrust. The Soviets still operated from a centralized command in ’41, and had to take two years of pounding before they had effectively rethought military formations, supply lines, and commander independence. The first Soviet “tank general”, Rokossovsky, had to wait for Fall ’43 before he commanded a true blitz-style armored spearhead, in the aftermath of Zitadella.

The Soviet armies were developing strong counter measures by 1942, in fact by late 1941, IIUC. In any case, their weaknesses were not only based on suprise.

Not at all. In fact, their inability to truly break German lines in the winter was due to their commander’s incompetence. As soon as summer came back, the Germans were rolling the dice again on the Eastern Front, and did so at least until Stalingrad according to some, until Zitadella according to others. After all, Zitadella was still a large-scale offensive against which the Russians could only hope to resist by entrenching for months (they had stolen plans of the German offensive).

Just drop the alleged ‘Spanish infrastructure problem’. In no case was Spain in a state worse than Eastern Europe, so if Germany can bring 160 divisions to the gates of Moscow and Stalingrad, they can certainly move five divisions through an allied country.

Yes, Im afraid it was. The German General Staff themselves recognized that.

Their calculations were that they could, if they used the *entire*
capacity of the Spanish rail net (and there were consequences to this
that they did not consider), they could manage to get a Sturm
(Assault) Division or two down to Gib plus another couple of Infantry
Divisions and a limited amount of heavy artillery. Say five divisions
total.

This would be supported, perhaps, by half a Luftflotte of aircraft.
Perhaps.

So, according to you, again —

a) Germany can move a Panzer Korps to Stalingrad, through muddy roads and dozens of thousands of Ukrainian partisans, without using the rail network (which had been designed to be incompatible with German trains, and damaged by scorched earth tactics) ;
b) Germany can launch an air and seaborne assault on Norway and subdue the country (without even a road link, and with the Royal Navy just on the other side);
c) Germany can move through mountainous Greece and take Athens in three weeks, against fierce Greek resistance, British expeditionary forces, and legendary Greek partisans;
d) Rommel can blitz to St. Nazaire, with his own armored column (French railways were not under control);

But they can’t move a motorized column in Spain, with the full authorization of Franco.

Why? According to you, because:

And Franco's goons will soon find what it is like to be playing
Napoleon to the Republic's Wellington.

Franco’s goons, who had fought alongside Italian and German troops during the civil war, would think it fun to disobey Franco and start a guerilla against members of their own military alliance.

This was the most they could get there (and not quickly, either) and the most that they could *supply* once they *were* there ... unless they supplied them by sea.

See, remember the limited rail net capacity?

That can barely supply five divisions at Gib?

This is madness. German trusts were designed to bring with them what supplies they needed for a week or two of combats. They would have brought with them every ammo they need until Gibraltar is decided.

Now, yes, the garrison of Gibraltar was relatively small in 1939-40,
but the capacity of the Spanish Rail net to get troops down south fast
in quantity was not enough ... so we can assume, quite reasonably,
that the allies, with control of the Atlantic, will get reinforcements
there.

A German motorized column can go from France and reach Algeciras in 48h, and begin offensive within 72h. The UK barely gets the time to notice, yet alone arm a reinforcement convoy… And what was Britain’s ability to conduct an amphibious assault in summer of ’40? What troops did they have?

And, push comes to shove, when they've bled the Germans dry, they can abandon it, as they now own the south side of the straits anyway.

Pure madness. Spanish Morocco is a fortified rock. England’s power projection capability is severely limited in ’40. How are they invading the Azores, Morocco, pounding the Spanish coast, infiltrating weapons in Portugal, while protecting their convoys against the Bismarck, Tirpitz, and U-Boots? You know, even in 1942, the UK was switching: one convoy for Malta, one for Murmansk, because they didn’t have enough ships to protect two convoys at the same time.

You just keep fantasizing about British power without providing relevant information: which troops are they using, where and when? Which ships?

Yes, their artillery (in the Sturm Divisions and a limited amount of
nondivisional artillery), would be causing some problems ... but the
*British* have artillery, too. And they can support the position by
naval gunfire (which can be defended by Carrier CAP and ground based
CAP from the captured Spanish Morocco on the other side of the straits
... the obvious move for the defenders).

OK, so Gibraltar is a tough nut to crack. But sure, the Germans didn’t know? They had informants in the base (Italy too), they knew what ships were there, and when, they knew how the facilities looked like, and they had devised a plan of attack, which obviously they thought credible.

Have you ever read historical accounts of battles? The plan can be the following: Germany pounds Gibraltar for a few hours with their 1,200 or so bombers, protected by 100 or 200 Bf-109s (ample enough to contain whatever RAF there is at Gibraltar). Want to wager about the ability of Gibraltar’s defenders to coordinate a defense after a thousand bombers? In the meantime, artillery pounds the land stretch between Spain and the port. Mines and obstacles turn to rubble. Stukas fly their last sortie, bomb the British defenders as to stun them, and then infantry (with bayonets) rush in their armored SDKFZs, while tanks are providing cover.

The Germans didn’t think it impossible, and apparently, seeing how they handled the war until ’42, rarely got their plans wrong (on a tactical scale, at least).

Portugal is Britain's oldest ally (since the 1300's). Shipping in weapons and training cadres will be child's play.

Portugal let U-Boots refuel in their bases, their banks took some German gold in transit from Switzerland, and it traded plenty with Nazi Germany.

With German troops in the country, protecting the ports, and Spain an Axis power, Salazar (a dictator) would have risked his job, and the lives of his citizens, for a “principled” stance for the UK? By throwing his pitiful army against German veteran Panzers? Houston, LOTM, Houston.

So what happens if the Italians actually send out their navy to
somehow convoy through supplies or an assault?

We can pretty much guarantee that, to a greater or lesser degree, the
Italian Surface fleet ceases to exist quite rapidly, and at a much
lesser loss to the RN (a sustainable one, as it was set up to allow
for this sort of confrontation).

I said the Italians would stay out of a Gibraltar plan. This said, their fleet was weaker than the Royal Navy, but not completely inefficient neither. They claimed the British 60% of what they lost themselves during the war.

It also means that the Italian Merchant Marine, which did not have
sufficient capacity to supply North Africa and its possessions in
Albania and the Dodecanese *as it was* can't undertake offensive ops
there. Not even effective *defensive* ops, for that matter.

This is where reading ability comes in handy. The Italians, as I said earlier, employed 2,500 merchant ships to the supply of North Africa, and I showed you by A+B that much less than that was required.

And, of course, the Italian Merchant Marine is gutted by the RN and
RAF in its attemps to support German ops in Spain ... and can't do
much there anyway.

So the Germans send in everything they can on the Mediterranean theater, and somewhat, the Italian navy finds itself more at risk than they were historically. Jesus ****ing Christ, LOTM, say hello to the world!

And, even if the Germans and Italians *do* manage, somehow, to take
Gib, Spanish Morocco is now *British* Morocco, and the straits are
*still* closed ... not that there's any worry about the Italian Navy
breaking out and joining up with the German Navy as the Italian
Surface Fleet is now at the bottom of the Med.

This, I’d really like to know how it would happen. Amphibious assault against a rock, all while sinking the Italian navy.

Problem is, the Eastern Med is now an allied lake because *all* of
Italian North Africa is now Allied occupied ... and probably all of
French North Africa, too.

So the British, who in ’41 didn’t have any troops to commit to Greece other than what they removed from Lybia, launch an amphibious attack on Morocco, take the Azores, kick Vichy out of Algeria, sinks the Italian navy, protect their shipping against German subs, and outflank Rommel’s shiny panzers from Tunisia, all the while he’s been magically stopped at the Egyptian border, with three times the amount of troops he had in ’41?

They reach a deal for a major French colonial concssion in days after the fall of France, which they could never reach after months. I think you misread the intentions of the Vichy pols.

How, pray tell, does one move and set up coastal batteries discretely?

Morocco is sovereign Spanish land, Spain can very well send an artillery battalion there without it being an act of war…

But Spain is completely opaque?

Franco and his close subordinates, most likely. Now sure, the British are informed of the German columns moving through Spain, but they don’t have time to react, as I said (72h isn’t enough).

He wants to sacrifice them? He doesnt want troops around when the inevitable insurgency starts in Spain?

So the republicans surrender in Madrid in the beginning of ’39, and suddenly rise up from their ashes, destroy Franco’s regime, and kick out German veterans?

And the RN overlooks them in the most intensively ASW patrolled waters on earth?

Huh… German subs never had any problem moving through Gibraltar. Really, they just deploy like 100-150 miles away, and are ordered to wait for fleeing ships.

From southern france, right? Fighter protection?

So Bf-109s and Stukas take off a few hours before the long-range bombers, land in Spain, and refuel. How many Spitfires in Gibraltar?

Thank goodness you didnt need the full 5 divs to take Gibraltar. You only needed 1 div of Alpine troops. That leaves a lot to spare for Portugal.

Reading ability? The forces sent to Gibraltar are not the same as those sent to Portugal.

meanwhile, the RAF takes Spanish Morocco. Oh wait, I forgot theyre stopped by the stealth coastal batteries.

So it’s the RAF now? Where are their paratroopers stationed? And what paratroopers?

Are the Spanish troops in Morocco going to be supplied by the same Italian merchies that are supplying Rommel?

You’ve got a fixation on Italian “merchies”, haven’t you? Spain simply stockpiles before the DOW and is assumed to have enough to last a few weeks, enough for Germany or Italy to intervene if need be.

Continued next post...

**Fake Boris** · May 1, 2007, 15:15

Before the Japanese are ready, you mean? I dont think the IJN was ready to do a Pearl any earlier than they did it. As it is, they were lucky. They took months to gather intell, among other things. In this scenario the US hasnt concentrated its aircraft to avoid sabotage, and fewer are caught on the ground. The IJN may just suffer some serious losses.

Japan had been preparing for war for a long, long time. In fact, they had 18 months worth of oil supply, and knew Spring ’42 to be the latest possible date for an attack.

No reason for US help to be nil, it will be massive. Im also not sure why UKs economy is in paralysis. It didnt depend on the colonies, not even on India, and certainly not on the ME.

Nope. American war preparedness was nil, and it shows: it’s only one year into the war that they could launch a Torch, a rather small operation. So the UK, one year after American entry, don’t have that much to expect from them, except natural resources and escorts.

You also assumed the Germans roll all sevens and the brits act stupid as Rommel tries to move east from Alex.

Like yeah, I plan for a scenario where Rommel has more troops than the British (while he has been historically known to pwn their ass with consistently weaker forces), where he begins his invasion from the Lybian border (because he can be deployed right at Tobruk, in ’40), where he can stockpile everything he needs at the border (remember, I gave him a good 10 weeks of deployment and stockpiling before he attacks), where the Axis have a 3:1 air advantage, and you call it rolling sevens?

Sorry to puncture your balloon.

You’re a comedy.

**lord of the mark** · May 1, 2007, 17:31

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Oncle Boris

[

Again, you haven’t even bothered to read my argument. I have already stated that Germany attacks Yoguslavia and Greece in fall ’40, and provided you with a detailed rundown of the troops involved.

And when the Germans do this, this clues the allies that there what the German intend, and they strengthen the defenses in Egypt. You move German resources around dramatically, but then assume UK resources are not shifted in response.

Now sweety, how does one ‘destroy’ an airfield built on an unpaved surface? You could possibly destroy the landing field with bombs or mines, but arguably this kind of damage can be repaired in two weeks by Rommel’s engineers (he had some).

Theyre going to be busy, since they need to repair the port at Alex (or are your planes going to bring in the fuel for the trucks for the ME offensive?) and preparing to bridge the canal, etc.

And incidentally, why has no airfield ever been destroyed during the North African campaign?

Perhaps because no airfield was as essential to the campaign as you are intending them to be?

Yes, and the numbers I have given were taken from a webpage quoting this very same book. You either prove my quotes wrong, or admit defeat on the issue of supply.

Or admit I have finite time. Ive seen variations on this strategy discussed dozens of times on SHWI. Always with the same result. Go ahead and post it there, if youre so confident.

[

How many British troops in Egypt in September ’40? 30,000. Where’s the rest? In Britain, void of any heavy equipment (they left everything at Dunkerke).

There were others elsewhere in the ME, and troops coming from the east and from Australia, who would have gotten priority to get to Egypt once German moves in Spain and Yugo cued what was up.

So now, you explain me how Rommel, a decorated general (from WW1), who crossed the Meuse (deemed impassable by the French command), against more numerous French defenders, who reached El-Alamein while being undersupplied AND undernumbered by the British (in ’42), can possibly lose a battle with numerical superiority?

He may not lose, but that doesnt mean the Brits cant delay him as they retreat.

2. How many Italian infantry? They need supplies as well. You cant just supply Rommels divs.

Infantry on garrison doesn’t need jack. Even assuming 2,800 tons/month, I have already shown there’s plenty of room for everyone. Italian garrison in Western Lybia can also rely on Tunis.

Im not talking about infantry on garrison in Tripoli, but infantry actively protecting the flanks of Rommels advance.

3. Spanish troops will defend Morocco no better than the French did, but that doesnt matter, Torch isnt happening yet anyway.

[

I have given you every number you need, most of them coming from the book you claim ‘proves’ your point. I have given the tonnage capacity of German trucks, their fuel consumption, and North African road distances.

No, el tigre provided those.

[q]Why not? Theyre hardly going to be able to supply the port cities with grain to avert starvation, or to supply their troops approaching Gib.

Why? The Subs will operate from Britain, not from the Med. That is until the Brits have taken the Azores.

British long-range submarines were not suited to the Mediterrenan, while short-range ones couldn’t operate from Britain.

At best that buys you the west coast of Spain, not the cities on the east coast. Assuming of course that youve taken Gib very quickly, which relies on the brits "forgetting" to defend it.

Oh, and since youre waiting to take the eastern Med till youve done with Yugo and Greece, meanwhile the Brits are operating subs from the eastern Med.

As for the Azores, I think it has been explained that infantry is deployed there just a few days before the invasion.

Oh, this is one where the Portugese go from "allowing some uboats to refuel" to "being active members of the Axis". I forgot. They do this because they are eager to lose their african empire. Of course.

You’re probably about to tell me “how are they going to be supplied”, but what you don’t realize is that you don’t need that much to defend against an amphibious assault, provided you have sufficient infantry to interdict the shores in the first place. You can easily stockpile enough in peacetime.

And the british dont notice this? Are we talking Portuges infantry, or German infantry? The Brits allow a German amphib force to move towards the Azores and dont sink it? Oh, cause its done by stealth, when the Brits arent looking. With the aid of the Portugese. Lisbon being a notorious nest of spies, but the brit spies are conveniently napping. Much like the troops at Gib.

Irrelevant. Will the Japanese rely on a piece of paper, signed by Stalin of all people, to protect their rear?

That’s what they did,

No, they relied on the fact that Soviet forces were tied up fighting the Germans.

[q] so I assume that’s what they’ll do. What happened is that Japan kept a 40 divisions garrison in Mandchukuo throughout the war. They signed the treaty mostly to gain some diplomatic assurances on their flank, but they weren’t stupid enough to rely on the word of Stalin alone. In case you didn’t know, too, the Transiberian railroad is very limited. It took the USSR 3 months to recall troops from the Eastern front to Siberia, after German capitulation, in order to launch an attack against Japan, as agreed with America.

And if the Japanese are commited to war against the US, then in three months they face most of the Red Army, while still being commited all over the pacific and SE asia.

The Soviet armies were developing strong counter measures by 1942, in fact by late 1941, IIUC. In any case, their weaknesses were not only based on suprise.

Not at all. In fact, their inability to truly break German lines in the winter was due to their commander’s incompetence.

Which is widely attributed to the purges.

Just drop the alleged ‘Spanish infrastructure problem’. In no case was Spain in a state worse than Eastern Europe, so if Germany can bring 160 divisions to the gates of Moscow and Stalingrad, they can certainly move five divisions through an allied country.

They can, but can they do so in time before the Brits reinforce Gib, is one problem. The other is convincing Franco to BE in ally, which means moving enough grain to avoid revolution in Spain. If Franco doesnt think they can do that, he wont BE an ally.

Yes, Im afraid it was. The German General Staff themselves recognized that.

Their calculations were that they could, if they used the *entire*
capacity of the Spanish rail net (and there were consequences to this
that they did not consider), they could manage to get a Sturm
(Assault) Division or two down to Gib plus another couple of Infantry
Divisions and a limited amount of heavy artillery. Say five divisions
total.

This would be supported, perhaps, by half a Luftflotte of aircraft.
Perhaps.

So, according to you, again —

a) Germany can move a Panzer Korps to Stalingrad, through muddy roads and dozens of thousands of Ukrainian partisans, without using the rail network (which had been designed to be incompatible with German trains, and damaged by scorched earth tactics) ;
b) Germany can launch an air and seaborne assault on Norway and subdue the country (without even a road link, and with the Royal Navy just on the other side);
c) Germany can move through mountainous Greece and take Athens in three weeks, against fierce Greek resistance, British expeditionary forces, and legendary Greek partisans;
d) Rommel can blitz to St. Nazaire, with his own armored column (French railways were not under control);

But they can’t move a motorized column in Spain, with the full authorization of Franco.

According the German general staff. Who were aware of how fast they had to do it, what they had to be able to do when they got to Gib, and the need to supply food to Spain.

Why? According to you, because:

And Franco's goons will soon find what it is like to be playing
Napoleon to the Republic's Wellington.

Franco’s goons, who had fought alongside Italian and German troops during the civil war, would think it fun to disobey Franco and start a guerilla against members of their own military alliance.

I think youve to Napoleon and Wellington mixed up. The person Im quoting is suggesting that Francos goons would be trying to put down insurgents, and not succeeding.

This was the most they could get there (and not quickly, either) and the most that they could *supply* once they *were* there ... unless they supplied them by sea.

See, remember the limited rail net capacity?

That can barely supply five divisions at Gib?

This is madness. German trusts were designed to bring with them what supplies they needed for a week or two of combats. They would have brought with them every ammo they need until Gibraltar is decided.

I think the person Im quoting is expecting it to take a good bit longer than a week to take Gib.

Now, yes, the garrison of Gibraltar was relatively small in 1939-40,
but the capacity of the Spanish Rail net to get troops down south fast
in quantity was not enough ... so we can assume, quite reasonably,
that the allies, with control of the Atlantic, will get reinforcements
there.

A German motorized column can go from France and reach Algeciras in 48h, and begin offensive within 72h. The UK barely gets the time to notice, yet alone arm a reinforcement convoy… And what was Britain’s ability to conduct an amphibious assault in summer of ’40? What troops did they have?

They dont need to assault, they hold Gib.

And, push comes to shove, when they've bled the Germans dry, they can abandon it, as they now own the south side of the straits anyway.

Pure madness. Spanish Morocco is a fortified rock. England’s power projection capability is severely limited in ’40. How are they invading the Azores, Morocco, pounding the Spanish coast, infiltrating weapons in Portugal, while protecting their convoys against the Bismarck, Tirpitz, and U-Boots? You know, even in 1942, the UK was switching: one convoy for Malta, one for Murmansk, because they didn’t have enough ships to protect two convoys at the same time.

They were doing that cause most of their shipping was moving supplies and troops to britain, to build up for Torch. Also German subs were much more effective in '42 than in '40. In fact Bismarck isnt even ready till spring of '41. I thought this was all happening in '40? Theyre not pounding the Spanish coast, btw, theyre intercepting supplies to it. Theyre doing that with subs, and with capital ships, and NOT with ASW assets.

Oh, and they dont necessarily have to take the Azores, if theyve got Spanish Morocco. And the Azores may not be defended, depending on Portugese politics. And they dont need to infiltrate massive quantities of weapons to make problems for the Germans in Spain. Hell, UK agents in Lisbon can BUY weapons in Portugal.

You just keep fantasizing about British power without providing relevant information: which troops are they using, where and when? Which ships?

The ships and troops who wont be needed in Britain when it becomes clear that the Germans have given up on Sealion, and even on the BoB.

Yes, their artillery (in the Sturm Divisions and a limited amount of
nondivisional artillery), would be causing some problems ... but the
*British* have artillery, too. And they can support the position by
naval gunfire (which can be defended by Carrier CAP and ground based
CAP from the captured Spanish Morocco on the other side of the straits
... the obvious move for the defenders).

OK, so Gibraltar is a tough nut to crack. But sure, the Germans didn’t know? They had informants in the base (Italy too), they knew what ships were there, and when, they knew how the facilities looked like, and they had devised a plan of attack, which obviously they thought credible.

Have you ever read historical accounts of battles? The plan can be the following: Germany pounds Gibraltar for a few hours with their 1,200 or so bombers, protected by 100 or 200 Bf-109s (ample enough to contain whatever RAF there is at Gibraltar). Want to wager about the ability of Gibraltar’s defenders to coordinate a defense after a thousand bombers? In the meantime, artillery pounds the land stretch between Spain and the port. Mines and obstacles turn to rubble. Stukas fly their last sortie, bomb the British defenders as to stun them, and then infantry (with bayonets) rush in their armored SDKFZs, while tanks are providing cover.

Oh,so this isnt merely the schwerpunkt of an armored thrust? its large amounts of artillery, infantry, and locally based air (if you want decent dwell times).

Yes, they can win eventually. But first enough reinforcements and preperation will happen to slow them down, and meanwhile the Brits will take Spanish Morocco.

the Germans didn’t think it impossible, and apparently, seeing how they handled the war until ’42, rarely got their plans wrong (on a tactical scale, at least).

They came up with a plan for Sealion too, cause Hitler ordered it. They were happy they never had to execute that, and I think the same was true for Gib.

Portugal is Britain's oldest ally (since the 1300's). Shipping in weapons and training cadres will be child's play.

Portugal let U-Boots refuel in their bases, their banks took some German gold in transit from Switzerland, and it traded plenty with Nazi Germany.

With German troops in the country, protecting the ports, and Spain an Axis power, Salazar (a dictator) would have risked his job, and the lives of his citizens, for a “principled” stance for the UK? By throwing his pitiful army against German veteran Panzers? Houston, LOTM, Houston.

The assumption the person I quoted made was that Germany does NOT invade Portugal. There wont be German troops in country until EITHER Salazar agrees, or they invade against Salazars will. Franco saw the future accurately, and refused. Youve got to have both Franco and Salazar make the same mistake.

And, of course, the Italian Merchant Marine is gutted by the RN and
RAF in its attemps to support German ops in Spain ... and can't do
much there anyway.

So the Germans send in everything they can on the Mediterranean theater, and somewhat, the Italian navy finds itself more at risk than they were historically. Jesus ****ing Christ, LOTM, say hello to the world!

You seem to be ignoring that in OTL the RM did NOT attack Gib. Thats what the above is discussing.

And, even if the Germans and Italians *do* manage, somehow, to take
Gib, Spanish Morocco is now *British* Morocco, and the straits are
*still* closed ... not that there's any worry about the Italian Navy
breaking out and joining up with the German Navy as the Italian
Surface Fleet is now at the bottom of the Med.

This, I’d really like to know how it would happen. Amphibious assault against a rock, all while sinking the Italian navy.

Spanish Morocco is a rock? Pardon, there are no beaches? And how many Spanish troops are there in Morocco? And aircraft? And,no, they cant reinforce them, cause they RN will stop them.

Problem is, the Eastern Med is now an allied lake because *all* of
Italian North Africa is now Allied occupied ... and probably all of
French North Africa, too.

So the British, who in ’41 didn’t have any troops to commit to Greece other than what they removed from Lybia, launch an amphibious attack on Morocco, take the Azores, kick Vichy out of Algeria, sinks the Italian navy, protect their shipping against German subs, and outflank Rommel’s shiny panzers from Tunisia, all the while he’s been magically stopped at the Egyptian border, with three times the amount of troops he had in ’41?

he may be exaggerating a bit in response to foolishness like yours, but the main point is that the attack on Gib leads to the quick defeat of the RM, and this makes it possible to stop ALL supplies from the axis to the southside of the Med.

They reach a deal for a major French colonial concssion in days after the fall of France, which they could never reach after months. I think you misread the intentions of the Vichy pols.

How, pray tell, does one move and set up coastal batteries discretely?

Morocco is sovereign Spanish land, Spain can very well send an artillery battalion there without it being an act of war…

Dakar was sov French land, and so was Madagascar. The moment the Brits sniff whats up, the do what they need to do. Besides, even if they let the Spanish move their coastal artillery in, they now know exactly whats up.

But Spain is completely opaque?

Franco and his close subordinates, most likely. Now sure, the British are informed of the German columns moving through Spain, but they don’t have time to react, as I said (72h isn’t enough).

If all they need is the schwerpunkt of an armored thrust, and not infantry, artillery, etc, etc.

Somehow ISTR that moving armor ahead without infantry was an issues for the Panzers in Russia in '41.

He wants to sacrifice them? He doesnt want troops around when the inevitable insurgency starts in Spain?

So the republicans surrender in Madrid in the beginning of ’39, and suddenly rise up from their ashes, destroy Franco’s regime, and kick out German veterans?

Yes, then the choice is starvation. Its amazing how that eliminates support for a regime. And the Germans are busy attacking Gib, there arent any to spare to deal with insurgency.

Thank goodness you didnt need the full 5 divs to take Gibraltar. You only needed 1 div of Alpine troops. That leaves a lot to spare for Portugal.

Reading ability? The forces sent to Gibraltar are not the same as those sent to Portugal.

Reading ability? that was my point.

meanwhile, the RAF takes Spanish Morocco. Oh wait, I forgot theyre stopped by the stealth coastal batteries.

So it’s the RAF now? Where are their paratroopers stationed? And what paratroopers?

brain fart. the UK takes Spanish Morocco.

Are the Spanish troops in Morocco going to be supplied by the same Italian merchies that are supplying Rommel?

You’ve got a fixation on Italian “merchies”, haven’t you? Spain simply stockpiles before the DOW and is assumed to have enough to last a few weeks, enough for Germany or Italy to intervene if need be.

And Brit intell doesnt pick up on whats going?

**lord of the mark** · May 1, 2007, 17:31