WW2 - the Axis in the Mediterrenean

[Ned]

Lord Avalon, if Germany could not keep up with Britain in the air war over Britain, it was insane to take on more enemies or diversions. It diverted to Africa, attacked the USSR and DOWed the US -- all at a time, you say, it could not even match Britain.

Somehow, I doubt that what you say is true. I think Germany could have kept up with Britain and really needed to do so to win -- in addition to not spreading itself thin by taking on even more opponents.

Dr. Strangelove seems to be of the opinion that Germany had no chance. But, I wonder if he would think the same way had Germany focused only on taking Britain and had not taken on the USSR and the US as well.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Ned
Lord Avalon, if Germany could not keep up with Britain in the air war over Britain, it was insane to take on more enemies or diversions. It diverted to Africa, attacked the USSR and DOWed the US -- all at a time, you say, it could not even match Britain.

Actually, Rommel didn't go to Africa till Sept 40, which was near the end of the Battle of Britain. Battle of Britain Day is celebrated on 15 Sept, which in 1940 was when the Luftwaffe suffered a major defeat. Though fighting continued into Oct, it was clear that the Luftwaffe was not going to gain air superiority, so therefore an invasion was out of the question. So Germany turned elsewhere.

Operation Barbarossa wasn't until June of 41, and the US wasn't even involved till Dec 41.

Somehow, I doubt that what you say is true.

Not surprising - I imagine this is why people bring up the Nediverse.

I think Germany could have kept up with Britain and really needed to do so to win -- in addition to not spreading itself thin by taking on even more opponents.

http://www.iwm.org.uk/upload/package/27/battleofbritain/luftwaffe.htm

The Luftwaffe suffered various problems, both structural and operational, which hampered its effectiveness in the Battle of Britain. It was not designed for a strategic bombing campaign against a well-equipped and well-entrenched opposing fighter force, but as a close support weapon to move forward in concert with ground troops. The rapid occupation of France and the Low Countries in the spring of 1940 compelled the hasty preparation of many new air bases and caused supply problems. More significantly, the difficulties in establishing adequate localised facilities forced the removal of damaged aircraft back to Germany for repair. As a result of underachievement in aircraft production, the Luftwaffe suffered from a lack of reserves throughout the battle. German aircrew were well-trained and with much greater combat experience than their RAF counterparts. Fighter pilots survived longer, but the Germans had fewer of them than the British. The Luftwaffe's vitally important fighter, the Messerschmitt 109, had a very short combat endurance over Britain and the fighter force as a whole suffered from two decisive disadvantages. It had no method of plotting the positions of Fighter Command aircraft and it had no means of ground -to-air control of its machines.

Rather than switch to bombing London, if Germany had kept going after planes, bases, radar stations, and plane production industry (if they even knew where to find it), they might have won air superiority over the south of England. I still don't think they can invade for reasons stated previously in the thread. With the RAF having to come from bases further north, and if the radar is down, maybe the Luftwaffe can bomb the south almost at will and cause Britain to submit to an armistice.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ned


Just when did Germany lose air parity, at least, over the channel?

The German air force during the Battle of Britain lost an estimated one and one half planes for every R.A.F. plane shot down.

Admittedly the process of attrition was such that the R.A.F. could not have withstood the loss of such skilled pilots for very long.

On the other hand, the Nazis had created a large pool of people from Occupied Europe willing to join the R.A.F. - and there were brave and principled American volunteers too.

[Ned]

I see the problem. I know the Germans could not launch an invasion of Britain in 1940 for any number of reasons, including the complete lack of proper bases of all sorts in France. But this does not argue that Germany should have given up and diverted its resources elsewhere so that it could no longer invade Britain even if it wanted to, it argue for the buildup, the kind of buildup that the allies actually did from 1942-44 in order to invade itself.

The German airforce may not have had the ability to dominate even Southern England, but it had enough, I suspect, to dominate Northern France to cover the buildup. Over time, the balance of power would have swung in Germany's favor just as it did later in the allies' favor.

The attack in Africa that they actually conducted was just as difficult, if not more so, than waging war over Britain. There they faces long supply lines and the British navy, two problems for which they had no solution.

Finally, taking on Russia while the first two fronts were unresolved could not have been a sane choice as well. Only if the USSR is knocked out very quickly does it make sense. But, given the shear size of Russia, that was hardly possible.

So given the alternatives, the only sane choice for Germany was to build up for an invasion of Britain.

Try to imagine this as a war game. I have played several where you can take Germany or Britain, etc. The one thing they all have in common is the assumption that Germany does invade the USSR and the US gets into the war. Even under these circumstances, Germany is strong enough to do well, if not win. But everyone knows that if Germany can keep both the USSR and the US out of the war, it wins by invading England.

In real life, it just could not do so immediately. It had to be patient just like the allies were patient.

[Lord Avalon]

Ned, if Germany can't even keep up with Britain on planes, how the hell are they going to build up transports, let alone come from behind in warships?

Going to Africa was far less difficult. The RN & RAF are there in far less strength than around England. Plus there's Italian support (FWIW). And they sent fewer forces there than they would have used in an invasion.

Invading Russia didn't require any naval buildup. Maybe it was too soon, but how long would Stalin have waited to attack Germany?

Why should I imagine this as a wargame? Games need to include play balance. Reality does not.

Germany probably would have been better served by starting the war later. Panzer Is were training tanks. IIs weren't MBTs. They had to use Czech tanks to fill out their panzer divisions. Maybe by the time they invade Russia, they'd have more advanced tanks better able to deal with T-34s.

[Ned]

Lord Avalon, I have no detailed knowledge of the Luftwaffe's plans, but I am sure that Germany would have done something to match Britain's fighter production and to develop long range bombers that could strike Northern England and Scotland. But sending the airforce off to support ground invasions of Egypt and the USSR hardly helps correct the imbalance in airplane production.

If the Italians lost its possessions in Africa - so what. She was under no real threat of invasion from Britain.

As to Stalin, he was being courted by both Germany and England and probably was content just to sit back and watch the show for the time being as the other two major powers of Europe pounded each other. Besides, if he invaded Germany and not the other way around, he would not have the sympathy of the world and would have a hard time attracting allies and support if things went badly. You have to remember that Stalin was able to beat Hitler only because he was supplied by Britain and the US.

[Lord Avalon]

You're funny, Ned.

Not only does Germany have to match Britain's fighter production, but they also have to develop long-range bombers - and the long-range fighters to escort them. AND produce all these things. All while increasing production on destroyers, cruisers, battleships, and all the mundane ships needed to support a fleet, not to mention all the mundane ships needed for an invasion.

And they still need to produce tanks. It's only a matter of time before Germany & Russia go to war. One of those guys was gonna backstab the other.

You have to remember that Stalin was able to beat Hitler only because he was supplied by Britain and the US.

I don't have to remember anything of the sort. Sure, Russia needed help early on, but they did end up producing massive armies. Not to mention Russia is vast, has a nasty winter, which the Germans weren't prepared for, and Hitler was a strategic dumbass. So Allied help wasn't the "only" reason.

[Ned]

Lord Avalon, I never said Germany had to match Britain's surface fleet. All they had to do was get air supremacy over the channel. That would have been enough to keep the Brit fleet at bay.

Admittedly, this will not have happened overnight. Germany would have had to make serious investments in new fighter and bomber designs and ramp up production of these new new designs. That would have taken time -- which would have deferred the date for an invasion for years -- perhaps even to 1943 or 44. During this entire time, they would have been pounding Britain daily and wearing her down. In the end, I think Germany would have prevailed.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Ned
Lord Avalon, I never said Germany had to match Britain's surface fleet. All they had to do was get air supremacy over the channel. That would have been enough to keep the Brit fleet at bay.

Yeah, air power pwns all!

If Germany wants to invade England, they have to have a better fleet. Even if - and that's a big if - they should manage to get across the Channel with air superiority, they have to continue to supply it. What if the weather goes bad, so no one can fly? Then the RN has a field day, they can prevent any more Germans from getting across and lay down fire on the rear of the German beachhead, while the Brit army attacks from the other side.

But what good is Luftwaffe air superiority when they have no bombs that can damage cruisers or battleships? And while they might be able to take out some destroyers, there are plenty of those, and they're fast, so hard to take out in one shot, and the invasion barges extremely vulnerable. They really have little chance of even establishing a beachhead.

Admittedly, this will not have happened overnight. Germany would have had to make serious investments in new fighter and bomber designs and ramp up production of these new new designs. That would have taken time -- which would have deferred the date for an invasion for years -- perhaps even to 1943 or 44. During this entire time, they would have been pounding Britain daily and wearing her down. In the end, I think Germany would have prevailed.

You seem to be forgetting that the Germans lost the Battle of Britain. So if they keep trying to fight it, they will keep losing. So there's no "pounding Britain daily and wearing her down." They would only wear themselves down. There's just no way they prevail.

[Ned]

Lord Avalon, the battle certainly was not over. Germany could have reversed the situation with its own airfields and repair facility, RR connections, and new plane and bomb designs. The rate of technical progress of German war machines of all sorts was astounding. I think they overtake Britain in one or two years at most.

No other plan knocks Britain out of the war, which is the only way Germany could have won it.
I still think the fleet issue is a red herring. No naval commander in his right mind wound send surface ships anywhere near concentrated air power.

[Lord Avalon]

Ned, you're just wrong, wrong, wrong. If the battle wasn't over, why did Germany go in other directions? Fleet issue, red herring??? If you're defending Britain - your homeland - from invasion, you send the RN to attack, whether you've got air cover or not. You think the RN would just stay in dock just because the Luftwaffe's in the air?? Oh noes! It's teh Luftwaffe! Yes, please just invade us and have your way with us!

And, as I said, the Luftwaffe didn't have any AP bombs to hurt big ships, for which I provided a source. And the RN had lots of ships, Germans very few. They can take a lot of casualties, because the most important thing is to make sure the invasion doesn't even make it across the Channel.

Sure the Germans developed some good weapons of war, but how are they going to produce all that? They need resources and production capacity, which they were short on.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ned
You have to remember that Stalin was able to beat Hitler only because he was supplied by Britain and the US.

So not because the Nazis over reached themselves and were bogged down in Autumn rain and mud, and Winter snow and blizzards then ?

And were caught without sufficient winter clothing or vehicles that could operate in below freezing conditions ?


And not because the Japanese (having been beaten by the Russians in the East, quite badly prior to the outbreak of WWII in Europe) chose not to attack Russia, thus freeing up Zhukov and men and supplies from the East of Russia ?


I seem to recall some of those things certainly had an impact.

In this universe, anyway....

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ned
The rate of technical progress of German war machines of all sorts was astounding. I think they overtake Britain in one or two years at most.

Uh huh. And yet the stupid British managed to build a Spitfire and develop radar and bouncing bombs and break Nazi codes....


One wonders how.


Couldn't be any of those nasty Jewish people who left Nazi Germany could it ? They betrayed Hitler!

That's it !

[Saras]

Originally posted by Ned
Sara, are you believing your own propaganda again?

It's Saras, not Sara.

And that "propaganda" is more commonly known as "history". You know, the disciplined, rigorous and scientific study of past events and people.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Saras

You know, the disciplined, rigorous and scientific study of past events and people.

Alas, you have hit the nail firmly on the head.

Ned has spent so long cruising Holocaust-denial sites, he thinks there was a logical reason for Nazi antisemitism.


Apparently, according to his exhaustive researches, 'TEH JOOZE' declared war on Germany in the early 1930s, and Great Britain started WWI and WWII- ostensibly for German colonies, oil wells and bits of Austria-Hungary.

Oh, and Arabs only began killing Jews after World War I, because of the Palestine Mandate.

Before that Arabs and Jews had vibrated in cosmic harmony. Like Poles and Russians, Germans and the French and Muslims and Hindus....