Operation Sealion | Forums

[Chrystine]

*

True enough & I’m always for giving credit where credit’s due…
But strike ‘Israeli’ from that list â€" since the British Mandate over Palestine didn’t even expire until May of ’48.
The Arabs had not yet been completely betrayed and there was as-yet no ‘Israeli’ anything … Including a State.

Best,
~ C.

*

[V-MAN2404]

Operation Sealion could never have worked, even if the RAF was wiped out the logistics of a seaborne invasion of the UK by Germany was simply not possable. They didn't have the ships, trained personel and equipment in 1940 to do it. Anyone that says otherwise is a fool.

Overlord took years to plan and prepare for and that was with the industrial muscle of the US.

For the sake of argument tho lets say Sealion did work and the UK was occupied.

The British Government and the Monarchy would have gone to Canada not the USA (this was already planned) The Royal Navy would have gone into exile in Canada as well. Britain wouldn't have surrendered tho they would have carried on the war from other parts of the Empire. Either Canada or Australia would have become the lead nation of the Empire after the fall of Britain.

As for Russia, I think that Germany would most likely still fighting her today had Sealion worked. Germany only wanted living space from Russia not to conqure the whole country all the way to vladivostok on the pacific coast. Occupying a country who's entire population numbers in the hundreds of millions would have been beyond Germany

[V-MAN2404]

Originally posted by Dominicrigg:
WOw nice!

You just reminded me of some more things. No Britain means no bombing of Nazi Europe which means lots of progress with the super weapons. No Britain means no jet engines or decent engines for later american planes to compete with the German jets.

Its getting worse for the allies! Thanks God for Hurricanes and Spitfires.

Some other things to consider tho are that Germany actually produced more war materials in the latter part of the war when they were being bombed the most. Mainly because the bombings forced them to build bigger and better production facilities inside mountains where they couldn't be bombed. These probably wouldn't have been built if it wasn't for allied bombings.

Then there's the German A-Bomb, no British/Norwegian commando raid to cripple it....

[Dominicrigg]

Originally posted by zuluDROOG:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WirMussen:
today has marked the 65th anniversary of the battle of britain, but something i often think about is what would of happened if operation sealion went ahead and succeded?

There have been many popular books based on this alternate history theme. My 2 personal favorites are:

SS-GB by Len Deighton (set in the UK), and;
The Man in the High Castle by Philip K. **** (set in the USA)

Edit: My God! If Philip K. D-i-c-k's name has been censored... then so is my REAL NAME! Fascists! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Zulu, are those books pretty good? I like the look of the SSGB one, which would you recommend as i think i will get one to have a look at. I have always fancied reading an alternative history book and think that would be a good place to start rather then the Aliens in ww2 one (forget the name lol). I need a new book since i just finished reading Massimo Manfredi in Italian which melted my brain.

Ohh and ps of course i meant the pilots too! Also ground crews who my great uncle (on my mothers side) was one of (and his crew didnt flee and go on strike as you hear about some crews when they were being bombed) I just take that as not needing mention which was wrong i realise (and the planners and radar operators, and people of hit cities)

[Goose_Green]

Originally posted by Chrystine:
*

True enough & I’m always for giving credit where credit’s due…
But strike ‘Israeli’ from that list â€" since the British Mandate over Palestine didn’t even expire until May of ’48.
The Arabs had not yet been completely betrayed and there was as-yet no ‘Israeli’ anything … Including a State.

Best,
~ C.

*

Fair comment - lets just say who did the pilot/country list on the film "Battle of Britian" must have got it wrong. I stand corrected - you can see the pilots involved at the following link

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/roll.html

[Kaleun1961]

As long as we are "revising" history...

I'm somewhat bemused by the posts crediting the Brits with "saving" the Yanks' backsides at D-Day, giving them all that lovely anti-U-boat technology, etc. How about if the Brits [and the French] had not ****ed things up in the first place? In other words, no Rhineland re-occupation, no Munich sell-out and so forth. How about if Britain and France had some balls and did not need the Yanks at all to clean up their Euro-mess [again!]?

I just love how the Brits are credited with winning the war all on their own. I mean, really, if you want to take credit for winning the war, how about taking the blame for allowing the rise of the Nazis? Who was it that actually kept Britain alive... you know, Lend-Lease, destroyers for bases, etc.?

I'm not a Brit basher, but I will not sit idly by and hear the Yanks get lambasted again.

[Kaleun1961]

This also: The impression is given that the Yanks did not know how to build fighters, all because of the Merlin engine going into the P-51. How about giving the Yanks some thanks for the Grants, Lees, Stuarts and Shermans, without which Montgomery would still be trying to take back North Africa with those crappy Crusaders and the like with their pathetic little 2-pound guns?

The Yanks built some very good fighters, other than the P-51's. Just look at what they built for the Pacific war.

[3.JG51_Molders]

I have always pondered this when I read about the Battle of Britain and think "What if ?". Personally i think Germany should have given the go ahead when they knew the RAF's forward airfields were heavily damaged, something along the lines of an early morning invasion supported closely by Ju87s, 109Es and He111's. When I think about this, I think about the movie "Red dawn". . Another battle that comes to my mind along the same topic is the attack on Pearl Harbour. It was a brillent plan indeed, but I think where it lacked was an invasion of the main island of Hawaii. With the previous Japanese invasion of hong kong, they could might have pushed the Americans to surrendering. They could have even laucnhed long range bombers to bomb the West coast. What a thought eh ?

[WirMussen]

@Kaleun1961: I think your confussed, Britain has never said they won the war all alone, thats the impression americans give (especially with regards to the pacific theatre were i have seen many americans say they won there alone!)

Americas military contribution to this discussion is limited to lend-lease and 'what ifs' as they were not even in the war at this point.

And i cant see were anyone has said a word against american military hardware, especially as 'crappy' and 'pathetic'.

@Molders: Valid point on Pearl Harbour, iv never thought of that scenario, its a good one.

As for the actual execution of Operation Sealion: i believe the plan to protect the invasion fleet (after the RAF had been disposed of) was to mine the channel, leaving key sea lanes open for the fleet, this would prevent the royal navy closing. to help keep them away, U-Boats would then patrol outside the mined passages, and along with that the obvious pressence of the Luftwaffe.

[Kaleun1961]

Germany never did know that the forward airfields were nearly wiped out. That's why Goring switched to bombing London, in order to flush the British fighters into the air and try to finish them there.

My part about criticism of American planes is in response to another post elsewhere, which details how the P-51 was not a good fighter until it received the British engine. I agree, the original engine was inadequate and the Merlin engine was indeed a superior engine. I responded thus against the inferred argument that the Americans could not produce a superior fighter on their own. Also, I have read posts about how if it were not for the Royal Navy and all its technology, the Americans would be up the proverbial creek.

While it is fine to try to limit the discussion to the "what-ifs" regarding Sea Lion, some leeway must be given to counter-arguments. Thus I posited the pre-war line. Nevertheless, in order to remain on topic... I wonder if the U.S. would have sat by and allowed Germany to land in England. This may have been the trigger for the U.S. entering the war.

I do not believe the Royal Navy would have stayed out of the landing battle, even if Fighter Command had been neutralized. Every ship afloat would have gone after the German landing like a pitbull after a rabbit. I don't think the Luftwaffe could have prevented all of them from getting through. Look at their accuracy of bombing at Dunkirk. Under the very nose of the Luftwaffe, the British succeeded in evacuating over 300,000 men.