Best Battle of Britain Aircraft

[bigZ]

Drop tanks for the 109 had been successfully tested in Spain.

 

[renrich]

The LW lost the BOB because they could never have won it. Their air force was not set up to win that type of campaign and Hitler and his generals and admirals except perhaps for Goering were never serious about invading England anyway and did not have the means in the Summer- Fall of 1940 to execute Sea Lion. The first directive to invade England was issued in mid July and all preparations were to be completed by mid August. ABSURD! The Anglo-American invasion of N Africa took over 9 months to prepare. Rightly so, the BOB was made into a great propaganda victory for Britain but the British Isles were never in any great danger. Having said that, the BF was not suited as an escort fighter because of short range and the British fighters held all the advantages of fighting over their own territory.

 

[Messy1]

Agree renrich.

 

[Burmese Bandit]

The LW lost the BOB because they could never have won it. Their air force was not set up to win that type of campaign and Hitler and his generals and admirals except perhaps for Goering were never serious about invading England anyway and did not have the means in the Summer- Fall of 1940 to execute Sea Lion. The first directive to invade England was issued in mid July and all preparations were to be completed by mid August. ABSURD! The Anglo-American invasion of N Africa took over 9 months to prepare. Rightly so, the BOB was made into a great propaganda victory for Britain but the British Isles were never in any great danger. Having said that, the BF was not suited as an escort fighter because of short range and the British fighters held all the advantages of fighting over their own territory.

Alas....I must, respectfully and humbly, disagree....

What most people don't realise is that England in 1940 was in an absolutely hopeless shape to resist an invasion.

Whose opinion? Mine? No, the opinion of, among others, FIELD MARSHAL SIR BERNARD LAW MONTGOMERY. In his postwar writings he wrote that if the Germans had really mounted an attack, and assuming the luck of battle was evenly balanced between the two sides, England would have fallen as a coherent fighting unit within two to three months.

At the time of the BoB England had -

No modern tanks in any numbers worth speaking of.
NO USEFUL ANTI TANK GUNS
None of the marvellous system of convoy defence, ship repair, and efficient maritime administration that would grow up later in the war
NO MODERN FIELD ARTILLERY!!!! Nearly every single freaking 25 pounder had been lost in France!
A shortage of everything from boots to rifles...
Generals who didn't have a clue how to fight a bloody war (Monty is particulary scathing on this - he should know - he had to fire a dozen or so of them later in the war)
Labour Unions WHO WERE STILL STRIKING IN THE MIDDLE OF A BLOODY WAR (believe it or not!)

the list goes on and on, but you get the picture......


IMHO if the luftwaffe, instead of bombing London, had bombed the port cities in combination with the U-boat sinkings (Churchill in his memoirs stated that this was the very combination he had nightmares about at the time) and after six months of this, had mounted an invasion, weak, unprepared Britian would have gone down from as little as five good german divisions.

OK...now let the debate and controversy begin!

 

[renrich]

Read JFC Fuller about the "invasion." This debate has been had on this forum before but the determining factor IMO is to look at the intentions of Hitler and his high command. To say seriously that preparations for the invasion were to be completed in one month is nonsense. Blumentritt said that, in July, Hitler told Runstedt that he did not intend to carry out Sealion. The original directive involved 39 divisions, 1722 barges, 471 tugs,1161 motor boats and 155 transports all fitted out and assenbled at the channel ports. In one month?

 

[Njaco]

Here is one of the better threads.....

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/operation-sea-lion-2795.html

 

[Messy1]

Without air superiority, Germany had any chance at all. History backs that up.

 

[kool kitty89]

And don't forget an invasion fleet would have to face the Royal Navy.

 

[Burmese Bandit]

The point which everyone, including kool kitty, seems to be missing in this - the idea that any possible invasion scenario of Britain in 1940 must fail, no matter what, rests of two assumptions:

(1) That the invasion HAD to be mostly or completely seaborne.
(2) That the Germans would be following the SAME BoB strategy and tactics in ALL possible scenarios.

As I (and many historians and generals and politicians, including Montgomery and Churchill) have pointed out, there were many other options available to the Luftwaffe and the Army.

What if the Luftwaffe Fighter arm had remained on the defensive in the BoB and stayed patrolling over the invasion ports, and allowed the invasion ports to slowly fill with invasion barges...the RAF would be forced to attck these ports, and with the home field advantage of both fighters and Flak, the Luftwaffe would have slaughtered the RAF bombers and fighters. (This did happen in the BoB on a smaller scale BTW).

And what if, simultaneously, the Luftwaffe had pounded using the once-by-day and many-times-by-night technique the East Coast Port Cities of Liverpool, Hull, etc etc, while the German Navy sent out its U-boats (yes, there were few of them in the BoB period, but against that we have to counterbalance the fact that the convoy system was in its infancy, escorts were scarcer than hen's teeth, the entire Royal Navy carrier force COULD NOT SINK ANY GERMAN SUBMARINE EVEN WITH A DIRECT HIT ON THE PRESSURE HULL (see Roskill, the best authority on the subject) and most of the destroyers were concentrated near the channel to counter an invasion)and this went on for months?

There would have been catastrophic effects on British Armament Production, AND food supplies...and as many doctors can tell you, it is slow, steady starvation that is the greatest breaker of morale. That's how the Germans lost WW I.

Your comments would be appreciated by me...

 

[slaterat]

I agree with Burmese bandit. In the summer of 1940 on land Britain was basically defenseless with its forces in chaos. A combined air/sea invasion by Germany could of been successful. Could the RN stop Sea Lion without air superiority ? maybe, maybe not. What can be said for sure though, is by the summer of 1941 things had completely changed.

Slaterat

 

[renrich]

There are all kind of scenarios one can construct about a German invasion of Britain. One can get plausible results if the Germans take enough time and concentrate their strength. One factor which the scenarios should certainly take into account is weather patterns. Remember how important a role weather played in Overlord. The fact remains, however, that Hitler never appeared to be serious about Sealion. Therefore England was never in as serious danger as popular opinion would have it. These facts don't seriously diminish the efort by the British during the BOB. For the first time the LW was shown to be beatable.

 

[kool kitty89]

And Hitler would have been to eager to shift to the invasion in the East to invest that kind of time and resources on Britain.

 

[Waynos]

The German objective was to remove Britain from the war to allow them to concentrate on Russia. And Hitler was completely serious about this objective and people looking at the BoB as something that Germany was not serious about are forgetting, or unaware of the domestic situation in Britain at the time.

There is more than one way to skin a cat and, while it is true that the Invasion of Britain as envisaged by almost everyone would have been impossible to successfully mount (due mainly to the existance of the Royal Navy) the reality was that Lord Halifax was determined to make peace with Germany right from the fall of France and the ex-king Edward VIII was freindly with Hitler. What is not so well known is that there was a lot of support in Parliament for Halifax's position as most MP's were in agreement that Germany was unbeatable and our position was hopeless, Churchill was feeling very threatened at this time and his rousing speeches were aimed as much at his colleagues as they were at the general populace.

A German victory in the BoB would have resulted in Germany achieving its aims by them being INVITED into Great Britain with Lord Halifax as PM, Churchill having been overthrown in a bid to prevent the destruction of the British Empire - which Hitler wanted to preserve as a single entity - and the Royal family having fled to Canada to be replaced by the reinstated Edward VIII as monarch.

But before I get rambling on about this in too much detail (if I haven't already) the most important plane of the BoB is impossible to define. The key to success was the Spitfire, Hurricane AND radar. The first two wouldn't have mattered without the latter.

The Bf 109 could not have been the best aircraft of the battle because it was being employed in the wrong job, despite its technical excellence. If Germany had a P-51 to deploy things MAY have been a bit different.

 

[Messy1]

The German objective was to remove Britain from the war to allow them to concentrate on Russia. And Hitler was completely serious about this objective and people looking at the BoB as something that Germany was not serious about are forgetting, or unaware of the domestic situation in Britain at the time.

There is more than one way to skin a cat and, while it is true that the Invasion of Britain as envisaged by almost everyone would have been impossible to successfully mount (due mainly to the existance of the Royal Navy) the reality was that Lord Halifax was determined to make peace with Germany right from the fall of France and the ex-king Edward VIII was freindly with Hitler. What is not so well known is that there was a lot of support in Parliament for Halifax's position as most MP's were in agreement that Germany was unbeatable and our position was hopeless, Churchill was feeling very threatened at this time and his rousing speeches were aimed as much at his colleagues as they were at the general populace.

A German victory in the BoB would have resulted in Germany achieving its aims by them being INVITED into Great Britain with Lord Halifax as PM, Churchill having been overthrown in a bid to prevent the destruction of the British Empire - which Hitler wanted to preserve as a single entity - and the Royal family having fled to Canada to be replaced by the reinstated Edward VIII as monarch.

But before I get rambling on about this in too much detail (if I haven't already) the most important plane of the BoB is impossible to define. The key to success was the Spitfire, Hurricane AND radar. The first two wouldn't have mattered without the latter.

The Bf 109 could not have been the best aircraft of the battle because it was being employed in the wrong job, despite its technical excellence. If Germany had a P-51 to deploy things MAY have been a bit different.

Excellent post Waynos. A lot of info there that I had not known before. Very interesting!

 

[Glider]

The point which everyone, including kool kitty, seems to be missing in this - the idea that any possible invasion scenario of Britain in 1940 must fail, no matter what, rests of two assumptions:

(1) That the invasion HAD to be mostly or completely seaborne.
(2) That the Germans would be following the SAME BoB strategy and tactics in ALL possible scenarios.

As I (and many historians and generals and politicians, including Montgomery and Churchill) have pointed out, there were many other options available to the Luftwaffe and the Army.

What if the Luftwaffe Fighter arm had remained on the defensive in the BoB and stayed patrolling over the invasion ports, and allowed the invasion ports to slowly fill with invasion barges...the RAF would be forced to attck these ports, and with the home field advantage of both fighters and Flak, the Luftwaffe would have slaughtered the RAF bombers and fighters. (This did happen in the BoB on a smaller scale BTW).

The serious damage that was done to the German barges was done at night when all the 109's avalable wouldn't be of any help. Daylight attacks would have been expensive and not advisable. What it would have done was allow the RAF to build up its strength.

And what if, simultaneously, the Luftwaffe had pounded using the once-by-day and many-times-by-night technique the East Coast Port Cities of Liverpool, Hull, etc etc,

German Bombers didn't have the payload to do this level of damage, and there wasn't enough of them. At the time we probably thought that they did, but it was proven many times during the war that this wasn't the case.

while the German Navy sent out its U-boats (yes, there were few of them in the BoB period, but against that we have to counterbalance the fact that the convoy system was in its infancy, escorts were scarcer than hen's teeth, the entire Royal Navy carrier force COULD NOT SINK ANY GERMAN SUBMARINE EVEN WITH A DIRECT HIT ON THE PRESSURE HULL (see Roskill, the best authority on the subject) and most of the destroyers were concentrated near the channel to counter an invasion)and this went on for months?

Destroyers are not the key to A/S warfare so the fact that some of them were on anti invasion duties wouldn't have made much of a difference. Also if you concentrate the U Boats you allow the RN to concentrate their A/S forces. They would tend to balance each other out, plus far more aircraft would be available close to shore.
You don't need to destroy a U Boat to significantly hinder the boats effectiveness. An Avro Anson even an unarmed Anson flying in the area of a convoy is enough to keep it submerged.

There would have been catastrophic effects on British Armament Production, AND food supplies...and as many doctors can tell you, it is slow, steady starvation that is the greatest breaker of morale. That's how the Germans lost WW I.

Your comments would be appreciated by me...

How would the impact be measured, I don't know probably not much more than actually happened. Maybe even less.

 

[Glider]

Alas....I must, respectfully and humbly, disagree....

What most people don't realise is that England in 1940 was in an absolutely hopeless shape to resist an invasion.

Also what people don't realise is that Germany were in no condition to launch a landing. The Japanese who inspected the preparations were pretty scathing.

Whose opinion? Mine? No, the opinion of, among others, FIELD MARSHAL SIR BERNARD LAW MONTGOMERY. In his postwar writings he wrote that if the Germans had really mounted an attack, and assuming the luck of battle was evenly balanced between the two sides, England would have fallen as a coherent fighting unit within two to three months.

Attack with what? Remember Germany had 10 destroyers in total in the Summer of 1940. No one invades anyone with 10 destroyers if and its a big if, they stayed undamaged in the build up.

At the time of the BoB England had -

No modern tanks in any numbers worth speaking of.
NO USEFUL ANTI TANK GUNS

And how many Tanks would the Germans land? Remember Germany had no tank landing craft just some converted barges.

None of the marvellous system of convoy defence, ship repair, and efficient maritime administration that would grow up later in the war

The Convoys were introduced before Sept 1940 and the Ship repair organisation ie shipyards did exist.

NO MODERN FIELD ARTILLERY!!!! Nearly every single freaking 25 pounder had been lost in France!

Not quite, all the first 25pd's on the 18pd mounts had been lost but the 25pd was in full production and its probably the only modern piece of equipment that was in decent numbers. In 1940 about 1,100 guns were produced and 4million shells.

A shortage of everything from boots to rifles...
Generals who didn't have a clue how to fight a bloody war (Monty is particulary scathing on this - he should know - he had to fire a dozen or so of them later in the war)

As for the Generals, I am not inclined to take to much of what Montgomery says. He was well known for blowing his own trumpet and putting others down even if they didn't deserve it.

Labour Unions WHO WERE STILL STRIKING IN THE MIDDLE OF A BLOODY WAR (believe it or not!)

True but this tended to get worse as the war situation improved. Strange but true.

IMHO if the luftwaffe, instead of bombing London, had bombed the port cities in combination with the U-boat sinkings (Churchill in his memoirs stated that this was the very combination he had nightmares about at the time) and after six months of this, had mounted an invasion, weak, unprepared Britian would have gone down from as little as five good german divisions.

OK...now let the debate and controversy begin!

Most of the points were covered earlier but the Germans would be very lucky to get anything like 5 divisions across.

 

[Waynos]

All of which excellent points made by Glider explain an Invasion of force was never going to succeed, the Royal Navy, which was vastly superior in numbers to the German navy, would have smashed it to bits had it launched, with 40 destroyers to nine (and that was only the Home fleet) the odds were certainly against the Kriegsmarine and the fact that even the bow wave of a destroyer, at full speed, will swamp a river barge, thats before it fires any guns, the very idea of river barges packed with men and marerials being towed, in pairs, by tugs across the treacherous waters of the channel, very slowly, without RN interference putting paid to them is preposterous. But that does not equate to Germany not being serious, as I wrote above. The apparent build up of an invasion force with hundreds of Barges (that were barely seaworthy anyway) was just another prod to Britain in the direction of a 'negotiated peace' ie capitulation. The end result would have been the same had the RAF been smashed.

 

[Graeme]

ex-king Edward VIII was freindly with Hitler.
- and the Royal family having fled to Canada to be replaced by the reinstated Edward VIII as monarch.

Wayne, I don't know how accurate "The Windsor Story" is, but you come away with the impression that the man was "pathetic". Would they have really reinstated him? Seems very unlikely according to this book. It also puts a different spin on the 1937 visit to Germany...

"-was nothing more reprehensible than a sight-seeing trip, devoid of politics, but ill-organised in its timing and sponsorship."

But as a couple they made a LOT of bad choices, kinda like the Seinfelds of royalty!

 

[Burmese Bandit]

Glider: I will later give a longer reply to your post, but first let me point you in the direction of the historian Corelli Barnett's books - in particular, his excellent "The Audit of War" for a detailed study of just how shockingly unprepared Britain was for war.

 

[Glider]

Feel free I look forward to it, but I suggest a new thread as this is supposed to be about BOB aircraft.