what if germany invaded britain - Sealion

what would have happened if germany invaded britain. Look i know it was not very likly but just imagine that some how the R.A.F was destroyed and the royal navy sunk. And the germans managed to land their forces in england what would have happened. would there be a totaly new theater and would it have been the british armys greatest battle.I think that in the end the british would have won ( because they had the best infantry in ww2)

 

That´s two quite big what if´s...

If you started the scenario with the RAF and Royal Navy destroyed then I guess the Germans might have a chance...At least that´s required to try to cross the channel and even then it might be the German ships would sink due to bad weather.....

 

With the RAF destroyed and the Royal Navy sunk we're assuming a dominant Luftwaffe and that the Wehrmacht somehow manage to move heavy weapons and tanks across the Channel.

In that case, no matter how good the British infantry and how courageous the Home Guard, the losses of equipment at Dunkirk would have been a major factor. You can't fight Panzers and Stukas with Ross rifles and petrol bombs.....

The close proximity of London to the Eastern ( invasion ) coast would also have been a weakness. Churchill's position as inspirational National leader at that time was relatively insecure.

The decision would have been what Hitler desired - a political collapse and capitulation. Yes, there would have been a 'resistance movement' in the Scottish Highlands or Cornwall, but London would have been in German hands.

But it's all pure fantasy - I'll say it again - thank God for the RAF and the English Channel !

 

…and for the Germans' stupidity!

This might be true for 1943 or 1944, but certainly not for the whole war!

 

This might be true for 1943 or 1944, but certainly not for the whole war! [/QB][/QUOTE]

Well, i think the case could even be argue against it being the case in 43, 44. But at the end of the day, it is a matter of opinion.

As for the invasion. Well, firstly, that would only hasve taken place with the RAF destroyed. And that was far from unlikely, i believe the RAF was 2 weeks away from destruction.

As for the RN, would that really have been a threat. WE are talking about a cross channel invasion across the narrowiest point, 22 miles. This would have meant little room for the RN to operate and bring its superior numbers to bear. And, it would have brough the RN to within range of German land based artillery, and more importantly the German Airforce. And the all now the consiquences of naval power going up against airpower. Taranto, Pearl Harbour, the Pacific, they all show ships don't stand a chance against aircraft without air cover. And of course there is no RAF, and i doubt that Swordfish and Fulmas would have been a match for 109s.

So, there is nothing stopping the Germans from invading. What could we ahve done. We have an army thats got no equipment and has just been roundly beaten in France, and the Home Guard, old men and boys armed with shotguns. These are up against guys who just occupied Europe in 6 weeks, beating two of the best and most powerful armies in the world in the process.

As for resistance in the Scottish Higlands. Why would the Germans bother. If they had any sense they would have done what the Romans did, build and wall and let them rot. There would ahve been no need to take Scotland. Its a cul-de-sac, it doesn't lead anywhere and theres nothing of value, more trouble than its worth. Britain isn't like Yugoslavia which is covered in mountains that you have to pass through.

I recall watching the news a while back about the realease of German documents. I seem to recall that German plans for Britain were similar to those of France. Take the important bit, and leave to reat to a right wing British goverment. And the capital of German control Britain would have been a small town in the midlands, i forget the name.

 

That's right-nothing, except three of the most important RN bases in Britain-Scapa Flow, Invergordon and Rosyth. Some of the most important ports and dockyards in Britain-Glasgow and Clydeside. So unimportant that the Luftwaffe blitzed Clydebank in 1941.
Nothing except the vast majority of the UK's timber and coalfields in the '40s; heard of the Newfoundland Overseas Forestry Unit, the Canadian Forestry Corps, the Women's Timber Corps? All based in Scotland/Northern England to harvest the rich timber supplies-along with other lumberjacks from British Guiana. The world record for coal produced per man shift was set at the Manor Powis colliery in Clackmannanshire, Central Scotland, pre-war. Not bad for an area 'with nothing of value'. All good reasons for the Germans to continue advancing.
The hills on the Scottish side of the border are high enough with narrow enough passes to prove a major obstacle to a land attack. Bear in mind too that there were top secret plans to attack invasion beaches with Mustard Gas, and that two of the designated airfields (and several stores) were in Scotland. By that stage, sheer survival would have triumphed over 'ethics'. All good reasons for resistance to continue in Scotland.
As for the Romans, they tried an experimental fortified frontier on the Gask Ridge in Perthshire before they retreated south and built Hadrian's Wall. They then tried to extend the frontier northwards by building the Antonine Wall across Central Scotland-and got severely ****ed in the process.

[ 09. September 2005, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: The_Historian ]

 

I agree with much of what has been said, as for the Scotland issue, well, they went for the caucasus didn't they? The Germans would have damn good reasons for going for Scotland but they would face resistance and undoubtedly some form of partisan warfare would develope.

 

Firstly - welcome back, Bish - long time no speak !

But the RAF was quite a lot more than 2 weeks from destruction - that's why the Luftwaffe pilots started to become a little demoralised in mid-September 1940 ; the 'last 50 Spitfires' so dear to German Intelligence went on - and on - and on.

And as for Scotland - well, with the Royal Navy sunk those Naval bases would have been pretty irrelevant. Probably best to just rebuild Hadrian's wall - eh, Gordon ?

 

Even if you wave a magic wand and the RAF and RN disappear, the Germans still have major problems with their invasion plans.
The German high Commands final plan for the September landing, was 3 seperate beach-heads over a 50 mile front, with a maximum of 1 division per beach-head , and a further air landed divison, on S-day itself
With no interference from the RN its was hoped that over an 11 day period this would be built up to 9 divisions in total.
Facing them on the South coast was a total 16 divisions and at least 2 Armoured brigades (total British forces were around 26 divisions and 4 armoured brigades)

 

Been saying it for years now, Martin!

 

i think that the british would have made a line of defense around london. Lets face it the british would have had more land forces than the germans. the only thing that the germans had were planes but this whole war was faught in the air

 

With what? If this 'What If...' scenario takes place in the immediate aftermath of Dunkirk, with what are you going to form this defence?

Would they? Depends how much the Germans send over... But the real problem is where are all these British soldiers coming from and what are they going to be equipped with???

Well that kinda kills your initial statement that the British would have won cos they were the best. If the war was to be decided 'in the air', then surely the lack of the RAF would have doomed the British defence? No air cover for ground troops... Lots of Stukas... Need I say more...


My Grandfather came back from Dunkirk. If the state he was in was even slightly typical of those who returned, then its bloody good the Germans didnt turn up at the seaside...

 

Still... Even if GB falls...

Atleast there is Ireland.

Not even Hitler would have been stupid enough to invaded Eire!

 

For a substantial German force to land on English soil there would have to be the crippling RAF losses. There would still be bases in the North outside of Luftwaffe range, but with air superiority in German hands the RAF would be reduced to harrassing actions. So they would not be a major impact on the transfer and landings.

The Royal Navy being so crippled that they could not oppose the landing would also mean they were so crippled they could not oppose German convoy blockades. This would be disastorous for the British forces. Without the Atlantic supply lines the prospect of maintaining against the Germans, even on home soil, would be grim.

If the invasion occurs far enough in advace that Great Britain capitulates as a nation before Pearl Harbor, I don't know if America would have gotten involved in the European Theater until after beating the Japanese. This may have meant that the American effort may have come through Asia instead of Europe to assist the Russians.

 

But Gordon, would all of this have been worth the trouble it would have taken to capture it.

What use would the naval bases have been. With the rest of Britain taken, any ship there would have been easy prey for German aircraft and they would have been out on a limb, with any supplies haveing to come by sea from Canada at best. And no doubt Scapa Flow could just have been taken with an airbourne force.

Coal, Germany has the coal mines of the Ruhr and Northern France, plus now the English ones and possibly Wales, would the coal of Scotland made a great deal of difference. Not sure about the state of German coal supplies, but don't seem to recall hearing of a problem with shortages, the problem they was with oil.

Timber, again, never heard it being a problem, and if i'm not mistaken, German itself has vast forests, plus access to scandiavian timber. So again, what could Scotland provide that Germany didn't have.

So, no, there is nothing there thats worth all the trouble it would have caused.

 

As Redbaron points out, you seem tocontrdicte yourself there. But if i'm not mistaken, the Germans were also out numbered in france, but that didn't stop them takeing that in a few weeks. They were also out numbered in Russia, but they went through that rather quick. Numbers are not everything. And i'm not sure about Crete, but weren't the Germans out numbered there as well. Not sure about Allied figures, think the Germans had just over 22,000.

As for the only thing the Germans haveing being planes, well i do seem to recall they had the odd tank or two, and they were rather important.

 

But Bish,
The Nazis weren't in the habit of leaving countries half-conquered, ignoring natural resources and all those nice new slave-labour victims to add to the Reich. Only an Englishmen would insist on Scotland not being worth the effort of fighting over. No-one said the Germans would be beaten off by resistance up here, but unlike now the population wouldn't just have rolled over when England went either. That's when the question of it 'being worth it' comes in...in terms of casualties inflicted on the Nazis.

 

So what about France then. The news item i watch some months back suggested that the UK would be treated just like France. Part conoleed by Germany, the other part by a puppet goverment.

I don't think the casualties inflicted on the GERMANS would have been worth what they would ahve gained by takeing Scotland.

O, and why would the Scots have been used as slave labour. Is Scotland full of Jews or Slavs, or were the Scots considered Untermenschen (no comment from me on that ) by the Germans. They considered the British as a Germanic people, the same as the Dutch and other North Western Europeans.

 

I seem to remember that the concentration camps were full of German victims too.
Why wouldn't the Scots and the rest of the British population have been treated as slave/forced labour? Being British didn't help any Jews in the Channel Islands.
I also don't believe the Germans would have left the heavily-industrialised Central belt alone, considering the majority of Scotland's 5.1 million people lived there. Bearing in mind that London's population was estimated at 8,615,000 in 1939, it's unlikely the Nazis would have ignored half as many people again living in Scotland. What Quisling government would have run Scotland? The Scottish National Party's support didn't exist outside the intelligentsia, the country was heavily-unionised and almost a Labour Party stronghold. Neither of which the Nazis would have tolerated for long. Labour would have been dismissed as 'Communists' and treated accordingly.

 

They did ! As I'm sure our friend Pillboxes would confirm, two 'stop lines' of interlinked pillboxes and anti-tank ditches, etc were swiftly built post-Dunkirk and many traces can still be seen today.

But realistically, under a determined onslaught backed by tactical air power I doubt whether a delay of more than a day or two would have resulted....