After the fall of France, Hitler gives Spanish leader Franco "an offer he can't refuse".
Germany tells Spain its army & air force are coming to close the straights of Gibraltar, and Spain can either join the Axis and gain the fruits of victory, or suffer the agony of defeat.
Consider:

The Axis lost the battle for North Africa due to allied raids on their supply lines. If the straights are closed by land based German aircraft operating from bases in southern and western Spain (and the British carrier's can be totally discounted here), this leads to the fall of Malta, unrestricted re-supply for the armies in North Africa, and greatly reduces Britons ability to supply their own forces. Malta falls, North Africa falls, Egypt falls(and with it, the all important Suez canal). With the Mediterranean now totally in axis hands, the entire Italian fleet is now freed to enter the Atlantic/Indian Oceans at will.

Combined with #1, things would be looking mighty grim for the UK about now.

[ 29. November 2006, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Otto ]

__________________
Maskirovka: Show the world one thing...then do another.

http://maskirovka.blogspot.com/

I think the Italian fleet was mostly sunk by Swordfish before all of France fell. The Germans let the Vichy rule southern France for awhile then took full control, but I am not sure of the dates. Nov. 11, 1940 was when the Swordfish attacked Taranto.

__________________
Work Harder ! Millions on welfare are depending on you.

If I remember correctly, most of the damage they suffered was in damage to their ships. Only a relative few were actually sunk, but the others were out of commission for some time.

France fell in the summer of 1940, so the Germans would have sealed the eastern med shortly there after. In my what if #1, the Germans would dominate the N Atlantic in short order, making the battle for North Africa that much easier.

Thanks for the reply!

__________________
Maskirovka: Show the world one thing...then do another.

http://maskirovka.blogspot.com/

I doubt that Franco would have just willingly given in to Hitler which means Spain resists invasion and the inevidable occupation that would follow. This puts Hitler off on any Battle of Britain at a serious level as the Luftwaffe will be needed to support operations in Spain and the Med.
But, if we assume that Hitler does invade Spain (and Portugal) he gets for his trouble a greatly increased coastline to defend and two more countries requiring occupation forces.
Also, the fall of Gibralter does not necessarily mean that Malta will fall. Short of an invasion it is likely to remain a pain in the German backside to operations in North Africa.
As to the later, the biggest problem for the Germans in North Africa was their abomidable supply system. At the Alamein position they were using 4 gallons of gasoline to deliver one to the front. And, this does not account for wastage which in itself was substancial. Basically, there really is little likelihood of Rommel succeeding in taking all of Egypt. As for dominating the Atlantic using the Italian fleet. Ain't gonna happen. The Italians have no at sea refueling capacity (although the Germans do) and their ships are realtively short legged. What was left of the Italian fleet after Matapan and Taranto was mainly smaller units; almost all of their battleships were out of action.

Ahhhhh.....

The Germans helped Franco come to power in the Spanish civil war, why would he wish to be a conquered nation rather than an ally? And even if he did, would his poeple stand for it? Were this an isolated change (and Franco decided to commit national suicide) from historical fact, you would be right. If #1 were also going on, no BoB would be needed.

Quote:

Originally posted by T. A. Gardner: [QB]But, if we assume that Hitler does invade Spain (and Portugal) he gets for his trouble a greatly increased coastline to defend and two more countries requiring occupation forces. Also, the fall of Gibralter does not necessarily mean that Malta will fall. Short of an invasion it is likely to remain a pain in the German backside to operations in North Africa.

Malta was a pain in the German backside not because of the troops on the ground, but because of the planes based there raiding the Axis supply lines. Take away the supplies to malta based aircraft (as the German airforce did suscessfully until operation barbarosa), and you remove or greatly reduce that thorn.

Quote:

Originally posted by T. A. Gardner: [QB]As to the later, the biggest problem for the Germans in North Africa was their abomidable supply system. At the Alamein position they were using 4 gallons of gasoline to deliver one to the front. And, this does not account for wastage which in itself was substancial. Basically, there really is little likelihood of Rommel succeeding in taking all of Egypt.

Where and how were the British getting their supplys? Some were coming from India, but the rest were coming from england, right? with the western med closed to British ships, no supplies could reach montgomery from there.

Quote:

Originally posted by T. A. Gardner: [QB]As for dominating the Atlantic using the Italian fleet. Ain't gonna happen. The Italians have no at sea refueling capacity (although the Germans do) and their ships are realtively short legged. What was left of the Italian fleet after Matapan and Taranto was mainly smaller units; almost all of their battleships were out of action.

Again, if #1 were also happening, the Italian fleet would just be icing on the cake.

__________________
Maskirovka: Show the world one thing...then do another.

http://maskirovka.blogspot.com/

Franco was not keen on what would essentially be a German occupation of Spain. In this sense, he was no different from Mussolini in Italy who insisted on minimal German presence in Italy. Mussolini actually insisted on running more of a "parallel war" rather than outright coalition warfare like the Allies had.
So, for Franco, whose army was heavily debilitated from the recent civil war, the choice is not between agreeing and forced occupation; it is between forced occupation and occupation. I would say neither was palatable to Franco and that is why he neither joined the Germans nor allowed their presence in Spain.
If no Battle of Britain occurs following the fall of France then the British are in a far stronger position right off both at sea and in the Mediterrainian. They could afford to reinforce Malta much sooner and with more material.

Planes and submarines. Malta was a major base for British subs operating against the Italians and supply convoys. The Germans were only with a major aerial effort involving hundreds of aircraft able to suppress air operations from Malta for short periods of time.
The problem for the Germans is they lack the aircraft to do this continiously without hurting in major ways other theaters of operations as well as their air support in North Africa. The secondary problem is one of fuel which is also a problem. Note how many Axis convoys sailed with as few as 1 to 3 ships and that tankers often sailed with as little as half a load.
Even without major interdiction from Malta when the Germans were receiving as much as 80%+ of the supplies shipped they were having severe shortages at the Libyan - Eqyptian border as the major supply port was still Tunis with Bengahazi being a minor player due to damage to the port that the Germans proved incapable of repairing. The major supply bottleneck in North Africa is not at sea for the Germans; it is on land.
You asked how the British got around this. First, they had a double rail line to the Libyian border. Trains are far more efficent at bringing supplies forward. Second, the British (and US) had the units and capacity to clear and repair ports making it possible to use them more efficently in sustaining their advances. Third, neither the British or US suffered from a shortage of trucks to any great degree.
Malta was not the crux of the problem for the Germans. It was moving the supplies overland in trucks along a vulnerable and very long single highway.

Most of the Commonwealth's supplies were coming up the Red Sea and through the Suez Canal to Alexandria. The supplies from Europe came around the Cape of Good Hope South Africa. Yes, it was longer but a much safer route. Massawa Eirtria was turned into a major stop over port for transports to get their hulls scraped and painted (a 3 or 4 day operation) saving alot of fuel and time in transit.
This was true whether Gibralter or Malta are effective and in British hands or not. Also, the Germans really have very little to interdict this route. The few Type IX submarines avaiable are already spread very thin in the Atlantic. Adding the South Atlantic with far less shipping overall to their operating grounds will reduce not increase their effectiveness.
While this required more hulls than transiting the Med, the British / Allies had them to do it.

I didn't know that the British raiders out of Malta were not the sole cause of Rommel's supply troubles (not counting bombing of supplies on the road, of course). I guess having Spain as an ally would have been problematic at best, and wouldn't have solved the problem anyway.

I know it's difficult managing 3 threads simultaneously! I tend to take along time to make my posts, my spelling is surpassed only by my bad typing, lol. Because of this, i tend to abbreviate my posts, often to the point of making it almost indecipherable. I'll keep trying, though.
Thanks. [img]smile.gif[/img]

P.S. I was referring to "Shadow Masters what if #1". If #1 succeeded, then no BoB would be needed, as Briton would already be defeated.

__________________
Maskirovka: Show the world one thing...then do another.

http://maskirovka.blogspot.com/

More on the torpedo bombers and convoys

http://www.ww2forums.com/ubb/ultimat...=000352#000000

__________________