Battle of Britain

It appears you still have some work convincing us Izaak.

:smok:

 

.......Not very, actually. :lol:

You are a stubborn kind of guys. You simply CAN´T imagine that the Britain could get "Sovietized" and your pretty (and all the other) women raped, as a sign of joy.
I would classify this as a mental block. I can understand it, but I can´t do anything about it.

I´ll try though ONE more time to smash some the most obvious misunderstandings:

"But they would still have to get these fleets of slow moving vulnerable transport aircraft past the RAF, flying huge numbers of sorties, even if the paras could get down and take their initial objectives keeping them supplied from the air would have been horrendusly difficult"

A: The best trained parachute units (the "Smersh" boys) were trained in terror like any other spacial forces. They would have taken hold of the airfields and their surroundings, giving them opportunity to supplt themselves. Besides, with the combined Soviet-Continental fighter force in the air, RAF, however good and effective, would simply not have: enough pilots, enough planes, and – after massive drops near major airfields – no place to start or land.

"
And nobody said that Stalin would necessarily have to invade England at once. He could possibly start with a sub + aerial blockade and bombardmants.


That would have been the threat - invasion would have been impossibe"

A: Not a threat but an effective securing the way for the invasion force. Any major RN vessels would be harrassed by diver-bombers, if they tried to leave their ports or by massive bombings of their ports.

"Assuming Stalin achieved total surprise and a total overwhelming victory, possible but it cannot be taken as read."

A: Yes, assuming. If you see at the numbers of Soviet attacking forces, it´s not an improbable assumption. On the contrary. With surprise on his side, Soviet forces would have not done worse than Wehrmacht did in June ´41. We have been discussing this.

"Unless he just buggered off with them to Algeria anyway Britain would not let the French fleet fall into the hands of an enemy as had already been shown"

A: Yes, but if not the nearest family members, he probably had an extended family and relatives who could get their teeth and craniums bored with slow boring mashines and other medieval instruments. Stalins NKVD boys were surprisingly creative in the art of torture. You have also to exclude the numerous communist agents in all Continental fleets (plus the known Soviet methods of dropping small commando units near key bases who could dispose of the commanders by terrorist methods – say – some kgs of TNT or something in officer´s quarters.) who had been trained in wrecking. With their machinery out of function, any "buggering off" would have been rather difficult.

"Few if any Black Sea subs would got past the Straights of Gibralter."

A: OK, OK, let´s forget the Black Sea subs. They could be used to hold a large part of RN and RAF in the area. Better than nothing.

"This whole theory is based on the assumption that the Soviets could have conquered an entire continent with only minimal casulties and then with no real navyjust a combination of submarines, aircraft and amphibious tanks defeating the RAF and the British fleet, it is quite simply inplausible"

A: That´s what I call your stubbornness. What didn´t happen – just couldn´t happen, full stop.

"My copy of "Fleets of world War II" names only around 240-250 boats for SU (I might miscalculate something) for whole war. I think I need to ask author if that is actual number.
And getting continental navies submarines to your system, it takes some time to integrate them to your system."

A: The production of subs was impossible in 1941-4 period. So, most if not all of the said subs had already been there in 1941. And integrating……
Why integrate? If you have a common supreme command, you can use them with their own operational commands as wholes (see Gulf War, f. ex,).

"Just ill-trained and badly lead. After WW2 someone in SU (Stalin?) managed to understand that in order to be a worldwide superpower, you need to have a credible navy. As you know, before WW2 SU navy wasn't very good or trusted by leaders (See Kronstadt rebellion). This all change after WW2."

A: It´s simply not too true. It was led by one of the wisest people in the whole RKKA – Admiral Kuznetsov, Stalin´s very trusted adviser. He, if anyone, understood what good training meant.

"SU definitely didn't have enough long range boats to start sub blockade. Aerial blockade, on the other hand, is very difficult. You need long range bombers to do that (did SU have these?) and remember, near british isles those convoys had aircover."

A: I have earlier on elaborated on possibilities of getting air supremacy of RKKA. I don´t know exactly the specifications of Soviet uboats. AFAIR they were built after German designs, probably a large part of them – the VII model. Not bad, if in large numbers.

"Therefore he should have used them against Finland, especially when fighting was most intense at Karelian isthmus. Division or two of angry paratroopers in the middle of Finland won't go unnoticed. And Finnish AA and airforce wasn't that numerous back then."

A: My guess is that Stalin didn´t want to show all his best cards too early. I have no better explanation. What is known is that these forces existed, already in very considerable numbers and with enough planes to drop them already in the middle ´30s.

"
"Britain 1941 was much more prepared to invasion than it was 1940". You can be more than sure, that Stalin would be MUCH more ready for an invasion in 1942 than he was in June ´41.

In what way more ready?"

A: In all ways. Partly by incorporating the Continental means. Partly by mass producing the new plane types (Il2, Pe2, Yaks, Laggs, Migs), more subs, gliders etc. Maybe even decidedly landing craft, as in Overlord.

"Didn't German conquer French just year earlier? Whatever, say three months. That would be october. And preparing for invasion (settling down, resupplying, making airfields, fixing roads and communications, crushing RAF etc). Winter 41/42 earliest. And waiting for good weather..."

A: Sorry, I forgot that the French army would not have been there. It only makes things much easier.

"Second, you need to get that British port intact. For sure they will scuttle some useless ships at port entrances and mine them too. And blow up piers and cranes etc. It will take weeks, even months to clear all those obstacles and rebuild piers and ports again."

First, you need to drop a parachute force near an usable port and kill off and detain in temporary concentration camps all people under 80 ys old. It souds easy. It IS easy if you are ruthless enough. And these guys were just that.

Any questions left unanswered? :lol:

 

Oh, there was a question of Kronstadt rebellion!

Please look in the history books, when it was.
Beginning at først quietly, from the very start of the bolshevik rule, and after Lenin´s death more and more quickly, Stalin was taking hold of the whole country. By 1938 the whole USSR was meekly eating from his generous hand. A thing like Kronstadt in 1941 would be URRELY impossible. People dared to talka little politics – only with their spouses, in the middle of the night, under thick blankets. There was a famous story of a Soviethero – a 7 yr old boy – Pavlik Morozov, who denounced his own father for anti-soviet attitude. His pretty, happy face was on the placards in the whole Soviet Union for a long time.
“ONLY HE WHO HAS FIRST CONQUERED HIS OWN PEOPLE CAN OVERCOME A STRONG ENEMY” Shan Yan, 5th century B.C.
Stalin did just that.


And the plan to conquer something was not new:

“We are the Party of the class which is on the way to conquest of the world” (Frunze, Report to the military delegates sent to the XI Congress of CPSU, 1922.”

“We are doin something which, if it succeeds, will overturn the whole world and liberate the entire working class” Stalin, Collected works, Vol.13, p. 41.

“In the event of general conflict, only one country can win. That country is the USSR”. Hitler, 1937 (Conversation with Lord Halifax)

“We shall destroy the beast in his lair” L. Beria (Minister of the Interior, Feb. 1941

“In the battles to come, we shall operate on the territory of the enemy. (.) Col. Rodimtsev, the chief of parachute training, Speech at the 18th Congress of CPSU, 1939.

“The air force must be rendered ineffective and destroyed on the airfields….” Marshal Konev, memoirs in VIZH, 1976

„Of all the aggressive armies which have ever existed, the RKKA will be the most aggressive”. Field Service Regulations for RKKA, 1939, p. 9.

“It has to be borne in mind that it is possible simultaneously to carry out two or even three offensive operations on different fronts (…) with the intention of rocking the enemy´s defensive capability on the widest posible scale” Marshal Timoshenko, Ministry of Def. Dec. 1940.

“In conditions where we are surrounded by enemies, a sudden attack from us, an unexpected maneuvre and speed will decide everything” Stalin, Vol.5, p. 225, 1923.

“The war of the poor against the rich will be the most bloody war which has ever been waged” F.
Engels, Works, Vol. 2, p. 504.

“We were fuly prepared for an aggressive war. It was not our fault that we were not theones to carry out the aggression.” Gen. P. Grigorenko, Memoirs, N. York, 1981.

“The Russian High Command knows its job better than the High Command of any other army” Gen. V.F. Von Mellentin, “Panzer Battles” 1977, p.353.

OK. that will be all for now.

 

You seem to predict that SU can have a total suprise and get hold of just about every airfield in britain. Remember, Britain had a radar which can give early warnings and remember that airfields had rather heavy AA-gunnery. Getting near heavily defended airfield at low altitude and low speed was definitely no-no to every pilot. Even at night.

And that combined Soviet-Continental fighter force cant reach everywhere in GB, therefore a good deal of British airfields were out of reach.

Its quite long way from France to Scapa Flow. Especially for unescorted bombers.

It will take some time to persue whole chain of command to co-operate. Even with Stalinist methods. And you probably have to build parts of chain of command first. Soldiers just leave to check their families, leave country, etc when war is ending. You cant get whole branches of navy etc intact after that kind of war. And ofcourse it takes sometime to iron out all misunderstandings, language barriers etc.

Some were built after German designs, atleast S-class. Most werent.

At same time factories in Britain churn out Spitfires, Mosquitos, bombers, AA-guns, AT-guns, tanks, rifles, machineguns etc. And convoys from US will deliver more fighters, tanks, fuel etc.

First, you need to be able to deliver all those paras to airfields everywhere in GB and to all of those ports. And all this when RAF is still kicking well. No, I think RAF refuses to play just like Stalin wants.

 

Who ever said that all airfields would be necessary? After a successful attack and having conquered several airfields In London area, the air-corridor would be established, under an umbrella of all available fighters. Don´t forget the not so quick, but agile I-16 – the heaviest armed fighter of the time. There were thousands of them. No nead to be everywhere. Just have the umbrella over the main landing area and southern England.

As to no-go place. HA! In Stalinland there was no such a thin for a soldier. Stalin had enough ground attack planes to sacrifice 200-300 of them for each airfield to be K.O. Let´s get serious….

A radar was a good thing when a number of attackers a time was manageable. RAF in case of an all-out Soviet onslaught would be simply overwhelmed. They could simply switch off the radar to avoid a worse headache.

Notmi, don´t think of Scapa – think of how to make it from there to the invasion force.
If anything – a Soviet patriotic pilot with his family in NKVD cellar, starving and waiting for death would also make a fine Kamikaze, if necessary. There were plenty of possible “volunteers” as most of them flew badly and the supply of suitable aircraft was limitless, virtually.

You are talking of chains of command, Notmi… Just give the various national forces one commmisar per brigade or division. There were enough Soviet Germans in RKKA, not to count a couple of millions of Jews, who spoke German, all of them, practically. And many of them happened to be commisars, in fact. Then give each national army a sector or a job to do and off we go!

“At same time factories in Britain churn out Spitfires, Mosquitos, bombers, AA-guns, AT-guns, tanks, rifles, machineguns etc. And convoys from US will deliver more fighters, tanks, fuel etc.”

And all this under heavy bombardment and during blockade by United uboat forces! You are very creative, Notmi. Remember: until Stalin shows his hand vs. England, having freed the Continent from the barbarian Nazis, Churchill would be thrilled. And if he weren´t, the Parliament would block any plans of massive armaments. Why? To welcome Uncle Joe across the Channel and press his generous hand??? More arms? Absurd. And until RKKA´s heroes have killed the last barbarian in the Pyrenees, RAF would oblige by helping the Savior of Britain.

And having accomplished the invasion of the south, Stalin would certainly propose negotiations, the basis of which would be certain constitutional changes like: free elections under joint Soviet-British control, a nationalization of this and that. More just conditions for the trade unions and the like. Short:some reasonable conditions which would appear like a blessing vs. a possible occupation of all Britain. Baltic states know how such modest proposals end. Poles – too.


UPS! I forgot one Black Horse in all this fight of Titans. Stalin wouldn´t.

About two weeks after the start of the invasion of the Continent, maybe having just taken Danzig, Unccle J. would have called Genito Pussolini and tell him thus!

“Zdrastvuy, Genito! How´s your health? Your boys were reeeally very brave. We would like to send you them in our military coffins. I am sure the families will be thrilled to meet them at last.

Know what, Genito? I think you are a fine man and your Party program is also great. We could almost combine our parties. You used to be a real tough socialist!
We have no problems with Italy. Why not be just friends? I daren´t even think of my boys crossing the Alps. Don´t worry.

Btw: What would you say about joining our little war. In a few weeks we are in France. Britain is a hard nut to be squashed, though. You have some brave army still left. Help us with Brits and you can take whatyou want of their colonies. Russians don´t like hot climats. Just take it. You choose. OK, Genito?”

The 10 cent question is: What Genito would answer to that? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Will answer to you in about a week, having quite hectic week coming. 3 exams etc.

 

Good luck.

 

Poy-poy! Shalom.

 

Ok, a few points.

1) The Germans tried to stop the Free French / Polish / Czech etc servicemen from fighting with the British with similar threats. It did not stop them.

2) Soviet personnel in German / French / Italian / etc equipment will basically be less effective than in Soviet equipment - unless htey get a good long warm-up period.

3) re-usable gliders? Lovely - but how to they get back to France to be re-used? Without some kind of physical cross-channel transport system, the gliders are one-use only.

4) British defensive doctrine in 1941 was very heavily slanted towards protecting airfields from paratroop attack. Every airfield had a standing garrison, with fortified positions, a mobile reserve (including at least an armoured car, usually tanks) and every airfield had a mobile 'relief column' of regular army troops within an hour's drive (or was it half an hour?)

5) what range did the I-16 have?

To my mind, the CCCP would have faired a wee bit better in the air than the Germans throught sheer weight of numbers, but the all-important superiority in the Channel would be unlikely to be theirs.

6) Yes, the CCCP had swarms of Il-2's. Question 1 - how many left after (if ) they conquer Continental Europe? Question 2 - how do they sink ships without trained crews (trained in anti-shipping strikes) and the neccessary ordinance (air-launched torpedoes, AP bombs, etc)?

That will do for now...

 

Answer to Ricky´s entry:

1. How could they know who was fighting? Besides, the Germans were too soft on Europeans. You can´t compare Germans with the Soviet butchers and bandits.

2)" Soviet personnel in German / French / Italian / etc equipment will basically be less effective than in Soviet equipment - unless htey get a good long warm-up period."
I told you the Soviets HAD very good methods of persuasion. Better than Dante could imagine. The Europeans themselves would serve – as DDR army did.

3) "re-usable gliders? Lovely - but how to they get back to France to be re-used? Without some kind of physical cross-channel transport system, the gliders are one-use only."
In transport planes, of course. THIS was the whole idea with these gliders. What else????

4)" British defensive doctrine in 1941 was very heavily slanted towards protecting airfields from paratroop attack. Every airfield had a standing garrison, with fortified positions, a mobile reserve (including at least an armoured car, usually tanks) and every airfield had a mobile 'relief column' of regular army troops within an hour's drive (or was it half an hour?)"

Imagine a drop of 3000 well trained commando soldiers with AT equipment, mortars and lots of dynamite, in the middle of the night. Just imagine: 3000 at one drop. And at that time there were units able to jump from something like 100 meters above ground, to avoid being shot. It is difficult, but they were really well trained. You could add a flying tank or two to help them (in 1941 still not released for production – "Icebreaker´s" English edition has a photograph and specifications of this. It was an Antonov´s construction. One- use flying gear, a light tank towed like a glider. Did you know that?

5) "what range did the I-16 have?" Don´t remember, but enough to be useful over the Channel, anyways.

" To my mind, the CCCP would have faired a wee bit better in the air than the Germans throught sheer weight of numbers, but the all-important superiority in the Channel would be unlikely to be theirs.

6) Yes, the CCCP had swarms of Il-2's. Question 1 - how many left after (if ) they conquer Continental Europe? Question 2 - how do they sink ships without trained crews (trained in anti-shipping strikes) and the neccessary ordinance (air-launched torpedoes, AP bombs, etc)?"

I repeat: I suppose a combined operation with Germans and certainly Genito´s boys would be plausible, very probable. Both in the air, under- and over water, and, last but not least – through British communists turned terrorists. Combined minds of Zhukov, Eremenko, Rokossovsky, Konev, Shaposhnikov, Stalin and BERIA would clear all the uncertain points, which I have been unable to.

I repeat: Dont think that what didn´t happen couldn´t happen. Before Sept. 11th Americans felt safe too.

 

one quick q?

when in 1941 were the russians actually planning on attacking nazi germany?

obvoiusly post june 22 but when exactly?

 

Answers to Izaak!

1. "How could they know who was fighting?"
But you yourself argued that German (etc) servicemen would not fight against the Soviets for fear of retribution...

2)"I told you the Soviets HAD very good methods of persuasion. Better than Dante could imagine. The Europeans themselves would serve – as DDR army did."
DDR did not get their own army immediately in 1945. Neither were they allowed front-rank equipment which would make them a threat to the CCCP until they had proved their loyalty over time. Stalin would have to be very sure of their loyalties before giving the armed forces back their equipment. Can you say 'insurgency'? (can I spell it? )

3) "In transport planes, of course. THIS was the whole idea with these gliders. What else????"
This would require the Soviets to have captured enough ground to have not only established airfields, but to have them relatively immune to British action - including shellfire. Which is unlikely to happen immediately...

4)"Imagine a drop of 3000 well trained commando soldiers with AT equipment, mortars and lots of dynamite, in the middle of the night. Just imagine: 3000 at one drop. And at that time there were units able to jump from something like 100 meters above ground, to avoid being shot. It is difficult, but they were really well trained."
Now realise that radar has picked them up, and defiants, beaufighters and even blenhiems are ripping the transports to shreds. Night attacks by air work against the soviets.

"You could add a flying tank or two to help them (in 1941 still not released for production – "Icebreaker´s" English edition has a photograph and specifications of this. It was an Antonov´s construction. One- use flying gear, a light tank towed like a glider. Did you know that?"
I did - I also know that they were highly impractical, and the tanks used were not exactly front-rank.

"I repeat: Dont think that what didn´t happen couldn´t happen. Before Sept. 11th Americans felt safe too."
failing to adequately guard is not the problem here. In 1941 Britain possesses the best air defence network and the best & largest navy.

 

Answers to Ricky:

1. Because they would have had them as POWs, and the Poles etc. who escaped occupation and POW status.

2. Yes, you spell it very well. Can you spell Third Echelon? It was the third wave of Soviet troops, mainly NKVD troops, headed by Beria, whose task was Sovietizatsia – i.e. immediate terror to whole populations. A couple of millions, all incl. They knew what to do to secure submission. The whole top rank of German Army would be beheaded, I guess. The remaining would be enough to lead brigades (higher units would be headed by high Soviet German-speaking officers).

3. The first landing parachooters would have the advantage of previous bombardments of British ground troops in the area of the airfields. The cargo planes would land with tanks and artillery – enough to defend themselves, until the main invasion force could arrive.

4. The Soviet-Continental airforce would of course also have fighter cover. Besides, Soviet would not be oblivious to the radar system. I am more than sure that small commando units would dynamite the radars prior to invasion. Soviets had such units of armed terrorists – Smersh, or what it was called at that time. They were formed of previous partisan units (formed prior to 1939 treaty, meant to stay behind enemy lines, and having hidden vast supplies in woods of western Russia, to terrorize German supply lines, in case of German attack on USSR).

5. The tanks were light – but still they were tanks with guns and armor. Better than nothing.

6. About handling British RAF and RN I have written meters of text already. You can just answer the challenges. :lol:

 

Sorry, Ricky, I forgot that the standard parachoot equipment included the good Russian AT rifles, able to take out most if not any British tanks at that time. I am not sure about small AT guns and AA guns dropped in pieces. Soory for the little omission on my part.

 

Uuuhhh...

A terrible situation. Finnish Army is bound in the battles of Karelia. Two divisions could EASILY take the major arms factories and supply points.

The only solution for Finns I could imagine: There was an elite Luftwaffe-squadron in Finland from 15. June to 10. July(if I remember correctly), Gefechtsverband Kuhlmey (wonder if you're heard of it). It was a ground attack squadron, destroyed 200 tanks, many bridges and supply convoys. A very important actor in defensive battles of summer 1944 in Finland, maybe the most important. If this 100 (Stukas and FW-190s) plane squadron could be moved to bombard the paras, maybe they could stop them. But on the other side, what can airplanes do against men.

 

I said before that RKKA was not eager to show everything tit had too early not to ruin Hitler´s sleep and provoke him.

On the other side, if you drop people with light equipment and there is no place to land nearby (snow - it was WINTER) they might catch cold, waiting for the break through of ground forces. I don´t know.

You seem to be very derisive of RKKA. I think you are mistaken. The fact that they had many problems breaking through Mannerheim Line at 40 grades minus (the line, although cheap, was a formidable obstacle due to clever laid pillboxes and minefields plus snipers behind miefields + blowing up bridges on both ends of Soviet columns). Finnish sarcasm is understendable for a 3rd generation bolshevik as myself, but - only because you lost. Be happy you didn´t get Kuusinen.

As to schedule for Soviet attac: first date: middle of June - postponed because of Hess´ flight and Stalin´s fear of peace with England. Later date - July 12 or 15th, afair.

 

Nope. Maybe you might get a image like that, but no. Most of them were gallant fighters (they were scared to be) with good equipment.

And we didn't lose, Izaak. We weren't conquered. That's a victory.

 

Of course it was a victory to hold such a colossus for such a long time. The only reason, though, that Stalin discarded Kuusinen was that Hitler asked him not to take the rest of Finland, due to nickel and wood and the need to keep Hitler quiet (he also didn´t want to be enemies with Britain, in case). But, militarily, he was able to Sovietize you in short time. Or am I wrong again?

 

Would you explain a bit more, please? It's not your fault, I'm not just well familiar with this thing (what a shame for a Finn ). Do you mean that Stalin was able to make communism an acceptable and worthy to support among part of the Finnish people?

If Notmi didn't have his exams, he could add some info into the pot. He knows these things quite well.

 

sovietize meant terrorize (into full submission, incl. mental level), those famous days....