question regarding the English Channel.

[boonie]

hi guys, i have a question.

from what i know the germans during ww2 has a pretty strong air force from the start to middle part of ww2. and they pretty much has control on that part of the european continent, why did they not clear up the channel with their air power so their subs can have safer passage to their hunting ground?

did they tried but failed? i imagine it would be quite easy to pop up over the coastline and straffe the bejesus out of all the patrol boats there and beat a quick retreat even if situation were not so favorable. just my thoughts..

[Sailor Steve]

The call it the ENGLISH Channel for a reason. Germany has nothing that can come close to matching the Royal Navy. The English heavily mined both ends of the channel, and only they had the charts showing where the mines were (and weren't). While the Royal Air Force was relatively weak, the German Luftwaffe fighters (the famous Me/Bf-109) had a rather short range.

The Kriegsmarine couldn't overpower the RN. The Luftwaffe had the bombers but not the fighter escort to stop the RAF from defending the RN ships. This is the reason for the Battle of Britain. The Luftwaffe had to knock out the RAF before they could hope to defeat the Royal Navy, and when they actually tried that it all went wrong for them.

As for popping up over the coastline, they had two more problems. The bombers had to stay at a fairly high altitude to avoid the batteries of anti-aircraft guns placed all around any possible targets. That, and the British had the world's first extensive Radar system, and it was tied to an equally massive communication system.

An easy way to get a grasp on this is to watch the fantastic old movie Battle of Britain. You'll be informed and entertained like never before.

[Aktungbby]

Anything U can actually fortify U can name!!??:D A forgotten bit of history: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/world-war-ii-fort-madness-britain-s-bizarre-sea-defense-against-the-germans-a-728754.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/world-war-ii-fort-madness-britain-s-bizarre-sea-defense-against-the-germans-a-728754.html) & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunsell_Forts (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunsell_Forts) https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/KnockJohn.jpg/300px-KnockJohn.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:KnockJohn.jpg)http://www.oddlyhistorical.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/603px-The_British_Army_in_the_United_Kingdom_1939-45_H34542.jpg (http://www.oddlyhistorical.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/603px-The_British_Army_in_the_United_Kingdom_1939-45_H34542.jpg)

[boonie]

hmm i still dont really get it.. they practically had control over the entire french coastline. the radar thingy should be easily spoofed by low flying and there should be no AA all the way until they hit the water. i think their bf110 should be well suited to do some quicky rodeo over the waters. couple that with some observation stations over the coastline this should be pretty feasible... just cant stop wondering why it wasnt done properly..

[Sniper297]

I would suggest going to your local library, non-fiction section, find some books on the Battle of France and the Battle of Britain in WW2. The main weapon they had against shipping was the JU-87 STUKA, which was defenseless against Hurricanes and Spitfires. The 110 was also no match for RAF fighters, and the Germans quickly discovered they were useless as escorts because they needed escorts themselves, so every time they ventured over the channel they were shot to pieces.

As for low altitude flights to defeat radar, there are entire books and chapters devoted to the rapid advances in the capabilities of British Chain Home and Chain Home Low radar in 1940.

But don't take my word for it, research it. :know:

[Jimbuna]

@boonie

An interesting question and coincidentally precisely what Steve and I discussed at length just a couple of days ago.

Sniper suggests researching the subject and rightly so because the subject matter is up there with other military achievements that are of great importance to the British people.

Meanwhile, I'll post a few links to help you along and leave you with the famous words of our leader after said events, in those troublesome days when Britain stood alone...“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.” ― Winston S. Churchill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zgs34j6

http://www.history.co.uk/study-topics/history-of-ww2/battle-of-britain

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-two/world-war-two-in-western-europe/battle-of-britain/

http://i.imgur.com/ooN9BjI.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/CZCABqW.jpg

[Polak2]

I am very much newcomer to subsim community and, with the great interest, I am still in process of learning historical aspect of North Atlantic struggle during the war.
To drop my 2c on this interesting question I would say, that taking over France early in the war and establishing naval bases with direct access to Atlantic in Normandy coast of France was strategically sufficient to make English Channel less important.
Also, I think, of some importance was possible "cooperation" or rather outright competition of top German military leaders (Georing vs. Doenitz) in influencing Hitler's decision how to conduct the war in most swift and efficient manner. Goering was practically 2nd in command then.
Believing, that Luftwaffe can conquer England was one of Hitler's gravest and resource wasteful mistakes, underestimating U-Boat (or naval force in general) was even more serious and more decisive military blunder.

[De Ruyter]

hmm i still dont really get it.. they practically had control over the entire french coastline. the radar thingy should be easily spoofed by low flying and there should be no AA all the way until they hit the water. i think their bf110 should be well suited to do some quicky rodeo over the waters. couple that with some observation stations over the coastline this should be pretty feasible... just cant stop wondering why it wasnt done properly..

As was mentioned, the BF110 pilots found out that they were totally outmatched, especially by Spitfires. The German tactic of bombing airfields was taking its toll, but then they switched to bombing London and other cities, giving Fighter Command a respite and enabling them to regroup and replace their losses. That was also a blunder on Germany's part.
Also as mentioned, England's radar setup was unmatched at the time. They had both long and short-ranged radar, and extensive spotters, so it would have been difficult to get in undetected, even at low altitudes. Had they gotten the HO229 back then, it would have been more feasible at the time, but that was developed too late in the war, and never saw service.

[Sniper297]

Can't believe all the pundits either.

1. Hugh Dowding (RAF fighter command chief) had a plan B - if the fighter losses got too great he would have pulled them back out of range of the 109 and waited for the invasion, accepting whatever damage that caused in southeast England.

2. The pundits often claim the ME-262 and HO-229 could have won the war for Germany if they had been produced sooner. False. The metallurgy for jet turbines was still being developed, and to withstand the heat and stress the steel alloy required high concentrations of tungsten and nickel. Tungsten was no problem, but 95% of the world's nickel was in Canada, which would have been unlikely to sell nickel to the Germans since Canada was on the Allied side. So the prototype JUMO jet engines had a MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) of 100 hours. Since the production engines couldn't be mass produced with the high nickel concentration, the turbines had a MTBF of 5 hours. So essentially every jet flight required both engines be changed after 1 or 2 sorties, and they still blew up in flight all too frequently.

[darkone999]

The bottom line is Germany had no chance to win a World War no matter what they tried and only made the loss come faster when they attacked Russia. Once the industrial might of America came to the war it was game over for Germany and japan. Every Smart Military leader of the time knew this to be true. I have to say it almost goes beyond belief the massive amount of military personnel,resources,research and equipment that America produced and brought to bear in such a short period time. No country in the world then could have stood up to that kind of power let alone try to fight half the world too. So in truth everything else is just cannon fodder. I do so love playing the underdog though..:o

Tim

[De Ruyter]

Can't believe all the pundits either.

1. Hugh Dowding (RAF fighter command chief) had a plan B - if the fighter losses got too great he would have pulled them back out of range of the 109 and waited for the invasion, accepting whatever damage that caused in southeast England.

2. The pundits often claim the ME-262 and HO-229 could have won the war for Germany if they had been produced sooner. False. The metallurgy for jet turbines was still being developed, and to withstand the heat and stress the steel alloy required high concentrations of tungsten and nickel. Tungsten was no problem, but 95% of the world's nickel was in Canada, which would have been unlikely to sell nickel to the Germans since Canada was on the Allied side. So the prototype JUMO jet engines had a MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) of 100 hours. Since the production engines couldn't be mass produced with the high nickel concentration, the turbines had a MTBF of 5 hours. So essentially every jet flight required both engines be changed after 1 or 2 sorties, and they still blew up in flight all too frequently.

Dowding is the one who said that the nearness of London to German airbases would lose Germany the war. They may have won the battle of Britain, but for their switching to hitting British cities.
I only mentioned the HO229 in reference to radar, it would have been less detectable (but definitely not stealth). The way Hitler was running the war only hurt the German military so they would have been hard pressed to win anyway, best example being he wanted the ME262 used as a bomber.

[Sniper297]

Yeah, he did say that after the Germans started bombing London, my point is he did have a plan B in his pocket before that happened.

And yeah, long range reliable jet fighters and bombers COULD have won the war for Germany, nuclear subs could have also done it, but the technology simply didn't exist at the time.

[De Ruyter]

And yeah, long range reliable jet fighters and bombers COULD have won the war for Germany, nuclear subs could have also done it, but the technology simply didn't exist at the time.

I hate to think of what they could have done with nuclear subs.

[boonie]

regarding the ho229, i doubt it would even be operational even if it the prototype was finished. because that thing does not have a tail fin, considering the F117 stealth fighter from the US with its minimal tail fin it still require a computer flight system to perform 100+ micro adjustment constantly to its control surfaces when it is flying in order to keep it stable, i dont think manual control over the completely absent tail fin ho229 will be feasible.

as for the topic of supremacy over the channel i think it is mainly a tactical blunder of the luftwaffe. failure to lend its aid to the KM in this matter.. also failing to develope a tactic and/or aircraft model to overcome the RAF. just my opinion.

if they could have avoided to open the eastern front against the soviet, they should have the resources to achieve this easily imo. new ships, new plane, much higher efforts, etc etc.

[Silavite]

regarding the ho229, i doubt it would even be operational even if it the prototype was finished. because that thing does not have a tail fin, considering the F117 stealth fighter from the US with its minimal tail fin it still require a computer flight system to perform 100+ micro adjustment constantly to its control surfaces when it is flying in order to keep it stable, i dont think manual control over the completely absent tail fin ho229 will be feasible.

as for the topic of supremacy over the channel i think it is mainly a tactical blunder of the luftwaffe. failure to lend its aid to the KM in this matter.. also failing to develope a tactic and/or aircraft model to overcome the RAF. just my opinion.

if they could have avoided to open the eastern front against the soviet, they should have the resources to achieve this easily imo. new ships, new plane, much higher efforts, etc etc.

Flying wings were by no means impossible in the 1940's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_N-9M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-49

The best move for Germany in 1940 instead of trying to invade Britain would be to invade the Iberian Peninsula and capture Gibraltar. If they could cut off the Med, it would put Britain and British troops in North Africa in a tight spot supply wise.
If they did it right, Germany might have even been able to snatch the Azores from the Portuguese during the Iberian Campaign when the RN wasn't looking and control the airbases there, though that would be difficult to orchestrate, and holding control of the Azores with an inferior navy doesn't seem very likely.

[Torplexed]

if they could have avoided to open the eastern front against the soviet, they should have the resources to achieve this easily imo. new ships, new plane, much higher efforts, etc etc.

Not very likely with Hitler at the helm, for whom the eventual invasion of the Soviet Union was not something he wished to avoid, but actively sought. Not just for Lebensraum but for ideological reasons. In mid-1940 here was little likelihood that German armament production could ever make up the the deficiencies in naval or amphibious equipment, or that the Germans could outpace the rapidly expanding air and naval forces of the British which were increasingly backed by the huge industrial potential of the whole Anglo-Saxon bloc. For Hitler, invading Russia meant Germany could make itself so self-sufficient in oil, food and resources that invading Britain would be irrelevant. They would make peace.

Hitler tended too, to make the Soviet Union the scapegoat for his inability to concentrate all his forces against England. Each incident and each irritant was used as a confirmation to justify the course he had already picked and to persuade others of the correctness of his views. For Hitler the simpler issues were more clear cut. In his mind, in the east the enemy could be cut down by the might of the German Army, then the finest in the world. In the west, his fine army availed him nothing and could go stale watching and waiting on the beaches. By July 29th, 1940 General Jodl was already quoting Hitler as having said he had decided on a preventive war with the Soviet Union which meant at that point the war with Britain was more about keeping them at arm's length while he engrossed himself in planning for Barbarossa.

[MortuusSum]

hmm i still dont really get it.. they practically had control over the entire french coastline. the radar thingy should be easily spoofed by low flying and there should be no AA all the way until they hit the water. i think their bf110 should be well suited to do some quicky rodeo over the waters. couple that with some observation stations over the coastline this should be pretty feasible... just cant stop wondering why it wasnt done properly..

Well, keep in mind that hindsight is 20/20; everyone and their mother knows now that nap of the Earth flying can get you around RADAR detection, but at the time Germany didn't really have working RADAR, so they wouldn't have known offhand how to spoof it. And even if they did, back in WWII and even in WWI German fighter doctrine, from the designer to the factory to the pilot, was focused on high-altitude, high-speed, diving attacks, followed by a swift climb away - a "Boom 'n Zoom". Britain, on the other hand, historically made superb turn fighters, from the Sopwith Pup ("Ace James McCudden stated that 'When it came to manoeuvring, the Sopwith [Pup] would turn twice to an Albatros' once' ..." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopwith_Pup#Operational_history)) to the Supermarine Spitfire. These could beat German aircraft by forcing them into a circling fight that they won through superior turning radii (as long as Jerry didn't just climb away). So, "spoofing" Britain's RADAR, even if they thought to do it, put them at a disadvantage right off the bat, should the RAF show up.


EDIT: I just realised, I should be clear; the statements I made about Germany making good energy fighters and Britain making good turn fighters are by no means categorical, just tendencies. As counterexamples to the above, the famous Fokker Dr. I (The Red Baron's cool triplane) was a fantastic turn fighter, largely for the same reason as the equally famous Sopwith Camel; both had a rotary engine that let them whip to the right with frankly terrifying agility. The Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.5, on the other hand, was an energy fighter that saw considerable success on the Western Front after its introduction - Canada's William Bishop, the third highest scoring ace of WWI, achieved many of his victories in one, and it was nicknamed "the Ace Maker" by its pilots.

[boonie]

very informative discussion :) thanks guys.

i really appreciate you guys (and this forum) to sharing these info and have a good discussion on this kind of topic.

[Jimbuna]

Flying wings were by no means impossible in the 1940's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_N-9M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-49

The best move for Germany in 1940 instead of trying to invade Britain would be to invade the Iberian Peninsula and capture Gibraltar. If they could cut off the Med, it would put Britain and British troops in North Africa in a tight spot supply wise.
If they did it right, Germany might have even been able to snatch the Azores from the Portuguese during the Iberian Campaign when the RN wasn't looking and control the airbases there, though that would be difficult to orchestrate, and holding control of the Azores with an inferior navy doesn't seem very likely.

Would have been to return to her pre September 39 borders and not repeat the mistakes made in 1914.

[MortuusSum]

Flying wings were by no means impossible in the 1940's.
The best move for Germany in 1940 instead of trying to invade Britain would be to invade the Iberian Peninsula and capture Gibraltar. If they could cut off the Med, it would put Britain and British troops in North Africa in a tight spot supply wise.
If they did it right, Germany might have even been able to snatch the Azores from the Portuguese during the Iberian Campaign when the RN wasn't looking and control the airbases there, though that would be difficult to orchestrate, and holding control of the Azores with an inferior navy doesn't seem very likely.

Would have been to return to her pre September 39 borders and not repeat the mistakes made in 1914.

Word. I can't see how Germany would have a net gain by invading the Iberian peninsula. It would have added what was a neutral country to the forces arrayed against them already, and even if they successfully conquered the Peninsula, the Spaniards practically invented the idea of a resistance movement 150 years before; the word "guerilla" comes from Spanish, meaning "little war". When Napoleon invaded the peninsula, his army was plagued by "Guerilleros" long after the Spanish army was dealt with.

Oh, and this is a little more nebulous, but it also would've handed Britain a fantastic propaganda/morale boosting opportunity, letting them tell their people something along the lines of "reliving Wellington's liberation of the Iberian peninsula"; propagandists already likened Hitler to Napoleon, and giving Britain an even better excuse to invoke Le Vainqueur du Vainqueur du Monde would have made the job of keeping British morale afloat that much easier.

[Jimbuna]

I'm at a loss to see any connection with the words from me you have quoted and the correlation with the Iberian Peninsular.

German borders pre 1939
http://i.imgur.com/IbBTVKM.jpg

[MortuusSum]

I'm at a loss to see any connection with the words from me you have quoted and the correlation with the Iberian Peninsular.

Woops. Meant to quote the fellow you were quoting; I was agreeing with you.

[Silavite]

Would have been to return to her pre September 39 borders and not repeat the mistakes made in 1914.

Touché, sir.

[Barkerov]

The best move for Germany in 1940 instead of trying to invade Britain would be to invade the Iberian Peninsula and capture Gibraltar. If they could cut off the Med, it would put Britain and British troops in North Africa in a tight spot supply wise.
If they did it right, Germany might have even been able to snatch the Azores from the Portuguese during the Iberian Campaign when the RN wasn't looking and control the airbases there, though that would be difficult to orchestrate, and holding control of the Azores with an inferior navy doesn't seem very likely.

I think they did make the right strategic choice actually. Where they messed it up was switching to bombing cities instead of keeping up pressure on the RAF airfields. I have read recounts which said fighter command was at breaking point when they switched targets, not so much because of lack of planes but pilots to fly them.

[Rockin Robbins]

Not very likely with Hitler at the helm, for whom the eventual invasion of the Soviet Union was not something he wished to avoid, but actively sought. Not just for Lebensraum but for ideological reasons. In mid-1940 here was little likelihood that German armament production could ever make up the the deficiencies in naval or amphibious equipment, or that the Germans could outpace the rapidly expanding air and naval forces of the British which were increasingly backed by the huge industrial potential of the whole Anglo-Saxon bloc. For Hitler, invading Russia meant Germany could make itself so self-sufficient in oil, food and resources that invading Britain would be irrelevant. They would make peace.

Hitler tended too, to make the Soviet Union the scapegoat for his inability to concentrate all his forces against England. Each incident and each irritant was used as a confirmation to justify the course he had already picked and to persuade others of the correctness of his views. For Hitler the simpler issues were more clear cut. In his mind, in the east the enemy could be cut down by the might of the German Army, then the finest in the world. In the west, his fine army availed him nothing and could go stale watching and waiting on the beaches. By July 29th, 1940 General Jodl was already quoting Hitler as having said he had decided on a preventive war with the Soviet Union which meant at that point the war with Britain was more about keeping them at arm's length while he engrossed himself in planning for Barbarossa.
Therefore, U-boats were a waste of time, money, resources and the best men in the Wehrmacht. Germany had no business going up against a strength they could not match. So Britain needed to be put in the pocket as at best an ally, at least a sympathetic bystander from day 1. That would mean no U-boats. That would mean Dunkirk as a planned and permitted escape to let Britain say "we did the best we could." an escape negotiated upon the invasion of France.

With no wasted resources in the Navy, Germany would have been much stronger on land that Britain ever could be, just as Britain was much stronger at sea than Germany ever could be. It would be security through strength on both sides.

With the continent in secure hands and no western front to worry about, Hitler could have put 130% resources (the 30% comes from not wasting those resources on a useless navy) toward the USSR. There is no doubt that 130% is much greater than the 45% that came within a hair's breadth of beating the Russkies. It would have been a done deal.

Fortunately, Hitler was not a level-headed character. He wasted effort persecuting the most solid and patriotic group within the country: the jews. He bragged about his unique vision on how to divide and conquer, acquiring territory for free because of the weakness of his adversaries. But he couldn't wait to begin a senseless slaughter which promised him nothing but Valhalla without the glory. Once in the slaughter, he left his strategic brain in the back of the closet and began indiscriminate slaughter in all directions at once, diluting his force, making the enemy stronger than he was at all points. Robert E Lee he was not. Tirpitz he was not. Bismark he was not. A fool he was. Such grand fools always get what they deserve but many, many better people usually have to die first.

And like Jimbuna said, the level-headed solution would have been not to have embarked on conquest at all, but to peacefully compete to attain first rate status in Europe, much as they are today. They could easily have been the center of gravity of a peaceful Europe. Their debt load was not crushing and they were building dramatically even with reparations. Living on less than you earn is the secret to prosperity and they had a forced program to make them do just that. Once the reparations were satisfied or negotiated away they would have been an economic unstoppable powerhouse. And the US never would have filled the vacuum to be the preeminent power in the world. We were quite happy with our knitting and had no desire to go off gallivanting in Europe.