Silent Victory - tactics discussion

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

But you extended the "Happy Times" to 1943, and we all pointed to 1942, which falls within the specified time frame. In fact, the Happy Times were over by mid-1941, and the "New Happy Times" started with the attacks on the American coast in 1942.


The Naval High Command also wanted to delay the start of the war for several years. Would that have made a difference? As was pointed out, If the Germans had more u-boats it's entirely likely that the British would have taken a different tack as well. Conjecture is always fun, but there is no way of knowing exactly how any scenario would have played out.

Looking at the numbers involved, i.e. merchants sunk per u-boat at sea, merchants sunk vs merchants at sea etc., I don't think Britain was exactly "brought to her knees". Wartime propaganda is a wonderful tool. Positive propaganda can inspire people, and negative propaganda can drive them to strive harder. I've read several books on the Battle Of Britain from during and immediately following the war, and they insist that on one hand Britain was "on her knees" and on the other the Germans never had a chance, often in the same book and sometimes in the same chapter.

Propaganda certainly played it's role, but we're also judging based on hindsight.

The question still remains, what resources would you trade uboats for that would've had the same effect....., another BB? We know early German command still thought the big ships were more important than Uboats, what a mistake.

Think if Germany would've put those resources into uboats, not declared on America and continued it's campaign against Britian, instead of turning against Russia, the Uboats would've brought Britian to her knees. Who knows, but I see no other resource for the buck that did as much damage as Uboats did

[magic452]

What would I trade U boats for? Me.262's

Two or three hundred U Boats may or may not have brought Britain to her knees but three or four hundred Me. 262's put into service before the Battle of Britain just might have. Had they pushed it's development this could have been done. At 652 miles range that is more than a 109 with drop tanks. (621)

Operation Sea Lion just might have succeeded if Germany had air superiority and all those merchant ships would have had nooo place to go.

Britain wasn't in all that good a position to fight a big invasion and the US, no doubt would have declared war but we weren't in a very good position to be much help right away. The British would have had to hold out for quite some time before we could do much.

Magic

[Dread Knot]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Propaganda certainly played it's role, but we're also judging based on hindsight.

The question still remains, what resources would you trade uboats for that would've had the same effect....., another BB? We know early German command still thought the big ships were more important than Uboats, what a mistake.

I'd put the resources into the battle on the Eastern Front that eventually consumed the German Army and the Reich. On the eve of the invasion of the Soviet Union the German Wehrmacht had about 5,200 tanks overall, of which 3,350 were committed to the invasion. This yields a balance of immediately available tanks of about 4:1 in the Red Army's favor. Although the Germans destroyed most of Russian's initial tank pool it took a toll and replacements were never produced at a high enhough rate to make good the losses. Plus, the lack of enhough panzer divisions severly impacted German planning and flexibility for Barbarossa.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Armistead

The question still remains, what resources would you trade uboats for that would've had the same effect.....,

That is a question I always avoid, primarily because I'm no good at it. I have a hard time believing anyone else is, because there is just no way to know.

Originally Posted by magic452

What would I trade U boats for? Me.262's

Two or three hundred U Boats may or may not have brought Britain to her knees but three or four hundred Me. 262's put into service before the Battle of Britain just might have. Had they pushed it's development this could have been done. At 652 miles range that is more than a 109 with drop tanks. (621)

No, it couldn't have been done. Your four hundred jets would have been sitting on the ground waiting for the Jumo 004 engines, which were not ready for a test flight until July 1942.

Of course you'll say that they could have poured more time, money and effort into engine development, but they made them as fast as they could, and nothing was going to change that.




Useless speculation is useless.

[Rockin Robbins]

I'll land in Dread Knot's corner. Just as Germany had nothing to gain with a war against the US, it also shared much and had much to lose by going to war with Britain. So long as they kept the British and Americans out of the war, owning the entire continent and Russia too was well within their capabilities.

I believe that even as late as Dunkirk, a rational Germany could have played nicey-nice, saying that they allowed the British to escape for humanitarian reasons and that they had no quarrel with the British people. They could have offered and held to a non-aggression treaty with Britain, granting them most valued trade status. I don't believe Britain's obligation to Poland would have justified hundreds of thousands of casualties if they continued at war.

This would have left Germany with a secure continent, actually protected and secured by the British, leaving them full access to all of their military means to attack Russia. They wouldn't have needed their subs any longer. A 100% effort would be focused eastward.

That would have left Russia, a communist country with no real friends, to be roasted like a Thanksgiving turkey.

After the war, we would have learned that there were much worse things to deal with than Soviet Russia...

[donna52522]

I believe, from all I have read, that Hitler made it well known that he did not want "this" war with the UK, even considering the Brits as Nordic cousins, and through diplomatic chains had sent many peace feelers to the UK after the fall of France.....Britain adamantly would have nothing to do with that. After all, Germany didn't declare war on Britain or France, they declared war on Germany.

Churchill knew FDR would eventually enter the war on the UK's side. After all the US aide was very open and had most in the world wonder just how neutral America actually was. The U-Boat crews seen for themselves the US escorts providing screen for the British convoys.

As for Hitler declaring war on the United States, I've read he had done it for two reasons, one was the knowledge of all the US aide crossing the Atlantic to the UK. The second is that he was hoping Japan would return the favor by surging it's huge Manchurian army forward into eastern Russia....

We now know that Stalin's spies in Tokyo informed him that Japans ambitions were elsewhere and that allowed Stalin, even before Pearl Harbor, to move about 40 highly trained and winter equipped divisions westwards to save Moscow in the winter of 41/42.

In the book 'Barbarossa, The Russian-German Conflict 1941-45' by Alan Clark, the author repeatedly states that Hitlers personal strategies were sound, but his Field Marshalls (all of whom were primadonnas) constantly sent him false information about their own armies abilities in order to do only what they pleased. After the war they all blamed Hitler for his meddling, because of course, dead men can't defend themselves.

[Torplexed]

After Pearl Harbor, Hitler should have sent the USA condolences and sent the Japanese ambassador packing, in disappointment for not having joined the Russian campaign earlier. The Tripartite Pact is dissolved! This would have put Roosevelt over a barrel as he would have to then struggle to get Congress to declare war on a neutral Germany after being attacked by a hostile Japan. It also would have shown Hitler's confidence in eventual German victory after the winter setback, and possibly underscored any peace overtures to Great Britain if Hitler announced that he would not adopt unrestricted submarine warfare and further provoke the Americans who had tried to help their cousins. Rumors about making a separate-peace with Russia might have been unsettling for the British too, as Stalin had no guarantees that the German offensives in 1942 would fail. You want your enemies to scramble with each other to be the first one seated at the peace table.

In seeking to cement his entangling-alliances, Hitler unified his enemies instead.

[Rockin Robbins]

But the central fact is that Hitler was not rational. His plans were NOT sound. He did not act in his own best interest at all, especially in his persecution of the Jews. The entire thing was a maniacal tirade, illogical, irrational, insane and without sense.

Hitler was operating solely as an emotional bomb, exploding continuously from 1939 through his death in 1945. There is not sense to be found anywhere in his actions. Therefore, analyzing them is just an exercise in frustration.