Operation Sealion; Third Reich Victorious

German unit histories, lineages, OoBs, ToEs, commanders, fieldpost numbers, organization, etc.

Moderator: Tom Houlihan

User avatar
DasReichX
Supporter
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 8:10 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Operation Sealion; Third Reich Victorious

Post by DasReichX »

Hello, Can anyone give some information on all the units that were to participate in Sea Lion, I have also noticed units called "Storch", what are these units? I may be wrong, but are they specially trained units? Such as Brandenburg Commandos?
DasReich.X
Mark
Stauffenberg
Supporter
Posts: 157
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 7:24 am
Location: Austria

Post by Stauffenberg »

Hi Mark!

See:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... t=tresckow

As regards the "Storch" units. Never heard. Maybe this would have been units which had to be transported by Fieseler Fi 156 planes (also used in the May 1940 campaign).

Regards!
Roger Griffiths
Associate
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:24 am
Location: UK

Post by Roger Griffiths »

I think this belongs in Campaigns. I used to have OOB for Sealion. I think it was 25 divisions. Would'nt have worked though. Although RAF won Battle of Britain, conditions were favourable for invasion. What people forget is the Royal Navy. Total superiority at sea. Germans only planned to deploy 30 U-Boats at both entrances to English Channel. Germans viewed English Channel as river crossing. Wrong, it's a dangerous and unpredictable stretch of water. Rhine barges towed by ships were just not good enough.

Roger
User avatar
Jason Long
Contributor
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:27 pm

Storch?

Post by Jason Long »

The Storch was the German equivalent of the Piper Cub; a small two or three seat liason plane with remarkable short-take off and landing abilities. A number were used to transport elements of Großdeutschland behind Belgian lines during Unternehmen Niwi.
Similiarly the Luftwaffe planned to fly troops across the Channel in Storch's for Seelöwe.

Jason
fknorr

Post by fknorr »

Roger Griffiths wrote:I think this belongs in Campaigns. I used to have OOB for Sealion. I think it was 25 divisions. Would'nt have worked though. Although RAF won Battle of Britain, conditions were favourable for invasion. What people forget is the Royal Navy. Total superiority at sea. Germans only planned to deploy 30 U-Boats at both entrances to English Channel. Germans viewed English Channel as river crossing. Wrong, it's a dangerous and unpredictable stretch of water. Rhine barges towed by ships were just not good enough.
Roger
I do not believe that the British navy would've been as big of a thorn as the logistical pieces (like transports as you mentioned) that were also missing. If indeed Sealion would've kicked off, that would've meant that the Luftwaffe had air superiority (my understanding was the reason it didn't happen was the lack of conquering British airspace.) If indeed the Germans had control of the air, the Royal navy leaving port would've been risky business.

I am sure if they (the Germans) would've gained air supremacy, they would've allotted more sea power and lest we forget their allies the Italians had a vast Navy w/some very big capitol ships in decent enough numbers to secure the southern Flank.

My impression was that the lack of air supremacy compounded by limited logistics in moving men was the key to Sealion's demise, not the British navy.
Roger Griffiths
Associate
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:24 am
Location: UK

Post by Roger Griffiths »

I don't follow your logic. The Luftwaffe did'nt attain air superiority. They traded one for one in fighters but lost 700 bombers. They could not sustain these losses because although they had about 4,500 aircraft in total, production had been reduced to replace only normal losses. British fighter strength was rising throughout the battle, due to total War footing.

Actually, the British were losing, because only the Southern Fighter Groups were used. There was only partial transfers in from further North (Bader's Big Wing). The pilots in the South were being worn out and replacement pilots were not surviving long enough to become proficient. This is what happened to the Luftwaffe in the last year of the War. Nowhere near all Fighter Comand assets were used.

I believe the Germans could have launched Sealion as far as the air situation was concerned. That would mean that the RAF would have had to divide their effort between the Luftwaffe and the invasion force. What effect Bomber Command would have had on the invasion force I don't know, but we had plenty of bombers even then.

The RN had 400 warships plus and was quite capable of keeping the Italians in the Mediterranean. The German Navy had a few good ships but totally inadequate numbers. The Germans were only too aware of this.

Roger
fknorr

Post by fknorr »

Roger Griffiths wrote:I don't follow your logic.
Logic is:
That if the Royal navy was the real threat to 'Sealion', the Luftwaffe would've attacked that instead of trying to achieve air supremacy. The Luftwaffe had to attain air supremacy for Sealion to become a viable option...it did not happen so Sealion did not come off.

400 ships sounds impressive and there is no doubt that they could be quite formidable to the German invasion fleet... but the royal navy (and associated civilian vessels) at Dunkirk suffered severe losses without the germans having air superiority. Imagine if the Germans did attain air supremacy what they could do to the 400 ships.

Italy's Navy was larger than Germanys at the start of the war and I doubt if the home Islands were threatened, the Royal navy would be 'bottling up' anything but racing for home and its defense.

Also, as you stated (and I did too), there were not enough transports to move enough men. The transport situation was hideous, and they would have had to use 'barges' which at that time of the year were in jeopardy of swamping. Even if the barges had gotten troops ashore, the initial assault wave would've waited up to a full day for reenforcements for the ships they had would have to traverse the channel again, load and then re-cross...I do not think they would have risked that. So the poor logistics (i.e. troops, transports, etc) also made Sealion not a viable option.

I agree that the Royal navy was a threat, but less important than 'air' (one man's opinion.)
vroddrew
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:01 am

Post by vroddrew »

The Germans would have had an extremely tough time carrying out an amphibious invasion of the British Isles at any time during 1940 or thereafter.

First, to discuss the Italian navy. In order to leave the Mediterranean it would have had to pass through either the Straits of Gibraltar or the Suez Canal. Both of these were controlled by the British, and were heavily defended by, amongst other things, shore based gun emplacements. It is almost impossible that the Italian Navy, even if it could have been persuaded to do so, would have been able to force a passage through either one.

Secondly, the major British surface fleet was difficult, if not impossible, for the Luftwaffe to destroy, for the very good reason that (unlike the major Kriegsmarine units) it spent most of its time at sea, rather than hanging around port, waiting to be bombed. Even while at sea, the Luftwaffe would have had difficulty destroying it, since it lacked significant anti-ship assets (i.e. torpedo bombers, etc.). It is one thing for Rudel to sink a Soviet battleship - it would have been quite another for him to sink a British one. The main British fleet in home waters was based in Scotland - effectively out of range of most Luftwaffe units.

Third - the Norwegian campaign gives some idea of what would have happened to any Kriegsmarine units engaged in support of an invasion of England. While the British managed to bungle most of this adventure, the Royal Navy did sink most of the German destroyer fleet it encountered.

Fourth - it would have been virtually impossible for a fleet of towed barges to make a crossing in any sort of conditions that would have allowed them to achieve a tactical suprise. Either Navy or RAF units would have spotted the buildup, and the Home Fleet would have raced southwards to engage it. The small tugs and steamers towing the flat-bottomed barges would have been easy targets for every vessel in the RN that could make it to the scene. Sure, either U-boats or Luftwaffe planes might have sunk some - but the Germans never had sufficient air or submarine strength to seriously challenge British sea supremecy - at least in the Channel. It is one thing for a couple of modern warships to make the "Channel Dash" under an umbrella of Luftwaffe fighters - it is quite another for a motley fleet of pick-up barges etc. to try the same thing.

Last: Even supposing that the Germans were able to land a few divisions in southern England, How were they going to keep them supplied? The Germans never undertook any serious study of resupplying an army across open beaches. As the German forces were to find out later in the war - a Panzer division without fuel and ammunition quickly loses a lot of its combat effectiveness.
fknorr

Post by fknorr »

vroddrew wrote:The Germans would have had an extremely tough time carrying out an amphibious invasion of the British Isles at any time during 1940 or thereafter.
We are all in agreement on this point.
vroddrew wrote:First, to discuss the Italian navy. In order to leave the Mediterranean it would have had to pass through either the Straits of Gibraltar or the Suez Canal. Both of these were controlled by the British, and were heavily defended by, amongst other things, shore based gun emplacements. It is almost impossible that the Italian Navy, even if it could have been persuaded to do so, would have been able to force a passage through either one.
There is no doubt that the Italian navy would have had a difficult time participating in this and I'll refer you to the agreement we all reached in your first paragraph. That being said, I believe if Sealion would have been a real viable plan, Franco may have been pressured into becoming more of a participant,at least in allowing a passage of troops in some assault on Gibralter. If not with the aid of Franco, a joint Naval, Air, Airborne assault could have been attempted on Gibralter (never say never...i refer you to Crete and Eben Emal). I am sure that whatever transpired, the Italian fleet or part of the Italian fleet could have participated.
vroddrew wrote:Secondly, the major British surface fleet was difficult, if not impossible, for the Luftwaffe to destroy, for the very good reason that (unlike the major Kriegsmarine units) it spent most of its time at sea, rather than hanging around port, waiting to be bombed. Even while at sea, the Luftwaffe would have had difficulty destroying it, since it lacked significant anti-ship assets (i.e. torpedo bombers, etc.). It is one thing for Rudel to sink a Soviet battleship - it would have been quite another for him to sink a British one. The main British fleet in home waters was based in Scotland - effectively out of range of most Luftwaffe units.
I agree with your "difficult/impossible statement" but that "fleet based in Scotland" is one thing...trying to drive off the German fleet on the south east coast is quite another. Regarding less than ample anti-shipping assets, with air supremacy (we are assuming this for I think we all agree that an invasion would not be attempted without it), and all the former French air bases along the coast, even the Luftwaffe w/limited assets (anti-shipping), the British would've thought long and hard about attacking the invasion fleet (remember Dunkirk).

With no friendly top cover, with U-Boats on the prowl, Luftwaffe circling above and whatever Italian/German surface fleet waiting for them, the Royal navy would've had a tough go but with the home isles in jeopardy, I am sure it would have been a case of acceptable losses.
vroddrew wrote:Third - the Norwegian campaign gives some idea of what would have happened to any Kriegsmarine units engaged in support of an invasion of England. While the British managed to bungle most of this adventure, the Royal Navy did sink most of the German destroyer fleet it encountered.
Lets remember that air and shore batteries aided the Royal navy crippling the Kriegsmarine during this campaign. Lets also remember that although less of a bloody nose, I think the Royal navy lost a 1/2 a dozen Destroyers sunk and that many more damaged as well as a couple Cruisers...I believe there were several other ships lost/damaged as well. The Royal Navy may have came out on top but in the end who captured Narvik/Norway?
vroddrew wrote:Fourth - it would have been virtually impossible for a fleet of towed barges to make a crossing in any sort of conditions that would have allowed them to achieve a tactical suprise. Either Navy or RAF units would have spotted the buildup, and the Home Fleet would have raced southwards to engage it. The small tugs and steamers towing the flat-bottomed barges would have been easy targets for every vessel in the RN that could make it to the scene. Sure, either U-boats or Luftwaffe planes might have sunk some - but the Germans never had sufficient air or submarine strength to seriously challenge British sea supremecy - at least in the Channel. It is one thing for a couple of modern warships to make the "Channel Dash" under an umbrella of Luftwaffe fighters - it is quite another for a motley fleet of pick-up barges etc. to try the same thing.
You and I are close to being on the same page with this one but keep in mind that during the Narvik Campaign close to 400 vessels were employed by the Germans transporting troops (without the aid of "barges") and only a small portion of these were lost (less than 30) with Royal air and Navy about. Once a foothold in England was obtained, although not large (and once again assuming air supremacy), the Germans had a fair "transport" air arm that could have been employed to bring in supplies and reenforcements (once they gained a usable airfield(s). This would not have been the same Luftwaffe Transport of "Stalingrad"...no gauntlet of anti-aircraft guns, no severe winter weather, no airfields being overrun...not a cake walk but significantly easier.

- The Germans never achieved air supremacy.
- Their Navy was limited in combat ships as well as transports vessels.
- Logistically it would have been difficult at best to supply an army on the ground.

If they (the Germans) would have had a better than average chance at succeeeding they probably would have attempted this but they did not and therefore Sealion never came about. All we have now is speculation.
JeffF.
Contributor
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:30 pm

Cannot Come By Sealion

Post by JeffF. »

These two sites are good articles on the position that Sealion was not feasible.

http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm

http://gateway.alternatehistory.com/essays/Sealion.html

The data seems accurate and the opinion seems to be backed by a solid foundation.

My own view is that many historical campaigns were not feasible. It is sometimes the human factor that gives the impossible a chance to succeed.
fknorr

Post by fknorr »

Thanks for the links...

I found them informative but the first one at least seemed to be just a tad biased...especially regarding the only German invasion trial...

I believe the allies had several test invasions that did not turn out too cool...

Here is another link I found..
http://pages.tca.net/wyvern/sealion/his ... 20Strength
JeffF.
Contributor
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:30 pm

Sealion

Post by JeffF. »

There is no doubt that the articles on the sites I posted are biased against Sealion but it seems to be a bias based on the results of data and not one of twisting data to support a bias. True the Allies had at least one bad rehearsal but that was due to enemy action. Had the Germans carried out their plans no doubt the chaos of their rehearsal would have been magnified many times over.

The site you posted is also interesting. One error though, in the OB it lists 4 light divisions as part of the mechanized forces. These four light divisions became the 6th-9th panzer divisions (bringing the total of pz div's to 10 - which the article gets right). The four motorized infantry divisions, SS and the rest of the OB is correct.

In measuring all the quantifiable factors the reasonable conclusion is that Sealion was not possible. I'd point out though that in measuring all the quantifiable factors prior to the German invasion of France concluding that France would fall as rapidly as it did was not something anyone would have deduced.

There are many unquatifiable factors which may have decided Sealion if it were launched. An unsuccessful landing that "seemed" victorious to civilians due to erroneous reports of disinformation may have caused a panic. If the royals evacuated that may have caused the British to lose heart. If scattered parachute landings and deceptive measures confused the British the way the Germans historically were by Operation Fortitude, perhaps the landings could recover from an initial minor disaster into long term victory. Did anyone predict the panic and loss of morale the French felt in May/June of '40?

As interesting as the discussion is we'll never really know (thankfully)
hallsworth_1
New Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 1:44 pm
Location: England

Post by hallsworth_1 »

Just a little side note to this discussion, plans had been drawn up for an assault on Gibraltar, named Operation Felix it required Franco to open the borders of spain to allow German units (two corps, XXXIX and XLIX to assault the Rock in the early months of 1941. This attack didn't go ahead due to Franco not opening his borders to German units, however an attack along the lines of Eben Emal or crete i feel could have been succesfull... there were only four infantry battalions on defence at Gibralatar plus a heavy artillery Regiment. Plans had already been made in Operation Felix for Brandenburgers disguised as sailors abandoning a sinking ship to clear the way for the assault troops.

Simon
penguin
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 10:52 pm
Contact:

Post by penguin »

I have the german OOB for Operation Sealion http://www.ccjunkies.xmgfree.com/index. ... 9&Itemid=1
a friend gave it to me
dduff442
Supporter
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 3:04 pm

Post by dduff442 »

Hi all,

I think its fair to say that an invasion in the autumn of 1940 was a non-starter. A single battleship on a suicide cruise (given the intense submarine threat) could have anihilated an invasion force in minutes.

Gibraltar was the key here; a successful assault, followed by the arrival of the Italian Navy into the Atlantic, would have made a summer 1941 invasion a distinct possibility. While there was much that could have gone wrong with this sequence of events, it could have succeeded.

Any opinions on a spring assault on Gibraltar i) via spain or ii) some sort of coup-de-main via the sea?

How about the Italian Navy attempting to break into the atlantic subsequent to such an assault? Without Spanish involvement, it would need to make a dash to France without air support. What were the RNs chances of successfully containing it?

Finally, with the Italian navy safe in a French atlantic port by July 1940, I'd say it would have been game over. Any dissent here?

Regardsio,
dduff
Post Reply