Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The Battle of Britain was won by the Royal Navy - Telegraph Online Article
Exemplo Ducemus    8/24/2006 3:41:31 AM
The Battle of Britain was not won by the RAF but by the Royal Navy, military historians have concluded, provoking outrage among the war's surviving fighter pilots. Challenging the "myth" that Spitfires and Hurricanes held off the German invaders in 1940, the monthly magazine History Today has concluded that it was the might of the Navy that stood between Britain and Nazi occupation. Spitfires and Hurricanes have previously been held responsible for preventing a German invasion The view is backed by three leading academics who are senior military historians at the Joint Service Command Staff College teaching the future admirals, generals and air marshals. They contend that the sheer numbers of destroyers and battleships in the Channel would have obliterated any invasion fleet even if the RAF had lost the Battle of Britain. The idea that a "handful of heroes saved these islands from invasion" was nothing more than a "perpetuation of a glorious myth," the article suggests. "Many still prefer to believe that in the course of that summer a few hundred outnumbered young men so outfought a superior enemy as solely to prevent a certain invasion of Britain. Almost none of which is true," reports Brian James, the author. Dr Andrew Gordon, the head of maritime history at the staff college, said it was "hogwash" to suggest that Germany failed to invade in 1940 "because of what was done by the phenomenally brave and skilled young men of Fighter Command". "The Germans stayed away because while the Royal Navy existed they had not a hope in hell of capturing these islands. The Navy had ships in sufficient numbers to have overwhelmed any invasion fleet - destroyers' speed alone would have swamped the barges by their wash." Even if the RAF had been defeated the fleet would still have been able to defeat any invasion because fast ships at sea could easily manoeuvre and "were pretty safe from air attack". While admitting it was an "extremely sensitive subject", Dr Christina Goulter, the air warfare historian, supported the argument. "While it would be wrong to deny the contribution of Fighter Command, I agree largely that it was the Navy that held the Germans from invading," she said. "As the German general Jodl put it, so long as the British Navy existed, an invasion would be to send 'my troops into a mincing machine'." Any challenge to the long-held theory that the 2,600 pilots of Fighter Command defeated the might of Germany would be subject to "more than a modicum of hostility", she added. The Battle of Britain was "a sacrosanct event" for the RAF, like Waterloo for the Army and Trafalgar for the Navy. It inspired Churchill to say: "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." Although six destroyers were lost during the evacuation of Dunkirk in May 1940 this was due to them being stationary as they picked up troops. Tackling capital ships would have been an even greater task because at the time the Luftwaffe, unlike the Japanese during the destruction of the fleet at Singapore, did not have armour-piercing bombs, the article says. It has been argued that German minefields strung across the Dover Straits would have prevented the Home Fleet, based at Scapa Flow, from destroying slow troop barges. But Dr Gordon disputed this saying that Britain had 52 minesweepers and 16 minesweeping trawlers arrayed against four German minelayers. The disparity between the navies was huge with Britain having 36 destroyers close by and a similar number two days away. The Navy also had five capital ships on hand, whereas the Kriegsmarine had lost or had damaged their battleships. "Anyway, in an emergency, the Royal Navy steams straight through minefields as they did when pursuing the Scharnhorst," Dr Gordon said. "They have a drill, following line astern. 'Each ship can sweep one mine' is the rather grim joke." Can you imagine the RN's targets? An invasion fleet of Rhine barges, moving at about two knots over the water, with a freeboard of a few feet. . . an absolute field day for our navy. So that was the nightmare for the German navy. They knew it just couldn't happen." Prof Gary Sheffield, the JSCSC's leading land warfare historian, said while some Germans might have got ashore it would have been near impossible for them to be re-supplied with the Navy so close by. The article also argues that while the RAF had 644 fighters to the Luftwaffe's 725 at the beginning of the battle by October 1940 Britain was far out-producing the enemy. It also said that after the defeat in France in early 1940 it was vital for Britain to have a victory to reassure the public it was winning the war and the RAF fighter pilots were an obvious choice. "In 1940, the total acceptance of the story's simple broad-brush strokes was very necessary," the historian Richard Overy said. Dr Gordon added: "The RAF's was a substitute victory - a substitute for th
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3   NEXT
Panther       9/5/2006 7:23:47 PM
I can't seem to get the link to exactly work, it is Samuel Eliot Morison's account of the Battle. I'll post it here in full, but i suggest looking around this guy's website (Though, his home page set-up is a little puzzling too me) for other accounts and information on Pacific battles:
 
 
Here's S.E.M. account:
 

Admiral Sir Tom Phillips's battleship Prince of Wales and battlecruiser Repulse were the core of a strong but unbalanced task force based on Singapore. It should have included HM carrier Indomitable, but she ran aground and left the capital ships without naval air cover. The Japanese, by striking at three points almost simultaneously, hoped to attract all available land-based fighters of the Royal Air Force and leave Phillips without air cover when they were ready for him;  and he steamed right into this trap.

Those who make the decisions in war are constantly weighing certain risks against possible gains. http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/s.gif" width=7>At the outset of hostilities Admiral Hart thought of sending his small striking force north of Luzon to challenge Japanese communications, but decided that the risk to his ships outweighed the possible gain because the enemy had won control of the air.  Admiral Phillips had precisely the same problem in Malaya.  Should he steam into the Gulf of Siam and expose his ships to air attack from Indochina in the hope of breaking enemy communications with their landing force? He decided to take the chance. With the Royal Air Force and the British Army fighting for their lives, the Royal Navy could not be true to its tradition by remaining idly at anchor.

So Prince of Wales and Repulse, escorted by destroyers Electra, Express, Vampire and Tenedos, sailed from Singapore at 1735 December 8. Admiral Phillips left his chief of staff at the command post ashore and flew his flag in Prince of Wales. Shortly after midnight

Shortly after midnight the chief of staff radioed that the Royal Air Force was so pressed by giving ground support to land operations that the Admiral could expect no air cover off Singora; that Japanese heavy bombers were already in southern Indochina; and that General MacArthur had been asked to send Brereton's Flying Fortresses to attack their bases. Little did he know that the United States Army Air Forces of the Far East were in a desperate situation. The Japanese invasion force was already well established in the peninsular section of Thailand, a country that had promptly surrendered. At Kota Bharu within British Malaya there was bitter fighting in a series of rear guard actions fought desperately by British and native troops. But by the time the British warships arrived, their opportunity had passed; the vulnerable transports were already returning to base. Admiral Phillips did not realize this.

He steamed north, leaving the Anambas Islands to port, and at 0629 December 9 received word that destroyer Vampire had sighted an enemy plane.

Phillips was entering the Japanese air radius without air cover,  but he still hoped to surprise a Japanese convoy at Singora. So on he sped to a position some 150 miles south of Indochina and 250 miles east of the Malay Peninsula. At 1830, when the weather cleared and three Japanese naval reconnaissance planes were sighted from the flagship, he realized that his position was precarious and untenable. Reluctantly he reversed course to return to Singapore at high speed.  It would have been a happy ending had he persisted in this resolve.

As he steamed south,  dispatches from Singapore portrayed impending doom on the shores of Malaya.  The British Army was falling back fast. Shortly before midnight 9 December word came through of an enemy landing at Kuantan, halfway between Kota Bharu and Singapore.  Admiral Phillips, in view of the imminent danger to Singapore, decided to risk his force in a strike on Kuantan.  But the report was false, and his brave reaction to it proved fatal.

At dawn 10 December an unidentified plane was sighted about 60 miles off Kuantan.http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/s.gif" width=10>The Admiral continued on his course but launched a reconnaissance plane from Prince of Wales.http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/s.gif" width=8>It found no evidence of the enemy. Destroyer Express steamed ahead to reconnoitre the harbor of Kuant

 
Quote    Reply

Panther       9/5/2006 7:32:25 PM
I forgot too add... if anyone doesn't  have windows pop-up blocker or something similar, the link i supplied may not be so enjoyable, with ads popping up each time you click a link. 
 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       9/6/2006 7:41:31 AM
Panther,
 
Thanks for the account. As that was happening my Uncle's unit was steaming toward Singapore from Australia. They met the Japanese in southern Malaysia at a place called Maur river several weeks later. They were surrounded & so badly mauled that they became known as the 'Lost Battalion'. A few (including my uncle) fell back to Singapore, where they were forced to surrender a few weeks later.
 
He spent time in the notorious Changi prison before being transferred to the 'Death Railway' in Thailand. Britain & her allies (not to mention the locals) paid a heavy price for lack of air power.
 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       9/6/2006 8:11:28 AM
On other military matters I don't think we are that far apart.
 
Germans could certainly have been trained to sink ships, but they weren't (except one or two elite units) at the time Sealion was scheduled to kick off. I also agree that the Stuka could have been an ideal anti-shipping aircraft, but there were precious few to spare & there would have been fewer if the Germans had 'won' the BOB.
 
This is another important point. A 'win' in the BOB isn't quite what it might have seemed. Germany was perhaps capable of forcing the RAF to abandon its bases in the Stheast of England, but it could not have destroyed either fighter or bomber command. Had losses become unsustainably heavy the plan was to withdraw to airfields out of the range of German fighters & conserve fighter strength to meet an invasion. Even then, most British fighters would have been closer to the beaches than most German ones. Germany was not going to have a free hand over the channel. Also remember that the RN had one or two carriers on hand, so they would have had some air cover of their own.
 
On the Stukas, in order to destroy enough airfields to drive out Fighter Command germany would have to have used its Stukas. In fact, they sustained such heavy losses early on thet they were withdrawn from the BOB. This was one of the reasons germany lost the battle. Level bombers were just not accurate enogh to consistently hit targets smaller than...London (something the Allies found out a bit later). Thus, there wouldn't have been many to spare from troop support to bomb ships.
 
Not sure if I mentioned it in an earlier post, but only one element of the German taskforce was due to depart from the French ports closest to England. Others were coming from as far away as Brittany & Belgium. Some units would have taken several days (& nights) just to get to the beaches. The troops being towed by tugs in their barges would have been moving VERY slowly. Talk about sitting targets.
 
Oh, and for those who get excited about paratroops (I know you haven't brought them up yet), they were so badly mauled in the Low Countries & France that there were only enough troops & aircraft to send about 4500. Too few to tip the battle.
 
One more point, and one rarely mentioned, is logistics. Vitrually all the shipping involved was for transporting troops. There was virtually none assigned for carrying things like fuel & ammunition (& food). Assuming some loss of shipping on the way over & at least as much on the return journey, an awkward decision was going to have to be made about the 'second wave' - guns or butter, so to speak. The Germans had no hope of seizing a functioning port - all those within reach were not only well defended, but also rigged for demolition. There is no way Germany was going to be able to supply an invasion force over the beaches. 
 
The Germans could certainly have attempted an invasion. In some ways I wish they had. It would have been interesting to see what might have happened if they had lost 50,000 of their best troops in a couple of days without any gain. The numbers could be replaced, but the blow to morale & prestige would have been heavy. Would have cost the Luftwaffe heavily too. Who knows, maybe those adventures in the Balkans & Nth Africa might not have come off. Maybe some of the French colonies or the French Fleet would have been persuaded to come over. Who knows?   
 
Quote    Reply

ProDemocracy    Joe6pk   9/6/2006 9:26:17 AM

A question I'd have is could the Royal Navy have held the channel if the Luftwaffe had gained complete air superiority? I'd have thought the lessons of what air power could do were made clear during WWII.



----Joe, I read in a few places that the Luftwaffe would never have gained complete air superiority (unless they completely destroyed ALL the airfields and then immediately invaded) because the British would rather have London burning than bring up all their fighters...part of the problem was the RAF would never fully engage the Germans.  That way, they always had a stash of bombers and fighters for the fateful day of invasion which was never to come.  Germany would never have been able to cross the channel without facing the combined might of the RN and elements of the RAF.
 
Contrast that with the US and UK superiority over France and Germany and it was just such an overwhelming superiority that Germany's industrial base was not going to achieve (especially since their economy did not convert to war mode until 1942-43).
 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       9/6/2006 5:56:16 PM
"----Joe, I read in a few places that the Luftwaffe would never have gained complete air superiority (unless they completely destroyed ALL the airfields and then immediately invaded) because the British would rather have London burning than bring up all their fighters...part of the problem was the RAF would never fully engage the Germans"
 
Correct ProD. Dowding always kept about 30% of Fighter Command's strength on reserve - rotating squadrons out of combat. Goering wasn't as bright, so his pilots became increasingly tired & stressed as the BOB progressed. There were always going to be enough fighters to at least contest the airspace over an invasion.
 
Quote    Reply

Panther       9/7/2006 6:54:07 PM
 "Germans could certainly have been trained to sink ships, but they weren't (except one or two elite units) at the time Sealion was scheduled to kick off. I also agree that the Stuka could have been an ideal anti-shipping aircraft, but there were precious few to spare & there would have been fewer if the Germans had 'won' the BOB."
 
I guess we should look at this as a matter of priority, on the fault for the loss of B.O.B. going all the way to the top of the German leadership (Hitler). Now, before i go on, i must admit, i got a little ahead of myself... when i said that it didn't matter if the Germans had any naval experience, by benefitting from their land bases acquired from France and the low countries. Naval experience would have enabled the Germans too notice the extreme importance of dive bombing (The Japanese understood it as well as their experience in torpedo's... but, severely lacked the industrial output of the Germans), particulary against armored naval military ships and most especially against the type of foe the Royal Navy represented to the Germans. I really don't think it was because of their lack of industrial military production of cranking out specialized Stukas in very great number's or the lack of  man-power so early in the war, but the ignorance of what Hitler thought was the German priority (Though for me, i'm always thankful for his ignorance).
 
 The UK unknowingly benefitted from Germany's leadership (Again... primarily Hitler) ways of thinking most especially, along the lines of land-force and all the restrictions that come with it when you go up against a powerful naval country... such as the UK! Now, it can be said by others.... Hitler never had any intention of actually fighting the British on their home turf, whether the home islands themseleves or the open seas, when his only wish was for the British too submit & recognize what he thought was his reality of the vastly more powerful German State. If that is indeed the case, instead of the RAF and RN being too much for German forces too handle (Which i think is the real reason for Hitler turning east too attack what he thought was a much more easier prey,  though not in his exact words, seeing that i do most of my posting exactly from memory: "All you have to do against the Russians is kick in his front door and watch the entire house of cards cave in"!), then all i can say to that (IMO) hypothetical is... It would have been an extremely naive way of thinking, for a man who greatly understood and favored the use of force, when political chicanery failed too hold sway against hios military opponets!!
 
  Now realistically, "If" the RAF were too have just rolled over  just as easily as france or the low countries did, there isn't any doubt the british surface ships would have been in an extremely vulnerable position against the mass of German airpower (Even with 1 or 2 aircraft carriers), even without the Stukas, the morale of the British would have been devestated against the loss of any of their primary Battleships, Destroyers & etc...  in any large and sufficent numbers to German airpower, with a good possibility of the fall of the Churchill government (A fact only aware too Churchill and a select few, i'm sure), in favor of a more peace prone government that would submit too a German designed peace, with a very good possibility of the negating aspects for the need of a bloody German invasion, in favor of forcing upon the British Govt. - German troops on British soil (No telling about how any of the local populace would have reacted, but i'm confident enough too say without a doubt... the Germans would've been met with fire works, of the violent kind in such a scenario)!
 
 Of course, that all sounds or seems too be extremely hypothetical, but in light of today's current Terrorist threat too democracies and most especially... since the fall of the Spanish Govt. in 04'  to terrorist bombings & quite a few other pull out's from Iraq by other democracies due too terrorist threats, i can only conclude that not all lessons were learned from WW 2. (Sorry, it's not my intention to drag modern problems into this, but quite frankly, that's how i basically see it when any historical lessons seem too have been unlearned!)
 
But- thankfully, with Hitler being at the helm of state, we can be incredibily thankful, that he had no absolute knowledge about defeating a powerful force that the RN & the bravery of the RAF & their working in tandem together and also in which t
 
Quote    Reply

Panther       9/8/2006 8:30:28 PM
Bigfella,
 
I didn't intentionally ignore your previous post, in regards to your Uncle's ordeal in Singapore and then Thailand (I got sidetracked and meant to post this yesterday, instead of today.). Sounds Fascinating in itself and i hope i'm not being too presumptuous in assuming from your post, that he ended up safe and well back in Australia after the War?
 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       9/8/2006 8:38:03 PM


Bigfella,

 

I didn't intentionally ignore your previous post, in regards to your Uncle's ordeal in Singapore and then Thailand (I got sidetracked and meant to post this yesterday, instead of today.). Sounds Fascinating in itself and i hope i'm not being too presumptuous in assuming from your post, that he ended up safe and well back in Australia after the War?



No worries Panther, thought hadn't occoured to me.
Yes, my uncle is a spritely 85, looks about 65, and will probably outlive us all. My mother & I actually interviewed him recently & I actually have the transcript on my desk now. For years he refused to talk about it, but in recent years he has opened up about his experiences. I'm glad. It is important to record as many of these experieinces as possible while that generation is still with us.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       9/10/2006 8:48:40 PM
This is interesting.
 
If this is true then how did the RN ever allow Germany to invade and occupy Norway? Wasn't the RN forced to withdraw from the seas off Norway by the Luftwaffe?
 
Did the RN patrol the straits or at least the channel during the battle? Were there many u-boats in the channel? How about German e-boats? My guess is that the Luftwaffe would have had a field day on at least the lesser RN vessels.
 
I thought the Germans were winning in the air until Hitler had them cease attacking the RAF airfields and instead carry out massive bombing raids on British population centers in retaliation for the RAF's bombing of Berlin.
 
My impression of the reason the Germans did not invade is that such an undertaking had never been taken seriously enough by the German high command to merit the same level of planning that, say, the capture of forts in Holland and Belgium had involved.
 
I personally believe Hitler had many admirers among the British upper class and that he therefore had counted on the acquiescence of Britain after a demonstration of German invincibility on the continent. I believe the purpose of Sea Lion was that of a threatening display.
 
The Germans should have brought their panzers in on the beach at Dunkirk but an order from Berlin had halted them. A bloodbath would have made British cooperation impossible. Rudolf Hess' mysterious flight to Britain in a fighter plane in 1940 suggests the Nazis counted on friends in Britain for some reason. It has been suggested Hess' "suicide" may not have entirely been his idea as what he knew may have been a threat to powerful people. 
 
The Kaiser had reportedly read Capt. Alfred Thayer Mahan's book on the influence of sea power on history and had become convinced of the value of a navy. Hitler never showed the same enthusiasm for building a navy. Was that because Hitler relied on the theory of land block powers or was it because he looked forward to having the RN handed to him?
 
Of course I don't even know if German e-boats existed at this time or if they did were they available in the channel but one might imagine the havoc that small, fast, torpedo carrying PT-type boats could wreak day or night, against RN ships in confined waters especially had the Germans been able to maintain an air umbrella over them.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics