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
ProDemocracy       9/10/2006 9:35:23 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.

 


 

 


1) Germans lost majority of their surface navy in the battle for norway
2) they acheived surprise and captured the airfields
3) land based aircraft have many advantages over sea based aircraft

 
 
Quote    Reply

Bigfella2       9/11/2006 5:30:02 AM
"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?"
 
basically the Germans gave them the slip. The Norwegian coastline is full of islands, fijords & other places to hide, and there was a LOT of fog about. Yes, the germans did have some success against the RN from the air, but the RN had little to no air cover, as one of the ships hit was carrying aircraft to support the operation. Had it not been for the invasion of France, the Brits & French might have held on in Norway, but as soon as the Wehrmacht crossed the Dutch frontier there were more important issues to deal with.
 
During the Norway op virtually the entire Kriegsmarine was destroyed. Interestingly, a seaborne assault on Oslo was stopped by the torpedoing of a German cruiser by the Norwegians.
 
"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."
 
The RN patrolled every night. In fact, they regularly attacked the barges moored in French ports. On several occasions they penetrated the inner harbour at Calais & other places. I'm not aware of a single loss. In addition to something like 100 major surface vessels (corvette size & up) the RN had literally hundreds of smaller vessels patrolling each night. These consisted of torpedo boats, sloops, armed trawlers etc. These had 2 & 6 pound guns - not enough to take on a naval vessel, but enough to take on a barge or the tugs pulling it.
 
The Kriegsmarine could have fielded about 10 destroyers or cruisers, some U-boats and e-boats. Probably less than 10% of the RN total.
 
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.
 
Yes, but keep in mind that Figher command always kept about 30% of its numbers in reserve & planned to witdraw beyond German range if losses became too high. These fighters & more would still have been available to contest airspace over the landing zone - where virtually all of the Luftwaffe's firepower would have been concentrated. 
 
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.
 
Hitler certainly hadn't planned to invade England originally, but he was serious enough about it in mid-1940 to assemble all the barges & tugs required & the troops too. My bet is that if he believed he had 'won' the battle in the air he would have chanced it - after the fall of France he was on a bit of a high. A gambler on a lucky streak, if you will.
 
As for the English upper classes, this impression was based on what he was told by von Ribbentrop - one of the stupidest men ever to rise to such heights. There were literally a handful of the English upper class who admired Hitler, even fewer who would have backed him if he invaded. Even Oswald Mosley, leader of the BUF, swears he would have fought a German invasion. Much as I despise the man, I tend to believe him. He was an Englishman first. 
 
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 Panzers stopped because they were in desperate need of refitting before returing to the offensive in the south, where a sizeable French Army still existed. Also, the Dunkirk op was really better suited to infantry than armour. DOn't know about Hess, but he
 
Quote    Reply

Crayfish       3/20/2010 10:37:28 AM
The Germans refrained from a seaborne invasion of Britain because of Britain's overwhelming naval strength. Sending Rhine barges packed with German troops in an attempted seaborne invasion of Britain would have been suicidal folly by the German high command, and the Germans knew it. Yes, RAF Fighter Command did hold off the Luftwaffe, but it was the Royal Navy that thoroughly deterred any German attempt at a seaborne invasion of Britain. The quoted historians in the article are right--and when you're right, you're right. Right? That's one scenario, I suppose.
 
But the enduring 'myth' of the Battle of Britain is based on the central idea that in modern warfare tactical air superiority is essential and strategic air supremacy a basic element of victory. Would the Royal Navy have survived and won a sea battle in which the Luftwaffe had tactical air superiority, preparatory to strategic air supremacy over British air space? I know not. But I do know that operationally RAF  Fighter Command blunted the German aerial threat with a highly organised defence using superior tactics, which coupled with greater aircraft production, ensured British neutralisation of the Luftwaffe's operations, which resulted in the Luftwaffe breaking off its attack. However, I am sure that the RN's strength vis a vis the Kriegsmarine's did contribute to deterring a German invasion: the German high command were professional military technocrats and it would be idiotic to suppose that they did not take into account the Royal Navy's strength in comparison to their own naval strength.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Remember what happened around Crete?    3/20/2010 1:17:06 PM
Just because the Germans had the wrong air force does not mean that an air power could not have cleared the Channel to support or defeat an invasion.
 
The British did have the right aircraft.
 
The Hawker Hurricane was a stable gun platform (strafer) and could carry a decent sized bomb. Not known for dive bombing, it in fact could do so, albeit at a shallow angle.
 
The Bristol Beaufighter showed up around this time. It was designed for anti-ship work. It could carry torpedoes.
 
Other British aircraft (naval types) were certainly available.
 
There was the Swordfush, Skua, and the Fairey Fulmars and Battles.
 
And of course there was the Vickers Wellington. Not exactly what I would call a Mitchell, but it could fly in thick air and lay down bombs on ships if it had too, just like any Focke Wulfe Condor or any A-20 Havoc.
 
Note that the British also had that excellent little Douglas plane and its near cousin, the Boston?  
 
The RAF could have made a dog's breakfast of the German Channel crossing, if they had too: but to do that, they had to maintain their air superiority so that the German fighters couldn't work over the RAF bombers. 
 
Those Hurricane and Spitfire pilots won their battle so the RN was never called or needed to face that challenge. The BoB is therefore actually not a myth.    
 
H.
   
         
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics