Posted by: Some_Guy_from_RI
Posting time: 2.8 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 5/5/2018 10:00:00 AM
Views: 279
SCP: 6
6 upvotes, 0 downvotes (100% upvoted it)
~2 user(s) here now
NSFW: No
Authorized: No
Anon: No
Private: No
Type: Default
view the rest of the comments →
[–] daskapitalist ago
Germany absolutely could not conduct Sea Lion, as you suggested. They could not gain air superiority even for a brief, tactical period. They also could not provide adequate naval coverage for a cross-channel invasion. In addition, Germany possessed only an inadequate number of river barges that werent truly suitable for an amphibious landing due to the high risk of swamping (even the wake from a British destroyer would sink them, nevermind actual weapons).
[–] DukeofAnarchy ago
All of those standard objections to Sea Lion are overstated IMO (especially the first: the Luftwaffe, despite bad tactics, was well on the way to crushing the RAF before Hitler called off the invasion in favor of strategic bombing and submarine warfare.) I think that Sea Lion could have succeeded in 1940. But that was not the scenario that I actually discussed in my post. I envisaged an invasion in 1941, after a year of preparations which would naturally include the building of more landing ships and transport planes.