The Battle for Britain

One of the major campaigns of the early part of World War II, the Battle of Britain is the name commonly given to the attempt by the German Luftwaffe, as part of German Blitzkrieg tactics, to gain air superiority over the Royal Air Force (RAF), before a planned sea and airborne invasion of Britain (Operation Sealion). Neither Hitler nor the German Wehrmacht believed it possible to carry out a successful amphibious assault on the British Isles until the Royal Air Force had been neutralised. Secondary objectives were to destroy aircraft production and ground infrastructure, as well as terrorising the British people with the intent of intimidating them into seeking an armistice or surrender and attacking areas of political interest.

British historians generally date the battle from 9 July to 31 October 1940, which represented the most intense period of daylight air raiding. German historians usually place the beginning of the battle in mid-August 1940 and end it in May 1941, on the withdrawal of the bomber units in preparation for the attack on the USSR. The failure of Nazi Germany to destroy Britain's air forces to allow for an invasion or to break the spirit of either the British government or people is widely considered the Third Reich's first major defeat.

-----------------------------------------
If you fight this battle as a pilot, download!

The Battle of Britain Ver.1.02
WinXPsp2 + .NET Framework2.0
WinVista

http://rapidshare.com/files/93132/BattleOfBritain.zip.html
1. Go to http://rapidshare.com/files/93.....n.zip.html
2. Push Free button.
3. Wait a second and enter the code.
4. Push Download from.... button.



Edited by comet9 - 24-Jan-2007 at 21:26

Even if the Luftwaffe had succeeded in neutralizing the R.A.F., the Germans possessed neither the necessary equipment in assault craft, nor the training,nor the experience, nor the technical know-how to mount a successful cross-channel amphibious operation.

Even the Americans, with almost a decade of Marine Corps experimentation with amphibious landings, made many mistakes at Tarawa, and that was with the support of naval gunnery and total air supremacy.

JT

Originally posted by jacobtowne Even if the Luftwaffe had succeeded in neutralizing the R.A.F., the Germans possessed neither the necessary equipment in assault craft, nor the training,nor the experience, nor the technical know-how to mount a successful cross-channel amphibious operation. Even the Americans, with almost a decade of Marine Corps experimentation with amphibious landings, made many mistakes at Tarawa, and that was with the support of naval gunnery and total air supremacy. JT

 

 

..thank you for your thread�.I would just like to add a few points to what has already been written�

 

�. I think it should be noted that the �evacuation of Dunkirk� gave some idea of the future potential of the Royal Air Force, and perhaps, helped reinforce Hitler and Goring�s belief that German air superiority was necessary in order to mount a successful invasion of Britain�despite the �defeat� of Dunkirk, the RAF fought an important rearguard action, which along with the flotilla of ships and boats crossing the English Channel from the south coast to rescue stranded soldiers, helped prevent  the potential disaster of the beleaguered British Expeditionary Force being totally overwhelmed and captured�the air cover  provided by the RAF did not go unrecognised by the German commanders, the RAF flew nearly 3000 fighter,  and approximately 650 bomber sorties directly related to the cover of the evacuation�the RAF lost roughly 180 aircraft against the Luftwaffe�s 240�.

 

 

..it must also be noted that although the RAF has been recognised as the main player in the Battle of Britain, some historians have observed that the Royal Navy�s role was vital, if not equally as important in Britain�s victory�.Britain�s Navy had already by this time, assembled four flotillas of destroyers to help protect the Channel�..in addition to this, the Home Fleet was poised to bring its battleships and cruisers (and thus heavy guns) into the fray if necessary� this again, had not gone unnoticed by the German commanders, indeed, Len Deighton has noted that the damage suffered by the German navy in Norway made it necessary for the Luftwaffe to gain �absolute� control of the air in the operation against Britain�however, had the Luftwaffe managed to establish air superiority and move about the skies uncontested, then a sea-borne landing would have been much more difficult to oppose�

 

Jacobtowne said�

 

Even if the Luftwaffe had succeeded in neutralizing the R.A.F., the Germans possessed neither the necessary equipment in assault craft, nor the training,nor the experience, nor the technical know-how to mount a successful cross-channel amphibious operation

 

..this is a pretty accurate assessment, indeed, the German Army had nothing equivalent to the United States Marine Corps, or it has to be said, the Japanese marines�apart from the �Siebel Ferries� and an experimental amphibious landing truck, the German�s had no landing craft�in fact it is curious to note, that at this time the German Army relied heavily on horse-drawn equipment and the biggest problem was how to transport a vast number of horse across the English Channel� most of the German efforts concentrated on the use of barges and tugboats� still, this was not enough to deter Hitler from continuing his plans to launch Operation Sea Lion..

 

..the actual first phase of the Battle of Britain took place in July 1940, when the Luftwaffe made small-scale bombing runs against coastal convoys (Operation Kanal-kampf) in which the German pilots soon realised the ineffectiveness of the twin-engined BF 110 against Spitfires and Hurricanes�the second phase (called Adlerangriff) was to be a major assault on British fighter command in a effort to deliver a swift knock-out blow to the RAF�.this practically became a battle of attrition with severe loses on both sides...the supply of planes and more importantly, trained and experienced pilots, took its toll on Britain�s efforts to fight back�Churchill observed that the Battle of Britain was an event that �will decide all��.and he was correct in his assessment�

 

..the event was decided by a group of young pilots who fought with immense bravery and tenacity and in the end they won�most were from the peacetime RAF, many were �part-time� airmen of the Auxiliary Air Force and the Volunteer Reserve�approximately one in every six  flyers came from outside the United Kingdom, many New Zealanders, twenty two Aussies ( 14 were killed), Irishmen, Frenchmen, South Africans and Canadians, and the most successful �ace� was Czechoslovakian�( and yes, some American pilots did see service in the Battle of Britain)�.the air battle was of vital importance to Britain�s everywhere, but i think ultimately, the victory that was the Battle of Britain served a greater purpose in that it demonstrated (mainly to the USA)  that Britain was not going to �surrender� and could survive, and along with Churchill�s personal �courtship�, gave strength to Franklin Roosevelt�s desire to continue aiding Britain for the rest of World War II, and thus a decisive factor in the eventual allied victory�.if Britain had succumbed to Nazi invasion, whose to say in a game of �ifs� and �buts� what destiny would have befallen mainland Europe?� 

 

 

Sources

 

Deighton, Len. Blood, Tears and Folly-An Objective Look at World War II (Castle Books, New Jersey) 1993.

 

Reynolds, David. Churchill in 1940: The Worst and the Finest Hour in Churchill- A Major New Assessment of his Life in Peace and War, Robert Blake and Roger Loius eds (Oxford University Press, New York) 1993.

 

 

 

Originally posted by Paul Originally posted by pekau   I don't think you got it right there. The German bombardment against England was so successful in the beginning that Germans literally achieved air supremacy. Yes, the Britain's spitfire was still more effective than German fighters... but Britain's air force was so numerically disadvantaged that they could not do a thing to German bombers knocking out the Britain's radars and other defense buildings. Many foresaw Britain's quick defeat. By air and sea, Britain was trapped and was scouraged.      I don't know what books you've been reading.... but   The Germans had no great numerical superiority of aircraft. It must be remembered Northern British squadrons largely didn't participate in the battle and were held back in reserved out of range of the Luftwaffe as a force to assault any attempted channel crossing. So if the southern air fields were destroyed and the planes unable to take off the British wasn't defenceless. The Germans were entirely ignorant of this fact, so it would have been a nasty surprise.   The Spitfire was far superior to the Hurricane and no better than the ME109. THe problem for the Germans was the rest of their planes were ME110's and JU88's which make appalling fighters.   Britain was also building planes at a faster rate than Germany and had a much more ready supply of pilots. Comeing from Canada, downed pilots who survived landing on friendly soil (unlike the Germans) and twin engine bomber squadrons whose experienced pilots could potentially be quickly retrained.   Effectively 2/3rds of the RAF only participated in the battle which when you consider the advantage in men, materials, range, radar and replenishment was the only reason it was so close.

Lesson learned. Never underestimate the commerical power of Britain. Holy crap, what the hell were they doing in France? They got tons of fighters.

Originally posted by gcle2003 I have to admit the hurricane destroyed more enemy aircraft than the Spitfire did.

From what I understand this was due to pitting the Spitfires against the German fighters, while the Hurricanes could concentrate the bombers, with the "Stukas" making partcularily good targets, hence the appelation of the time of "a Stuka party".

Different taks for different machines to get the best odds.

Iirc the reason the RAF was initially less successful against the Luftwaffe than it later became was du to tactics. Too small numbers of fighters would be sent up to engage the enemy at good odds. They ended up spending too much time ducking an d weaving.
Changing to bigger formations, "the big wing", meant they could gain tactical superiority and really start dishing it out.

Pekau wrote:

"German bombers knocking out the Britain's radars."


I'd like someone else's assessment here. I've been under the impression, rightly or wrongly, that German bombers failed to destroy the British coastal radar towers.

In one of my books there is a photograph of German troops practicing boarding and debarking  "assault craft" prior to the scheduled Sea Lion operation. The boat is a flat-bottomed, flat-topped, river and canal barge with low gunwales of the sort known in Northern Germany as Binnenschiffe.  And these people expected to cross the English Channel in these things?

JT




Edited by jacobtowne - 24-Jan-2007 at 14:46

Originally posted by Decebal Paul, I think that looking at the statistics for fighter production to determine the industrial strength of the Germany and Britain is misleading. Hitler had a definite preference for bomber production, despite his Luftwaffe generals insistence that more fighters were needed. The problem was that German bombers were quite poorly designed. The Ju87, while very effective against ground troops, were sitting ducks when attacked by fighters. The Ju111 was somewhat better, though not by much.

very clever......