• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Sea Lion Fails...Then What?

M

MAC161

Well-known member
Published by SLP
Location
WI, USA
(Given the name of this site, and the number of times the operation's come up elsewhere, I would be wholly unsurprised if someone's already got or has had a thread going on this scenario, so please forgive me if it sounds stale or otherwise like rehashing.)

This vignette and its discussion is a great speculation on how Operation Sea Lion seems bound to fail in any iteration, barring resources, planning, good weather and other factors that simply didn't exist for Germany in September 1940, and which weren't too likely to be put together well enough or in sufficient numbers to match/overcome Britain's buildup/capacity, esp. once Lend-Lease gets going and far more so if the USA joins in as per OTL. What interests me here, however, is what if the invasion had gone forward as planned and failed (thanks to more ranting/demands by Hitler, or anything else suitably handwavey), becoming either a disastrous rout after a very short period, or a quagmire (limited mostly to the southern coastal regions of England, with maybe some other small, bogged-down fronts opened later) that eventually led to collapse and defeat? What are the likeliest outcomes following either of these?

If there's a fast rout, what does it mean for Germany's position in Europe, esp. France? Barbarossa would probably be delayed, at the very least, but for how long? Do new fronts still open in North Africa (likely, in my view) or in the Balkans/Greece? (unlikely, but willing to be proven wrong)? I doubt Hitler would just shrug and turn east after such a humiliating loss, but what's his likeliest next move? If he focuses even more resources on Britain, does this mean fewer for the Holocaust, and thus perhaps a lower death rate, if only for a certain amount of time? How weakened is Hitler's control at home--enough for an earlier coup attempt?

If it becomes a quagmire, of whatever kind and duration, mostly the same questions, with a few others: What's the longest stretch any beachheads could last, presuming just enough supplies getting past the RN to sustain them for this? How long would the quagmire have to last before somebody (maybe Raeder or Goring, if only as front men for other plotters, given their OTL opposition to Sea Lion and possible ATL resentments over losses?) tries to topple Hitler, and what are the chances of success? Does the quagmire gradually push the USA to support Britain more openly, to the point of an earlier declaration of war, or just the opposite?
 
Last edited:
Part of this is likely dependent on how far German troops get, and how long for and how much damage done - Germany will have suffered great damage but so too will Britain, and the level of damage affects what we do next.
 
Charles EP M. said:
Part of this is likely dependent on how far German troops get, and how long for and how much damage done - Germany will have suffered great damage but so too will Britain, and the level of damage affects what we do next.
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember once reading something about Sea Lion along the lines of the conditions required to make it a viable option would also make it unnecessary as German air and naval dominance would allow them to neutralise Britain without an invasion. Obviously Sea Lion still fails here but how bad have things gotten to make the Germans confident to at least go for it? I know OP offers a ranty Hitler handwave but even then you could just have the first wave getting mowed down by an intact RAF whilst hititng the beach and it ends there and then. Heavy losses for the Germans sure but no more than, say, the Battle of Crete and everything happening so quickly as to basically be passed off as a botched raid.
 
The biggest potential impact as I understand it is the Kriegsmarine would be stretched beyond breaking point to do the landings, so the surface fleet is likely knackered for the rest of the war
 
Charles EP M. said:
The biggest potential impact as I understand it is the Kriegsmarine would be stretched beyond breaking point to do the landings, so the surface fleet is likely knackered for the rest of the war
Click to expand...
They were pretty stretched before. From memory, they had one (yes, one) destroyer that was in full fighting shape after Norway.
 
And anything destroyer sized or bigger which isn't completely knackered from Norway will be expected to fight, and go down fighting.

Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, despite the fact their paint is barely dry, will be expected to join anything else bigger than a trawler, and they can't run back home after one 500lb bomb, or a single 15" or 16" shell. They fight to the death. And even if there's a Hood equivalent in this TL, the RN have too many ships for it to matter. The KM will sink.

I covered this in my epilogues for Tee Im Schwarzwald, but one of the big changes in a Sea Lion Fails TL is that there is no KM fleet in being. Apart from a rag tag and bobtail that were being repaired after Norway, so missed out on the Death Ride to the Channel. This has many ramifications in the Atlantic and Med, and given time, these changes have potential consequences in the Far East.
 
Charles EP M. said:
What does this mean for Germany backing up Italy in Greece and North Africa?
Click to expand...
Well, it partly depends on specifics, but I suspected that there would be no Afrika Korps in the TL suggested by Tee.

In that, I reckoned (with very little working beyond my gut, I admit) on about 60,000 casualties in German land forces, saved from a bigger disaster by the lack of transport. Only two armies of the three prepared were transported, and the destruction of landing craft meant that the second wave was about 25% of the first, and the third wave nonexistent. Lack of hulls prevents throwing good money after bad. But 60,000 lost is still a big chunk, before adding in KM and LW losses.

I thought that such losses would stop Africa. Yugoslavia, on the other hand, feels baked in. I can't see Hitler allowing a back door that close to Vienna. Greece, well there's the hubris of Hitler, Mussolini and Churchill to account for there.

Benny might want to do it on his own, partly to thumb his nose at Hitler. He'll struggle mind, but he might insist. Churchill might want a follow up to the victory in Kent and Sussex, and act similar to otl. Hitler might want to concentrate any troops on the actual enemy of the USSR, or might want to get a win first. If a Greece campaign happens (I wasn't sure, in my tl) , I proposed that mainland Greece would fall, as in otl, but Crete would not. Mainly due to German airborne losses. My TL meant that they were gutted, and the Ju-52 fleet was more or less destroyed, with consequent issues for pilot training, of course. Where the British troops were drawn from would be another question.

I thought that the failed invasion would make Westminster less worried about invasion, allowing troops, tanks and planes to be released, mainly to North and East Africa. That's where the fighting was, after all. Even if the Afrika Korps came, I thought O'Connor might take all of Cyrenaica first. If they don't come at all, the Italian position may be in danger of unraveling rather faster than OTL. Fresh supplies from the UK and greater interdiction in the Med are only going to help one side.
 
Last edited:
@The Red already said but any timeline where the Germans attack is one where they've already kinda won the war? Like their plans were hopelessly optimistic but stated very firmly that the RAF and RN needed to be put out of action first. They may have overestimated their crossing capability but nobody involved including Hitler thought that a contested landing was anything but a disaster.

If they've driven the RAF back to Scotland, sunk or disabled the Home Fleet then regardless of a botched landing or not the British position is probably still worse than it was OTL, they were hardly swimming in assets to patrol the Atlantic or send to strength Asia in OTL. If the RAF and its factories and pilots are spent then what gets sent to keep Malta and North Africa a going concern?
 
You're right, deaths, which is why it becomes impossible to launch. The sheer disparity of forces between the RN and KM is so ludicrous that they must can't make the landings attempt, let alone make it stick. This is why the Sandhurst games wouldn't let the Andrew intervene properly - if they do their thing, there's no Sea Lion. And the balance of force is so lopsided there's no way out can be redressed.

If they launch Sea Lion, they've won. But they can't win enough to launch Sea Lion.

Makes the hypotheticals even more speculative than usual.
 
Geordie said:
Well, it partly depends on specifics, but I suspected that there would be no Afrika Korps in the TL suggested by Tee.

In that, I reckoned (with very little working beyond my gut, I admit) on about 60,000 casualties in German land forces, saved from a bigger disaster by the lack of transport. Only two armies of the three prepared were transported, and the destruction of landing craft meant that the second wave was about 25% of the first, and the third wave nonexistent. Lack of hulls prevents throwing good money after bad. But 60,000 lost is still a big chunk, before adding in KM and LW losses.

I thought that such losses would stop Africa. Yugoslavia, on the other hand, feels baked in. I can't see Hitler allowing a back door that close to Vienna. Greece, well there's the hubris of Hitler, Mussolini and Churchill to account for there.

Benny might want to do it on his own, partly to thumb his nose at Hitler. He'll struggle mind, but he might insist. Churchill might want a follow up to the victory in Kent and Sussex, and act similar to otl. Hitler might want to concentrate any troops on the actual enemy of the USSR, or might want to get a win first. If a Greece campaign happens (I wasn't sure, in my tl) , I proposed that mainland Greece would fall, as in otl, but Crete would not. Mainly due to German airborne losses. My TL meant that they were gutted, and the Ju-52 fleet was more or less destroyed, with consequent issues for pilot training, of course. Where the British troops were drawn from would be another question.

I thought that the failed invasion would make Westminster less worried about invasion, allowing troops, tanks and planes to be released, mainly to North and East Africa. That's where the fighting was, after all. Even if the Afrika Korps came, I thought O'Connor might take all of Cyrenaica first. If they don't come at all, the Italian position may be in danger of unraveling rather faster than OTL. Fresh supplies from the UK and greater interdiction in the Med are only going to help one side.
Click to expand...
If (going off the "extra Hitler rant" handwave of the starting post) Sea Lion is launched and becomes (absolute best case) bogged down to, say, the end of Dec. 1940 when whatever invasion forces left surrender or withdraw, what are the likeliest scenarios for North Africa and SE Europe the following year?

North Africa is probably out; focused so much on England, Hitler might lean on Mussolini to stand on the defensive there (while maybe appeasing him with the "honor" of a greater role in whatever Operation 25 might go forward, and perhaps by pushing harder on a Malta invasion?).

Greece might be off the table, too, at least for a while; IMO it depends on whether or not the British have (or Churchill believes they have) enough resources despite a failed though drawn-out Sea Lion to spare, and whether Mussolini is distracted enough from his "spazio vitale" obsession, which I suspect is unlikely.

I could see Hitler going forward with some form of OTL's Operation 25, as you point out; whether or not Mussolini invades Greece, the events before that (namely pressure to join the Tripartite Pact) and a failed Sea Lion might mean the Yugoslav army would feel more emboldened to overthrow Regent Paul, and the nation is an easy target and O25 a means of restoring Axis prestige after failing in England. Part of me also wonders whether Hitler might demand Mussolini and the other Pact members provide more troops for occupation in France and elsewhere in the wake of Sea Lion's failure, to take the burden off him while his forces recover?

Still figuring an Allied victory in the end, just with somewhat different fronts. The big questions remaining: How long is Barbarossa delayed? What does a failed Sea Lion do for the internal Axis power balance, and perhaps for the relationship with Vichy? How is U.S. entry into the war affected by a defeated invasion?

Smaller side question: Would Hitler, desperate for a victory with a bogged-down/failing Sea Lion, change his mind on Operation Felix, or some form of it?
 
Last edited:
I did a timeline on this. General conclusions:



  • Germany no longer poses a naval threat to the UK, nor is she capable of projecting power into the Mediterrian, for several years after the invasion.

  • Italy probably loses quicker in the Mediterrian, as the Germans are less capable of helping them and the UK can move more ships and troops into the region because the invasion threat is gone.

  • Vichy may split in two if the UK threatens French North Africa. Alternatively, Hitler occupies Vichy in 1941 and French Africa joins the Free French or plays host to the remainder of the Vichy Government.

  • Greece and the Balkans remain uninvolved in the war, as Italy is in no state to cause trouble.

  • Hitler’s position is much weaker in ATL, as the failed invasion caused major economic problems (all those lost barges), and the generals may be more resistant to any plan to launch Barbarossa in this TL.

  • Japan will see the UK as a stronger power, because the UK can move more troops east when/if Japan starts gearing up for war.

Long-Term possibilities:

  • Hitler invades USSR and declares war on US. Pretty much OTL.

  • Hitler invades USSR earlier than OTL, with better planning, and probably more limited war aims. Nazi Victory.

  • Hitler invades USSR and loses; assuming no US involvement, Russia probably takes most of Europe. Soviet Victory.

  • Hitler either invades USSR and the fighting stalemates, or doesn’t invade USSR at all. Britain can’t beat the Germans alone, so Stalemate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top