Yuku free message boards

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

What's the point two.

People have talked about an early, decisive result in the Med as a good return for a stronger than historic RN.

Lets assume we allow events to proceed as historic for the RN from the loss of France to the end of 1940, which, lets face it included some pretty fair outcomes for British arms.

Assuming its January 1941, your aim is to isolate North Africa completely for the axis, supply Malta at low risk and be able to run east west convoys at will, as well as to project power securely to islands and the littorals of your choice (Greece, Syria, Crete etc).

What additional force levels or materiel do you need to make this happen? Quantatively? Qaulatively? What allwances for damage and wastage?

New Battleships?

Rebuitl Battleships?

New Carriers?

Old Carriers?

Aircraft? Embarked and land based.

Cruisers?

Destroyers?

Submarines?

Mine Layers?

Sloops and other escorts?

Dockyard and other infrastructure?

Where do you base these in addition to the historically deployed forces?

What operations do they undertake?

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

Hundreds of destroyers, hundreds of submarines, thousands of corvettes, thousands of mine layers, thousands of aircraft.

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

If we limit accuracy to orders of magnitude , I think you are right (1) wrong (10), wrong (10/100), wrong (100), right (1)

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

I would do the following:

Sicily:
Axis forces in Sicily need to be destroyed.
Some kind of raid to destroy the Luftwaffe on the island.
Destroy anything on that island that is of any value: vinyards (olives and grapes), livestock, orange trees, fresh water supply.

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

1) Finish Conquest of Libya before assisting Greece.
2) "Occupy" Crete - build airbases and position enough RAF sqn to hold it. If possible bomb Rumanian oilfields (possible in 41?)
3) Neutralize or conquer Pantelleria & Lampedusa. Position enough RAF figther sqn to hold the islands + malta and dominate adjecent waters
4) Occupy Tunesia before Germany/Italy
5) Ensure air support for naval forces: All Sea Hurricane and Martlet Sqn to Med alongside sufficient Coastal Command reece and attack sqns.

Naval Forces:

Alexandia:
Main Task: Support Crete & Malta + cut off eastern Med for enemy forces + support for landforces in libya.
Barham
Warspite
Valiant
Malaya
Illustrious or Eagle+Argus/Hermes

Gibraltar:
Main task: Support Malta + cut of western Med for enemy forces.
Renown
Repulse
Nelson + Rodney (leaves KGV and Hood in Scapa Flow)
Ark Royal

Malta:
Main task: Minelaying and interdiction of enemy Africa-bound transports + neutralisation of Lampedusa and Pantelleria.
5-10 cruisers + destroyers + subs (how many necessary/avaliable?)

Costs:
Less RAF fighter Sqn on the British Isles?
Less Coastal Command Sqn controlling british waters?
Only KGV & Hood to counter Bismarck?
Politically impossible not to support Greece?
Possible to conquer Lampedusa and Panterilleria with forces available?
Possible to conquer Tunisia when finished with Libya?
Enough Martlet and Sea Hurrican sqn to protect Ark Royal and Illustrious?

At a minimum i would choose:
a) Hold Crete and Malta. Send enough RAF fighter and coastal command sqn to hold both islands and control adjecent waters.
b) maintain naval presence at Malta to interdict enemy shipping and conduct minelaying.

best regards

Benjamin Nielsen

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

The big thing would be enough RAF air cover at Malta/Crete to allow the RN heavy units to operate in daylight around Sicily/Malta/Crete at acceptable levels of risk.

More subs and Beaufighters for anti-shipping strikes would be a plus.

How about a rebuilt Hood & Repulse so RN has a couple more highly useful fast capital ships to deploy in the region as carrier escorts, etc?

My Recent Posts · (14-Apr-2008

I'd say more submarines.
Greece is still neutral. It is not possible to get much more air units on Malta to provide necessary air coverage. Heavy units are adequate after the Taranto raid. Increase cruiser force (from the Atlantic or the Far East), and get whatever old BBs are left in the Atlantic to the Far East (the 5 R class + maybe Ocean, leave the QEs in the med) to discourage the Japanese. Get more cruisers to the Med (from the Atlantic and Far East). Subs are the only ships that are the least affected air cover.
Use ground forces not in Egypt/Libya to launch a preventive attack Syria and Lebanon ASAP - that would secure the Western Med. Operations finished in February.
When Greece is attacked, emphasis on RAF/RN presence around Crete. That would help with withdrawal when the eventual German attack arrives. Crete airbases would more or less secure Tobruk.

After Barbarossa, with less units available in Britain for convoy transport, LL to USSR would be reduced (no need to deliver British tanks to USSR) - freed up resources go to the Med (some more planes) or to the Far East.

My Recent Posts · (15-Apr-2008

Aye, there's the rub.

Conventional surface forces are adequate. Argue about 'modernized' BBs if one must, but all BBs were adequate, including the despised 'R' class. When compared with the potential capital ship opposition.

As you have noticed before, all the carriers (old, new, converted, whatever) are of no particular use in daylight and against determined daylight opposition unless adequately stocked with adequate airplanes.

With this shortcoming fixed, the existing base structure (Gibraltar, Malta, Egypt) is adequate to mount any operation one would desire. Malta could be supplied at will at any time of one's choosing. The Luftwaffe would remain a formidable opponent, but would not be sweeping all surface ships before it. Neither Sicily nor the Italian mainland would be sanctuaries for axis aircraft. Every time an Italian surface force sortied, it would be hounded to destruction.

I ask for no more carriers than were historically available. The number of FAA aces would grow asymptotically.

My Recent Posts · (15-Apr-2008

I would have to agree - 30 operational fighters embarked with the eastern fleet at all times (rather than 6-12), and suff. fighter direction equiped ships cuts down significant damage and attrition. I dont even think it matters to much of they are fulmars, sea hurricanes or martlets. Fulmars break up raids, while the 30 mph aircraft do the same but shoot down more aircraft.

40 strike aircraft rather than the historic 12-20 lands much heavier blows when they are needed.

Secure runs of large convoys into the med puts pressure on axis forces in southern italy much sooner, and makes cutting off north africa more thorough.

The RN ordered 250 Fulmars in two orders during 1938, the first of which were delivered to squadrons in May-1940 and deliveries then progressing at roughly 20 month for 12 months. Another 250 were ordered in three batches during 1940 - being delivered from mid 1941, too late to effectively change 1941 in the Med.

Is the key to controlling the med and shutting down north Africa as simple as ordering another 250 fulmars in 1938 at the expense of RAF orders, and recruiting and training the appropriate number ofpilots and support personel. Or alternatively ordering 250 Sea Hurricanes with folding wings and naval equipment in addition to the historic fulmars in 1938, for mid 1940 delivery?

My Recent Posts · (15-Apr-2008

I think the latter. One of the best single seat fighters of its age. Not a great deck landing aircraft, but so what? It can catch things the gallant Fulmar cannot, no matter how professionally directed or flown.

It seems such a little thing, perhaps one or two months of production, but it is hard to ignore what this aircraft in numbers might have wrought in the Med.

Just received a copy of Osprey's Aircraft of the Aces #75 - "Royal Navy Aces of World War 2." Your question was timely.

My Recent Posts · (15-Apr-2008

IMHO its surprising how much the Fulmar achieved. German fighters in early 1941 were short legged. They can't really reach out more than 100 miles from their bases if the strike aircraft need to spend time finding the targets.

Vs bombers the Fulmar is marginal for an interceptor, but if its already at height and under radar control it can make the intercept and break up the raid.

Didn't the big damage occur to the two armored fleet carriers when the handful of Fulmars present were drawn down to the deck by other attackers?

Having 30 embarked means you can be replacing those on CAP while the current CAP gets down and dirty. Only the most well coordinated, heavy raids get a clear run.

Of course Hurricanes are even better, because you can chase and kill the stragglers. Enemy pilots get home each time to find 10% of their mates missing. Units are at 50% after a few weeks of operations.

Poor old Hurricane as a deck lander, even the Spitfire. Both have ridiculously low stall speeds. Spitfire has the best stall warning of any WWII aircraft. Both were supposedly crisp and easy to control. Poor visibility and ill set up landing gear then, amongst other things?

You would have to think with more time and resources to do the conversion, and more trials, both could have been considerably improved in this respect.

Author	Comment
NewGolconda	Whats the point II	Lead	[-]
Posts: 3273 (14-Apr-2008 00:54:19) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	What's the point two. People have talked about an early, decisive result in the Med as a good return for a stronger than historic RN. Lets assume we allow events to proceed as historic for the RN from the loss of France to the end of 1940, which, lets face it included some pretty fair outcomes for British arms. Assuming its January 1941, your aim is to isolate North Africa completely for the axis, supply Malta at low risk and be able to run east west convoys at will, as well as to project power securely to islands and the littorals of your choice (Greece, Syria, Crete etc). What additional force levels or materiel do you need to make this happen? Quantatively? Qaulatively? What allwances for damage and wastage? New Battleships? Rebuitl Battleships? New Carriers? Old Carriers? Aircraft? Embarked and land based. Cruisers? Destroyers? Submarines? Mine Layers? Sloops and other escorts? Dockyard and other infrastructure? Where do you base these in addition to the historically deployed forces? What operations do they undertake?
seasick		#1	[-]
Posts: 4578 (14-Apr-2008 03:21:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Hundreds of destroyers, hundreds of submarines, thousands of corvettes, thousands of mine layers, thousands of aircraft. Nicotine: America's number one mind altering chemical.
NewGolconda		#2	[-]
Posts: 3275 (14-Apr-2008 03:28:38) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	If we limit accuracy to orders of magnitude , I think you are right (1) wrong (10), wrong (10/100), wrong (100), right (1)
seasick	Honestly	#3	[-]
Posts: 4579 (14-Apr-2008 04:52:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I would do the following: Sicily: Axis forces in Sicily need to be destroyed. Some kind of raid to destroy the Luftwaffe on the island. Destroy anything on that island that is of any value: vinyards (olives and grapes), livestock, orange trees, fresh water supply.
BenjaminGraff		#4	[-]
Posts: 120 (14-Apr-2008 13:49:17) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	1) Finish Conquest of Libya before assisting Greece. 2) "Occupy" Crete - build airbases and position enough RAF sqn to hold it. If possible bomb Rumanian oilfields (possible in 41?) 3) Neutralize or conquer Pantelleria & Lampedusa. Position enough RAF figther sqn to hold the islands + malta and dominate adjecent waters 4) Occupy Tunesia before Germany/Italy 5) Ensure air support for naval forces: All Sea Hurricane and Martlet Sqn to Med alongside sufficient Coastal Command reece and attack sqns. Naval Forces: Alexandia: Main Task: Support Crete & Malta + cut off eastern Med for enemy forces + support for landforces in libya. Barham Warspite Valiant Malaya Illustrious or Eagle+Argus/Hermes Gibraltar: Main task: Support Malta + cut of western Med for enemy forces. Renown Repulse Nelson + Rodney (leaves KGV and Hood in Scapa Flow) Ark Royal Malta: Main task: Minelaying and interdiction of enemy Africa-bound transports + neutralisation of Lampedusa and Pantelleria. 5-10 cruisers + destroyers + subs (how many necessary/avaliable?) Costs: Less RAF fighter Sqn on the British Isles? Less Coastal Command Sqn controlling british waters? Only KGV & Hood to counter Bismarck? Politically impossible not to support Greece? Possible to conquer Lampedusa and Panterilleria with forces available? Possible to conquer Tunisia when finished with Libya? Enough Martlet and Sea Hurrican sqn to protect Ark Royal and Illustrious? At a minimum i would choose: a) Hold Crete and Malta. Send enough RAF fighter and coastal command sqn to hold both islands and control adjecent waters. b) maintain naval presence at Malta to interdict enemy shipping and conduct minelaying. best regards Benjamin Nielsen
DonnieBaseball23		#5	[-]
Posts: 26 (14-Apr-2008 16:35:57) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The big thing would be enough RAF air cover at Malta/Crete to allow the RN heavy units to operate in daylight around Sicily/Malta/Crete at acceptable levels of risk. More subs and Beaufighters for anti-shipping strikes would be a plus. How about a rebuilt Hood & Repulse so RN has a couple more highly useful fast capital ships to deploy in the region as carrier escorts, etc?
P3D		#6	[-]
Posts: 807 (14-Apr-2008 22:21:01) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I'd say more submarines. Greece is still neutral. It is not possible to get much more air units on Malta to provide necessary air coverage. Heavy units are adequate after the Taranto raid. Increase cruiser force (from the Atlantic or the Far East), and get whatever old BBs are left in the Atlantic to the Far East (the 5 R class + maybe Ocean, leave the QEs in the med) to discourage the Japanese. Get more cruisers to the Med (from the Atlantic and Far East). Subs are the only ships that are the least affected air cover. Use ground forces not in Egypt/Libya to launch a preventive attack Syria and Lebanon ASAP - that would secure the Western Med. Operations finished in February. When Greece is attacked, emphasis on RAF/RN presence around Crete. That would help with withdrawal when the eventual German attack arrives. Crete airbases would more or less secure Tobruk. After Barbarossa, with less units available in Britain for convoy transport, LL to USSR would be reduced (no need to deliver British tanks to USSR) - freed up resources go to the Med (some more planes) or to the Far East.
jlyons97	Aircraft? Embarked and land based.	#7	[-]
Posts: 1428 (15-Apr-2008 03:57:55) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Aye, there's the rub. Conventional surface forces are adequate. Argue about 'modernized' BBs if one must, but all BBs were adequate, including the despised 'R' class. When compared with the potential capital ship opposition. As you have noticed before, all the carriers (old, new, converted, whatever) are of no particular use in daylight and against determined daylight opposition unless adequately stocked with adequate airplanes. With this shortcoming fixed, the existing base structure (Gibraltar, Malta, Egypt) is adequate to mount any operation one would desire. Malta could be supplied at will at any time of one's choosing. The Luftwaffe would remain a formidable opponent, but would not be sweeping all surface ships before it. Neither Sicily nor the Italian mainland would be sanctuaries for axis aircraft. Every time an Italian surface force sortied, it would be hounded to destruction. I ask for no more carriers than were historically available. The number of FAA aces would grow asymptotically.
NewGolconda		#8	[-]
Posts: 3278 (15-Apr-2008 04:24:24) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I would have to agree - 30 operational fighters embarked with the eastern fleet at all times (rather than 6-12), and suff. fighter direction equiped ships cuts down significant damage and attrition. I dont even think it matters to much of they are fulmars, sea hurricanes or martlets. Fulmars break up raids, while the 30 mph aircraft do the same but shoot down more aircraft. 40 strike aircraft rather than the historic 12-20 lands much heavier blows when they are needed. Secure runs of large convoys into the med puts pressure on axis forces in southern italy much sooner, and makes cutting off north africa more thorough. The RN ordered 250 Fulmars in two orders during 1938, the first of which were delivered to squadrons in May-1940 and deliveries then progressing at roughly 20 month for 12 months. Another 250 were ordered in three batches during 1940 - being delivered from mid 1941, too late to effectively change 1941 in the Med. Is the key to controlling the med and shutting down north Africa as simple as ordering another 250 fulmars in 1938 at the expense of RAF orders, and recruiting and training the appropriate number ofpilots and support personel. Or alternatively ordering 250 Sea Hurricanes with folding wings and naval equipment in addition to the historic fulmars in 1938, for mid 1940 delivery? Last Edited By: NewGolconda 15-Apr-2008 05:10:25. Edited 1 times.
jlyons97	Fulmars or Hurricanes?....	#9	[-]
Posts: 1429 (15-Apr-2008 05:49:24) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I think the latter. One of the best single seat fighters of its age. Not a great deck landing aircraft, but so what? It can catch things the gallant Fulmar cannot, no matter how professionally directed or flown. It seems such a little thing, perhaps one or two months of production, but it is hard to ignore what this aircraft in numbers might have wrought in the Med. Just received a copy of Osprey's Aircraft of the Aces #75 - "Royal Navy Aces of World War 2." Your question was timely.
NewGolconda		#10	[-]
Posts: 3280 (15-Apr-2008 06:46:52) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	IMHO its surprising how much the Fulmar achieved. German fighters in early 1941 were short legged. They can't really reach out more than 100 miles from their bases if the strike aircraft need to spend time finding the targets. Vs bombers the Fulmar is marginal for an interceptor, but if its already at height and under radar control it can make the intercept and break up the raid. Didn't the big damage occur to the two armored fleet carriers when the handful of Fulmars present were drawn down to the deck by other attackers? Having 30 embarked means you can be replacing those on CAP while the current CAP gets down and dirty. Only the most well coordinated, heavy raids get a clear run. Of course Hurricanes are even better, because you can chase and kill the stragglers. Enemy pilots get home each time to find 10% of their mates missing. Units are at 50% after a few weeks of operations. Poor old Hurricane as a deck lander, even the Spitfire. Both have ridiculously low stall speeds. Spitfire has the best stall warning of any WWII aircraft. Both were supposedly crisp and easy to control. Poor visibility and ill set up landing gear then, amongst other things? You would have to think with more time and resources to do the conversion, and more trials, both could have been considerably improved in this respect.

Yuku free message boards

Whats the point II

Whats the point II

Quick Reply