Probablly. There are several games publsihed on this. They all seem very bloody with lost of Axis airborne pieces hitting the eliminated pile.godfrey wrote:....
Surely, thousand of troops would have landed in the sea or crash landed.
Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
-
- Host - Allied sections
- Posts: 10062
- Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
- Location: USA
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
If you pack them in Junkers 52 or similar-sized Italian planes, you get about 7,500 men across in one lift. The gliders give you another 5,000. That leaves you with 17,500 to transport after the first lift. Then you need another 3-5 lifts, accounting for losses. Flight time is rather short, say including refuel and reload this could happen in 1-2 days, easily.godfrey wrote:hello everyone
I have just joined the forum,
My question is. How possible is it to land 29,000 airborne troops using about 500 transport aircraft and about 500 gliders? When Malta is just 18 by 5 miles at its widest points, furthermore the only flat areas were the airstrips., the terrain is hilly and our fields are small with stone rubble walls to retain the soil.
Surely, thousand of troops would have landed in the sea or crash landed.
godfrey
As for packing them at Waterloo you had 133,000 men on 4 square km. Having 29,000 men distributed over Malta doesn't strike me as infeasible.
If you speak Italian 'Operation C3' is the official study of the planned attack.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Even with Malta captured, Rommel without his North African railroad or 8,000 more trucks or building a port closer to the Egyptian border still faces the exact same very long supply line problems...admittedly, more supplies will actually get to Tripoli and Bengazhi, but they still have to get to the front lines to be of any real USE. Building even an ad hoc "Mulberry " type temporary harbor might have worked...
- T. A. Gardner
- Member
- Posts: 3568
- Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
- Location: Arizona
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
What Rommel really needed was about 50 - 90 of these:
and these:
Used properly, they could have moved supplies along the coast ducking into what harbors were available with the Germans and Italians needing only to provide some degree of coast defense against the RN and aircraft.
50 MFP and Sibel ferries would provide the equivalent of about 4,000 to 5,000 trucks. But, the Germans were not much on maritime strategy...
and these:
Used properly, they could have moved supplies along the coast ducking into what harbors were available with the Germans and Italians needing only to provide some degree of coast defense against the RN and aircraft.
50 MFP and Sibel ferries would provide the equivalent of about 4,000 to 5,000 trucks. But, the Germans were not much on maritime strategy...
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Luckily for the whole rest of the civilized world...
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
They had more than that by mid-1942 IIRC, plus the italian ones and the PiLb-39s...T. A. Gardner wrote:What Rommel really needed was about 50 - 90 of these:
Used properly, they could have moved supplies along the coast ducking into what harbors were available with the Germans and Italians needing only to provide some degree of coast defense against the RN and aircraft.
50 MFP and Sibel ferries would provide the equivalent of about 4,000 to 5,000 trucks. But, the Germans were not much on maritime strategy...
...Hitler just didnt trust the Italians, and the RM, to actually fight and not leave the German FJs holding the bag.
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
As JAG13 says, he had those. He still lost. There was a very considerable amount of coastal traffic in North Africa.T. A. Gardner wrote:What Rommel really needed was about 50 - 90 of these:
and these:
Used properly, they could have moved supplies along the coast ducking into what harbors were available with the Germans and Italians needing only to provide some degree of coast defense against the RN and aircraft.
50 MFP and Sibel ferries would provide the equivalent of about 4,000 to 5,000 trucks. But, the Germans were not much on maritime strategy...
http://rommelsriposte.com/2015/01/18/th ... -crusader/
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
In fact, here is some data on coastal traffic in 1941:
http://rommelsriposte.com/2011/06/01/ca ... ours-1941/
http://rommelsriposte.com/2011/06/01/ca ... ours-1941/
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Know the quays at both ports had railroad tracks on them with direct lines out of each port. And realize laying railroad tracks in a desert setting would be hard but being able to load the rail cars quickly, transport those supplies quickly and unload them quickly would have made extending the railroad an absolutely CRITICAL project...the British wasted NO time extending a spur W from the port of Alexandria thus ensuring that regardless of other problems rapid delivery of supplies to the front as they arrived was not 1 of them.
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Building a railroad in itself is not trivial in terms of supply needs. Just a quick googling shows about 20,000 tons per 100km of material weight, ignoring replacement material for wear tear and combat loss, also rolling stock and locos are extra. Compare that to the monthly supply requirements and capabilities, and it should be clear why the British found this easier than the Italians.flakbait wrote:Know the quays at both ports had railroad tracks on them with direct lines out of each port. And realize laying railroad tracks in a desert setting would be hard but being able to load the rail cars quickly, transport those supplies quickly and unload them quickly would have made extending the railroad an absolutely CRITICAL project...the British wasted NO time extending a spur W from the port of Alexandria thus ensuring that regardless of other problems rapid delivery of supplies to the front as they arrived was not 1 of them.
Also, you are aware that most convoys discharged at Port Suez, not at Alex?
And despite the railway, supply was still an issue for the Allies.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
- T. A. Gardner
- Member
- Posts: 3568
- Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
- Location: Arizona
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Urmel wrote: As JAG13 says, he had those. He still lost. There was a very considerable amount of coastal traffic in North Africa.
http://rommelsriposte.com/2015/01/18/th ... -crusader/
The problem is as the link shows...
A total of 30 MFPs were foreseen at this time, in two lots of 15, of which 22 were to be built in Palermo, and eight in Varna, Bulgaria. 15 of these vessels had been ordered in April 1941, to be built in Italy. In October the Italian order was expanded by another 15, and in December another 20 were planned to be built. The intent was to grow the fleet to about 100 vessels.
The Germans might have foreseen the need but they didn't produce the necessary quantity. Having 10 to 30 MFP total in service is a fraction of what they needed. The 100 planned would have made a difference, 10 to 30 would not make that much of a dent in things.
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
The MFP weren't the only coastal traffic enablers. There was a lot going on with smaller steamers and motorised sailing vessels. Also, keep in mind that the link refers to the situation at the end of 1941. They kept building them, and during 1942 also added Italian MFP.
The enemy had superiority in numbers, his tanks were more heavily armoured, they had larger calibre guns with nearly twice the effective range of ours, and their telescopes were superior. 5 RTR 19/11/41
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle 1941/42
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Again, it boils down to the Axis logistical (supply) handling and movement system was simply inadequate to handle the rapidly increasing demand placed upon it. Even a modern superbly trained, equipt and led fighting force of any type force in the field is ultimately held hostage to whether it can be regularly resupplied and maintained in the field; if not then short of a miracle it is DOOMED to be eventually defeated...
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Hitler just didnt give enough of a damn, in 1940 he wanted in and offered sizable help, Musso said no; in 1941 he sent Rommel with a token force just to shore up silly Musso and prevent his downfall and ulterior surrender (yes, already in early 1941), not to conquer Egypt.
...and with Barbarossa adportas he no longer could give a damn, the Med would get whatever and whenever the Eastern front allowed, hence Malta getting pounded into dust by the LW during the Russian winter.
Sizable resources would be directed to the Med only after El Alamein, when Musso and Rommel lost, and again just to prevent the Italians to leave the war.
So, after 1940, there was not much German interest in the Med other than to distract the allies and sustain the Italians, hence the lack of resources allocated to the theather when clearly the Germans could have donce a lot more if willing to deviate resources from the main campaign.
...and with Barbarossa adportas he no longer could give a damn, the Med would get whatever and whenever the Eastern front allowed, hence Malta getting pounded into dust by the LW during the Russian winter.
Sizable resources would be directed to the Med only after El Alamein, when Musso and Rommel lost, and again just to prevent the Italians to leave the war.
So, after 1940, there was not much German interest in the Med other than to distract the allies and sustain the Italians, hence the lack of resources allocated to the theather when clearly the Germans could have donce a lot more if willing to deviate resources from the main campaign.
Re: Operation Hercules - would it have worked?
Yeah, but it was a political sideshow duly dwarfed by the eastfront, the only way for the Germans to do more requires Barbarossa to be moved into 1942.Urmel wrote: As JAG13 says, he had those. He still lost. There was a very considerable amount of coastal traffic in North Africa.
http://rommelsriposte.com/2015/01/18/th ... -crusader/
Does Japan still move south if the Germans do not attack the soviets in 1941?