The British Response To Operation Sealion

Discussions on WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic.
Locked
Knouterer
Member
Posts: 1661
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 18:19

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#691

Post by Knouterer » 27 Jun 2013, 17:19

phylo_roadking wrote:
Many batteries (were more or less) cleverly camouflaged to resemble innocuous beach pavillions and such.
I take it you realise this is another one of the German pics?
I'm not sure, but I don't think so, and in any case the Germans, as I believe I have pointed out before, were (almost) totally unaware of the existence of the emergency batteries, as far as I can tell from published sources. Apart from the defended ports, they only "suspected" a battery at Dungeness, and another one at Beachy Head, which in fact did not exist.
"The true spirit of conversation consists in building on another man's observation, not overturning it." Edward George Bulwer-Lytton

Knouterer
Member
Posts: 1661
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 18:19

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#692

Post by Knouterer » 27 Jun 2013, 19:25

phylo_roadking wrote:
Since the unloading was suppose to take place over 4 days there's still a fair amount of exposure as far as the Germans are concerned....
Again they have time to adjust the rules.
But...do they? ;) Once the batteries betray their locations by opening fire at the limit of their 6,000-yard range - how long before the Stukas arrive???

That's if the Germans didn't actually know in advance where they were - remember those highly detailed, low-level photo recce shots!
That is in fact an interesting question - when do the Stukas arrive? Taking beach B as an example, if the Germans are on schedule and the first elements of the Vorausabteilungen are to hit the beach at 6h00, the minesweepers, trawlers, motor boats and barges carrying them come within the 6,000 yard range at least an hour before (some time is needed to launch the assault boats and inflatables from the various vessels carying them). By that time it would still be relatively dark, even if it is a moonlit night as planned. So let's assume the coastal guns will only open fire when the first vessels come within the range of the searchlights, about 2,500 yards. But by that time - I surmise - it would still be too dark for Stuka pilots, if they arrive over the beach at that exact moment, to clearly distinguish targets on the ground. They would have only muzzle flashes to aim at, that is if the gunners were imprudent enough to fire when Stukas were directly overhead.
In any case, the Luftwaffe had only two "Gruppen" Stukas (50-60 aircraft) to spare for the 20 kms or so of beach B. And since - as I believe on the basis of the available evidence - the Germans had no idea where the batteries were, they would be unlikely to do much damage to them. Consider also that well-trained Stuka pilots were able to place their bombs in a circle 50 meters across, but a gun-house, even if clearly identified, is a much smaller target.
"The true spirit of conversation consists in building on another man's observation, not overturning it." Edward George Bulwer-Lytton


User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#693

Post by phylo_roadking » 27 Jun 2013, 19:47

In any case, the Luftwaffe had only two "Gruppen" Stukas (50-60 aircraft) to spare for the 20 kms or so of beach B. And since - as I believe on the basis of the available evidence - the Germans had no idea where the batteries were, they would be unlikely to do much damage to them. Consider also that well-trained Stuka pilots were able to place their bombs in a circle 50 meters across, but a gun-house, even if clearly identified, is a much smaller target.
However - the example of the Mlawa Line in Poland in 1939 showed that while the anti-tank gun-armed bunkers of the Line could indeed withstand Stuka attack, even a number of direct hits...the attacks they suffered on the morning of the 2nd of September were A/ extremely demoralizing, and B/ the gunners weren't able to man their guns during the attack. And these were hardened bunkers... not relatively openfronted gun batteries with at most a naval gun shield to protect the gunners, apart from the concrete roof and partly in-filled sidewalls; they weren't full casemates...There's going to be a LOT of bomb fragments/shrapnel flying around from a divebomber attack...even one that doesn't hit the batteries.
But by that time - I surmise - it would still be too dark for Stuka pilots, if they arrive over the beach at that exact moment, to clearly distinguish targets on the ground. They would have only muzzle flashes to aim at, that is if the gunners were imprudent enough to fire when Stukas were directly overhead.
Mid-September...

Sunrise in the middle of the third week of the month is c. 6.40 am...which means first light is anything from 45 minutes to an hour beforehand...which means before the invaders hit the beach....

Of course - this ALSO means that the GUNNERS don't have the light to see let alone accurately target any enemy shipping out towards 6,000 yards before that time either! Which is something people do tend to forget...
So let's assume the coastal guns will only open fire when the first vessels come within the range of the searchlights, about 2,500 yards.
Question is - what do they see within 2,500 yards at that point? The transport ships...or the rubber dinghies/motorboats? And don't the searchlights of a coastal battery give the Stukas slightly more of a target than muzzleflashes? The next problem is more prosaic - exactly how effective are searchlights in the growing light after first light? 8O

That anything-up-to-an-hour or so between first light and full dawn is a bit of a problem for the gunners; that's right at the time they NEED to be able to engage out to 6,000 yards...but can't effectively until full visibility.
Last edited by phylo_roadking on 27 Jun 2013, 20:35, edited 3 times in total.
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Dunserving
Member
Posts: 757
Joined: 14 Sep 2009, 12:43
Location: UK, not far north of Dungeness

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#694

Post by Dunserving » 27 Jun 2013, 20:08

How effective are searchlights in the growing light?

Well, pretty good at affecting the vision of anyone the beam hits for several minutes - or were German troops trained to keep the right eye shut when there was a risk of a bright light shining in the eyes in low light conditions?

Heaven help us if any of you do not know why it was the left eye to be kept open!

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#695

Post by phylo_roadking » 27 Jun 2013, 20:11

Well, pretty good at affecting the vision of anyone the beam hits for several minutes
True - but if it takes "several minutes" to lay a gun....! 8O
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Knouterer
Member
Posts: 1661
Joined: 15 Mar 2012, 18:19

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#696

Post by Knouterer » 27 Jun 2013, 20:41

On the subject of German reconnaissance photos, this is one, without a shadow of a doubt. Langney Point east of Eastbourne. The area is now completely built over and there is a marina at about the center of the picture. The circular settlement on the left, St. Anthony's Hill, still exists and permits orientation. Two Martello Towers are visible, Nos 64 and 66 (No 65 was lost to coastal erosion sometime during the late Thirties), which both held several Vickers MGs in the autumn of 1940.
The German photo interpreter however did not consider them worthy of attention, but he carefully drew rectangles around two other structures as you can see. At first I thought of coastal batteries but there were none there. In fact, as far as I can make out, on the left is the Eastbourne main sewer outlet, and on the right is the Langney Hospital for Infectious Diseases.
Neither would be of any military significance that I can think of, although even the most battle-hardened German assault engineer might hesitate before entering either :)
Attachments
pevenseycoast 001.jpg
"The true spirit of conversation consists in building on another man's observation, not overturning it." Edward George Bulwer-Lytton

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#697

Post by phylo_roadking » 27 Jun 2013, 20:56

Hall says " In the event of a lodgment by enemy troops, the C-in-C Home Forces was to make his request for air support directly to the AOC-in-C Bomber Command through the CCOR. Under a recent joint service agreement the Army's anti-invasion air support would come directly from the light bomber squadrons of Nos.1 and 2 Groups, operating from permanent bases and under the centralized control of Bomber Command. <>
And? All that means is that Bomber Command's aircraft - those still under its direct command and those transferred to the Army - were still to fly out of Bomber Command's fields....the Army not being in the business of building and running airfields at that time...
Except for a few tactical reconnaissance machines of the AC squadrons attached to the Army's five home commands no RAF aircraft were placed under direct Army control. Even the targets selected for attack were subject to the agreement in "general terms" of the two commanders."
I REALLY hope you're not trying to say that C-in-C Home Forces and AOC Bomber Command had to agree over every single attack or target? That just means that the two gentlemen had agreed a set of general targeting criteria beforehand...amd/or delegated the responsibility to the Duty Controller(s).
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#698

Post by phylo_roadking » 27 Jun 2013, 22:28

Knouterer - THIS is what I mean about the batteries and ther vulnerability to near misses :P We've seen Folkestone West...this is Folkestone EAST...http://www.kenthistoryforum.co.uk/index ... pic=6019.0

Image

...and THIS is what it looks like on the ground!

No.1
Image

No.2
Image

As you can see - bar any turrent or gun shield, and maybe a sandbag wall up to maximum depression level - pretty open to bomb fragments and shrapnel from near misses within that 50-metre radius...
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#699

Post by phylo_roadking » 27 Jun 2013, 22:42

Talking of depression - is it just me, or given the distance back from the edge of the cliff, and the sandbag wall in front of the battery....you can JUST see it in the earlier pic of Folkestone West...

Was there a MINIMUM distance at which the guns could engage an enemy out to sea??? 8O
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#700

Post by Sid Guttridge » 28 Jun 2013, 13:54

I suppose it would depend on the specific circumstances.

Where I live there were a lot of blind spots. Beaches not covered by coastal artillery were the first to be sown with with landmines.

Cheerts,

Sid.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#701

Post by Gooner1 » 28 Jun 2013, 17:01

phylo_roadking wrote: And? All that means is that Bomber Command's aircraft - those still under its direct command and those transferred to the Army -
You had trouble understanding this bit "Except for a few tactical reconnaissance machines of the AC squadrons attached to the Army's five home commands no RAF aircraft were placed under direct Army control."?
I REALLY hope you're not trying to say that C-in-C Home Forces and AOC Bomber Command had to agree over every single attack or target? That just means that the two gentlemen had agreed a set of general targeting criteria beforehand...amd/or delegated the responsibility to the Duty Controller(s).
Bomber Command had to agree to every request, yes.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#702

Post by Gooner1 » 28 Jun 2013, 17:58

Knouterer wrote:
That is in fact an interesting question - when do the Stukas arrive? Taking beach B as an example, if the Germans are on schedule and the first elements of the Vorausabteilungen are to hit the beach at 6h00, the minesweepers, trawlers, motor boats and barges carrying them come within the 6,000 yard range at least an hour before (some time is needed to launch the assault boats and inflatables from the various vessels carying them). By that time it would still be relatively dark, even if it is a moonlit night as planned. So let's assume the coastal guns will only open fire when the first vessels come within the range of the searchlights, about 2,500 yards. But by that time - I surmise - it would still be too dark for Stuka pilots, if they arrive over the beach at that exact moment, to clearly distinguish targets on the ground. They would have only muzzle flashes to aim at, that is if the gunners were imprudent enough to fire when Stukas were directly overhead.
Would that be 6h00 British time or Continental time?

Also there is the problem of the two layers of boom netting the invaders have to deal with. IIRC the nets were laid at a distance of a half mile and one mile from the shore.

Of course the British also have other guns which are less fussy about precise accuracy ..

Image

:thumbsup:

Dunserving
Member
Posts: 757
Joined: 14 Sep 2009, 12:43
Location: UK, not far north of Dungeness

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#703

Post by Dunserving » 28 Jun 2013, 20:29

phylo_roadking wrote:Talking of depression - is it just me, or given the distance back from the edge of the cliff, and the sandbag wall in front of the battery....you can JUST see it in the earlier pic of Folkestone West...

Was there a MINIMUM distance at which the guns could engage an enemy out to sea??? 8O

It would depend on the maximum depression that the gun mounting allowed, but the minimum distance would be rather further than other posters would appear to have realised - for the very simple reason that the guns are NOT at sea level.

The battery is on the top of a cliff, well above sea level!

Just about exactly 100 feet above sea level, or 90 metres if you prefer....

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#704

Post by phylo_roadking » 28 Jun 2013, 21:03

You had trouble understanding this bit "Except for a few tactical reconnaissance machines of the AC squadrons attached to the Army's five home commands no RAF aircraft were placed under direct Army control."?
No, I have no trouble at all in accepting that they weren't under DIRECT Army control; as I said earlier - they were under the Ops Room(s)'s control...not the Army area command battle staffs.
Bomber Command had to agree to every request, yes.
And where does Hall say that?
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17488
Joined: 01 May 2006, 00:31
Location: Belfast

Re: The British Response To Operation Sealion

#705

Post by phylo_roadking » 28 Jun 2013, 21:06

Where I live there were a lot of blind spots. Beaches not covered by coastal artillery were the first to be sown with with landmines.
Sid - you've just brought up something else I need to check; could the period British "GS" mines function underwater? I.E. were they waterproof/able to fire if waterlogged?

Or was just the stretch above high tide mark mined?
Twenty years ago we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. Now we have no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs....
Lord, please keep Kevin Bacon alive...

Locked

Return to “WW2 in Western Europe & the Atlantic”