Germany did not lose the Battle of Britain

[planespotter]

New article by Heinkill:

While the British regard the Battle of Britain as an epic struggle which resulted in a resounding victory, there is evidence that it barely registered in German consciousness in 1940 and is still of only minor significance today.

The first thing that strikes you researching German language internet or published sources about the Battle of Britain, is how scarce they are.

Partly, this can be due to the old adage, “History is written by the victors”, but it also signals that this is a chapter in German history which German historians and even aviation enthusiasts, do not regard the same way British scholars do.

How can this be? Read more!

http://www.freewebs.com/heinkill/booksfilmssites.htm

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by planespotter

New article by Heinkill:

While the British regard the Battle of Britain as an epic struggle which resulted in a resounding victory, there is evidence that it barely registered in German consciousness in 1940 and is still of only minor significance today.

The first thing that strikes you researching German language internet or published sources about the Battle of Britain, is how scarce they are.

Partly, this can be due to the old adage, “History is written by the victors”, but it also signals that this is a chapter in German history which German historians and even aviation enthusiasts, do not regard the same way British scholars do.

How can this be? Read more!

http://www.freewebs.com/heinkill/booksfilmssites.htm

I think that air superiority was attempted by the German high command, without the sucess being achived there was no sence to continue

[NSU]

“History is written by the victors”

yes this is right and most forget!
and many german documents lost at the end of the war!!

what remains is much propaganda and storys on both sides!

[brando]

While the British regard the Battle of Britain as an epic struggle which resulted in a resounding victory, there is evidence that it barely registered in German consciousness in 1940 and is still of only minor significance today.

Epic struggle....yes. Resounding victory... no, unless you compare it to the spectacle of the years preceding it.

I'd have to add that what registered in the German consciousness back in that year was entirely what the Nazi party wanted to register and wasn't necessarily the whole truth.

Most of the Air Marshals, Goring, Harris, et al, were operating according to the maxim espoused in Douhet's book published in the 30s; to whit, a country could be brought to its knees by aerial bombardment alone. That philosophy prevailed almost throughout the war, but the truth is that it doesn't work unless you can follow up with armies on the ground. Only the advent of the A-bomb in 1945 brought Douhet's prophecy somewhere near the truth, though even that is contested.
In reality it was submarine warfare that prevailed, viz. the Americans ability to sink nearly every oil-tanker before it reached Japan, thereby cutting off the Japanese from that vital resource.

Had it not been for the British resisting the Luftwaffe's attempts to knock them out of the war, everything might have played out very differently in the following years. There is a very strong case for suggesting that the U.S. might never have involved herself in the European conflict if Britain had not hung on - and it's clear that the second front couldn't have been mounted without Britain as a springboard.

It'd be interesting to know where you get the notion of resounding victory from. While wartime British propaganda unsurprisingly hailed the conflict as a victory at the time, much research into the subject has been made since the war years and the overwhelming consensus is that it was "a damned close-run thing". Yet from that stubborn resistance came a glimmer of hope that grew in so many ways as to eventually overturn the Nazis' ambition towards total domination.

Maybe you're trying to see this history in little chunks - when a step back would reveal the whole ebb & flow.

B

[Jughead]

"there is evidence that it barely registered in German consciousness in 1940 and is still of only minor significance today."

I would have to think that they reconsidered that on June 6th, 1944.

[Feuerfalke]

Just as much as Dunkirk is described in many British documents as a great military rescue operation against an overwhelming force. I saw very few British documents, that took note Hitler stopped his troops from crushing the British at the beach, hoping Britain would note this as a friendly act and strengthen the chances for a peace later on.

[Chivas]

The germans definitely lost the Battle of Britain. The purpuse of the battle was to clear the RAF from the sky's and land forces on British soil. Neither was accomplished. Thats a loss. Losers generally don't write alot of articles extrolling the virtues of their loss.

[Avimimus]

I actually think it was a major turning point in the war.

The simple fact is that the German airforce suffered heavily during the whole of 1939 and 1940 with almost even attrition rates against inferior opponents. But, if Germany had managed to get England to make peace in '39 and had avoided bombing cities then it could have been a victory. It could even have one them the war.

But the failure of fascist sypathisers to consolidate power in the parliament, the failure to demoralise or destroy the RAF and the bombing of civilian targets prevented this. It was the greatest political (not necessarily military) defeat imaginable.

With England still in the war and the Commonwealth behind her and with the pro-fascist element relatively restricted in what they could do made German defeat inevitable (even if the United States stayed isolationist - which became less likely each day the U.K. held out).

After this point only a really major alteration to history like a fascist coupe in an allied country, a German attack on the Soviet Union in 1938-1939 (which the allies would have been sympathetic to), a giant U-boat fleet or a much stronger German air defense could have altered events.

Eventually, even if it took an extra year, the Great Patriotic War would end in Berlin.

[csThor]

Some quick comments:

brando - Even though Douhet was a diffuse "ideal" they sought to reach each and every higher Luftwaffe officer, except that fat fool Göring, was well aware that Germany didn't have the assets to wage a war Douhet had envisioned. It didn't have the aircraft and not the ammunition needed to pulverize a whole country from the air. One reason for the obsession for the Stuka idea was the problem of a lack of explosives and ammunition factories (most of which had been torn down after 1918 on behalf of the Entente). The Stuka could deliver a relatively small payload with a much greater precision than any level bomber could until the appearance of much more sophisticated bombsights such as Lotfe 7 or Norden.

Avimimus - I think you're overestimating the potential of the Empire without being backed by the US industry. I mean Great Britain bancrupted itself just to pay for the lend&lease material and it still took the massive effort of the Red Army in the East as well as the appearance of US forces to tip the balance in the Allies's favor in the west (before it had been pretty much a draw after 1940). Make no mistake - british and commonwealth forces bravely held the line until the war potential of the US industry had been brought up to speed and until the US armed forces entered the battle, but it still took this massive influx of men and material to tip the tide of battle. The russians could and would have done it on their own (for various reasons), but I don't see Britain walking all over Germany on its own. For that task its sources of power were just too far away and its supply lines being much too exposed to enemy interferance.

[Avimimus]

CSThor, I agree completely.

The economic strain of the war was devastating to the United Kingdom and most Commonwealth countries also racked up decades worth of debt. In comparison the United States barely felt the strain of the war (economically that is) and were certainly could allies to have.

My assumption is simply that if England made peace in 1939, cross-Atlantic trade might well resume with the continent. This would be a disaster. If England did not make peace it would be much harder politically for an Anglo nation to conduct large scale trade with Axis Europe.

Without the Eastern Front I have trouble imagining any of the western allies, let alone the Commonwealth by itself, "walking over Germany" (prior to Trinity/the atomic bomb anyway). In all of the scenarios I assumed that the war on the eastern front would start and would eventually end with a Soviet victory (barring Allied nations joining or supplying the German army).