WW1 Paved the Way for the Battle of Britain.

[baronWastelan]

Originally Posted by winny

How do you conclude something you haven't started yet?

I think Hitler thought they might as well 'have a go' at Britain, I agree that He didn't show any real interest in the UK. He had no involvement in the planning of Sealion, which was very unusual because he was involved in the planning of every other major offensive.

His main target was always the Russians.

However it's easy to say in hindsight, are you saying that if the RAF had been 'defeated in 4 days' that Hitler would not have continued the offensive?

It's pretty obvious that he never really wanted to go to war with Britain (at least not in 1939).Paradoxically, he knew the longer Britain held out the more the possibility of the US getting involved increased. And he was well ware of what that would mean.

He just bit off more than he could chew. It's a recurring theme from 1941 onwards.

Hitler was very afraid of the USA grabbing huge chunks of Britain's empire if the British gov't were to cease functioning. He did not want to take over the British empire for the same reasons he didn't take over all of France and her colonies and Navy. The more one studies it, the more it seems that Hitler's brain was hard-wired not to invade England. It is clear that already as early as July 1940, Hitler convinced himself the invasion of Russia was the key to neutralizing the British, this was the deranged game of chess that he was playing in his mind. It's in Halder's diary, after the OKW meeting of 31 July: "With Russia smashed, Britain's last hope would be shattered."

[Blakduk]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

It's not always understood that a mini-Battle of Britain occured in WW1. Mainly between 1916 and 1918.

Britain was being bombed by Zeppelins and later by German bombers in WW1.

The defending British aircraft of the RFC and RNAS had huge problems as regards interceptions and the destruction of these crafts.

It was realised that both a Detection System and heavily armed high performance fighters was the answer.

Hence, radar and eight gunned fast fighters desigined for the RAF in the 1930's.

The only flaw in the calculations was as follows. It was anticipated that the German Luftwaffe bombers would have to fly unescorted from Germany. The fall of France was not envisaged.

Enter the Defiant. Built to intercept unescorted bombers.

Any thoughts?


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

I agree with you- the British got a huge fright from the Zeppelin and Gotha raids in WW1. The damage done was relatively light due to the low bomb loads and primitive navigation and bomb aiming used (they basically went over a large town and dropped by guesswork). It served to illustrate that Britain was vulnerable and intercepting incoming raids needed careful planning. The British planned for exactly the type of Battle the Germans offered in 1940, whereas the German battle plan was ill-considered and poorly coordinated. As you say the only element the Brits hadn't counted on was the proximity of German airbases- they had developed tactics for confronting flotillas of unescorted bombers and had to adapt quickly.
A similar scenario happened with the Allies use of tanks in WW1- sending waves of tanks in poorly organised ranks with little/no support from artillery and aeroplanes was barely effective. The later battles of WW1 where the allies used tanks tightly packed to punch holes in enemy ranks with artillery and planes interfering with the German efforts to reinforce the breaches in their lines were extremely effective.

In WW2 the Germans had learned their lesson well and used exactly those tactics against the Allies whereas the Allies seemed to have forgotten what had worked (Many don't realise the French had far more tanks than the Germans but used them quite ineffectively).
As Napoleon said 'You must not fight the same enemy too often or you'll teach him all your art of war'.

[winny]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

It's not always understood that a mini-Battle of Britain occured in WW1. Mainly between 1916 and 1918.

Britain was being bombed by Zeppelins and later by German bombers in WW1.

The defending British aircraft of the RFC and RNAS had huge problems as regards interceptions and the destruction of these crafts.

It was realised that both a Detection System and heavily armed high performance fighters was the answer.

Hence, radar and eight gunned fast fighters desigined for the RAF in the 1930's.

The only flaw in the calculations was as follows. It was anticipated that the German Luftwaffe bombers would have to fly unescorted from Germany. The fall of France was not envisaged.

Enter the Defiant. Built to intercept unescorted bombers.

Any thoughts?


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

The RAF owes it's existance to the WWI air attacks by Germany.
An Air defence committee was set up because of them, the main conclusion of the committee was that Britain needed an independant (of the Army) air force. They also saw the need for a flexible defence network of interceptors, AA and detection methods.