PHD Discussions Logo

Ask, Learn and Accelerate in your PhD Research

Question Icon Post Your Answer

Question Icon

1 year ago in Medieval Military History By Rani

When we strip away the propaganda and directives, how credible were Hitler’s operational plans for the invasion of Britain from a purely military standpoint?

I'm analyzing war games and staff assessments from 1940. Beyond the famous "barges in the Channel" photos, what did the actual operational plans look like? Were the proposed landing zones and troop allocations viable against likely British defenses? Did the logistical tail for supplying an invasion force across the Channel exist? I need an expert's cold-eyed look at the plan's inherent credibility, divorced from Hitler's political posturing.

All Answers (1 Answers In All)

By Sourabh Answered 1 year ago

 From my analysis of the operational plans, they were militarily not credible. The plans, such as they were, relied on a series of impossibilities. The Kriegsmarine had to assemble a makeshift invasion fleet from river barges under constant RAF attack. The logistical plans for resupply were fantastical, with no workable port capture and supply scheme. The proposed landing force was insufficiently armed for a opposed beachhead against a prepared defense. In war games I've studied, even German staff officers concluded it would be a "river crossing on a broad front against a determined enemy"—a recipe for disaster. The plan lacked the specialized equipment, naval supremacy, and detailed joint-service coordination that made later Allied amphibious operations successful. It was a plan born of desperation and bluff, not rigorous staff work. 

Your Answer