It seems to me that the British were very poorly prepared for war. Im they knew that is was coming and even if they didnt they had some time to prepare before France was invaded. Looks to me that they didnt really get on the ball untill France fell. What do you think?
Well yes Britain was unprepared for the war. They had been through hell and back in the first world war, and they never wanted to go into another war. Being considerably active in both world wars would of course be a drastic thing for the country. Well, that is the reason why the Sten gun was made. Extremely simple, cheap, easy to mass produce, and quite a good gun. When WW2 broke out Britain found they didnt have a reliable submachine gun, hence the sten is made.
The Britain isn’t made preparations for ground war, but the fleet of Britain was very impressive. And don’t forget, about fact, that Britain was first country used tanks in war… Hitler can’t do anything with Britain fleet. Submarines was only temporary method, and latest time proofed it. Britain fleet was main defense line of Britain, and all operation like “Sea Lion” couldn’t be completed without destruction of britain Ships…
Sorry but i have to disagree with you. If the Germans had achevied air superiorty They would have greatly reduced the effective ness of the British Navy. Remember the Bismark was disabled by just a lucky torpedo shot to the rutter. From a Swordfish which wasnt much better than most world war1 plans. Air power vs Naval can be pretty evenly matched. Pearl harbor is another example. Of couse this would depend alot on mass production of Germans planes.
Air force - good thing, and can make a lot of troubles to Navy. But you self proof my point. The German hadn’t number of planes to fully cover such great landing operation. And they have a very small time in Air. Time for active actions on the British side was about 10-20 minutes for all sturm planes… That wasn’t enough…
Again alot of that goes to problems with Hitler and Goering. The lufftewaffe had great protetype by 1940 and if this were to be rushed into production this could have given the British navy alot of trouble. I have no doubt that if the Germans had continue to strike stragegic targets in England they could have acheived air superiority over english areas. Then the just need to focus on the Navy. Germany had the production to mass produce planes but they only massed produce the crappy and outdated ones.
If you read the book of Adolf Galland “First and Last”, you must know, that the Hitler wants more bombers with more range of actions. But germans have no good prototypes of it. All bombers attacks on British was only to south part, and the bombers can’t even make a scar on industry zones at the north. The range was very limited.
I forget the source but I will tell you that most historians agree that that RAF had only 2-4 weeks of combat effectiveness before they germans switched to bombing cities. They were winning the battle in the beginning. If the had bumped up aircraft production after this they could have controlled the english skys. Southern part ot not. Also the Germans did have a navy even if it was weak. Im sure that they could have invaded britain if they had achevied air superiority. Probably would have been early or mid 41. The British would have to throw everything they had into protecting the homeland and would have greatly depleted their combat effectiveness in other areas of the world.
I understand that the Germans lost many pilots and plane during this but it could have been done because they almost did it.
Almost did? Don’t think so. We are returned to begininig of our discussion. How german can transport enough tanks and supplies to another coast? Every tank - not only 30-40 tonns of metal and 3 members of crew. Every tank such PzKv IV needs at least about 1 tonn of ammunition, 3-4 tonns of fuel, mechanics crew, reserve part, hedquarters, field evaquators, medics, food for all that people (Don’t forget about prostitutes, legalized in german army, Hitler personaly create that law 
) But not only tanks must be transfered. Infantry more than important in some type of actions… Hitler have no transport shipss for such operation… And more. The Soviet operation “Groza” (“Thunderstorm”), was planned to the 6 Jule. If the Hitler was transfered the army to Britain, they would lost all European territories in few days…
Komissar Ombrok, I think your right we are getting a bit off topic here. And almost off topic in the other forum as well. We might need to make a new forum so that they debate may continue. 
Interesting point about the hookers. :lol:
Yes it might be true that if Hitler kept up the attack a bit longer they would have reached Air superiority. But it all goes to Radar, the German air force could not believe that the British could have so many planes, they really didnt have as much as Germany thought. Radar put the planes in exactly the right place and time to meet the German Planes.
Anyway the German fighters deffinetely had a good match with the British Spitfires and Hurricanes, I would have to say that the British planes were supperior. BUT I AM GOING OFF TOPIC, so forgive me.
I think this point isn’t off topic… But you all forgot very important thing. Britain had not bad air forces, but the british pilots havn’t a war experience. Most of Hitler pilots have an experience in the Italy. That given to Hitler very great superiority. At this point, we must talk not about bad preparations of Britain to air war, but about better preparations of German.
Britain had been preparing for war for several years before it broke out as had most other countries involved,they all knew it was coming.
The production of aircraft and radar etc as well as the expansion programme for the RAF was well underway by the outbreak of war although it was hard to fully put the required resources into it in peace time.
The British were not as ready as they needed to be but if we had not wasted so much of our resources in France then we would have been better off to defend ourselves.As for the experience of the Germans they were much better organised for a start due to their fighting in Spain but it didn’t take long for the RAF to adopt their tactics.
Also the attack fleet seemed to consist of Barges which are definitely not ideal for crossing the channel at the best of times let alone under attack and it would have been hard to land the forces required to establish a Bridgehead as every available man in the UK would have been there with a gun to repel them
The worst about Britain’s preparation to war was the tank problem…
Between the 2 war , britain politic , and specially in the army, was against tank…and heavy armor…( not all but mainly!!)
That’s why when the war began, britain had a few tanks and mainly light tanks…
Yep. This is a true about tanks. But for which type war Britain prepaired? Agressive or defensive? Tanks was need only for agressive war. The two counties made it - USSR and German. But for defensive war, the Britain was need to make more better fighter airforce and Navy.
Ya, but in the end the British tanks where not toooo bad. Id have to go with the Churchill flame thrower.
Oh… The Churchill tank was more bad then T-34, tank builded before war. With tanks designed in the war like King Tiger or JS-2 he can’t even compare… I’m very like the Royal Navy, British also had a good airforce, but american and british tanks was suxx… 8)
Agree with Komissar Ombrok’s point of view!!
You just simply couldn’t compare German or Soviet tanks with American or British tanks. With all respect, Americans (mostly, but also the Brits) learns a lot from studying after the war German and Soviet tanks.
For real, american might have a good tanks. The first tank of Red Army, the BT series, was developed by americn engenier W. Cristy in the 1928 or so (don’ remember the date) but the american HQ decline to produce this tank, and they was sold to Soviet like a tractors… That was light tanks, but much better than PzKv-III
Maybe you talk about PzKw II because PzKw III was a medium tank…
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tanks_medium/pzkpfw_iii.html