Get Nebula with 40% off an annual subscription with my link: https://go.nebula.tv/realtimehistory
Watch Battle of Britain on Nebula: https://nebula.tv/battleofbritain?ref=realtimehistory
Summer 1940. The United Kingdom is gripped by the fear of a German invasion. Even if the Luftwaffe secures the sky over Britain, could Germany’s Operation Sea Lion ever really work?
» SUPPORT US
https://patreon.com/realtimehistory
https://nebula.tv/realtimehistory
» THANK YOU TO OUR CO-PRODUCERS
Jim Frame, Erik Ritter, Cardboard, Ken Brownfield, David Garfinkle, Raymond Martin, Konstantin Bredyuk, Lisa Anderson, Brad Durbin, Jeremy K Jones, Murray Godfrey, John Ozment, Stephen Parker, Mavrides, Kristina Colburn, Stefan Jackowski, Cardboard, William Kincade, William Wallace, Daniel L Garza, Chris Daley, Malcolm Swan, Christoph Wolf, Simen Røste, Jim F Barlow, Taylor Allen, Adam Smith, James Giliberto, Albert B. Knapp MD, Tobias Wildenblanck, Richard L Benkin, Marco Kuhnert, Matt Barnes, Ramon Rijkhoek, Jan, Scott Deederly, gsporie, Kekoa, Bruce G. Hearns, Hans Broberg, Fogeltje
» SOURCES
Clark, Ronald W. Battle for Britain: Sixteen Weeks that Changed the Course of History, (London : George G. Harrap & Co Ltd, 1965)
DeGering, Randall, “Radar Contact”: The Beginnings of Army Air Forces Radar and Fighter Control, (Maxwell, AL : Air University Press, 2018)
Fleming, Peter, Operation Sea Lion: The Projected invasion of England in 1940 – An account of the German preparations and the British countermeasures, (New York, NY : Simon and Schuster, 1957)
Grinnell-Milne, Duncan, The Silent Victory: September 1940, (London : The Bodley Head, 1958)
Heilenday, Frank W, The Battle of Britain – Luftwaffe Vs RAF: Lessons Learned and Lingering Myths from World War II, (Santa Monica, CA : RAND Corporation, 1995)
Holland, James, “The Battle of Britain: A Reassessment”, RUSI Journal, Vol. 155, No. 4 (2010)
Holmes, Tony, Spitfire vs Bf-109: Battle of Britain, (Oxford : Osprey Publishing, 2007)
Hooton, E.R. Pheonix Triumphant: The Rise and Rise of the Luftwaffe, (London : Weidenfeld Military, 1994)
Mason, Francis K. Battle over Britain, (London : McWhirter Twins Ltd., 1969)
Ministry of Information, “If the Invader Comes”, (London, 1940)
Murray, Williamson, Strategy for Defeat: The Luftwaffe 1933-1945, (Maxwell, AL : Air University Press, 1983)
Oberkommando des Heeres, “Küstenkampf” (1940)
Ray, John, The Battle of Britain: New Perspectives (London : Arms and Armour, 1994)
Trevor-Roper, H.R. (ed.), Hitler’s War Directives, 1939-1945, (London : Sidgwick and Jackson, 1964)
Wehner, Jens, “Technik können Sie von der Taktik nicht trennen”: Die Jagdflieger der Wehrmacht, (Campus Verlag : Frankfurt am Main, 2022)
Wragg, David, Operation Sealion: Hitler’s Invasion Plan for Britain, (Barnsley : Pen & Sword Military, 2017)
»CREDITS
Presented by: Jesse Alexander
Written by: Mark Newton, Jesse Alexander
Director: Toni Steller
Editing: Philipp Appelt
Motion Design: Philipp Appelt
Mixing, Mastering & Sound Design: http://above-zero.com
Research by: Mark Newton
Fact checking: Florian Wittig, Jesse Alexander
Executive Producer: Florian Wittig
Channel Design: Simon Buckmaster
Contains licensed material by getty images, AP and Reuters
Maps: MapTiler/OpenStreetMap Contributors & GEOlayers3
Music Library: Epidemic Sound
All rights reserved – Real Time History GmbH 2024
source
Get Nebula with 40% off an annual subscription with my link: https://go.nebula.tv/realtimehistory
Watch Battle of Britain on Nebula: https://nebula.tv/battleofbritain?ref=realtimehistory
Please do a full series on the war of 1812.
The Germans never had a strong navy so no and plus the British empire always had one of the strongest ships in the world
Was the role of AA gunners very huge and important during the battle of Britain too?
Excellent documentary!
Jesse, How many takes did you need to deliver that last line with a straight face?
It seems like Herr Kurt and I have something in common…
A bit disappointing that the aircraft production figures arent shown, they show that Britain was getting stronger throughout the battle whilst Germany was getting weaker. It was never really a close run thing, the Luftwaffe would have needed a miracle to overcome the RAF and this can be seen in the kill ratios later in the battle. The comparison of the 109 vs the Spitfire is also unfortunately a bit weak, both were tricky to land (although th 109 was worse) however the 109 was also more difficult to take off with. Air accidents make up a significant proportion of losses so these are important factors. Overall it needed a more experienced pilot to get the most out of it, something which Germany was running short of.
I wirked in a steike recovery ward. An old lady knew Bader from her war service as a waaf. She said he was an arrogant pig who tried to put down every person he met. She really didnt lime him lol
They lost it because the Brit’s were a hard bone to crack…
When Britain was able to fend off invaders…
Years ago I found a book in a bookshop that was a reprint of a book given out in preparation for the defence of the home islands, one chapter was called "how to destroy or disable a German Tank with items you might find around the house
Still wish I'd picked up a copy to this day
wird das schon wieder durchgekaut^^
The Germans made three massive blunders during the Battle of Britain. 1. The 3 Air fleets of the Luftwaffe never coordinated attacks, to overwhelm the RAF. 2. Very seldom did the Luftwaffe attack in timed waves to catch the RAF fighters on the ground refueling and rearming. It always gave the RAF time to recover. 3 Was the biggest, switching to city bombing instead of aerodrome destruction, giving the RAF the reprieve it needed as stated in the video.
Germany did not lose the Battle of Britain.
As soon as Stalin broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact on 28 June 1940 the OKW started preparing for Barbarossa.
Just look at the state of the UK now if you really think Britain won …
I find some peoples' conviction that Sealion was guaranteed to fail boring.
It would have been a long shot in the late Summer and early Fall of 1940 but a lack of British interservice cooperation may have created opportunities for the Germans and the British Army was in rough shape after their escape from France. The Royal Navy had the ability to disrupt the sea lanes across the channel nearly any time they wanted but at what cost? They barely had enough ships for all of their commitments as it was. A costly victory in the Channel could have cost them the war. Logistics would have probably been the decisive factor against German success.
If the Germans had applied themselves to a Sealion in the Spring of 1941, instead of Barbarossa, that would have been more interesting still. Assuming they used the time to adapt to what they learned over the previous Fall and Winter. The British Army had recovered but as it demonstrated in North Africa, it still had little idea how to deal with a Panzer division and the Royal Air Force still couldn't support the Army in any meaningful way on the battlefield. The German Navy had also recovered from Norway and their Air Force had developed anti-shipping tactics that would have made the intervention of the Royal Navy much more expensive than it would have been in 1940. The biggest advantage in delay would have been time to sort out the logistics of keeping their Army supplied in England. The British were not stumble bums so a lot would still have to go right for the Germans for them to have succeeded in 1941, but unlike 1940 it wouldn't have required nearly everything to go right.
Thanks for the show. Sealion is one of my favorite what ifs from Military History.
If Sealion had happened, It would arguably have been great for the allies, perhaps even shortened the war.
Sealion would've been a disaster greater than stalingrad. A total Encirclement of whatever troops managed to land in britain. Once the sea lanes would be cut, there would be nowhere for the germans to escape to. And operational losses alone would be huge considering the German's complete lack of ambhibious experience and shipping capacity.
if the swells and rough weather in the channel on D-day managed to overturn landing craft and DD tanks, i can't imagine what it would do to a bunch of river barges, half of which didnt even have their own propulsion.
If anything It'd probably be massive morale boost for the Britain and the allies, in finally shattering the image of an invincible and unstoppable German war machine.
Hitler never intended to invade the UK, as he confirmed to his generals on 14 August 1940.
Stalin broke the pact on 28 June 1940.
The Royal Navy would have just continued the war from Canada.
The United States was already at war with Germany in 1940, as Admiral King had confirmed at the time.
zo, English.
you are trying to corner ze market in pepper I zee…
your nefarious plan vill not werk.
ve haf vayz uf making you talk.
The Germans had another problem. If things started getting bad for fighter command, Dowding always had the option of pulling most of 11 group back north of the Thames beyond the range of the German fighters, but available to rapidly redeploy to provide air cover for the Royal Navy once the invasion had started. The Germans were never going to get clear skies above their invasion fleet, and their Stukas were never going to get a free run at the Royal Navy ships.
The worst decision in all -times history was when Hitler declared war on the USA.
They didn't. It was a draw
Great content and the Sherriff was spot on. But you mention the navel losses in Norway much to late. The conquest of Norway likely robbed the Germans of any chance they had to invade Britain. The British still had both a navy designed to defend its shores and coastal command aircraft by the hundreds.
The Germans air sea rescue of pilots was superior to the British. British had limited resources to be able to safely rescue downed pilots . Germans the opposite . Had the advantage in the Channel.
Germany lost the battle of Britain because they used the Luftwaffe instead of the navy.
They wanted to show off their air power, and we just shot them out of the sky; with some help from the Free French, Free Poles and other allies.
But not the Americans.
{:o:O:}
Because the British had radar.
This is incredible quality. Thanks for another amazing video!
1) First of all Assman is a bit of an unfortunate last name, at least when viewed from an English speaking perspective. 2) Even if they'd tried to occupy Britain I feel like there's no way they could've held it, not with all the troops needed for the Eastern Front. Plus, the U.S was going to get involved pretty much no matter what…even if they didn't get involved directly, they were sending tons of supplies over.
The British government published ads in US newspapers asking American gun owners to donate their sporting arms to Britain so that the British public would have sufficient small arms to fight potential German invaders.