Japan had no interest in invading Africa, they knew that UK had that on lockdown and they didn’t have the resources to do it. I am 100% sure that Japanese High Command would of double down on invading Australia over that. The idea behind controlling Indian ocean was to do two jobs. First: Close Burma Road since the Chinese were getting heavy equipment from the US. People forget the bulk of the IJA was in China and China was always the end goal for Japan. Two: Cutting the Persian trade route was more of a request from Germany. People forget that the Battle of Madagascar was the only battle during WWII that had both Germany and Japan in the same battle.
Royal Navy Response to Operation Herkules
-
Thought of this question today. What are your thoughts? Would the Airborne and seaborne invasion work? Would the RN risk everything to stop the invasion? I believe the RN would loss 75-90% of any fleet they sent to attack the invasion fleet.
-
What does RA stand for?
-
Probably the Italian Airforce: la Regia Aeronautica.
Italy had 2000 operational aircraft on the 8th June 1940. More than half were Bombers; the Fighters were the biplane CR32 and CR42. There were 400 planes in Libya.Worsham, I think British Naval mentality over the centuries was never to shy away from an engagement, even unfavourable looking ones, number wise. I think everything would have been done to retake Malta. The Italians, as you will have read, often threw their Battleships and Cruiser fleets in the way of danger, but would rather withdraw to fight another day, if things went badly. They also seem to have had bad luck, when they sailed looking for the British fleets.
-
@CWO:
What does RA stand for?
Sorry I was heading into work while typing this.
-
I believe the plans for attacking Malta called for a large joint German-Italian Airbone attack. This attack would force the Italian Navy into a large do or die support role.
How close to Malta would the RN need to get to launch carrier based planes in support?
-
That is a excellent question AB
I guess with Churchill running the show the British would have been all in. Whether or not they would’ve been successful and if that’s what they should’ve done would be harder to answer.
-
I agree.
The Brits weren’t in the mood for retreat. If they got their butts kicked they might have abandoned Malta, but they wouldn’t have given it up without a fight.
-
If Italy had invaded early enough…say prior to 1941…I doubt that any effort by the UK could have retaken it.
They were simply unable to manage Axis air superiority to make a landing in strength in the central Mediterranean, especially after the fall of France.
The longer the Axis waited, however, the harder the invasion was going to be. The civilian populace would be more apt to resist, and there were more British military personnel being sent to the island. Italian deficiencies in naval armor, naval radar, and joint air/naval operations also became more apparent to the Royal Navy as the war progressed.
The inevitable German invasion of Russia also ensured that German support would be limited after mid 1941.
That is about the point in time that I would tilt the scale from the Axis to the Allies. There was no hope of the UK retaking Malta had it been lost prior to that point. Likewise, after that point, there was no chance the Axis could take the island without incurring enough casualties to make it a pyhrric victory.
-
I voted for the RN fighting for Malta whatever. Understand that Malta was a vital part of the UK’s efforts to interrupt supplies to N Africa and so defend the Suez canal and thus the UK’s whole middle east position. I am presuming this was understood at the time - but that’s an assumption others may challenge.
Suggested Topics
