Could "Sea Lion" have succeeded?

[rotorgun]

Dowding's plan was to withdraw 11 Group into the midlands to refit if it all got too much. That leaves at least 10 and 12 Group in the vicinity to deal with any deeper ranging German attacks. Once 11 Group withdrew to the north, further German bombing of airfields would have been useless, as they were no longer strategically useful targets. However, if any invasion took place everything would have been thrown into the mix, land, air, sea. And you'll still have to answer the question of how you're going to supply the troops that got across.

1. Your transports are crap and not seaworthy. 2. You have more barges than you have crew. 3. The enemy has a fleet hugely more powerful than yours. 4. Your air superiority, hardwon over 11 Group, disappears as it returns to action stronger than ever with 10 and 12 Groups joining in as well. 5. You are attacking the most heavily defended area in the world, with very strong defences in extreme depth. 6. Your heavy weapons can't get across the Channel to help overcome these defences.

So you're attacking with only light troops, without air superiority, with a chronically threatened supply line that cannot be repaired or defended if the enemy attack it, or if the weather turns bad. Good luck with your invasion.

http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm
http://gateway.alternatehistory.com/essays/Sealion.html

All very good points indeed. I also enjoyed your counterpoints to my previous post. I would be grateful for you to share the history books you've read about the Battle of Britain. I also was impressed with Csar's intelligent responses to my arguements. (Not to mention the very astute Seamus Fermagh) Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't 10th group rather woefully equipped in comparison to 11 and 12 group? I realize that the Luftwaffe was dreadfully mauled by the battles in the south prior to switching over to night attacks in late August. Wasn't that because they had switched tactics due to Hitler's orders to bomb the cities? I guess my point was that attrition began to favor the RAF only after such a move. It was only when London was thrteatened with large-scale raids that 12 group was brought into the battle with the "Big wing" approach.

If the Germans were able to gain a foothold in the south, admittedly at very high odds against such an outcome, with what land forces was England supposed to defend so heavily? The survivors of Dunkirk where also only "lightly" armed due to their heavy weapons being abandoned in France. I still maintain that if the channel could be controlled by the Germans for a week, enough troops, tanks, artillery, and supplies could have been landed for the Germans to establish superiority on land. With that comes enough airfields to establish the Luftwaffe as a serious threat to the rest of the RAF. No longer restricted to 15 minutes loiter time over the targets, they could have finished off the RAF in the north. Of course such sucess would come at a very high price to all arms of Germany. I would imagine that Hitler would have seriously depleted his forces to such an extent that he would have never contemplated the invasion of Russia for many years, if ever.

Post Edit: I just noticed the links you provided and will take the time to read them this week sometime. Thanks for such a great discussion!