Why did the Royal Navy do virtually nothing against Germany when

>>30082413

>I have zero military or historical knowledge: THE POST

>>30082423
Oh, I forgot where the RN stopped the Krauts from ever going into Norway and how they blew the shit out of even poorly protected but vital sub pens like Willhelmshaven at the start of the war and how the Luftwaffe had """"""""""superb"""""""""" maritime strike capabilities. My mistake.

>Brits
>Doing anything right

>>30082413
I don't think you realize just how incompetent the English were for most of the war

File: based britain.webm (3MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x360px

>>30082804
once in a while they do

>>30082423

FPBP.

[/thread]

>>30082804
He says, as he types in their language

>>30083605
Did you notice any unnecessary vowels in that post? If not, then it's American English.

>>30083421
>"based britain" webm
>starts with American bombers

>>30083605
>American English.
>ENGLISH

lol

>>30083651

>american english

nigga you just went full retard

File: 1462975662051.jpg (53KB, 500x383px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x383px

>>30082413
>make thread asking legitimate question
>buttmad Brits ensue

>>30082413

Well here's a proper answer.

They did, anon.

The Brits pretty much fucked Germany's U-Boat fleet, dominated the Mediterranean Sea, ran the convoys to Russia to help keep them in the war with a ton of supplies on the Arctic convoys, sunk their best ships and completely denied the German navy of their long term strategic objectives at every turn, while also supplying and supporting worldwide operations at the same time.

Issue was that most of the time, the Germans just went on land. When they fought at sea, the Royal Navy beat them virtually every time, and just ask the Italians what happened to them when they tried to team up too.

>>30083811
No, what I'm questioning is why did they not just strike directly at the vulnerable ports, particularly those on the western side of Denmark, when they had overwhelming advantage in numbers and capability. Why not just destroy the bases and sub pens that were responsible for raiding all of those convoys? Why deal with the subs at all when you can do a direct strike on their base and knock them out at anchor. Why did it take until late in the war to do this when the RN Home Fleet had a distinct advantage and the Luftwaffes maritime strike was pathetic at its best.

>>30083979
>Why did it take until late in the war to do this when the RN Home Fleet had a distinct advantage and the Luftwaffes maritime strike was pathetic at its best.

Because the sub pens didn't exist till late in the war, you fucking prat.

>>30083421
>Most successful instance of British involvement in the war was killing civilians
Seems about right

>>30083979
Sending your Navy to shell bases defended by air power, mines, coastal guna, torpedo boats, coastal guns, is suicide. You do this only after getting air supremacy.

>>30085318
>Willhelmshaven wasn't up and functional by the mid 30s

This is what britcucks actually believe

If you look up the raid on st nazaire, the sub pens were in that cove behind all those coastal guns, airpower, mines, kriegsmarine

I know what you mean though, just sail up and down the coast razing shit, however that wouldn't damage the german war machine in anyway. The destroyed subpens wouldn't had been a safe haven for subs and the British food situation would've been better but the eventual losses from the dangers I listed above would affect the war effort in other ways. Who'd guard the South east asia campaign convoys, the NA concoys, the Atlantic trade/troop convoys etc

>>30087087
You'd only need the Home Fleet to do offensive action though as it already outmanned and outgunned everything in the North Sea a few times over. You don't even need to do something extreme like going after Kiel, just taking out the shipyards that serviced the lesser ranged boats would have been a substantial boon.

>>30087214
Though you gotta remember that for '41-'42 the RN was dealing with shit job after shit job. U-boats sinking convoys and dragging valuable destroyers and corvettes into convoy babysitting duty for both transatlantic and barets sea, the fucking Bismarck and Tirpitz hijinks, evacuating everything off of mainland Europe, they kinda had their hands full

>>30082413
britain didn't even do any meaningful offensive operations until the burgers entered the war

meanwhile, in Russia they had already killed millions of krauts

>>30083979
>"hey let's throw away our superior number advantage in one risky decisive battle!"

>>30082413

The UK was completely unprepared for the war as Hitler wanted to fight it.

They, along with the Frenh, thought it was going to be WWI 2: Hitler's Boogaloo. The UK was just woefully unprepared, and it took them a long, long time to figure out how to fight the war.

>>30089456
They're was a quote saying how those who won the war are content with the tactics used, while those who lost look for new ways to win.

Which is painstakingly true when you look at the WW1 mentality used by the allies during the beginning years of the war.
>invasion of France
>Maginot line.
>North Africa campaign.

>>30086897
>wants the navy to attack a heavily defended location with no air support and no land units against an opposing strong naval force
>expects the navy to win

Americuck logic, everyone.

>>30089394
>one battle

Britcucks making excuses as usual

Britain did almost zero offensive campaigns until Africa despite having ample opportunities

>>30089140
I mean sure this is true, but if you don't understand what a siege is, you shouldn't be lurking on /k/

Britain being a island is both highly advantageous but also a massive disadvantage. Can be defended easily, see battle of britain, but a logistical and strategic nightmare to launch an offensive

>>30091149
>no air support
>the home fleet had no carriers at all u guise!
>heavily defended
>when Willhelmshaven didn't even get anything larger than 8" coastal guns until 43
>German maritime strike was near nonexistent throughout the war
>Britain still acted as a reactionary force until Normandy despite being able to take the initiative whenever it wanted
>implying I'm even from the western hemisphere

>>30091178
>>implying I'm even from the western hemisphere
Well then you're opinion is irrelevant and discarded.

>>no air support
>>the home fleet had no carriers at all u guise!
If you count old ass carriers with nothing but biplanes armed with only one-two guns a superior naval air force to match that of the Luftwaffe, sure.

>>heavily defended
>>when Willhelmshaven didn't even get anything larger than 8" coastal guns until 43
Take away the air assets, land forces and opposing navy, then yeah it'd been easy to take\destroy. Good job, you've possibly lost one or two vessels and 500 or so men to take out a couple U-Boat pens.

Come on now, anon. You're not even trying.

>>30091162
>Britain did almost zero offensive campaigns until Africa

>until Africa

mid 1940 is late war now guiz

Americans here seem to know very little about military strategy desu. Not a big surprise, I suppose

>>30082413
Because the RN learned at Gallipoli what happens when unsupported ships try to take on fortified land positions, defended by things like minefields, coastal artillery and submarines?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_operations_in_the_Dardanelles_Campaign Here. Now add in air support (though the lufwaffe had a shit record against warships, see Dunkirk, but still)

>>30091253
>just a few sub pens that had an inordinate amount of strategic impact

K. Clearly a worthless target. Guess that's why the RN just let the KMgo right up to Narvik as well since iron was worthless.

>meanwhile never even bothered to do much as look at the undefended bases littering western France that were major resupply and repair points.
>thinking that the Luftwaffe had anything approaching a even mediocre record against naval forces when they tried to engage them, even shit at port

I guess it's easier losing hundreds of ships in convoys including military vessels than to even consider striking their base of operations when you have a decisive advantage with the Home Fleet alone.

>>30091369
Provide some examples of opportunities you feel were missed. Actual, specific opportunities, not vague statements.

>>30091369
Oh gee anon, the bongs should've made you their commander in chief of all naval operations, since you know so much about naval warfare. Guess they really missed out on that one, huh?

Fucking retard summerfag. Stop shitting up this board with these ridiculous threads

>>30091313
the rn decided to pull back when the turkish coastal artilery had something like 6 shells left.

>>30091369
>I know nothing of wartime Naval operations - The post

>>30091413
Nothing that sailed out of Willhelmshaven for operation Weserubung should have been allowed to go into norway unmolested (eg the entire invasion force west of Denmark). If you wanted to be ballsy, mining the Denmark strait could have been done, thus forcing all KM traffic from Kiel through canals. Again, Willhelmshaven was poorly defended throughout the war with it becoming almost comical in 42 when aviation assets were diverted to the eastern front. Keroman, while being a fort was also poorly defended and was a hugely important uboat resupply point that was one of the last plaçes to see serious fortifications put in place when the Atlantic wall went up.

The battles at Narvik showed that the KM was outgunned and simply not in the Home Fleets league when it came to anything like a straight fight or even when the KM had defenses like coastal artillery and mines to help them out.

>>30091434
Considering how ineffective the RN was outside of convoy duty, someone with a history book could've done much better

>>30089140

>Wat is Operation Compass
>Wat is Norwegian Campaign
>Wat is Malta
>Taranto
>The entire stratigic bombing campaign

Bait post I know but factually inaccurate, unless you don't count shit-stomping Germany's most powerful ally pretty much out of the war as an offensive act.

>>30082413
>Armchair Admirals: the post of the century.

This thread, in fact, is a spectacular example of how /k/ is dumb as a bag of spanners.

File: tmp_31761-1462816835017-1372229275.jpg (63KB, 464x290px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 464x290px

>>30083384
It's been forever since I've used 'qft' but qffuckingt

>>30091477
>Considering how ineffective the RN was outside of convoy duty, someone with a history book could've done much better
Yeah good point RN was so shut German shipping wasn't interrupted at all and they could import all the Mexican and Venezuelan oil they wanted.

>>30091552
>britcucks SERIOUSLY think that the RN was the greatest thing ever and that it never made any mistakes

Oh I love how bongistanis get so upset over nothing

File: ufc.gif (2MB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x169px

>>30082413

Wow, I can already tell this is going to be a great thread full of well-informed opinions and relevant discussion supported by properly cited references.

Cunt.

>>30093187
you sure showed him and backed up your position

>>30092961

would you like to work in a cinema showing films onto a wall, because you're projecting quite madly just now.

>>30083605
I speak American get the fuck out of here britcuck

>op asks a legitimate question
>Angry Brit bonging ensues saying how dumb it is without ever answering the question or giving any reasons for why

Why do Brits get so mad about the Royal Navy?

File: r68g0.jpg (66KB, 720x588px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 720x588px

>>30093606
>op asks a bait question
>buttmad Brits ensue
>look Britcucks MAD
>lol Britain did nothing
>HA HA Britbongs you even trying

Not a single Brit responded, just Merica's being summer

>>30093829
Explain what's bait about it?

>>30093588

>get the fuck out of here britcuck

I'm French but are countries are close so as an American I guess you could be confused.

>I speak American

American English is the set of dialects of the English language as a result of British colonization of the Americas in the 17th century.
So in short you speak British like I speak French Tu es completement débile.

File: pretending.png (3KB, 698x1284px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 698x1284px

>>30093606

you mean OP says something retarded.

Brits put him back in his place and refute EVERY point he made.

OP and retards are now on damage control.

>>30094796
>things that didn't happen

It's okay to be delusional as long as you recognize it.

>>30087214
you know, people have already told you why. luftwaffe maritime strike gets a whole lot better when your fleet is just off the heavily mined and coastal gun defended coast in one big turkey shoot. in the home waters of the kreigsmarine. no one is that shit.

now all of a sudden there aren't enough ships to do convoy and escort and britain starves to death.

but that's ok, just ignore and deny what everyone has told you and continue to wonder why the thing that never happened never happened. must just be because you're so much smarter than anyone else ever.

>>30089456
in britain's defence (lol) they spent the entire 20s and thirties, pretty much, disarming. the government for a long time refused to believe there was ever going to be another war and also believed that if they set the example by disarming, everyone else would as well. they were fucking delusional basically.

>>30091445
which they had no way of knowing

>>30097272
>coastal 8" guns
>that even CAs could outrange

k

>not enough ships for convoy duty

The Far East fleet was already in shambles and had no reason to stay there and the line ships of the Home Fleet alone were more than enough to deal with the forces arrayed against her.

>b-b-b-but who's going to do convoy duty when you've taken out the primary threat to convoys???

It's like arguing with a child.

>>30091283
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_El_Alamein

Guyz october 1942 is mid 1940

>>30097750

>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_El_Alamein

>Guyz october 1942 is mid 1940

guyz al alamein was the first battle of the North African campaign instead of the beginning of the end.

British troops invaded Italian Libya in June 1940

>>30097378
>k

plus mines, the kreigsmarine and aircraft close to base that would have a turkey shoot and no airborne opposition. no one is that bad, not even the luftwaffe. the same luftwaffe that fucked over the same royal navy in the battle of crete

>Attacks by German planes, mainly Junkers Ju 87s and Ju 88s, sank eight British warships: two light cruisers (HMS Gloucester and Fiji) and six destroyers (HMS Kelly, Greyhound, Kashmir, Hereward, Imperial and Juno). Seven other ships were damaged, including the battleships HMS Warspite and Valiant and the light cruiser Orion. Nearly 2,000 British sailors died.

>It was a significant victory for the Luftwaffe, as it proved that the Royal Navy could not operate in waters where the German Air Force had air supremacy without suffering severe losses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Mediterranean

you based your entire argument on fucking headcannon

every fucking time all you do is say

>8 inch guns

and ignore the rest

>The Far East fleet was already in shambles and had no reason to stay there

except for the one going war. britain never stopped her land offensive.

>and the line ships of the Home Fleet alone were more than enough to deal with the forces arrayed against her.

naturally, the royal navy never had to fucking scramble to get as ships as possible, never shat themselves buying out-dated destroyers from the us and the black swan was never a thing.

>It's like arguing with a child.

people tell you things and you refuse to listen, rehashing the same shit that people have already contradicted. you're the child here dickhead. and you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>30083979
When your navy is doing it's job without major risk of losing it's advantage why go up against the enemy at their best defenses?
It was not a game .....

>>30098936
>muh mines
>muh kriegsmarine

Narvik showed that they had little impact on RN strategy and efficiency.

>muh planes

And Willhelmshaven and Keromans aviation defenses were a joke, especially when all but a single interception group was transferred from Willhelmshaven to the Eastern front in 42.

The RN played as a reactionary force throughout the war and was flat out adverse to taking the initiative unless Monty of all people had to tell them to grow some balls. It's extremely telling that only three attacks were ever mounted against such a vital port as Willhelmshaven before the US entered the war in earnest.

Using a blue water navy to lob few shells at land targets is moronic. UK had the Bomber Command for that task and had no reason to risk warships to do the same.