Carrier thoughts

[Capt Andrew]

I stand corrected SO. I should have proof-read my post - I actually had gone into more of the issues facing the transport of supplies to Malta and deleted most of it... so this post is off-topic (apologies).

But you are correct, the main coastal batteries the Vichy had were in Morocco near Casablanca and in Algiers. And if you flew the Union Jack, you could bet on getting some shells lobbed at you. I wouldn't exactly call them "neutral", as they despised the British for their actions in the attack on the French Navy at Mers-el-Kebir. If you ask me, they were neutral only when they didn't know which side was going to win. The French African units would probably have fought tooth and nail if it wasn't for sneaking General Clark into Algiers by sub for some diplomatic efforts pre-Torch.

Speaking of subs, that where I missed my edit. They were the ones that were shredding everything. The Allies had a devil of a time getting supplies to Malta because of them. Some major tonnage was lost in the Med to German Uboats. I don't have any numbers off the top of my head, but I do recall that even despite a very heavily supply convoy mission (Operation Pedestal), a Uboat managed to still sink a British Carrier in the Med. (Was it the Eagle or Ark Royal? I know both were sunk down there...)

But you're correct, it was the spies that relayed the ship information playing a critical role in the sub successes in the Med. Even though the Rock is considered an Allied port, I wonder if SC2 could show this by lifting FOW for all ships going in/out of Gibraltar and adjacent tiles as long as Spain is >= 40% Axis. Might be a cool tweak. Good catch though Stalin, my bad.

[Retributar]

What a most 'Excellent!' suggestion Capt Andrew to have the FOW lifted for all ships going in/out of Gibraltar and adjacent tiles as long as Spain is >= 40% Axis.

It's obviously the correct thing to do if we want this game to be as realistic/accurate as can be had under the circumstances.

[Liam]

It's amazing the English supplied Malta, I know a great deal was lost and the strategic significance of Malta definitely was not as large the effort on both sides to control it. Malta wouldn't have ensured perfect supply lines for the Germans and it was such a costly defensive position for the British it wasn't worth holding.

However toward the end of the North African Campaign, I'm certian Malta was a bit more vital, considering it was relatively close to Tunisia and the fighting.. Good Fighter-Bomber base. Still probably most German Troop Transport Airplanes were shot down from A/C based in North Africa, not the tiny Malta. Which could barely hold itself together let alone disrupt supplies of the Axis in the early days..

The British had good longe range Bombers, I am guessing the Swordfish must've been one of their few Torpedoe Sea attack planes.. Aside from those used in North Africa? Not sure on British Carrier design. The Trip from Gibraltar to Malta was a deadly one. Not just spied, Italians and German's in the Air... Amazing All the Resources Germany expended in Malta when she was losing on the Eastern Front?

[Scook]

Amazing All the Resources Germany expended in Malta when she was losing on the Eastern Front?

Hitler's fixation with named locations: Paris, Kiev, Sevastopol, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow, Malta, etc. Put a name on something and der Furer wanted to spare no expense.

[JerseyJohn]

In the case of Malta, Italian frogmen operated out of an old hulk on Spanish territory. They reported everything going in and out. The Spanish knew about it but I don't think the British did.

On the other end of the Mediteranean, Egypt had an Italian embassy as, technically it was an independent nation, and again the Italians were able to see what was moving through the Suez Canal and also in and out of Alexandria. Of course, the British knew about that one.

-- There was the episode of Italian frogmen in midget subs blowing holes in the bottom of two British BBs in Alexandria. The ships sank to the decks and the crew was still able to walk around on them. Meanwhile the frogmen had been captured. So the Brits had the crew walking about acting as though nothing had happened and, from the Italian embassy it looked as though they were still afloat. The radioed home that the mission had failed.

[Liam]

You're correct JJ and for a brief period the Italians blundered by not following up to investigate...

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

In the case of Malta, Italian frogmen operated out of an old hulk on Spanish territory. They reported everything going in and out. The Spanish knew about it but I don't think the British did.

On the other end of the Mediteranean, Egypt had an Italian embassy as, technically it was an independent nation, and again the Italians were able to see what was moving through the Suez Canal and also in and out of Alexandria. Of course, the British knew about that one.

-- There was the episode of Italian frogmen in midget subs blowing holes in the bottom of two British BBs in Alexandria. The ships sank to the decks and the crew was still able to walk around on them. Meanwhile the frogmen had been captured. So the Brits had the crew walking about acting as though nothing had happened and, from the Italian embassy it looked as though they were still afloat. The radioed home that the mission had failed.

[JerseyJohn]

Correction -- Malta above should be Gibraltar. I'm sure anyone reading it would know that, but may as well make the correction.

Liam,

It does seem odd that they didn't. I guess the Brits had a large secure area around the moorings, which must have been on the opposite side of the harbor from the where the diplomats/spies observation point.

That happened right after the BB Barham was sunk by a U-Boat near Tobruk. For a brief period the Italian Navy was stronger than the Brits, but they never realized it.

It would be great to get even a little of those cat and mouse things into the game, but I think PC capability for that is still years away.