What if: Operation Paul – the Fleet Air Arm attack on Luleå (Sweden) in 1940

[miletus12]

Dec 3, 2021 6:55:13 GMT DMZ said:

miletus12 ,

2. & 5. Sorry, did you measure distances on Google Map? Bodo - Lulea is definitly 400 km, 215 nautical miles, I checked several times.

An air route from west of Lefoten to Lulea (I wrote this above) is not a straight line and it is not inside the funnel mouth where presumably HMS Glorious and HMS Ark Royal would not have the running space for a westerly speed run. It is 290 nautical miles + the speed run. If one wants a land based strike from Bodo... the runway in 1940 is not long enough for either the Swordfish or a Hampden. It might do for a Gladiator or possibly a Skua, but neither could carry a standard British torpedo or air dropped mine of the date.

And running West half an hour at 20 knots are 10 nautical miles, not 20. Plus Værøy wind statistics show mainly northern or southern wind.

Two loads or strike packages. My error. I should have pointed out that at Taranto it took TWO cycles. But the point of the half hour is well taken. So 300 nautical miles and a speed run inside a funnel that narrows and allows no maneuver room. Uhm... no I would not plan to enter those confined waters atg all. 

www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/vaeroy-heliport_rossnesvagen


Not exactly what I would be leery. There is low cloud associated with Foehn winds in many mountain systems. 

Dec 3, 2021 2:07:01 GMT miletus12 said:

One might also want fleet maneuver room for submarine and torpedo boat defense of at least 50 to 100 km offshore in addition to the distance specified above. 

Fleet entered several time in Vestfjord until Narvik to support terrestrial operations.

3. June is the quietest month in north Norway but OK, 2,500 m, within ceiling.

Dec 3, 2021 2:07:01 GMT miletus12 said:

4. Loss of planes and aircrew. Operation Paul, it must be stated, to shut down Lulea, has to be a repetitive operation.

Agree. This operation had no future.

See above?

6. Do you mean Stavanger raid didn't happen or was a failure?

I presume that one means this?

7. Loosing all planes in failing to come back to the carriers doesn't mean the raid is a failure. The two Swordfish lost in Stavanger raid were on the way back.

Did they achieve anything?

8. Operation Catherine was one of the maddest ideas of Churchill...

One must look at the lunatic who was tasked to plan and lead Operation Catherine. Lord Cork was either mad or could not read a map or do chart work. HOW was a British fleet supposed to navigate the shallows through the Greater and Lesser Passages or the Copenhagen Straits?

The route was too shallow for the passage of heavy ships south of the Norwegian Trench which was mined.

But 70 days from the idea to execution for Pearl Harbour raid, including torpedoes modifications for shallow waters and at extrem range both for fleet and planes, was much more an achievment than Operation Paul setting. And Taranto raid was imagined before the war but it doesn't mean it was continuously prepared throughout this period.

a. Pearl Harbor was extremely complex.

Operation Judgement was not a sporadic thing either.

Notice that Lyster was tasked to draw up the operations plan by one Dudley Pound? Fellow must have heard of the stunt pulled off by Admiral Yarnell, USN (1932). Certainly the repeat performance in 1938, reached the ears of one Yamamoto. Strange days those were.

[DMZ]

Dec 6, 2021 1:22:59 GMT miletus12 said:

An air route from west of Lefoten to Lulea (I wrote this above) is not a straight line and it is not inside the funnel mouth where presumably HMS Glorious and HMS Ark Royal would not have the running space for a westerly speed run.

Following Luleälven (Lule River) from north of Bodo until Luleå will add only 50 km to the raid.



Starting from the mouth of Vestfjord, which is nearly 40 nautical miles large, enought to launch planes and evade potential air attack, would have required 950 km (515 nautical miles) as the crow flies, and 1,000 km (540 nautical miles) following Luleälven. There would have been no margin... but just within range.

Dec 6, 2021 1:22:59 GMT miletus12 said:

Not exactly what I would be leery. There is low cloud associated with Foehn winds in many mountain systems.

Foehn is a well known phenomena in mountain... when there are low clouds. Sometime the weather could be godd enought to fly over the summits . Of course, weather was crucial to launch operation.

Dec 6, 2021 1:22:59 GMT miletus12 said:

6. Do you mean Stavanger raid didn't happen or was a failure?

I presume that one means this?

Probably this one: aviation-safety.net/wikibase/245880

Dec 6, 2021 1:22:59 GMT miletus12 said:

The two Swordfish lost in Stavanger raid were on the way back.

Did they achieve anything?

One can imagine the same job as their teammates, since the Stavanger raid seems to have been successfull.

Dec 6, 2021 1:22:59 GMT miletus12 said:

Lord Cork was either mad or could not read a map or do chart work. HOW was a British fleet supposed to navigate the shallows through the Greater and Lesser Passages or the Copenhagen Straits?

The route was too shallow for the passage of heavy ships south of the Norwegian Trench which was mined.

HMS Royal Sovereign would have been fitted with large bulges that would have reduce the draught to 7.5 m, allowing her to sail through the Kattegat and in the channel between Dannish islands. But, once again, this operation was insane...

[miletus12]

Dec 6, 2021 18:21:00 GMT DMZ said:

Starting from the mouth of Vestfjord, which is nearly 40 nautical miles large, enought to launch planes and evade potential air attack, would have required 950 km (515 nautical miles) as the crow flies, and 1,000 km (540 nautical miles) following Luleälven. There would have been no margin... but just within range.

There is no sea room for a wagon wheel defense of the aircraft carriers or an air defense zone inside the funnel. The minimum distance that the Japanese and the Americans both agreed that was required for sea-air defense of a carrier task force was to the horizon and that works out to a radius of 18 nautical miles.

Dec 6, 2021 18:21:00 GMT DMZ said:

HMS Royal Sovereign would have been fitted with large bulges that would have reduce the draught to 7.5 m, allowing her to sail through the Kattegat and in the channel between Dannish islands. But, once again, this operation was insane...

[DMZ]

Dec 7, 2021 21:48:54 GMT miletus12 said:

DMZ said:

Starting from the mouth of Vestfjord, which is nearly 40 nautical miles large, enought to launch planes and evade potential air attack, would have required 950 km (515 nautical miles) as the crow flies, and 1,000 km (540 nautical miles) following Luleälven. There would have been no margin... but just within range.

There is no sea room for a wagon wheel defense of the aircraft carriers or an air defense zone inside the funnel. The minimum distance that the Japanese and the Americans both agreed that was required for sea-air defense of a carrier task force was to the horizon and that works out to a radius of 18 nautical miles.

20 nautical miles radius, so enought place according to US and Japanese rules.


More than 75 km (~40 nautical miles) between Bodø and outer Lofoten island...

Øresund:

Near the seafloor (where the sea is deep enough), conditions are more stable and salinity is always oceanic (above 30 PSU) below a certain depth that varies between 10 and 15 metres. In the southern part, however, the depth is 5–6 metres (outside the rather narrow waterways Drogden and Flintrännan)

Wikipedia

Drogen:

Drogden is a channel through Øresund. The trench is located on the Danish side of the Øresund, between Saltholm and Amager. The road and railway connection between Denmark and Sweden passes below it in the Drogden Tunnel. The maximum depth for ships to pass is 8 meters.

Wikipedia

Drogden
The controlled depth is 8.0 m at mean sea level and the passage width is 300 m.

www.sjofartsverket.se/en/services/maritime-traffic-information/sound-vts/soundrep-information/mariners-reference-card-for-soundrep/

Several Hipper-class cruisers (draught 7.2 m) were built in Kiel.

[miletus12]

Dec 8, 2021 3:12:22 GMT DMZ said:

Dec 7, 2021 21:48:54 GMT miletus12 said:

There is no sea room for a wagon wheel defense of the aircraft carriers or an air defense zone inside the funnel. The minimum distance that the Japanese and the Americans both agreed that was required for sea-air defense of a carrier task force was to the horizon and that works out to a radius of 18 nautical miles.

20 nautical miles radius, so enought place according to US and Japanese rules.


More than 75 km (~40 nautical miles) between Bodø and outer Lofoten island...

Øresund:

Near the seafloor (where the sea is deep enough), conditions are more stable and salinity is always oceanic (above 30 PSU) below a certain depth that varies between 10 and 15 metres. In the southern part, however, the depth is 5–6 metres (outside the rather narrow waterways Drogden and Flintrännan)

Wikipedia

Drogen:

Drogden is a channel through Øresund. The trench is located on the Danish side of the Øresund, between Saltholm and Amager. The road and railway connection between Denmark and Sweden passes below it in the Drogden Tunnel. The maximum depth for ships to pass is 8 meters.

Wikipedia

Drogden
The controlled depth is 8.0 m at mean sea level and the passage width is 300 m.

www.sjofartsverket.se/en/services/maritime-traffic-information/sound-vts/soundrep-information/mariners-reference-card-for-soundrep/

Several Hipper-class cruisers (draught 7.2 m) were built in Kiel.

A moving circle 60 km in diameter? running west for 30 minutes in the gap between Lefoten and Bodo? no. 

The Skaggarak is mined. 

The Hippers used the deep channel and several canals and traveled south to north. The British will not be able to move through the German controlled routes. Plus they will ground around the kattegat..   

[DMZ]

miletus12,
OK, you win, both operations was absolutly impossible and Churchill was mad.

[lordroel]

Dec 8, 2021 15:17:30 GMT DMZ said:

miletus12,
OK, you win, both operations was absolutly impossible and Churchill was mad.

And a bit crazy, among other plans he dreamed of during the Great War and World War II.

[miletus12]

Dec 8, 2021 15:17:30 GMT DMZ said:

miletus12 ,
OK, you win, both operations was absolutly impossible and Churchill was mad.

My method of speculation.

1. If a proposed scheme was not implemented by sane professionals of the era, who know more about the scheme then than I do now; it is incumbent upon me to look at what they wrote or recorded about why they did not commit to an operation.   
2. Once I have figured out the why and how for so the operation was not mounted, I can understand why some operations (Narvik, Dedocanese Islands, Greece, Singapore / Force Z might have slipped through the cracks and were implemented anyway. 

Churchill...

Dec 8, 2021 15:19:32 GMT lordroel said:

And a bit crazy, among other plans he dreamed of during the Great War and World War II.

Churchill was an amateur military strategist. He shared an enthusiasm for imagining "map operations" along with several other national chiefs of state, such as Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler and that sort of ilk.    

A map operation is someone putting a finger on a map or a globe and drawing an imaginary arrow from point a to b. ; while imagining just how easy such a move would be to foil an enemy.


Several military so-called professionals^1 might be included in that company.

Lord Gort
Neville Richie
Brooke Popham
"Bomber" Harris
Dudley Pound 
Rommel
Guderian
Galland
Jodle
Model
Braubitsch
Paulus
Grazziani
Homma
MacArthur
Harold Stark
Kimmel
Turner
Omar Bradley
Bissel, Brett and Brereton the three killer bees of the USAAF.
Browning, Miles (Midway)
Browning, Frederick  (Operation Market Garden)

People who actually looked at the operations proposed and the means to be employed... My favorite guys being Zhukov, Eisenhower, Patton, Doolittle, MONTGOMERY, Slim, and the team of King, Nimtz and Spruance; always asked;

1. How far?
2. Over what terrain?
3. Against what predicted opposition?
4. Through what weather?
5. With what means?
6. And how much supplies
7. and how much TIME allowed?

If the professionals did not like the answers to three of the seven questions in that WW II era, they usually advised against the proposed scheme. 

  
    

[lordroel]

Dec 8, 2021 16:06:58 GMT miletus12 said:

Churchill was an amateur military strategist. He shared an enthusiasm for imagining "map operations" along with several other national chiefs of state, such as Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler and that sort of ilk.    

Reading how Churchill decided to circumvent the Chiefs of Staff and go directly to the Canadians in order to use them in his Operation Jupiter (Norway) is another example, lucky the Canadians where smart enough not go with this plan.

[DMZ]

Just for fun, I tried to answer you questions. According to the result, it seems even Operation Catherine could have been launched...

Operation Catherine
1. How far?
850 NM (nautical miles) i.e. three and half days at average speed of 10 knt.
2. Over what terrain?
North Sea from Scapa Flow to Skagerrak 325 NM (32 h at 10 knt), open sea, international waters
Skagerrak to Kattegat 125 NM (13 h), coastal waters, mined except on Norwegian or Danish waters or international waterways
Kattegat to Øresund 100 NM (10 h), tight waters, mined except on Swedisk or Danish waters or international waterways
Øresund 55 NM (5 h at 13 knt), narrow channel (300 m), Danish or Swedish waters
Øresund to Gotland (out of LW range) 240 NM (24 h), Swedish waters
3. Against what predicted opposition?
Four heavy cruisers, 20 destroyers, one Luftflotte, a hundred of U-boats.
4. Through what weather?
Winter, cloudy expected in order to minimize detection and air attack.
5. With what means?
Three Revenge-class battleships, an aircraft carrier, five cruisers, two destroyer flotillas, submarines and supporting auxiliaries. The battleships would need to be significantly modified to resist air and submarine attack to pass through the shallow waters. (Wikipedia)
6. And how much supplies
On board of battleship and auxiliaries.
Scandinavian countries were expected to join Allies and then could supply the raid force.
7. and how much TIME allowed?
Time to modify three battleships.
Four days to sail from Scapa Flow to Gotland. Raid force based on Sweden.

In fact only question 5. had a bad answer as the ressources were badly needed elsewhere (but there was there...) It was more that enough to Lord Pound to resist Churchill will.

Operation Paul
1. How far?
Fleet: 800 NM from Scapa Flow
Air raid: 440 to 550 km depending the initial starting point.
2. Over what terrain?
Northern Scandinavia, average heigh 1,000 m, maximum height 1,400 m
3. Against what predicted opposition?
Initialy operation Paul had to be launched when Bardufoss area was under Allied hands.
After withdrawal from Norway, before Bardufoss being operational for LW.
So none to light opposition expected.
4. Through what weather?
Visibility: several km (2 to 5) to be able to recognise terrain and follow railraod.
Cloud base minimum: 2,000 m
5. With what means?
One to three carriers and DD escort, 18 to 70 modified Swordfish (range 500 km, ceiling 2,500 m loaded), one to three Gladiator or Skua squadrons to protect fleet.
6. And how much supplies
One shot raid, on board aircraft.
7. and how much TIME allowed?
One week to prepare raid, one day to sail to starting point, 8 hours mission.

Only question 1. had a bad answer should the starting point was off Lofoten Islands (550 km) but in this case, aircrafts and crews would have to land and be interned in Sweden or Finnland.

It seems some questions are missing like:
a. What are the objectives of the operation?
b. Are the objectives in line with war strategy?
c. Are the objectives achievables? (here are you questions)
d. At what cost?
e. To the detriment of what other operation?
f. Are possible undesired outcomes affordable?

[miletus12]

Dec 8, 2021 17:56:39 GMT DMZ said:

In fact only question 5. had a bad answer as the ressources were badly needed elsewhere (but there was there...) It was more that enough to Lord Pound to resist Churchill will.

Dec 8, 2021 17:56:39 GMT DMZ said:

Operation Catherine
1. How far?
850 NM (nautical miles) i.e. three and half days at average speed of 10 knt.
2. Over what terrain?
North Sea from Scapa Flow to Skagerrak 325 NM (32 h at 10 knt), open sea, international waters
Skagerrak to Kattegat 125 NM (13 h), coastal waters, mined except on Norwegian or Danish waters or international waterways
Kattegat to Øresund 100 NM (10 h), tight waters, mined except on Swedisk or Danish waters or international waterways
Øresund 55 NM (5 h at 13 knt), narrow channel (300 m), Danish or Swedish waters
Øresund to Gotland (out of LW range) 240 NM (24 h), Swedish waters
3. Against what predicted opposition?
Four heavy cruisers, 20 destroyers, one Luftflotte, a hundred of U-boats.
4. Through what weather?
Winter, cloudy expected in order to minimize detection and air attack.
5. With what means?
Three Revenge-class battleships, an aircraft carrier, five cruisers, two destroyer flotillas, submarines and supporting auxiliaries. The battleships would need to be significantly modified to resist air and submarine attack to pass through the shallow waters. (Wikipedia)
6. And how much supplies
On board of battleship and auxiliaries.
Scandinavian countries were expected to join Allies and then could supply the raid force.
7. and how much TIME allowed?
Time to modify three battleships.
Four days to sail from Scapa Flow to Gotland. Raid force based on Sweden.

1. More like 8 days. One has to maneuver through the Danish passages and speed will be less than 5 knots through those cluttered islands.
2. Past shore with coast artillery and through minefields and shifting underwater terrain features.
3. Three Swedish and six German PDNs and whatever fast attack torpedo boats the Germans whistle up.
4. Fog, rain, snow,, gusting westerlies and waves, sea state 4=> 6 at night. Unacceptable without pilots.
5a.Three Revenge class battleships with poor secondaries and inadequate torpedo defense. 
5b. No aircraft carrier should be risked in the Skarragat or the Kattegat. (Coastal guns and dive bombers.)
5c. Torpodo circus between British destroyers without air cover and German E boats with close air support? Outcome in those shallows? Crete will be childs play by comparison.
6. Run out of fuel oil after 200 hours. No refueling. Who is happy? the Kriegsmarine who will be staging boarding actions.
7. If one cannot reach friendly ports within 200 hours, one has spent 20% of the Royal Navy to no purpose.

==============================================

Have already covered Operation Paul.  
 
        
 

[DMZ]

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

1. More like 8 days. One has to maneuver through the Danish passages and speed will be less than 5 knots through those cluttered islands.

55 NM at 5 knots in Øresund (I wonder why a ship has to reduce her speed in a 300 m wide channel but let's assume that): 6 hours more. Definitly not 8 days.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

2. Past shore with coast artillery and through minefields and shifting underwater terrain features.

No German coastal artillery. Not at war with Danish, Norwegian nor Swedes. Free passage allowed in Øresund.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

3. Three Swedish and six German PDNs and whatever fast attack torpedo boats the Germans whistle up.

Swedes neutral. What PDN stands for? Yes, I missed a dozen of E-Boats.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

4. Fog, rain, snow,, gusting westerlies and waves, sea state 4=> 6 at night. Unacceptable without pilots.

A two days journey to Øresund is enought to select the weather forecast with the current knowledge.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

5a.Three Revenge class battleships with poor secondaries and inadequate torpedo defense. 

Very large bulges had to be added to this purpose (and to limit draught).

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

5b. No aircraft carrier should be risked in the Skarragat or the Kattegat. (Coastal guns and dive bombers.)

Stated by Wikipedia without precision. I assume it was for escorting battleships until Skagerak as, as far as I know, only the latters was to cross to Baltic Sea. Anyway, no ennemy coastal guns and bad weather (at least low clouds). Plus no carrier had ever been sunk or even damaged by bomber during Noweigian campain.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

5c. Torpodo circus between British destroyers without air cover and German E boats with close air support? Outcome in those shallows? Crete will be childs play by comparison.

Extra bulges was there for dealing with the threat.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

6. Run out of fuel oil after 200 hours. No refueling. Who is happy? the Kriegsmarine who will be staging boarding actions.

So height days, more than enought to reach Stockholm.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

7. If one cannot reach friendly ports within 200 hours, one has spent 20% of the Royal Navy to no purpose.

True but Churchill intended to join Sweden to Allies with this operation so good answer to the question.

Dec 9, 2021 1:45:29 GMT miletus12 said:

Have already covered Operation Paul.  

No answered your questions but OK, leave it at that.

[miletus12]

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

55 NM at 5 knots in Øresund (I wonder why a ship has to reduce her speed in a 300 m wide channel but let's assume that): 6 hours more. Definitly not 8 days.

Uncharted reefs and mines.

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

No German coastal artillery. Not at war with Danish, Norwegian nor Swedes. Free passage allowed in Øresund.

Railroad guns, dive bombers, motor torpedo boats and Germany will "respect" Danish neutrality in 1940?

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

Swedes neutral. What PDN stands for? Yes, I missed a dozen of E-Boats.

How neutral can one be when one remembers....  Pre-dreadnoughts may not be the equal of dreadnoughts, but Sweden has three, Germany has six and they will kill a Revenge class since those (German) ships have good modern radar assisted fire control and the British ships did not.

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

Stated by Wikipedia without precision. I assume it was for escorting battleships until Skagerak as, as far as I know, only the latters was to cross to Baltic Sea. Anyway, no ennemy coastal guns and bad weather (at least low clouds). Plus no carrier had ever been sunk or even damaged by bomber during Noweigian campain.

1. Only a lunatic passes an aircraft carrier through a strait, or adjacent, right next to an enemy land based air force during time of war. Have stated why aircraft carriers are not "bath-tubbed" in pointing out why Operation Paul was insane. Aircraft carriers are highly vulnerable to de-decking.



2. Just because an aircraft carrier had not been sunk by air action yet, does that mean one ignores the results of war games which indicated aircraft carriers would be burned down to the water line when they caught fire after being BOMBED? Or maybe the USS Lexington incident of 1934 should be ignored?

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

So height days, more than enought to reach Stockholm.

3. To be interned. Just what did neutrals do to belligerents' ships under International Law?

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

True but Churchill intended to join Sweden to Allies with this operation so good answer to the question.

Churchill was a "romantic" and sometimes did not connect solidly with the real world. In other words; he fantasized a lot.

Dec 9, 2021 3:51:32 GMT DMZ said:

No answered your questions but OK, leave it at that.

The negation suggested; was out of range, not possible to reach the target from Yankee Option and possible Germanic-Swedish interference in the air and on the ground to such lunacy as an added impediment. Plus weather, terrain and not achievable objectives as bonus "no" factors.

[DMZ]

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

Uncharted reefs and mines.

Uncharted reefs in Øresund? Are you kidding?

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

Railroad guns, dive bombers, motor torpedo boats and Germany will "respect" Danish neutrality in 1940?

We were talking about coastal artillery, so no German artillery on the way to Baltic Sea and neutrals won't fire on British.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

How neutral can one be when one remembers Pre-dreadnoughts may not be the equal of dreadnoughts, but Sweden has three, Germany has six and they will kill a Revenge class since those (German) ships have good modern radar assisted fire control and the British ships did not.

Are you suggesting Denmark was still on war with UK since 1801. From PDN only Schleswig-Holstein remained in KM at the outbrake of the war and I doubt she was equipped with radar as Admiral Scheer was only fitted with a radar in the beginning of 1940.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

2. Just because an aircraft carrier had not been sunk by air action yet, does that mean one ignores the results of war games which indicated aircraft carriers would be burned down to the water line when they caught fire after being BOMBED? Or maybe the USS Lexington incident of 1934 should be ignored?

Just remember British carriers was armored, US wasn't.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

3. To be interned. Just what did neutrals do to belligerents' ships under International Law?

Did you read that:

Dec 8, 2021 17:56:39 GMT DMZ said:

Scandinavian countries were expected to join Allies and then could supply the raid force.

Even if it was not likely to happend.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

The negation suggested; was out of range, not possible to reach the target from Yankee Option and possible Germanic-Swedish interference in the air and on the ground to such lunacy as an added impediment. Plus weather, terrain and not achievable objectives as bonus "no" factors.

Huml... Already demonstrated it was into range, did you ever try to check on Google Map? Weather, terrain: do you mean no air operation was ever conducted over Norwegian montains?

Not achievable objectives: true, we already stated that without following raids, mining will only stop traffic for a short time.

[miletus12]

Dec 9, 2021 21:20:25 GMT DMZ said:

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

Uncharted reefs and mines.

Uncharted reefs in Øresund? Are you kidding?

No I am not. That place is not static at all.

Let me quote...

As the Kattegat in the north has almost oceanic conditions and the Baltic Sea (around 7 PSU, in its main basin) has brackish water, Øresund's water conditions are rather unusual and shifting. The streams are very complex, but the surface stream is often northbound (from the Baltic Sea) which gives a lower surface salinity, though streams can change from one day to another. The average surface salinity is about 10–12 PSU in the southern part but above 20 PSU north of Helsingør.

Near the seafloor (where the sea is deep enough), conditions are more stable and salinity is always oceanic (above 30 PSU) below a certain depth that varies between 10 and 15 metres. In the southern part, however, the depth is 5–6 metres (outside the rather narrow waterways Drogden and Flintrännan), and this is the definite border of oceanic salt water, therefore also a border for many maritime species of animals. Only 52 known salt-water species reside in the central Baltic Sea, compared to around 1500 in the North Sea. Close to 600 species are known to exist in at least some part of Øresund. Well-known examples, for which the bottom salinity makes a distinct breeding border, include lobster, small crabs (Carcinus maenas), several species of flatfish and the lion's mane jellyfish; the latter can sometimes drift into the southwest Baltic Sea, but it cannot reproduce there.

There are daily tides, but the lunar attraction cannot force much water to move from west to east, or vice versa, in narrow waters where the current is either northbound or southbound. So, not much of the difference in water levels in Øresund is due to daily tides, and other circumstances "hide" the little tide that still remains. The current has a much stronger effect than the tide on the water level, but strong winds may also affect the water level. During exceptional conditions, such as storms and hurricanes, oceanic water may suddenly flow into the Baltic Sea at all depths. Such events give deep waters in the southern Baltic Sea higher salinity, which makes it possible for cod to breed there. If no such inflow of oceanic water to the Baltic Sea occurs for around a decade, the breeding of cod becomes endangered.

Generally, when the current shifts from northbound to southbound, it never turns 180 degrees with the same flow, instead the current will "slow down to zero" and then begins to flow in opposite direction. (Local phenomenon close to shores, might differ from this general pattern)

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

Railroad guns, dive bombers, motor torpedo boats and Germany will "respect" Danish neutrality in 1940?

We were talking about coastal artillery, so no German artillery on the way to Baltic Sea and neutrals won't fire on British.[/quote3]

a. Operation Weserebung shows differently.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

How neutral can one be when one remembers Pre-dreadnoughts may not be the equal of dreadnoughts, but Sweden has three, Germany has six and they will kill a Revenge class since those (German) ships have good modern radar assisted fire control and the British ships did not.

Are you suggesting Denmark was still on war with UK since 1801. From PDN only Schleswig-Holstein remained in KM at the outbrake of the war and I doubt she was equipped with radar as Admiral Scheer was only fitted with a radar in the beginning of 1940.[/quote]

b. I'm suggesting that neutrals will defend against all comers.
c. I must revise my estimate of the OOB. itg is actually worse than I conceived ... for the British. The Germans have the twins and at least one panzer ship (armored cruiser) in home waters. And they have 1 PDN, which was radar equipped.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

2. Just because an aircraft carrier had not been sunk by air action yet, does that mean one ignores the results of war games which indicated aircraft carriers would be burned down to the water line when they caught fire after being BOMBED? Or maybe the USS Lexington incident of 1934 should be ignored?

Just remember British carriers was armored, US wasn't.

Just remember that Ark Royal, Glorious and Courageous were NOT armored box hanger or flight deck aircraft carriers. As for the armored carriers, Norfolk and Bremerton saw a parade of British armored deck aircraft carriers parade through their repair yards in 1940-1942. Average repair time? Seven months. Average repair time for US equivalents not sunk by torpedoes or forced to scuttle in battle? 30 days.

There are distinct minuses to having your hull twisted and having a bomb blow your frame and power allleys out of alignment. Severe vibration and loss of hull plate temper (fire) means your armored deck carrier is a post war write off.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

3. To be interned. Just what did neutrals do to belligerents' ships under International Law?

Did you read that:

Dec 8, 2021 17:56:39 GMT DMZ said:

Scandinavian countries were expected to join Allies and then could supply the raid force.

Even if it was not likely to happend.[/quote]

That would be somewhat optimistic thinking given that the real circumstances were that no-one Scandinavian adjacent to Germany showed any evidence that they were eager to join the UK in any way shape or fashion prior to the demonstration that the Germans were going to lose the war.

That would be D-Day.

Dec 9, 2021 16:57:23 GMT miletus12 said:

The negation suggested; was out of range, not possible to reach the target from Yankee Option and possible Germanic-Swedish interference in the air and on the ground to such lunacy as an added impediment. Plus weather, terrain and not achievable objectives as bonus "no" factors.

Huml

... Already demonstrated it was into range, did you ever try to check on Google Map? Weather, terrain: do you mean no air operation was ever conducted over Norwegian montains?

Not achievable objectives: true, we already stated that without following raids, mining will only stop traffic for a short time.

[/quote]

I have covered the actual Swordfish performance parameters. What was unclear about 100 nautical miles with a torpedo?