Thon Taddeo wrote:
Stuart Slade wrote an (in)famous work of alternate history called The Big One, which involved the UK falling to the Nazis, the war in the eastern front becoming a bloody stalemate and the US finally winning the war by launching a massive atomic attack on the Reich.
>snipage<
Given these issues, is it possible to come up with a more plausible story involving a massive atomic attack on the Reich?
Let me first say I've not read nor had interest in reading the cited work. This has been BEFORE reading any critisisims or discussion on the work as the it was the "jacket notes" themselves on various offerings that put me off, and nothing I've seen since has reversed that lack of interest.
In answer to the OP why yes there is in fact: AANW by CalBear does a marvelous and plausible job of it. The key to being plausible is simply having enough background material, research and willingness to learn, a viable POD, and the skill to write more than a few paragraphs at at time.
(The lack of one of these is why I have no time lines on this site

)
As to the "issues" those would be addressed by the above "stuff" OTHER than being able to write but as PuffyClouds wrote:
The period in which this story was written was heavily saturated in German fanboyism which argued for outrageous German accomplishments had the war continued for even a shorter bit of time due to their wonder weapons. Slade intended this story to be a mirror of that line of thinking to show that even if the Germans accomplished as much as they could, that applying the "Wonder Weapon - Luft'48" fantasy to America would result in a much more horrific outcome for Germany.
A (possibly) laudable goal initially but simply "doing it in reverse" isn't very credible which seems to be the case. The 'concept' of fighting "fire-with-fire" is plausible, fighting "fanboyism-with-fanboyism" is unfortunately not as, (obviously) neither is based in reality.
PLasmaTorch wrote:
It's hard for me to believe that a guy who was employed in the defense industry could be this blissfully ignorant and hopelessly optimistic about the development of a weapons system, even one that he has a soft spot for... Actually, you know what, I CAN believe it. Just take a look at the colossal screw up that is the F-35 fighter, or the zumwalt destroyers!
Should not be hard at all to believe as they're as human as the next person is with all that implies. Jack Parson's a literally "Rocket Scientist" believed in Magik, (not knocking the 'belief' itself mind there's a reason there is a "k" on the end

) which has no reasonable basis for plausibility given his training, education and intelligence. The use of the former helped developed effective solid rocket motors, the latter seems to have had no tangible effect of the same magnitude.
What one chooses to 'believe' and evidence gathered to support ONLY that belief can significantly effect ones interaction with the "real" world but one can still in fact be effective. Probably less effective but still...
The thing is that setting up a "fantasy fulfillment" story is all well and good as long as you're willing to admit it. Doing so and not expecting to get criticism, and ignoring any facts or figures that contradict the narrative move the story from "AH" plausibility to "Fanfic" territory.
And quite obviously he's not the only one as is noted
I recall RanulfC stating...
Ok, can I admit that seeing this then having the conversation go on with a shrug was kinda a 'mini-squee' moment for me?
Colier wrote:
I think the problem is that his ego got the better of him. If it was just the original story and every subsequent response to the stalemate being brought up was "I know, I know, I was making them artificially powerful to prove my point about the nukes", I'd have less of an issue. Instead it was an insistence that it was all realistic with justifications like the thin line, and this was far from the only case of such a thing happening.
Has happened to others so...
As I noted initially the sense of 'wanky-ism' from the "jacket notes" was enough to put me off and seeing the RESPONSES to the criticisms was more than enough to seal the deal for me.
I'm a fan of the B-70 myself but it was statements like:
(paraphrase)"No missile is capable of intercepting a B-70 attack with full support"
Cause me to seriously question the general knowledge of the aircraft, the planned "support" and the expected opposition.
LeMay's "plan" for fully supporting a B-70 penetration into hostile airspace was based on a prior 'bombardment' by ICBMs to "open holes" in the Air Defense net. The B-70 itself was (towards production rather than the prototypes actually built) to be armed both or either with free-fall bombs OR stand-off missiles of some type because it was understood that they would quite probably be unable to successfully penetrate an active Air Defense zone as originally designed. (High and fast)
The fact that American HAS B-70s is a major problem as the geopolitical climate is totally different than the one that drove the development of the OTL B-70. The B-70, like the B-58, would have been a nuclear attack aircraft using its speed and altitude to avoid ground and air intercept to deliver a nuclear payload to target. It had no other purpose or use as it had a limited ability to carry conventional weapons and even less utility in dropping them into tactical situations. And as early as 1950 it was quite obvious OTL that 'nuking' every problem wasn't a practical solution, it should of course be far MORE obvious in the TBO-verse.
Probably THE most 'unforgivable' issue with the TBO-verse is the lack of justification for America and American's in the TBO-verse to actually want or care to develop either the hegemony or technology described. It took the bombing of Pearl Harbor to get most of America motivated to destroy Germany and Japan OTL and lacking that...
Despite appearances, and unlike any other "Big Power" both ability wise and temperament wise American's are not big on maintaining "empires" even if we occasionally attempt to build one. While this tends to be viewed as a weakness by some parts of our society, (hence the 'need' for wish-fulfillment fiction I suppose) I don't see it and, quite obviously, historically neither has the majority of the American population. Hence why we tended to get rid of our 'colonies' pretty quickly. "Regimentation" and "commitment" are two things we do really, really well for a short period but tend to backlash against rapidly and in similar measure.
Fact is, and this also upsets a segment of our society, economics isn't the only thing we're mostly "laissez-faire" (
http://vocabulary-vocabulary.com/dictionary/laissez-faire.php) about
We're lazy at heart over things directly outside our immediate interest, and that interest is fairly short-sighted and direct in and of itself. We can be trained, (and even housebroken!) but very often we don't do the whole 'long-haul' thing and frankly THAT has been a real puzzle for everyone else. (And again a segment of our society finds this "annoying" to say the least) Neither Empire or Hegemony is really an American thing.
Randy