QUOTE
Originally Posted by wiking
How viable is it to have Torch forces in the Middle East instead?
The NW African option certainly makes sense from a strictly logistics stand point. But, we know considerable materials were sent from the US to Egypt in 1942, instead of being used for the Gymnast or Torch operations that year. In fact one of the reasons for postponing Gymnast multiple times was the diversion of mtl to Egypt, and to the Persian LL route.
The Persian LL route is another consideration. There was a plan in the WPD files for establishing a US Army Group in the Persian Gulf region, had it been necessary. A lot of complex reasons for that one, including the necessity for retaining the Red Army as a viable force. & it never went beyond a few pages of outline, but it was studied.
Unless there was a clear judgement by the senior Allied leaders that the Germans were at their limit in Egypt it is possible either Torch would be delayed due to further diversion of material to the ME, or Op Torch is reduced. Op Torch on the scale we know & at the same approx dates would look like a severe gamble to the leaders at the moment.
Since Pz Army Africa has been reinforced we might assume there is less to send to Tunisia if the Allies do land in Algeria. That could see Tunisia secured in December 1942, Allied air forces dominating the Sicilian Straits shortly after by February, & heavy bombing of Italian ports and air action vs the Axis sea route to Africa. Allied possession of the all weather airfields in Tunisia in December 1942 is a game changer.
Originally Posted by wiking
How viable is it to have Torch forces in the Middle East instead?
It is not. Baltimore to Morocco is 14 days at 10 knots. Baltimore to Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) is 47 days. We will need 3.5 times as many freighters as OTL torch. What other operations are cancelled to support this operation? When you take away freighters, you have to take away active military campaigns.
And then we get to issues such as if the USS Wasp is damage, where does she sail for repairs?
Below is the link to calculate port to port times.
http://www.sea-distances.org/
The NW African option certainly makes sense from a strictly logistics stand point. But, we know considerable materials were sent from the US to Egypt in 1942, instead of being used for the Gymnast or Torch operations that year. In fact one of the reasons for postponing Gymnast multiple times was the diversion of mtl to Egypt, and to the Persian LL route.
The Persian LL route is another consideration. There was a plan in the WPD files for establishing a US Army Group in the Persian Gulf region, had it been necessary. A lot of complex reasons for that one, including the necessity for retaining the Red Army as a viable force. & it never went beyond a few pages of outline, but it was studied.
Unless there was a clear judgement by the senior Allied leaders that the Germans were at their limit in Egypt it is possible either Torch would be delayed due to further diversion of material to the ME, or Op Torch is reduced. Op Torch on the scale we know & at the same approx dates would look like a severe gamble to the leaders at the moment.
Since Pz Army Africa has been reinforced we might assume there is less to send to Tunisia if the Allies do land in Algeria. That could see Tunisia secured in December 1942, Allied air forces dominating the Sicilian Straits shortly after by February, & heavy bombing of Italian ports and air action vs the Axis sea route to Africa. Allied possession of the all weather airfields in Tunisia in December 1942 is a game changer.