Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

[Urban fox]

Ok, even if that were true. Why do we assume that A-Bombs decisively change the picture? They didn’t seriously effect Japanese thinking about surrender. The Soviet attack in Manchuria caused far more shock and fear, the nukes meant Japan would lose a city a single bomb rather than the waves of bombers. Japan really wasnt any worse off due to the A-Bomb if you look at all the facts.

A single night of massed firebombing can do just as much damage to a German city if intense enougth, if they get through that is. You also cant just handwave all those planes and pilots freed up from the east. Depending on the date they are sent west, that really is a game changer plus all the production efforts will be far more concentrated on home defence. Greater bomber losses will take a real toll on the RAF and the US Army Airforce cant just spam pilots and planes endlessly as some people think.

Beating down the German air defence to the degree the Allies managed OTL is a lot harder with no U.S.S.R keep thousands of experiencedpilots and their machines busy. With all that have a free ride to drop A-Bombs at will is by no means a given. Also we must rember the prospect of anthrax carrying German bombs fired back in retaliation.

Lastly there seems to be trend towards excessive A-Bomb fixation that is rather odd. These aren’t hydrogen bombs we’re talking about, sure they can devastate but not to an unheard of degree. A single day & night of carpet bombing can do much the same damage to a city as an A-Bomb, without the long bomb production times.

 

[Beluga the hutt]

How come only one person has mentioned anthrax? And they were even slightly off about it. Also, Germany's anthrax program hadn't developed a reliable delivery method. Anthrax spores are hardy, but they take some rather complex machinations to actually get them to disperse correctly in the air. You can't just blow something up 400 feet up and expect everyone in the area to get sick and die.

Edit: someone else mentioned it since.

The United States had an extremely efficient (in terms of $ for potential enemy kills) biological weapons program based in western Maryland that, by the end of 1944, had developed delivery systems that could disperse communicable anthrax over thousands of square miles in a single bombing run. Their tuberculosis and smallpox programs were also doing well, with the former being successfully tested in July of 1945. They used a non-lethal strain to test the delivery systems against volunteers (it was tested on members of some weird religious group that wanted to assist the military, but their beliefs prevented them from fighting actively) somewhere in Nevada (I forget exactly where).

Germany would be choking on it's own blood by the end of '46. All their captured industrial slaves from the USSR would be dying too quickly to help significantly with the industrial production, especially considering their diet and working conditions. Civilian populations would be terrified, as both them and their leaders would be quickly dying of some very scary diseases, which don't precisely have a cure even today.

 

[Arachnid]

Personally I think this depends on the nature of the Soviet surrender/peace.

1.Bitter Peace in 1944. Germany surrenders in Sept '45 as Hamburg ans Kiel go up. Germany hasn't got time to re-orientate their industry to fight an air war with the allies before the USAAF/RAF have air superiority (Jan '45). Getting Air parity back after you've lost it is very difficult.

2.Bitter Peace in 1942. Different kettle of fish. As other people have said a slog from Normandy to Berlin without the Red Army tying down troops isn't on the cards. Therefore you going to see the emphasis shifted to air warfare and peripheral theatres eg Allied re-invasion of Crete but most importantly Japan.
So Japan First strategy, with Japan starving on the vine by Jan '45. Germany still controlling Mainland Europe but all peripheral theatre's wrapped up and massive Aerial Warfare. Thanks to having two years to re-orientate production priorities i.e. no more tanks but lots of Fw 190's (much more useful the Me 262's) and pilots to fly them, the Luftwaffe can put up much more of a fight. But without the Allied Armies and Lendlease to the Sov's the Allied Air-forces are also a even more capable than OTL.
This means gaining air superiority everywhere probably isn't on the cards, so no 1000 Bombers over Berlin (at least in the day). But anything within range of a P-51 can and will be hammered right up until August, then it'll be nuked. Now this Germany in this August 1945 is in a much better situation than Japan in OTL, but no-one can take repeated nuclear incinerations.
Hitler might, but the sane people in the German military who in OTL launched Valkyrie in order to "Save Germany" are still around.
The big difference is the Peace, forget Unconditional Surrender, you only get that when you're in their Capital or they are completely prostrate and starving. Something much more on the lines of "Peace with Honour" is on the cards: i.e. Free France and Benelux, nominal independence for Eastern Europe (though they are still going to be economically subjected), maybe some reparations and having to say sorry.

 

[xchen08]

I don't intend in getting into the discussion of just how much the A-bomb affected Japan's surrender. Suffice it to say that I believe you are wrong, the majority of WWII scholars believe that you are wrong, and a search of this forum will uncover a large number of threads on the topic, which the revisionists have always lost.

A single night of massed firebombing can do just as much damage to a German city if intense enougth, if they get through that is. You also cant just handwave all those planes and pilots freed up from the east. Depending on the date they are sent west, that really is a game changer plus all the production efforts will be far more concentrated on home defence. Greater bomber losses will take a real toll on the RAF and the US Army Airforce cant just spam pilots and planes endlessly as some people think.

First, firebombing is a tactic restricted mostly to Japanese cities, due to their nature of being mostly wooden. They are not possible in most European cities, not enough combustibles. Second, I'm handwaving nothing. Just as the cream of the German army was in the East, so was the cream of the Luftwaffe in the west, including near all of their interceptors and superiority fighters, with outdated aircraft and deathtraps like the Stuka sent to the east. The USAAF may not be able to infinitely spam fighter pilots (though it basically can for the less demanding bomber pilot and crew roles and it certainly can for planes), but that's hardly necessary unless the Germans are able to achieve unrealistic kill ratios. You really can't get around the fact that the USA and Britain can vastly outproduce Germany and have a far larger pool of potential pilots on top of a more efficient training program and no fuel shortages.

Also we must rember the prospect of anthrax carrying German bombs fired back in retaliation.

As mentioned before, Britain has a lot more anthrax, and putting chemical/biological weapons on ballistic missiles is most likely beyond Germany's ability, at least in the 1940s. And Germany sure as hell is not going to be getting any bombers through.

Lastly there seems to be trend towards excessive A-Bomb fixation that is rather odd. These aren’t hydrogen bombs we’re talking about, sure they can devastate but not to an unheard of degree. A single day & night of carpet bombing can do much the same damage to a city as an A-Bomb, without the long bomb production times.

The only thing that can match even the Little Boy in destruction at the time would be the results of the massed firebombings in Japan, which are only possible thanks to near unique circumstances which don't apply in Europe. No realistic amount of conventional bombing with normal high explosives can match the sheer destruction, particularly of irreplaceable machine tools, nor can conventional bombing prevent rapid reconstruction.

The big difference is the Peace, forget Unconditional Surrender, you only get that when you're in their Capital or they are completely prostrate. Something much more on the lines of "Peace with Honour" is on the cards: i.e. Free France and Benelux, nominal independence for Eastern Europe (though they are still going to be economically subjected), maybe some reparations and having to say sorry.

Eh? Getting unconditional surrender isn't that hard. Destroy a couple of transportation hubs and all the German armies in France would be paralyzed from supply shortages, and a landing becomes possible again. And once the B-36 comes online, it'll be a straightforward 3 (or more) cities destroyed a month until whoever is left alive and marginally in charge in Germany agrees to unconditional surrender.

On your other points, be very careful of thinking a tank factory can be quickly converted to producing fighters. Real life isn't HOI, and such conversions are difficult, time consuming, and start running into hard limits like aviation fuel production and the availability of rubber, aluminum, and the various rare metals needed for jet engines. Needless to say, while all these limits affect Germany, few will have much impact on the Western Allies.

 

[DCC]

First, firebombing is a tactic restricted mostly to Japanese cities, due to their nature of being mostly wooden. .

Not necessarily.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Hamburg_in_World_War_II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_firebombing

 

[xchen08]

Not necessarily.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Hamburg_in_World_War_II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dresden_firebombing

Note the "mostly." Compare the level of destruction with similar raids on Japan, and you can see near an order of magnitude difference. Of course, some of that's due to being later in the war, better technique, etc, but still.

 

[Arachnid]

On your other points, be very careful of thinking a tank factory can be quickly converted to producing fighters. Real life isn't HOI, and such conversions are difficult, time consuming, and start running into hard limits like aviation fuel production and the availability of rubber, aluminum, and the various rare metals needed for jet engines. Needless to say, while all these limits affect Germany, few will have much impact on the Western Allies.

I fully understanding in RL you can't cancel your Tank builds and start spamming Interceptors. But given two years you can shift all the ancillary industries (ball bearing, machine tools etc.) leading to a jump in production.

I agree that my Peace was probably too soft, but while the WAllies could (and would) win any air war, but late '45 you are going to be seeing war-weariness setting in. So I think a decent peace with a non-Hitler Germany, drastically cut back in terms of influence, but with all German areas staying in the Recih and a clear acknowledgement that the WAllies won fair and square would be acceptable if not to Churchill, then to Atlee.

 

[xchen08]

I fully understanding in RL you can't cancel your Tank builds and start spamming Interceptors. But given two years you can shift all the ancillary industries (ball bearing, machine tools etc.)

That's assuming an unusual degree of competence on the part of the Nazi leadership. Yes, I suppose they could immediately foresee the need to fight off bomber swarms and concentrate all their resources on that, but it's just as likely (more likely actually), that they'll get victory disease, and divert resources into landing boats and warships for invading Britain, or bombers of their own to "strike back," or boondoggles like the Amerika Bomber and giant supertanks. And like I said, even if they get a shot of competence, they still can't get away from the fact that producing enough aviation fuel is going to be near impossible, and Europe is simply lacking in many of the resources needed for a modern air force. The Americans and Brits can afford to give all their rookie pilots hundreds of hours of flight time before sending them into combat. Germany can't and sure as hell can't with even more planes to support.

 

[Urban fox]

I don't intend in getting into the discussion of just how much the A-bomb affected Japan's surrender. Suffice it to say that I believe you are wrong, the majority of WWII scholars believe that you are wrong, and a search of this forum will uncover a large number of threads on the topic, which the revisionists have always lost.

Nothing revisionist about my argument at all, you just have to get some Japanese sources. They were quite willing to fight on to the end. The thing you really tend to notice about the nutcase Japanese leadership is that the prospect of immolation didn’t seem to faze them much, as they still held out false hope of bleeding the US white if they tried a landing.

When the Soviets attacked it was a major blow to their willingness to fight on. Even if many tend to ignore the Soviet attack on Manchuriaand it's effects.

First, firebombing is a tactic restricted mostly to Japanese cities, due to their nature of being mostly wooden. They are not possible in most European cities, not enough combustibles. Second, I'm handwaving nothing. Just as the cream of the German army was in the East, so was the cream of the Luftwaffe in the west, including near all of their interceptors and superiority fighters, with outdated aircraft and deathtraps like the Stuka sent to the east. The USAAF may not be able to infinitely spam fighter pilots (though it basically can for the less demanding bomber pilot and crew roles and it certainly can for planes), but that's hardly necessary unless the Germans are able to achieve unrealistic kill ratios. You really can't get around the fact that the USA and Britain can vastly outproduce Germany and have a far larger pool of potential pilots on top of a more efficient training program and no fuel shortages.

Fireboming was used in Germany to great effect in many cases and the HE bombs still reduced German cites to rubble without nukes and the Germans kept fighting on. As for the Luftwaffe the planes sent east had to hold off the Red Airforce which wasnt as shoddy as you seem to think. If you dont think those pilots will cause a major problem for the USAA and the RAF your kidding yourself. As for planes the Germans could produce a lot of planes OTL that wasnt the main problem, their main problem was lack of pilots. So freeing up all those fighter piots from the east helps a lot and prevents Germany from being totaly outmatched. Also Germany is fighting over home skies so any pilot who gets shot down has a fair chance of living to fight again, if he can bail out safely. US-UK pilots who get shot down are sent off to a POW camp and are out of the war. Keeping experienced pilots can bust ase important as piolet training or crude plane production.

As mentioned before, Britain has a lot more anthrax, and putting chemical/biological weapons on ballistic missiles is most likely beyond Germany's ability, at least in the 1940s. And Germany sure as hell is not going to be getting any bombers through.

You think so? Well the Germans managed some novel innovations even at the very end of the war, in this scenario focus can be shifted to new avenues of research.

The only thing that can match even the Little Boy in destruction at the time would be the results of the massed firebombings in Japan, which are only possible thanks to near unique circumstances which don't apply in Europe. No realistic amount of conventional bombing with normal high explosives can match the sheer destruction, particularly of irreplaceable machine tools, nor can conventional bombing prevent rapid reconstruction.

Hmm, the Little Boy could mangle a city but more than massed carpet & fire bombing, day & night? I dont think so (radiation is a problem for the Germans however). The Germans still keep rebuilding as long as the war goes on and I dont see how machine tools taking out by an A-Bomb are any more ''irreplaceable than those blown up for melted by HE.

A-Bomb dosnt = instant win, if the WA can even manage to get the bombers through. Whatever else happens I doubt Germany ITL will be simply broken & helpless the way Japan was when A-Bombs were used.

 

[xchen08]

Fireboming was used in Germany to great effect in many cases and the HE bombs still reduced German cites to rubble without nukes and the Germans kept fighting on.

Already covered above.

As for the Luftwaffe the planes sent east had to hold off the Red Airforce which wasnt as shoddy as you seem to think. If you dont think those pilots will cause a major problem for the USAA and the RAF your kidding yourself. As for planes the Germans could produce a lot of planes OTL that wasnt the main problem, their main problem was lack of pilots. So freeing up all those fighter piots from the east helps a lot and prevents Germany from being totaly outmatched. Also Germany is fighting over home skies so any pilot who gets shot down has a fair chance of living to fight again, if he can bail out safely. US-UK pilots who get shot down are sent off to a POW camp and are out of the war. Keeping experienced pilots can bust ase important as piolet training or crude plane production.

Shoddy is a matter of opinion. That they were second line aircraft is fact, as is the USA sending its own second line fighters as lend-lease to the Soviets where they performed quite well against what Germany could put up against them. And of course, a lot of tactical bombers and ground attack aircraft were out East as well, since they would never survive in the West. So yes, no Eastern front does mean a few more fighter pilots in second line planes, but that only means a few extra months at most before getting crushed.

You think so? Well the Germans managed some novel innovations even at the very end of the war, in this scenario focus can be shifted to new avenues of research.

You, know, an argument that goes: Germany doesn't have and never came close to having technology X, but because Germans are really good at making CGI planes, they can come up with X on demand, even though said demand is most likely to arise with the first industrial center being destroyed by an A-bomb...is not the best argument.

Hmm, the Little Boy could mangle a city but more than massed carpet & fire bombing, day & night? I dont think so (radiation is a problem for the Germans however). The Germans still keep rebuilding as long as the war goes on and I dont see how machine tools taking out by an A-Bomb are any more ''irreplaceable than those blown up for melted by HE.

You missed the point. HE generally can't melt or destroy machine tools. What happens is that the HE collapses the factory, burying the machines, and subsequent bombs makes the rubble bounce. Then the Germans come back, dig the machines out, rebuild the building, and get back to work. An A-bomb on the other hand, will destroy the machine tools, which can't be replaced. Not to mention how trying to rebuild immediately just means sentencing your skilled workers to death.

As a side note, the answer to your question is: yes. Simply compare the aftermath of Hiroshima with the aftermath of Dresden, which was indeed subjected to massed carpet bombing with HE and incendiaries, day and night.

A-Bomb dosnt = instant win, if the WA can even manage to get the bombers through. Whatever else happens I doubt Germany ITL will be simply broken & helpless the way Japan was when A-Bombs were used.

Not broken and helpless at the beginning of the A-bombing as Japan was, no. That'll happen soon enough though, particularly as by late 1944, the WAllies had realized the key to destroying German air resistance is to target fuel production.

 

[adam888]

Interesting topic but what's forgotten is the affect on the atmosphere of multiple nuclear bombs and radiation sickness which not understood in the 40's which would cause Millions of deaths not to mention what would happen if one of the bombs fell into German hands.

The bottom line is while the war could be won militarily by the Western Allies, nobody would win in the end for the cost of victory is too great.

 

[xchen08]

Interesting topic but what's forgotten is the affect on the atmosphere of multiple nuclear bombs and radiation sickness which not understood in the 40's which would cause Millions of deaths not to mention what would happen if one of the bombs fell into German hands.

The bottom line is while the war could be won militarily by the Western Allies, nobody would win in the end for the cost of victory is too great.

While Urban Fox greatly underestimates the power of nukes, you are greatly overestimating it. Remember that dozens of nukes were detonated in surface tests, most vastly more powerful than the first and second generation bombs we are talking here, and did pretty much nothing. (well, other than melting a lot of sand/tundra and rendering a few small islands uninhabitable.) Though, cancer rates might be dangerously high in modern Germany if the Nazis take too long to surrender.

As for a nuke falling into German hands...I believe the eleven11 thread covers it the best.

 

[DaleCoz]

I wonder what the impact of putting two or three bombs a month on German cities would be on the morale of German civilians. For that matter, I wonder what US and British public opinion would say about it.

Would the Germans relocate key facilities and people to ex-Soviet and French territory? How would the German minor allies react to atom bombs hitting the Germans? My guess: They would be in "get out of the war" mode in short order. I'm not sure how much difference that would make given their military weakness, but it would be a factor.

 

[Beer]

Xchen, pardon me you fly very high on the US/UK-wank. Where do you get some of your preposterous notions about the eastern front?
1. Your second rate fighters given to the soviets in the east, made their impact on numbers alone! They swamped the Luftwaffe units, but could not stop them for a long time.
2. Some of the best fighter pilots ever flew over the east, e.g. Hartmann, Kittel, Rudorffer. Erich Rudorffer´s 222 secured kills (his actual count is higher, but as it is in the Luftwaffe till today, only the checkable kills count) in particular include over fifty "Sturmovik" planes, which were harder to bring down than a B-29 or comparable bombers. In this ATL-scenario, with europe in german hands, the Luftwaffe can bring all her aces to bear against the west.
3. You vastly underestimate how many of the german forces were tied on the eastern front! The western allies faced what Germany could scramble for that front. It was never the main focus, what you seem to believe (wrongly), since the fight in Russia was harder. And about the Luftwaffe, lots of the best pilots and planes were tied in the east. I don´t get how you arrive at the point that the Luftwaffe in the east had outdated fighter planes.
With the breathing space given of no eastern front anymore, Germany can weed out the birthing deficits of the Me 262, Go 229, V2 and other "wonder weapons". After the Luftwaffe is equipped with those in numbers, say goodbye to the allied bombers. And before Xchen08 starts his wanking abou the "never wonder weapons" again, there were several US scientists after the war OTL, who stated that after going through german jet plane research, they are sure that the germans were over a decade ahead of anything the allies had on the board. Couple this with a Germany ATL, which has Europe in her hands, to see what a potent Luftwaffe is facing the allies. Without the drain on production used the eastern front was, the air defense will get more jet planes (and earlier), rockets and all the things Germany OTL never could produce due to the deteoriating war situation.
4. As said in 3, with no eastern front, Germany can devote much more ressources to fighters and air defense. The western allies will never get OTL air superiority! What some wankers here overlook is the fact, that most of their arguments like scarce oil, etc. made their impact late in the war, with the focus of the Wehrmacht always in the east and bled dry. The western allies never encountered the full might, which they will be doing here ATL.
5. Xchen, from where do you get your info on air war, some "we are the best" propaganda? The allies could not hit Germany really hard from air OTL until mid 44. And it was only because too many ressources had to be given to the eastern front, so the air defense never got what they needed and then someday they were overpowered. The bombing before mid 44 laid waste to large swats of the cities, but did not impact production much. In fact, some production topped in early 44, even with the bombing! Only after the air defense was fully overpowered in mid 44, it began to change.
In this ATL Germany can devote much more to air defense.
In 43 some allied air force persons said that the bomber command can´t stomach many sorties like Schweinfurt, which was an unmitigated disaster! In ATL the stronger Luftwaffe can dish out many more Schweinfurts. And don´t let the P-51 blind you. It was a very good plane, but a lot of it´s fame rests on fights against a depleted Luftwaffe force. If they had to fly against a Luftwaffe in better shape, the impact of the P-51 would have been much less. In addition, you underestimate the power of several german designs, because you overlook the fact that due to several reasons, these planes were never available in the numbers needed to have much impact. In ATL a better Luftwaffe is a given.

 

[Riain]

Is the US going to drop Abombs piecemeal as they become available or will they wait until later in the year when they can drop a number of them at once?

 

[Jotun]

Beer, you beat me to the punch...

 

[altamiro]

Not to mention that many strategic materials were not available in Germany due to the war in the East. German engineers DID know how to make more durable jet turbines - but knowing about let's say tungsten carbide for turbine blades coating, and getting your hands on sufficient amounts of tungsten, are two completely different things.

Therefore, even with a similar amount of say Me-262s much more sorties per plane can be managed.

 

[Arachnid]

Beer you are simply wrong.
We all agree that you would be talking about an aerial warfare campaign with the WAllies trying to put bombers over German cities in order to either "Dresden" them or nuke 'em.
You seem to think that without the distraction of the Eastern front Germany's oil and raw materials problems would disappear and the Luftwaffe equipped with thousands of Me262's would cream the WAllies.
However there are two tiny problems with this theory:
1. Does anyone really think that even a focused, undistracted Germany could compete with the WAllies (remember Britain outproduced Germany on her own) in terms of aircraft numbers. Yes the Germans wouldn't need to pour as many resources into the Heer, but then the WAllies wouldn't need to build up an invasion force either. Also well Allied pilots are just as good, if not better considering the difference in doctrine and training standards in OTL.
Thus the correlation of forces would not change.
2. Nukes, yes the Germans had other CBRN weapons available, but Hitler (see OTL) would not use them unless nukes had been used and maybe not even then. What he knew and you seem to have forgotten is that the WAllies had them as well, so while Germany could build an Anthrax or Nerve Gas bomb and maybe deliver, if they did slime London then Cologne would get the same treatment. And no one can seriously claim that the Germans were more able to deliver CBRN weapons to their enemies capitals than the WAllies.
So the CBRN advantage is massively with the Allies.

And before you say V2's, do some research putting nerve gas or Anthrax on a ballistic missile is really hard, due to the fact that you've got to stop it being burned up on impact. Requiring months if not years of effort, all the while German cities are going up. Finally in comparison pretty much anything else the V2 is a shitty weapon.

You are not going to get an unconditional surrender, but the Western Allies are going to batter Germany down eventually.

 

[Beer]

You seem to think that without the distraction of the Eastern front Germany's oil and raw materials problems would disappear and the Luftwaffe equipped with thousands of Me262's would cream the WAllies.

Not entirely disappear, but with no eastern front, Germany can get more rare metals or oil from the Caucasus and/or world market. e.g. A Germany victorious in the east or no eastern war at all will get enough oil from the conquered lands or from Russia, if staying at peace. In addition, with no need to field that many divisions in the east, the reserves of the more scarce materials won´t be depleting as fast, since tank production, etc. need specific metals too, not only the air industry.

However there are two tiny problems with this theory:
1. Does anyone really think that even a focused, undistracted Germany could compete with the WAllies (remember Britain outproduced Germany on her own) in terms of aircraft numbers. Yes the Germans wouldn't need to pour as many resources into the Heer, but then the WAllies wouldn't need to build up an invasion force either. Also well Allied pilots are just as good, if not better considering the difference in doctrine and training standards in OTL.

(Facepalm!) Why do so many US/UK-wankers think that aircraft numbers alone are the one and all? Yes, having more planes than your enemy has advantages, several in fact, but even the western allies can´t shake crews for them out of their sleeves! Training bomber crews is costly and timeconsuming. Even with a much more handicaped OTL Germany the air defense held until mid44. In 43, with rising problems, the air defense was strong enough to bloody the noses of the allied bomber command more than once, Schweinfurt being one of the prime examples. As said before, the bomber command was wary that more sorties like Schweinfurt would bleed the manpower pool dry. It wasn´t the number of planes, the losses hurt bad, but could be handled. It was the steady drain of dead/POWed crews that would be the problem.
In ATL the Luftwaffe can concentrate, is equipped with even better planes and greater numbers of fighters. Even the allies can´t allow themselves to loose several hundred trained bomber crewmen in one day often. Which would happen far more frequently than OTL. And there is a chance that the bomber campaign gets the finger from the allied public after they loose a far larger number of men and planes in ATL often. I´d doubt the public would stomach it until the bomb is ready.
Thus the correlation of forces would change!

And before you say V2's, do some research putting nerve gas or Anthrax on a ballistic missile is really hard, due to the fact that you've got to stop it being burned up on impact. Requiring months if not years of effort, all the while German cities are going up. Finally in comparison pretty much anything else the V2 is a shitty weapon.
You are not going to get an unconditional surrender, but the Western Allies are going to batter Germany down eventually.

facepalm again! I did not even talk about WMD warheads for the V2! A V2 with most targeting problems solved (they were on it OTL) and a conventional warhead is a good weapon! Rain them down on the british airfields and other strategic targets and your shiny bomber fleet has a wee bit problem with starts and landings!

 

[xchen08]

Not entirely disappear, but with no eastern front, Germany can get more rare metals or oil from the Caucasus and/or world market. e.g. A Germany victorious in the east or no eastern war at all will get enough oil from the conquered lands or from Russia, if staying at peace. In addition, with no need to field that many divisions in the east, the reserves of the more scarce materials won´t be depleting as fast, since tank production, etc. need specific metals too, not only the air industry.

Conquering European Russia does mean more oil...after some time, since the Soviets are bound to blow up the wells and refineries as they retreat. Still won't increase availability of aviation fuel, since the Sovs got theirs through Lend Lease, and you are not going to convert a tank factory to refining avgas. So German pilots are still going to be going into battle with almost no flight time and additional aircraft means jack. No more tungsten either, and the limited supplies thereof are still going to be going into machine tools, so jet engines are still not going to work right.

And really, a conquered SU means a hell of a lot of divisions tied up fighting guerrillas, and you still seem to be under the strange presumption that you can expect the Nazi leadership to be sufficiently competent to immediately throw all their resources into air defense once the SU is down.

but even the western allies can´t shake crews for them out of their sleeves

Strange you should mention that, since the single largest advantage the allies had over Germany in the air alongside fuel, even more so than in sheer numbers and quality/reliability of aircraft. The WAllies can shake out a lot more crews than the Germans can pilots, and in any case, the introduction of fighterbombers and aircraft like the Mossie were already rendering the big multi-crew bombers obsolete by 44. Then again, what does all this matter in nuclear war? The Germans never had to take on the B-29, and had nothing either active or in the pipeline that could take on a B-36. Even if the Luftwaffe was still putting up some resistance a year after they were crushed OTL, they would still go down once the thousands of allied pilots in the East transfer over after the defeat of Japan.

I did not even talk about WMD warheads for the V2! A V2 with most targeting problems solved (they were on it OTL) and a conventional warhead is a good weapon! Rain them down on the british airfields and other strategic targets and your shiny bomber fleet has a wee bit problem with starts and landings!

You know, this is truly an absurd argument. The V2 was not a cost effective weapon, and raining it down on bomber bases would cost the Germans more than it cost the allies. Not to mention that "they were working on the guidance" doesn't mean they are going to succeed. Nobody did OTL until the 60s.

On your other points:

Wanking to high kill numbers for Nazi aces...you might want to note a hell lot of kills early in the war against unprepared Sovs. Later in the war, the Soviet aces performed comparably. So your supposed argument also works for "demonstrating" that the Nazis also used second line aircraft in the East.

And really, the belief that without the USSR, all those CGI wonder weapons become game changers is so absurd that I merely point you towards the search button. I'm sure as hell not going to spend time countering something which has already repeatedly been countered. Not to mention how even if all of them work properly, still none are capable of stopping an unescorted B-36 from dropping an A-bomb on its target.