D-Day Fails but US atom bomb wins WWII in Europe

Peter Tsouras's Disaster at D-Day is a fairly good scenario.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mc47DAAAQBAJ&pg=PT221&lpg=PT221&dq=review+of+disaster+at+d-day&source=bl&ots=5_xKeqkTlo&sig=dIBnQy0yMcJNaEk__rprTu3RZ4o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi-mqDlm93QAhXpA8AKHTDeDYAQ6AEIXDAI#v=onepage&q=review of disaster at d-day&f=false
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1619710.Disaster_at_D_Day
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01G51Q0PQ/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

It involves a few minor changes that snowball into disaster.
(One of the most crucial of which doesn't even involve one of the crucial Military or Political figures, Frau Lucie Rommel catches a cold so the Field-Marshal delays his travel plans for a day and is still at his post on the morning of 6th June 1944).
Except that Rommel was going back anyway to see Hitler, he just popped in to see Lucie because it was her birthday. Also does it mention how much damage was actually done to the German communications network? And how badly outnumbered the Luftwaffe was?
 
If we have to have an actual failed D-Day on June 6 AND Germany still fighting a year later, we'd want to be more specific about the scale of the disaster - and why the Allies don't try again a bit later or push harder in Operation Dragoon, for example, to go through Southern France!

But again, let me throw in my two-cents ...

If D-Day fails, for whatever reason, but severely enough to throw planning back at least 2-3 months ...

a) The Allies are either ready to try again in the autumn
or
b) Push harder through Italy and Southern France first, followed up by channel raids and another DD-try in the spring of 1945

In both cases, you'd still have the Soviet armies deep into Germany proper in April-June 1945 - even if the WAllies haven't quite made it to the Rhine by that time.

About 25 per cent of the Wehrmacht were fighting the Western Allies from 1944-45 and the rest were fighting the Soviets. So even if the Allies fail to somehow establish a beachhead in S-France as well, you would still have to have divisions there to

i) fight them off and
ii) stay there to prevent them from coming back

Furthermore, you'd have to subtract all those men killed in stopping D-Day the first time around (that number might be considerable).

Thus, I doubt more than 10 per cent of the Wehrmacht could be transferred in this period to deal with the Soviets on top of the troops already at the Eastern Front. That won't make much of a difference compared to OTL.

So by the summer of 1945 in this scenario - (with some very unlucky/very incompetent WAllies) - you likely have the Soviets at the Elbe, or slugging it out with Hitler Jugend and SS diehards in Berlin.

You also, all other things being equal, have a much harder nut to crack in Japan now - since nothing has changed ITL vs. OTL on that front in this scenario.

In conclusion: The Bombs come online in July-August, and they would most likely still be used in Japan first, since Germany at this point is all but defeated. At most you will have the WAllies throw one or two 'demo-Bombs' - (cf. Calbear's point) - taking out a good chunk of the Ruhr or nearby - to make an impression on the Soviets more than anything else. (As if Hiroshima+Nagasaki won't be enough!)

That won't leave the post-war world much different, as I see it, from the first 3 options I suggested ... The Soviets have more of Germany, all of the Balkans and Scandinavia-minus-Sweden. France and Italy are severely hurt and seething with social unrest - esp. the latter. The US+UK will have to make a great effort to stop the Iron Curtain at the Elbe or Rhine and rebuild.

An interesting knock-off effect might be that a rump Western Germany will arise a few years after, and perhaps unite with the Benelux in a de facto federation, at least economically - foreshadowing the early EEC-constellation.

You might also see Italy breaking up, depending on whether or if there is a continuing civil war there, a la Greece, between fascists, communist insurgents and whatnot. Then again, the WAllies might decide to stay there and pour in a lot of military 'to protect the population' and insert a military government or some such.

But again ... those are just stray thoughts: The specific cause-effects and end-results would - obviously - have to be described if a full-time line at least since June 6 1944
 
Except that Rommel was going back anyway to see Hitler, he just popped in to see Lucie because it was her birthday. Also does it mention how much damage was actually done to the German communications network? And how badly outnumbered the Luftwaffe was?

The Field Marshal visited his wife before seeing the Fuhrer, if he's not going home for his wife's birthday he can stay in France for an extra day or two and still make his appointment with Hitler on schedule.
Which in the book he uses to shift the 12SS Pz Division "Temporarily" further forward for a training exercise. So that its in range of Omaha on the 6th.
The Allies fail to notice because it only occurs literally a few hours before the landings, remember Allied intelligence missed the movement of the 352nd Infantry Division, in March, into coastal area altogether.

As I said small changes that snowball. In fact some things go better for the Allies, Rommel's presence diverts more of the 352nd towards Omaha Beach so the British Landings are more successful, which leads to a giant attack of Hubris and the near total loss of the 1st Airbourne Division, which in turn convinces Hitler of just how serious the situation is and an earlier release of Panzer Group West and units of the 15th Army.
 
Thanks for all the replies. I think Calbear is most persuasive with the argument that the A-bomb alone would not cause Nazi Germany to surrender.

Why surrender when they are dead men if they do or don't surrender? And for the people why stick out your neck to try to overthrow the government when you won't get jack shit for risking you and your families lives.

We made clear in the papers we knew the Japanese Emperor was reading that Japan proper would not be divided and he personally would come out alive and he didn't need to surrender to the USSR unlike Germany.

You need to sweeten the pot for the German people for nukes to have an effect and that still can mean a dead Hitler, but it means tossing Uncle Joe a bit under the bus compared to OTL and allowing German surrender to only the WAllies.
 

It's

Banned
The Bomb would NOT have defeated the Reich, not by itself.

Two weapons did not, by themselves, cause the Japanese to capitulate. The Japanese capitulation was caused by the combination of two nuclear attacks AND the entry of the USSR into the war an action that was the uppercut after the first hook to the body (Hiroshima) that had stunned Tokyo, follow by the overhand jab (Nagasaki) that dropped the country. The irony, of course, is that instead of being a brilliant plan by the Allies to utterly crush what morale remained in Japan's senior leadership, it was a matter of the USSR and U.S. racing to try to get/prevent the Soviets a seat at the table for the surrender.

It is more than possible that the Bomb wouldn't even impress Hitler that much. Dresden didn't even raise an eyebrow. Bomber Command's brutally effective dehousing offensive didn't make the Reich blink. There were, frankly, no targets left in Germany that were worth a Bomb. It is worth keeping in mind that the Reich didn't surrender WHILE the Soviets were firing 203mm howitzers over open sights INSIDE downtown Berlin.

D-Day fails and the War ends because the Red Army has reached the Rhine (that MIGHT be the only reason a Bomb is used, to demonstrate to the Soviets that IT WOULD BE A BAD THING to go further than the pre-war German borders).
In his surrender broadcast, Hirohito specifically mentioned the A bomb as a reason for surrender, as well as how Japan was losing everywhere. He made no specific mention of how Japan was now getting beaten by the soviets as well, who were much further away than the Americans.
 
In his surrender broadcast, Hirohito specifically mentioned the A bomb as a reason for surrender, as well as how Japan was losing everywhere. He made no specific mention of how Japan was now getting beaten by the soviets as well, who were much further away than the Americans.

Sure as he was just surrendering to the WAllies not the USSR. He was given an out the Germans would have needed leverage as Japan had (the expected American deaths from invading mainland Japan) to achieve.
 
The Field Marshal visited his wife before seeing the Fuhrer, if he's not going home for his wife's birthday he can stay in France for an extra day or two and still make his appointment with Hitler on schedule.
Which in the book he uses to shift the 12SS Pz Division "Temporarily" further forward for a training exercise. So that its in range of Omaha on the 6th.
The Allies fail to notice because it only occurs literally a few hours before the landings, remember Allied intelligence missed the movement of the 352nd Infantry Division, in March, into coastal area altogether.

As I said small changes that snowball. In fact some things go better for the Allies, Rommel's presence diverts more of the 352nd towards Omaha Beach so the British Landings are more successful, which leads to a giant attack of Hubris and the near total loss of the 1st Airbourne Division, which in turn convinces Hitler of just how serious the situation is and an earlier release of Panzer Group West and units of the 15th Army.
If they're waiting to the rear of Omaha, they're dead, because the rear areas were utterly pulverised by either the air force or the navy (that's why Omaha was such a struggle OTL, one bombardment had fallen short, the other had overshot). Also 'a few hours' before means when the paratroopers are on the ground, and in those circumstances, communication is going to be bloody difficult given the number of telephone lines cut by those guys. And the allies put a lot of work into making it look like there was a force headed for Calais as well.

And I live in NZ, which means the Kindle version is unavailable (you can only get it if you live in the UK).


Now one thing I could see screwing it up, apart from the weather, is if Johnny Jebsen (codenamed Artist), under torture, spilt the beans. Of course, that wouldn't actually result in D-Day failing, so much as it never actually being launched.
 
Last edited:
If they're waiting to the rear of Omaha, they're dead, because the rear areas were utterly pulverised by either the air force or the navy (that's why Omaha was such a struggle OTL, one bombardment had fallen short, the other had overshot). Also 'a few hours' before means when the paratroopers are on the ground, and in those circumstances, communication is going to be bloody difficult given the number of telephone lines cut by those guys. And the allies put a lot of work into making it look like there was a force headed for Calais as well.

And I live in NZ, which means the Kindle version is unavailable (you can only get it if you live in the UK).


Now one thing I could see screwing it up, apart from the weather, is if Johnny Jebsen (codenamed Artist), under torture, spilt the beans. Of course, that wouldn't actually result in D-Day failing, so much as it never actually being launched.

A few hours means the 4th and the evening of the 5th in the book, they bivouac around St. Lo.
So just how far to the rear is 10 miles, the closest unit is just outside Balleroy NE of St. Lo, well out of range of any of the initial bombardment, the 12SS only get into action late in the day of the 6th, just as the 1st and 29th divisions are getting off the beach and as far inland as they did historically.
In the book Tsouras has Rommel meeting with General Marcks in St. Lo at the time of the landings, he drives to the beaches, and personally directs the action, the only communications required are "Follow Rommel!", and he is nearly killed by US Paratroopers while doing so, his driver is killed and his aide Captain Lang is wounded.
 
Even if you had the Soviets at he end of the war (September 1945) on the Rhine, you still end up with German occupation zones probably OTL. There would still be a Yalta conference, occupation zones would have been agreed upon. The Soviet played ball OTL (evacuated Northern Norway, Bornholm). I think they would here.

However getting the Soviets out of Denmark might be tricky, could end up communist, most likely Finlandized though.

Probably though the finish lines are somewhat about OTL and the war just goes on a month or two later. Bagration happens at the end of June, the Germans will probably pull the best 4 Panzer divisions out of France to help deal with that (and maybe a couple before it happens). The Soviet advance will slow.
 
The Bomb would NOT have defeated the Reich, not by itself.

Two weapons did not, by themselves, cause the Japanese to capitulate. The Japanese capitulation was caused by the combination of two nuclear attacks AND the entry of the USSR into the war an action that was the uppercut after the first hook to the body (Hiroshima) that had stunned Tokyo, follow by the overhand jab (Nagasaki) that dropped the country. The irony, of course, is that instead of being a brilliant plan by the Allies to utterly crush what morale remained in Japan's senior leadership, it was a matter of the USSR and U.S. racing to try to get/prevent the Soviets a seat at the table for the surrender.

It is more than possible that the Bomb wouldn't even impress Hitler that much. Dresden didn't even raise an eyebrow. Bomber Command's brutally effective dehousing offensive didn't make the Reich blink. There were, frankly, no targets left in Germany that were worth a Bomb. It is worth keeping in mind that the Reich didn't surrender WHILE the Soviets were firing 203mm howitzers over open sights INSIDE downtown Berlin.

D-Day fails and the War ends because the Red Army has reached the Rhine (that MIGHT be the only reason a Bomb is used, to demonstrate to the Soviets that IT WOULD BE A BAD THING to go further than the pre-war German borders).

I wouldn't be so sure. At least three bombs would be produced every month, starting in August 1945, and production speed might increase toward the end of the year. This means at least 15 cities are toast by the end of the year. In 1946, the USA are going to keep up their production capacity and likely increase it further, which could mean up to a 100 bombs are produced that year, making every town with a population of over 20.000 fair game. Hitler might not flinch at this carnage, but plenty of other higher ups will want to see Germany not reduced to radioactive cinders.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
I wouldn't be so sure. At least three bombs would be produced every month, starting in August 1945, and production speed might increase toward the end of the year. This means at least 15 cities are toast by the end of the year. In 1946, the USA are going to keep up their production capacity and likely increase it further, which could mean up to a 100 bombs are produced that year, making every town with a population of over 20.000 fair game. Hitler might not flinch at this carnage, but plenty of other higher ups will want to see Germany not reduced to radioactive cinders.
The Reich didn't HAVE 15 cities that could be bombed out. That was part of the problem. Germany had been destroyed, many cities had been struck multiple times, to the point that reconstruction was barely even attempted. Harris was always looking for targets where he could "dehouse" large numbers of the enemy. Unlike Japan, where the U.S. intentionally kept several cities more or less pristine in anticipation of using the Bomb (the better to gauge the effects in a real world setting) the Reich had been pounded for three years before it was even shown that a Bomb was possible.

THere is also the simple fact that the Reich leadership didn't friggin' care about civilian losses. Hitler, if anything, WANTED more civilian casualties, his warped view of Darwinism told him that if the German people could not prevail it should not survive. With the SS and Gestapo conducting on the spot, "hanging, no drop" executions at any sign of "defeatism", there won't be any sort of public uprising. Simply won't happen. The ONLY way a Bomb knocks out the Reich is if it manages to kill Hitler and his nest of vipers, that would allow someone with an ounce of reality left to them to surrender.
 
The Reich didn't HAVE 15 cities that could be bombed out. That was part of the problem. Germany had been destroyed, many cities had been struck multiple times, to the point that reconstruction was barely even attempted. Harris was always looking for targets where he could "dehouse" large numbers of the enemy. Unlike Japan, where the U.S. intentionally kept several cities more or less pristine in anticipation of using the Bomb (the better to gauge the effects in a real world setting) the Reich had been pounded for three years before it was even shown that a Bomb was possible.

THere is also the simple fact that the Reich leadership didn't friggin' care about civilian losses. Hitler, if anything, WANTED more civilian casualties, his warped view of Darwinism told him that if the German people could not prevail it should not survive. With the SS and Gestapo conducting on the spot, "hanging, no drop" executions at any sign of "defeatism", there won't be any sort of public uprising. Simply won't happen. The ONLY way a Bomb knocks out the Reich is if it manages to kill Hitler and his nest of vipers, that would allow someone with an ounce of reality left to them to surrender.

I know this doesn't fit the parameters of the thread, but in a scenario in which the USSR is knocked out in 1942-'43 (as in your own AANW TL), I'd expect a lot of Luftwaffe assets will be moved west and seriously reduce the bombing campaign's effectiveness and increase Allied losses. Some reconstruction work would potentially even get done. And, like I said, they could target any town with a population over 20.000. How many of those does Germany have that haven't been bombed yet? None of that would change Hitler's mindset, I agree. But how about a military coup?
 

thorr97

Banned
Something to remember about the Atom Bomb is that it's not just a city destroying weapon. Rather, it's a target destroying weapon.

You got a nicely dug in division or two holding up your advance? A force that'd take weeks and thousands of casualties to dislodge? Not a problem! Just send over a gadget or two and... presto! That enemy force is now just a charred smear on the landscape. Might want to wait a day or two for the radiation to get back down to tolerable level before sending the boys through....
 
Something to remember about the Atom Bomb is that it's not just a city destroying weapon. Rather, it's a target destroying weapon.

You got a nicely dug in division or two holding up your advance? A force that'd take weeks and thousands of casualties to dislodge? Not a problem! Just send over a gadget or two and... presto! That enemy force is now just a charred smear on the landscape. Might want to wait a day or two for the radiation to get back down to tolerable level before sending the boys through....

Later on, devices with the yield like Fatman and Little Boy were classed as tactical.
 

Thothian

Banned
The Bomb would NOT have defeated the Reich, not by itself.

Two weapons did not, by themselves, cause the Japanese to capitulate. The Japanese capitulation was caused by the combination of two nuclear attacks AND the entry of the USSR into the war an action that was the uppercut after the first hook to the body (Hiroshima) that had stunned Tokyo, follow by the overhand jab (Nagasaki) that dropped the country. The irony, of course, is that instead of being a brilliant plan by the Allies to utterly crush what morale remained in Japan's senior leadership, it was a matter of the USSR and U.S. racing to try to get/prevent the Soviets a seat at the table for the surrender.

It is more than possible that the Bomb wouldn't even impress Hitler that much. Dresden didn't even raise an eyebrow. Bomber Command's brutally effective dehousing offensive didn't make the Reich blink. There were, frankly, no targets left in Germany that were worth a Bomb. It is worth keeping in mind that the Reich didn't surrender WHILE the Soviets were firing 203mm howitzers over open sights INSIDE downtown Berlin.

D-Day fails and the War ends because the Red Army has reached the Rhine (that MIGHT be the only reason a Bomb is used, to demonstrate to the Soviets that IT WOULD BE A BAD THING to go further than the pre-war German borders).

Cal, I think you're certainly right that Hitler wouldn't have cared about the atom bomb being used on Germany. However, other Germans at the top might well have. I recall a post-war interview given by Speer wherein he remarked that he had toyed with the idea of introducing chemical weapons into the FuehrerBunker's ventilation system.

Doubtless there were other high-level Germans at the time considering other ways of removing Hitler. They may well have been moved to act by the idea of Germany undergoing atomic armageddon, even if Hitler wasn't.

Also, the Allies might well have concluded that Hitler indeed wouldn't have been moved by the a-bomb. Thus, they say to hell with it, and nuke Berlin. Disappearance of the upper command structure would have been a blow perhaps enough to motivate a senior general outside of Berlin to seize power and surrender the Reich.
 
In all the 4-ish scenarios I've contemplated so far in which there is a failed or delayed D-Day or both, and the Reich is still fighting in the summer of '45, there is the possibility, obviously, that Hitler is butterflied away at some point. Valkyrie or some other attempt on the Führer's life might be timed differently and work this time, and before the situation even gets critical (i.e. with Allied troops on German soil).

But you would have to have some 'moderates', like the band behind Stauffenberg, take over, I suppose ... and in that case they'd probably be prone to end the war anyway ASAP, i.e. start negotiations and just fight to delay/secure the best position for talks. There's no reason to use the Bomb on them if peace-feelers to the Allies are thought to be genuine. The Allies might rightly fear that Bombing a German city to speed things up would have the opposite effect - esp. if there, plausibly, is some kind of dissension in German ranks, perhaps open conflict with SS-units going up against Wehrmacht in some theaters. It depends on how stable the new regime is perceived to be. This is unlike the Japanese situation OTL in which you have some very, very weak peace-feelers going on from a few diplomats in Switzerland etc. and then pretty much nothing but the impression that the Japanese would fight to the end. So you try to Bomb them into submission.

The big alternative scenario from an early Führer demise in this timeline could be a nightmare: The coup following Hitler's death is thwarted, Himmler takes over and from now on it's hunting time for any perceived traitors. You might, in some ways, get a Nazi regime even more fanatic than the constellation OTL, although that'd be hard to measure in any meaningful way ... Whatever the case, you certainly won't get any defeatist elements running the show ready to give up once the Allies find somewhere to Bomb.
 
Top