DBWI: Americans Won at Midway?

I know that this has been done quite a few times, but I've always been curious on the what the outcome would be if the results were more reversed. Personally I'd think that the Pacific Theater might have been wrapped up a good deal sooner because the USN wouldn't have had to play more defensively with its navy until they refurbished their losses. This new outcome would also help with the island hopping campaign at the very least.

Any other takers? How would this battle's outcome change the shape of the war?
 
Such a victory would no doubt have allowed the US to finish the war much sooner, most likely by late 1944 or 1945, as compared to early 1946 in OTL. More interesting though are the ramifications for Europe. An earlier defeat of the Japanese would have allowed the US to refocus on the European theater, which--unlikely as it may seem--could mean the Western Allies reach Germany before the Soviets. Maybe Cold War battle lines drawn on the Elbe rather than the Rhine, even!
 
OOC: The forces deployed in Europe were not the same as those deployed in the pacific mostly, indeed island-hopping and continental deployment have dramatically different requirements, so even with a greater focus on the Pacific, the deployments in Europe wouldn't have been very much affected.
 

sharlin

Banned
That the battle for Midway island itself was a bloody and sobering lesson for the IJN and the IJA was some light for the US. Fletcher was bloody unlucky to get hit first but even so he still managed to get the Enterprise home. (Visit her if you're in New York, well worth the admittance fee)

The US was rocked on the back foot but they still held on and churned out the Essex Class in staggering numbers and those ships with their superior aircraft more than got their own back in the Second Battle of Midway and of course the big showdown at the Phillipines Sea where the bulk of the IJN was destroyed in carrier and surface engagements. That the war lasted until March 46 still makes me think it would have ended in 1945 if the americans had not put everything into carrier production to make up for losses, even affecting the Manhatten Project.
 
By shortening the war in Europe by a few months, you could probably have an earlier Soviet invasion of Manchuria. Operation Spring Awakening becoming "Autumn Reckoning", or something, would probably bring the Japanese to the table earlier.
 
Not sure that this changes a whole lot; by March of 46' the Japanese surrendered because the Soviets have torn them apart wholesale. If the USN had performed better, there might not be an Japanese Democratic Republic on Hokkaido and Northern Honshu.


In OTL, the question is whether they wanted their Emperor to enjoy Stalin's tender mercy or the Allies; with the Red Army close to enlarging their toehold on Honshu, the IJA folded to the Allies.


If Midway is won, would the USA have the political will for CAPSTONE? Some planners proposed simply burning Japanese Cities to the ground with incendiaries and the nuclear bombs. The point is; the Soviets are the ones that forced Japan to terms OTL--and they had nine months to wail on them.


So we assume that the Battle of Midway turns into the Battle of Darwin: The IJN is gutted and left only capable of a halting defense. Obviously, there will be no odd encounters of Japanese Soldiers being found years later in the Great Sandy Desert, some of them well into the 50s.


But that has little military impact. I presume that Bull Halsey probably survives the battle, and the USA probably does close in on the Home Islands themselves. But what then?


The Soviets encountered Kamikaze and Kaiten suicide weapons in their conquest of Hokkaido, and fierce resistance on Honshu to a degree that the Soviets couldn't even get off the beaches.


The idea of trying to take Kyushu or the Kanto Plain is pure folly. Japan would undoubtedly dedicate its last measures of strength to ensure that any attempt inland would be purchased at an unbearable price.


It just seems impossible that the USA would easily beat Japan without massive Soviet Help, which is the real game changer here. If it were somehow possible, the USA could well clear Korea and Manchuria and keep the Nationalists in power in China. No Communist Korea, North Japan, or Vietnam either.


In the end, I guess it worked out rather well. Communist China and the Soviet Union soon discovered that Communism does little to address historic grievances, and I think that short of the Nationalists winning the CCW, the Sino-Soviet issues will boil over.


That Ussuri River stuff--good lord, that could have killed us all. I think we can all thank our lucky stars that NATO was able to broker a truce before those missiles went off.
 
If the U.S. won the battle of Midway, it would, I presume have meant the destruction of at least four of the Japanese Carriers and most of the AMerican Carriers woould have either sustain minor damage, or not been damaged at all.. This would have imediatly place Japan on the back foot and dealt a terrible blow to their morale. The U.S. could, and DID replace our staggering naval losses in that battle, but the Japanese, simply would NOT have had the industrial ability to replace their four Carriers.

The real Battle wounded us, but a reversed battle would have Killed them and their Propaganda minister would have had to start obfuscating losses MUCH sooner that they did.
 
If the U.S. won the battle of Midway, it would, I presume have meant the destruction of at least four of the Japanese Carriers and most of the AMerican Carriers woould have either sustain minor damage, or not been damaged at all.. This would have imediatly place Japan on the back foot and dealt a terrible blow to their morale. The U.S. could, and DID replace our staggering naval losses in that battle, but the Japanese, simply would NOT have had the industrial ability to replace their four Carriers.

The real Battle wounded us, but a reversed battle would have Killed them and their Propaganda minister would have had to start obfuscating losses MUCH sooner that they did.

What makes you think that the Japanese would get so badly gutted? I mean that sounds pretty unlikely. The US did lose the Hornet and Astoria in the actual match, but it was the aftermath of the battle that got the Yorktown, so it'd be quite possible for a damaged carrier to make it back. (OOC: ;))

I'd imagine that it'd be closer to two or maybe even three carriers sunk, with the likely candidates being the Kaga and Soryu. The Kaga was sunk IOTL, and it's honestly a real life ASB that had the Soryu not get mission killed or sunk. Maybe some of the screens and possibly another mission killed carrier, but I don't think it'd be a total sweep.

If Midway is won, would the USA have the political will for CAPSTONE? Some planners proposed simply burning Japanese Cities to the ground with incendiaries and the nuclear bombs. The point is; the Soviets are the ones that forced Japan to terms OTL--and they had nine months to wail on them.

I could see Capstone going off. I mean it was sort of a requirement for the airforce to bomb as much as possible as often as possible, especially cities. Although then again, I'm using Europe for that example, and also a different country.:eek:


So we assume that the Battle of Midway turns into the Battle of Darwin: The IJN is gutted and left only capable of a halting defense. Obviously, there will be no odd encounters of Japanese Soldiers being found years later in the Great Sandy Desert, some of them well into the 50s.

I don't think a gutting would be likely without a lot of luck for the US. I can still see a severely reduced, but functional IJN fleet in the aftermath.

But that has little military impact. I presume that Bull Halsey probably survives the battle, and the USA probably does close in on the Home Islands themselves. But what then?


The Soviets encountered Kamikaze and Kaiten suicide weapons in their conquest of Hokkaido, and fierce resistance on Honshu to a degree that the Soviets couldn't even get off the beaches.

Which I think led to some interesting results over in Europe afterwards.

The idea of trying to take Kyushu or the Kanto Plain is pure folly. Japan would undoubtedly dedicate its last measures of strength to ensure that any attempt inland would be purchased at an unbearable price.

It was already pretty much unbearable for the USSR to make the landings. Remember that by this point they were forced to recruit and press women into the echelons due to their manpower losses in Europe and the Korean plus Hokkaido campaign.


It just seems impossible that the USA would easily beat Japan without massive Soviet Help, which is the real game changer here. If it were somehow possible, the USA could well clear Korea and Manchuria and keep the Nationalists in power in China. No Communist Korea, North Japan, or Vietnam either.

I personally think that it was just distance that factored it in. It didn't help that the Japanese were probably fighting the worst parts of the Allies.


In the end, I guess it worked out rather well. Communist China and the Soviet Union soon discovered that Communism does little to address historic grievances, and I think that short of the Nationalists winning the CCW, the Sino-Soviet issues will boil over.

It certainly turned and still turns the Far East into one heck of a quagmire that's for sure.
 
I think, if America HAD won the battle of Midway, it would have enabled us to go on the offensive much eariler, perhaps somewhere in the SOlomon Islands.
 
I think, if America HAD won the battle of Midway, it would have enabled us to go on the offensive much eariler, perhaps somewhere in the SOlomon Islands.
Why? There was no strategic purpose of the Solomans. The US made it through fine IOTL without taking the Solomans. I'd imagine there'd be an earlier CenPac push.
 
Why? There was no strategic purpose of the Solomans. The US made it through fine IOTL without taking the Solomans. I'd imagine there'd be an earlier CenPac push.
I think there was an island in that island chain with a pretty good sized airbase on it, used to be one of ours before the war. If we retook that, we would have just had t orefurbish it rather than having to build fresh.
 
I think there was an island in that island chain with a pretty good sized airbase on it, used to be one of ours before the war. If we retook that, we would have just had t orefurbish it rather than having to build fresh.
Well, yes, but that would only be of affect after the war. I can tell you right now that bull Halsey would not be thrilled if Nimitz was thinking of the economy after the war rather than the war itself. OOC:Not sure what you meant by the last line.
 
Well, yes, but that would only be of affect after the war. I can tell you right now that bull Halsey would not be thrilled if Nimitz was thinking of the economy after the war rather than the war itself. OOC:Not sure what you meant by the last line.
Retaking Guadalcanal gives the Navy a shot at retaking the Phillipese and taking the rest of the Solomons drives the offensive into a zone the Japanese are not expecting and are not protecting.
 
Retaking Guadalcanal gives the Navy a shot at retaking the Phillipese and taking the rest of the Solomons drives the offensive into a zone the Japanese are not expecting and are not protecting.
Now that you mention the airfield, I faintly remeber that from somewhere. However, the fact there's an airfield is a sign that it will be heavily defended. Also, the Japanese will be able to force a war of attrtion, which would only serve to slow the United States down.
 
Now that you mention the airfield, I faintly remeber that from somewhere. However, the fact there's an airfield is a sign that it will be heavily defended. Also, the Japanese will be able to force a war of attrtion, which would only serve to slow the United States down.
The facts you mention ARE important, but remember, the U.S> can afford losses in both troops and material, Japan cannot. They have neither the men nor the wherewithal to spend on a campaign of attrition. That would have worked against them as a battle for Guadalcanal would have forced them to spend assets they could not afford on the battle. In addition they is a slim chance that significant Japanese naval assets could be destroyed, shortening the war further.
 
The facts you mention ARE important, but remember, the U.S> can afford losses in both troops and material, Japan cannot. They have neither the men nor the wherewithal to spend on a campaign of attrition. That would have worked against them as a battle for Guadalcanal would have forced them to spend assets they could not afford on the battle. In addition they is a slim chance that significant Japanese naval assets could be destroyed, shortening the war further.
True. However, ITTL, I believe that the Austrailians will be able to hold Port Moresby from the second Japanese attack. As such, they'll have a strong air base to counter Japanese airpower in the region.
 
True. However, ITTL, I believe that the Austrailians will be able to hold Port Moresby from the second Japanese attack. As such, they'll have a strong air base to counter Japanese airpower in the region.

True, but leaving them to their own devices in that regard cost us diplomatically later. the common belief was that we were spending AUssie dead to save our own.

An American offensive i nthe solomans would have been a different story and caused the Aussies to think very well of us for decades after.
 
Technologically speaking. If the war had ended earlier I dont think we would have seen the F-80 in combat and not seen jet to jet combat between the F-80 and the Japanese Ne-20. Of course F-80 was a vastly superior plane but learning about jet to jet combat was invaluable for later wars
 
Technologically speaking. If the war had ended earlier I dont think we would have seen the F-80 in combat and not seen jet to jet combat between the F-80 and the Japanese Ne-20. Of course F-80 was a vastly superior plane but learning about jet to jet combat was invaluable for later wars
I will sacrifice that if it saves us the operational years of 45-46 worth of casualties on both sides.
 
Top