What if the fat one took charge in 41? Hitler is poisoned by morell, earlier.
Goering might settle for madigascar rather than mass murder.
Goering might settle for madigascar rather than mass murder.
I seem to recall some quote about Italy needing at least five years to prepare for war. How would their situation have looked?Their wouldn't be any nukes - since there would be no need.
Each country would purse a more sustainable rearmament, so the Nazi would not waste billions on West Wall or Hitler's goofier 4 year plan. NO economic crises, not that there really was much of one.
Every year USSR would build 4000 tanks most likely T-32 followed by KV/T-34. By 1950 they should have 20,000 T-34/KV-1.
Every year NAZI Would build 2000tanks most likely PZ-III/PZ-IV. Followed by VK-2000/20-30ton, So by 1950 they should have 10000 VK2028 ton.
Every year UK would build 2000 tanks mostly cruiser tanks and Infantry tanks into the 1940s followed by some universal tank, like Cromwell like tank. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Cromwell type tanks.
Every year the USA would build 2000 tanks per year , most likely Grant/LEE , followed by Sherman/M-10. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Sherman tanks.
Similar patterns would repeat on other weapons like planes,AFV & BOMBERS modeled on the above patterns using maybe the best prewar production numbers in each category, using the best prewar model and the logical follow on based on threat production.
I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.That was more what I was thinking also, a Red Alert 2 style scenario where Hitler never takes power, Germany remains a democracy or more likely a stock standard right wing autocracy (more bark than proverbial bite) and you have a powerful USSR have a go at Europe.
Maybe Japan already attacked SEA and has been defeated by the undistracted UK, France and US. Or maybe Japan withdrew from China. Or maybe the Nationalists managed to defeat the Japanese and they unify China. Or any number of possibilities. There is no telling what occurred in Asia with a European WW2 not starting until 1950.I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.
When the USSR strikes, does Japan strike SEA?
I seem to recall some quote about Italy needing at least five years to prepare for war. How would their situation have looked?
Their wouldn't be any nukes - since there would be no need.
Each country would purse a more sustainable rearmament, so the Nazi would not waste billions on West Wall or Hitler's goofier 4 year plan. NO economic crises, not that there really was much of one.
Every year USSR would build 4000 tanks most likely T-32 followed by KV/T-34. By 1950 they should have 20,000 T-34/KV-1.
Every year NAZI Would build 2000tanks most likely PZ-III/PZ-IV. Followed by VK-2000/20-30ton, So by 1950 they should have 10000 VK2028 ton.
Every year UK would build 2000 tanks mostly cruiser tanks and Infantry tanks into the 1940s followed by some universal tank, like Cromwell like tank. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Cromwell type tanks.
Every year the USA would build 2000 tanks per year , most likely Grant/LEE , followed by Sherman/M-10. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Sherman tanks.
Similar patterns would repeat on other weapons like planes,AFV & BOMBERS modeled on the above patterns using maybe the best prewar production numbers in each category, using the best prewar model and the logical follow on based on threat production.
I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.
When the USSR strikes, does Japan strike SEA?
Perhaps Red Germany allied with USSR starts communist crusade?
Nazi will be building no tanks, as there was a huge economic crisis. They're economy was doomed to fail miserably, mismanagement, rampant rearmament, cronyism and general incompetence meant that the Nazis were facing massive issues if they didn't start plundering their neighbors. The Nazis spent every penny on war materials to get an edge over France and Britain, if they didn't go to war they were probably fucked.
.
This shows me that discovering fission was a matter of time and someone realizing that the results they were getting could only be interpreted that way. There was a lot of interest in nuclear physics and related subjects at the time, and it was basically inevitable that someone was going to observe fission sooner or later and figure out what it was. Delaying the discovery of fission past 1950 is pretty much impossible, I think.Watching this topic with interest. With regard to nuclear weapons development, if the POD is prior to 1938, atomic fission may not be known, much less to be later weaponised. After all Fermi, in Italy, had all the evidence needed in 1934, yet he missed fission entirely. In 1938, at Kaiser Wilhelm institute, it became known almost as a fluke.
Try this time line with no nuclear weapons, bombs or dust.
Dynasoar
Sounds like the kind of convoluted histories I grew up with. You need to read some more histories...preferably not from America or Britain.
The Soviets would have been screwed .The faults of Stalin's "reforms" to the military wouldn't have been exposed in the Winter War and 10 years of promotions and training based on political loyalty would have made it a system wide problem that would be impossible to fix rapidly.How would the Soviets and Italians have managed?