If the USSR was defeated how would the Pacific War play out?
- Thread starter Captain Homicide
- Start date
Let's take a step back and reassess.
A Germany that controls European Russia unchallenged in late 1942 is likely to take a view to conquering Persia and chunks of the Middle East as supply chains permit. R&D labs, refineries, and other key projects will likely be relocated farther east out of bombing range as might Pennemunde. Germany is resupplied with Ukrainian produce and partisan activity will be dealt with harshly. Presuming they are able to reach a deal with Turkey for military access, the Azerbaijani oil fields might be able to pipe Caucasian and Persian oil through neutral Turkey into Europe or be refined by German facilities there for use almost anywhere.
With the additional supplies, access to alloys, and less interruption in R&D, we are likely to see developments at OTL early 1945 in late 1944 and OTL end of war in early 1945. Look up Mario Zippermayr and see what you find - Germany seemed to be working on non-nuclear weapons of devastating capacity. New submarine models like the Type XXIX, designed for hydrodynamticity with modular construction, were well under design and likely development as evidence exists for longer-range missiles of approx. 1800km being designed with possible testing in March 1945. Assault rifles were coming into their own while SAMs were becoming viable by war's ends. HeS 011 jets were on the verge of advanced testing and with better alloys the BMW 018 might reach that stage earlier as well. Design and development of Jumo's 022 turboprop (which would in OTL evolve into the Kuznetsov NK-12 as on the TU-95 'Bear' bomber after the war) was already underway with proposal to develop 6,000 shp (4,500 kW) and a weight of 3,000 kg (6,600 lb). Better alloys would roughly double the power while cutting the weight by almost half.
But most of all let's consider how Japan's defenses benefit from restored/secured communciations with Germany and Italy. These may occur by flights as OTL or dedicated trains through Soviet territory. G8N aircraft may appear in the air bearing German hallmarks around late 1944 while Japan may bring Ki-201 fighter aircraft to bear in late 1944 or early 1945. Japanese pilots might be able to train in more secure territory (assuming Kamchatka or other areas are not handed to Japan by the USSR as part of the peace) and ground defense may be more lethal to the West should spare SVT-40s or Stg44s appear on various Pacific islands, especially alongside Japanese-made (or confiscated) T-34s. Russian oil may be flowing into Japanese engines while steel and other industrial capacity might be 'prioritized' for Tokyo and Berlin. The Pacific war is likely to get bloodier and much more difficult, though still winnable if events like the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot still occur. Get Long Lance [inspired] torpedoes into German subs and we get serious trouble.
US research under such a scenario will continue at full speed with long-range bombers like the future B-52 and B-36 being promoted ahead of OTL, probably with the Lycoming XR-7755 being used in at least one of the two. Allied jet development will proceed but without German assistance will not be *quite* as fast, the output of the RB-44 Tay being roughly equivalent to the BMW 018. US intercontinental bombers may benefit from the additions of jet engines while Horten jet fighters appear as well. The new frontier will be altitude as each strives to go higher and higher. YB-35s may also appear briefly if only to see about giving high-speed bombers a chance to run the gamut. In all, the war map will look very different as may the weapons with which the war is fought. And without a Soviet Union the postwar world is going to look *radically* different.
A Germany that controls European Russia unchallenged in late 1942 is likely to take a view to conquering Persia and chunks of the Middle East as supply chains permit. R&D labs, refineries, and other key projects will likely be relocated farther east out of bombing range as might Pennemunde. Germany is resupplied with Ukrainian produce and partisan activity will be dealt with harshly. Presuming they are able to reach a deal with Turkey for military access, the Azerbaijani oil fields might be able to pipe Caucasian and Persian oil through neutral Turkey into Europe or be refined by German facilities there for use almost anywhere.
With the additional supplies, access to alloys, and less interruption in R&D, we are likely to see developments at OTL early 1945 in late 1944 and OTL end of war in early 1945. Look up Mario Zippermayr and see what you find - Germany seemed to be working on non-nuclear weapons of devastating capacity. New submarine models like the Type XXIX, designed for hydrodynamticity with modular construction, were well under design and likely development as evidence exists for longer-range missiles of approx. 1800km being designed with possible testing in March 1945. Assault rifles were coming into their own while SAMs were becoming viable by war's ends. HeS 011 jets were on the verge of advanced testing and with better alloys the BMW 018 might reach that stage earlier as well. Design and development of Jumo's 022 turboprop (which would in OTL evolve into the Kuznetsov NK-12 as on the TU-95 'Bear' bomber after the war) was already underway with proposal to develop 6,000 shp (4,500 kW) and a weight of 3,000 kg (6,600 lb). Better alloys would roughly double the power while cutting the weight by almost half.
But most of all let's consider how Japan's defenses benefit from restored/secured communciations with Germany and Italy. These may occur by flights as OTL or dedicated trains through Soviet territory. G8N aircraft may appear in the air bearing German hallmarks around late 1944 while Japan may bring Ki-201 fighter aircraft to bear in late 1944 or early 1945. Japanese pilots might be able to train in more secure territory (assuming Kamchatka or other areas are not handed to Japan by the USSR as part of the peace) and ground defense may be more lethal to the West should spare SVT-40s or Stg44s appear on various Pacific islands, especially alongside Japanese-made (or confiscated) T-34s. Russian oil may be flowing into Japanese engines while steel and other industrial capacity might be 'prioritized' for Tokyo and Berlin. The Pacific war is likely to get bloodier and much more difficult, though still winnable if events like the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot still occur. Get Long Lance [inspired] torpedoes into German subs and we get serious trouble.
US research under such a scenario will continue at full speed with long-range bombers like the future B-52 and B-36 being promoted ahead of OTL, probably with the Lycoming XR-7755 being used in at least one of the two. Allied jet development will proceed but without German assistance will not be *quite* as fast, the output of the RB-44 Tay being roughly equivalent to the BMW 018. US intercontinental bombers may benefit from the additions of jet engines while Horten jet fighters appear as well. The new frontier will be altitude as each strives to go higher and higher. YB-35s may also appear briefly if only to see about giving high-speed bombers a chance to run the gamut. In all, the war map will look very different as may the weapons with which the war is fought. And without a Soviet Union the postwar world is going to look *radically* different.
Last edited:
Truman faces the same problem in 1945 that Roosevelt faced in 1942; politically he had to do something in the second half of 1945. Unfortunately there is little evidence that the "Big Six" in Japan cared about civilian life and suffering and like Kim in Korea they would live ok despite the blockade. The Manhattan Project could produce two or three bombs a month. They would have to be divided between German and Japanese targets. With Overlord still a dream I think German retaliation with chemical weapons was a real possibility,
Prisoner exchange would perhaps be the reason for a treaty. Now admittedly that happened in Korea but what if Hitler refused to agree without some sort of peace?
I doubt Hitler would care whether or not the peace with the WAllies was based off an official piece of paper or a simple unstated acceptance of German hegemony if the result was the same (Germany in control of Europe and able to carry out the Nazi Party’s sick and evil plans unbothered for decades).
I can imagine the surviving Soviet leadership (assuming Stalin dies) making a formal AANW style peace with the Reich in the event of defeat/collapse (though there is a chance they simply flee past the Urals and hope the Luftwaffe doesn’t start bombing) but the WAllies wouldn’t be under the same pressures so a formal peace isn’t as feasible as an unofficial cessation of hostilities.
Last edited:
Quick note
The Type 93 "Long Lance" was a 24"/610mm diameter weapon. The Japanese used the 21"/533mm Type 95 & Type 96 out of subs. Still a very impressive weapon. Unfortunately the Type 95/96 is ~two meters longer than the German weapons. They won't fit in the German tubes and even if the did they wouldn't fit in the storage racks.
May the Great Spaghetti Monster bless the Luftwaffe with the Horton wings. Flying wings in the pre fly-by-wire were really good places to kill pilots. Everything was great until they, just sort of out of the blue, went into falling leaf (divergent on all three axes) totally unrecoverable spins.
Ya, it's one of those little details that will drive you nuts. Like the Americans had three DIFFERENT sets of 5" naval shells during the war. The 5"/51 (found on the old battleships and as shore batteries) the 5"/25, (ALSO found on many on the same Old Battleships), and the 5"/38 (found all over the place) used different shells, with different weights and overall lengths. At the very end of the war when the Midway was commissioned with her 5"/54 guns it added a 4th different 5" shell.
There is more than one reason supply officers weep at their desks.
I think if Kai-shek is seen as the man who finally kicks the Japanese out (which still won't be easy as even if the Army of Manchuria is cut off from the home islands it's till large and well established in the area), then yes Mao will have support issues in china and as you say no USSR. It also means being comfortable with China likely taking control of Korea in some fashion.
TBH if the USSR falls in WW2 then communism might well be seen as a busted flush as a viable system.
If we did have some kind of ATL coldwar US vs. victorious Germany I suspect that fascism possibly filtered out to extreme nationalism would become the duelling alternative ideology to US capitalism (Which really would only be the US at that point).
I really should get to reading Calbear's TL!
Last edited:
thaddeus
Donor
was just reading an observation on another forum about the draining of trained manpower from the German AA flak to the Eastern Front, I did not see a good reference though?
does seem to me that some small improvement(s) in the accuracy of their flak network, starting with retention of their trained troops, is more of a threat to Allied bombing campaign than anything else? (more accurate personnel, more 128mm guns, the AA rockets might even be given priority over "vengeance weapons?")
not saying they could eliminate Allied bombing threat, the numbers of Allied aircraft and production capabilities have already been mentioned, just pointing out it was contested by more than rudimentary jets.
does seem to me that some small improvement(s) in the accuracy of their flak network, starting with retention of their trained troops, is more of a threat to Allied bombing campaign than anything else? (more accurate personnel, more 128mm guns, the AA rockets might even be given priority over "vengeance weapons?")
not saying they could eliminate Allied bombing threat, the numbers of Allied aircraft and production capabilities have already been mentioned, just pointing out it was contested by more than rudimentary jets.
That's pretty close, actually. The planned production rate was for 3 bombs per month in August, which was expected to rise to 5 bombs per month in November, and 7 bombs per month in December. In 1946, it could rise much higher ("increase decidedly in early 1946," in Groves' words).
Presumably, in a scenario like this, the U.S. would not only push bomb production to full throttle - they were clearly setting up for that by summer of '45 - but also would keep up research into higher yield fission and probably even multi-stage bombs...which would push up timeframes somewhat over what obtained in our timline, one should think. All of that, of course, was put on the backburner after the Japanese surrender, and really did not resume until the Soviets exploded their first bomb in '49.
Last edited:
Yep that's what I'm thinking, OTL further development was generally post war, here it's going to be in the context of an ongoing war. And TBH 10 fatmen per month is still pretty devastating. That development is also going be matched by development of nuclear capable bombers in an ongoing wartime context as well
I do get the point about early bombs not being nearly the same as 2-3 stage 50MT monsters later on. But even so just taking those comparisons Calbear brings up in Japan they are devastating enough to bring an whole new scope to the bombing campaign.
But for me the big advantage is not going to be how many square miles of Hamburg can you bounce the rubble of, in abstract. It's the fact that with the area of effect being large and intense you can now hit specific targets without being super accurate and be pretty sure of severely damaging them. Something conventional bombing could not reliably do.
Take for examples a rail hub, power station or large factory complex, i.e. a big diffuse target. Your big issues with conventional bombing is that conventional bombs are still inaccurate in terms of a bomb's effect being dropped too far away from any part of your target to matter, and your individual bombs are often not individually effective even when on target to effect long term such a big target. So you had to try and hit as many vital areas within a much larger target as many times as you can, all with a pretty inaccurate weapons (all while trying to survive doing so night after night). I.e. a big diffuse target like this tended to need not just a lot of planes dropping lots of bombs, but lots of planes on lots of nights dropping lots of bombs to do the job. That's not only a massive resource cost but a massive target itself for retaliation with potential of lots of loses of your own.
The other problem is as numerous as allied bombers were there were always more targets than you could devote large multiple nights of raids to hit. So in terms of hitting and long term effecting specific targets conventional bombs was well hit and miss. So yes if you got lucky you might take out your target with a raid, but a lot of the time a lot of bombs were dropped and either no significant damage was inflicted or the damage was repaired pretty quickly once the RAF and USAAF had to move on to the next target. This means that the idea of pinpointing individual factories, installations adn effectively hititng them etc was not that possible, and partly why they went with ok saturate the weaker targets targets i.e. cities in an attempt to destroy/disincentive the 'human manufacturing resources'
But even a 20kt fat man airburst has a 20PSI pressure wave with a 760m radius that will pretty much level all but the toughest structures and still render those few still standing unusable. Effects drop off after that but unless your rail hub, factory or power plant is all massively heavy concrete or stone structures you basically don't need to be anywhere near as accurate with one bomb and it's far more likely that your one bomb will have far most lasting effects. That's before we even get into the additional effects like the flash, thermal effects and radiation. Take the attack on Nagasaki fat man dropped 3km off the planned target, and yet The Nagasaki arsenal was completely destroyed and about 58 percent of the Mitsubishi Arms Plant was damaged, and about 78 percent of the Mitsubishi Steel Works (pp Wiki)
What this means is your range of targets that you can reasonably effect goes up, (even if you can't drop an atomic bomb on everything you might want to drop one on due to lack of bombs). This will now include an increased ability to hit support infrastructure not just for industry but for the armed forces. Consequently German AA will have to be spread out more to cover this wider range of targets.
On top of this the AA defence network for all these targets will also degrade, AA guns, airfields and hangers don't need to be at the centre of such blasts to be wrecked. Railway lines and marshalling depots moving stuff from those factories in conquered Russia to Germany will be destroyed.
Then there's the point that while you can in theory move manufacturing further and further east ahead of bombing ranges (although you have to keep doing that as ranges increase), but Germany is still Germany and even if Hitler and co are safe in some bunker somewhere the German state still has to function as a state. Otherwise it just becomes a disconnected mess. Especially as it's not just trying to run Germany but also trying to run a much larger Reich that really has no interest in being ruled by Germany without the threat of immediate force and direct control. There's also an ideological aspect of this. The theory of Aryan/Germanic supremacy doesn't look too clever if it's really just some slave factories and army division safe in the Urals while the Germanic homeland and the Volk is on fire,
Finally there is the effect on civilians. So OK we know that OTL no country surrendered only because a magic percentage of civilians were killed by conventional bombing campaigns. But a concerted atomic campaign is going to destroy far more houses, kill far more people, create far more internal refugees if it goes on for long. The pressures from that will only build (especially in conjunction with the reduced ability of the state to function above). Especially as this doesn't just have to be a functioning state, but a state that can maintain it's newly conquered empire, and secure its borders etc
tl;dr early atomic weapons are not a magic bullet that end all wars the moment one or two are dropped, but I can't see how any country especially one with a pretty centralised control structure within range can withstand a concerted atomic campaign (along with an ongoing conventional one). Especially if they have no warning of it beforehand and any attempt to develop the ability to resist it will have to be done during it. e.g. like building a hurricane shelter in in the middle of a hurricane
Last edited:
Nick P
Donor
As I see it Japan will fall by the end of 1945 pretty much as per OTL. They may get a few months extra if any of the German supplies or weapons plans are helpful to them. The USA was determined to get revenge for Pearl Harbor and they will have it.
If Germany is able to station more forces in France as a result of the USSR collapsing then D-Day is on indefinite hold.
In order to slow the increase of German forces in France then the invasion of Italy and Sicily must go ahead as a diversion in 1943 or 44. If these don't go ahead would Operation Dragoon (invading south of France) even be considered?
Turning the Med into an Allied lake becomes practical in 1945 as Japan collapses and Allied naval forces can be diverted into the only real combat area for them.
Restarting the Russian Front with major Allied support will be necessary to defeat Germany, if only to force them to keep many divisions east of Warsaw that would otherwise fight in France.
Ongoing guerilla war and Resistance attacks in occupied Russia, Ukraine, Belorussia will be supported. More drops to the Balkans too.
The Allies may delay D-Day by a year to increase the forces available to them, more landing sites and the extra shipping needed. Operation Dragoon might happen at the same time as Overlord to increase the immediate pressure.
Once Japan has fallen and the mopping up of their little Empire starts then there are a lot of Allied Army and Air Forces that can be moved into position against Germany. From what I can tell there are more ports with railways in China than Russia. The rails to Perm or Ekaterinburg are limited in capacity but there are other routes from the south mainly via Iran.
Without Normandy in 1944, Allied forces might be sent to reinforce North Africa and to secure Syria, Iraq, Iran and the oilfields. In turn this opens another route or two to supply the USSR with. Maybe a Georgian Mountain Front against Germany?
Could Turkey be persuaded by either side against neutrality?
Most concerning is morale in the Allied Forces. After several years away from home and family, often in dangerous and unsafe territory, many men will have had enough of an unending war. German troops are mostly within a day or two train ride from home. British and US soldiers have to spend several weeks on a ship or a quicker but risky plane ride over unforgiving mountains and wide oceans. This time cannot be allowed while they are needed for fighting.
If Germany is able to station more forces in France as a result of the USSR collapsing then D-Day is on indefinite hold.
In order to slow the increase of German forces in France then the invasion of Italy and Sicily must go ahead as a diversion in 1943 or 44. If these don't go ahead would Operation Dragoon (invading south of France) even be considered?
Turning the Med into an Allied lake becomes practical in 1945 as Japan collapses and Allied naval forces can be diverted into the only real combat area for them.
Restarting the Russian Front with major Allied support will be necessary to defeat Germany, if only to force them to keep many divisions east of Warsaw that would otherwise fight in France.
Ongoing guerilla war and Resistance attacks in occupied Russia, Ukraine, Belorussia will be supported. More drops to the Balkans too.
The Allies may delay D-Day by a year to increase the forces available to them, more landing sites and the extra shipping needed. Operation Dragoon might happen at the same time as Overlord to increase the immediate pressure.
Once Japan has fallen and the mopping up of their little Empire starts then there are a lot of Allied Army and Air Forces that can be moved into position against Germany. From what I can tell there are more ports with railways in China than Russia. The rails to Perm or Ekaterinburg are limited in capacity but there are other routes from the south mainly via Iran.
Without Normandy in 1944, Allied forces might be sent to reinforce North Africa and to secure Syria, Iraq, Iran and the oilfields. In turn this opens another route or two to supply the USSR with. Maybe a Georgian Mountain Front against Germany?
Could Turkey be persuaded by either side against neutrality?
Most concerning is morale in the Allied Forces. After several years away from home and family, often in dangerous and unsafe territory, many men will have had enough of an unending war. German troops are mostly within a day or two train ride from home. British and US soldiers have to spend several weeks on a ship or a quicker but risky plane ride over unforgiving mountains and wide oceans. This time cannot be allowed while they are needed for fighting.
The political problem isn't quite to that level since there's no national election in 1945 like there was in 1942. You are right though that there is a political calculus in play.
On the flip side, Truman and the Democrats got rocked in the '46 midterms despite the war ending a year earlier so there's probably not much more the Democrats can lose in a scenario where the war goes on longer and the public blames them for it. Only so many non-safe seats after all, even in those less gerrymandered times.
There's also a good chance that if the war continues to/through 1946 there's not the huge wave of strikes in 1946 and the price control fiasco, both of which added to Truman's unpopularity back home.
GOP went +12 in the Senate and +55(!) in the House, winning both chambers narrowly. Entirely possible that if the USA stays on a war footing longer Truman (and by extension the Democrats) are more popular nationally, lessening the losses somewhat and keeping one/both chambers Democratic. That being said the bill is coming due politically sooner or later and Truman and Co know that.
There are a number of other issues regarding actual delivery of the weapon (I've posted them a number of times, as have others, so I'll save everyone the need to read them again, unless someone wants me to lay them out) that are serious negative indicators.
Why delay D-day or have it at all in this case?
Keep FUSAG right across the channel and keep tons of Germans parked in Normandy, push into southern France and perhaps the Balkans from bases in Libya et al. Germany gets taken from the South, her Normandy divisions cut off from the wrong side of the Rhine and isolated to the beaches as soon as the hedgerow country begins.
Keep FUSAG right across the channel and keep tons of Germans parked in Normandy, push into southern France and perhaps the Balkans from bases in Libya et al. Germany gets taken from the South, her Normandy divisions cut off from the wrong side of the Rhine and isolated to the beaches as soon as the hedgerow country begins.
I disagree on how fast the US can ramp up A-bomb production. In OTL the US didn't go all out to ramp up A-bomb production after Japan surrendered. In TTL it is going to continue full speed ahead. After all one A-bomb will have been proven to be as powerful as 1,000 bombers. The number of available A-bombs will be considerably greater in TTL 1946 than OTL. I would also assume the H-bomb is invented sooner as the US is again going to go all out to increase the power of the bomb. The budget will be higher which should speed up a year or two.
The issue of atomic bombs being used against Germany without the USSR was discussed thoroughly in these threads.
In short successfully using them against Germany would be difficult and there’s no reason to think that actually hitting them with nuclear weapons would be a magic bullet considering how formidable the Reich would be and how fanatical the Nazi leadership was (IOTL Hitler wasn’t fazed by Dresden and refused to surrender when the Red Army was within a mile of his bunker). Comparing 1945 Japan to TTL’s Über Germany is like comparing a 98 pound crackhead to Mike Tyson in his prime. They’re completely different threats.
Defeating a continental power requires a tremendously costly ground campaign (as WW1/WW2 demonstrates) and can’t be pulled off with only first generation nuclear weapons. There’s no way the WAllies can defeat Germany without an ocean of blood and treasure and years of intense fighting.
ObssesedNuker summed it up perfectly:
In short successfully using them against Germany would be difficult and there’s no reason to think that actually hitting them with nuclear weapons would be a magic bullet considering how formidable the Reich would be and how fanatical the Nazi leadership was (IOTL Hitler wasn’t fazed by Dresden and refused to surrender when the Red Army was within a mile of his bunker). Comparing 1945 Japan to TTL’s Über Germany is like comparing a 98 pound crackhead to Mike Tyson in his prime. They’re completely different threats.
Defeating a continental power requires a tremendously costly ground campaign (as WW1/WW2 demonstrates) and can’t be pulled off with only first generation nuclear weapons. There’s no way the WAllies can defeat Germany without an ocean of blood and treasure and years of intense fighting.
ObssesedNuker summed it up perfectly:
Last edited: