Luftwaffe uses French aircraft after June 1940?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Hmm... well now that i see where this goes, perhaps they might be made more useful, but still the lack of proper armour like Hs-129 is a big drawback, even the Hs-129 were taking heavy losses to soviet flak. If you uparmour the Potez or Breguet or even the Bloch-175 to something similar to the Hs-129 though they too will become pigs to fly, so the only advantage will remain in having a rear gunner.
The HS129 was pretty vulnerable from 1943 on, so being armored was no special asset, it just made the target slower. The Germans figured out it was more viable to do tank busting from 1943 on from their side of the lines against breakthroughs, so having a faster attack aircraft where ground and air defenses aren't so great is just as viable without the Hs129 as with. In 1941-42 though when Soviet air defenses were nil they'd be highly useful.

Bingo - I'm all for an earlier no-nonsense tank-buster.
Which my friend is why I suggested center-line mounting 30mm/37mm autocannons. In 1941-42 they'd be pretty ideal for it given the opposition in the East.
 
...

for the record, most produced French aircrafts of 1940 were Potez 630 and MS-406, a thousand of them in both case.
So it wasn't as if they were 5000 fighters or bombers to be taken over by the Luftwaffe. A large chunk of the French Air force was either obsolete or shot down (for the most modern types) or american types.

By the spring of 1940 the French aircraft industry had been reorganized & retooled. it was on the edge of a massive production run. Exactly which types & numbers I'm unsure of.

Should have had existing sources in place.
Makes more sense to keep an intact factory producing than shipping material a long distance away for an untested design.

Keep making LeO 451-01s

Hypothetically The Germans could have taken advantage of the capabiliy of the French aircraft industry as it stood in may 1940. But...

>Portions had been damaged/sabatoged when the factories were over run in May and June. This was particularly the case in the subcontractors level where plants making things like wheels, instruments, electrical motors/generators, tubes, electric wire, ect...

>A portion of the feed stock for the components had been contracted from the US. Extruded aluminum stock to be fashioned into frame, or rolls of sheet aluminum, or copper stock for extruding electric wire were a few items. Replacement for those sources would have to be found, which did not take away from other essential production, and for which a period of retooling would be required.

>This previous overlaps into raw materials. France neither had a mass of Aluminum ingots lying about ready for use, there was some, but not several years, or even a years worth; nor did Germany had a massive supply from elsewhere. Given a finite supply of aluminum the net increase from French production is not going to be significant since sending the stuff to French plants reduces it to German plants.

>Prevent the random looting by German industry in the summer - winter 1940. This was condoned up to the highest levels including Goering who controled large swaths of German industry. To prevent this you need to have a clear policy ready before France falls & the will to execute it. That is the Germans must plan for a event they did not expect, and nazis must stop being nazis.

>French production goals depended on ethusiastic workers doing their patriotic best. Thats unlikely when working for the Germans. There are also questions of labor cost. In the winter of 1940-41 the German reich & occupied zones were already experiencing food shortages, stringent rationing, and scarce consumer essentials. The nazis were busy rewarding the favored Germans by ensuring Europes remaining goodies went to them. To keep the French labor force compensated a hefty portion of the declining stocks of stuff has to remain in France & good Germans do without.

>Following on that is the problem of the not inconsiderable number of leftists in the French labor force remaining reliable after 22 June 41. Production slowdowns & sabatoge are inevitable.

I'm guessing the autum & winter of 1940 is spent reviving partial production in French factories. This means a decline in German production vs OTL during 1940 & early 41. In 1941 there is a small rise in aircraft delivered to the German AF over that of OTL, but nothing spectacular. That runs its course & given the finite supply of aluminum and key alloys then production in 1942 is no better than OTL.

So are the French aircraft really good enough to justify any of this? Or would it be better to use the French industry to make parts for German designs?
 

Deleted member 1487

So are the French aircraft really good enough to justify any of this? Or would it be better to use the French industry to make parts for German designs?
Compared to the Hs129? Yep. 1000 or so aircraft using existing French designs from 1940 would fill a need in German aviation and actually save them having to set up a specialized line and retrain workers to make a new aircraft.
 
Though with the Communists sabotaging things from 1939 to 1940, that really didn't occur anyway

I've sen different numbers for communist sabatoge. The worst claims seem to come from right wing military leaders, the guys who blamed the defeat on everything but their decisions. The factory managers claimed less, perhaps because it reflected on their managerial ability. tho some may have used communist sabatoge as a excuse for failing to meet goals.
 

Deleted member 1487

Were 1000 HS129 built???
865. I'm just saying 1000 would have been plenty for that ground attack role using French aircraft, especially if available in 1941 and only used in Russia through 1944. IOTL as it was the French built some 4-5000 aircraft for the Germans anyway and if there are savings from not building 865 Hs129s that could mean more on the existing Bre 693/Potez 63 lines. Probably the Breguet aircraft though would be better for ground attack.

What is your source for the previous claims about American supply chains for France and sabotage of factories?

I've sen different numbers for communist sabatoge. The worst claims seem to come from right wing military leaders, the guys who blamed the defeat on everything but their decisions. The factory managers claimed less, perhaps because it reflected on their managerial ability. tho some may have used communist sabatoge as a excuse for failing to meet goals.
Wikipedia seems to support this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histo...ore_Operation_Barbarossa_.281939-June_1941.29
Domestically, the PCF led anti-war actions, but although the party published pacifist propaganda for soldiers they stopped short of inciting desertion. The role of the PCF in alleged sabotage operations, against armaments plants, has been a point of debate among historians. In 1951, A. Rossi listed a number of sabotage operations initiated by the PCF against armaments factories throughout France,[9] but later historians have downplayed the PCF's role in any such actions, stating that they were isolated cases.[10]
 

Deleted member 1487

Examples?
How do you mean? It was faster, lighter, and had the same bomb load as the Potez aircraft, same with the HS129, but then it was less well armored. It was a faster, smaller Ju87 with smaller bomb load and twin engines, but longer range and potential for better forward strafing armament. With the G-R 18N it might have been pretty solid:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breguet_693
Intended as a pre-prototype for the Breguet 700 C2 heavy fighter. Powered by Gnome-Rhône 14N-48/Gnome-Rhône 14N-49 engines which offered 50% more power than the 14M, the Bre 697 prototype displayed a sensational rate of climb, and was as fast as a Bf 109E. The Bre 700 was expected to offer even higher speed and would have been very heavily armed.
 
It seems like folks here are ignoring the fundamental realities in place in terms of utilizing conquered Western industrial resources.

Energy.

Germany in WW2 was an energy starved empire desperately trying to utilize whatever scraps it could find. France/Belgium/Netherlands at this time all imported the majority of their energy needs from abroad (The US,UK, Caribbean/South America, East Indies, and the Middle East) none of which the Germans had easy access to. By conquering Western Europe Germany acquired vast stored resources but little in terms of production capacity. The alliance with Italy actually made it even worse as it added yet another energy consumer to the system. Germany realized that it was better to direct what resources it had to it's own production rather then try to stretch them across a much larger industrial system.

In terms of captured aircraft, vehicles, weaponry, and material Germany also did the smart thing by modifying and adopting some of what they had captured (Mostly artillery and logistical support), using certain gear in second line anti partisan units and selling or giving the rest to it's poorer allies. Countries like Bulgaria/Romania/Hungary/Finland all needed and demanded advanced weaponry and lots of it and giving them captured Western gear made sense.
 

Deleted member 1487

Take this as a potential outsized effect of having a dedicated ground attack aircraft as of June 22nd 1941 courtesy of the French:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Raseiniai
The Germans had total air superiority, yet a Soviet Mechanized Corps held them up for 4 days with some motley crew of barely prepared AFVs, though including T-34s and KV-2s including the famous lone KV that held up 6th Panzer division for over 24 hours. It knocked out multiple AT weapons that were brought up against it. There was no Luftwaffe support available to help them; having a dedicated ground support Gruppe of say 30 French Bre 693s and/or Potez 630s would have smashed them at leisure and saved days worth of time. Plus they would have been pretty helpful against retreating Soviet troops pulling back into Estonia, as the Soviet 8th army ended up holding the German 18th army up until September in some places and gave the retreating NKVD destroyer battalions time to wreck the Estonia shale oil industry and several other critical bits of infrastructure. Having dedicated air support early on would have had some significant knock on effects in the North even with logistics issues.

It seems like folks here are ignoring the fundamental realities in place in terms of utilizing conquered Western industrial resources.

Energy.

Germany in WW2 was an energy starved empire desperately trying to utilize whatever scraps it could find. France/Belgium/Netherlands at this time all imported the majority of their energy needs from abroad (The US,UK, Caribbean/South America, East Indies, and the Middle East) none of which the Germans had easy access to. By conquering Western Europe Germany acquired vast stored resources but little in terms of production capacity. The alliance with Italy actually made it even worse as it added yet another energy consumer to the system. Germany realized that it was better to direct what resources it had to it's own production rather then try to stretch them across a much larger industrial system.

In terms of captured aircraft, vehicles, weaponry, and material Germany also did the smart thing by modifying and adopting some of what they had captured (Mostly artillery and logistical support), using certain gear in second line anti partisan units and selling or giving the rest to it's poorer allies. Countries like Bulgaria/Romania/Hungary/Finland all needed and demanded advanced weaponry and lots of it and giving them captured Western gear made sense.
Not really an issue in France until around 1942-43. As it was those factories were producing thousands of aircraft for the Germans in the meantime anyway, the bigger issue was controlling French labor better and committing the necessary raw material inputs to make it happen. In terms of coal France had enough to run their society for the most part, they just were starved of oil. Had they made the choice they could have exploited French industry more to make say 1000 more French ground attack aircraft like the Bre 693, as they historically either had or had the French make more G-R 14M engines for the HS129. The Bre 693 was about the same weight as the Hs129, so for that it would be a shift of materials to France to make them, as the production line was already set up, the labor was there, and the Germans wouldn't need to retool the Henschel production line for it. Plus there is the added bonus of having them earlier and having a faster aircraft to boot.
 
Seems to me that the Germans were particularly bothered by Soviet partisan formations operating in their rear during most of the war, enough so that they continued to operate such anachronisms as armored trains. They formed numerous small and medium size security units, many substantially armed with captured/surrendered equipment. Makes you wonder if maybe a "colonial air force" type of operation with French aircraft for these areas would have been useful. Catch-as-catch-can armament, cannibalization for spares...doesn't have to be pretty.
 

Archibald

Banned
I repeat it, replacing the HS-129 with Potez 631 is a very, bery bad idea. If only because the Potez has zero armor.

Also, Vichy France wanted the aircraft industry to keep their best engineers, at any cost. The French aircraft industry found itself with design bureaus dreaming of advanced machines while the production line nearby build servitude aircrafts for the Luftwaffe.

Wiking,
I think you would better get ride of Vichy altogether - no free zone from 1940, fully occupited territory. that way the Nazis could loot more aircrafts, plants, engineers, and tooling. As bizarre as it seems there were some internal reluctance from Vichy to surrender the whole industry to the nazis. Fact is France had made a hugely costly rearmement effort from 1938 and even Vichy didn't wanted those investments to go to waste.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

I repeat it, replacing the HS-129 with Potez 631 is a very, bery bad idea. If only because the Potez has zero armor.

Also, Vichy France wanted the aircraft industry to keep their best engineers, at any cost. The French aircraft industry found itself with design bureaus dreaming of advanced machines while the production line nearby build servitude aircrafts for the Luftwaffe.

Wiking,
I think you would better get ride of Vichy altogether - no free zone from 1940, fully occupited territory. that way the Nazis could loot more aircrafts, plants, engineers, and tooling. As bizarre as it seems there were some internal reluctance from Vichy to surrender the whole industry to the nazis. Fact is France had made a hugely costly rearmement effort from 1938 and even Vichy didn't wanted those investments to go to waste.
Hs129 had unarmored engines and was frequently felled by rifle bullets. It's armored tub wasn't really useful when it was so vulnerable to ground fire as it was, so it offered no real benefit there, was delayed, underpowered, and cost more because the Germans had to spend money to build up a special line in Germany for it. The French could keep their best engineers if producing aircraft for Germany in France.
Do you have any idea how much the occupation of Vichy cost the Germans from 1942 on? Vichy from 1940-42 saved Germany heaps of trouble AND the problem of the war continuing in North Africa.
 

Deleted member 1487

didn't the A.K wase send to North Africa in February 1941, nearly two years before vichy France was invaded ?
To fight Britain alone. Not to fight Britain and French North Africa, who would have rolled over Italian Libya and force the Germans to send troops to defend Italy from the combined Franco-Brits. Beyond that they'd also lose the ability to stop British convoys through the Mediterranean, which IOTL prior to May 1943 cost them millions of tons of shipping per year in detours around Africa
 
Hs129 had unarmored engines and was frequently felled by rifle bullets.

The Breguet and Potez had the same unarmored engines, so your solution is to add the unarmored fuselage to the mix so that additional rifle bullets can enter the little pink bodies of highly trained German pilots, saving 800 kgs of weight. The Japanese did the same thing. The French lost about half of their Breguets, which were not single-seaters.
 

Deleted member 1487

The Breguet and Potez had the same unarmored engines, so your solution is to add the unarmored fuselage to the mix so that additional rifle bullets can enter the little pink bodies of highly trained German pilots, saving 800 kgs of weight. The Japanese did the same thing. The French lost about half of their Breguets, which were not single-seaters.
Right, so they were no more vulnerable. Plus they were armored against some ground fire, just not as much as the Hs129. Plus they were quite a bit faster, so harder to hit. For the low and slow Hs129 it needed that armored fuselage. For ground attack you can use less well trained pilots on an abbreviated program, the Bre 693 was deigned to be easy to fly and suffered it's historical losses to fighters and the heaps of German ground fire in 1940 which was a problem for all Allied aircraft. The Soviets did not develop that level of ground fire ability until 1944-45 (arguably in some cases in 1943, but not for a rapid advance). Plus they were faster, no less armored, and just as capable as the Ju87. With G-R 14N engines they might be comparable to the Bf110 and with 14R engines the Potez might be like a ME210C with better flight characteristics.
 

Archibald

Banned
Plus they were armored against some ground fire, just not as much as the Hs129

no they weren't, armor was quite miserable, to the delight of the crews flying those death trap into flak nests in Belgium.
 

Deleted member 1487

no they weren't, armor was quite miserable, to the delight of the crews flying those death trap into flak nests in Belgium.
Compared to armored tubs, sure. But can you prove it was any more vulnerable to than anything but a Sturmovik (also lost in appalling numbers)? They were a brand new aircraft and the French were just working out tactics with them, they weren't ready to face massed 20mm autocannon AAA, and they were also facing Luftwaffe air superiority. Plus were the loss rates to ground fire any worse than the Ju87? And again what is the issue in the East in 1941-42?
 
Top