Munich Shuffle: 1938-1942
- Thread starter Garrison
- Start date
Reading about the Germans trying to learn carrier ops would be hilarious, especially given some of the aircraft they were using.
I'm now trying to imagine a B-17 with dive breaks trying to dive bomb a factory. I suspect either the stress of pulling out would damage the flight surfaces and stress the wings and wing roots the to the extent the wings could fall off, or the dive would have to be so shallow that it may as well be horizontal bombing.
Either way, the idea of nosing a heavy bomber into a dive like a JU-87 or a JU-88 is just amusing.
Did The Whale has Wings finish and put it into service to be sunk by the Royal Navy? (Okay, that timeline had an earlier and different point of departure, and everyone else looked at what the British were doing and said to themselves 'maybe we need some of that' as far as I recall. Or at least some of them. I think the IJN had more ships...)
" Look at all our returning fighters showing no sign of damage from those supposed Englander cannons."
An excerpt about survivor bias from the Wikipedia article describing Abraham Wald's work and including this diagram.
"The damaged portions of returning planes show locations where they can sustain damage and still return home; those hit in other places presumedly do not survive. (Image shows hypothetical data.)
During World War II, the statistician Abraham Wald took survivorship bias into his calculations when considering how to minimize bomber losses to enemy fire.[16] The Statistical Research Group (SRG) at Columbia University, which Wald was a part of, examined the damage done to aircraft that had returned from missions and recommended adding armor to the areas that showed the least damage. This contradicted the US military's conclusion that the most-hit areas of the plane needed additional armor.[17][18][19] Wald noted that the military only considered the aircraft that had survived their missions – ignoring any bombers that had been shot down or otherwise lost, and thus also been rendered unavailable for assessment. The bullet holes in the returning aircraft represented areas where a bomber could take damage and still fly well enough to return safely to base. Therefore, Wald proposed that the Navy reinforce areas where the returning aircraft were unscathed,[16]: 88 inferring that planes hit in those areas were the ones most likely to be lost. His work is considered seminal in the then-nascent discipline of operational research.[20]"
Last edited:
Garrison
Donor
I would have to reread it because I can't remember, it was such a good TL and I wish it had been given an ending.
It's amazing how things like this seems so obvious, after someone else works it out." Look at all our returning fighters showing no sign of damage from those supposed Englander cannons."
An excerpt about survivor bias from the Wikipedia article describing Abraham Wald's work and including this diagram.
"The damaged portions of returning planes show locations where they can sustain damage and still return home; those hit in other places presumedly do not survive. (Image shows hypothetical data.)
During World War II, the statistician Abraham Wald took survivorship bias into his calculations when considering how to minimize bomber losses to enemy fire.[16] The Statistical Research Group (SRG) at Columbia University, which Wald was a part of, examined the damage done to aircraft that had returned from missions and recommended adding armor to the areas that showed the least damage. This contradicted the US military's conclusion that the most-hit areas of the plane needed additional armor.[17][18][19] Wald noted that the military only considered the aircraft that had survived their missions – ignoring any bombers that had been shot down or otherwise lost, and thus also been rendered unavailable for assessment. The bullet holes in the returning aircraft represented areas where a bomber could take damage and still fly well enough to return safely to base. Therefore, Wald proposed that the Navy reinforce areas where the returning aircraft were unscathed,[16]: 88 inferring that planes hit in those areas were the ones most likely to be lost. His work is considered seminal in the then-nascent discipline of operational research.[20]"
Another cool update Garrison. 
Another reason the Focke-Wulf Fw-190 didn't replace the Me-109 was because it's performance fell off severely at higher altitudes where the Me-109's did not and as the war progressed air combat was taking place at higher and higher altitudes especially in regards to strategic bombing.
Say what you will of the Me-109 but even at the end of the war when the Allies had total air supremacy, Me-109's were still shooting down the latest Allied fighter designs but this was more due to Germany having some of the most experienced fighter pilots of the war although they were few and fewer in numbers as the war progressed.
I'm a big Luftwaffe buff so I had to chime in with that.
Question, were fewer German fighter pilots lost ITTL's version of the BoB?
Another reason the Focke-Wulf Fw-190 didn't replace the Me-109 was because it's performance fell off severely at higher altitudes where the Me-109's did not and as the war progressed air combat was taking place at higher and higher altitudes especially in regards to strategic bombing.
Say what you will of the Me-109 but even at the end of the war when the Allies had total air supremacy, Me-109's were still shooting down the latest Allied fighter designs but this was more due to Germany having some of the most experienced fighter pilots of the war although they were few and fewer in numbers as the war progressed.
I'm a big Luftwaffe buff so I had to chime in with that.
Question, were fewer German fighter pilots lost ITTL's version of the BoB?
Excellent as always, Garrison.
It is simply mind boggling that a people with a reputation for efficiency could have such a mess of war time production and projects. This only reinforces my earlier comment that in the Munich Shuffle timeline’s perspective our actual WW2 history would be an unrealistic Naziwank.
Göring… reliable as ever I see. I’m surprised Hitler in OTL simply didn’t sack him to the point of being mainly a ceremonial leader and left the Luftwaffe to operate under different leadership (Milch or Kesselring), especially after the Luftwaffe’s inability to supply Stalingrad despite his boasts that it could.
I’m curious if Hess will have his fly to Britain incident here. Could be he tries but there’s mechanical failure or he is stopped or delayed by guards. Or he decides to simply not do it. Would Hess, other than being a public speaker to represent a withdrawn Hitler (in the final year/months of the war) would he even have a shot at a possible leadership struggle? It’ll still likely be Himmler but it’d be nice to have an unusual choice for someone trying to take over. Perhaps leads a Flensburg like government in the final weeks.
It is simply mind boggling that a people with a reputation for efficiency could have such a mess of war time production and projects. This only reinforces my earlier comment that in the Munich Shuffle timeline’s perspective our actual WW2 history would be an unrealistic Naziwank.
Göring… reliable as ever I see. I’m surprised Hitler in OTL simply didn’t sack him to the point of being mainly a ceremonial leader and left the Luftwaffe to operate under different leadership (Milch or Kesselring), especially after the Luftwaffe’s inability to supply Stalingrad despite his boasts that it could.
I’m curious if Hess will have his fly to Britain incident here. Could be he tries but there’s mechanical failure or he is stopped or delayed by guards. Or he decides to simply not do it. Would Hess, other than being a public speaker to represent a withdrawn Hitler (in the final year/months of the war) would he even have a shot at a possible leadership struggle? It’ll still likely be Himmler but it’d be nice to have an unusual choice for someone trying to take over. Perhaps leads a Flensburg like government in the final weeks.
I would assume so due to the shorter length.Another cool update Garrison.
Another reason the Focke-Wulf Fw-190 didn't replace the Me-109 was because it's performance fell off severely at higher altitudes where the Me-109's did not and as the war progressed air combat was taking place at higher and higher altitudes especially in regards to strategic bombing.
Say what you will of the Me-109 but even at the end of the war when the Allies had total air supremacy, Me-109's were still shooting down the latest Allied fighter designs but this was more due to Germany having some of the most experienced fighter pilots of the war although they were few and fewer in numbers as the war progressed.
I'm a big Luftwaffe buff so I had to chime in with that.
Question, were fewer German fighter pilots lost ITTL's version of the BoB?
Actually they had a solution to the ME-110 problem but Willie and the Nazi bureacracy killed it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_187_Falke
Maybe they'll sell the GZ to the Japanese, Italians or even the Soviets to clear the ship from its moorings.
She was incomplete at the beginning of the war.
Not sure if she was in a state to be moved etc although she was launched in Dec 1938 but if it had not been done by Aug at the earliest then it isn't happening
They can't sell it to Japan or Italy, because it would never get there, and both would know it.
I agree. My aeronautical engineering is weak, but I understand that the hard part is making a big plane strong enough to pull up without breaking. Personally I find it surprising that the Ju88 could survive it, and truly wonder at the people who looked at the He 177 and thought "Hey, a dive bomber!"
I read recently that while the British were not noted for their dive bombers, Swordfish, Albacores and Battles could do very steep dives, though more like 70 or so degrees than the near-vertical approach of a true dive bomber. It's amazing what string and canvas can tolerate (even if some of the string was actually steel cables).
Sell it to the Soviets then, sell them on the idea of a mostly complete CV and have the ship handed over to the Soviet Navy and then when Operation Barbarossa is underway carrier either is present for the siege of Leningrad or it is elsewhere like off in the Pacific
Garrison
Donor
Overall lower losses there, somewhat offset by the longer campaign in France and the introduction of cannon armed fighters that meant planes were less likely to limp home, though by the time the cannons arrive the Luftwaffe is mostly operating by night.Another cool update Garrison.
Another reason the Focke-Wulf Fw-190 didn't replace the Me-109 was because it's performance fell off severely at higher altitudes where the Me-109's did not and as the war progressed air combat was taking place at higher and higher altitudes especially in regards to strategic bombing.
Say what you will of the Me-109 but even at the end of the war when the Allies had total air supremacy, Me-109's were still shooting down the latest Allied fighter designs but this was more due to Germany having some of the most experienced fighter pilots of the war although they were few and fewer in numbers as the war progressed.
I'm a big Luftwaffe buff so I had to chime in with that.
Question, were fewer German fighter pilots lost ITTL's version of the BoB?
Hess is a good question, but I think given the different strategic position I suspect he may stay in Berlin and frankly if he does try it with the RAF being in a stronger position his chances of surviving are slim.
This would be logical, problem is that Raeder is afraid if he does anything like that it will open the door for the rest of his surface ships to go the same way.
German logic after Operation Judgement: "What the British can do, we can do better. Finish GZ, sortie with Bismarck & Tirpitz, soften up the British fleet at Scapa Flow by airattack and finish them off with the battleships."