Not very different, the Germans could never build enough Sam´s to stop the Bomber offensive, let alone all the tactical Jabo´s. The best comparison would be the bombing campaign in vietnam, A few point defences (Berlin, Fuel, etc) vs. a growing electronic warfare. If the Allies would be willing to pay the price, those sites could be destroyed. (aka. Linebacker I & II).
 
Like with the Fritz X and other guided weapons how long would it be before the allies with their significantly greater scientific capacity found a reliable way to jam them?
 
Not very different, the Germans could never build enough Sam´s to stop the Bomber offensive, let alone all the tactical Jabo´s. The best comparison would be the bombing campaign in vietnam, A few point defences (Berlin, Fuel, etc) vs. a growing electronic warfare. If the Allies would be willing to pay the price, those sites could be destroyed. (aka. Linebacker I & II).
While not enough SAMs could be built to totally stop the offensive, enough could be built that Allied bombers could be forced to fly low.
 
I think you are not only talking about getting a much better SAM than the Wasserfall would ever be, but also getting it in much bigger numbers and earlier than the OTL Wasserfall would ever have been available in.

Assuming no equal and opposite changes in the allies It's going to be make big difference but more importantly you are clearly talking about a considerably better off Nazi Germany than OTL, and I suspect that's going to be an (even) bigger deal.

Radar jamming tech would be a big deal.
 
Last edited:
IOTL the Third Reich had a program to build SAMs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasserfall
How would WW2 be different is this system was operational, reliable, of similar quality to the S-25, and mass produced by January 1st, 1942.

Considering they were optically guided (IE the operator had to steer the missile manually guiding it with his Mk.1 Eyeball) they wouldn’t have been very successful. Especially once the Allies started jamming the radio command links.
 
Like with the Fritz X and other guided weapons how long would it be before the allies with their significantly greater scientific capacity found a reliable way to jam them?
The technology was widely available at the beginning of the war... the Remington-Rand electric razor.

US was very cautious on its use of VT fuzes because they were so easy to defeat. The leading German proximity technologies were electrostatic charge based, I believe. Once this principle is figured out, counter measures would be simple.
 
Last edited:
IOTL the Third Reich had a program to build SAMs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasserfall
How would WW2 be different is this system was operational, reliable, of similar quality to the S-25, and mass produced by January 1st, 1942.
To be frank, nothing that the Third Reich designed and built comes anywhere close to fitting the requirements of being operational, reliable, and mass producible. If they were lucky they got two. Often it was one. The actual likely outcome is they cost ten times as much as the S-25, work maybe half the time, and can only be produced in limited quantities.
 
Considering they were optically guided (IE the operator had to steer the missile manually guiding it with his Mk.1 Eyeball) they wouldn’t have been very successful. Especially once the Allies started jamming the radio command links.
And without a proximity fuse they'd be pretty useless.
 
You want to basically move technology ahead 13 years? Not just Electronics for the guidance system but the rocket itself as you want this in production about 2 years before they get a somewhat dependable V-2.
Good luck with that
 
You want to basically move technology ahead 13 years? Not just Electronics for the guidance system but the rocket itself as you want this in production about 2 years before they get a somewhat dependable V-2.
Good luck with that
Just want to see what the consequences would be.
 

thaddeus

Donor
think 1942 would be out of the question, maybe some version of the Wasserfall concept by early 1944? it certainly would be a more realistic project than the V-2, in terms of objective and their own resources.
 
To be frank, nothing that the Third Reich designed and built comes anywhere close to fitting the requirements of being operational, reliable, and mass producible.
That's a little strong. Yes, Nazi Germany put a lot of effort into "sexy" stuff that failed one (or more) of those tests: the Tiger, the Panther, the Me-262, the He-177, the 88mm Flak 41, the "Gustav" cannon, the "Narvik" class destroyers, and any number of failed projects . But the bulk of German war equipment was OK. (And most of it was designed after 1933, including essentially all the aircraft and tanks.)

What was wrong with:

  • Ju-88
  • Me-109
  • MP40
  • Pz III
  • 88mm Flak 36 and 37
  • Nebelwerfer

to name a few items the Germans produced in large numbers and used effectively without any notable diffculties, AFAIK?
 
What was wrong with:

  • Ju-88
  • Me-109
  • MP40
  • Pz III
  • 88mm Flak 36 and 37
  • Nebelwerfer
It is good list, for example British SAS used MP-40 up until mid 1960s, in that era they already had M16 assault rifles, and Norwegian military used it up until circa 1995. The only piece of equipment, what is somewhat debatable, is Bf-109 and not as flying machine, but as a plane to land - the narrow track landing gear was tricky and dangerous for inexperienced pilots. If the list would contain not a Bf-109 , but a Fw-190, what was also produced in large numbers (over 20 thousand planes), then it would be a great list.
 

McPherson

Banned
Not enough of them.
Tail control, landing gear, weak fuselage barrel, landing gear, and Willy Messerschmidt.
Bullet dispersion.
Not enough of them.
  • 88mm Flak 36 and 37
Not enough of them.
  • Nebelwerfer
No VT fusing in the warheads?
 
What was wrong with:

  • Ju-88
  • Me-109
  • MP40
  • Pz III
  • 88mm Flak 36 and 37
  • Nebelwerfer
Large number is rather debatable here. For instance the Pz. 3 had only a bit over 5000 built. If you add on the 8ish thousand Pz 4s that were built the entire lifetime production only comes about a thousand higher than the production T-34s. In 1942.

But sure, I’m exaggerating (slightly) but what the OP is talking about isn’t some decent plane or tank. Or even gun. It’s a wunderwaffen. A design that wouldn’t even exist for a decade after the war. It’s not going to be one of the exceptions.
 
Last edited:
This isn't just moving the goalposts, it's replacing the goalposts with a basketball net or an archery target.

[said re Ju-88] Not enough of them.
The criteria were "operational, reliable, and mass-producible." 15,183 looks like "mass producible" to me,. Of course, not "mass-producible by Germany in quantities sufficient to overcome the combined industrial power of the USSR, the British Empire and Commonwealth, and the United States." Which is what "enough" would have to be.

[said re Me-109] Tail control, landing gear, weak fuselage barrel, landing gear, and Willy Messerschmidt.
"Operational and reliable", not "flawless;y designed".
[said re MP40] Bullet dispersion.
See above.
[said re Pz III] Not enough of them.
See above.
[said re 88mm Flak...] Not enough of them.
See above.
[said re Nebelwerfer] No VT fusing in the warheads?
See above.

A lot of Allied war production would fail to meet these "enhanced" requirements. Soviet tanks broke down regularly, The M4 Sherman was an undergunned and underarmored. The SB2C was miserable to fly. The Marines threw M50 Reising SMGs into rivers. Etc. And there were never enough... lots of things
 
Maybe if they make rocketry a priority even before the fall of the Waimar Republik to replace heavy AA and field artillery, circumventing the Versailles treaty.
 
Top