Operation Pike in April 1940

First better take in consideration that at the time the Red Army and Air Force performance was way way way less than stellar, Stalin purge and general mismanagement' had their consequences. Vichy and Italy will have difficulty to collaborate with each other image with the URSS as it will weaken their reason d'etre and Benny declare war and meaning being an ally (even unofficial) of Stalin it's a big big no.
The purge didn't have much effect on the Soviet performance against Japan in 1939. Anyone looks weak against the ubermensch Germans and Finlanders. Even the Soviets would have eventually crushed Finland but Stalin was rightly worried about foreign intervention and settled early. The members of the Axis were opportunists more motivated by territorial aggrandizement and redistribution European imperial holdings, than ideology. I don't think there would be a problem with Italy allying with Soviets. Italy was just as willing to join a war against Germany if the rewards were great enough and Italy thought they could win. Spain and Japan would also be willing to bandwagon with Axis and attack the Brits in 1940 if the British Empire in the Middle East was collapsing.
 

Deleted member 1487

The purge didn't have much effect on the Soviet performance against Japan in 1939.
I'd look into the particulars of the Nomonhan battles; the Soviets did not do well against their much weaker adversary despite hand picking their commanders and equipment from all over the USSR.
 
In 1939 it was a modern army lead by Zhukov against the IJA so don't count if we want to extrapolate what they will perform against the Wallies, basically image how the italian army and air force will perfom and think worse
 
Forces allocated to Operation Pike according to Target: Hitler’s Oil: Allied attacks on German oil supplies 1939-1945 Ronald C. Cooke and Roy Conyers Nesbit

The Allied assault force would comprise a total of 120 medium bombers made up of ten squadrons, each containing twelve operational aircraft. The force would be divided equally into five RAF and five French squadrons. The RAF contribution would comprise four squadrons of the new twin-engine Blenheim IV fighters/bombers, drawn from the UK, plus one squadron of single-engine Wellesley’s, already available in the Middle East. The French force would consist of five squadrons of the modern Maryland medium bomber equipped with extra fuel tanks. The plan envisaged that the Blenheim’s would attack at low level during daylight, whilst the Wellesley’s would attack at night; surviving records do not show whether the Maryland’s were intended to operate by day or by night.
 
... The Allied assault force would comprise a total of 120 medium bombers made up of ten squadrons, each containing twelve operational aircraft. The force would be divided equally into five RAF and five French squadrons. The RAF contribution would comprise four squadrons of the new twin-engine Blenheim IV fighters/bombers, drawn from the UK, plus one squadron of single-engine Wellesley’s, already available in the Middle East. The French force would consist of five squadrons of the modern Maryland medium bomber equipped with extra fuel tanks.

This sounds faIrly theoretical. The Martin 167 were not yet operational. Martin was sending partial assemblies to Morroco, where a final assembly/maintenance facility was under construction. By May 1940 there were over 120 M167 in France & Africa with partially trained ground and air crew. Those begain flying missions over France in late May and June.
 
... surviving records do not show whether the Maryland’s were intended to operate by day or by night.

Primary French doctrine centered on daylight air ops. There were air crew trained for night navigation & the Berlin raid was at night. I've not yet seen any evidence the M167 crew were trained for night ops when they started combat ops in May.
 

Deleted member 1487

Primary French doctrine centered on daylight air ops. There were air crew trained for night navigation & the Berlin raid was at night. I've not yet seen any evidence the M167 crew were trained for night ops when they started combat ops in May.
The French bombed by night during the 1940 campaign:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farman_F.220
A variant NC 223.4 Jules Verne of Naval Aviation French was the first Allied bomber to raid Berlin: on the night of 7 June 1940 aircraft of this variant dropped eight bombs of 250 kg and 80 of 10 kg weight on the German capital.[4] This operation, which was of a primarily psychological-warfare nature, was repeated three days later.

The first NC 223.3 bombers were delivered on May 1940 and participated in night bombing attacks on Germany before being transferred to North Africa in June 1940.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiot_143
GBs I/34 and II/34 in the north, GBs I/38 and II/38 in the East and 17 equipping one African groupe, GB II/63, which was in the process of re-equipping with Martin 167Fs.[15] Following the start of the Battle of France, the Amiot 143M was mainly used in night attacks against German airfields and lines of communications, with losses relatively low.[16][17]
So at least one unit trained for night operations was reequipped with the Martin.
 

Deleted member 1487

Which I refered to in my post.
You referred to the Berlin raid alone, not all the other stuff I referenced, including night raids by medium bombers on German operational targets, including by units that were to convert to the Martin.
So the ALA did have training and doctrine for strategic and operational night bombing, including among medium bomber units.
 
In 1939 it was a modern army lead by Zhukov against the IJA so don't count if we want to extrapolate what they will perform against the Wallies, basically image how the italian army and air force will perfom and think worse

Wavell didn't have much in the way of tank forces in his Middle East command until late 1940. Italy is not a good reference for Soviet performance. The Italian tanks were pathetic. The French would be out of a Soviet Middle East action by June 1940 when they are overrun by Germany. The Soviets would then dominate a middle eastern battlefield with their large quantity of relatively modern tanks. If the Soviets can capture the Abadan refinery in Iran the Brits will likely seek an armistice with all parties.
 
In 1940 the mainstay of the Soviet tank forces it's the T-26 (and many are not in great shape), a tank not much more advanced than the italians and even the anti-tank version of the L-33 can destroy it.
 
Assuming the POD allows for this to occur, Operation Pike would be disastrous for the Allies in both the short and long run; depending on how damaging it was, the Soviets would see this as an act of war and take it out on Turkey and Iran, and presumably the Allied-held Middle East and throw its weight behind the Nazi-Soviet pact. The Nazis would exploit this, using the resources of the USSR granted by said pact to help bolster their warmachines to drive the Allies to the ground (though Sea Lion would still fail regardless of the attempt) and perhaps making their hold on the Mediterrean easier (provided if Italy joins in), in fact it might be a boon to them in the long run, though they still will plot to invade the USSR for their colonization schemes (provided if Hitler is still in charge). Japan is Japan, so its role is a wild card, though they could take advantage of the reinforced Nazi-Soviet pact or not. It can safely said that Pike is one of the few more truly plausible ways for the Axis to win, provided if the USA doesn't act fast about aiding the Allies via lend lease and eventually getting involved in the conflict directly (even if it could it might face an uphill battle with the USSR being the engine behind backing the Axis war efforts, until the Axis stab it in the back). And if it was to be in the war, I don't think the USA would bother with lend lease as much as OTL's provided it's increased distrust of the USSR if the latter does get attacked by the Axis.
 
And if it was to be in the war, I don't think the USA would bother with lend lease as much as OTL's provided it's increased distrust of the USSR if the latter does get attacked by the Axis.

Lend Lease passed in March, 1941

What makes you think that the Turks would be an easy pushover?

When Pike goes off, Baku would ruined, and the USSR now has a POL problem in being able to do logistics far from home.
 
Lend Lease passed in March, 1941

What makes you think that the Turks would be an easy pushover?

When Pike goes off, Baku would ruined, and the USSR now has a POL problem in being able to do logistics far from home.

I cant see Baku being ruined given the forces the British and French were going to deploy.....slightly scratched maybe but not ruined.
 
I cant see Baku being ruined given the forces the British and French were going to deploy.....slightly scratched maybe but not ruined.
I agree, strategic bombing was only in its infancy in 1941, there were still a lot of bugs to be ironed out.
 
Assuming the POD allows for this to occur, Operation Pike would be disastrous for the Allies in both the short and long run; depending on how damaging it was, the Soviets would see this as an act of war and take it out on Turkey and Iran, and presumably the Allied-held Middle East and throw its weight behind the Nazi-Soviet pact. The Nazis would exploit this, using the resources of the USSR granted by said pact to help bolster their warmachines to drive the Allies to the ground (though Sea Lion would still fail regardless of the attempt) and perhaps making their hold on the Mediterrean easier (provided if Italy joins in), in fact it might be a boon to them in the long run, though they still will plot to invade the USSR for their colonization schemes (provided if Hitler is still in charge). Japan is Japan, so its role is a wild card, though they could take advantage of the reinforced Nazi-Soviet pact or not. It can safely said that Pike is one of the few more truly plausible ways for the Axis to win, provided if the USA doesn't act fast about aiding the Allies via lend lease and eventually getting involved in the conflict directly (even if it could it might face an uphill battle with the USSR being the engine behind backing the Axis war efforts, until the Axis stab it in the back). And if it was to be in the war, I don't think the USA would bother with lend lease as much as OTL's provided it's increased distrust of the USSR if the latter does get attacked by the Axis.
There is no way the Soviet retaliation could go that far, especially with their main source of oil (and soon after their entire economy) on fire. I doubt they could afford to support Germany as they did if they wanted to. An invasion of Turkey or Iran would bog down a couple hundred kilometers at most in the mountains. That may be a problem if the Axis is later successful in North Africa, but there is little immediate threat in the Middle-East for the Allies.

If anything, the Soviets may want to take Romania (previously an ally of France in the Petite Entente) to hedge their loss, but that won't sit well with the Axis.

I've no doubt that in any case Hitler will see the USSR as pathetically weak and launch Barbarossa as soon as possible. Stalin may actually come to expect it, but assuming Pike fulfill its objectives I don't think 1941 will play out significantly different. I doubt Lend-lease would happen and consequently the Soviet Union will fare much worse in the years after. If the Germans are too greedy they could still loose, but I agree they definitely have a shot at knocking out the USSR and settling a peace with the Allies later in that scenario.

As for Japan, they could try to grab Sakhalin and poke into Mongolia if the Germans are doing well, but that won't do them any good against the US. However the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 may not happen or may not be as quick and successful, though, and communist China is hence likely butterflied.
 
There is no way the Soviet retaliation could go that far, especially with their main source of oil (and soon after their entire economy) on fire. I doubt they could afford to support Germany as they did if they wanted to. An invasion of Turkey or Iran would bog down a couple hundred kilometers at most in the mountains.

If anything, the Soviets may want to take Romania (previously an ally of France in the Petite Entente) to hedge their loss, but that won't sit well with the Axis.

I've no doubt that in any case Hitler will see the USSR as pathetically weak and launch Barbarossa as soon as possible.

my understanding the Allies didn't launch Pike due to doubts over its possible effectiveness? doubt it would have had the planned impact on deliveries to Germany (if for no other reason than Soviets would have wanted to conceal level of Allied destruction, had it been effective?)

my scenario is always a German-Soviet deal over Poland and Romania due to Soviet designs there and it should not have been surprise they moved on Romania while Germany distracted with France?

throw in agreed upon sphere of influence over Turkey (or regions of Turkey) and that might replace Finland as target of Winter War? and a greatly increased chance of Operation Pike happening?
 
Can I just remind the audiance that carrying out Operation Pike = Declaring war on Russia in 1940

It is never usually a good idea, Declaring war on Russia, regardless of the year but Britain and France had rather a lot on their plate during the first half of 1940!

Is it no suprise then that the plans were quashed?

But in answer to the OP - the Russians so long as they were not a major Axis beligerent at the time would totally still get British and US Lend lease

Enemy of my Enemy and all that
 
The bombload of the Vickers Wellesley, the aircraft to be intended to be used is very small. Damage would be minimal.

Some areas still had wooden derricks and used open air storage of crude. They would dam off one side of a valley, then fill it with crude. Pipelines leaked frequently
Much of the area was soaked to bedrock with spills. It would not take much to set all alight.

This was nothing like the raids of the Romanian refineries.
 
Top