Question about Japan

If by "war" you mean any armed conflict in the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, then you have a chance for a scenario that does not include US participation. The prerequisite for any "victorious" (or even intact) Japan is no war with the US. If political and/or military actions bring the US into a shooting match, Japan is out. Maybe sooner, maybe later, but out. A couple of possibilities:

A sometimes suggested strategy of OTL's attacks on British and Dutch colonies but bypassing and not engaging the Philippines. Gambling that the US will not declare war if not directly attacked with the backup that, after successful occupation of the various European colonies, troops, transport and supplies can be built up to threaten or invade the PI into a status quo peace or at least an armistice. Sort of a Pacific "Fall of France" scenario, minus the BEF.

Second (possibly in combination with the first) is shifting the European/Pacific war timelines. If Japan attacks the French/British/Dutch before, say, the Danzig crisis bursts upon Europe, then the UK, France, and Netherlands may send expeditionary forces to deal with it all only to find Hitler suddenly deciding that the Polish Corridor is now a thing. Either a withdrawal or some sort of hasty armistice is needed to bring troops back to Europe for a feared big show. An un-attacked US may not be willing to start a war for colonies. Especially colonies that the Europeans have just abandoned, anyway (with interesting butterflies on the Atlantic Charter).

A couple of possibilities. Can't speak to probabilities, though.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Under what conditions would Japan have won the Pacific war?
A different US, basically. One which really was as weak-willed as Japan viewed the US to be.

Alternatively, one with absolutely no capital ships building as of 1941, and the Japanese getting lucky. (The US has retreated into not having a navy worth a damn before, but it's basically a Depression PoD for this.)

In either case you have the US losing the initial clash and declining to pay the price in blood and treasure.

But the problem there is how the actual Pacific War developed. It was because the US was being assertive and embargoing Japan - no embargo, probably no war.

So you need either:

An assertive, dynamic US in foreign policy which has no stomach for a fight.
OR
An alternative US with a smaller navy than Japan, none building, and the Japanese picking a fight with them anyway despite sheer distance.

These are not easy to get, and you don't get anything remotely like the OTL Pacific War.


That said, there are a lot of things the Japanese could have done to improve their score - like better pilot training programmes which focused on lots of good ones rather than a few wizards.
 

Insider

Banned
So the Japanese remain safe until the 1980s?

Flying wings were death traps until computer aided stability systems were available.

"On 4 February 1949, the first YB-49 flew from Muroc Air Force Base in California to Andrews Air Force Base near Washington, D.C., in 4 hours 25 minutes, after which President Truman ordered a flyby of Pennsylvania Avenue at rooftop level. The return flight from Andrews was marred when four of the eight engines had to be shut down due to oil starvation. Inspection after a successful emergency landing at Winslow Airport, Arizona, revealed no oil had been replaced in these engines at Wright after the Muroc-to-Andrews leg, raising a suspicion of industrial sabotage."

A promotional cruise with a death trap. :rolleyes: Sounds improbable. I believe that if this sort of bomber would be really necessary, it would be troubleshooted like Maryland or Superfortress. Both started as a death traps but cleaned up nicely afterwards. In this scenario if Japan acheved control of the seas, there is little need for B-29, so northrop flying wings would likely get the priority.
 
Top