What if General O'Connor had not been captured by the Germans in April 1941?

General Sir Richard O'Connor played a key role in Britain's desert offensive in late 1940/early 1941. He was captured by the Germans in April 1941. Given the impressive way he handled the forces at his command during the offensive, do you think things might have turned out differently in the desert war if he had avoided capture?
 
By sending his best unts and reinforcements to Greece the damage had already been done. I doubt OConnor could have stemmed Rommels advance much better than happened IOTL. However with the reinforcements I think he could have taken Tripoli before Rommel could do much about it, and wouldn't that make a difference to WW2!
 
By sending his best unts and reinforcements to Greece the damage had already been done. I doubt OConnor could have stemmed Rommels advance much better than happened IOTL. However with the reinforcements I think he could have taken Tripoli before Rommel could do much about it, and wouldn't that make a difference to WW2!

That's Churchill's decision, not O'Connor's.

Perhaps the campaign in North-Africa lasts a few months less long. It wouldn't suprise me if O'Connor would've attacked earlier than later leaders like Monty.

But unless he gets more forces/more supplies I think the historical battles will be the same.
 
The real question here is. With O’Connor in Command could the drive to the sea work? Rommel would have a tiny force on the ground before O’Connor got there. I don’t know who would win however I know O’Connor believed to his dying day that he could of done it.

If he had then the Desert War would be won so much earlier in OTL. It would have massive knock on effects. With no need for ANZAC units that would help against the Japanese.
If only O’Connor had not been captured…
 
This narrow time period is pregnant with AH opportunity. The Axis mounting a successful campiagn against the ME while Britain was so busy with the BoB, invasion scare, the blitz and the 1st uboat happy time. Or Britain taking all of Libya before Rommels arrival, and perhaps holding Crete as well, destroying the Italian fleet and Bismark/Prinz Eugene and thus removing so much painful tooing and froing from the war. _______________ As for OConnor, he was captured on about the 10th April somewhere near Mechilli, I think, 2 weeks after Rommel had gotten off to a great start and already cut across the Benghazi bulge to surround the weakened Brit forces. His ability to influence the battle if he avioded capture would be limited to stopping Rommels headlong advance from the Mechilli area to the border, by commanding what was left of the already defeated Brit forces. He may have made operations Brevity and Battleaxe more successful later on though.
 
Would O’Connor really have made much of a difference? Sure, he did extremely well against the Italians. But then, name me a British general (or any other) who did not do well against the Italians.

Part of his success was down to the Matilda’s which totally demoralized the Italians (like the 88 would do in later years to the British) and his use of flying columns to outmanoeuvre the lumbering Italians. When the British later tried those same tactics against the Germans, they were slaughtered.

Much of O’Conner’s mystique is based on his great offensive against the Italians. There is no reason to believe IMO that he would have done any better against the Germans than any other British general at the time considering the huge gap in institutional knowledge in modern maneuver warfare. He certainly didn’t do much better than fellow corps commanders after returning to front line command in 1944.

Similar to movie stars who die at a young age, O’Conner had a huge success and then ‘conveniently’ escaped the punitive years learning modern warfare at the hands of the Germans, just like Montgomery was lucky to get command of Eight Army after they had already learnt from previous mistakes, won the first battle of El Alamein and held an impregnable position.
 
Would O’Connor really have made much of a difference? Sure, he did extremely well against the Italians. But then, name me a British general (or any other) who did not do well against the Italians.

Part of his success was down to the Matilda’s which totally demoralized the Italians (like the 88 would do in later years to the British) and his use of flying columns to outmanoeuvre the lumbering Italians. When the British later tried those same tactics against the Germans, they were slaughtered.

Much of O’Conner’s mystique is based on his great offensive against the Italians. There is no reason to believe IMO that he would have done any better against the Germans than any other British general at the time considering the huge gap in institutional knowledge in modern maneuver warfare. He certainly didn’t do much better than fellow corps commanders after returning to front line command in 1944.

Similar to movie stars who die at a young age, O’Conner had a huge success and then ‘conveniently’ escaped the punitive years learning modern warfare at the hands of the Germans, just like Montgomery was lucky to get command of Eight Army after they had already learnt from previous mistakes, won the first battle of El Alamein and held an impregnable position.

I don't think you appreciate O'Connor enough. The tactics he used were effective against the enemy he faced and given the resources he had at his disposal. Plus, unlike some of the commanders who came after him, he was imaginative in the use of his forces. For example, when he was confronted with defensive positions, he attacked from the rear. There would have been no"cauldron" type battles with him in charge.

The jury may still be out on what he did in Europe , but even then he showed flair by employing converted tanks as APCs.
 
If it were up to me he wouldn't have fought the Germans, or perhaps done so in Tripoli with experienced units with fresh equipment. Oconnor did seem to aviod the major mistakes of the British; he was in command (not getting into discussions about his orders like happened later), he pushed his men hard and he used his armour en masse.
 
Top