WI Invasion of Norway fails alternate WW2

Some, but where it counts is in lower losses of Allied cargo ships.

Norwegian ports aided the surface raiders & submarines in getting to the Atlantic. So some small advantage for the Allies there.
I agree.

If the invasion of Norway failed it's very likely that The Twins and Hipper would be sunk. I doubt very much that the OTL sorties by Scheer, Bismarck and Prinz Eugen would have been attempted because as you wrote possession of Norway helped the Germans get the surface raiders into the Atlantic.

However, a surviving Bismarck with Tirpitz (and The Twins if they survive Norway) might be more valuable to the Third Reich as a fleet in being tying down British battleships at Scapa Flow than they were IOTL when they were sent out piecemeal on raiding operations.
 
Who is Prime Minister of Great Britain if the invasion of Norway fails? TTL Neville Chamberlain would have stayed on as PM until at least the Fall of France.
 

Driftless

Donor
Who is Prime Minister of Great Britain if the invasion of Norway fails? TTL Neville Chamberlain would have stayed on as PM until at least the Fall of France.

There's a string of potential timelines coming off this POD (Op. Weserubung is less successful or a failure)

Would Chamberlain get the boot when France falls? Does Britain negotiate with Hitler before/after whatever Dunkirk looks like? Etc., etc.
 
One for the Battle of Britain.

If there is no Luftflotte V in Norway can Fighter Command transfer more squadrons from No. 13 Group to No. 11 Group?
 
I'm choosing to ask about two different divergences. The first being that the Norwegians call a full mobilization and not a partial secret one done by mail.
If the Norwegians did that would there have been time for the Germans to cancel the invasion and recall the ships already at sea?
 
If the Norwegians did that would there have been time for the Germans to cancel the invasion and recall the ships already at sea?

Be nice if the message was too garbled to understand. Norwegian Coastal Defense's were nothing to sneeze at. Had they been fully manned and ready, Blucher would have had a lot more company.
 
If the Norwegians did that would there have been time for the Germans to cancel the invasion and recall the ships already at sea?
Not really there is not a lot of time and they are committed at this point plus it might not be verry succesful like the recall of the air units.
 

Driftless

Donor
Well, the Germans probably overrun Denmark as they did historically. Not a lot the Danes could do, considering the disparity of military manpower and equipment.

If the Danes slowed down the German takeover of the Aalborg airfields, that would have significantly helped the Norwegians. However, the Danes had far higher defense priorities on April 9
 
I understand that there was a number of 'near misses' for the Germans with regards to the Royal Navy and Allies

For example had some of the Submarine egagements been 'luckier' or as previously mentioned had Glowworm not had a man overboard she might have stayed with the Biggest Destroyer (Renown) and maybe even better - operation Wilfred (the mining of Norweigian waters) actual takes place on the 5th Arpil as planned and not the 8th April by which time it was effectively too late.

Therefore RN assets are in place - possibly the Royal Lincashire Regiment have been landed in Narvik by the 4 Cruisers (ie Winston does not interfere and have the Cruisers swanning about on a fool errand with most of said units equipment still on board) who are then also in place along with the rest of the home fleet providing cover!
 
I understand that there was a number of 'near misses' for the Germans with regards to the Royal Navy and Allies

For example had some of the Submarine egagements been 'luckier' or as previously mentioned had Glowworm not had a man overboard she might have stayed with the Biggest Destroyer (Renown) and maybe even better - operation Wilfred (the mining of Norweigian waters) actual takes place on the 5th Arpil as planned and not the 8th April by which time it was effectively too late.

Therefore RN assets are in place - possibly the Royal Lincashire Regiment have been landed in Narvik by the 4 Cruisers (ie Winston does not interfere and have the Cruisers swanning about on a fool errand with most of said units equipment still on board) who are then also in place along with the rest of the home fleet providing cover!
This was what I was thinking except landing at Trondheim not Narvik.
Though I'm also wondering what is most likely to happen if the Germans are out of Norway the Italians out of North Africa and Greece being occupied and Barbarossa starting as otl what are the allies going to do next
 
This was what I was thinking except landing at Trondheim not Narvik.
Though I'm also wondering what is most likely to happen if the Germans are out of Norway the Italians out of North Africa and Greece being occupied and Barbarossa starting as otl what are the allies going to do next

Depends on who is sitting on Winston ;)

I vote duffing up more Vichy French earlier - possibly some foolhardiness in the Aegean - Standby Iran......oh hang on whats this...

The Japanese go full bushido batshit mode and fully occupying French Indochina with the Thailand Government throwing in with them? - well - there is a number of 1st class combat experienced divisions (including the 6th,7th and 9th Australian) available to be recalled to the Far East cooling their heels in Palestine....

A number of these 'spare' Divisions could be sent to Malaya where only 3rd tier 'Militia' - 2 brigade style divisions where initially available OTL - hopefully before Winnie finds something silly for them to do.

Had the 2nd Australian Imperial Force (including all or most of the following - 1st Australian Armoured, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Australian Infantry Divisions) been sent to Malaya then the IJA is in deep do do - each one of the Middle eastern deployed Australian Infantry Divisions probably has more artillery fire power than the entire Japanese 25th Army - they could use additional troops slated for the Philippines but then then that's still probably not enough
 
Depends on who is sitting on Winston ;)

I vote duffing up more Vichy French earlier - possibly some foolhardiness in the Aegean - Standby Iran......oh hang on whats this...

The Japanese go full bushido batshit mode and fully occupying French Indochina with the Thailand Government throwing in with them? - well - there is a number of 1st class combat experienced divisions (including the 6th,7th and 9th Australian) available to be recalled to the Far East cooling their heels in Palestine....

A number of these 'spare' Divisions could be sent to Malaya where only 3rd tier 'Militia' - 2 brigade style divisions where initially available OTL - hopefully before Winnie finds something silly for them to do.

Had the 2nd Australian Imperial Force (including all or most of the following - 1st Australian Armoured, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Australian Infantry Divisions) been sent to Malaya then the IJA is in deep do do - each one of the Middle eastern deployed Australian Infantry Divisions probably has more artillery fire power than the entire Japanese 25th Army - they could use additional troops slated for the Philippines but then then that's still probably not enough
Could they do some Aegean operations Iran and still reinforce Malaya and if they do what are the effects in the Pacific?
 
I would say that in late 41 or 42 an Aegean op is likely to ultimately fail

Iran - any commonwealth units in the area could probably succeed the Iranian armed forces were relatively weak

With North and by extension East Africa in British hands and the Middle east pretty much wrapped up earlier than OTL and with no Greek adventures I can see with Japanese aggression in FIC the Australian and likely the New Zealand Government asking for their units back and having 4 well equipped experienced Divisions back in the far east is going to cause the IJA some serious issues.

For starters they will have to send more troops to Malaya to even hope to start to match those Australian units and what ever else gets sent
 
Even if Norway holds out in Spring of 1940 there is nothing stopping the whole of the German armed forces repeating the trick in late Summer.
If the “failure” consists of the invasion stalling out in the south then perhaps, but this seems unlikely. After all OTL the Allies responded to the Germans taking the south by playing the “run away run awaaaay” card so if the Germans get established they win by default assuming France plays out OTL. To me a “failure” means the Germans either completely faceplant initially or get confined to one or two small lodgements which are eventually pinched out. In that scenario how do the German forces get back in play? The mighty mighty Heer are going to storm across 100km of North Sea in their invincible barges of doom and rampage up the rocky Norwegian coastline? The elite Luftwaffe parachutists are going to pit their gravity knives and pistols against dug-in infantry battalions with artillery? The Kriegsmarine certainly won’t be contributing unless the first invasion failed due to them all fleeing in panic rather than getting sunk
You are not talking about facing the RN here - it would be a Baltic invasion with overwhelming air superiority. Besides many of the destroyer losses would be made good in 1941 from the 36A class. And there are other heavier units available (Bismarck / Prinz Eugen) if the Germans want to risk them.
Given the will the Germans would get ashore and could take Oslo. Taking the whole country could be more difficult - and I agree Mo I Rana is the fall back position after Trondheim.
Now I am really confused.
Why won’t they be facing the RN? Does everyone at the admiralty huff so much paint thinner they are completely sold on the idea of handing the Germans a strong position on Britain’s east flank as a cunning wheeze? Perhaps the RAF sell it to them as a way of suckering the Germans into bombing Scotland more thoroughly because.... err why? Why would the British not try to fend off a second attempt if the first had been defeated?
Baltic invasion? In what way is the North Sea like the Baltic?
Overwhelming air superiority? In what timeframe is this going to happen? Does Hitler just squeeze in a magical winter invasion between losing the Battle of Britain and starting Barbarossa, or does he put Stalin on hold for a few years to focus on cobbling together an air and sea fleet capable of seizing all those desirable fjords and trees? Or does he perhaps completely skip menacing Britain across the channel in favour of menacing Norway across the Skagerrak from the amazing infrastructure of North Jutland? No matter what, a second bite at Norway cunningly skips past all Germany’s strengths in favour of pitching their naval weakness straight at Britain’s strongest arm, it’s a strategic gift to the British.

They lost a dozen destroyers while bouncing an unprepared defense and a keystone kops intervention. How many dozen do they have building to face the literally hundreds of destroyers the RN have available and can base in Norway? If the Bismarck & Prince Eugen and other big nazi ships are going to go participate in some shore bombardment, I suspect the RN admirals and captains would temporarily go deaf to the orders of their paint-thinner-huffing superiors until they have Zerg-rushed the remains of the kriegsmarine into scrap metal.
Why would the Germans have The Will? Sure, if Adolf tells them to they will keep pounding the sand but what on earth justifies putting huge efforts into reinforcing abject failure in this way?

Basically, the Germans had exactly one chance at pulling off the invasion OTL which was to have simultaneously:
-their ridiculous movie-plot plan work almost perfectly
-the Norwegians to blunder badly
-the British to completely shit the bed and then fall down the stairs with their pants on their head
Which was why the professionals were unkeen on attempting it and so disbelieving when it actually worked. Those circumstances are incredibly unlikely to come together with a prepared defense. If their invasion fails at the first attempt then either they have to give up or else much of the European history of WW2 will consist of Germany maniacally focusing on trying to take Norway and probably still failing.
 
Last edited:
If the “failure” consists of the invasion stalling out in the south then perhaps, but this seems unlikely. After all OTL the Allies responded to the Germans taking the south by playing the “run away run awaaaay” card so if the Germans get established they win by default assuming France plays out OTL. To me a “failure” means the Germans either completely faceplant initially or get confined to one or two small lodgements which are eventually pinched out. In that scenario how do the German forces get back in play? The mighty mighty Heer are going to storm across 100km of North Sea in their invincible barges of doom and rampage up the rocky Norwegian coastline? The elite Luftwaffe parachutists are going to pit their gravity knives and pistols against dug-in infantry battalions with artillery? The Kriegsmarine certainly won’t be contributing unless the first invasion failed due to them all fleeing in panic rather than getting sunk

Now I am really confused.
Why won’t they be facing the RN? Does everyone at the admiralty huff so much paint thinner they are completely sold on the idea of handing the Germans a strong position on Britain’s east flank as a cunning wheeze? Perhaps the RAF sell it to them as a way of suckering the Germans into bombing Scotland more thoroughly because.... err why? Why would the British not try to fend off a second attempt if the first had been defeated?
Baltic invasion? In what way is the North Sea like the Baltic?
Overwhelming air superiority? In what timeframe is this going to happen? Does Hitler just squeeze in a magical winter invasion between losing the Battle of Britain and starting Barbarossa, or does he put Stalin on hold for a few years to focus on cobbling together an air and sea fleet capable of seizing all those desirable fjords and trees? Or does he perhaps completely skip menacing Britain across the channel in favour of menacing Norway across the Skagerrak from the amazing infrastructure of North Jutland? No matter what, a second bite at Norway cunningly skips past all Germany’s strengths in favour of pitching their naval weakness straight at Britain’s strongest arm, it’s a strategic gift to the British.

They lost a dozen destroyers while bouncing an unprepared defense and a keystone kops intervention. How many dozen do they have building to face the literally hundreds of destroyers the RN have available and can base in Norway? If the Bismarck & Prince Eugen and other big nazi ships are going to go participate in some shore bombardment, I suspect the RN admirals and captains would temporarily go deaf to the orders of their paint-thinner-huffing superiors until they have Zerg-rushed the remains of the kriegsmarine into scrap metal.
Why would the Germans have The Will? Sure, if Adolf tells them to they will keep pounding the sand but what on earth justifies putting huge efforts into reinforcing abject failure in this way?

Basically, the Germans had exactly one chance at pulling off the invasion OTL which was to have simultaneously:
-their ridiculous movie-plot plan work almost perfectly
-the Norwegians to blunder badly
-the British to completely shit the bed and then fall down the stairs with their pants on their head
Which was why the professionals were unkeen on attempting it and so disbelieving when it actually worked. Those circumstances are incredibly unlikely to come together with a prepared defense. If their invasion fails at the first attempt then either they have to give up or else much of the European history of WW2 will consist of Germany maniacally focusing on trying to take Norway and probably still failing.

The RN would have to interdict the second invasion with all of the North Sea coast of Europe held against them and the Skaggerak heavily mined. The chances of the RN in late 1940 or early 1941 putting its head in the noose to save Southern Norway is nil in my opinion.

Hitler does just that in terms of squeezing an invasion in between July 1940 and May 1941 - he was preparing for Sea Lion IOTL. In this TL the resources get diverted to Norway. He managed to invade Yugoslavia and Greece almost at the drop of a hat.

Most of the destroyer losses would be replaced by the 36A builds and the RN doesn't have hundreds of destroyers to deploy - thay had 164 at the start of the war across the world. Remember in September 1940 they were so short of escorts for the Atlantic that they had to beg 50 WW1 destroyers off the USA. So they hardly have hundreds spare for Norway.

If you had bothered to read my post before you went into flame mode you would have noticed that I didn't say Germany could take all of Norway second time around - only up to Trondheim / Mo i Rana. And for the British holding on to Narvik is probably good enough for their defense of Norway.

Would a failed Norway invasion have consequences - yes. But probably more on what Hitler doesn't do in the Med than failing to secure both sides of the Skaggerak. The loss of Narvik to Germany in the long term would be painful but not crippling - the amount of ore actually exported from Narvik to Germany during the war was significant but not essential. Germany could have pursued other options like improving the Southern Swedish ports and increasing the number of ice breakers, both of which were considered IOTL.
 

Driftless

Donor
The Germans needed a quick victory in Norway, as the critical events for the remainder of 1940 were coming in May, with knocking the French and British out of the war - that's not much margin for delay. The quick victory on the German Western Front allowed them the security launch Barbarossa in 1941. If the German initial plan for Norway gets knocked off it's schedule, there's likely a significant delay for another go. Some of the pressure for year round access to Swedish iron ore went down with the German conquest of the French and Belgian iron mining areas; so if the Germans were stymied on the first pass at Narvik, the imperative for a second go is reduced as well.

On a separate thought, even a partial setback in Norway would lessen the aura of German military invincibility. More of morale issue, but useful. That, and any greater German losses (even temporary) to capital ships and airborne forces significantly lessens the chances of a 1940 invasion of Britain - even considering a Dunkirk level loss of British Army hardware. Reducing the possibility of invasion would impact British planning for productions and deployment of forces. Think of how many seat-of-the-pants decisions in June 1940 (based on the threat of invasion) had a negative impact on later British operations.
 
The Germans needed a quick victory in Norway, as the critical events for the remainder of 1940 were coming in May, with knocking the French and British out of the war - that's not much margin for delay. ...

More since the German leaders up & including Hitler were not confident about a decisive victory vs France & its Allies. The Norweigian campaign was a desperate move to gain a strategic location and a bargaining chip for later. There was a diversionary aspect to it as well. The minimal commitment of ground forces, and relatively easy to withdraw air forces made it something of a economy of force distraction supporting the May attack on France & the low countries.
 
So here there is no Sealion as such because the assets etc are used for a second invasion of Norway, which, like the first, is a qualified success but ultimately fails to conquer the whole country. At the very least this should dispel the invasion scare in Britain entirely by the end of 1940.

Immediate impact: No or at least fewer off the cuff procurement decisions.
Earlier introduction of the Griffon engine?
Earlier work on the Meteor engine?
Earlier switch to the 6-Pounder?

The Vulture engine originally earmarked for the Tornado and Manchester was an
X 24 engine, and I can't find any evidence of any nation making general use of this particular configuration.
 
The RN would have to interdict the second invasion with all of the North Sea coast of Europe held against them and the Skaggerak heavily mined. The chances of the RN in late 1940 or early 1941 putting its head in the noose to save Southern Norway is nil in my opinion.

Hitler does just that in terms of squeezing an invasion in between July 1940 and May 1941 - he was preparing for Sea Lion IOTL. In this TL the resources get diverted to Norway. He managed to invade Yugoslavia and Greece almost at the drop of a hat.

Most of the destroyer losses would be replaced by the 36A builds and the RN doesn't have hundreds of destroyers to deploy - thay had 164 at the start of the war across the world. Remember in September 1940 they were so short of escorts for the Atlantic that they had to beg 50 WW1 destroyers off the USA. So they hardly have hundreds spare for Norway.

If you had bothered to read my post before you went into flame mode you would have noticed that I didn't say Germany could take all of Norway second time around - only up to Trondheim / Mo i Rana. And for the British holding on to Narvik is probably good enough for their defense of Norway.
Still none of this makes sense to me, maybe you need to explain it better.
What is the relevance of Germany possessing e.g. Netherlands or Schleswig when Britain can easily reinforce from Scotland to Stavanger, well beyond reasonable German reach? What seems far more relevant is that Denmark is full of German aircraft and a handful of German ships, while Norway would be full of Allied aircraft and more allied ships. How are the Germans going to heavily mine a waterway actively contested by air and naval forces, and in a way that prevents the allies sortieing from Norway to attack the invasion but still allows the German invasion to sortie into Norway? How does German air power from Denmark manage to sweep allied navies from the open sea (despite allied air cover) while allied air power from Norway is magically unable to interfere with German landings on the Norwegian coast, minutes from Norwegian bases but (at least) the same distance from Danish bases as London is from France?
I do agree that in “late 1940 or early 1941” it’s extremely unlikely the RN would do anthing to save Norway, because that is winter and any invasion attempt in that season would be a guaranteed disaster even without their intervention. The available windows for a non-suicidal invasion are late summer 1940, I.e. taking the pressure off the British in favour of menacing the Norwegian fjords, or early 1941, I.e. distracting even more from Barbarossa than OTL and giving the British a ready excuse for dodging a half-arsed intervention in a marching war on the wrong side of the continent in favour of a naval war in their back yard. A second Norway instead of the Balkans is a gift to the brits.
From the British perspective Inverness-stavanger is what, 650km, 18 hours on a fast ship through friendly waters. Plymouth to Piraeus is 5300km, at least six days on a fast ship to the complete other side of a war zone with a hostile Italy in the middle of it. From the German perspective Yugoslavia and Greece are both a couple of train tickets and some marching away, Norway is an amphibious invasion (without a fleet) away.

I take your point about the perennial shortage of British escorts, but the fact is that they had a lot of them (and corvettes, and cruisers, and armed trawlers, and yadda yadda yadda), were building more new ships faster than the Germans, and were getting stronger at sea all the time. Whereas the Germans would be hopefully replacing “most” of their losses (if they don’t lose even more contesting the Skagerrak). For the British, expending a bunch of ships to finally wipe out the kriegsmarine and secure their east flank is a straightforward calculation.

Lastly, if you had bothered reading my post you would have seen that I specifically addressed Mo-I-Rana. I repeat, to me it seems much more likely that if the Germans were to reach that far north the allies will just wash their hands of the whole scenario. German uboats, coastal craft and aircraft based along the Norwegian west coast transform the whole situation and turn the UK supply line from a protected interior route into an exterior, exposed route. The strategic danger of losing the east flank has already come to pass, in 1940/1941 Stalin is a Nazi ally so access to Murmansk is a non-issue, what is to be gained from battling away against superior German forces (and they must be pretty damn superior to have pulled it off on the second attempt)? Why would the allies not just cut their losses? If the iron ore was a concern they could thoroughly demolish the railway from the Swedish border to the sea, and wreck Narvik completely. Much more cost effective than trying to hold on to a tiny port that has no value other than denying it to the Germans.
 
I think the problem is that you are assuming Norway round II would be the same as Norway round I.

It won't be for some of the very reason you describe.

But in Round I the British and French forces never entered the Skaggerak apart from submarine pickets - they won't in round II with Denmark and the airbases wherein in German hands

Assuming France goes as per OTL then the British have to decide where to spend their limited manpower. A failed invasion of Norway would give the opportunity to garrison Norway and fly bombers into the heartland of Germany. For this reason the Germans have to go for round II. I question whether sufficient British and CW ground troops will be spared to significantly increase the Norwegian army - if they are positioned then I suspect they will be concentrated in the vital areas for British interests i.e. Narvik and Trondheim.

Germany won't be able to go further North in a successful Round II than Trondheim / Mo I Rana - but this will be sufficient to prevent the RAF from threatening either escorted bombing missions to the heart of Germany or unescorted bombers anywhere they like. Which is sufficient (along with securing the Skaggerak) for Germany.

To recap - I can't see the RN putting its ships in harms way to protect Southern Norway, I can't see the Germans venturing outside of the Skaggerak (so no third battle of Narvik) but I can see a round II where the british and Gwermans are content to partition Norway as mentioned earlier.
 
Top