Morison, volumes VII and VIII; Sherrod, History of Marine Corps Aviation in WW II; Maurer, Air Combat Units of WW II; etc. Morison, at least, should be in any college or major municipal public library in the US; may not be elsewhere in the Anglopshere (too many uncomfortable truths, even when gilded by Cold War courtesies), although Roskill is pretty easy to find in the US... as are Bryant, Churchill, and quite a few other rather "focused" texts.
If not, a tremendous amount of this material is available on the website of the Naval Historical Center, the Army War College, the Air War College, etc, and it is free - the Army Historical Center has the majority of the Army's official histories (the "Green Books") on-line, for example, and the NHC had some of the Administrative Histories as well...
If you really want a Pacific War where the Japanese "last longer" (forget "win"), though, 1941-45 is not going to be it, any more than 1941-45 can ever be folded, spun, and mutilated enough to yield a German "win" ...
After Dec. 10, 1941, the result is clear; it's just a matter of time, given all else as historical up to that point.
Best,
Thank you for the detailed list of sources, would not be able to access any of the library works (or buy), but online materials would be interesting to peruse through. Hyperwar is one source i have read in the past.
As for the rest (especially Germany) let's agree to disagree, that's a subject for another topic anyway.
Have some other RL things on my head right now, so i'll have to offer only a brief reply to what CalBear posted earlier (regarding what is "acceptable" to make alternative history scenarios about), but i'll say i definitely do not agree to that concept. I have read all the forum regulations several times, and i can't find anything there about this "consensus". I have seen enough topics here in this section that imo are far more general, far less improbable to happen and improbable to even predict the flow of events after a given POD than things like Seelowe, and a few scenarios i have written about regarding IJN. However personally i have no problem with that, alternative history (as i understand it at least) is about exploring just that. What i have a problem is however pushing pet opinions as "consensus" and trying to inhibit folks from discussions challenging these said opinions. Trying to censor talking about the possibility of a succesful Seelowe or about some scenario in which IJN might do better in this or that battle i truly find it absurd! I don't understand why those who have a particular dislike for such scenarios just don't participate in. Is this to be traced to the exceptionalism mentioned by at least another member not long ago? If it is just that, then it is truly a pity.