So for three to four years they just whack each other with aircraft and nobody suggests a truce? The public just accepts this endless bombing as par the course?
Would the atomic bomb be a magic bullet against Germany if they defeated the USSR?
- Thread starter Captain Homicide
- Start date
So for three to four years they just whack each other with aircraft and nobody suggests a truce? The public just accepts this endless bombing as par the course?
It really depends on the exact PoD and follow on events.
A successful Case Blue would still extend into 1943 in its final mopping up stages in the Transcaucasus. During this time, the Allies have mopped up North Africa in turn.
The next logical step is invading Sicily, which leans towards an inevitable Allied victory due to the correlation of forces in the Mediterranean theatre and control of the sea. Invading Italy proper is probably out of the question without an Eastern Front.
1944 and 1945 could see islands being picked off and a buildup for an invasion. However, there is the strong possibility for ground action in perhaps one of the most difficult theatres: the Caucasus. This would be quite static.
Throughout '42 and '43, the Allies will keep up the bombing war; this could continue into '44 and '45, if there was no ground invasion of France.
U.S. mobilisation will probably change if the Soviets collapse.
A successful Case Blue would still extend into 1943 in its final mopping up stages in the Transcaucasus. During this time, the Allies have mopped up North Africa in turn.
The next logical step is invading Sicily, which leans towards an inevitable Allied victory due to the correlation of forces in the Mediterranean theatre and control of the sea. Invading Italy proper is probably out of the question without an Eastern Front.
1944 and 1945 could see islands being picked off and a buildup for an invasion. However, there is the strong possibility for ground action in perhaps one of the most difficult theatres: the Caucasus. This would be quite static.
Throughout '42 and '43, the Allies will keep up the bombing war; this could continue into '44 and '45, if there was no ground invasion of France.
U.S. mobilisation will probably change if the Soviets collapse.
What 'british bases' after 3 years of continuing air war (only ?) against isolated british islees by a Luftwaffe much lesser ... employed in the east ?
How eliminate an AA defense of the whole european continent ?
Only that this isn't OTL with most of the losses at the eastern front of 1942, 1943, 1944.
You do know that prior to the war germany was the largest uranium producer worldwide ?
You do know that 50-60% of Stalins nuclear weapons material cam from Germany ?
Ever heard of the "Wismuth AG" ?
... only that ITTL many of the restrains, reasons and losses of the LW and the Reichs ability to sustain are unexistant.
Therefore you can assume a much more capable LW ITTL already ion 1945, not to speak of 1946/47.
Well within the 48.000 ft ceiling of the 12.8 cm Flak 40, beginning to be produced in numbers 1942
... not to speak of the interceptors fleet possible for the LW after 3 years without having to fight in the east and without the restrains put on production IOTL.
In general :
IMHO in most posts the changed conditions due to a victorious german cvampaing against the SU are simply ... ignored.
IMHO :
There would be kind a armistice in 1943/44 turned into cold war with german first test nukes going boom sometimes 1945/46 possibly somewhere in the former SU.
The concept of plutonium breeders were already there in germany, but ... you know : lack of resources due to war ... that would be on "pause" ITTL.
And for the "Atomic Rain" it would IMHO simply take too long to build up such an arsenal of nuclear bombs.
Using V1s would be completely counter productive and moronic for the allies.
The WAllies will first use them on cities but because of the destruction of historical monuments as well as population relocation policies by the German they’ll likely slow down their Nuking and focus on industrial regions, at some point one nuke will kill a few dozen thousand PoW or French/Polish citizens and the allies leadership will see it’s not the most efficient way to make Germany collapse.
For oil plants, ploeisti would be among the first target and would be destroyed long before the nuking begins ,the germans would have problems even restarting production in Baku and IMO it would be easier to destroy the oil transport lines from the east to germany.
Germans may have some success with building some fast bombers, think AR 234, or even transsonic rocket or jet powered V1-like missiles, in the enemy even if they can send something like 30 or 40 thousands of various missiles or fast air raid, the total explosive amount would be a few dozen KT, it would kill several dozen thousand brits, but it wouldn’t matter at all since the Anglo American will be able to drop the equivalent of several megatons worth of nuke and conventional bombs and kill some millions of Germans.
They could strike some lucky succes with a nerve gas raid with Fast bombers or missile, that could kill dozen of thousands, but then the allies will retaliate, I doubt chemicals would cripple much germany comparatively to the nukes, but anthrax or herbicide (the latter may already have been used against japan) will starve Germany and kill additional millions - although occupied European countries will have see the most death.
One problem for the American that I can see arising is if the are *too quick* in the Pacific, they may be in a situation comparable to summer 45 in late 44, then there would be no USSR or nuke to make them surrender, they will either have to starve japan and apply the same strategy as with Europe; or do a nuke-less operation downfall, which may need both the invasion of Kyushu and Honshu and would claim the lives of more than 200k Americans soldiers
RamscoopRaider
Donor
Nobody trusts Hitler to keep his word regarding any sort of peace deal, he's broken every promise and treaty he ever made more or less. Any peace is going to be a high intensity Cold War at best, and the WAllied leadership knows this
Hitler is still allied with Japan and the US is no going to make peace with Japan after Bataan
You'd also have plenty of peripheral operations, finish up North Africa, Sicily-Sardinia-Corsica, Crete, Rhodes, other Aegean islets, Norway
The idea of an armistice in 43-44 is absurd. And by "German first test nukes going boom 1945/46" I presume you mean killing themselves in criticality accidents.
Assume Soviets suffer critical blows in winter 1941-2, like the loss of Moscow and Leningrad. Germany grabs the resources of the south in summer 1942 and 1943 is spent mopping up what's left, while diverting some forces back to the Med and West, to be followed by more in 1944.
What the Allies are doing in this time? They are winning in North Africa,the Atlantic and Pacific. German air reinforcements will get overwhelmed in 1943 in the Med much as OTL, so all reinforcements pumped into Tunisia are doomed. So by the end of 1943 we see little change in events. Hamburg has been devastated by air power, the Med has been reopened and Italy has invaded, probably toppling Mussolini but definitely forcing Germany to commit large numbers of troops to keep Italy on the right side. We should also assume that the Allies don't do Roundup in 1943. The destruction in Hamburg and the Ruhr campaign will be taken to "prove" the value of strategic bombing, so the historical big push of winter 1943-1944 goes ahead. Losses are considerably higher, particularly if the RAF shifts focus to Berlin, which it very likely will, futilely seeking a knockout blow, but the Luftwaffe still can't handle the daytime attrition.
So now what for the rest of 1944? The Luftwaffe is crippled, but is much more capable of replacing losses without a campaign in the east, and can be expected to maintain strength and capability better, particularly as exploitation of resources in the east begins. German performance in the air campaign picks up further in 1945 as new production, resources and interceptors come into service. But they don't have an answer to the problem that every single B-29 is capable of destroying an industrial centre or air base. They cannot judge correctly judge the threat from night attacks by bomber streams when packets of B-29s break formation to attack individual targets.
Ultimately, the destruction of the Ruhr and the transport links to Normandy will keep much of German production stuck away from the battlefield. That allows domination of the air above Normandy, thence a successful invasion and, after bloody attrition, breakout. To defeat this strategy, Germany needs to respond in kind - to prevent the application of US industrial power. She can't attack the US, so the only hope is the new U-boats. But they look like a 1946 technology, and the ports will be in a bad condition by that point.
Assume Soviets suffer critical blows in winter 1941-2, like the loss of Moscow and Leningrad. Germany grabs the resources of the south in summer 1942 and 1943 is spent mopping up what's left, while diverting some forces back to the Med and West, to be followed by more in 1944.
What the Allies are doing in this time? They are winning in North Africa,the Atlantic and Pacific. German air reinforcements will get overwhelmed in 1943 in the Med much as OTL, so all reinforcements pumped into Tunisia are doomed. So by the end of 1943 we see little change in events. Hamburg has been devastated by air power, the Med has been reopened and Italy has invaded, probably toppling Mussolini but definitely forcing Germany to commit large numbers of troops to keep Italy on the right side. We should also assume that the Allies don't do Roundup in 1943. The destruction in Hamburg and the Ruhr campaign will be taken to "prove" the value of strategic bombing, so the historical big push of winter 1943-1944 goes ahead. Losses are considerably higher, particularly if the RAF shifts focus to Berlin, which it very likely will, futilely seeking a knockout blow, but the Luftwaffe still can't handle the daytime attrition.
So now what for the rest of 1944? The Luftwaffe is crippled, but is much more capable of replacing losses without a campaign in the east, and can be expected to maintain strength and capability better, particularly as exploitation of resources in the east begins. German performance in the air campaign picks up further in 1945 as new production, resources and interceptors come into service. But they don't have an answer to the problem that every single B-29 is capable of destroying an industrial centre or air base. They cannot judge correctly judge the threat from night attacks by bomber streams when packets of B-29s break formation to attack individual targets.
Ultimately, the destruction of the Ruhr and the transport links to Normandy will keep much of German production stuck away from the battlefield. That allows domination of the air above Normandy, thence a successful invasion and, after bloody attrition, breakout. To defeat this strategy, Germany needs to respond in kind - to prevent the application of US industrial power. She can't attack the US, so the only hope is the new U-boats. But they look like a 1946 technology, and the ports will be in a bad condition by that point.
A V1 can be used by a conventual aircraft to fire at a safer distance than a bomber and also it can be used instantly as very long-range artillery. Much of Northern Germany and Japan would be its range if the allies workout a naval version. The big plus is that a V1 is very cheap.
Indeed as Germany is turned into a nuclear wasteland. Once Hitler is dead the war will stop.
elkarlo
Banned
Problem is would the US and Wallies in general fight the whole time til an atomic bomb can be dropped? You're talking about much much higher losses than iotl . Hundreds of thousands more. Plus Lw that can make good for any loses they receive from the west as the war machine isn't in over production fighting everyone
thaddeus
Donor
Who Knows?
the collapse of USSR would bring 100's of PODs just by itself? my most likely victory scenario would have the Germans going no further south than Crimea while others are discussing capture of Baku?
so a great deal rests with the timeline? Soviet defeat before the Allies land in Vichy territory could change events significantly, with that regime less receptive to Allied overtures?
the collapse of USSR would bring 100's of PODs just by itself? my most likely victory scenario would have the Germans going no further south than Crimea while others are discussing capture of Baku?
so a great deal rests with the timeline? Soviet defeat before the Allies land in Vichy territory could change events significantly, with that regime less receptive to Allied overtures?
Just saying, in the timespan people on this thread are talking about, capturing Baku is entirely useless and counter productive for the German, when they will reach the place the Soviets would have sabotaged the place, then it would take maybe up to 2 years, definitely more than 1 to make it produce significant amount of oil, then there is the problem of, you know, bringing the oil to Germany, I doubt they can build a pipeline so long in this timespan, and ships in the Black Sea, barges on the Danube and trains would be perfect target for allied bombers and partisans.
And I would be surprised if they can reach 1945 without having Baku itself being bombed to death.
It’s best they don’t even bother with Baku, they will naturally, but just staying at Grozny is better for them
The main problem is how many casualties are the allies willing to take. The allied bomber force will have a much higher attritional level then IOTL. USAAF will soon forget about day light raids, it will be too dangerous for all sides, so everyone moves at night. If the German cities burn, so will the British ones. There is no comparison with the BOB, that was just a bluff, Luftwaffe being already spent during the BOF. The Germans also had heavy bombers like the Do 217 and He 177, and the ability to build a lot more. Soon the germans will attack with more than 1000+ bombers and intruders. The Luftwaffe has a lot of space to disperse airfields and build a lot more fake ones, while the British Isles are quite cramped.
Let us go with the most "optimistic" scenario for the Germans. They take Leningrad in 1941, and come close to Moscow and hold before winter sets in in the fall. Throughout 1942 when campaigning starts, they get their act together and cut rail ties between Moscow and Murmansk, and then envelop Moscow with the city falling in the late summer of 1942 with Stalin dying either in Moscow or during a last ditch attempt to escape the city. As a result German advances east and south are only inhibited by logistic strains and localized counter attacks by disorganized Soviet forces and by winter of 1942/43 the new government in Russia finally has control, likely a military led government, internally, and there is some sort of armistice with the line being somewhere east of Moscow, how far in the Caucasus one can debate. The Armistice is signed January 15, 1943.Now what?
In North Africa, things have gone pretty much as OTL. The Axis forces are pocketed in Tunisia and there is no way they can be reinforced between January and May significantly better than OTL. Moving forces to Italy and then transporting them by ship to Tunisia simply not doable in this time frame (how many ships are freed up by the USSR ending the war in the east for the Axis - answer essentially zero). It is entirely likely that Husky will go off on schedule, and again preventing the capture of Sicily is unlikely although the cost may be higher. Allied naval superiority, even if Italy stays in the war, but greater German forces in Italy may mean they go for Sardinia and Corsica instead of landing on the mainland, and you may see an island hopping campaign in the Eastern Med.
In the Pacific, pretty much nothing changes. Even if the armistice with Russia means the Germans and Japanese can use the trans-Siberian railroad to ship information (blueprints) and some goods, this really is not going to help either side very much. By early 1943 Japan is suffering from shortages as it can't ship anywhere near as much of the resources it seized to the Home Islands, and its industries, even if provided with all of the blueprints etc for aero engines and other goodies the Germans have in 1943 are still limited. Since the invasion of Italy has probably been shelved in favor of Sardinia and Corsica, there may be more landing craft, troops etc available for Pacific campaigns which might be accelerated.
For the Germans, they are no longer bleeding personnel, equipment, and burning petroleum on the Eastern Front to the extent they were OTL. Now they have to control this vast territory they have acquired. What they have acquired while rich in potential, is a howling wasteland. Industries have been destroyed or relocated, mines and oil fields have been sabotaged. The rail system is a disaster and has to be regauged and rebuilt to accept standard gauge rolling stock. The road system, which was pathetic before the fighting is now even worse. Most of the locals will either not care or help with the Jewish issue, however once what is in store for the bulk of the population becomes obvious, the Germans will continue to have a serious partisan problem to deal with - if you consider yourself dead already, you have little to lose in blowing a rail line of cutting the throat of a soldier. There will still be a need for troops, equipment, Luftwaffe, petroleum and so forth in fairly large numbers to deal with these issues and allow targeted reconstruction and resource extraction as well as administrators and construction supervisors to make all this work - no comment n Nazi "efficiency". The point of all this is that while there will be a movement of German resources out of the conquered USSR, it will be significantly less than one might guess, and accelerating Atlantic coastal defenses and garrisoning Italy will have a call on this.
By early 1943 the tide was significantly turning in favor of the Allies in the battle of the Atlantic, a German victory in the east by early 1943 will not change things very much even though in theory more resources could go in to building U-boats that was going pretty flat out already and the commander and crew quality was declining at the same time Allied ASW forces were getting better and better resourced. Technical reasons as well as Hitler's interference were still going to mean that introduction of German jets was not happening until 1944 and they were not the war winner, especially against night raids.
Japan is still going to be toast. By spring 1945, the Home Islands will be cut off from the rest of the world as much if not more than OTL. With Germany still on the continent, maybe no Overlord June, 1944, the Allies will blockade and bomb Japan in to starvation and industrial shut down while nibbling away at places like SEA worth attacking, and of course letting numerous island garrisons starve to death.
By the summer of 1943 the atomic program was showing signs that things were going to work, and the huge industrial complex that was required to make it happen was well underway. In 1943 Germany had zero functional atomic program, and folks like Heisenberg were strolling down the wrong path in their theoretical thinking. In order to have a bomb Germany would need to devote resources somewhat comparable to what the USA did, and even with victory in the east their industrial capacity can't do that - a smaller, slower program perhaps. Assuming the Manhattan Project proceeds as planed you have three weapons by August, 1945, and soon after monthly production begins. Even if Germany begins a crash atomic program in summer, 1943 the most wildly optimistic estimate would mean they produce their first bomb in late 1946, early 1947. This means they would have been getting nuked steadily for a minimum of 18 months, and that would slow their program even more - the estimate in the previous sentence sentence is working free of any interference. There is no need to hit "Allied" cities with nukes, conventional bombing of selected targets work just fine.
The USA and UK will never throw in the sponge in this scenario. Yes, they will probably end up paying a higher price for winning than OTL. The reality is anyone not drinking lead paint knows that any deal with Germany is a fools bargain. It merely gives Germany a chance to integrate conquered territories more completely, and allows them to build up for the next round free of interference. Keeping the atomic bomb a secret, while at the same
time building a stockpile and improving them is not realistic. Sooner or later the Germans will realize it can be done, and they will get them as well as aircraft/missile capable of delivering them (which they were nowhere near even in 1945) setting up a scenario similar to the early Cold War.
In North Africa, things have gone pretty much as OTL. The Axis forces are pocketed in Tunisia and there is no way they can be reinforced between January and May significantly better than OTL. Moving forces to Italy and then transporting them by ship to Tunisia simply not doable in this time frame (how many ships are freed up by the USSR ending the war in the east for the Axis - answer essentially zero). It is entirely likely that Husky will go off on schedule, and again preventing the capture of Sicily is unlikely although the cost may be higher. Allied naval superiority, even if Italy stays in the war, but greater German forces in Italy may mean they go for Sardinia and Corsica instead of landing on the mainland, and you may see an island hopping campaign in the Eastern Med.
In the Pacific, pretty much nothing changes. Even if the armistice with Russia means the Germans and Japanese can use the trans-Siberian railroad to ship information (blueprints) and some goods, this really is not going to help either side very much. By early 1943 Japan is suffering from shortages as it can't ship anywhere near as much of the resources it seized to the Home Islands, and its industries, even if provided with all of the blueprints etc for aero engines and other goodies the Germans have in 1943 are still limited. Since the invasion of Italy has probably been shelved in favor of Sardinia and Corsica, there may be more landing craft, troops etc available for Pacific campaigns which might be accelerated.
For the Germans, they are no longer bleeding personnel, equipment, and burning petroleum on the Eastern Front to the extent they were OTL. Now they have to control this vast territory they have acquired. What they have acquired while rich in potential, is a howling wasteland. Industries have been destroyed or relocated, mines and oil fields have been sabotaged. The rail system is a disaster and has to be regauged and rebuilt to accept standard gauge rolling stock. The road system, which was pathetic before the fighting is now even worse. Most of the locals will either not care or help with the Jewish issue, however once what is in store for the bulk of the population becomes obvious, the Germans will continue to have a serious partisan problem to deal with - if you consider yourself dead already, you have little to lose in blowing a rail line of cutting the throat of a soldier. There will still be a need for troops, equipment, Luftwaffe, petroleum and so forth in fairly large numbers to deal with these issues and allow targeted reconstruction and resource extraction as well as administrators and construction supervisors to make all this work - no comment n Nazi "efficiency". The point of all this is that while there will be a movement of German resources out of the conquered USSR, it will be significantly less than one might guess, and accelerating Atlantic coastal defenses and garrisoning Italy will have a call on this.
By early 1943 the tide was significantly turning in favor of the Allies in the battle of the Atlantic, a German victory in the east by early 1943 will not change things very much even though in theory more resources could go in to building U-boats that was going pretty flat out already and the commander and crew quality was declining at the same time Allied ASW forces were getting better and better resourced. Technical reasons as well as Hitler's interference were still going to mean that introduction of German jets was not happening until 1944 and they were not the war winner, especially against night raids.
Japan is still going to be toast. By spring 1945, the Home Islands will be cut off from the rest of the world as much if not more than OTL. With Germany still on the continent, maybe no Overlord June, 1944, the Allies will blockade and bomb Japan in to starvation and industrial shut down while nibbling away at places like SEA worth attacking, and of course letting numerous island garrisons starve to death.
By the summer of 1943 the atomic program was showing signs that things were going to work, and the huge industrial complex that was required to make it happen was well underway. In 1943 Germany had zero functional atomic program, and folks like Heisenberg were strolling down the wrong path in their theoretical thinking. In order to have a bomb Germany would need to devote resources somewhat comparable to what the USA did, and even with victory in the east their industrial capacity can't do that - a smaller, slower program perhaps. Assuming the Manhattan Project proceeds as planed you have three weapons by August, 1945, and soon after monthly production begins. Even if Germany begins a crash atomic program in summer, 1943 the most wildly optimistic estimate would mean they produce their first bomb in late 1946, early 1947. This means they would have been getting nuked steadily for a minimum of 18 months, and that would slow their program even more - the estimate in the previous sentence sentence is working free of any interference. There is no need to hit "Allied" cities with nukes, conventional bombing of selected targets work just fine.
The USA and UK will never throw in the sponge in this scenario. Yes, they will probably end up paying a higher price for winning than OTL. The reality is anyone not drinking lead paint knows that any deal with Germany is a fools bargain. It merely gives Germany a chance to integrate conquered territories more completely, and allows them to build up for the next round free of interference. Keeping the atomic bomb a secret, while at the same
time building a stockpile and improving them is not realistic. Sooner or later the Germans will realize it can be done, and they will get them as well as aircraft/missile capable of delivering them (which they were nowhere near even in 1945) setting up a scenario similar to the early Cold War.
marathag
Banned
By time Fermi got the Stagg Field CP-1 Pile operational, the US had made more pure Uranium Metal than the Germans would in the entire War.
Iowa State University had a breakthru for refining Metal from Ore with a process a fraction of the Time, money and effort than before.
What had once resulted in pounds, could now be tons
marathag
Banned
Oak Ridge used more electricity than all of Germanys generation capacity, so that rules out Calutron separation completely, and even after the war, US Gaseous Diffusion plants used almost as much power, so that's not looking so good either.
That leaves Plutonium-- and with their reactors, that's a disaster in the making
Its funny how you think that's a lot. The B-29 could carry almost twice that at a longer range, and greater altitude. At a lower altitude the B-29 could carry FOUR times that much. And there were three times as many B-29s built just OTL.
And what are they going to do? Impotently wave their fists across the ocean?
Oh not this bullshit again. What part of Germany's atomic program was a colossal shitshow with no chance of making a bomb is difficult to understand?
For the summer-autumn of 1942 when I asume is the last chance to finish the SU is quite enough. And without the huge eastern front to use most of the fuel, i belive there is enough for a night air campaign against british cities. And there where new projects on their way
I wasn't talking about the US
Without a serious atomic project, the next best thing i see is rumping up production of nerve gas facilities in the east, outside the range of allied bombers, and a strategic reseve of heavy domestic bombers to deploy that gas on Britain if necesary.
Last edited:
Name one instance of the world being ruled from Siberia. inb4 mongols
Not if they are going to be defeating the UK. By "new projects" meanwhile I assume you mean the Napkinwaffe, ie the designs that existed solely on paper, were usually garbage, but get held up as evidence of the super advanced Germany engineering right?
Neither am I.
The Germans still lack any sort of sea capacity, and defeating the USSR does absolutely nothing to reverse this. They can shake their fists across the Channel/Mediterranean at the British, but that doesn't give them the ability to reverse their colossal shortcomings in this area.
If gas gets deployed then Operation Vegetarian will be a go. Beyond that, the Nazis refused to utilize chemical weapons against the Western Allies due to the belief that said Allies would retaliate on a larger scale with those same weapons. Nothing involving this belief has changed, nor do I see a reason it will change. If you say they will be used in response to atomic bombings, then maybe. But if the Allies are actually at the point of dropping atomic bombs on Germany then the Allied air forces will be a colossal overmatch for the Luftwaffe over Britain, limiting the damage such attacks would do.