World War 2 What If

[Garth Vader]

This is somewhat true, but I'm assuming that after a disastrous B-17 raid (maybe 15% losses) or three, the Allies would re-evaluate the strategy, and use the bombers for raids within range of friendly fighter cover - northwestern France, and possibly Greece. The B-29 would be deployed to the ETO, which would have been much more effective in my opinion. Also keep in mind that the bomber offensive, while good for Allied morale, did little to actually win the war - German production in the latter half of 1944 was greater than any other 6 month period between 1933 to that time.

But any strategy you outlined depends on air superiority. Without the east Front and with access to fuel and materials the Germans could have built enough 262's to defend their skies. They were also on their way to A2A and SAM capabilities. You'd be looking at a long air war. Maybe long enough for a settled peace.

[David Floyd]

The Me-262 wasn't actually all that effective against the P-51D in skilled hands. Additionally, the Meteor and the P-80 Shooting Star were on the horizon.

The German SAM and A2A "capabilities" were basically the same as most of their Wunderwaffen - looked good on paper, but impractical given the technology of the time.

Additionally, given Allied production numbers and greater training acumen, the Allies could have counted on air superiority anywhere their fighters could reach. So, air superiority in Africa, the Med, the Channel, northwestern France, and once bases were seized/carriers from the Pacific used, in Norway, and from their Denmark and the Baltic.

[BlackCat]

Yes, emphasis on the bolded part. The Royal Navy was, let's just say, MARGINALLY more capable of detecting and destroying U-boats than unarmed merchant ships.

Have you heard about the concept convoys ? A number of merchant ships sailing together protected by warships ? Despite these warships with their ability to detect submarines, the german subs had the audacity to sink merchant ships - often they first discovered the attack when a ship exploded. Are you saying that the germans was unable to aim against the warships if that had been their prime target ?

I don't try to claim that the germans easily could sink the RN, quite contrary, but they could do serious damage.

[David Floyd]

Do you understand how heavily the use of convoys reduced merchant losses and increased U-boat losses?

Also, the whole point of convoy escorts is for the subs to GO AFTER THE ESCORTS! Doing so defeats the purpose of attacking the convoy to begin with.

Additionally, once the British broke Enigma they pretty much knew what attacks were coming when and where, and could plan accordingly, not to mention that they had virtually mastered the art of direction finding as a means of U-boat detection (the aforementioned HUFFDUFF).

If you are going to win the U-boat war, you need to seriously beef up Enigma, or at least have the Germans change the code rather than insist it was unbreakable, as well as developing a U-boat that was deployable in massive numbers in 1942/3 that could run submerged at high speed for long periods of time and that operated with complete radio silence.

If you can do all that you have a chance, but going after the Royal Navy instead of the merchant ships is not even close to a war winner.

[Kitschum]

If only there was a strategic target that the Allies could isolate, land in overwhelming strength, AND create a strategic advantage for themselves by doing so.

Oh wait, there is. Norway. I'd put a Norwegian campaign on the books for summer of 1944, around the same time as Overlord historically, except that I really think that to pull this off the Allies need massive carrier support in the North Sea. This pushes the campaign back a year, to May of 1945, when Japan is essentially defeated. At this point, the US can easily transfer 8-10 carrier decks to the region, and in conjunction with land-based air power and the Royal Navy, absolutely dominate the Luftwaffe. Germany can't easily reinforce, nor can they easily defend the landings along the long Norwegian coastline. Additionally, the Luftwaffe is absolutely not suited for anti-shipping strikes, as the Luftwaffe never developed an adequate anti-shipping aircraft or a torpedo bomber, so I can easily see 8-10 US carriers, with UK support, operating at will in the region.

I agree on the Allied superiority at sea and to a lesser extent in the air, but I think you're underestimating the practical problems of landing. Even historically, the Germans had 350,000-400,000 men in Norway up until the end of the war (essentially one German soldier for every three adult male Norwegians) and after Hitler had committed suicide and the Soviets were toasting in vodka in Berlin there were still fears that Norway would be made into a very bloody last stand.

In any case the Germans were well aware of how exposed they were and had plenty of time to train and make preparations. Norway is excellent defensive ground just by nature (look at a map, it's mostly mountains). Roads and infrastructure in general can not be compared to northern France. And without researching it closer, lack of big ports would most likely be a big obstacle, because you'd still need to ferry about the same number of troops as in Overlord and their supplies. In Normandy the Allies managed for an impressively long time before capturing a port, but a difference here is distance which will necessitate even more attention to planning. All logistic errors will be costlier. Actually as I write this a landing on the scale of Normandy in Norway is looking more and more like the worst gridlock conceivable.

I disagree that the Germans can't reinforce. At landing sites maybe you're right, but not in country. They can do so over the Baltic sea through Sweden, or even from Finland. For that matter, odds are that Sweden has already been occupied. Plans were drawn up in 1943 for an invasion of Sweden from Norway. They never came close to implementation, but I'd think in our scenario Hitler would want to tie up all loose ends, which means more defensive depth and even more forests with poor roads to cover for prospective Allied spearheads.

And that's where I stop for now. In August 1945, the fight is still going in Southern Norway, although the Allies are gradually gaining the advantage. Swedish iron ore shipments to Germany are diminishing, due to Allied "suggestions".

Just a note since you mentioned it. I think it's debatable how important the Swedish iron ore was after the fall of France. Narvik is not the only possible option in summer either and in winter you can expect that some can be transported the other direction by train to southern Sweden.

[Garth Vader]

The Me-262 wasn't actually all that effective against the P-51D in skilled hands. Additionally, the Meteor and the P-80 Shooting Star were on the horizon.

Additionally, given Allied production numbers and greater training acumen, the Allies could have counted on air superiority anywhere their fighters could reach. So, air superiority in Africa, the Med, the Channel, northwestern France, and once bases were seized/carriers from the Pacific used, in Norway, and from their Denmark and the Baltic.

I think performance against P-51's had a bit more to do with being out numbered 20-1 or whatever the number was. Give the Germans a handful of F-16's in 1945 and the allies would just get them landing like the did with the 262's.

I am not saying the Allies couldn't eventually win, I am just saying it might take long enough that the people back home would get tired of it. How long is it going to take to whittle the luftwaffe down enough for an invasion when it is more than twice the size that was faced historically, and German industry can focus on air production? Without the needs of the East Front I think the Germans would be capable of training to a high level as well.

[BlackCat]

Do you understand how heavily the use of convoys reduced merchant losses and increased U-boat losses?

Yes, of course - that's the whole point of convoys.

Also, the whole point of convoy escorts is for the subs to GO AFTER THE ESCORTS! Doing so defeats the purpose of attacking the convoy to begin with.

As far as I know they didn't do that - they still had the merchants as prime target. IF they had gone after the escorts heavily for a period, the allies could have run out of escort ships.

Additionally, once the British broke Enigma they pretty much knew what attacks were coming when and where, and could plan accordingly, not to mention that they had virtually mastered the art of direction finding as a means of U-boat detection (the aforementioned HUFFDUFF).

If you are going to win the U-boat war, you need to seriously beef up Enigma, or at least have the Germans change the code rather than insist it was unbreakable, as well as developing a U-boat that was deployable in massive numbers in 1942/3 that could run submerged at high speed for long periods of time and that operated with complete radio silence.

If you can do all that you have a chance, but going after the Royal Navy instead of the merchant ships is not even close to a war winner.

The brits having acces to enigma was certainly a backdraw, especially since the germans didn't know and thought it secure - though, I belive it was more efficient in protecting the murmansk convoys than convoys to england. Since the murmansk convoys would stop if russia was overrun, it would be smaller areas they would have to hunt in wich wouldn't need same communication, but of course also smaller areas to patrol for the brits.