RAF 1946 versus Luftwaffe 1946?

First of all, this is my very first post on this forum and while I know that no topic will be entirely original (you guys have been at this some time!) I have done a search for RAF 1946 and didn't find anything, so...

I get a bit riled at digital documentary channels and their obsession with Nazi prototypes and 'what if?' scenarios - I mean, who in their right mind would have wanted Nazi Germany to have survived another year, much less had some sort of chance to have succeeded?

One thing I feel the documentary makers forget is that *if* Nazi Germany had been allowed the extra year of development and deployment of new aircraft types the Allies would have also had another year to do the same! However, my view isn't that it would have been a case of the Allies advanced prototypes versus the Nazi advanced prototypes - but that the Allies would have simply overcome by means of their ability to make huge numbers of conventional aircraft.

My contention is - like the M4 Sherman v Tiger scenario where the theory goes that while one Tiger was 'worth' 4 Shermans, the Allies could actually afford to lose 4 Shermans to destroy one Tiger - and still have more to spare. The Allies would win by means of industrial attrition.

Do you think this would be the same case with aircraft? Would the RAF in 1946 be fighting the end of the war with a slue of new advanced types or would they have continued until the inevitable end using large numbers of conventional craft (perhaps in upgraded versions)?

(Apologies if that was a bit long winded and thanks to the moderator for putting this in the most appropriate section/)

This sort of exercises are always fascinating, and of course pointless, but still fun. However, one should be realistic about it and take a few things into account.

First and foremost: does Nazi Germany in this scenario have access to various prime resources and ores? Is it's crude oil supply intact? In which way did the strategic bombing influence the industrial strength?
Developing advanced airplanes on paper is one thing, actually building operational types is another entirely, and they should have been built in numbers to actually influence the war at that stage.

Secondly: timeframe. No matter how impressive some of the Nazi projects look, you need a lot of time to design / evaluate / build a good airplane. So it would be wise to first gather as much information as possible and determine which projects where most advanced.
Conjecture:

Nazi Germany ( fairly strong industrial scenario):
Me 262 developments
Limited numbers of Focke Wulf Ta154
Limited numbers of Horten designs ( highly speculative)
Numbers of legacy prop planes and their developments.

Raf:
Meteor
Vampire
Spitfire developments and other advanced prop planes
Legacy Typhoons and Fury's.

A year just might not have been enough to really change the way the aerial battlefield might have looked at that point. Furthermore, speculating about another year for WWII implies that certain key events might have either not taken place or failed for the allies.

As I said, I find it very challenging to give any reasonable view of 1946 aerial battle.

Wouter

LOL - thanks for the reply Wouter...

As you quite rightly say, this is something of a pointless exercise - something I wish documentary makers on the Discovery channel would understand!

However, I think you make a valid point, and it's something that crossed my mind on a post I wrote on my blog about this subject - in 1946 *this* was the reality about Nazi Germany...



And all this was done with very conventional prop driven Allied bombers!

As you state, a year would not - I think - been enough to see any Nazi technological break through turn the tide (except perhaps a nuclear bomb?)...

It does intrigue me, however, how the opposing technological mix might have influenced an end to the war in Europe in '46. The allies seemed to ahve a pragmatic approach to winning the war, almost one of quantity over quality - though perhaps that's a little unfair.

It seems to me that the urgency and the industrial capability of the Allies meant that they didn't have to clutch at untested technological solutions as much as the Germans and Japanese did. That the US, Soviet Union and Britain had a slower more long term strategy about the use of advanced weapons.

I do wonder about the improved versions of conventional fighters that were cancelled due to the defeat of the Nazis, we hear much less about these than we do of the 'sexier' jets. Again I think documentary makers overlook the fact that the Germans did not have a monopoly over ingenuity or innovation.

How - just to pick one example - would have a 1946 Hawker Fury have faired against advanced marks of FWs? It's an interesting thought - as you say.

D.H. Hornets over the Berlin nuclear crater? :

I get a bit riled at digital documentary channels and their obsession with Nazi prototypes and 'what if?' scenarios - I mean, who in their right mind would have wanted Nazi Germany to have survived another year, much less had some sort of chance to have succeeded?

Click to expand...

That's why they call it the History Hitler Channel.

D.H. Hornets over the Berlin nuclear crater? Roll Eyes

Click to expand...

Good point.

It does intrigue me, however, how the opposing technological mix might have influenced an end to the war in Europe in '46. The allies seemed to ahve a pragmatic approach to winning the war, almost one of quantity over quality - though perhaps that's a little unfair.


Remember, the "Luftwaffe 1946" concept means everything from aircraft that were in limited production in '45 being produced in useful quantities, to stuff that was still at the bar napkin doodle stage. You have to pick some scenario where Germany had sufficient resources and industry to operate effectively. Also, development takes time. Take one of the L46 darlings, the Ta-183. Given any reasonable scenario, that would not be truly operationonal until 1948. Consider the aircraft Germany was actually making in 1945. How well do you think a He-162 piloted by some kid with 80 hours in his logbook going to do against a P-80? Against a combat box of Martin B-33s?

Berlin nuclear crater

Click to expand...

I read on a magazine that Berlin was initially considered as a target for a nuclear bomb but military and political circumstances prevented that possibility.

prolific1 said:

I get a bit riled at digital documentary channels and their obsession with Nazi prototypes and 'what if?' scenarios - I mean, who in their right mind would have wanted Nazi Germany to have survived another year, much less had some sort of chance to have succeeded?

Click to expand...

That's why they call it the History Hitler Channel.

Click to expand...

An aside: many long years ago when I was in college (thus sometime in the 1993-95 timeframe), the local Public Access broadcast station in the Ames Iowa region kept running a little low-budget spoof of the "Star Trek" episode with the Doomsday machine, starring what appeared to be college student. As the "captain Decker" character is in the shuttle flying towards his doom, the other cast members are on the radio, trying to talk him into coming back. But he's a dick, and they don't really care *that* much. So when one of 'em radios "Don't do it! You have so much to live for!" and Decker radios back "Yeah? Like what?" there a bit of silence until one of them says... "Umm... there's a documentary about Hitler on A&E tonight."

Wish I could find that. ISTR it was hilarious.

beaty1961 said:

First of all, this is my very first post on this forum and while I know that no topic will be entirely original (you guys have been at this some time!) I have done a search for RAF 1946 and didn't find anything, so...

I get a bit riled at digital documentary channels and their obsession with Nazi prototypes and 'what if?' scenarios - I mean, who in their right mind would have wanted Nazi Germany to have survived another year, much less had some sort of chance to have succeeded?

_ _ _

Click to expand...

Dear sir, please be a good sport and step down from the high horse, you might fall and injure yourself, I dare say!

Sorry, there aren't many times I get an excuse to pretend to be a part of the English upper class. Now, to the topic at hand.

The "obsession" you speak of have at least two plausible reasons: the everlasting fascination of evil and evil-doers among otherwise perfectly normal people, and the increased popularity of the genre Alternative History, thanks to authors such as Harry Turtledove. As a lad, I had a huge boy-crush on Soviet and Russian fighter aircrafts (due to their supposed ability to land where "Western" dare not to land, their crude electronics (in the MiG-25 anyway), the acrobatics of Sukhoi Su-37, the novel and film "Firefox", etc. That didn't mean I endorsed totalitarian socialism (I use this wording to avoid the "Soviet Union never had true communism" discussion). I've been against Marxism/Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism since I became interested in modern history and politics. Also, as a kid, I was far more pacifist than I am today, feeling uncertain at times whether it was OK to like military aircrafts at all. I think most people speculating about Luft -46 concepts are mostly interesting in the "cool" designs, some may get titillated by the "evil" aspect, but very few are Nazis who crave the return of Das Reich. If you like, you could speculate in 46 realities in which Operation Valkyrie succeeded and Germany fought alongside the Western Allies against USSR, or along with all the Allies against Japan.

Anyway, thanks for starting this very interesting topic.

Orionblamblam said:

prolific1 said:

I get a bit riled at digital documentary channels and their obsession with Nazi prototypes and 'what if?' scenarios - I mean, who in their right mind would have wanted Nazi Germany to have survived another year, much less had some sort of chance to have succeeded?

Click to expand...

That's why they call it the History Hitler Channel.

Click to expand...

An aside: many long years ago when I was in college (thus sometime in the 1993-95 timeframe), the local Public Access broadcast station in the Ames Iowa region kept running a little low-budget spoof of the "Star Trek" episode with the Doomsday machine, starring what appeared to be college student. As the "captain Decker" character is in the shuttle flying towards his doom, the other cast members are on the radio, trying to talk him into coming back. But he's a dick, and they don't really care *that* much. So when one of 'em radios "Don't do it! You have so much to live for!" and Decker radios back "Yeah? Like what?" there a bit of silence until one of them says... "Umm... there's a documentary about Hitler on A&E tonight."

Wish I could find that. ISTR it was hilarious.

Click to expand...

;D
One of the commercial channels here (back when TV was aired through analog signals, it was the only commercial channel allowed to air through "ground" (radio) transmitters, while you had to have cable or dish to get other) used to have lots of documentaries about Hitler, Nazis, the Holocaust etc. When Sweden later got digital channels, the owner of said station started other channels, including one documentary channel. Guess what the historical documentaries were mostly about (or so it seemed)? That's right, Hitler once more! : I, and IIRC a few more I knew, started to call it "Channel Hitler", a bit like prolific1. Now they don't have Hitler and Nazi documentaries so often, though once in a while there are documentaries about WWII in general. (Recently on the public service channel I followed the French series Apocalypse, la 2e Guerre mondiale. I noted that the - briefly mentioned - Tiger tank was credited to Ferdinand Porsche, not Dr. Erwin Aders, though I can see were the producers got confused.)

People are fascinated by Nazi Germany and the Wunderwaffen and these edutainment programs are made to satisfy this interest. It is a "What if..." intellectual game or fantasy to many people. I don't believe that the people who are writing these alternate histories, or viewing them, are Nazi sympathizers or wish that historical events had unfolded differently and that Nazi Germany was able to resist the allies for another year or prevailed in World War II.

Alternative history begins with the desired outcome or premise and the author then works backwards manipulating historical events to support the outcome. The author is free to pick and choose which events are changed to support the outcome. Sometimes this requires historical actors to make decisions that are contrary to their natures, blessed with greater talent or intellect they did not possess,
or be blessed with resources that they did not have and were unlikely to receive. They can also manipulate the weather or other natural conditions. Alternative history requires a lot of hand wavium and most authors cannot take into account all the actors at work that influence historical events.

Like all fantasy and science fiction, alternative history requires a willing suspension of disbelief.

pometablava said:

Berlin nuclear crater

Click to expand...

I read on a magazine that Berlin was initially considered as a target for a nuclear bomb but military and political circumstances prevented that possibility.

Click to expand...

O.K.
"Spitefuls over the Munich nuclear crater" :

Hammer Birchgrove said:

The "obsession" you speak of have at least two plausible reasons: the everlasting fascination of evil and evil-doers among otherwise perfectly normal people, and the increased popularity of the genre Alternative History

Click to expand...

There is one other: they lost. Why this is important in this instance is this: when they lost, their archives and design bureaus got thrown open for the world to see and catalog. The designers themselves openly publicized their work in order to bribe their way into better post-war circumstances (see: WvB). Thus there are a *vast* array of WWII German projects easily available. But the winners? They won. Theiy didn;t need to show nobody nuthin'. The United States created far more designs than the Germans, and every bit as forward thinking and astonishing. But the difference was, those were classified and *still* *are* classified in many instances. Thus, for all intents and purposes, all the public can see of "Allied '46" was what actually flew.

There was a much derided novel set in '46 that, IIRC, had the premise that Ambassador Kennedy's strongly held opinions meant US deferred Lease/Lend and stayed out of war a bit longer, leaving UK hangin' on by fingernails.

Anyhow, German special forces attack the Manhattan project and set it back a-ways.
( Analogous to RAF raid on Peenemunde etc ??)

Anyway, by the finale of the book, there's a mega-blitz on London, a viable version of Sealion mustering opposite the UK East coast, air-cover provided by Luft-46 jet fighters and all hope seems lost.

Cue Lockheed skunk-works, who 'double up' assorted single seat prop-fighters unto P-38-ish plus rocket boosts and drop-tanks etc etc to support the too-few Shooting Stars...

"They'll only have sixty seconds of boost, but what a wonderful time they'll have !!"

Which is the cliff-hangar, er hanger...

Fortunately or otherwise, one of the two authors went back into politics and seems to have busied himself there...

Perhaps mercifully, I cannot remember title or authors...

Nik said:

There was a much derided novel set in '46 that, IIRC, had the premise that Ambassador Kennedy's strongly held opinions meant US deferred Lease/Lend and stayed out of war a bit longer, leaving UK hangin' on by fingernails.

Anyhow, German special forces attack the Manhattan project and set it back a-ways.
( Analogous to RAF raid on Peenemunde etc ??)

Anyway, by the finale of the book, there's a mega-blitz on London, a viable version of Sealion mustering opposite the UK East coast, air-cover provided by Luft-46 jet fighters and all hope seems lost.

Cue Lockheed skunk-works, who 'double up' assorted single seat prop-fighters unto P-38-ish plus rocket boosts and drop-tanks etc etc to support the too-few Shooting Stars...

"They'll only have sixty seconds of boost, but what a wonderful time they'll have !!"

Which is the cliff-hangar, er hanger...

Fortunately or otherwise, one of the two authors went back into politics and seems to have busied himself there...

Perhaps mercifully, I cannot remember title or authors...

Click to expand...

Newt Gingrich co-wrote the book "1946," but the plot was unlike what you've described. In this case, Hitler got in a plane wreck a day or two before Dec 7, '41 and was knocked out of action for a few weeks, so when the Japanese declare war on the US, the Germans *don't.* When Hitler regains power, he maintains neutrality, and thus the US winds up devoting its efforts towards defeating Japan. By the end of the novel the Germans raid the Oak Ridge, TN, parts of the Manhattan Project, and start losing soldiers to a sherrif visiting from Kentucky...a sheriff named Alvin York.

Orionblamblam said:

Hammer Birchgrove said:

The "obsession" you speak of have at least two plausible reasons: the everlasting fascination of evil and evil-doers among otherwise perfectly normal people, and the increased popularity of the genre Alternative History

Click to expand...

There is one other: they lost. Why this is important in this instance is this: when they lost, their archives and design bureaus got thrown open for the world to see and catalog. The designers themselves openly publicized their work in order to bribe their way into better post-war circumstances (see: WvB). Thus there are a *vast* array of WWII German projects easily available. But the winners? They won. Theiy didn;t need to show nobody nuthin'. The United States created far more designs than the Germans, and every bit as forward thinking and astonishing. But the difference was, those were classified and *still* *are* classified in many instances. Thus, for all intents and purposes, all the public can see of "Allied '46" was what actually flew.

Click to expand...

Good point.

The best Alt Uni novel I read was of course: The Man in the High Castle (1962) Philip K. Dick. Winner of the 1963 Hugo Award.

The intent of the Nazi's December,1944 push in the Bulge was to thwart Allied access to Antwerp, thus stifle supply and impose a stalemate in the West. In any lucid moments in his mind, V-weapons, with the threat of CB warheads, would then cause UK to revert to his 1940 offer, of Brit lead at sea, German on the Eurasia landmass; US would abandon two-timin' Limeys and go home to strengthen their invasion Force for Japan; with or without US/UK connivance he would then attend to the Eastern sub-humans, relying on impending techno-kit to defeat their mass.

He in fact had no Plan B for January,1945 after the Bulge whimpered. We feared he must have a last throw - Werewolf Redoubt, something irradiating, V-next of real military efficacy. So: matej/justo m are right: the Little Boy target, 6/8/45 would have been German, from Tibbet's B-29 with, not just Wm.Penney as observer, but with an RAF, say, second navigator.

The point about non-target (Tokyo or)Berlin is the same as the report that at Waterloo Wellington, informed that Boney was in range of Allied cannon, chose to preserve a Centre of High Authority - to order armistice/surrender.

Orionblamblam said:

The United States created far more designs than the Germans, and every bit as forward thinking and astonishing. But the difference was, those were classified and *still* *are* classified in many instances. Thus, for all intents and purposes, all the public can see of "Allied '46" was what actually flew.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's only recently with the declassification of the Spangenberger Collection at the National Archives II in College Park, MD, that we've been able to see at least what the U.S. Navy was looking at in the late 1940s (or early 1950s) to the 1960s.

In other instances, a lot of the data is just tied up in musty archives at companies or buried somewhere in the Sarah Clark files -- you have to actively dig them out; unlike the case with the Napkinwaffe, which was publicized heavily.

beaty1961 said:

One thing I feel the documentary makers forget is that *if* Nazi Germany had been allowed the extra year of development and deployment of new aircraft types the Allies would have also had another year to do the same!

Click to expand...

That's what I love!

US vs Germany in 1946 is just going to be awesome.

You'll have masses of P-80A Shooting Stars tangling with Me-262s (four YP-80s or so were sent to Italy and flew some operational missions before the end of the war in '45 but never encountered any enemy aircraft); and the P-80 will be decisively superior.

It's quite possible the P-72 may get built in some numbers; and that will be even more awesome -- Ta-152s having to tangle with R-4360 powered Republic products.

Tankwise, you'll end up with M-26 Pershings (by summer of 1945, the US was producing...300 of them a month, and by December 1945, had produced 2,000). That's more than enough to equip at least one battalion of tanks with Pershings in just about every US Armored division IIRC. And the US Army gets a tank with the firepower of the Tiger I, but weighing less, and with significiantly better mechanical mobility.

Also, by this point, the M-24 Chafee will have re-equipped every light tank battalion in teh US Army, so instead of Stuarts with 37mm guns, the US Army's recon tanks will have 75mm guns. Quantum leap in capabilities.

Excellent points Ryan. Frankly, any way you look at it, the trends were against the Germans from essentially 1943 on and no matter whether it was Luft '46 or Luft '47, there was no way they had a chance for even a stalemate when you look at the quantity and quality of the materials headed into the war zone. Add to the that the irrational way that Hitler and his surrounding minions were running the war by late '44 and on into '45. I'm not sure we (the US and some Allies) would have followed through with an atomic weapon being dropped in Europe (ancestory is a powerful influence - not an issue in dealing with Japan) and I have not seen/read anything that leads me to believe the Germans were anywhere close to achieving that ability and forcing the Allies into dropping it first.

My 2 cents worth... Mark

RyanCrierie said:

Also, by this point, the M-24 Chafee will have re-equipped every light tank battalion in teh US Army, so instead of Stuarts with 37mm guns, the US Army's recon tanks will have 75mm guns. Quantum leap in capabilities.

Click to expand...

A quantum leap? Hell, I would've thought that going from 37mm to 75mm would have been a *major* increase in capabilities, not the smallest possible step.

To reiterate the points of others, and add some of my own, German industry by 1945 was shattered even with the slow movement to underground facilities production was taking a severe hit from a range of factors, not least a lack of raw materials and oil before we get to the devastation being wrought by the allied bomber offensive and a very real prospect of famine. From an aviation point of view the best the Germans would have in any numbers in 1946 would be Me-262s, He-162s and AR-234 variants (of the history channel generation). The He-162s would have spent most of their time killing their own pilots leaving the 234s and 262s. As others have pointed out though, the allies would have Meteors and P-80s whilst it is questionable where the German's would have acquired quality personnel from (12 year olds in jet fighters?).

Something often forgotten, the germans excelled (to an extent) at platforms but the allies did much better at sub-systems. This often comes up when people raise this issue in relation to U-Boats. There are frequent rants about how the late war Electric U-Boats would have been game changers, however, even once you get beyond the fuel and personnel issue one has to remember that the allies were then acquiring a range of new sonars, torpedo decoys and homing torpedos. Much of what is deployed in the 1950s to face down dangerous lunatic Mk2 is a product of late war allied developments far more than it is any captured German anti-gravity, undead supersoldiers with rocket backpacks technology.

The reality is that in 1945 Germany was a wasteland and any prospect of holding out until 1946 is nonexistent. it is better to ask how they held on so long rather than how they could have held on longer. Indeed compare the German defence of the homeland in 1945 to the French effort in 1940: For a massed conscript army to make its last stand in the shattered ruins of its own capital city is telling of a motivation that probably kept them going longer than they would have managed otherwise.

sealordlawrence said:

Indeed compare the German defence of the homeland in 1945 to the French effort in 1940: For a massed conscript army to make its last stand in the shattered ruins of its own capital city is telling of a motivation that probably kept them going longer than they would have managed otherwise.

Click to expand...

Well, it might not have been obvious to the French in 1940 that the conquering Nazis were the personification of pure evil... but it was obvious to the Germans in 1945 that the conquering Communists *were* pure evil

Orionblamblam said:

sealordlawrence said:

Indeed compare the German defence of the homeland in 1945 to the French effort in 1940: For a massed conscript army to make its last stand in the shattered ruins of its own capital city is telling of a motivation that probably kept them going longer than they would have managed otherwise.

Click to expand...

Well, it might not have been obvious to the French in 1940 that the conquering Nazis were the personification of pure evil... but it was obvious to the Germans in 1945 that the conquering Communists *were* pure evil

Click to expand...

An argument that does not wash, the historical antagonisms between the two were wide open for all to see and everyone knew that Germany did not have happy plans for France. The visions of Mitteleuropa were well known and the WW1 objectives that manifested from them were equally fresh in the mind.

sealordlawrence said:

An argument that does not wash, the historical antagonisms between the two were wide open for all to see and everyone knew that Germany did not have happy plans for France. The visions of Mitteleuropa were well known and the WW1 objectives that manifested from them were equally fresh in the mind.

Click to expand...

This may all be, but the French may not have envisioned the Germans carrying out the sort of depopulation campaigns that the Russians imposed on the Germans.

While 1940 is a little before my time, I've seen and read a lot that indicated that the Brits and French thought Hitler an uncouth bastard around 1940, but not quite the monster he turned out to be. But by 1945, the German people seemed quite convinced that Stalin and his armies *were* monsters. And history kinda bore both the French and Germans out... the German occupation of France was Not Good by any rational measure (especially if you were Jewish/Roma/gay/what-the-hell-ever), but the Germans hardly plowed the place under and raped and pillaged to the extent the Russians did to Germany five years later.

The Germans weren't especially *angry* at France. The Russians, however, seem to have been a little steamed at the Germans.

sealordlawrence said:

To reiterate the points of others, and add some of my own, German industry by 1945 was shattered even with the slow movement to underground facilities production was taking a severe hit from a range of factors, not least a lack of raw materials and oil before we get to the devastation being wrought by the allied bomber offensive and a very real prospect of famine.

Click to expand...

Germany wasn’t a wasteland in ‘45, far from it, and despite suffering a lot of damage was still able to produce huge quantities of equipment and move it around their country. Because of the peculiar nature of inputs to air combat capability this suffered far more than other arms because of the damage Germany had suffered. That is the lack of high octane fuel and peaceful skies for flying training. On the other hand despite huge superiority the allies were not flying enough sorties to disrupt German land forces to the degree the air force was disrupted.

Hitler did far more damage in the constant demands for small scale counter offensives and lack of flexible defence. It’s hard to quantify how different the German resistance to the Soviet and US/UK land offensives would have been if there was proper leadership of the Army (ie no interference by Hitler). Given the immense tactical resilience of the German Army despite the combat power of their enemies with proper strategic and operational leadership they could have added years to the time needed to reach Berlin.

sealordlawrence said:

Something often forgotten, the germans excelled (to an extent) at platforms but the allies did much better at sub-systems. This often comes up when people raise this issue in relation to U-Boats. There are frequent rants about how the late war Electric U-Boats would have been game changers, however, even once you get beyond the fuel and personnel issue one has to remember that the allies were then acquiring a range of new sonars, torpedo decoys and homing torpedos. Much of what is deployed in the 1950s to face down dangerous lunatic Mk2 is a product of late war allied developments far more than it is any captured German anti-gravity, undead supersoldiers with rocket backpacks technology.

Click to expand...

The Type XXI and Type XXIII U Boats made redundant virtually all of the allies ASW capability. While new systems were under development they were not ready in 1945 or 1946 or sometime after to counter the XXI and similar Soviet boats. The level of panic about the Electro Boats was extreme and they became the no. 1 priority of the bomber force. If the Germans had another 6-12 months of operations they would have been able to put 200-300 XXI patrols to sea (despite allied air and mine interdiction) and caused immense damage to the Atlantic convoy route. If a single XXI came across a convoy it would sink 15-20 merchants using its capability and that of its torpedos (later validated by the allies post war). Fortunately the Germans were only able to launch a single XXI patrol and right on the eve of the ceasefire. This boat was able to carry out a successful mock attack after the ceasefire that would have sunk a heavy cruiser. This is one area where the Germans had invested enough scale with significant new technology to make a real difference compared to the huge overmatch in the air and land. Fortunately they converted to the Electro Boats too late.

Orionblamblam said:

Newt Gingrich co-wrote the book "1946," but the plot was unlike what you've described. In this case, Hitler got in a plane wreck a day or two before Dec 7, '41 and was knocked out of action for a few weeks, so when the Japanese declare war on the US, the Germans *don't.* When Hitler regains power, he maintains neutrality, and thus the US winds up devoting its efforts towards defeating Japan. By the end of the novel the Germans raid the Oak Ridge, TN, parts of the Manhattan Project, and start losing soldiers to a sherrif visiting from Kentucky...a sheriff named Alvin York.

Click to expand...

My god do people really think the world works in such simple ways? Even if Germany never declared war on the USA after Peal Harbour the US still would have pursued a Germany first campaign. America was already fighting an undeclared war against Germany anyway. How are the Germans going to sneak soldiers into a fully mobilised USA anyway! And Former Sgt. York was actually a Colonel regiment commander in the Tennessee State Guard during WW2…

Abraham Gubler said:

My god do people really think the world works in such simple ways?

Click to expand...

It often does work in remarkably stupid ways.

Even if Germany never declared war on the USA after Peal Harbour the US still would have pursued a Germany first campaign.

Click to expand...

How do you figure? The American declaration of war on Germany did not come until, what, the 12th or 13th... *after* the Germans declared war on the US. Had the Germans not done so, I'm hard pressed to see how FDR could've swung the US over. With the Germans and italians declaring war on the US, it was easy to make it a "war on Fascism." but without those declarations... the American public would've been focussed solely on Japan.

How are the Germans going to sneak soldiers into a fully mobilised USA anyway!

Click to expand...

Me 264's, as memory serves.

As far as what would the RAF have in 1946 to combat the luftwaffe . well why has no one mentioned the de haviland Vampire . it would have been a great performer vs the me -262 etc.
as far as piston engined aircraft go you would have seen the p-51 h / the hawker fury / the de haviland hornet and that just the tip of the iceberg . as fare as ground forces go the germans would have seen centurions with 20 pound cannon and also pershing tanks in evre increasing numbers . no longer would the tiger and panther have been feared .

Orionblamblam said:

How do you figure? The American declaration of war on Germany did not come until, what, the 12th or 13th... *after* the Germans declared war on the US. Had the Germans not done so, I'm hard pressed to see how FDR could've swung the US over. With the Germans and italians declaring war on the US, it was easy to make it a "war on Fascism." but without those declarations... the American public would've been focussed solely on Japan.

Click to expand...

Before he was sent to jail for fraud Conrad Black spent a lot of time researching and writing about FDR. His essay “The Japanese Do Not Attack Pearl Harbor” in “What Might Have Been: Leading Historians on Twelve 'What Ifs' of History” edited by Andrew Roberts presents pretty convincing evidence that it was FDR’s policy to defeat Germany irrespective of American public opinion and wether Congress would declare war on Germany.

FDR would not have to fight Germany uphill against American public opinion as the tide was strongly moving towards war with Germany in ’41 regardless of Pearl Harbour and Hitler declaring war or not. Since the US had so many units actively engaged against the Germany Navy in the Atlantic it was inevitable that there would be American losses and that would not bode well for German popularity in the USA.

I would expect that such a scenario would only affect the war in minor ways, perhaps with no Operation Torch and more US forces in the Pacific in ’42 (both good things). War between the USA and Germany would be inevitable during the great Atlantic battles of the summer of 42.

Orionblamblam said:

Me 264's, as memory serves.

Click to expand...

One or two prototype aircraft flying half way across the world as the basis for a major military raid. Mr Gingrich shouldn’t give up his day job – whatever that is…

Orionblamblam said:

.....the German occupation of France was Not Good by any rational measure (especially if you were Jewish/Roma/gay/what-the-hell-ever), but the Germans hardly plowed the place under and raped and pillaged to the extent the Russians did to Germany five years later.

The Germans weren't especially *angry* at France. The Russians, however, seem to have been a little steamed at the Germans.

Click to expand...

If you want to compare the invasion of Germany by the Russians to anything, shouldn't it be the invasion of Russia/the Soviet Union by the Nazi's? Before my time as well, but I consider it pretty well documented that it wasn't exactly a picknick for those parts of the civilian population that didn't manage to escape.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

Orionblamblam said:

This may all be, but the French may not have envisioned the Germans carrying out the sort of depopulation campaigns that the Russians imposed on the Germans.

Click to expand...

The Germans really feared the Russians, and for good reason. They knew exactly what they had done in the east --and knew that the russians were coming for Revenge.

After all, the Germans had killed about 2.2 million civilians in Russia (about 1/3 to 1/4th of the population in Byelorussia died, depending on which count you take).

Lauge said:

Orionblamblam said:

.....the German occupation of France was Not Good by any rational measure (especially if you were Jewish/Roma/gay/what-the-hell-ever), but the Germans hardly plowed the place under and raped and pillaged to the extent the Russians did to Germany five years later.

The Germans weren't especially *angry* at France. The Russians, however, seem to have been a little steamed at the Germans.

Click to expand...

If you want to compare the invasion of Germany by the Russians to anything, shouldn't it be the invasion of Russia/the Soviet Union by the Nazi's?

Click to expand...

No, since we're talking about French resistance to the German invasion, which occured in 1940. The German invasion of Russia wasn't until '41, so the French wouldn't have that as a comparison. Had the order of invasions been reversed, and the French saw the horrors of the German advance into Russia, they may well have decided to fight harder, since it would then be more apparent that the Nazis were Especailly Awful.

The Type XXI and Type XXIII U Boats made redundant virtually all of the allies ASW capability.

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

They made the Flower Class Corvettes and the 19-21 knot Destroyer Escorts obsolete -- due to them not having enough speed to chase down a fast submarine in heavy seas -- their speeds would drop down to the point where a streamlined submarine doing 15~ or so knots submerged could actually outrun the ASW platform.

The newer 24 kt Destroyer Escorts plus older Fleet destroyers, with their higher speeds well in excess of 30+ knots, weren't as inconvienced, and plans were laid out for conversions of Fleet DDs into large DEs.

While new systems were under development they were not ready in 1945 or 1946 or sometime after to counter the XXI and similar Soviet boats

Click to expand...

Incorrect.

When the first information about the XXI began leaking out in '43; the British pulled the design cover for their earlier R-Class submarines -- which were small 500 ton SSKs designed in 1918 for optimum underwater performance (something like 14~ kts) to hunt and kill U-Boats.

Later in 1944, the Brits converted several S-Class submarines by cutting down their conning towers, and fairing over the torpedo tubes and hull openings. They couldn't dive very fast, but they could make 12.5+ knots underwater, and were operational at Bermuda for training duties for the USN and RN against a possible fast submarine threat.

The U.S. Navy then formally laid out in 1946 the plans for their DDK (Killer) and the DDE (Escort) conversions to defeat the fast submarine threat:

Interim DDE:
1 x trainable hedgehog
2 x Twin 5/38
4 x single fixed torpedo tubes (4 torpedoes total)
6 x 20mm twin mounts

Interim DDK
2 x Trainable hedgehogs (or 1 plus Squid)
3 or 4 x Twin 3/50 or 40mm quad
4 x single fixed torpedo tubes (20 torpedoes total)
6 x 20mm twin mounts

Furthermore, they laid out the general specifications of anti fast submarine task forces:

Anti-Type 21 TF:

5 x Fleet Destroyer Austere DDE with their superfiring 5"/38s replaced with trainable hedgehogs. No other modifications were to be done, not even to make the bridge layout more ameniable to ASW.
2 x Fast DEs (24 kt)
1 x CVE

Anti Type 26 TF:
1 x CVE
6 x Fleet Destroyer DDE conversions

It's funny how the Type XXI went back to pre-war doctrine -- for the U.S. Navy that is -- which emphasized submerged attacks using sonar bearings, and streamlined appendages, for maximum underwater speed -- take a look at the early wartime/pre-war towers of US Fleet boats -- they had enclosed bridge towers, and even the aft antiaircraft gun tub was enclosed to a point -- which made using it against surface targets impossible -- and even the periscope shears were streamlined.

RyanCrierie said:

Incorrect.

Click to expand...

Not quite. Please bear in mind I’m not making these calls based upon what I think but rather referring to period studies carried out by allied Navies as referenced in various books including the excellent the David Stevens “A Critical Vulnerability: The impact of the submarine threat on Australia’s maritime defence 1915-1954” published by the RAN’s Seapower Centre.

http://www.navy.gov.au/w/images/PIAMA15.pdf

Which for history buffs as the interesting story about how the RAN nearly brought Canadian ASW frigates in the late 1950s… Anyway back to the question:

RyanCrierie said:

They made the Flower Class Corvettes and the 19-21 knot Destroyer Escorts obsolete -- due to them not having enough speed to chase down a fast submarine in heavy seas -- their speeds would drop down to the point where a streamlined submarine doing 15~ or so knots submerged could actually outrun the ASW platform.

The newer 24 kt Destroyer Escorts plus older Fleet destroyers, with their higher speeds well in excess of 30+ knots, weren't as inconvienced, and plans were laid out for conversions of Fleet DDs into large DEs.

Click to expand...

The difference in speed between an ASW escort and a submerged submarine is not one of who’s fastest. The relationship between a Flower class and similar and submersible U-Boat like the Type VII was 4 to 1. The relationship between a DE and a Type XXI was 1.5 to 1. This was a loss in speed advantage of a factor of 2.5. Very considerable.

And pure speed was just one of the many elements in the Type XXI toolkit that enabled it to defeat 1940s ASW. It could stay underwater much longer, diver deeper than sonar, could out turn the escort’s tracking ability, have minimal above water indiscretion countering pervasive ASW aircraft and so on. Offensively the combination of the integrated firing computer and passive sonar with the pattern homing torpedos meant that each torpedo fired had a >90% chance of a kill in a box convoy.

To counter the Soviet copy of the Type XXI the Whiskey class the Type 15 fast ASW frigate was developed. It was far superior to anything in the water in WW2 and it is debatable if they could have any luck against a Whiskey/Type XXI. Certainly the kind of advanced ASW aircraft and ASW torpedos used to provide a high end ASW capability in the 1950s and 60s against the Whiskey and Yankee boats was not available in WW2.

RyanCrierie said:

When the first information about the XXI began leaking out in '43; the British pulled the design cover for their earlier R-Class submarines -- which were small 500 ton SSKs designed in 1918 for optimum underwater performance (something like 14~ kts) to hunt and kill U-Boats.

Later in 1944, the Brits converted several S-Class submarines by cutting down their conning towers, and fairing over the torpedo tubes and hull openings. They couldn't dive very fast, but they could make 12.5+ knots underwater, and were operational at Bermuda for training duties for the USN and RN against a possible fast submarine threat.

The U.S. Navy then formally laid out in 1946 the plans for their DDK (Killer) and the DDE (Escort) conversions to defeat the fast submarine threat:

Click to expand...

Yes but none of this is actually a reasonable countermeasure to the Type XXI. While the Allies were rushing fast ASW targets into service as mentioned above it was only part of the Type XXI’s tool kit. The later proved its capability both during the war and post war by running rings around WW2 contemporary ASW technology.

If the Germans had managed to launch significant numbers of Type XXI war patrols the only countermeasure the Allies would have had is to attack them at the source. Which would have required a major naval battle in the German Bight.

Abraham,

I have very little time but will just answer the two points that come immediately to mind.

The relationship between the Whiskey and the Type 21 is not as close as many people think. Secondly RN frigates in the 50s were not being developed to counter Type 21s but what was expected to appear as the generation after that. There is no debate about the Type 15 being able to take a Whiskey class, it would have done so with ease (comparatively). In service the type proved noisy, not especially fast, and rarely if ever dived as deep as it was claimed it could.

The torpedo's were available: the RN was receiving both Trumper (active / ship launched) and Dealer (passive / air dropped) homing torpedoes in 1945. Ironically most of these were scrapped soon after the war and were then revitalised under the later rearmament programmes (Dealer becoming Dealer B and the Trumper concept turning into Pentane).

Not quite. Please bear in mind I’m not making these calls based upon what I think but rather referring to period studies carried out by allied Navies as referenced in various books including the excellent the David Stevens “A Critical Vulnerability: The impact of the submarine threat on Australia’s maritime defence 1915-1954” published by the RAN’s Seapower Centre.

Click to expand...

I skimmed through that; and I didn't find anything really, other than "can move pretty fast, can dive deep(er) and can turn inside sonar beams".

My information on the USN/UK countermeasures comes from Norman Friedman's US Submarines (both books, I cannot recall specifically which one has the information), and his U.S. Destroyers, Revised Edition.

The difference in speed between an ASW escort and a submerged submarine is not one of who’s fastest.

Click to expand...

You have to be able to operate as an ASW platform in North Atlantic weather, in adverse seas. In 1948, the USN GenBoard heard a report on our first GUPPY submarine, the USS Odax, and how she was capable of outrunning a destroyer escort in any sea state above 3 by turning into the sea while submerged.

This is also why the CLK Norfolk was so huge. Due to the requirement of maintaining a 5 knot advantage over a 25 knot submarine even in rough weather, the SCB board simply picked the Atlanta class CLAA hullform and size as it had proven itself of meeting that requirement.

This also had other beneficial effects -- more room for equipment, a steadier ride in heavier seas, etc.

And pure speed was just one of the many elements in the Type XXI toolkit that enabled it to defeat 1940s ASW. It could stay underwater much longer, diver deeper than sonar, could out turn the escort’s tracking ability, have minimal above water indiscretion countering pervasive ASW aircraft and so on.

Click to expand...

The Snorkels as installed on the XXI was a horrible horrible design shot through with problems. In fact, the XXI was shot through with so many design problems, such as placing all the hydraulic lines -- which are used for everything from depth keeping through planes, to fast reloading of torpedo tubes, OUTSIDE the pressure hull, which makes them susceptible to seawater corrosion, damage, and they can't be fixed while submerged.

Goes to show if you give the Germans a task to do, they won't do it the right way or the wrong way, but will find a third way which is even WORSE.

I suggest you get Clay Blair's Hitler's U Boat War Volume I; in the preface, Blair talks about his experiences after the war investigating the Type XXI when some examples were tied up next to his boat, and he lists all the major problems in the design. Like for example, it never could achieve it's design depth, due to horrible quality control problems, which made leaks a grim experience at half the design depth, etc.

Anyway, the XXI's 'advantages' don't really count for much, since it still has to ATTACK a convoy to earn it's keep; and it's advantages over the VII don't outweigh the massive ASW advantages that the defender had in 1945; with forward firing ASW weapons, airborne hunter/killer teams with Sonobuoys, and anti-sub acoustic homing torpedoes.

Ironically, the British experience with their evaluations of their captured XXI's convinced them that the fast battery submarine was a dead end -- they already had Type XXI performance from their basic austere conversions of S-Class Boats, and the more elaborate one planned for HMS Scotsman, and evaluation of that performance against existing technology showed that the fast battery submarine was basically slightly more survivable than the conventional one, but it still did not have the performance necessary to survive even a 1945 ASW screen.

Hence the Royal Navy's extensive interest and support of the fast peroxide submarine -- it not only was faster -- 25 kts vs 16, but had more basic range; allowing you to at least have a chance of escaping the escort screen after you provided a flaming datum.

Certainly the kind of advanced ASW aircraft and ASW torpedos used to provide a high end ASW capability in the 1950s and 60s against the Whiskey and Yankee boats was not available in WW2.

Click to expand...

Actually, they were. The Mighty Mk 24 Mine "FIDO" had a top speed of 12 knots. Even if the Type XXI can outrun the FIDO; she only has about 30-45 minutes of submerged endurance at 15-16 knots, and the noise she makes at full speed submerged is bad -- the Type XXIs had horrible flow problems at those speeds.

So just have Avengers continuously dropping sonobuoys and Mk 24s over a XXI to exhaust her battery power, forcing her to submerge.

Course, the Mk 44 Mine/Torpedo will have it's development accelerated. It began development in 1944; and was basically a Mk 24 Mine/Torpedo lengthened by 41 inches to accomodate a second battery, which allowed a 11 knot search mode for acquistion of a target, then a 17 knot attack mode.

One or two prototype aircraft flying half way across the world as the basis for a major military raid. Mr Gingrich shouldn’t give up his day job – whatever that is…

Click to expand...

Writing a trilogy of wet dreams about a protracted American Civil War. Those pesky abolitionists.