User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 8:38:40 AM EST
[#1]
Outside of the technology advances, the US was tapped on drafting troops and paying into the war. Politically, the will was running out. The whole "it would have cost us a million casualties to invade Japan" is an irrelevant thought exercise, because the US would never have drafted that many more men.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 8:39:55 AM EST
[#2]
Had the war continued Hollywood could have been very different.
Ending when it did, guys like Jimmy Stewart, Lee Marvin, Eddy Albert, Audie Murphy survived and made it home. Had it continued another couple of years, who knows what may have happened if they'd stayed in combat longer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 8:49:43 AM EST
[#3]
We need to discuss why the war has gone on 2 more years: is it because D Day failed,the atomic bomb isn't developed,the Soviets were unable to reach Berlin? Japan defeated the US at sea?
All of these would yield different answers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 8:55:11 AM EST
[#4]
Too bad it didn't go on long enough to defeat the Soviets before they had nukes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:21:04 AM EST
[#5]
B36? How’s much battle damage would that have been able to absorb?
Don’t get me wrong.....neat looking airplane. Not pretty but intriguing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:24:21 AM EST
[#6]
Let's be honest the Japanese had lost the war by 1945. There was an invasion force, in route, when they agreed to surrender. They were about to commence shelling Mainland Japan with battleships, battle cruisers, cruisers, and destroyers as a prelude to full scale invasion. There is no logical come back other then potentially the emperor escaping to some other landmass. Yamamoto was already dead in a plane crash - and had come to the conclusion the war was lost when we didn't surrender after Pearl Harbor. The only way I see Japan still being an adversary 1945/47 is no Pearl Harbor, and some sort of pseudo cold war where they continue to occupy Korea (as long as the Russians don't go after them hard). If that happens they plow money into Battleships and light tanks, and probably develop a domestic submachine gun and a belted light machine gun. Maybe they invade Australia.
Germany's obvious place to pause is when they take France, and they don't start the terror campaigns on the Brits. If they do that - they can focus on Russia. I think the other thing that has to happen is they need to discard the wonder waffen and vengeance programs and focus on improving their equiptment to support the blitzkrieg. That means better Tiger tanks, probably a true medium tank too, improved medium bombers and ground assault planes, probably some sort of super 192 fighter. Their 8mm Kurtz Assault Rifle developments would continue. They'd have to focus on the Russians and only the Russians. Probably actually take/hold Stalingrad and Leningrad and get to Moscow. This is all contingent on keeping the USA out of it and getting to some sort of British ceasefire and relentlessly pushing on the Russians. There is pretty much no chance of the German "A Bomb" working from post war review from what I remember. They had essential errors in their thinking, and they just didn't have the right physicists. They may have gotten to massive fuel air bombs that could have ended some of the sieges in Russia earlier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:32:33 AM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sturmgewehr and Volkstuemgewehr in large issue STG's in the hands of troops would have stalled the Russian push, and given us fits with every Wehrmacht soldier capable of full auto fire. Back up the timeline, have Moscow fall, and it starts getting higher possibilities. Hitler frees the occupied countries to reestablish their own governments but not completely subservient and the divisions about face to set up defenses on the Channel coast which are 3X more extensive with brigade level QRF's to meet the Allies on the beaches. If DDay fails we have to nuke Berlin. Like the first Tokyo raid, those guys aren't coming back, and it's not voluntary. The sticking point is whether London gets nuked first. With London nuked the Germans cross the channel bring the war to England on their soil. Not the first time. The German jets would decimate the Spitfires and make Mustangs look downright commuter. Controlling the Channel on BOTH sides and embargoing the English to starve, while looting them and sending all the appropriate genetic selectees back, if they can get by for 20 years then you have another Aryan Army massed, trained, and poised for further conquest. That makes 1965 a completely different adventure with the German War machine moving to the Mexican border. Nukes would have been deployed anyway. No getting around it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:42:14 AM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Google failed me. WTF is a T20 Garland?  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
We'd have seen the P-80 Shooting Star, F8F Bearcat, AD Skyraider go into action. I have to wonder how the P-80 would've done against the Me 262? Also the T20 Garland and more use of the M26 Pershing. What other just too late weapons would've seen use? WTF is a T20 Garland? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:44:52 AM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
B36? How's much battle damage would that have been able to absorb? Don't get me wrong.....neat looking airplane. Not pretty but intriguing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:46:46 AM EST
[#10]
Centurion tank for the Brits.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:53:52 AM EST
[#11]
Okay, stupid question. Have there been novels written about WW2 1946-47?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:55:47 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The B36 was a massive lumbering AC and would have made an easy target I think. Early on, it wld not have been easy to bring them down. Edit: my Dad was a B-36 mechanic, so that kinda makes me an expert. 
He loved the plane and loved SAC, but I did ask him why they didn't use them in Korea....."because they would have been shot down." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:58:05 AM EST
[#13]
Quoted:
We'd have seen the P-80 Shooting Star, F8F Bearcat, AD Skyraider go into action. I have to wonder how the P-80 would've done against the Me 262? Also the T20 Garand and more use of the M26 Pershing. What other just too late weapons would've seen use? The British had the Sea Fury, and we had later more advanced Corsairs as well as the P51H and P82. That said, the Germans would have had the Horton, TA152, as well as the P1011 which was the bases for both the MIG15 and the F86. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 9:58:52 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People get seduced by a sexy picture, and fail to consider practicality and Logistics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:00:20 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This ^^^^^. No more Mausers, production turned to assault rifles firing the 8mm Kurz. T20's would have to be pushed to catch up. STG's in the hands of troops would have stalled the Russian push, and given us fits with every Wehrmacht soldier capable of full auto fire. Back up the timeline, have Moscow fall, and it starts getting higher possibilities. Hitler frees the occupied countries to reestablish their own governments but not completely subservient and the divisions about face to set up defenses on the Channel coast which are 3X more extensive with brigade level QRF's to meet the Allies on the beaches. If DDay fails we have to nuke Berlin. Like the first Tokyo raid, those guys aren't coming back, and it's not voluntary. The sticking point is whether London gets nuked first. With London nuked the Germans cross the channel bring the war to England on their soil. Not the first time. The German jets would decimate the Spitfires and make Mustangs look downright commuter. Controlling the Channel on BOTH sides and embargoing the English to starve, while looting them and sending all the appropriate genetic selectees back, if they can get by for 20 years then you have another Aryan Army massed, trained, and poised for further conquest. That makes 1965 a completely different adventure with the German War machine moving to the Mexican border. Nukes would have been deployed anyway. No getting around it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Sturmgewehr and Volkstuemgewehr in large issue STG's in the hands of troops would have stalled the Russian push, and given us fits with every Wehrmacht soldier capable of full auto fire. Back up the timeline, have Moscow fall, and it starts getting higher possibilities. Hitler frees the occupied countries to reestablish their own governments but not completely subservient and the divisions about face to set up defenses on the Channel coast which are 3X more extensive with brigade level QRF's to meet the Allies on the beaches. If DDay fails we have to nuke Berlin. Like the first Tokyo raid, those guys aren't coming back, and it's not voluntary. The sticking point is whether London gets nuked first. With London nuked the Germans cross the channel bring the war to England on their soil. Not the first time. The German jets would decimate the Spitfires and make Mustangs look downright commuter. Controlling the Channel on BOTH sides and embargoing the English to starve, while looting them and sending all the appropriate genetic selectees back, if they can get by for 20 years then you have another Aryan Army massed, trained, and poised for further conquest. That makes 1965 a completely different adventure with the German War machine moving to the Mexican border. Nukes would have been deployed anyway. No getting around it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:00:24 AM EST
[#16]
Everybody, but especially the Axis, was running out of people into 1944.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:03:17 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SKS and |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:10:24 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
B36? How's much battle damage would that have been able to absorb? Don't get me wrong.....neat looking airplane. Not pretty but intriguing. However high altitude bomb accuracy sucked, and the large cities were already wrecked, so they'd be doing very little damage. High altitude bombing was also very hard on engines, which combined with the accuracy problem is why the B-29's switched to low altitude night time incendiary raids. Add to this the B-36's engines always had a poor reputation for reliability, even after the plane had matured and was babied in peacetime. We could buy 6 B-29's for the cost of 1 B-36, which would be a bit of a hangar queen and too expensive to risk lightly at low altitude, while Japanese defenses were steadily weakening. And range from airfield to target had fallen off to where it was easy for the B-29 and the B-36's intercontinental range was extreme overkill. So I reckon we'd build a relatively few B-36's to bomb ineffectively, but untouchably, from high altitude just to work the kinks out and blood the crews, but a lot more B-29's to bomb much more effectively, at a higher but rapidly falling risk, down low.  Attached FileB-36 low pass:  Convair B-36 Peacemaker makes low pass over Fort Worth neighborhood |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:11:44 AM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The most obvious one, nukes. So be thankful it ended when it did I guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:13:21 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More atom bombs by then 
How does the war go on? Do we beat Germany and then get into a fight with Russia over the treasure and to stomp out communism? I think he was right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:17:20 AM EST
[#21]
Que oprah everyone gets a nuke
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:18:18 AM EST
[#22]
The casualties
A T20 Garand would be ideal. Didn't need the selective fire though. The Springfield approach was to lengthen the M-1 receiver by 1/4" to give it more travel time. It was that or increase the spring strength on the BAR magazine, making the magazine unsuitable for the BAR. The Remington solution was superior to Springfield. They embedded a spring within the op rod spring. The Pershing was the best we had, but suffered from weak transmission and was underpowered. This was corrected in the M46. As for the T-80, I think it would have given the Me-262 a run for its money. We had superior metallurgy (Me-262 engines were only good for a flight and a half). Our production capability was superior to the Germans (slave labor tend to sabotage things). Truman may even have grown a mushroom over Berlin, ending the war in 1945. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:18:58 AM EST
[#23]
Every major power had troops on the ground INSIDE Germany in 1945. The Us Army crossed the Rhine in March. Kind of hard to extend the war with that going on.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:19:22 AM EST
[#24]
About the only way this happens is if the Japanese launch additional waves at Pearl Harbor and destroy all of the fuel dumps. Meanwhile Germany puts Leningrad and Stalingrad to encirclement and siege instead of inner city fighting. Throw in a little less Hitler crazy and more general war production instead of fantasy weapons and the war could go to 46.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:20:14 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Luft 46 secret weapons are far more interesting to speculate. Swarms of cheap He-162 would have been useful if they had trained pilots in them. https://www.tamiya.com/english/products/21072salamander/top700.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:20:56 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: New thread topic: If Roosevelt lived longer how much Stalin cock would he have gobbled? Either way, good riddance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:21:02 AM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
B 32 employed more than it was. M2 Carbine w/30 round magazines more widely issued Two additional Iowa-class battleships, plus more use of the four Alaska-class Battle Cruisers P2V Neptune F7F Tigercat C-87 C-97 B-29D (aka B-50) B-36 (possible) F9F (possible) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:21:05 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the B-36 had a higher ceiling than any Japanese fighters at 42,000 feet officially, unofficially 50k+. The B-29's ceiling was much lower at 32K, and was 50-60 mph slower, and when doing high altitude bombing the Japanese couldn't manage very many interceptions on them. I think the B-36 almost completely out ranges their flak as well. So if you stuck with high altitude it doesn't matter, they'd be taking little or no damage. However high altitude bomb accuracy sucked, and the large cities were already wrecked, so they'd be doing very little damage. High altitude bombing was also very hard on engines, which combined with the accuracy problem is why the B-29's switched to low altitude night time incendiary raids. Add to this the B-36's engines always had a poor reputation for reliability, even after the plane had matured and was babied in peacetime. We could buy 6 B-29's for the cost of 1 B-36, which would be a bit of a hangar queen and too expensive to risk lightly at low altitude, while Japanese defenses were steadily weakening. And range from airfield to target had fallen off to where it was easy for the B-29 and the B-36's intercontinental range was extreme overkill. So I reckon we'd build a relatively few B-36's to bomb ineffectively, but untouchably, from high altitude just to work the kinks out and blood the crews, but a lot more B-29's to bomb much more effectively, at a higher but rapidly falling risk, down low. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/172926/Untitled_jpg-1191551.JPG B-36 low pass:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCViKu9XlbQ
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:24:40 AM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasnt the Skyraider built at the end of the war? You listed that one. The well trained early 20s pilots in the P80s would have chewed up the 16 year olds in the 262s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:24:48 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
2nd Post nailed it. Thread ended after that answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:29:12 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Horten HO 229 seems like it had the potential to be bad news for the allies... https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/359475/F089BA5E-9D75-4452-BDE0-6B7DF0C5C2DB_jpeg-1191310.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:30:01 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We would have nuked Berlin. Game over. Europe would be a different place today. After letting the genie out of the bottle in Japan, Germany would have been nuked into submission if they were still waging war. I believe Americans were sick and tired of Germany's shit after 2 world wars and would have supported nuking Berlin (and where ever else in Germany until it was over). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:30:29 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What pushes the war to 46/47? D-Day gets pushed back and they can't reInvade anytime soon? Conventional invasion of Japan bogs down? Nukes is the answer to both. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:33:43 AM EST
[#34]
The B29 in service at the time would have failed miserably in Europe, like said above the B29C (never built, based on the Silverplate) or D series.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:33:43 AM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Luft 46 secret weapons are far more interesting to speculate. Swarms of cheap He-162 would have been useful if they had trained pilots in them. https://www.tamiya.com/english/products/21072salamander/top700.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:36:46 AM EST
[#36]
Allies would have been fighting manpower shortages. Britain was tapped out by early 44. All 106 divisions we raised were overseas by 45, there was no reserve left in the US. Home front would have been getting antsy, people wanted the war over.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:37:55 AM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Truth. Also, the 262 did not have the maintenance facilities to keep it running by the end of the war. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:39:01 AM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If Roosevelt has lived out his fourth term he may well have established himself as an American Stalin. There's been some speculation that his death was not due to natural causes and there's circumstantial evidence to lend some validity to the theory including the disappearance of many of his medical records after his death. Either way, good riddance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: New thread topic: If Roosevelt lived longer how much Stalin cock would he have gobbled? Either way, good riddance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:39:20 AM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Patton wanted to conscript what was left of the German military and crush the USSR while it was weakened. I think he was right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:46:20 AM EST
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:52:32 AM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More atom bombs by then
How does the war go on? Do we beat Germany and then get into a fight with Russia over the treasure and to stomp out communism? But the loss of life would have been even more staggering. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 10:56:25 AM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Cite? It was a book written a few years ago that covered some of the more unusual aspects of FDR's failing health. Mrs Roosevelt suspected as much herself and when she requested his medical records some years later she was told that the records had been lost. The author points his suspicions at Stalin who wanted to consolidate his power and influence in Europe after WWII but I'm inclined to think there were domestic interests at play who feared an increasingly more powerful Roosevelt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:22:00 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @wganz T20 GARAND https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2W3Zu51Sj68/TY_5qEa6GAI/AAAAAAAAABc/HdhUszCdzRg/s1600/t20_8ld3fj9a.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:25:16 AM EST
[#44]
We might have gotten a Montana class battleship or two had the war gone longer.
German type XXI submarines would have created new problems in the Atlantic too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:33:50 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
About the only way this happens is if the Japanese launch additional waves at Pearl Harbor and destroy all of the fuel dumps. Meanwhile Germany puts Leningrad and Stalingrad to encirclement and siege instead of inner city fighting. Throw in a little less Hitler crazy and more general war production instead of fantasy weapons and the war could go to 46. Halifax was a Hitler appeaser and hated Churchill, with disaster staring them in the face Halifax was offered the PM job but, I believe, figured he'd hand the shit sandwich to Churchill and just try to survive politically to pick up the pieces later. Halifax was made part of Churchill's war cabinet and then tried to convince the cabinet to force Churchill to seek peace terms with Hitler just as Dunkirk began, but Churchill saw it coming and beat him to the punch by a matter of hours with a speech to the cabinet that established his policy of total resistance. Dunkirk was as successful as it could be, the British hung on by their fingernails, the rest is history. But if Halifax took the PM offer, or if Churchill's government lasted all of two and a half weeks before he had to resign after Halifax hijacked the cabinet and stirred an already rising panic, Halifax would have negotiated. Hitler wanted Britain as an economic (and perhaps even direct military) ally against Russia much more than he wanted to march into London, I think both he and Halifax would have accepted "internment" of most of the RN and RAF's equipment in occupied France (which Hitler would then steal, that being understood by both but unstated for political reasons), mild reparations and advantageous but not disastrous trade terms (which Hitler would unilaterally change once Britain was largely disarmed) and the right to build a colonial empire hither and yon. Britain wouldn't have to be invaded or occupied, just being disarmed and neutral would add many, many years to the war. Russia is much more likely to have fallen, at a minimum FDR has to adopt a Japan first policy since it would be the better part of a decade before we could hope for a trans-Atlantic D-Day, quite possibly we avoid war with Nazi Europe entirely until both sides have nukes and we settle into a cold war. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:36:07 AM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The B36 was a massive lumbering AC and would have made an easy target I think. Quote HistoryQuoted:
The B36 was a massive lumbering AC and would have made an easy target I think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:36:43 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Horten HO 229 seems like it had the potential to be bad news for the allies... https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/359475/F089BA5E-9D75-4452-BDE0-6B7DF0C5C2DB_jpeg-1191310.JPG |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:42:16 AM EST
[#48]
USS Montana
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:55:14 AM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The most obvious one, nukes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2019 11:56:22 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Montana class battleship possibly may have been resurrected? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
B 32 employed more than it was. M2 Carbine w/30 round magazines more widely issued Two additional Iowa-class battleships, plus more use of the four Alaska-class Battle Cruisers P2V Neptune F7F Tigercat C-87 C-97 B-29D (aka B-50) B-36 (possible) F9F (possible) |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File