The Japanese were badly mauled by the Soviets in 1939, so they were VERY cautious towards them.

True.  Heavy Bombers without adequate Fighter escorts & heavy suppression of enemy fighters in advance of the bomber stream have suffered unsupportable losses.

Bigger_Hammer

I never said it didn't, but I could have been more clear. American involvement, in my opinion, really was a given from the time the war started.

I imagine that Germany would have the same issues that we encountered. The other issue being how much of a secret they could have kept their massive bomber fleet development under the Treaty of Versaille. It was relatively simple to train fighter pilots in gliders, but heavy bombers?

The B-17's had a range of 2000 miles. The B-29's were 3000 miles.  Not much of a problem for bombing Europe, but the Pacific theater posed challenges.

It is a pretty quick read, but check out The Bomber Mafia by Malcolm Gladwell.

It covers some of the limitations encountered with the Daylight Precision Bombing the US preferred, and the Night Area Bombing the UK preferred. Some of the personalities, the Air Tactical School and the affiliated officers. Covers Norden, the creation of Napalm, some of the issues encountered getting the B-29's to reach Japan from the Pacific islands and from India.

This was my thought as well. No way the Luftwaffe could have sustained the kind of losses that the 8th did. The 8th almost couldn't.

The Germans would have needed a long range fighter to escort their bombers.

The 10,000 mile range B-36 was ordered before Pearl Harbor for the worst case scenario, capable of the intercontinental bombing of Japan and Germany in the event that the Pacific islands and Britain fell and the US was pressed back to the coasts.  A full scale mockup was complete in July 1942:
Attached File


Priority fell as worry for the worst case scenario faded and B-29 development lagged, first flight wasn't until 1946.  But if the atom bomb program failed and Japan held out until 1947 a few may have participated in the invasion.  

B-36 was fast, it's ceiling was higher than the range of all but a handful of Japan's heaviest AAA, higher than any of Japan's fighters, and they could outturn every fighter of the 1940's-1950's at high altitude thanks to the enormous wing.  Nearly untouchable until high altitude SAM's.  Wouldn't have hit a thing with dumb bombs dropped from high altitude, but the US was already using small numbers of command guided and radar or IR guided bombs in combat in 1945.  Would have been incredibly expensive, of course.

The bulk of the secret build up of the German military, as well as development of the technological base to support, occured in Russia with the cooperation of the Communist Russians.

"Beginning in 1925 and growing rapidly after the Junkers scandal, the two militaries established a series of secret military bases at which German and Soviet officers lived, studied, and trained side-by-side. Teams of engineers and scientists worked on new weapons systems and reverse-engineered American, British, and French military equipment. Two of these bases were devoted to chemical weapons production, one to aviation training, and one to armored warfare. These bases helped to modernize the Red Army and played a central role in developing the military technologies that would enable the rebirth of the German military under Hitler ."

source:  https://warontherocks.com/2016/06/sowing-the-wind-the-first-soviet-german-military-pact-and-the-origins-of-world-war-ii/

Had they focused on getting a large number of long range bombers over the V1 rocket 'campaign' against England, they would have destroyed England.

The V-1 was cost effective compared to manned bombers with valuable trained crew and fighter escort, and Allied countermeasures, like bombing, were disproportionately expensive in equipment and personnel.  That program was a large net positive and well worth it.  The V-2, on the other hand, was possibly the most wasteful military project of the war.

True. The V-2 was a colossal waste of funds when viewed from its effect on the war. A marvel of science that ultimately had no effect on the outcome.  The cost of simply fueling them was absurd, let alone all the researchers and skilled labor wasted on their production.

We're fortunate they were so foolish.

They should have concentrated on defeating the British before stirring up the Russian hornets nest.

They could have used their navy to destroy lend lease fleets coming into the Eastern side of the Soviet Union and caused quite a bit of havoc

No, because no matter what wonder weapon they have, they still have Hitler who didn’t have a damn clue on how to conduct military operations. His constant meddling and micromanaging will single handedly cost Germany the war in every scenario that he is in charge.

It is amazing to look at the number of foreign SS units there were.

The amount of men, materials & armament the Germans dedicated to bomber defense was huge, and took those resources away from front line combat units.

Over 8,750 88mm Flak guns were deployed in Germany's air defense. About 25,000 20mm & 30mm cannon. In the fall of 1941 the Afrika Korps had less than 40 88's, just before attacking the British.

The Anti aircraft units inside Germany used 900,000 soldiers. Rommel's army for defense of Normandy was right around 500,000 men.

About 1 million men worked full time in Germany repairing bomb damage.

The U-boat fleet got much stronger before the ASW forces gained the upper hand.  I don’t think changing their starting strength would change much in the end.  Superior American industrial capacity and the one dimensional nature of the Kriegsmarine determined the outcome of the Battle of the Atlantic.

...and there is speculation that it wasn't as much the bombs that forced Japan to surrender as was the threat of Soviets unleashed on the mainland.

I still agree with your comment, Germany and Japan could have absolutely won WWII.  First and foremost, they have to keep the US out of the war at all costs.  Germany has to convince Japan not to provoke the US and definitely not attack the Pacific fleet, they have to ally together with their primary goal of conquering Russia.  Before moving on the Soviets, the Germans have to annihilate the BEF at Dunkirk.  Most of Britain was still very much against the war, it was still incredibly unpopular with even high ranking officials, and the demoralizing loss of the BEF would have almost certainly forced the British to sue/agree to a negotiated peace with the Germans.  Once the UK situation is solved, Germany can focus east....except it has to move across as a liberating force, not as an army of murdering/raping/genocidal maniacs.  Ukraine would have willingly joined in against Stalin, and with the addition of air assets no longer tied up fighting across the Channel, the Germans can bring to bear a considerably stronger force.  Add to the fact that Lend Lease doesn't really exist in the same capacity, and the Soviets are in considerably more trouble...and with the potential threat of the Japanese opening another front, and Stalin is forced to split his armies.

Few people realize that Japan hated/feared Communism, and always saw it as a much greater threat to their way of life than any of their disagreements with the US. Plus, the US wasn't going to go to war with Japan over the China issue, so Germany and Japan could have split up most of mainland Asia.  The Soviets weren't beating Germany fighting only a single front war in 1941, especially not with Japan aiding from the West.  Now, there are a lot of questions how effective the Japanese would be in a mainland attack...they certainly had their struggles in China against a woefully inept and poorly supplied force effectively split in two between Mao and Kai-Shek. Nonetheless, it would have been enough of a diversion that Stalin would not have been able to defeat both Germany and Japan....they barely kept Hitler from succeeding in the first place, despite Lend Lease and Germany fighting multiple fronts.

A little while ago I looked up U Boat casualties in WW2 on Wikipedia. The Germans lost a lot of men and boats.

Such is war I suppose.

The US eventually got used to their schtick and started learning how to better detect and sink them.

With the A bomb at the beginning and the ability to obfuscate their production capabilities, America might not have entered the war.

Think about it - London, Warsaw, Moscow, etc. smashed to bits with no ability to stop it. FDR would have said "fudge no."

German industry still could not have produced enough 4 engine bombers to made a difference.

Even if Albert Speer could have put a stop to Hitler's fascination with mega tanks, the German industrial capacity still could not have produced enough Panzer III, Panzer IV, Panthers and Panzerjaeger to have  stopped The Arsenal of Democracy.

Even if Albert Speer could have produced 3x the Panzer III, Panzer IV, Panthers and Panzerjaeger of all Marks, the German Petroleum  Industry STILL COULD NOT produce enough synthetic fuel and lubricants once the Sovs stopped their Southeastern advance towards the Kaukus oil fields.

The War would have ended exactly the same way, just leaving whom was going to die in the process as the actual mystery.

It would also be a matter of targeting.  Could they pick the right targets to really isolate Great Britain? The German high command showed an ineptitude for that coupled with Hitlers demands. If they could have effectively targeted shipyards with said heavy bombers they could have destroyed the RNs escorts and the ability to repair or make new. Enabling the Kriegsmarine to go after shipping without interference. They would have also needed to simultaneously strike airfields and factory’s to put them out of service.

Why the comment about shipyards. The RN had perilously few escorts in the opening months of the war. One of the big mistakes was leaving them alone and not putting them on the bottom allowing them to pool resources and build strength.

This seems like it belongs in this thread.



There’s a few myths about this aircraft that are dispelled in this video. There’s also a really incredible story at 27 minutes in. The kind of thing that could make for a cool movie, if not for the fact that they were on the wrong side…

I think the German U-boat crews had a 70-80% fatality rate.

Missiles can do everything better anyways.

Are you suggesting geography and demographics matter?

They were stupid to fight on two fronts.

I suspect it would have prolonged the war but wouldn't have changed the outcome. The first city to experience a prompt super critical fission event may have been Berlin instead of Hiroshima.

The biggest effect may be that it may have prolonged the war long enough for the Russians to get involved in the Pacific theater which may have subjected us to a North Japan vs. South Japan as well as a East vs. West Germany.

Germany did not need long range bombing to bomb England. Germany owned France. They could bomb most of England with a 600 mile range. They needed more bomb load and accuracy as well a leader that was not mentally unstable.

Strategic bombing doesn't win wars.

Nor was the concept of massed unescorted bombers a viable one, especially given the dwelltime of a early model 109 over England

Not even sure it prolongs the war, merely adds more civillian casualties

The Axis had a very narrow avenue to victory had they done everything right. Wait a few years, go into full war mode industrially, build up their navy especially U-Boats, destroy the BEF at Dunkirk, win the Battle of Britian buy keeping pressure on the RAF fields instead of bombing London, telling Italy to join the Allies instead, starting Barbarossa a few months earlier or the following spring, getting Japan to attack Russia instead of the USA...etc. etc...I dont think any specific piece of equipment could have made a difference. Maybe the U-Boats...

Operation Starvation

ICBMs btfo.

Germany was done the day they invaded Russia.

Not losing to Russia in 1941 would change the war maybe.

I don't think any bomber would have really affected the war in any way.

Just look at the V1 program.  They launched almost 10,000 of the things, up to 100 a day.   England was already under constant bombardment and it didn't do squat other than blow up some random neighborhoods.

Nope. Would have ended the same way.

I agree.

It would have made invading Russia that much more difficult.  Given the state of the Soviet military and recent Stalin purges, 1941 was the right time....just everything else going on doomed the Germans and they still almost managed to win in Russia.

Arado 234.  Arrived too late, too few and too expensive to make any difference in the war.  A great reconnaissance platform, it gave Germany a spectacular view of the end of the war.  They flew over England with impunity due to its speed and altitude.  

If Germany over-powers the Soviet Union in the fall of 1941, there is no one to lend-lease to. The largest standing armies in the world move west, making a landing in Italy or France impossible. The US met run down, conscript ridden, weak units in 1944. Fighting those huge Eastern Europe field armies in France wouldn't have been something we could do at a distance of 4,000 miles from home.

They were comically close to winning the war in Europe.

If you want to see beast, look up Stalingrad and tell me which US Army units would win that.

The Germans had 10 field armies engaged in one battle. The German 6th army alone was 360,000 soldiers. The entire D-Day landings for the month of June weren't even half that.

No, the He-177 was a "Hot Shit Ship".  So many engine fires & losses that it was nicknamed by its own Luftwaffe crews as "the flying lighter".

The He-177 was crippled by the Luftwaffe requirement that it be able to perform Dive Bombing.

Yes, that is right that the Germans expected to use their 4 engine (two props - each driven by a pair of Daimler Benz 601's - same engine from the Bf-109 & Me 110) fully loaded heavy bomber to Dive Bomb down at 60-70 degree dives onto enemy targets.   Imagine trying to do that with a Lancaster or B-24.

Talk about FUBAR Bomber Doctrine.

The DB 606 (twinned 601 engines combined to drive a single propeller shaft) caused endless problems including endemic overheating and inflight fires resulting in the He-177 being nicknamed by Luftwaffe aircrew as the Reichsfeuerzeug ("Reich's lighter") or Luftwaffenfeuerzeug ("Air Force lighter").

The Germans kept discussing for several years changing the troubled He-177 to a conventional 4 engine 4 prop configuration, but in the end it was nothing but talk as the Germans never did this for production.

The He-177 was yet another example of the Nazis fascination in over complicating what should be a straightforward weapon to the point it was ineffective & never built in any sufficient numbers.

Would have helped a little.  It would have been useful in 1940-1941 against Britain.  Maybe retrofitting them to attack shipping in the Atlantic would have helped the most.  

History would have been written much differently if Germany didn't invade the Soviet Union.  It's one of the many strategic mistakes that Hitler made.