Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

What if? Roosevelt ignores Churchill and heeds his generals, no invasion of French Africa.

Discussion in 'North Africa: Operation Torch to Surrender of Tuni' started by archytas, Mar 18, 2018.

  1. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    A huge difference beteween the OTL and ATL invasion of France is the fact that Vichy is not going to blow up Marseille, Nice, Toulon, etc, which Patton seizes and defends, so US forces have excellent ports to land materiel, reinforcements, supplies, etc, and evacuate the wounded to Sardinia.
    Another difference is the fact that Hitler's utter failures in Stalingrad, the Caucasus, Rzhev, Yugoslavia, etc, are greatly compounded with the strong second front in France, So German troop morale sink rapidly and German generals start earlier to conspire seriously to eliminate Hitler and put an end to the hopeless war. Also, the Soviet invasion of Manchuria completely demoralizes Japanese troops.
    Perhaps most importantly, the opening of the 2nd front in France, greatly boosts Soviet and Yugoslav morale, bravery and effectiveness, as Germany has to withdraw forces already withdrawing in the USSR
     
  2. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    More troll conduct. Your "statement" was "Anton took place without a single American plane, tank or soldier in France and with Germany having much greater industrial capacity than in Oct 1942, when industry was struggling to replace hellacious losses in Stalingrad, Rzhev, the Caucasus, etc," You claimed that Germany's "industrial capacity" was "much greater" in November than in October of 1942, which is stupid. Average monthly capacity was low throughout 1942.

    BTW, the "hellacious" [sic] losses were in December 1942-February 1943, when 6. Armee was trapped.
     
  3. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not ATL, because of the much reduced L-L to Britain and correspondingly increased L-L to the USSR and heavier deployment in the strong US, Canadian and Polish, Anzac, etc, forces for France, the British receive fewer planes (not just P-39, but also Kittyhawks, etc,) and the Soviets more, greatly upping plane losses in the USSR and making Pokrishkin more effective months before.
    Large numbers of French pilots fight quite effectively and the few Polish pilots even more so, in France.
    So,instead of the P-39 being wasted OTL in 1942, it becomes invaluable in the E and W fronts.

    The stronger L-L arriving in Iran allow the wiping out of Kleist's force in the Caucasus, exacerbating the massive German losses in 1942.
     
  4. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you think I'm a troll, ignore me.
    Germany, Italy and Romania incurred enormous losses, even before reaching Stalingrad and occupying it and fighting in the Caucasus, Rzhev, etc, throughout 1942. Just taking Sevastopol cost 8 months of valuable Manstein's time and entire axis divisions. The fact that ATL Hitler has to remove even more planes, etc, earlier and faster from Stalingrad, etc, ensures earlier collapse in the east
     
  5. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,703
    Likes Received:
    2,344
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    No P-38 ace is going to fly into combat with with the British variant of the Lightning...they ate not that dumb.

    There is a re son why those a.c. were only used as US trainers.
     
    RichTO90 likes this.
  7. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    Vichy did not "blow up" cities...they scuttled their fleet, which was an act they were only able to accomplish because of the two-week delay negotiating with the Germans. Except the Germans are unlikely to negotiate and delay anything with American forces attempting a landing. Oh, and given the French navies reaction ot the appearance of an American task force off North Africa, it is doubtful the fleet at Toulon would react any differently.


    Sorry, but in October 1942, the Soviets are barely hanging on to Stalingrad and the Caucasus, the 1st Battle of Rzhev has been a Soviet disaster (soon to be followed by another), and Yugoslavia is barely an annoyance.

    BTW, the idea the Soviets would start a second front against the Japanese when they are barely holding on against the Germans is fatuous at best.

    "Yugoslav morale"? Seriously? You really haven't a clue. By late 1942, Yugoslav Partisan strength was about 150,000, poorly armed and equipped. During the year they had lost 66,394 personnel in ineffectual attempts to engage the German occupation forces. The strength of the Axis occupation forces was virtually unchanged from the year before (34 divisions in 1941 versus 32 in 1942) and German losses for the entire year amounted to 1,093 men.

    BTW, speaking of Yugoslavia, it was the Italian capitulation that resulted in eventual disaster there for the Germans...in late 1941 25 of those occupation divisions were Italian, in late 1942 22 were, but in September 1943 none were...

    You just go from one badly thought out assumption to another....
     
  8. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
  9. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Even after stupidly wasting 2,000 Canadians in HK and even more in Dieppe, see how many Canadians were wasted taking Ortona, etc, OTL, so obviously the Canadians were not smart enough to see how stupid the British were and remained under them, even in Normandy, where the Canadian losses were so much higher than the British losses, that Churchill ordered that Canadian casualties be including in the ridiculously low British casualties, to improve appearances. The British had time to stop for tea, while the Canadians advanced and were the only ones to attain all D-day objectives.
     
  10. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please read the thread,before commenting. ATL MArseille, etc, are under Vichy. I stated that they will not blow them up, so Patton gets excellent ports.
     
  11. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    If I think you are a troll, I'll ignore you as I see fit, while continuing to point out your troll-like actions.

    Such as this. Trolls only know what their opinion is; they suffer from a dearth of factual information.

    German losses to all causes on the Eastern Front by month, 1942-1943:

    April: 108450
    May: 134230
    June: 126050 (Sevastapol siege ends 4 July)
    July: 156600
    August: 256100(peak of BLAU operations)
    September: 185000
    October: 130100
    November: 128900
    December: 200690
    January: 152465
    February: 212152
    March: 111525

    October and November were relatively quiet and the 158,400 replacements arriving nearly covered the losses...well, at least as nearly as they ever did.
     
  12. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    No bubba, I don't need to "see" any such thing. I need you to tell me how many "were wasted" and why it was a waste, but your idiotic notion of sacrificing four American divisions on an unsupported assault on Southern France isn't.
     
  13. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    Oh, I get it, "ATL" is just like MAGIC! We waves our widdle hands and poof! the unicorn farts rainbows and MArseille, etc are all mine...

    I've had better conversations with my cat...
     
    George Patton likes this.
  14. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    The early version rejected by Britain was soon replaced by the excellent plane, yet Britain never adopted it. It stuck to the massive, more expensive Beaufighter, even worse as a fighter than the P-38, with a lower speed and shorter range. Go figure! Britian never produced the much superior P-51, it simply spent a fortune eventually providing the obsolete, difficult to produce Spitfire with a larger engine and a 5 blade propeller than the Merlin used by the P-51. The RN was so incompetent that it built the only CV with a steel deck, but provided them with 100 mph torpedo biplanes (for years the Swordfish and then the equally obsolete Albacore!) and two seat fighters,it depended on the Wildcat and then the Hellcat, Corsair, etc, (which ATL they are not getting)
     
  15. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Before Torch, Marseille, etc, were under Vichy and ATL the landings are taking place instead of Torch, so these ports are under Vichy. There is nothing magic about seizing them, rather than Oran, pointlessly.

    Sorry I'll ignore your irrelevant and despective comments from now on. If you think I'm a troll or wave a wand, simply ignore the thread, like I'll ignore yours..
     
  16. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,617
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    Location:
    God's Country
    Well that makes things totally different. If we can get MacArthur's silly azz killed off in an ill advised landing in southern France we can save many American lives in the Pacific and prevent getting our butts kicked the first year in Korea. I'm all for it!!

    The M2 was a 60mm not 65mm mortar. See I am paying attention.[/QUOTE]

    You still haven't told me how you're going to get your medium tanks ashore in southern France without the necessary ships to land them across the beach. The US LST's and LSD's were not yet in commission. You do have the Lakehurst, but that requires you capture the port of Marseille intact. It can carry 250 mediums, but can't land them amphibiously, sooo, you'll have to rely on M3 light tanks to oppose the Germans until you can capture the port. Other freighters can carry mediums, but you have to have the requisite capacity booms/cranes in the port to off load them across the dock. What happens if the sabotage the port?
     
  17. archytas

    archytas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2018
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again the landings in weak Vichy creates less oposition than in strong Africa, where Vichy had to respond, whereas with the Americans in France, Vichy has no choice but to join them (it has nothing to repel US forces and it can liberate France by doing so).

    Rooevelt wanted so send more aid to China, which as stated, obtained the only major victory on Japan in the fisrt months of 1942 (Chang Sha for Chiang and several smaller battles for the Communists). Chinese was a black hole for the Japanese. Plaese compare the number of IJA divisions deployed in China for years, to the 2 months of quick Japanese victory agains massive British forces in Malaya, by 3 IJA divisions. In the latter, the IJA acquired 30,000 Indian recruits, so it ended up with many more recruits than casualties!

    It is funny that everybody thinks that Britian was more useful than Chiang, despite the British wasting years in Africa against a couple of German Divisions and in Burma, against a few, neglected IJA divisions (despite the massive Indian army and all the L-L received).

    OTL The US had to spénd fortunes flying materiel to China over the Himalayas (which did not count as British aid, but were caused simply by Britain not liberating Burma in 1942, because Churchill was obsessed with the Med and stupid Monty required endless materiel and men to fight small, weak forces).

    King, more than anybody, hated the British leaders. Churchill requested the largest, fasters US tankers and cargo ships to supply Malta. Roosevelt obliged and the BB, CV and most of the cruisers, DD, etc, returned to Gibraltar before the Narrows of Tunisia, so that most of the ships and men in the fast Anglo-American convoy were lost, even though no capital Italian ships were involved! Including a brand new, badly needed US tanker.

    Similarly, in 1942, admiral Pound ordered the escort (including USN ships) to abandon a convoy heading for Murmansk, which incurred heallacious losses! I think it was Q-17. All just because Tirpitz was mistakedly suspected to be nearby.
     
  18. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    Sigh...so much ignorance, so little time.

    The French and British ordered 667 Lightning in March 1940 as the Model 322 F and 322B without turbochargers and with all right-hand Allison engines in order to ensure commonality with the Allison-engined Curtis aircraft ordered (140 Hawk 81-A1 (Tomahawk) by the French 10 May 1939, 1,040 Hawk H81-A2 (P-40B/C) by the British in May 1939, 560 Hawk 87-1 (P-40D) by the British and an unspecified, but likely equal number of P-40 B/C/D, by the French, also in May 1940). The British took over the French orders after the fall of France, but by June 1941 the Air Ministry was reconsidering its decision on the engines and turbochargers in the P-38, based upon their combat experience to date. They modified the contract with Lockheed on 5 August 1941 in order to have 143 delivered under the original specs and the remaining 524 as standard P-38E. However, and this is a big however, in August they attempted to kill the contract completely, except for three Lightning I for evaluation Why? BECAUSE THE P-38E WAS UNFIT FOR SERVICE. Specifically, the problem identified by the RAF test pilot at Burbank was tail flutter, which also led to the USAAF decision to keep the P-38E out of combat.

    "Soon replaced" was the production of the P-38F in late 1942...about when this idiotic ATL begins. The P-38F corrected the tail flutter, but also had a number of major issues when deployed to the ETO. Those issues were not corrected until mid 1944.

    So apparently bubba's definition of "soon replaced" is somewhere between one and three years...

    Nor, for those aware of the reality of such things, was the Beaufighter ever considered as a Lightning substitute. It was a multi-role strike aircraft, closer to an A-20 than anything.

    Of course, the notion that the P-51 and Spitfire used different engines is simply comedic.
     
    George Patton likes this.
  19. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    The magic is getting the American task force the 1,000 miles or so from Gibraltar to a position off Toulon, without the knowledge of the entire world. At the convoy's probable speed of advance that is three days...

    :rolleyes:
     
  20. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,242
    Likes Received:
    888
    So I wonder if anyone besides me has noticed that Amiral Auphan's orders to Amiral de Laborde and Amiral Marquis were to oppose "foreign troops", not "German", or "British", or "American", or "Free French" troops, because the reality was they were all considered as possibilities.
     

Share This Page