Could the Western allies have won it alone?

No, I haven't. I have, however, read similar books about the American Civil War. Harry Turtledove has written an entire series of books based on a Confederate victory in that conflict.

 

Had Britain fallen then Nazi germany would have had the wolf packs in the atlantic with out the extended range of aircraft to detect them, The us would not have had the codes to crack enigma, So most of the American Divisons would be at the bottom of the atlantic. They would also have captured our radar (yes we gave it to you too) so any aircraft coming over could have been detected.

So had Britain fallen, Don't even think the atlantic a viable option, Also the Artic passages would have been closed too.

So yes it is hard to imagine. :bang:

 

Ja mein herr.

The Germans are a very tall race, are you all this tall?

 

I'm not a German, I'm Dutch, but yes I am quite tall, over 6ft. Why do you ask?

By the way, what did you think of Fatherland? I thought it was fascinating.

What it all comes down to is that if Russia fell, the only chance the Allies had of winning laid in British survival. If both fell, there was no chance of the US winning, and if only the SU fell odds would still be low.

 

So you're assuming a surrender and occupation of GB including Northern Ireland, rather than moving to Canada to continue the fight? And an occupation of Iceland and Greenland (and Newfoundland)? And Bermuda, and the Azores and the Canary islands? Long range patrol aircraft flew from all these areas. Sounds like the Germans are beginning to get strectched out and require a huge shipping fleet. But I suppose you're assuming the British merchant marine is entirely in German hands as well. Along wiht the Canadian and Australian navies. You're also saying that it would have been impossible to get the Enigma codes from GB to North America, after they'd already made it from Poland to France to GB. The Germans and Americans already had radar (the orignial idea came from the U.S. Navy playing with interruption of radio beams as a harbor defense). You're also assuming thre Germans have built a 300+ U-Boat fleet. Even then U.S. Navy wasn't totaly defenseless against submarines

 

I guess the difference in this scenario would be whether the US would be willing to lose such large amounts of troops and materiel to liberate a country and continent so far away, especially if the Germans were at the limit of their resources (Which they almost certainly would be), or whether they would simply regard it as more practical to agree terms with the new masters of Europe. Historically they did, but with Britain as a stop off, of course leapfrogging from the US to Greenland, Greenland to Scotland, liberate the rest of Britain and then build up for Overlord probably some time around 1950 would be a viable military option.

In a lot of these alternative histories a lot seems to hinge on Germany continuing high wartime production rates when we know historically that when victory seemed certain Germany slackened off, fighter production reduced during the Battle of Britain and failure to issue winter clothing during Barbarossa, so realistically in this scenario, even if still at war with the US there would be mass demobilisations and mothballing of equipment.

 

But such an invasion would face a much more impressive Atlantic wall, probably with enormous stretches of flooded land behind it and formidable bunker positions. Also, a much larger mobile reserve would be present in Northwest Europe, of at least 50 instead of ten mobile divisions. Even if, as you say it, production and research would slack off in the years that followed victory in europe for the Germans, their position on the coast would still be so firm as to significantly reduce the need for great equipment. With six extra years before an invasion, the Wall would be as close to impenetrable as man has ever come.

 

or as the Maginot line was? There are still ways around this, an invasion through Spain via Portugal, or even directly to the Spanish coast would bipass the Atlantic wall completely.

 

In that scenario, the pyrenean mountains would have been a big obstacle.
And every army invading Spain has so far been confronted to extremely efficient guerilla.
Allied supply routes would bee far greater than in Normandy.

 

True. I was merely trying to show that the Allies might not have to go over the Atlantic wall, since flanking it was an option. OK it may involve a violation of Spanish Neutrality, however violation of Neutrality was considered by the Allies as well as the German's blatantly ignoring it during the war, and in any case wouldn't be too problematic to justify (A preventative attack backed by "Proof" that the Spanish were allowing their ports to be used by U-boats for example).

Secondly the other point I made, we assume the Atlantic wall would be impregnable which strikes me as similar to the way the Maginot line was in 1940. A couple of Grandslams or Tallboys amongst all those fortifications and I'd bet they wouldn't look that impregnable anymore.

Plus of course, with Britain neutralised the Germans may not have begun building anything at all until the US and Free-British had finished liberating the UK

 

I agree with Simonr1978. Any scenario requirng a cross Atlantic campaign would have taken years. A landing in Africa might have made more sense, to provide advanced bases for B-29s. The Geramns would have had ample time to react to such a move. It may have been possible, but it would have been bloody. It still seems more likely to me that had the U.S. decided to continue the war, it would probably have launched mass atomic bomb raids on Germany with B-36 aircraft. This couldn't have happened any earlier than 1946.
Hitler and the Nazi's almost certainly would have scaled back military production after "winning" in the east, and presumably North Africa and the middle east. Hitler was always concerned about Nazi's losing popularity with the German public and considered it necessary to continue produciton of non-essential consumer items at the highest possible rate.

 

ik weet u bent nederlands.

But when you measure a tall German using your right hand, and they are very tall.

Imagine you are in front of a 7.5 foot germanand put your right hand up to the top of his head, and say are you all this tall.

I'm only 5 foot 8 or 172 cm, so to the fiets diebs I am short.

It was very interesting and would probably have happened.

 

With radar the Germans could have seen the approaching bomber (perhaps) and the nukes may not have reached Germany.

 

I don't understand, is this something from Fatherland or what? Why do you say all this? Are you all this tall, no, the tallest peoples on earth are the Dutch, the Danes and the Hutu (or was it Tutsi? :cry: ).

Most people are short compared to Dutchmen. We don't fit in your beds.

 

send me your email address and i will tell you but not on here.

johsmi@spray.no

 

Am I the only one completely lost by the last few posts, where height seems to be the topic?

 

"With radar the Germans could have seen the approaching bomber (perhaps) and the nukes may not have reached Germany."

Probably would have, and the first time at least they would assume that it was just a recce flight or similar and probably wouldn't bother to send much more than a token interception after it, if it was caught at all.

After that if I was the US I would stick my nuke laden bomber in the middle of a much larger formation (100 aircraft plus), so that even if the nuke plane was shot down the raid wouldn't be a total loss but also it would be much harder to determine which aircraft was the nuke bomber and which the conventional. Once the target was reached if the nuke bomber had survived I'd use my nuke over that target, conventional bombs over a secondary target, then home for tea and biscuits.

The Germans had radar of course, but they didn't have a command and control system anything approaching the British which made interceptions far more problematic than needed to be the case. A single B-36 flying high and carrying only around 25-30% its maximum bombload would probably reach its target with impunity.

 

There is a possibility that the Germans would see it as a recce flight, but then wouldn't they still want to take it down? They are at war. Long-range recce is vulnerable and could get the Allies some very valuable information.

In any case, if I were the Americans having to drop nukes on Germany I'd give them an auto-trigger, so that when shot down the bomb(s) would still go off when the wreck hits the ground. The impact of the blast would be huge psychologically even if the target isn't hit.

 

Depends on where it came down. Over Paris Bad idea. Over Dusseldorf not too bad (although it is a nice place, I'm talking from a strategic point of view) just outside Berlin, good shot. That is if it was armed.

When Britain bombed the dams, one plane crashed before the device exploded. If this was to happen in Germany with a nuke.


Woooooooooops

:kill:

 

Yes they would want to take it down, but the fact is a lone B-36 (Or even B-29) operating at say 35,000ft, you have to detect, confirm, scramble and vector interceptors who are going to have to spend a lot of time climbing to altitude to the follow what is a pretty fast bomber, carrying far less than half its maximum bombload. It would be very difficult to intercept, just look at the difficulties the RAF had against the Ju86Ps!