alternate ww2 timeline...

Tigers? Jet planes? No way!

Remember war time preasures accellerate the pace of developement. Example if you see your tanks getting smoked and factories getting bombed then you definately know there is a problem but peace time isn't going to show up those problems.

Start war in 43 and you basically have the armies of 1939 with a few extra bells and whistles.

 

Ricky
The Tiger wouldn't be that effective against static defences - you might as well employ assault guns, which could have been manufactured in relatively large numbers at much lower costs (which were a factor until the war started, because there were no raw material shortages). The main problem is still, that the defences are likely to be tougher than the weaponry available could overcome.
The best way to capture the fortifications would be through the use of paratroopers, who didn't need better equipment than they already had. To take the Maginot line fortifications, more paratroopers would be needed, and thus the Luftwaffe had to be strengthened. If more Bf 109s were build, it may also help later on in the Battle of Britain (assuming there would be any), but the British would also have a chance to develop and build the Spitfire.
Jet fighters would still be in the prototype stage, but could possibly be put into production faster, when the war did start. There is a risk that the Allies would also develop jet fighters, though.
It is also possible that a long-range strategic bomber would be developed, which would help defeating the British and Russian factories.

 

I don't evisage the Germans attacking the Maginot Line.
Why would they? Defenses through Belgium would be much weaker than the Line, despite a year or 2 to increase them (as discussed).

A heavier tank would be handy.

I think my original post was phrased very badly.
Ebar put it much better - a heavier tank of some kind might (I would say probably would be) available in small numbers for the original assault.
I said 'Tiger' as it was in development for the role of 'breakthrough tank' at the time.

Yes, definatelt an increase in the numbers (and quality compared to 1940) of SP guns & StuGs.

As for jets...
no chance they would be in service by '43. They might have built a one-off as a world-record attempt plane, however. This would undoubtedly act as an encouragement to the British to think about maybe looking at that thing Mr Whittle keeps going on about...

 

If there was a 43 kick you might conceivably see jets start to appear mid war in meaningful numbers and quality as apposed to end of war as per OTL. Depends if any serious research is done in the extra couple of years.

If we're talking heavy tank for breaking in then think less Tiger tank and more heavy infantry tank. But this would be heavily against the theory the rest of the German tanks are based on so personally I'm not really convinced such a vehicle would ever see the light of day.

I think the bottom line is a 43 start is going to result in a more difficult battle to break the allied lines but once the Germans are through their still going to run riot.

 

Ricky
The problem of using Belgium as a launch platform is that the German forces owuld have to fight the Belgians first, and then attack the French, with both a smaller front line and a weakened force. It would also play right into the hands of the French, who expected the von Schliffen-plan to be re-played.

The Tiger wasn't being developed at a speed which would have made it ready by 1943 prior to the war - the final phases of the developement were rushed a great deal. A tank with the capabilities or attacking fortifications was considered, though - some designs more 'interesting' than others.

Ebar
Germany did have infantry tanks, but they were classified assault guns. They were based on the same principle as the British infantry tanks, but had less armour in exchange for a much more powerful gun - I don't know what the British were thinking of with the tiny 2 pdr. on a tank of that size - a 6 pdr. in the Matilda would have given a tank which both had the capability of effectively engage fortifications, infantry and tanks, with only a slight weight increase.

 

Basically yes!

Potentially, Spain will do an Italy, see the way things are going, and join in and attack the South of France. With Spain & Italy attacking via Pyrennes & Alps, I don't think France will hold them that well, and quite potentially by the time France lies down & dies there will not be a need for Vichy France. The country itself could well be divvied up between Germany/Italy/Spain, and the Empire could either stand alone as a Vichy-type relationship, go over to the Allies (unlikely!) or get absorbed by the Axis.

 

The reply above was to Ebar.
I think that this particular discussion (a heavy breakthrough tank for the Germans) has been ended with 'well, possibly, but probably not'.
However, just because I am that kinda guy (annoying & pedantic at times):

But that is what they did do...

Not in OTL, but if they perceived a need for it to be ready by 1943, when they planned to kick off...

Anyway, you need not dignify my rudery with an answer if you don't want to join in the 'bang-your-head-on-a-brick-wall' game, but would prefer to join the 'well, possibly, but probably not' club!

 

They also used Luxembourg, and attacked through the Ardennes, though, which took the French by complete surprise.

What is OTL, by the way?

By the way, I like the headbanger club ;-)

 

OTL = Original Time Line (ie: what actually happened)

Sorry, saying 'attack through Belgium' is shorthand for 'attack through Belgium, Luxemburg, Ardennes etc, as they did in real life'.
A bit like saying 'Britain' instead of 'Britain and the Empire and the Commonwealth'

 

Christian Ankerstjerne

The Matilla tank. I believe what the British were think of when they build them was money. The Matilla 1 in particular was built to a budget rather than a specification.





Back on topic

I think we're going into a bit of a loop here on the fine detail. We all seem to agree that on balance a 43 start is still going to result in France getting squished so lets move on.

Assumming a 43 start and assumming that we end up with a fairly similar situation as per OTL Fall of France (ie Vichy, Italy in, Spain out, and Britain having managed some kind of Dunkirk) how do things look now?

I would have thought that the situation starts to reset itself to a 1940 position. British minus most of their equipment but unassailable on their island.

 

Ricky
That explains it

The German attack was far more than a simple attack - von Manstein's bold attack towards the channel was a quite revolutionary idea.

By the way, wouldn't 'Britain and the Empire and the Commonwealth' merely be the United Kingdom?

Ebar
I was only referring to the Matilda Mk. 2 - the Matilda Mk. 1 can hardly be consideres anywhere near this. You might be right that the gun choice was based on financial considerations, though.

I think that if Dunkirk happened in 1943, Germany could have more transports. This would have made an invasion of Britain easier.

 

How are they going to manage an invasion of Britain? As in 1940 unless they defeat RAF Fighter Command, who likely will be stronger than they were in the OTL, invasion remains a none starter.

If the British fail to achieve a Dunkirk the situation far more grim but not instantly fatal. To achieve a successful invasion the Germans have to be able to hold a portion of the English Channel indefinately.

At the start of a 43 war the British will have at least 17 battleships and 3 battlecruisers. The Germans will have, at best, 3 battleships and 2 battlecruisers. The comparison isn't going to get any prettier in any other vessel types.

 

I am assuming a larger fleet of paratroopers, followed by a large fleet of transports.

 

You really love paratroopers don't you.

Problem is that they need back up. If they get dropped and back up doesn't get thought then basically they cause chaos for a day or two then end up surrendering to the Home Guard. As for your big fleet of transports unless you have some means of protecting it the RN will use it as a giant live fire exercise.

 

'My' plan includes the following:

• Destruction of the part of the Royal Navy placed in the English channel by submarines, which must also keep away the rest of the Royal Navy.
• Attacking naval bases which the bulk of the Royal Navy is occupied. With no harbour, it is only a matter of time before the ships runs out of supplies.
• Using long-range bombers to destroy airfields.
• Mounting droptanks on the Bf 109 to allow it to escort said bombers.
• Landing paratroopers, and creating an air bridge of supplies to last for enough day to allow the main forces to arrive (this was proven possible for shorter durations).
• Landing light and medium tanks to create a rapid advance, followed up by regular infantry.

 

Okay my counter point by point. ( I have changed your bullet points to numbers for ease )

1) The English channel is fairly shallow, averages out about fifty meters. Against an RN that had a couple of extra years to figure out how to use sonar U boats aren't going to have things their own way. Not to mention the RN doesn't necessarily have to sink the U boats. If they can keep them down they can prevent them from getting involved. Also RN has a fair few subs of it's own and German anti sub systems are much weaker. Keep the surface fleet and the RAF out and the RN's subs will still be sinking supply ships left, right and center.

2) Easier said than done and some of those bases are a long way from the English channel. This stage would have to come between a German victory in a 1943 or 44 (depending on how long it took the French to expire) Battle of Britain, and start of the landing. Only going to be so many bombers and so much time to go round. Can't make invasion in autumn or winter due to likely hood of storms.

3) Falls foul of same argument against Germans having Tigers. If it hasn't reached at least prototype by 39 you can't have it by 43.

4) Seems feasible enough as long as you have something worth escorting.

5) As long as it is very short term. If war has started in 43 then we probably don't have hollow charge weapons yet so even a very small number of very feeble British tanks could grind unsupported paratroopers into the dirt.

6) Landing the troops and tanks is the easy bit. The English Channel has to be kept clear of the RN until the end of the campaign. If the RN sever the supply link from France then it is game over for the invasion force.

 

Certainly not!
The United Kingdom is merely England (including Wales) Scotland & N. Ireland.

But back to topic.

Your plan is nice, but you will suffer horrendous losses if us Brits can put up a good resistance.
If you put enough submarines out to be able to effectively stop the RN, these will be fairly easy pickings for the RAF/FAA (after heavy initial losses ASW planes will receive fighter escorts). And to Destroyers, those that survive the initial contact...
Paratroopers - these are basically a modern 'shock' weapon - designed to be a complete surprise to the enemy to throw him into a state of confusion. Except the English have radar so they can see the planes coming. The first fighters to intercept / AOP to see them will report what they are. The defenders will be warned & got ready. With an RAF well-stocked with Spitfires (about Mk V standard would possibly be beginning to be introduced by 1943), I would hate to be a Ju52 pilot!
An air bridge is a lovely idea, but being as the defenders have radar, they will get decimated, fighter escort or not. The Germans never seemed to make enough transport planes, and although they would probably keep the paras supplied for a while, they would fail. I know you know this, and hope that by then the landing troops would link up with the paras, but I thought I'd point it out!
Oh, yes, a significant chunk of your transports were used to ferry the paras across the channel - how many survived that?
Also, I should point out that the Home Guard were really not that ineffective. They regularly had exercises where the Army played the invading Germans - and were regularly trounced.
All this is assuming that the withdrawl from France etc went pretty much as in the OTL - make the 'dunkirk' better or worse and you change the fortunes of England...

Edit: dang, once again Ebar got there first and answered better...
But at least I scored a point for the LDV!

 

Alternate time lines

Alternate time lines

Invading Oahau (big, big post)

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =750.topic

Japan wins Midway

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =861.topic

Battle of Wake Atoll

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =874.topic

1942 ceasefire

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =672.topic

Operation Sealion

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =564.topic

IJN control of Oahu

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =710.topic

Operation Sealion 2 (long post)

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =487.topic

Pearl Harbour

http://p069.ezboard.com/falltheworldsba ... =690.topic

 

Albert Speer, in charge of war production in 1939; wilst heeding the front line general's feedback on the performance issues of the vehicles they use and the field servicing issues and recovery techiques at hand.

1). Streamlines production of all equipment.
2). Winter fighting supplies, of all types required.

Just a couple of items, that are very important to anyone who has served, to be successful at waging a successful war.