What if thread #2: D-Day Fails

[gaijinsamurai]

Victory might have been delayed, but I don't see the German units which may have been able to be freed from France in order to move to the Eastern Front as being significant enough to make a difference, other than to buy the Germans a little more time before the inevitable.

[Flagg]

Interesting one James.

I would posit the following:

The loss of a REAL 2nd front against Germany, since Northern Italy's topography was the stuff of nightmares for those playing offense, would have seen the Russians going BALLISTIC facing the near full attention of the German Army and no allied 2nd front in sight.

I would think the shrewder/longer term US/UK thinkers, being far more sensitive to casualties than their Soviet "allies", would have looked hard at an "invasion light" of Norway in late Summer, very early Fall of 44 or Spring 45 to achieve the following:

Better encircle Nazi dominated Europe from the North

Be able to claim a "2nd front" in name if not in reality

Attempt to drag Sweden out of it's "sympathetic neutrality" and "join the party" even if it meant dragging them kicking and screaming.

Demand Finland flip to the Allies or quit and withdraw to it's borders to take pressure off the Soviets.

Shut down Nazi U-boat/Naval activity.

Overall, a low-to-medium risk, medium-ish reward propostion........forcing others to do the heavy lifting.

If the "invasion light" failed or was not particularly effective beyond it's propaganda value, Berlin would surely have been the first of several German speaking cities nuked come August, 1945.

Assuming the US/UK could quickly get boots on ground to fill the void once Germany fell it would possibly be in a stronger position vis-a-vis the Soviets post war Cold War with the Soviets having carried even MORE of the human and economic cost of Allied efforts to defeat Germany and possibly far weaker long-term post war.

If THAT failed to stop or reduce the screaming from the Soviets being bled white an "invasion medium" option of driving boldly into Germany's energy centre of gravity in Romania would have been a medium/high-risk, possibly higher reward proposition by twisting Turkey's arm with promises of postwar military/economic regional dominance with direct military intervention and/or transit/logistical support of an allied 2nd front.

Put Iwo Jima and Okinawa on hold....and divert USMC resources dedicated towards it with a bold amphib invasion of already teetering Nazi allied Bulgaria/Romania with an airdrop of any/all remaining airborne capable allied forces to seize and hold the oilfields until the cavalry arrives.

The goal to seize and hold the regional oil fields until relieved by Soviet forces moving westward would have possibly appeased the Soviets better with a bigger/bolder/tangible effort , it could have gained/maintained an eastern european foothold with post war geopolitical value, and would have cut Germany's energy production off at the knees.

From the Soviet perspective, a bold and successful invasion of Bulgaria/Romania could have allowed the Soviets to gain substantial momentum for a bit....but would have probably reduced the pressure on them far less than a successful Overlord.

A Scandinavian Invasion would have probably done little but boost US/UK egos, allow for total Atlantic Ocean Naval dominance and done little if anything for the Soviets except slightly hasten Finland's exit against the Soviets.

Long term geopolitics of an Overlord failure leave me thinking it could have ironically been US/UK beneficial, and Soviet detrimental.....could have potentially been a less chilly Cold War with an even less equal pair of post WWII superpowers...every day the Soviets continued to fight a MORE focused and LESS distracted German killing machine the weaker it would be coming out the other end of the WWII meat grinder.

I don't think Nazi wonder weapons would have had ANY tangible impact.....with one POSSIBLE exception....IF the German Navy was able to build, crew, and surge enough Type XXI U-boats it might have seen yet ANOTHER costly Battle of the Atlantic.

Speaking of subs, I think the US Navy's effort to starve Japan would have further intensified, along with possibly stronger consideration of the use of WMDs in regards to Iwo Jima and Okinawa.

I have no idea how it would/could have changed geopolitics postwar in Asia......but by mid-late 44 even without the loss of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, Japan no longer represented a credible offensive threat to the United States, the Imperial japanese Navy was littered across the bottom of the Pacific, the Home Islands were completely cutoff from strategic natural resources, and was being systematically burned to the ground starting a week or so after Overlord was underway.

Just my 0.02c

[TheKiwi]

I think at that point Nazis were pretty much f*cked with the way things were going on the Eastern front. Maybe US would cut its aid to Russia via the lend lease program to stall Russian advance to Rhine since at that point it was obvious that it was more about who is going to control Europe when the war ends. US and Britain would most likely attempt another landing and another offensive. In any case Germans committed their most capable troops to the war with the Russians. Many of those troops were dead or captured anyways despite Germans staunchly defending themselves. I think they lost the war when they lost at Moscow and then Stalingrad. Psychologically that loss is hard to underestimate and was the beginning of the end for the Nazi Germany, D-day or not.

Now a negative sh*t storm is surely to follow) but that is my very humble opinion on this subject.

I pretty much agree with this, although I doubt public opinion in the UK or USA would allow for the cutting of Lend-Lease etc to the USSR. Public opinion at the time (bearing in mind that critique of Stalin's rule was severely censored at the time) was very behind the USSR as "the only team really fighting the Nazis".

Interesting Scenario.

Churchill wanted a Balkans invasion before the cross channel attack so your push could be there. If not once Italy has been pacified you're fighting your way through the Alps. You may be able to invade the south of France from the Pyrenees while also using amphibious landings on the southern coast or the Bay of Biscay. Either way stopping the cross channel attack puts the allies into a pickle, however I'm sure Doenitz would not have any aspiration/imagination to attack the United States, and you'd have a European state that wouldn't be hindered by blockade. During the time that it would take to regroup the Germans would transfer troops East and they'd probably either fight to a draw or get the tactical victory while also making a separate peace leaving Britain and United States on their own again giving Germany the advantage.

Churchill's government wouldn't have survived a failed D-Day regardless of the fact that he was somewhat ambivalent about the whole thing. Roosevelt would have had a hard time of it too, possibly accelerating his decline and death.

As for Churchills "invade the Balkan's" idea, a worse idea really couldn't have been come up with if you had a government committee working on it for 6 years. Logistics through the Balkans were awful. There would have been no way of bringing the allies strengths against the German's weaknesses in the restricted hills and mountains.

A revamped bombing campaign (maybe you could have Harris have a stroke and be replaced by someone with an ounce of sense) that targeted the German transport infrastructure (especially the canals and rivers) as well as the oil industry while not capable of bringing down the Germans, could certainly have made life a bit easier for the Red Army.

The Wehrmacht would still be forced to keep pretty much the same forces in France to prevent the allies from trying again even though they'd tipped their hand as to where they were going to try it, so the Red Army is still facing almost exactly the same sized force as it did in reality. As a result of that, I think Berlin still falls in May or June at the latest, denying any chance of it going up in atomic fire. And once Berlin falls, I suspect the German forces in France and the rest of the West are going to surrender, maybe giving the western allies a chance to occupy some areas (apart from Italy which is certainly going to be an all Anglo-American affair anyway).

However post war I expect that the "liberation" factor will certainly play a fact in even those countries that the Red Army didn't reach, with communists enjoying significantly greater support (at least until the USSR does something dumb which no doubt would happen here as it did in our reality).

[James]

Just my 0.02c

Pretty good .02c. Nice when someone looks beyond tomorrow.

Victory might have been delayed, but I don't see the German units which may have been able to be freed from France in order to move to the Eastern Front as being significant enough to make a difference, other than to buy the Germans a little more time before the inevitable.

I agree - I edited my second post. I think the outcome of the war favored the Allies regardless, it might just have been in 1946.

[hank2222]

i allways thought about this fact in ww2 what if they had got the m262 in the air in the spring of 42 era and made it a fighter unit instead of a fighter bomber typle and had the numbers of air craft to make the daylight bomber raids in the two year time frame in the summer of 44 a fact to the people in England that the air war is not going well with the loss of a lot of the long range bomber aircraft from both militarys at the time and have the stg44 model assault weapon as the main German inf weapon at the time in all the German inf units though out the Europe..

if the invasion had failed and the Germans offered peace talks to let us out of the war and let them deal with the Soviets alone without any help from any other nation at the time with supplies and other war items that they may need at the time ..

for mr Churchhill want the Soviets out of the way as a world power after ww2 for he feared the Soviets as a emeny more then a friendly nation towards England for he felt that the soviets wanted all of Europe not stoping intill they reach the coast of France and down into the end of the boot of Italy

[SoSo]

Steven Ambrose believed the Western Allies would have ended their participation in the European war, leaving it to be fought out between Hitler and Stalin.

[James]

Steven Ambrose believed the Western Allies would have ended their participation in the European war, leaving it to be fought out between Hitler and Stalin.

Because of... ?

[TheKiwi]

i allways thought about this fact in ww2 what if they had got the m262 in the air in the spring of 42 era and made it a fighter unit instead of a fighter bomber typle and had the numbers of air craft to make the daylight bomber raids in the two year time frame in the summer of 44 a fact to the people in England that the air war is not going well with the loss of a lot of the long range bomber aircraft from both militarys at the time and have the stg44 model assault weapon as the main German inf weapon at the time in all the German inf units though out the Europe..

The Me-262 really wasn't as good as is made out. The engines in particular were very poor quality, with a service time of only 20 hours of flight. Despite some (post war) German claims that it could have been in service early if not for Hitler, the troubles with designing it and getting it reliable enough to fly AND to fight mean that 1944 was the earliest it was ever going to get into combat.

Meanwhile the Meteor's engines were doing almost 200 hours between replacements, and the Meteor's speed and climb rate were practically as good as the Me-262.

Both sides were working at the cutting edge of metalurgy and aerodynamics, but the west have much greater access to rare metals.

[TheKiwi]

Because of... ?

The fall of the Churchill government, and because it would put huge pressure on the US government to shift resources to the Pacific. (That's what he wrote, not what I think).

[blilov]

The Meteor wasn't the same class as the Me-262 at all. Although the engine part is true.

[TheKiwi]

I found 5 sources on the 'Net that all indicate the Swallow (262) had a top speed of 540 MPH (870 KPH. The speed on the Meteor is a bit more vauge, ranging from 580 MPH (930 KPH) to 600 MPH (965 KPH). In any case that makes the Meteor at LEAST 40 MPH faster than the Swallow.

The simple fact is that the Swallow, Meteor, & F-80 Shooting Star had virtually identical performance (in regular operational conditions), both in speed AND manueverability, with the British & American designs having a slight advantage in straightline speed performance. The Meteor & Swallow had short legs (max range 600-650 Miles/1000-1100 kilometers), making them unsuitable for bomber escort over Europe, and the F-80 lacked the range to escort bombers deep into Germany (F-80 1200 Miles vs. P-51 1680 miles).

It was the range factor, as much as any other single issue that ensured that the three aircraft would never meet in combat. The Swallow was used as a point defense aircraft, as was the Meteor. The P-80 was never deployed as an escort, and had only been deployed to Europe in small numbers by the time the war ended.

Given the relative equality of the aircraft, things would, as is so often the case, depend on the skill of the pilots involved. Although the German's were putting their best pilots into the 262, their training programs had gone downhill since the beginning of the war, the opposite of the allies. And the allies could out produce the Germans in the air by 5 - 10 :1

[zad]

Long term geopolitics of an Overlord failure leave me thinking it could have ironically been US/UK beneficial, and Soviet detrimental.....could have potentially been a less chilly Cold War with an even less equal pair of post WWII superpowers...every day the Soviets continued to fight a MORE focused and LESS distracted German killing machine the weaker it would be coming out the other end of the WWII meat grinder.
...........
I have no idea how it would/could have changed geopolitics postwar in Asia......but by mid-late 44 even without the loss of Iwo Jima and Okinawa, Japan no longer represented a credible offensive threat to the United States, the Imperial japanese Navy was littered across the bottom of the Pacific, the Home Islands were completely cutoff from strategic natural resources, and was being systematically burned to the ground starting a week or so after Overlord was underway.

Just my 0.02c

The post-war peace in Europe was settled in Yalta,Soviets will keept at less what they signed in Yalta treaty.

Soviets casualties will be a bit higher but when you have lost 23 millions of citizens, half a million more casualties between injured and dead is not such a big deal.

War in Europe take 4 to 6 months more to be finished. That means that invasion o Japan mainland is delayed, nukes are already used in Europe, no surprise element in Japan and Japan scatter its troops and population to minimize the effects of nuclear attacks.

The fail of D-Day take a toll on western allied minds while preparing the invasion of Japan.

Soviet Union is displeased with the perfomance of his allies in Europe so SU doesn´t declare the war on Japan, no August Storm in 1945.

Japan is assured the neutrality of the SU, Japan send part of the Kwantung army to mainland Japan.

Japan have six more months to prepare for the invasion of it is mainland.

Western allies launch a dozen of nukes over Japan, Japan doesn´t blink.

Operation downfall begins, US run out of purple heart medals after 6 months.

SU waits until Japan is nearly defeated to launch August Storm 1947 and take Manchuria and North Korea.

Chinese reds are supplied with all the discarted soviet equipment of WWII.

Operation downfall D-Day plus one year and a half. Japan is ashes. USA population has a Vietnam trauma square by two. France and UK are in the same mindset than after WWI, avoid a future war at all cost.

Soviets test their first nuclear bomb in 1949.

Chinese reds defeat Chiang Kai-Shek in 1951.

Western allies have to conduct counter-insurgence operations in Japan until 1952.

Toshio Maeda parents are killed in the war, he doesn´t born, japanese tentacle **** is no re-invented until 1996.

[Soldat_Américain]

Well then this also begs the question of whether the United States and England would have made their peace with Germany, if not joing Germany and sending the USSR back to the twilight zone.

[zad]

Well then this also begs the question of whether the United States and England would have made their peace with Germany, if not joing Germany and sending the USSR back to the twilight zone.

A pact with post-nazi Germany will be hard to explain to the public opinion once the fate of jews, gipsies, homo******s and the rest of groups on the nazis hit list.

You can´t turn the public anger 180º so easily.

[Soldat_Américain]

A pact with post-nazi Germany will be hard to explain to the public opinion once the fate of jews, gipsies, homo******s and the rest of groups on the nazis hit list.

You can´t turn the public anger 180º so easily.

You know, some said about the red scourge that since we had the Army there we might as well keep on fighting. I'm pretty sure the final solution would have received a nice abrupt halt also freeing the Soldiers that were guarding concentration camps for duty on the Eastern Front.