# What if...



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 7, 2006)

_I'm not sure if it's the right place so mods are free to move this topic_

I open this topic to ask help to find some infos or idea about at "what if GER wons Battle of Britain" I mean: Do you think that ENG wants to use "gas" to defend her beachs? What do you think about alternative Great Britain situation? What about Scotland, Galles, England and both North Irland and Irland? Do you think that Waffen-SS could found any volunteers for their Army?

I'm sorry for my english


----------



## plan_D (Aug 7, 2006)

The German invasion fleet would have been sunk in the Channel.


----------



## johnbr (Aug 7, 2006)

What if the Heinkel He 277 with BMW 802 was made in stead of the He177 or the He s30 or Jumo 004h was made from good material.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 7, 2006)

CCM von Hausser said:


> _I'm not sure if it's the right place so mods are free to move this topic_
> 
> I open this topic to ask help to find some infos or idea about at "what if GER wons Battle of Britain" I mean: Do you think that ENG wants to use "gas" to defend her beachs? What do you think about alternative Great Britain situation? What about Scotland, Galles, England and both North Irland and Irland? Do you think that Waffen-SS could found any volunteers for their Army?
> 
> I'm sorry for my english



No worries for the English, gets the job done. 

Depends on what you mean by win. Do the Germans force Fighter Command back above London, allowing the them local air superiority over the beaches? Makes a toehold on the channel beaches a better chance but there are still big problems for the germans. Let's assume the Germans can and do invade in Early October. And they capture a port (very big deal).

1. Can they be supplied over the winter? Going to be tough. They will have limited control of the coast. The british MTB and Destroyer squadrons can sortie into their shipping lanes. Granted, the Luftwaffe will make it hard for them but with national survival on the line, they'll throw everything they have into it. If the British can interdict the lines of communication effectively (and it is a big and crucial "if"), the invasion will fail some time in the winter. 

2. Can the Germans keep air superiority through the winter? Seems like a simple question but it is actually many faceted. The attacks on British airfields and aircraft manufacturing will have to come from France. Bomber bases will probably not be available due to the logistical trail they need. For the 109s, it will be a target rich environment. Some of them will be based in England. Probably some 110 fighter bombers as well. For the Spitfires and Hurricanes, it will be a job of sitting on the airfields the Germans establish. Tough call on that one either way. 

3. Will the Americans continue to supply the British? Will they up it, will they cut them off? Bill Donovan, future head of the OSS went to England in the Summer/Fall of 1940 to see if England would survive. He came away with the opinion that they would (at the same time Joe Kennedy was saying they wouldn't) and Lend Lease worked it's way through. If the Germans were on the Isle, would Donovan have the same opinion?

That's a just a few offhand thoughts.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 7, 2006)

Im with pD on this one, again....

Without establishing air supremacy/superiority, the German invasion fleet would be lying at the bottom of the English Channel.....


----------



## plan_D (Aug 7, 2006)

When the Allies invaded Normandy they had absolute naval and air superiority. 

The Luftwaffe still existed but what was left of the bomber force had no chance of striking through the massive fighter screen the RAF and USAAF could send up. There's proof of this in the days during _Overlord_ where Ju-88s were shot down in droves as they attempted to attack the beach head. 

The Kriegsmarine was out-numbered and out-gunned. The only real chance they had was using stealthy small E-boats to cause havoc and confusion in the Allied supply line across the Channel. 

The Allied invasion fleet had 6,939 vessels : 1,213 combat vessels, 4,126 landing craft, 736 ancillary craft and 864 merchant vessels. The 2nd Tactical Air Force and Ninth U.S Air Force had been hammering tactical targets in France since May in support of the upcoming invasion, airfields, power stations, bridges, rail lines and marshalling yards were all high on the list. The 'Mighty 8th' and RAF Bomber Command had been bombing Germany proper for months with great effectiveness, and the escort fighters had started exacting a heavy toll on the Luftwaffe. 

And with all that, the Allied invasion almost failed on more than one occassion. And Field Marshal Sir Alan Brooke, Chief of Imperial General Staff even said on 5 June, 1944, _"I am very uneasy about the whole operation. At best it will fall so very far short of the expectations of the bulk of the people, namely those who know nothing of its difficulties. At worst it may well be the most ghastly disaster of the whole war. I wish to God it were safely over."_

The Germans had a sixth of the Allied invasion fleet, at best. Not all of which was completely sea-worthy. They didn't have complete air superiority. No heavy bombers had been hammering away at British industry. No tactical bombers had been smashing British lines of communication for months in direct support of the invasion. And the Germans lacked naval superiority. ... even if Germany forced the RAF to move north of London ... they'd lose any invasion attempt in 1940.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 7, 2006)

plan_D said:


> When the Allies invaded Normandy they had absolute naval and air superiority.
> 
> The Luftwaffe still existed but what was left of the bomber force had no chance of striking through the massive fighter screen the RAF and USAAF could send up. There's proof of this in the days during _Overlord_ where Ju-88s were shot down in droves as they attempted to attack the beach head.
> 
> ...




Good post. Good points.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 8, 2006)

Im with pD on this as well.

The only way it would have happened would have been with complete air superiority and the Luftwaffe was not going to gain that. Even if they had gained superiority over the channel coast, the aircraft did not have the range to reach the northern parts of England and therefore the RAF would have still be present in numbers to sink the invasion fleet.

Now to go with tim said, even if they had established a beach head, I dont think the Germans would have been able to overcome the logistical problems.


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 8, 2006)

plan_D said:


> The German invasion fleet would have been sunk in the Channel.


uhm... no, I'm thinking if GER was able to land on the ENG Beachs


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 8, 2006)

johnbr said:


> What if the Heinkel He 277 with BMW 802 was made in stead of the He177 or the He s30 or Jumo 004h was made from good material.


uhm... This is a different approach for me. Luftwaffe was a Tactical Air Force and not a Strategical Air Force: it's cause in GER this force was seen just like a support for the Heer, so I think that not enough efforts was made to build a nice Strategic Bomb


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 8, 2006)

@ timshatz plan_D - Really good posts... really good points!!!
I know 2 things,
1) GER made a big mistake bombing London all around the clock;
2) Already in 1940 RAF was in pilots deficit and was very near to be unable to lunch her fighters versus Luftwaffe

but... also if your answers are really good (again) my question is different: Do yuo think that ENG use the "gas" to defend her beachs? What the future for the Great Britan under GER rules? What the future for Scotland, Galles, England and Irland?

I found a lot of idea about this but noone really good for me; noone with infos to support itself

thanks for your time


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2006)

I don't think Great Britain would use gas on the beaches. It would be pretty obvious to the British forces that they could contain any invasion attempt by the sea. It would not be worth the political and environmental damage caused by the gas, when they could slaughter the German invasion by conventional means.

If Germany had managed to take Great Britain, it would have remained much the same as France did. Under German rule, but pretty much left alone.


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 8, 2006)

this is your personal idea or have you any proofs?
I mean: other than a personal interest on this particular fact, I need these infos and proofs cause my modding role for HoI2/DD game. You must to know that with our modding team we're re-working a large part of the game (about the 90%) including this "what if..." for GER and ENG. Some guys says that under an hard pression will be possible that ENG use gas to defend his homeland. I'm not sure about it, but it's still possible as Turtledove wrote in his books  My goal here is to look for a solution - with your helps - that I can put in game in form of % of choice for both HU and AI player


----------



## timshatz (Aug 8, 2006)

There is no way to prove a non-event. In such a case, you can only deal with similar situations and potential plans. I agree with PD that the use of gas was probably not a viable option for several reasons:

1. No country that fell to the Germans (France, Belgium, Poland, ect) that had experience with gas used it in their final (or any part of) their defense. I do not believe they let themselves be conquered rather than use it. More along the lines that they did not see Gas as a war winning weapon. In WW1, it accounted for only 5% of the casualties. It just wasn't effective enough against military targets. 

2. The British had more to lose by letting that genie out of the bottle than the Germans. The Germans were soldiers and soliders are trained on how to handle gas. The British were a combination of everything from proffessional soldiers to home guard to straight civilians. Gas would've been far more effective against a civilian population than a military one. The threat of Gas, like that of Radiation, causes panic. And with civilians, a little panic goes a long way.


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 9, 2006)

Thanks timshatz: those are words I want to read

What do you think about a puppet Governament in Great Bretain under GER rules? What options?


----------



## timshatz (Aug 9, 2006)

CCM von Hausser said:


> Thanks timshatz: those are words I want to read
> 
> What do you think about a puppet Governament in Great Bretain under GER rules? What options?



Thanks for the official "attaboy". Glad it helps. 

Going on about the Govt of England under the Germans goes straight into speculation. Before I start, I want to put that proviso out there. While some of what I am about to write is based on plans (in some cases little more than memos), most of it is nothing more than that whims of my one time fertile immagination. 

But like the man said, nothing ventured, nothing gained. 

Let's assume the Germans conquer England by December of 1940 (if it takes longer than that, the odds favor the Brits). They take England, Scottland, Whales and the Northern Irish Counties. Southern Ireland is not invaded. No need to. It becomes a defacto ally of the Germans. Similar to Switzerland, they dance to Germany's tune in the interest of national survival. 

In England, there is some initial resistance. The British had, in a hurried way, tried to establish a potential resistance force in the possibility that the Germans took over part of England. However, the Gestapo and other "Special Task" units quickly clamp down on any active resistance. Reprisal shootings, deportations, patrolling in active areas, ect. as well as turncoats all bring the bands to a violent and unhappy end. Passive resistance/ intelligence gathering continues unabated for the duration of the entire occupation for Allied contacts. 

The Germans invade England with a list of 3000 persons who are to be arrested or deported upon the success of the German cause. All the predictable names are on it (Churchill, Orwell, Beverbrook, ect). Anybody in postitions of authority above local government, anyone who is a socialist or communist is on the list. Anyone who fought in Spain is on the list. Also, Jews as well as those the Nazis considered morally/mentally inferior (Mentally retarded, Homosexuals, Gypsies, Downs Syndrome ect) are all rounded up as well. Given the cost of moving such numbers, I think the Nazis would've established work camps in England. As a guess, I would think two/three work camps and one death camp. Again, just a guess based on the size of England and German concentration camps before the war. The death camp is not established untill late in 1942 and is one of the last to be established. Not for any moral sense, just that German occupation of England would've been initially disorganized. 

The Germans will attempt a Waffen SS unit made of British Solidiers but be only marginally successful. Maybe a regiment or a brigade's worth volunteer. The British Army (those that surrender) are sent off to Germany to work. The officers are sent to POW Camps. Repatriation does not occur. 

A British "Quisling" Govt is set up using British Nazis to head it. They are, lap dogs to the Gestapo. However, their zeal to prove themselves as "true Nazis" leads to a reputation as being sadistic, vile fanatics bent on discovering "Monarchist" or "Fifth Columnist". They are feared and detested. 

British bullion supplies are moved in October of 1940 to Canada. Also, the Crown Jewels leave in late November. The Queen leaves in Early December to escape capture. She reconstitutes her government (Free English Forces) in Canada. Calling on the rest of the Dominions, she vows to fight on. However, only Canada, NZ, Australia, the Carribean Islands, agree. South Africa waits 6 months and leaves the dominion, agreeing to terms with the Germans. India initially agrees but develops a strong local resistance (mostly passive but with an active component under Chandra Bose). Free English (along with Free French, Dutch, Polish, ect) forces are pretty much in name only and based in Canada.

The British Navy (what's left of it after the battles around the British Isles) makes a run for North Amrica (Canada and Carribean) ports. For the most part, it is successful. Ships trying to escape are not all as lucky. Uboats, surface ships and Condors catch upwards of 20% of them. There will be at least two large liners loaded with refugees that are sunk with most on board. It will be December, in the North Atlantic, with no effective rescue operations. Sink out there and you're done. 

Gibraltar becomes a German outpost. Surrounded by the German Navy to the west, Italy to the East, Vichy French territory to the south and Nazi Spain to the north, they realize they can not be resupplied and have no powerful friends in the hemisphere. Egypt is an unknown. It could stay British or go German (more likely a German Puppet State with Egyptians in charge). Take your pick on that one. Enough of an arguement either way. In short, the Med becomes an Axis lake (given the importance of the Suez Canal, I believe the Germans/Italians would make a concentrated effort to get their hands on Egypt but then again...).

In January of 1941, the US lands troops on Iceland (to replace the British troops and hold the island) citing anything they can think up with the exception of a request from any of the Free Forces. The US is going to try to stay neutral now that Europe is essentially under Nazi control. But just in case things get out of hand, they want to have Iceland. The Nazis are not happy but with their eyes to the East, do nothing about it for the present. The US increases funding to building war materials. 

Occupation under the Germans is much like it is in the rest of Europe. Food is short, drafts of young men are called occasionally to work for the Germans. Most leave the islands. British factories turn to working for the War Effort. No frontline machines are made in England (with possibile exception to the Spitfire but that is only a maybe) with the focus being support machines (trucks, trains, equipment). The extended Royal family is quietly appealed to become Nazis (or at least collaborators) and for the most part, quietly rebuffs the offer. One or two turn. But the majority ignore the Nazis and try to do the best they can with what they have. Herman Goering does one of his famous "Art Trips" where he takes (or buys at ridiculously low prices) English Artwork. 

Hitler never visits England. 

That's a thumbnail sketch of my guesses on how things would turn out for the British if they had lost. There are a ton of other interesting things that might've been (Japan taking Malaysia and Hong Kong leading to a war with NZ and Austrialia a year earlier-without US intervention for the present, the Rolls Royce Merlin never comes to the US so the Mustang never gets that powerplant put in,ect) but I wanted to keep it kind of general.

Hope it helps.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 9, 2006)

> it is nothing more than that whims of my one time fertile immagination.


That was pretty damn funny Tim, and a great post as well....


----------



## timshatz (Aug 9, 2006)

lesofprimus said:


> That was pretty damn funny Tim, and a great post as well....


 
Thanks bud, appreciate the boost. Like I said, all speculation but some of it is based on fact. The Germans did have a list of people they were going to arrest, they did take local Nazis and turn them into lap dogs, the bullion was moved from most countries when it looked like the country was going to fall, ect. Other stuff I based on what had happened previously (sinking of the Lancastria in June 1940 for the liners being sunk) as well as what did happen subsequently (the US taking over for the Brits in Iceland) and things the Germans wanted to do (they really wanted Gibraltar). But history turns us all into liars so I wanted to keep it as tight as possible. Don't want to make it sound like little green men popped out of spaceships and started ordering the Waffen SS around. Some guys write stuff like that and it makes you wonder what they're smoking... and if they'll sell ya'any.


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 10, 2006)

lesofprimus said:


> That was pretty damn funny Tim, and a great post as well....


I quote 100% !! Great timshatz!!! Just one more effort for you... ...if I can  Any idea about the men to form the British Nazi Gov?


----------



## plan_D (Aug 10, 2006)

I actually have a VHS somewhere that is called "Hitler's Britain" and makes assumptions on German rule of Great Britain using orders and paperwork from the Reich. I'll have to find it. 

I have to say though, Tim. The British resistance was planned and well organised. It was set to the be largest resistance movement in Europe, and all the members had already been trained before the invasion would have taken place.

And it's spelt Scotland (One T) and Wales (No H) ... sorry, but I couldn't but notice that.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 10, 2006)

plan_D said:


> I actually have a VHS somewhere that is called "Hitler's Britain" and makes assumptions on German rule of Great Britain using orders and paperwork from the Reich. I'll have to find it.
> 
> I have to say though, Tim. The British resistance was planned and well organised. It was set to the be largest resistance movement in Europe, and all the members had already been trained before the invasion would have taken place.
> 
> And it's spelt Scotland (One T) and Wales (No H) ... sorry, but I couldn't but notice that.



My appologies on the spelling. One of the blank spots in the Armor. Never, never been able to spell consistently well. No offense to anyone from Scotland and Wales...does this forum have a spellcheck?

As for the resistance, I had seen a show on it as well as read some on it. Not a lot. But some. I based my belief on the effects being limited on a couple of things.

1. Islands are tough to get a long running successful insurgency running, Sri Lanka not withstanding. They are relatively easy to isolate. 

2. The insurgency would need to be resupplied and Britian was out of friends in Europe. Nobody would take on the Wermacht. Their reputation was well reserved. That perspective was also bound to affect the moral of the partisans. In short, "Why bother?". Maybe not immediately, but eventually. 

3. The Nazis successfully supressed every active resistance movement in the West. Part of that was the controllers in England telling the active units on the continent to go passive and spend more time gathering information. The active units tended to bring on retribution in extreme forms. That retribution brought the local populace, while not on the Nazi's side, against the partisans. The only exceptions were Yugoslavia and Russia. Only when allied troops were close did the partisans become active (as much from orders from England as from their own volition- recruitment went way up when the allies got close).

4. The Germans had well organized and effective antipartisan units that hunted down active cells. They were also very good at infiltrating cells. 

5. Active partisan units tended to drift towards banditry and become a law unto themselves. This did not go over well with the local population. 

I conceed that this is all potential but based my perspective on the results they garnered from Holland, France, ect. Some parts of the English isles lead to a better chance for an insurgency (Northern Scotland for example), but even active insurgencies those areas had been suppressed back in the 1700s. 

The potential for an isurgency to exist and succeed is directly based on the simple question, Who would help them? Europe had England during the war, but a conquered England had nobody. However, it does make for interesting speculation to consider where the war might go from there. But beyone the scope of the original question.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 10, 2006)

CCM von Hausser said:


> I quote 100% !! Great timshatz!!! Just one more effort for you... ...if I can  Any idea about the men to form the British Nazi Gov?



Good question. The best way to answer that one is to get a listoff of the major parties in the British Nazi party during the 30s and start picking names. You might want to insert one or two lower level royals to spice it up, but in general you would be dealing with the British Nazis. Beyond that, it is anybody's guess.

One point that would be interesting is who would be the Nazi High Commissioner in England. Hydrich? He would be a good choice and held the post in Czech/Slovak areas before being killed. England might've been the place he was sent to enact/enforce Nazi Policies. 

Just a thought.


----------



## RonRyan85 (Aug 10, 2006)

What if HITLER had been killed during the July 20,1944 bomb
in his bunker and Germany had surrendered to Gen. Patton and
the AMERICAN forces? What if the USA allowed the German war
machine,or what was left of it, to join the the U.K. and all
the friendly Allied forces to capture BERLIN and stop the
U.S.S.R. in their rush to secure Berlin? Would the COLD WAR
with the U.S.S.R. every have taken place? Would the IRON
CURTAIN have been built and all the trouble with RUSSIA have
ever happened. What if Gen.Patton had been elected PRESIDENT
of the USA instead of IKE EISENHOWER and Gen.MACARTHUR had
been elected as Patton's Vice President? Would the KOREA war
and the war in VIET NAM have taken place?


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 11, 2006)

timshatz said:


> Good question. The best way to answer that one is to get a listoff of the major parties in the British Nazi party during the 30s and start picking names. You might want to insert one or two lower level royals to spice it up, but in general you would be dealing with the British Nazis. Beyond that, it is anybody's guess.


Right  I simply didn't think about it before  



timshatz said:


> One point that would be interesting is who would be the Nazi High Commissioner in England. Hydrich? He would be a good choice and held the post in Czech/Slovak areas before being killed. England might've been the place he was sent to enact/enforce Nazi Policies.
> 
> Just a thought.


uhm... I'm not sure about it. If we talk about History all is possible, but if I think about my idea, my project about the HoI2 Game, this is a very hard way cause Paradox policy about some "episodes" and "concepts" of the WWII. So, just talking about History, Hydrich maybe was a candidate, but I think that will be better to choose a man most near to the ENG culture cause ENG was seen like a natural GER partener... or I mistake?


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 11, 2006)

RonRyan85 said:


> What if HITLER had been killed during the July 20,1944 bomb in his bunker and Germany had surrendered to Gen. Patton and
> the AMERICAN forces? What if the USA allowed the German war
> machine,or what was left of it, to join the the U.K. and all
> the friendly Allied forces to capture BERLIN and stop the
> ...


Good points!!!
First of all... just few days ago I finish to read some bboks about the last days of Hitler in his bunker in Berlin. I read also about attempt of the July, 20 - 1944 and is possible that if Hitler was been killed a simil-civil war would be begin with Heer, Waffen-SS, Goering's forces and Bormann's men fighting for the leadership. Someone wants to continue to fight, some other wants the peace!!! Think about this situation with SOV Army advancing from the East and with the Allies coming from the West... 
...I think that would be really a carnage for GER maybe worse than what was in reality

my 2 cents


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2006)

CCM von Hausser said:


> Right  I simply didn't think about it before
> 
> 
> uhm... I'm not sure about it. If we talk about History all is possible, but if I think about my idea, my project about the HoI2 Game, this is a very hard way cause Paradox policy about some "episodes" and "concepts" of the WWII. So, just talking about History, Hydrich maybe was a candidate, but I think that will be better to choose a man most near to the ENG culture cause ENG was seen like a natural GER partener... or I mistake?



Picked Hydrich (I'm almost positive I got the spelling wrong) because he was the Nazi's "go to guy" for projects that involved special treatment. Knowledge of English culture was not, to my mind, an overriding requirement. The Nazis may've paid lip service to England "not being their natural enemy" (whatever the hell that means) but when they were in control, they tended to strip the economy of anything that was useful to them in a fairly ruthless and efficient manner. Hydrich was a very efficient Nazi. Ambition was his prime motivator. 

On the other hand, England would've quickly turned into a backwater if the US had not entered the war. The real action was going to happen in the East (one way or another Hilter was going to go after the Soviets). Hydrich would've wanted to be where it was best for him. To that end, Hydrich may not've been the choice. 


SPECULATION TIME...
But if I were the Nazis, and I had control of England, I would send a guy like him to England. I know in my long term plans, the US is going to be dealt with one way or another. That said, I will need a bigger and better navy than the US Fleet to handle the other side of the Atlantic. A good chunk of that would come out of British yards. Maybe not the major combatants, but the escort type ships. That and standard merchantmen would come from England. If Russia does get conquered (a pretty big if), it will take about 3-5 years to really consolidate gains of Europe and Trans-Europe Asia. Thereafter, what else can a totalitarian system do but go to war with someone else. That would have to be North America. 

Now that is where the speculation gets really interesting.


----------



## CCM von Hausser (Aug 11, 2006)

timshatz said:


> Picked Hydrich (I'm almost positive I got the spelling wrong) because he was the Nazi's "go to guy" for projects that involved special treatment. Knowledge of English culture was not, to my mind, an overriding requirement. The Nazis may've paid lip service to England "not being their natural enemy" (whatever the hell that means) but when they were in control, they tended to strip the economy of anything that was useful to them in a fairly ruthless and efficient manner. Hydrich was a very efficient Nazi. Ambition was his prime motivator.
> 
> On the other hand, England would've quickly turned into a backwater if the US had not entered the war. The real action was going to happen in the East (one way or another Hilter was going to go after the Soviets). Hydrich would've wanted to be where it was best for him. To that end, Hydrich may not've been the choice.


Interesting, very interesting. I'm still not sure, but a large part seems possible. I'm near to go in holiday, so thanks to your words I'll have somethings to think about  



timshatz said:


> SPECULATION TIME...
> But if I were the Nazis, and I had control of England, I would send a guy like him to England. I know in my long term plans, the US is going to be dealt with one way or another. That said, I will need a bigger and better navy than the US Fleet to handle the other side of the Atlantic. A good chunk of that would come out of British yards. Maybe not the major combatants, but the escort type ships. That and standard merchantmen would come from England. If Russia does get conquered (a pretty big if), it will take about 3-5 years to really consolidate gains of Europe and Trans-Europe Asia. Thereafter, what else can a totalitarian system do but go to war with someone else. That would have to be North America.
> 
> Now that is where the speculation gets really interesting.


I'm really studip man!!!!! This your "...it will take about 3-5 years to really consolidate gains of Europe and Trans-Europe Asia..." I never thought at the time factor modding the game!!!! It's so immediate, like all other classic games... thanks one more time to make me think about it


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2006)

Have a great vacation. Don't stress about this stuff too much. It is all castles in the air. But fun to consider anyway.


----------

