Could the Luftwaffe survive against Allied attacks if the USSR had been defeated?

Could the Luftwaffe survive after 1943 if it faced only the US/UK airforces?

  • The Allies could still eliminate most of the LW strength within a year

    Votes: 24 28.6%

  • The Luftwaffe could maintain air superiority over Europe if the USSR is eliminated.

    Votes: 17 20.2%

  • It would be a long battle with neither side prevailing for several years.

    Votes: 27 32.1%

  • German technical advances would cancel the Allies strength in numbers.

    Votes: 6 7.1%

  • The Allied bomber casualties would force them to give up on bombing Germany

    Votes: 12 14.3%

  • Other?

    Votes: 8 9.5%
  • Total voters
    84

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

freebird said:
Consider: The US has to build aircraft and train pilots to send to Europe for BOTH fighters bombers, plus any pilots shot down become POW's, while most German fighter pilots that are shot down can fly again {if not KIA}
Click to expand...

True. There are some other factors though that help compensate for the Luft being over home turf. The Germans, as mentioned previously suffered a serious manpower shortage even before 43. One major impact this had on the Luftwaffe was that they tended to keep their best pilots in the mix vs. rotating them out, sending them to where they were needed most in the best equipment. While the pro of this was creating a small cadre of extremely competent pilots, it also had the con of denying their services in the training field similar to the problem Japan faced. Further, because they tended to assign their best pilots to missions with the best equipment available, this tended to cause the "lesser" pilots to build exp at a slower rate vs. their Allied counterparts. The Allies on the other hands had a far greater manpower resource pool....enough that they could maintain a rotation policy which resulted in many experienced pilots returning from the fronts to train the next batch. This did mean a greater preportion of greenies in the cockpit but they were supported by a huge logistical net and were getting better equipment and had great numbers (along with experienced trainers and flight leaders)

Going to the late 43 situation, by this time the Luft in Europe was facing not only BC and 8th AF but the 2nd TAF and soon, elements of the IX AF. Combining this with a fight in NA, this is why i don't see several hundred additional LW as a sure thing for victory.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough in the original question, I expanded on it in post # 16. The most likely way for a defeated or much weaker USSR is if the Allies suffer a heavy defeat in the U-boat war.
Click to expand...

Ok.....understood. .....I think that for the Allies to suffer such a defeat via the Uboat war, enough to cause Monty's fall in NA, that any such discussion of invading Europe or defeating the LW is largely moot. Without a secure sealane, none of it is possible. (I would personally consider such a what if (a massive Uboat victory) far more unlikely than a Russian defeat in 43)
 

Nothing in war is a sure thing, that's why I posted the thread, to see what opinions were on the effect. Plus it can be like a "domino" effect, with the lesser side losing more aircraft each time. if the Germans were to gain the upper hand, the domino effect might go the other way. {At least over German controlled Europe}


Read the KM IJN thread, you might see what the theory is based on. Instead of the Kriegsmarine launching attacks in Jan '41 against the US {Drumbeat} using only FIVE boats, they should have used 50 or 60+.

Also if the Japanese had listened to their sub commanders instead of the BB Admirals, they could have contibuted significantly to Allied losses in the Pacific
 

sure! anything's possible. I was just adding a voice to the side that thinks that not all that much would change. Events tend to have inertia as well as dominos.


Read the KM IJN thread, you might see what the theory is based on. Instead of the Kriegsmarine launching attacks in Jan '41 against the US {Drumbeat} using only FIVE boats, they should have used 50 or 60+.
Click to expand...

I don't think the Germans had that many subs to spare for such an op which is why the initial effort was so small to begin with. My thoughts on the uboat war are based largely on the late Clay Blair's exhaustive study of the Uboat war.

Also if the Japanese had listened to their sub commanders instead of the BB Admirals, they could have contibuted significantly to Allied losses in the Pacific
Click to expand...

Had Sixth Fleet HQ acted better, yes the Japanese subs could have done alot more damage to merchants but not enough to cause such a serious alteration. Their training, good for the attack was badly lacking in ASW defense which coupled with big sub designs of modest maneuver, dive speed and max depth would be harder and harder pressed to survive in a hostile ASW environment. So there would IMO be a serious limit to their ability to maintain effectiveness once USN assets redeploy to counter a dedicated mechant campaign by the IJN.
 
Nikademus said:
Not according to the Experten pilots who fought against it. [P-40]
Click to expand...

That's wrong Nikademus. Marseilles for one only turn fought the P-40 and always with success.

The Bf-109F G both turn better than the P-40, that's the reality of things.
 
Soren said:
That's wrong Nikademus. Marseilles for one only turn fought the P-40 and always with success.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Marseilles was an exceptional pilot....arguably the greatest of his generation. His skill was such that yes, on rare occasion he could and did outturn even a Hurricane in a defensive circle long enough to shoot it down. That didn't translate to the Emil being able to outturn a Hurricane under normal circumstances with a lesser pilot in the cockpit.


The Bf-109F G both turn better than the P-40, that's the reality of things.
Click to expand...

I was mainly thinking of the E varient along with the F. Not sure about the G. "Reality" according to the Experten who flew against the Curtiss type in NA in 41/42 was that getting into a turning fight with it, especially at low altitude was not a good idea.
 
Nik you need to read up on Germany's situation and the Me-262.

With the USSR taken Operation Overlord could've never succeeded and would've only resulted in tragedy for the Allies, and for the simple reasons below:

1.) The Eastern front took up 80% of German ground forces, which means a 4 times greater force would be available in the West, an unmatched experienced and equipped one.
2.) Without the acute fuel shortage the panzers could roll unhindered, and this alone would doom any Allied invasion to failure.

And as for the Me-262;

With the USSR taken there wouldn't have been a lack in the proper metals for the Jumo 004 engine, which reliability was the sole problem plaqueing the Me-262. So this problem would disappear and the Me-262 would fly with reliable engines, which wouldve meant the Allied could kiss air superiority goodbye over mainland France and the channel.
 
Would the air units of Rumania and Hungary factor in at all? Or even ground forces culled from disgruntled Russian soldiers?

I think the focus would shift again to the Med with Malta as a target much heavier than before.
 
Soren said:
Nik you need to read up on Germany's situation and the Me-262.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I have.


Well the exact "nature" of the USSR being taken is a tad bit up in the air. Like the Air Force, some forces would need to be taken back but I agree that a majority of the armored forces would probably be redeployed....some to Italy if things were to go reletively on sched there. I think however you are greatly oversimplifying things. Armor without adequate air cover might not succeed as well as you think and I doubt that there would be no fuel shortages at all if the Allies can hurt Big Oil.


From what i've read, the issues revolving around the 262 were not simply linked to the USSR's existance, including Eighth Air Force interference. Other factors were present that helped delay the deployment of the Jet, including Hitler, who it can be postulated would have interfered more or been less inclined to proceed with haste with one of his major opponents on the lam.
 
Nikademus said:
sure! anything's possible. I was just adding a voice to the side that thinks that not all that much would change. Events tend to have inertia as well as dominos.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what makes the discussion interesting.

Nikademus said:
I don't think the Germans had that many subs to spare for such an op which is why the initial effort was so small to begin with. My thoughts on the uboat war are based largely on the late Clay Blair's exhaustive study of the Uboat war.
Click to expand...

According to Uboat.net the Germans comissioned 312 U-boats from 1935 - 1941, of which 68 were sunk in that period.

So at the end of 1941 Germany had 203 U-boats {Type VII/IX} plus a further 41 coastal boats {type II} If only 60% of these are available for patrol in any given month, that gives 146 U-boats.....

uboat.net - The U-boat War 1939-1945

Lucky13 said:
How would this scenario have affected the aircraft carriers of the Kriegsmarine, would they have been finished, if so, what kinda threat would they have made?
Click to expand...

Germany had two that could have been ready in 1942 {Zeppelin Strasser}, but there were some serious technical problems to be solved, considering that Germany had never built an Aircraft Carrier and had no experience in A/C ops. Delcyros poited out some problems with the Me109 Ju87 as carrier aircraft in the other thread. In any event, if they did send them out in the Atlantic, the Allies would throw everything at them to eliminate this threat.

In Dec '41 the UK has 5 CV's, 1 CVL 4 CVE's, while the USN has 7 CV's, you can bet that they would send at least 3 or 4 of these to eliminate the Axis CV right away.

Njaco said:
Would the air units of Rumania and Hungary factor in at all? Or even ground forces culled from disgruntled Russian soldiers?
Click to expand...

One of the greatest failings of the German war effort was not recruiting from among the millions of anti-Soviet Ukrainians who hated Stalin for killing millions of Ukrainians. They would have been willing to fight against the Red Army Soviet partisans

Good questions Njaco! I would think that some of their air units would stay in Russia to help continue eradicating leftover Russian forces.

Njaco said:
I think the focus would shift again to the Med with Malta as a target much heavier than before.
Click to expand...

If the UK loses Egypt and retreats down the Nile into Sudan, that would be the new "Med" frontline. With the loss of Alexandria, Malta would be unsupportable in 1942, and would surrender mid-year IMO. {no gas, no food}

I would imagine the the UK effort in Africa would then be a holding action, to prevent the Axis from moving up the Nile into Kenya/Uganda. The main UK US action in '42 would be a relief effort to re-open supplies to India China, both of which would be near imminent collapse.


Do we know what the US had available in summer-1942 for long-range fighter aircraft in Europe?
 
With all "quiet" on the eastern front, Baltic Sea would pritty much become a German domain, right, with the Finns on the German (they were still allies with Germany at this point, right?) side and Sweden still neutral (I guess), where would they go from there? I guess that they could come and go as they wanted, would they move shipbuilding to this safe haven, more u-boat bunkers etc?
 
kool kitty89 said:
Soren meant that supplies of Nickel, Chromium, etc from Russia would solve the engine reliability problems and short service lives of the 004Bs.
Click to expand...

And by that the Allies could kiss control of the air goodbye. Furthermore the proper metals would improve fuel consumption, giving the Me-262 further range. The abundance of the needed raw materials would also mean an increased development speed of the Jumo 004D E series engines, which would both considerably increase power and fuel efficiency.

Now that put aside, that the panzers in France suddenly wouldn't lack fuel was enough in itself to make sure that operation overlord would become very onesided, while the addition of 2 to 3 times as many panzers troops would make it a complete tragedy for the Allies.
 
US priorities would also have changed. With Roosevelt being president you can be sure in case of a Russian defeat (which was considered a possibility in 1941-42) a larger proportion of material would've been diverted to the European theatre.

Even with only the UK and US as adversaries, an allied numerical advantage would've been inevitable. Most likely prohibitively large bomber losses would've meant a stalemate for maybe 2 years (basically that was already the case from 1941-mid 1943). Eventually you would have an Allied jets vs. German jets scenario with B-29 bombers flying high altitude campaigns. Very similar to the early stages of the Korean War. The atomic bomb would've sealed this.
 
krieghund said:
Not to mention the Luftwaffe Long Range Aviation dropping a nuke on New York.
Click to expand...

What nuke? the Neo Nazi fantasy nuke?

I still stick to my opinion, that Germany could never have won the war, simply because its industry including that in the occupied countries was no match for the US and its allies. The historical war timeframe starting at 1939 was years ahed of Germanys industrial and military readiness.

Even a success against Russia would have lulled Hitler and Goering (the latter was responsible for the industrial program) into further neglecting the non fully war instructed German industry. It would have taken at least 2-3 years to gain an industrial added output from within the conquered Russian territory.

And as I stated before, if you would take out madman Hitler from the equation, anythink could have happened right up to Germany never getting itsself into a WW2 in the first place.

Regards
Kruska
 
I have never seen evidence there even was such a program. The only nuclear program in Germany at the time I know of was the Uranverein (uran association) and fellow smaller associations. They were creating a primitive nuclear reactor, not a bomb.
 
Soren meant that supplies of Nickel, Chromium, etc from Russia would solve the engine reliability problems and short service lives of the 004Bs.
Click to expand...

Better turbine materials means greater thrust levels (more heat added = more power available) and better lifetime. The extra thrust would be the most useful but even so, the advantage would be small - between 5 and 10% increase at the most. Specific Fuel consumption would increase not decrease because you are adding more fuel. The thermal efficiency increases, but this is not the same as specific fuel consumption.

Better materials do nothing to rectify the largest flaws of the Jumo 004; unreliability and the fact that its so heavy. The introduction of nickel superalloys would in fact increase the weight, nickel being a fair amount heavier than the steels used. The difference wouldn't be much though. The unreliability comes from the basic design of the axial compressor which had lower efficiency than the the allied centrifugal types, and poor surge characteristics which made it vulnerable to rapid throttle changes.
 
I wasn't talking about the flamout problems, I meant the turbine softening from rapid throttle changes (overheating turbine due to lack of adequate cooling air) leading to turbine failures. I believe there were also occasional combustion chamber failures.

Increased fuel consumption doesn't immediately mean increased specific fuel consumption. SFC is thrust/weight of fuel consumed per hour. So if the increase in thrust devided by thin increase in hourly fuel consumption is less than the previous SFC (at lower thrust value), the nominal SFC will be lower. Also, as you mentioned, the thermal efficiency shoul increase, which should lower SFC as well. And don't forget that the air bleed would no longer be necessary, which consumed some power as well. (the elimination of the air bleed and hollow turbine blades would mean the RPM limitations of the 004B due to turbine blade vibrations would no longer be a problem either)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
924
Vahe Demirjian
S
  • Poll
Best Allied medium bomber 1942-1943 besides the Mosquito
8 9 10
Replies
186
Views
28K
Dimlee
  • Poll
Which period/theater of WWII do you enjoy studying the most?
Replies
6
Views
2K
gomwolf
G
  • Poll
Which aircraft was the better Russian bomber?
Replies
5
Views
4K
GrauGeist
  • Poll
PZL P11 vs Bf 110
Replies
2
Views
2K
parsifal
Menu
Log in
Register