Luftwaffe focused in the East

[rank amateur]

why would the fins go to war? the winter war and war of contunation were started by the russians....if russia is not the agressor i think the fins stay neutral.

Hi Bob, I gues you did not graps all the implications from my last sentence?
If a gouvernement receives notice that a foreign country is planning an invasion do you think they will lean back and watch it happen? Especially when they have a friendly neighbor on their team.

And offcourse Germany wasn't up to another war in october '39. I think they did a lot of irrational things. Does anyone consider Japan ready for a war with the US in september '41?

This is just a scenario to come to a situation where Germany is only fighting in the east without interference from the France, the UK or the US and without meddlings in the Balkan or Africa. Maybe a full fledged war with the USSR is more logical in may 1940. I have no problem with that.

 

[stona]

This is just a scenario to come to a situation where Germany is only fighting in the east without interference from the France, the UK or the US and without meddlings in the Balkan or Africa. Maybe a full fledged war with the USSR is more logical in may 1940. I have no problem with that.

How are the Germans going to get to the USSR without provoking the enactment of various treaties and protocols that will bring Britain and France into the war?
Does your scenario also dispense with most of the political and military manouerverings of the 1930s?
European powers at that time had a network of alliances and protocols in place more reminiscent of 19th century politics which seem odd to our modern eyes.

Japan was never going to win a long war against the USA. She had a pretty good run against the European colonial powers in Asia (Britain,France,Netherlands etc) and the Chinese before,finally,being overpowered by the might of the Americans.

Cheers

Steve

 

[michaelmaltby]

".... How are the Germans going to get to the USSR without provoking the enactment of various treaties and protocols that will bring Britain and France into the war? ...?

Through Romania and the Black Sea, via Hungary which borders Austria IIRC ...

MM

 

[davebender]

How are the Germans going to get to the USSR without provoking the enactment of various treaties and protocols that will bring Britain and France into the war?
Does your scenario also dispense with most of the political and military manouerverings of the 1930s?

I agree.

If Britain supports a plebiscite for Danzig as they did for the Saar then Poland will back down. There will be no war between Germany and Poland during September 1939.

 

[JoeB]

If Hitler had set out single mindedly to conquer the USSR, alone, I agree there are ways that could have been done without going to war with Britain and France. Poland could conceivably have been made an ally of Germany, as most of the other East European countries, and Finland, were coaxed or intimidated into becoming. And as mentioned, the USSR was attacked from allied Finland (the Soviets did start the Winter War, but it's too cute to say they started the Continuation War, whoever started shooting first the Finns and Germans had an agreement they'd attack the Soviets in concert) Hungary and Romanian as well as occupied Poland and Czechoslovakia.

But, the whole national complex which caused Hitler's rise had a lot to do with Germany's treatment after WWI, which was about the ancient enemy France (and with less German passion, Britain) and post WWI territorial issues with neighboring countries like Poland. Hitler's 'crusade against Communism' might have been as important to him, but much less important to why the Nazi regime gained power and had such solid support in German as of 1939.

Anyway the answer to what would have happened if Germany could concentrate the LW against the Soviets is, IMO, not much, or only some straw which might have broken the camel's back at some key decisive point. A war against the Soviets had to be won on land. Both sides repeatedly testified about how, even on the open steppes, enemy tactical air ops were at most a serious nuisance to ground operations. They didn't win or lose battles.

OTOH the Germans diverting the resources to conduct a serious strategic bombing campaign v the Soviets would have been a disastrous mistake even without Western opponents. Strategic bombing only (possibly) made sense as a way to apply force against an enemy when he was still insulated by a water body you couldn't (yet) cross. Of course having built up a large bombing effort v Germany the Western Allies naturally didn't suddenly stop it as soon as they opened a really major land front v Germany in June 1944. But it would have made no sense for either the Soviets or the Germans to build a strategic bomber force to attack the other, assuming no nukes. The extra resources would always be better used to go for the knock out blow in the land war.

Joe

 

[rank amateur]

How are the Germans going to get to the USSR without provoking the enactment of various treaties and protocols that will bring Britain and France into the war?
Does your scenario also dispense with most of the political and military manouerverings of the 1930s?
European powers at that time had a network of alliances and protocols in place more reminiscent of 19th century politics which seem odd to our modern eyes.
Cheers

Steve

Both France and Britain were not very eager to commence an active war. The invasion of 2 democratic western european nations only lead to an illconceived counterinvasion in Norway 6 day's later. Nothing happening over Franco/German border.
I think that if Germany had played their cards right, they could have get away with the Polish invasion and even a declaration of war with the USSR. If only they could have managed to step over the old WO 1 resentments and focussed their efforts on the east. Stalin did not have many friends in 1939 and did even less to get new.

 

[Jenisch]

IA war against the Soviets had to be won on land.

How about the effects of the Luftwaffe attacking the Soviet logistics? I think the much more numerous strike 190s would been significant.

 

[davebender]

You are wrong.

Read historical articles written during the 1930s and you will find communist sympathizers all over Europe and the USA. You will also find numerous French and British attempts to form a military alliance with Stalin during the late 1930s.

 

[Njaco]

Both France and Britain were not very eager to commence an active war. The invasion of 2 democratic western european nations only lead to an illconceived counterinvasion in Norway 6 day's later. Nothing happening over Franco/German border. ......

Thats not completely true. There were many clashes between the Luftwaffe and French / BEF forces - including Moelders rise in his score. There was also at least one incursion into the territory, but I will have to search to see if it was France into Germany or the other way around.

Found it - the Saar Offensive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War

"The Saar Offensive was a French attack into the Saarland defended by the German 1st Army in the early stages of World War II. The purpose of the attack was to assist Poland, which was then under attack. However, the assault was stopped after a few miles and the French forces withdrew."

 

[rank amateur]

You are wrong.

Read historical articles written during the 1930s and you will find communist sympathizers all over Europe and the USA. You will also find numerous French and British attempts to form a military alliance with Stalin during the late 1930s.

Hi Dave. Sure Uncle Joe was enjoying a sort of popularity in certain circles but not where it would have matterd. At least not in 1939. And even then not every communist followed the Stalin doctrine (you might remember J. Trotski). The man was considered an emberrashment especially after the Molotov/Ribbentrop pact. In fact many a communist was relieved when Barbarossa took place. I should have added the word 'relevant'.

 

[rank amateur]

Thats not completely true. There were many clashes between the Luftwaffe and French / BEF forces - including Moelders rise in his score. There was also at least one incursion into the territory, but I will have to search to see if it was France into Germany or the other way around.

Found it - the Saar Offensive

Phoney War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"The Saar Offensive was a French attack into the Saarland defended by the German 1st Army in the early stages of World War II. The purpose of the attack was to assist Poland, which was then under attack. However, the assault was stopped after a few miles and the French forces withdrew."

You are right (as usual I might add) but in my opinion they were just going through the motions and had no real plan other than find better defendable positions. Eventualy Germany took the initiative.

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... Sure Uncle Joe was enjoying a sort of popularity in certain circles but not where it would have mattered...."

Sure, sure - who needs "friends" when American and British capitalists are willing to ship factories over for you, set them up, and show you how to run 'em ...! Ford Model A cars and trucks, Ford tractors, Austin, Leyland, Autocar to name a few .... Stalin knew capitalism worked - delivered the required stuff efficiently - Stalin didn't "need" other friends ....

MM

Post: "Bloodlands", Timothy Synder's latest book, reviewed:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/arc...ass-murder-starvation/?pagination=false#fnr-1

 

[Altea]

If germany wasn't at war in the West then presumably they could ahve started the war in the East 12 months earlier and that could have made a huge difference. The new russian aircraft which were just entering service wouldn't have been in the picture, ditto the T34/KV1 tanks.

For the Luftwaffe the only big difference is that the 109's would have been 109E not 109F subtypes.

This is a rather questionnable assertion.

From technical point of view it might be true. From operational it's false, but with no doubt this time.

On june 1940 the 1st VVS were not powerless and had 15 693 combat planes for 18759 in june 1941. Only 706 modern planes were delivered to western districts between january the 1st and june the 20th. They were suffering many teething troubles and had no trained pilots for them. They were useless and played insignificant rules during first stages of Barbarossa, as well as new tanks. On the other hand spare parts and maintenance sets disappeard for old types as I-15bis, I-16 and SB during or even well before their withdrawal from production, and this affected a lot VVs operational ability, from the secund part of 1940.

About 1940 year: it was exceptionnaly cold unlike 1941th a rather standard one, promissing a short and catastrophic campaign for germans and especially the luftwaffe, bad weather, early frosts, late thaws, etc...The soviet army had more mobilised strengh than in 1941 ( 500 000 more men on arms in western districts) due to baltic and moldavia operations and had in general more combat readiness. And not such bear garden of frontline aerodromes as in 1941. It should be noted that the the overwhelming majority of soviet planes destroyed during first weeks of Barbarossa were either destroyed by Luft on the airfields or sabotages by their own crews during the retreat even for light damages. No such a problem with stabilised front lines, but evacuated and repeard planes.

Difficut to take them by surprise as easy as in 1941, when Stalin as well as his generals were persuaded that no attack would be launched against SU before separate peace with UK!

Regards

PS And about technical edge, no doubt that both MiG-3 and LaGG-3 were much more outclassed by the 109F in 1941 than I-16 tip 24-29 in 1940 by a 109E.

 

[rank amateur]

"... Sure Uncle Joe was enjoying a sort of popularity in certain circles but not where it would have mattered...."

Sure, sure - who needs "friends" when American and British capitalists are willing to ship factories over for you, set them up, and show you how to run 'em ...! Ford Model A cars and trucks, Ford tractors, Austin, Leyland, Autocar to name a few .... Stalin knew capitalism worked - delivered the required stuff efficiently - Stalin didn't "need" other friends ....

MM]

Hi Michael,

Not to be cynical but I'm sure that Ford, Austin, Leyland and others didn't perpetrade all this out of the kindness of their hearts but just to make a buck or better said a lotta bucks. Wouldn't be surprised if they did. And if we are talking about friendshipdom. That usually ends when there's money issues

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... Not to be cynical but I'm sure that Ford, Austin, Leyland and others didn't perpetrade all this out of the kindness of their hearts but just to make a buck or better said a lotta bucks."

I think I referred to them as "capitalists" ..... making money is usually what capitalism is about ..... is that not the case in Holland?

Stalin achieved his objectives for industrialization of the Soviet economy .... no communist friends could help him achieve that.

MM

 

[rank amateur]

[I think I referred to them as "capitalists" ..... making money is usually what capitalism is about ..... is that not the case in Holland?

Capitalism these day's isn't what it used to be. It used to be about producing stuff and selling it at the highest price. Nowadays companies outsource their production to China. Or are things different in Canada?



Stalin achieved his objectives for industrialization of the Soviet economy .... no communist friends could help him achieve that.

No argument from me there. But I wonder: did Ford, Austin and all the other companies, get what they were expecting?

Chrzzzz

 

[DonL]

This is a rather questionnable assertion.

From technical point of view it might be true. From operational it's false, but with no doubt this time.

On june 1940 the 1st VVS were not powerless and had 15 693 combat planes for 18759 in june 1941. Only 706 modern planes were delivered to western districts between january the 1st and june the 20th. They were suffering many teething troubles and had no trained pilots for them. They were useless and played insignificant rules during first stages of Barbarossa, as well as new tanks. On the other hand spare parts and maintenance sets disappeard for old types as I-15bis, I-16 and SB during or even well before their withdrawal from production, and this affected a lot VVs operational ability, from the secund part of 1940.

About 1940 year: it was exceptionnaly cold unlike 1941th a rather standard one, promissing a short and catastrophic campaign for germans and especially the luftwaffe, bad weather, early frosts, late thaws, etc...The soviet army had more mobilised strengh than in 1941 ( 500 000 more men on arms in western districts) due to baltic and moldavia operations and had in general more combat readiness. And not such bear garden of frontline aerodromes as in 1941. It should be noted that the the overwhelming majority of soviet planes destroyed during first weeks of Barbarossa were either destroyed by Luft on the airfields or sabotages by their own crews during the retreat even for light damages. No such a problem with stabilised front lines, but evacuated and repeard planes.

Difficut to take them by surprise as easy as in 1941, when Stalin as well as his generals were persuaded that no attack would be launched against SU before separate peace with UK!

Regards

PS And about technical edge, no doubt that both MiG-3 and LaGG-3 were much more outclassed by the 109F in 1941 than I-16 tip 24-29 in 1940 by a 109E.

You don't understand the issue! We are talking about no war at the west!
So any aircraft that was deployed on the west (french campaign, BoB) would be deployed on the east! Bf 109E, Bf 110, Ju 88, He 111, Do17, Ju 88, Ju 87.
The VVs wasn't at 1940 able to do any coordinate action, because they had no equipment (radio)to do a lead from the central.

The technical superrioty one the german side would be outstanding, even the Bf 110 could outmatch an I-16 at free hunting at altitude (freie Jagd), and a Bf 109E is as outstanding against a I-16 as the Bf 109F was against MiG-3 and LaGG-3. The air superrioty would be much higher then the original 1941 Barbarossa campaign. At 1940 with no war in the west and without any Landlease and learning the Luftwaffe had made mince mead of the VVS with no doubt, at any situation of the war!!!

 

[michaelmaltby]

".... But I wonder: did Ford, Austin and all the other companies, get what they were expecting?"

For the most part, I would say, they did. Remember in 1931 the western economies were in deep depression .... selling to Stalin was no different than selling to Saddam Hussein in Iraq, IMHO.

"... Capitalism these day's isn't what it used to be. It used to be about producing stuff and selling it at the highest price. " It's about providing investors with dividends and growth in their investment .... hasn't changed much that I'm aware of.

MM

 

[Altea]

You don't understand the issue! We are talking about no war at the west!

Where did i talk about war in the west in my post?

So any aircraft that was deployed on the west (french campaign, BoB) would be deployed on the east! Bf 109E, Bf 110, Ju 88, He 111, Do17, Ju 88, Ju 87.
The VVs wasn't at 1940 able to do any coordinate action, because they had no equipment (radio)to do a lead from the central.

Some of them had, it was still possible to make a coordonate planified action, even i admit the handicap.

The technical superrioty one the german side would be outstanding, even the Bf 110 could outmatch an I-16 at free hunting at altitude (freie Jagd), and a Bf 109E is as outstanding against a I-16 as the Bf 109F was against MiG-3 and LaGG-3.

You think that a BF-110 could outurn and outroll a I-16, something like that? Numbers please.

Now considering the I-16 type 24, best examples were just flying at 489 km/h at about 4500 m hight, but as SL it was full 440 km/h exactly as soviet tested Bf-109 E-3! Even serial type 29 with 20 mm canons was making 430 km/h. From comparative trials it was beating the "Emil" after only 2 or 3 turning circles* or only 1 to 1.5 loop!
* (17-19s vs 26.5 -29.4)
So what does it make at 1000 m? 5% less speed for 50% more turn rate, 80% more loop rate and 300-400% more roll rate...
Obviously, considering that a fighter is always a compromise between performance and manoeuvrability, it was not as osolescent as it look like!

Catching german bombers at hight, should be a problem of course, but the switch to the already produced I-180 at factory n°21 plant coulf have quickly salve this.

The air superrioty would be much higher then the original 1941 Barbarossa campaign. At 1940 with no war in the west and without any Landlease and learning the Luftwaffe had made mince mead of the VVS with no doubt, at any situation of the war!!!

Barbarossa as Pearl Harbor never looked like a fair football match. From the 3 500+ soviet lost planes the first week, only 824 were due to air combats against Luft even if counting those that occured during take-offs and landings, the major part as i already said was lost on airfields or sabotaged during evacuation.
That mean rather a victory due to the Heer's advance over soviet logistics (in fact the lack of soviet logistics) rather than Luftwaffe's one over VVS in the air.

In final worlds, considering Luftwaffe's superiority, i have no doubt that VVS would have been gradually decimated, but not destroyed with such catastrophic speed as during Barbarossa. That change a lot of things.

Even during Barbarossa there were little to do to preserve VVS strengh, only to distract planes or protect airfields (and bombers from time to time during missions).
Now preserve and make it last is one thing, make an effective weapon from that amount of planes, is another one...

 

[rank amateur]

".... But I wonder: did Ford, Austin and all the other companies, get what they were expecting?"

For the most part, I would say, they did. Remember in 1931 the western economies were in deep depression .... selling to Stalin was no different than selling to Sadam Hussein in Iraq, IMHO.MM

At times everybody did business wit Irak. Saddam seemed betere manageble than his neighbor Iran. Would make an interesting subject for a historical disertation: doing business with the enemy. We Dutch have a long standing tradition with selling anything to anybody. In the 80 year war with Spain (staring somewhat round 1548) Dutch merchants freely sold cannonballs to the Spanyards


[QUOTE"... Capitalism these day's isn't what it used to be. It used to be about producing stuff and selling it at the highest price. " It's about providing investors with dividends and growth in their investment .... hasn't changed much that I'm aware of.

MM[/QUOTE]

Well perhaps but in my view shareholdersvalue now seems a lot more import than the continuation of the companies. Again this is not the place to be discuss this. Now lets try to get back on thread