Generally, you develop counters to what you know the enemy CAN do, what you THINK the enemy can do, and what YOU can do.
The USA also had many coastal artillery units that hindsight says were a 'waste of resources,' but then, hindsight is 20-20.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
View attachment 604244
120mm AA guns, around 500 built, most stayed in the US. there were some 105mm AA guns.
Hard as it is to believe, the US had not only heard of, but did have minesweepers (mostly for submarine laid mines).
Me 264 mine laying sorties to America?
a lot of resources spent for little result.
Generally, you develop counters to what you know the enemy CAN do, what you THINK the enemy can do, and what YOU can do.
The USA also had many coastal artillery units that hindsight says were a 'waste of resources,' but then, hindsight is 20-20.
View attachment 604244
120mm AA guns, around 500 built, most stayed in the US. there were some 105mm AA guns.
Hard as it is to believe, the US had not only heard of, but did have minesweepers (mostly for submarine laid mines).
Me 264 mine laying sorties to America?
a lot of resources spent for little result.
Where is this air to air refueling to take place?
The 120mm guns make my point: the mere fear of a Luftwaffe bomber tied up resources such as these.
The Me 264 could have worked. Although 2500 meter (8200ft) sealed runways are common these days for transatlantic flight they were a problem for the Germans since they were bombing targets. Hence until the 2400hp DB603H became available RATO would be needed so that 1500m runways were an option. The alternative was in flight refuelling immediately after take-off (to shorten the take-off) which the Luftwaffe had proven in 1942/42 in hose/drogue style refuelling between JU 290 and Ju 252 in 1942.
I don't see either RATO or In flight refuelling a problem in 1943.
US defences would have been formidable. SCR-272 early warning radar, SCR-584 AAA radar, proximity fuses and picket ships (themselves targets that needed protection).
My view is that the US would need to obtain Mosquitos. The turbosuperchargerless P-61A and B couldn't cut it. The P61C was not in service before June 1945.
Where are these airfields located?Two main options.
1 Shortly after a reduced weight takeoff, to allow a shorter runway to be used, immediately after cruise altitude is established.
2 A buddy to buddy refueling 1/3rd of the nominal maximum range (say 3000 miles out) to add 3000 miles range. A failed rendezvous would still allow an abort.
3 A combination of the above.
Schwann-Luft or Schwann-See radio marker transmitters could be used or the aircraft could be flown In formation till transfer.
Trouble is they will take one look at the Plans for the P-61E and sayThe best P-61 alternative would be to take your friendly neighborhood TARDIS to Northrup late in the war to copy the P-61E drawings and then hop back to the beginning of the program at Northrop and swapping them for the P-61 prototype drawings...
Two main options.
1 Shortly after a reduced weight takeoff, to allow a shorter runway to be used, immediately after cruise altitude is established.
2 A buddy to buddy refueling 1/3rd of the nominal maximum range (say 3000 miles out) to add 3000 miles range. A failed rendezvous would still allow an abort.
3 A combination of the above.
Schwann-Luft or Schwann-See radio marker transmitters could be used or the aircraft could be flown In formation till transfer.
In-flight refuelling had been trialed since 1923 (https://www.amc.af.mil/Portals/12/documents/AFD-141230-027.pdf) and, shockingly, nobody used it.
In any case, any significant raid would be noticed because many routes from western Europe to the continental United States cross the UK. I'm sure that the RAF would completely ignore a large number of German bombers overflying their territory, so that's not a problem. Nor is the fact that that HM Government would send a cable or a phone call to the US Government to the effect of "hey, guys, there's a big bunch of nazi bombers heading in your direction. The RAF got a few, but we couldn't get all of them" likely to cause any trouble.
As mentioned earlier, the US had several airframes that could be converted to night-fighters had there been an immediate need. NACA ginned up a two-seat, instrumented P-38 in a few months. Lockheed could produce a two-seat nacelle with adequate room for an AI radar. All the waste heat from the plethora of vacuum tubes could be used to heat the cockpit, thereby reducing the risk of frostbite. In other words, was there a need, the US Government would reset priorities and spend some time yelling at airframe manufacturers to get the behinds in gear and get this done now, otherwise the USAAF cuts some contracts and buys Mosquitoes from Canada.
The 120mm guns make my point: the mere fear of a Luftwaffe bomber tied up resources such as these.
The Me 264 could have worked. Although 2500 meter (8200ft) sealed runways are common these days for transatlantic flight they were a problem for the Germans since they were bombing targets. Hence until the 2400hp DB603H became available RATO would be needed so that 1500m runways were an option. The alternative was in flight refuelling immediately after take-off (to shorten the take-off) which the Luftwaffe had proven in 1942/42 in hose/drogue style refuelling between JU 290 and Ju 252 in 1942.
I don't see either RATO or In flight refuelling a problem in 1943.
US defences would have been formidable. SCR-272 early warning radar, SCR-584 AAA radar, proximity fuses and picket ships (themselves targets that needed protection).
My view is that the US would need to obtain Mosquitos. The turbosuperchargerless P-61A and B couldn't cut it. The P61C was not in service before June 1945.
The route via Greenland is interesting. Probably the refuelling over the landmass could be the best option since the beacons could be placed at German weather stations. Air crews had more chance to survive. Another topic for "what if" section.
The route via Greenland is interesting. Probably the refuelling over the landmass could be the best option since the beacons could be placed at German weather stations. Air crews had more chance to survive. Another topic for "what if" section.
I'm quite sure that the US would take no notice of German radio transmissions from Greenland.
I think all of this talk of Germany fielding trans-Atlantic bombers to attack the mainland US relies on the US doing absolutely nothing in response. While there were certainly Americans who were (and are) living under figurative rocks regarding nazi Germany, they were largely not in positions of power. They'd be even farther from those positions had a German bombing raid hit a minor US city, let alone someplace major. Penny-packet nuisance raids could be handled by a couple of fighter squadrons. Raids numerous enough to inflict real damage could be handled by reallocating resources being devoted to the war against Japan.
The Me264 existed, but only in prototype form.Whether or not the ME-264 existed or not, the US would have had those heavy duty anti aircraft guns anyway. I can't imagine the Arsenal of Democracy not anticipating that need.
Did you forget the balloons?The Me264 existed, but only in prototype form.
The U.S. did have considerable AA batteries installed in strategic locations on both coasts.
The U.S. also had fighter squadrons, both Army and Navy (plus Marines) situated in key locations on both coasts.
Add to that constant ASW patrols by Navy, Coast Guard and Civil Air Patrol, inner coastal patrols by Army and Civil Air Patrol on both coasts PLUS patrols by RCAF that interlaced with US patrols at the border on either coast.
Not much was going to get through.
The only way the Japanese managed to bomb the West Coast, was with a sub-launched aircraft - It acheived zero success.
No, I didn't include the FuGo ballons because they were random events, not a conventional attack via bomber(s).Did you forget the balloons?