Switch the Axis and Allies planes during WW2 (1943 Western Front)

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by B-17engineer, Jun 16, 2013.

  1. B-17engineer

    B-17engineer Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    14,953
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    model builder
    Location:
    Revis Island.
    #1 B-17engineer, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    So, I'm sitting here bored and I thought of this:

    Say you switch the Axis and the Allies planes in 1943. So, Allies have any planes the Axis had operational in 1943 and the Axis have any planes the Allies had operational in 1943. Would the Allies still be able to complete their objectives? Or were the aircraft the Axis produced at the time not suited for the operations the Allies were carrying out?
     
  2. Civettone

    Civettone Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    London, UK
    Home Page:
    Very interesting !
    Especially if you bring in the Japanese and Russians.

    The obvious dillema would be the bombers. The Allies would no longer have a strategic bomber, the He 177 was not fully operational yet.
    The Allies did not need the Bf 109 nor Fw 190 nor Stuka nor Ju 88. Maybe the Hs 129 or Ju 87G? Better than the Hurricane IV.
    Maybe the He 219 with Double Wasp engines?

    The Germans could well have used the Mosquito and some long-range high-altitude fighters like the P-38 or P-47 to escort their B-17s. :)

    The Japanese would have liked the F-6F for their carriers. And the TBF and SBD.
    I also assume that the Americans would be forced to use Japanse bombers like the G3M! :/

    As such, I only see advantages for the axis, none for the allies. Says a lot !

    Kris
     
  3. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I've always thought that the U.S. was (or needed to be) geared towards expeditionary warfare, whereas the Germans were geared more towards shorter range, Reich-based actions.

    Equipment designed for expeditionary warfare may very well have better suited the Germans in their far-off adventures.
     
  4. B-17engineer

    B-17engineer Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    14,953
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    model builder
    Location:
    Revis Island.
    I switched the title to both fronts as I feel like the East would be very interesting between Germany and Russia!
     
  5. l'Omnivore Sobriquet

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2013
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    political scales
    Location:
    deep France
    Quite a radical 'what if' proposition...

    Certainly awakes the most bored 'n sitting internet WWII 'expert'...

    The question is : could japanese pilots simlply reach the Hellcat's cockpits ??
     
  6. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Could the Germans afford the price of U.S. equipment?
     
  7. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,185
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    The Me264 and Ju290 were available to the Germans in 1942, so technically there were long range, heavy bombers available to the Allies in this scenario. Unless this scenario dictates that the Allies have the limited resources that plagued the Germans...otherwise, those two bombers would be able to be mass produced and brought into service.
     
  8. altsym

    altsym Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    #8 altsym, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    Americans with the Me 262? Game over (first flight 18 July 1942 with jet engines).
     
  9. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,185
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    Actually, I was referring to the Me264, which was a long range heavy 4 engined bomber.
    The Me262 jet would still have suffered at the hands of the "enemy" fighters due to it's inability to dogfight, so I wouldn't rely on that as a game changer unless the He280 (capable of production while Me262 was still in testing) was put into a role of fighter cover for the Me262's heavy interceptor role.

    But bear in mind that the range of the He280 and Me262 were less than 600 miles (cruising, much less in combat) so in this reverse scenario, you'd have have similiar problems the Allies actually faced early in the war in regards to combat radius.
     
  10. fastmongrel

    fastmongrel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,334
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Motor Mechanic
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #10 fastmongrel, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    The LW in 43
    needed a good point defence fighter = Bf109 and Ta152
    A good general purpose fighter bomber/bomber killer = FW190
    A good medium bomber and night fighter = Ju88 family
    A Jet powered bomber killer = Me262
    A cheap transport = Ju52
    A heavy fighter/PR/Attack = Me410

    It didnt need a big bomber or a long range bomber escort so I think they had it pretty well covered and didnt need anything particulary from the Allied arsenal apart from fuel, enemy free skies to train pilots and there very own Detroit.
     
  11. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,185
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    However, how would the Allies conduct a heavy bombing campaign against the Axis without the Me264 and Ju290?
     
  12. pinsog

    pinsog Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    #12 pinsog, Jun 16, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2013
    I think the P47 in German hands would have been a nightmare for the allied bombing campaign. Fast, tough, superb high altitude capability, ability to carry a VERY heavy bomber killing armament without affecting performance(4 20mm and a LOT of ammo or 6 20 mm, or 4 30mm or something else if you like). A nightmare for allied bombers in my opinion.

    Same goes for the P38. If you re-armed a P38 with German weapons, either 20mm or 30mm cannon, or a mix of both, I think it would be a potent bomber killer with the added advantage of long range and being able to defend itself against escorting fighters.

    Unlike Germany's 109 and 190, the P47 and P38 could carry a heavy bomber killing armament without degrading performance. They could kill bombers and still defend themselves against single engine escort fighters.
     
  13. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Nope.

    U.S. and British doctrine revolved around massive aerial bombing. German doctrine revolved around CAS. As one would expect aircraft were designed to fulfill national doctrine. Ju-88 cannot perform high altitude aerial bombardment and B-17 cannot perform CAS.
     
  14. altsym

    altsym Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The Americans is a production GIANT in WWII. THousands of HE-111's, Me 262's, etc., etc., etc., would be prowling the skies.
    Its all about the numbers at that time.
     
  15. B-17engineer

    B-17engineer Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    14,953
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    model builder
    Location:
    Revis Island.
    So we have two different point of views it seems

    1) Sheer numbers would allow the allies to finish their objective regardless of aircraft and the role it was developed for

    2)The Axis' aircraft suited a specific mission that no matter how many numbers, were not going to fulfill the Allies duty.
     
  16. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    The reverse is also true. Even during 1945 the USA had nothing which could take out a bridge, bunker or artillery emplacement as well as Ju-87 and Ju-88 dive bombers.
     
  17. VBF-13

    VBF-13 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,029
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    They'd probably need another step-hole in the side and probably need to sit on phone books to see over the dash but beyond that I don't see them having any problems with it.

    PS: :lol:
     
  18. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,185
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    I think adaptability would be the order of the day...if all the Allies had at the time, were the Me264 and Ju290 for thier heavy bombing, then that's what they'd use...

    For medium bombing, there was the He111 and the jack-of-all-trades; Ju88. Just having the Ju88 alone would fill many roles, just as it did in German hands.

    I al ost forgot that Italy had several medium and heavy bombers that could apply here, too.
     
  19. B-17engineer

    B-17engineer Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    14,953
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    model builder
    Location:
    Revis Island.
    What would be the best option for the allies in terms of Italian bombers?
     
  20. bob44

    bob44 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2012
    Messages:
    173
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Interesting thought.
    I see a big problem with the US Navy using light unarmored Japanese planes. Adding armor to the Zero would hurt performance.
    This would give the Germans some interesting aircraft. B17s, P51s, Mossies.
    On the Russian front, I do not think swapping aircraft would make a huge difference.
     
Loading...

Share This Page