- Thread starter
- #141
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
it is my uneducated belief that had the LW devoted some of their resources to 4 engine high altitude bombers and developed drop tanks for fighter escort the battle for the uk and ussr would have taken a completely different complexion. the end result would still be up for conjecture but.....just as in another thread about who defeated the LW. when the usaaf bombers and fighters were able to conduct deep raids into germany denying the LW safe haven and demanding they re-station forces that were needed on the front lines....multiplied their attrition rate. in the BoB the LW was taking more losses than the RAF....but the RAF was near the end of the road. in one of the battles churchill was in the ops room and asked how many planes were in reserve...the answer was none. but then the focus of the bombing went to london and gave the RAF a much needed break and chance to resupply. had the LW had longer range bombers/fighter escort the same scenario but in reverse would have surfaced...where the RAF would have no safe haven. bases as far as ireland could have been raided. in the east soviet aircraft development would have had to evolved differently. the soviet ac were great at low level but up high...the MEs and FWs would have proved better. the LW bombers may have not reached the urals but would have had the ability to recon hundreds of miles beyond the front. this would have denied the soviets the ability to mass large amounts of troops and armor beyond the eyes of the germans and bring them to bear like they did in kursk. the devastation done by bigger bombers with larger and more numerous bombs would have come into play. london took a pounding but look at hamburg, munich, even berlin before the soviets entered. the damage to the large german cities far exceeded that of most any allied city attacked only from the air. if that had been the opposite early on.....and if "Fatty" would have understood radar and its significance......????