Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ron

    Ron Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2000
    Messages:
    607
    Likes Received:
    3
    What if the Allies were pushed back on D-day. Or at least couldn't hold their ground and were forced to withdraw?
     
  2. CoWBoY MoRoN

    CoWBoY MoRoN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2000
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    A Bomb...
    And no matter what the outcome in the West, the red meatgrinder was crushing Wehrmacht in the East.
    Maybe most of historically "Western" Europe would speak Russian right now. [​IMG]

    That may be the only good thing with Nazis and Commies: one had to kill the other.
     
  3. Erich Hartmann

    Erich Hartmann Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2000
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    3
    A VERY good point, Cowboy. I agree.....
     
  4. Mito

    Mito Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps....

    The Germans could have obtained more time to halt the Red advance. And precious time to develop more weapons, like the V3 and the like...

    And the Allied would have continued carpet bombing German cities, criminally.
     
  5. CoWBoY MoRoN

    CoWBoY MoRoN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2000
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    V3 was a "danger" for London civilians, but could have done nothing against USSR war industry. You can't bomb unknown targets!
    And "secret weapons" factory like Penemunde were well known targets for allied bombers.

    We can talk of the "criminal" carpet bombing if you want, but maybe in another thread...
    There's nothing new in the "war for Europe" board. [​IMG]
     
  6. Yankee

    Yankee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Stalin would have said "damn it look at those lazy capitilist fatcats, they cant do anything right!" pushed back to the boarder of Poland and sued for peace. The alliance already fragile would have left the Soviets to seek their own peace, followed by the Americans and English most likely having an arguement and the US taking its war to the Pacific.


    Most of Western Europe would probably be speaking german Possibly even England.
     
  7. Richard Murphy

    Richard Murphy Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2000
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hows this for arquements sake (All dates approximate!)

    July/August 1944; Eisenhower concedes that landings have failed. Allied forces withdrawn as rapidly as possible. Reinforcments diverted to N. Africa and Italy.

    September 1944; Allies land reinforced elements (IE Stronger than those actually used in "Dragoon".) in Southern France. At the same time renewed offensives are launched in Italy and possibly a feint against the Balkans (Or, assuming WSC and FDR didn't renage on their deal with Stalin and launch a full scale attack across the Adriatic, thus tying down considerable German forces without overstreching the Allies.
    Don't forget, much of the equipment for the landings were in the Mediteranean by the time of the Normandy landings in early June, including much of the shipping. Losses of vessels in an unsuccesful landing in the North would have only been relatively slight, as the Germans lacked an effective means to attack them.

    Sept.- Dec. '44
    Whilst the Eastern Front has been stabilised (Not significantly faster than it actually was, the Germans would still have suffered considerable casualties in the north-west of France, even if they did throw the Allies back into the sea, the Allied offensives gain ground. Combined strain of defending both N. Italy and S. France leads to effective withdrawl to the Siegfried line (With the addition of some newly built fortifications along the edge of the Alsace-Lorraine border.) whilst Italy is more heavily reinforced by the forces that would otherwise have fought the Battle of the Bulge)

    January 1945
    Just days before the Russians are due to launch their offensive, a heavily reinforced 1st (Now led by a recalled Guderian) and 4th (Manstein taking charge at Guderians insistance) Panzerarmees go over to the offensive, with a devastting counter stroke back through Byelorussia. Russians recover, but are back to the pre-War Polish Border and Armeegruppe Nord now reconnected by land to the rest of the Wehrmacht. Rebuilding with increasingly crippling personnel shortages delays Soviet attack "By at least six months."

    August 1945
    Front's have been stable ever since the Spring (When the fighting finally died down in the East.). The Germans have all but withdrawn for large areas of the Balkans, but launch frequent strikes which inflict enough casualties (Both Military and civilian) "to keep the war against the Guerrillas to a reasonable level". Rumania and Hungary have stayed loyal to Hitler (Though only through the flooding of Bucarest with several German Divisions and other Military personnel.

    In mid-Month the newly installed Pres. Truman ANNOUNCES the development of the Atomic Bomb and warns Hitler (Who now has to use a double for all public meetings and speeches as his health has worsened.) that Berlin is no diffent to Hiroshima or Nagasaki "As far as the United Nations is concerned"

    So: What happens next?

    Rich
     
  8. Yankee

    Yankee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    The allies wouldnt have bombed berlin, i dont think they could have brought themselves to destroy cultural and art treasures of Berlin.


    By this time Luftwaffe has built a large aresennel of Fighter jets that reak havoc amongest allied bombers reclaimed the German/french skies. After the US 8th airforce suffers devestating losses it joins english bombers for only night time raids.
     
  9. CoWBoY MoRoN

    CoWBoY MoRoN Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2000
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yankee you don't seem to realize Berlin was destroyed.

    And I'm searching for them, but I can't find your "large arsenal" of fighter jets, where are they?
    Luftwaffe reborn in 1945 just because D Day failed ??? WTF are you talking about?
     
  10. Ron

    Ron Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2000
    Messages:
    607
    Likes Received:
    3
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
    By this time Luftwaffe has built a large aresennel of Fighter jets that reak havoc amongest allied bombers reclaimed the German/french skies. After the US 8th airforce suffers devestating losses it joins english bombers for only night time raids. [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Are you saying the germans had a large arsennel of jets historically...or hypothetically?
    But in my opinion, even had the germans had all these great jets...they were restricted by needing specific runways.
    The ME 262 was a great dogfight aircraft...however it's cons made up for that. The allied fighters SO outnumber the german jets that they had enough fighters to try and protect bombers, attack the jets while taking off and landing (which was when they were most vulnerable), and also strafe the airfields.
    The specific airfields would be under constant watch by fighters...if jets took off they would be immediatly attacked...which ever ones made it up would be attacked while landing.
    This would be compounded by the fact that germany was suffering from severe fuel and material shortages.
    ALSO the engines of this aircraft were so bad that they needed to be replaced after 15 hours of flight time. (heat resistent nickel and chromium was needed but the germans used only 30% nickel and 15% chromium due to shortages) Thus giving the engines a horrible lifespan.
    Also even when working properly the engines were prone to burn outs.
    Also last but not least germany was suffering a pilot shortage. Their pilots training hours were constantly dropping. Their inexperience would put the experienced allied pilots in their prop planes close in ability to the inexperienced german pilots in their jets.
    If it came to it the allies would not bomb berlin but a smaller city. Hopefully ending the war...if not the war woyuld have probaby ended like it REALLY did just months later.



    <FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Ron on 19 October 2000 at 06:17 PM</font>
     
  11. Otto

    Otto Rested & Resupplied with MREs. Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,478
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    I think Berlin was a likely target. Even though it had already been badly bombed. Remember that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never bombed with conventional bombs during the war so that the effects of the nukes could be accurately measured. As well, I also know that strategic bombing was halted in the Europen theater prior to the end of the war, (I'm not sure how long before), because there were no strategic targets left to bomb.

    I do think that Hitler would make a good target for the Bomb. I'm thinking an A-Bomb strike dead on top of the Fuhrerbunker would end the war, and quick. So Berlin gets it.
     
  12. Otto

    Otto Rested & Resupplied with MREs. Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,478
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Yankee:
    The allies wouldnt have bombed berlin, i dont think they could have brought themselves to destroy cultural and art treasures of Berlin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Just like they spared the cultural treasures of the Abbey at Monte Cassino? Berlin was as good as vapor had the Allies had the Bomb in time.
     
  13. Otto

    Otto Rested & Resupplied with MREs. Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,478
    Likes Received:
    1,626
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mito:
    The Germans could have obtained more time to halt the Red advance. And precious time to develop more weapons, like the V3 and the like...
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    What was the V3 anyways?
     
  14. Mito

    Mito Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2000
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rommel:
    What was the V3 anyways?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I would deduce it was the V2 successor.
     
  15. Marcus Wendel

    Marcus Wendel Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2000
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. Yankee

    Yankee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was saying hypotheticly by that time they could have constructed a Jet fleet......


    And the Germans had all the art stashed away inside the Flak towers by the Berlin Zoo.

    who is to say the Germans didnt use Gas warfare on London by that time..? or finally got their crap together and bombed NYC to scare the Americans.

    The failure of Normandy wouldnt have been a "failure" it would have been a slaughter. Which i doubt the Western Allies could have stomached i doubt that they would have even gotten off the beach in some cases. It would have been Dieppe 10 times as bad.
     
  17. Henrik Krog

    Henrik Krog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me offer my ideas, so far only to September 1944:

    June 1944

    The Western Allied landings are thrown back into the ocean in a matter of days, the Allies suffering large losses in personnel, less in equipment, even less in shipping. It is decided, that a new attempt will have to wait until 1945, and that forces will be concentrated on the Pacific. The German troops start rebuilding.
    When the Soviets attack in late June 1944, the mobile troops are moved East along with a few infantry divisions (since most are immobile, they cannot be moved).

    July-August 1944

    The additional German troops start materialising on the Eastern Front in mid-to-late July, and are used to inflict large losses when the Germans reestablish contact with the forces encircled in Estonia and Latvia.
    Due to the Allied failure at Normandy, the Rumanian switch is cancelled, and though they suffer huge losses, the Rumanians and Germans manage to hold the Carpahtians-Focsani-Danube line, including the Poesti oilfields.
    The historical fighter losses that the Germans suffered during the retreat through France do not take place, and the fighter reserve historically lost over France is put to the use it was designed for: "Der Grosse Schlag", a one-off attempt at crushing the Allied bomber-streams. The November plan (after the fighter reserve was rebuilt for the task) counted on committing 2.500 fighters in one attack, thus breaking up ther Allied bomber pulks by superior numbers, and bringing down 4 to 500 bombers for the loss of an equal number of German fighters and 150 pilots.
    This attack exchanges the pilot losses that occurred historically for no gain over France for a tremendous blood-letting of the Allied bomber force. Daylight (precision-) bombing is cancelled in favour of night- (area-) bombing, and as a result the Germans produce more war materials than they did in our timeline. During the months of June, July and August, the Germans produced 2400 tanks, but during September, October and November only 1800. These "lost" 600 tanks are produced in our alternative timeline.
    In addition, the huge losses suffered in Belorussia and Rumania lead to the same mobilisation efforts as in our timeline, but without the drain that the Western Front provided. Equipment-losses suffered historically on the Western Front dont take place, either.
    The invasion of Southern France (Operation Dragoon) does not take place. As it was, it was only considered auxiliary to the Normandy landing, and as that one fails, Dragoon does not take place.
    As the Soviets are in Rumania, the role of Bulgaria is pivotal, and the Germans dont evacuate Greece (would invite an allied invasion and thus a Bulgarian switch like the attempted Hungarian one earlier in the year).

    Henrik
     
  18. Yankee

    Yankee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still feel Stalin would have said that he could rely on Americans for anything and canceled the western alliance seeing he could gain more through a non-agression pact with Hitler which Hitler was hoping for so much. America and England would have had a large disagreement the results being America taking its war to the Pacific and leaving England to stand alone again.

    I think there would have been one likely scenerios is a freak Channel storm blew up outa nowhere devestating the invasion fleet causing spararitc landings and un reinforced landings in the wrong areas alowing the Germans to slaughter those that did land and systematicly wipe out paratroopers already disorganized. The Material lost would not have been able to be replaced and another offense could not have taken place until 1946.

    Rommel was right, The Germans could have only won if they stopped the Allies on the beach, the Germans wouldnt have had a chance fighting a well entrenched and well supplied/supported invasion force.

    Would there have been successful beaches? probably.

    Most likely the Americans on Omaha would have been pushed into the sea (as they nearly were) allowing hte Panzers to move down onto the beach and split the allied beachead and cut off units that were "cleverly" and "successfully" moving inland at breakneck pace allowing the Germans to circle around them and cut them off from the Sea to wither away without the precious supplies from the sea. the Battle wouldnt have lasted more then a day, after that there would have been some heavy resistance pockets but most likely bands of 10-20 disillusioned and shellsocked Paratroopers that would need to be rounded up. (Those could prove to be pesky for the Germans had they rallied into some groups and waged a geurilla war from the countryside)

    ------------------
    Out side is America!
     
  19. Anton

    Anton recruit

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2000
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alright, so Overlord fails in '44? It delays another landing till '45. Sure the losses would have been horrible, but the losses on the successful D-Day were horrible anyway. In truth, the amount of German division in the West during and after the Normandy landing never compared to the amount of German divisions in the East. Sure a failed Overlord would mean the Germans could transfer some divisions to the East, but the threat of a renewed assault means that the Wehrmacht must leave garrison duties with fewer and fewer men as the Soviet Bear advanced in the East.

    After a year, I see the Allies making a new Overlord in one of four places: Mediterannean France, Italian Peninsula, Normandy (again), or Norway/Denmark. Personally, I would have liked a Norway/Denmark landing.

    Or, the Allies could always invade through Spain, and cross the Pyrenees.

    What I'm trying to say here is that it really wouldn't have mattered had Overlord failed. Nothing, and I mean nothing, was going to keep the Red Army out of Berlin in '45. Not even the hand of God (cause remember, they were atheists. At least officially.) To me, all it would have meant was that the Russians met us at the Rhine rather than the Elbe.
     
  20. Yankee

    Yankee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2000
    Messages:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    I disagree the date of a failed overlord couldnt have been for another 2 years 1946 at the ABOSLUTE earliest keeping in mind not only men would have been lost but also the a big chunk of the landing fleet. Hitler could have used his new super advaned subs to starve england into submission at this point?

    The Germans could have very easily transferred those panzers from the west to the East, the Russians were taking atrocious losses and Stalin would have probably felt that for the time being at least it was time to toss in the towel and call it right back to the 41 lines so both sides could try to clean up and get back in shape. Lets face it the Allies wern't going anywhere in Italy. This all would have been in the course of a year by this time the Allied air raids would be taking heavy losses from German Jet interceptors making mincemeat out of the Allied bombers.

    ------------------
    Out side is America!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page