What if GB and the USA didn't bomb industry?

what if for some reason air superiority over the skies was far to great, and the AA was incredible for every location... so the United States and Britain decided not to bomb out the great Reich? :|

 

More fighters and artillery on the Russian front, less flak production (75% of all German artillery production was AA according to Overy) maybe? The impact of this? A longer war for certain, the USSR would have to change their doctrines to deal with German air power and artillery.

 

Ditto. While Speer was able to perform miracles by keep production steady, the achilles heel was the fuel production. The planes, tanks and guns were available but without fuel, they were useless.

Without the bombing, fuel deliveries would be guaranteed and the fighting potential of the Wehrmacht much better resulting in a longer war time frame and more casualties for the Allies.

 

I´d guess the war would last longer, too, but then again the planes could be used to bomb the enemy front lines instead.

 

Yes I would same the same, the war would last longer but the end would have still been the same just with more casualties.

Germany's man power was not infinite and after 1942 Germany had lost a large number of her experienced troops, after 1943 she could no longer keep all of her divisions at full strenght on the Western front.... The man power of Germany was starting to dwindle, no point of having all the planes, tanks and fuel, if you dont have the men to operate them.

 

Consider this, do you think that Germany lost more men due to the insufficient supply of armaments especially fuel? Lets take a look at the Battle of the Bulge, had Hitler uninterrupted supply lines, then he would have had the fuel not only for his tanks but also the planes. Granted, Germany was digging at the bottom on manpower but the Wehrmacht may have been better off if enough fuel and supplies were delivered. No loss of tank crews due to running out of gas and getting hit while walking back to the lines.

 

While this doesn't follow the original supposition exactly, a more likely scenario is that the Allies put more effort into developing alternative means of destroying German industry instead. Things like stand-off missiles (something like the V-1), alternative aircraft that could penetrate defenses (the Mosquito?), or, waging a war of attrition on the Luftwaffe at shorter ranges (attacking airbases and such).
The problem for the Germans remains even in such a scenario as originally proposed that causing the Allies to abandon their immediate bombing campaigns....which in itself is a huge delimmea as there are two very different methods in use, day and night bombing....the results for the Germans are tactical, not strategic. They do not recover the initiative as a result of this. at least not against the West.

 

From what I understand , the supply problem in the east was due to simply being overstretched ( for the most part ) I myself am not too familiar with many Germans jumping out of their tanks because they ran out of fuel at Moscow or Kursk. So as for the Eastern front the Germans lost more men due to the Russians shooting accurately rather them not having enough fuel to advance

The Western front might be a little different, Battle of the Bulge you say? I have always thought that the reason why the Germans had no air cover was due to lack of planes ( for the most part ) and not fuel. This is why the Germans launched the attack when the skies were filled with clouds. When the skies cleared, then the Germans got a wooping. The fuel in my opinion had more effect on the tanks rather then planes, as by this time not much was left of the Luftwaffe.

The question should be what happend to the Luftwaffe and how is it that Germany was bombed so heavily? My answer is the Eastern Front, had this not been the case and Germany not loose 10-15,000 planes in Russia, the bombing of Germany's industry and supplies by the Allies would have been more difficult.

 

interesting replies? thank goodness that there is a very low percent in any scenario that Germany would have one the war.

 

The Luftwaffe certainly had enough aircraft left for Bodenplatte - I don't know exactly how many ; Erich can probably give more info on this. The Germans needed to launch the Ardennes offensive under cover of cloud because they had well-learned the lessons of Falaise ; just how destructive the 9th AF and 2nd TAF could be.....

Going back to the topic, I'd go along with the general consensus of a longer war. In addition, the Germans would have had an uninterrupted opportunity to develop their 'wonder weapons' ( from the MP44 to the Me262 and the V2 ) all of which - sometimes accidentaly - had their development and production interrupted by Allied bombing.

 

Reading the biographies on Galland and Rudel, fuel shortage played a major part in handicapping the luftwaffe. Partial staffels would take off due to the shortages. They even complained that they had planes but not enough 'experienced' pilots to fly them due to the fuel shortages affecting pilot training.

 

Reading the biographies on Galland and Rudel, fuel shortage played a major part in handicapping the luftwaffe. Partial staffels would take off due to the shortages. They even complained that they had planes but not enough 'experienced' pilots to fly them due to the fuel shortages affecting pilot training.

 

These biographies were written after the war were they not? You know if I were a German fighter ace and then General of the fighter arm on a loosing side I too would lay claims such as fuel or other shortages for loosing, would you not do the same to try to preserve your honor? So far I dont believe that I have stumbled upon any German claims that have stated the following, " We lost because the other side was better " This unfortunately is the problem with reading German memoirs, they for the most part state excuses as to why they lost and not reasons for why the other side won.

Sure I absolutely agree, that fuel, transportation and supply lines were a problem, who wouldnt? However the emphasis on this problem was given only when they were loosing, not winning For this reason im not buying the claim that fuel played a major role in Germany lacking pilots, as in my opinion the reason for them lacking those pilots is mainly due to to them being shot out of the sky, including many of their aces.The truth of the matter is that yes, allied bombings really made it difficult for Germany to accomlish her tasks which in the end did cause Germany more lives. However what made the bombings possible is the fact that the luftwaffe was no longer a power in 1944 that it had once been in 1940-1941..... The main reason for this is them loosing so many planes in the east.

Just out of curiousity could this have been due to the fact that Germans lacked enough planes to counter the 9th and 2nd TAF, or was it because they had all of these planes which were grounded because of lack of fuel?

As I am not a hard head ( at least try be ), I fully understand and appreciate the importance and necessity of both in order to function. I guess the point that I am trying to make is that when Germany had over 10,000 planes, fuel was not a big problem.Fuel and supply lines became a big problem only when they could no longer be protected by the luftwaffe which was a result of so many planes being lost in the years before. As a result the supplies and fuel being grinded to almost a halt did in the end cause more Germans casualties.........

 

Which brings us to the original topic, if the Germans had air superiority whereas forcing the Allies not to bomb Germany, then that would mean that Germany had ample fuel supply for their aircraft and tanks. This would allow, at least the army, to conduct operations with mobile flexibility. The Luftwaffe still had crappy management so their operations would have been null towards victory.

We don't hear much about the German tank crews abandoning their tanks in the East but who is to say that they did not. What would you do if your Tiger runs out of gas while heading back towards the refueling point? I doubt many would have waited for the refueling truck to come to them. But I do wonder if there was any punishment for abandoning vehicles. I do know there was severe punishement for losing personal weapons such as rifles and Machine pistols. Hmmm.

 

Agreed

From my knowledge the Germans do not mention this, neither do the Russians. So im going to say the Germans and Russians.

As I am sure there have been isolated cases ( as there always are ) for both the Germans and Russians this was not a problem anywhere near on a scale of which the Germans had exeprienced on the Western front by 1944.

 

True enough. Now I wonder why that is? There seems to be more documentation on operations in the west than in the east. Curious. Cheers to you.

 

LW had many brand new planes available up to the end of the war, many of them were captured intact because there were no more fuel and pilots available. IIRC Germany produced around twice as many planes in 44 than in 43.

IMHO Germans missed fuel and pilots, way more than planes.

If we suppose a German air superiority over Germany controled territories (it's the subject of this what if), maybe this would mean less German losses (especialy against allied heavy bombers), but what about the fuel issue ?

Of course, German air sup. over Germany would mean better logisitcs, and to some extent more synthetic fuel production, but I've always thought the main German fuel issue was not really loss of air sup., but being cut from each (friendly) controled oilfield as time passed.

I mean, after being cut from Romanian oilfields, where the hell will Germany find its fuel, with all the air superiority of the world ? The small Hungarian oilfields were far from enough.

 

If the Allies could not bomb industrial targets without certain destruction, then they would have concentrated on targets of opportunity. It is impossible for any military to control every aspect of every zone. Essentially, the Allies would nibble away at the edges of the enemy. Taking shots where the odds allowed. Eventually the attrition of pilots would favor the Allies.

 

I've often wondered what would Britian benifit if a large portion of the heavy aircraft had been directed at the German submarines? A thousand or so built for long range ASW patrols. And, several hundred heavy bombers attacking the submarine bases along the coast?

 

Aircraft were not real effective at taking out submarines, but did well spotting them. A team effort may have been possible. I have wondered why more long range aircraft were not used to escort the convoys and spot submarines. A relay system might have saved many ships.