Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8618
Joined: 21 Sep 2005, 22:46
Location: Michigan

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and U

#16

Post by LWD » 23 Jul 2014, 13:29

What are they going to use to fuel such an expansion? Given that they are pretty throughly involved in a land war in China would adding another huge chunk of territory to the conflict help them at all?

AJFFM
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 22 Mar 2013, 21:37

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and U

#17

Post by AJFFM » 23 Jul 2014, 18:40

The first thing that will happen is that the British will move imperial troops into Egypt to start defending against the Germans even at the expense of giving land to the Japanese in Burma. Historically Burma only started to fall in mid 42. Enough time to move half the Indian troops to Egypt and mobilise a similar number of from India especially from what is now Pakistan where anti-British feelings were low.

Second the British might start making deals in the middle east to secure flanks. Either appease Iran, the Arabs or most likely the Turks. With a large experienced army with a fighting spirit the Turks will be the Brits besties especially that Turkish leadership while having many pro-Germans in its ranks still had Turkey's interests of an oil rich Pan-Turkic state, a thing directly conflicting with Nazi interests.

A Russian white movement in the Caucasus where the majority of the Cossacks live and where a large number of Soviet troops will move to after the supposed defeat might be reborn. The British won't be against a Red movement either if it was lead by fighting people.

However the most immediate action would probably be an American invasion of Morocco with the most available troops as early as February of 42. The goal is of course to have a foot in NA before any German offensive with more troops.

Finally willing or not, expect more from South America, the last major untapped reserve of trained manpower.


Politician01
Member
Posts: 441
Joined: 02 Sep 2011, 07:56

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and U

#18

Post by Politician01 » 06 Aug 2014, 19:57

If the USSR collapses in 1941 the Western Allies are screwed

Even if one keeps in mind that 1 Million german soldiers or roughly 50 divisions with some 2000 tanks and aircraft have to be kept in the east in order to supress the partisan movement and possible attacks from beyond the Urals

in 1941 some 1,5 Million soldiers can return from Russia - some 500 000 can be sent back into the war industry - giving Germany a greater 1942 production then OTL - on top of that - ALL German production can be used against the West now.

In 1942 the Germans lost some 3000 tanks/spgs, some 3000 aircraft and 500 000 dead on the eastern front - these additional forces would be more then enough to conquer Malta, Gibraltar, Cyprus and North Africa - by the end of the year German forces could occupy even Bagdad.

Also the RAF could not take the losses inflicted by a Luftwaffe twice as strong as in OTL and would have to suspended its bomber offensive by the end of 1942

An Allied Invasion of North Africa would have been impossible with the Germans holding Gibraltar - an Invasion of mainland Europe even more so

Had the Allies not sued for peace Germany would have advanced to India - an Air offensive in 1943 would have been as bad as in 1942 - in this year the Luftwaffe lost some 4000 aircraft on the eastern front - now all of them would be used against the west

Neither churchill nor roosevelt could have stayed in Office had they continued to pursue the war under these circumstances.

So peace and a following cold war in 1942/1943

User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and U

#19

Post by BDV » 06 Aug 2014, 20:43

Politician01 wrote:If the USSR collapses in 1941 the Western Allies are screwed
If if's and buts would be candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. How's that to happen? Some forum members think it cannot happen under any circumstance, I think it's probably possible if this becomes single focus of the entire Axis war effort as early as when the decision is made: July 1940.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

User avatar
Guaporense
Banned
Posts: 1866
Joined: 07 Oct 2009, 03:35
Location: USA

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and U

#20

Post by Guaporense » 10 Feb 2015, 10:08

Politician01 wrote:Also the RAF could not take the losses inflicted by a Luftwaffe twice as strong as in OTL and would have to suspended its bomber offensive by the end of 1942

An Allied Invasion of North Africa would have been impossible with the Germans holding Gibraltar - an Invasion of mainland Europe even more so

Had the Allies not sued for peace Germany would have advanced to India - an Air offensive in 1943 would have been as bad as in 1942 - in this year the Luftwaffe lost some 4000 aircraft on the eastern front - now all of them would be used against the west

Neither churchill nor roosevelt could have stayed in Office had they continued to pursue the war under these circumstances.

So peace and a following cold war in 1942/1943
Indeed. That's what I also would find probable because the Western Allies weren't willing to commit millions of men to their deaths, unlike the Nazis.
"In tactics, as in strategy, superiority in numbers is the most common element of victory." - Carl von Clausewitz

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#21

Post by bf109 emil » 12 Feb 2015, 11:53

Doubt there would be millions of deaths if we are answering upon the thread topic. Germany would have no chance to have anything like the success they had during the Blitz. Allied airforces would still flatten Germany while dominating the skies over Great Britain disallowing any chance of a German reprisal.

User avatar
JAG13
Member
Posts: 689
Joined: 23 Mar 2013, 02:50

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#22

Post by JAG13 » 26 Feb 2015, 19:09

With the USSR gone the Turks were supposed to be next, either join the Axis or join the Russians... and they werent dumb.

The Japanese go north in 1941, not south.

The Iranians wanted the British out, as did the Iraquis, expect a renewed uprising with the Germans ad-portas and a two-pronged attack on Egypt. In any cas, the Germans would soon start to get a lot more oil than IOTL allowing the Luftwaffe to retake its regular training program.

First priority would be to double or triple the night fighters, soon that would make the RAF night bombing offensive a bloodbath, save for the Mosquitos.

Likewise, the Luftwaffe would bomb London and the islands with an almost as bloody failure.

Pearl Harbor 1942.

With a lot more day fighters available the USAAF gets butchered as well since the Germans now do have the fuel to train their pilots and have a lot more aircraft.

V program turns in to the Amerika program, funding goes to nukes and the A9/10 ICBM.

By late 1943 the Me-262 enters service taking care of the Mosquito issue and ending any dream of an air offensive.

Late 1945 the Ruhr is nuked, of the 1.000 bomber force one carried a nuke. Germans focus on their Amerika weapons while getting nuked from time to time. London suffers a large scale gas attack using A4s.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3546
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#23

Post by T. A. Gardner » 27 Feb 2015, 19:55

The US continues to arm what is left of the Soviet Union and Britain. Britain itself is untakable as Germany lacks a fleet to do it. Japan gets crushed in the Pacific by the US in any case.

The US pushes development of atomic bombs, aircraft like the B-36, and programs like MX 774 and Rascal.

If Germany continues to pursue military technology at the pace they did by 1946 they have the lead in very few areas.
Electronics: They are 5 to 10 years behind the Allies.
Jets: Parity at best and losing their advantage. The British and US have ones equal to the Germans in service and better stuff on the horizon. They have also developed more powerful turbojets than the Germans have and can produce far more of them.
Nuclear weapons: They are 10 to 15 years behind the US in development. Their first heavy water reactor is a failure.
In ballistic missiles and missile technology the US and Britain are reaching parity and soon will pull ahead of the Germans.
Even with the Type XXI in service the Allies have so much ASW in the Atlantic it is a death trap for German subs. The defeat of Japan has freed up huge naval assets Germany can never match.
Germany continues to spend serious cash on fortifications only to recognize with their first city to be hit with nukes it was all for nothing.
Germany continues to face shortages of many resources and lacks the sort of civil engineering capacity that the US in particular has.

User avatar
JAG13
Member
Posts: 689
Joined: 23 Mar 2013, 02:50

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#24

Post by JAG13 » 27 Feb 2015, 21:04

I doubt the conventional bomber is a solution in the jet age, you need the overwhelming superiority the allies actually had for it to work, if not it would be juts a very expensive failure.

The Germans had the Jumoo 004A by 1943, they spent a year trying to make it resource savvy AND reliable due to their lack of resources, if they can get them now from the USSR they wont be so constrained allowing them to progress faster than IOTL.

In missiles the US spent years trying to make something as good as the V-2.

How are they behind 10y in electronics?

No, a sub is very hard to find, an ESM equipped snorkel would detect radar emissions far sooner than the other way around, the Type XXI would make attacks submerged using passive equipment to aim the torpedoes armed with both passive and active guidance warheads. It was the first real modern sub.

There is no Atlantic Wall, what for? I they can keep air superiority and have a huge army ready to squash any landing there i no need for large fortifications save for major ports.

There are lots of new slaves available...

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10054
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#25

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 03 Mar 2015, 04:09

JAG13 wrote:...
In missiles the US spent years trying to make something as good as the V-2.
...
Conversely the US did have some 5000 copies of the V1 in production, as the JB-2 Loon. The project was canceled when Germany collapsed & only 1,000 were completed & some shipped to the Pacific for use against Japan. Some were expended by the USN in the 1940s studying how to launch missiles from submarines.

User avatar
JAG13
Member
Posts: 689
Joined: 23 Mar 2013, 02:50

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#26

Post by JAG13 » 03 Mar 2015, 15:30

Carl Schwamberger wrote:
JAG13 wrote:...
In missiles the US spent years trying to make something as good as the V-2.
...
Conversely the US did have some 5000 copies of the V1 in production, as the JB-2 Loon. The project was canceled when Germany collapsed & only 1,000 were completed & some shipped to the Pacific for use against Japan. Some were expended by the USN in the 1940s studying how to launch missiles from submarines.
Sure, but that was the V-1, more airplane than missile, the real difficulty as the US soon found was to develop a viable rocket, in fact IIRC they failed until assisted by von Braun if I am not mistaken.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3546
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#27

Post by T. A. Gardner » 03 Mar 2015, 18:58

JAG13 wrote:I doubt the conventional bomber is a solution in the jet age, you need the overwhelming superiority the allies actually had for it to work, if not it would be juts a very expensive failure.
An intercontinental bomber with a stand-off weapon (eg., guided or unguided missile) that can deliver the payload the last 50 to 100 miles to the target is a solution. In the 50's both the US and USSR saw that as one means of delivering a nuclear weapon successfully.
The Germans had the Jumoo 004A by 1943, they spent a year trying to make it resource savvy AND reliable due to their lack of resources, if they can get them now from the USSR they wont be so constrained allowing them to progress faster than IOTL.
The US had the J35 in advanced development and it out performed the Henkel 011. Metrovick (Vickers) had the Beryl and other engines in development, RR was starting on the Nene. Westinghouse had the J34 in development.
Basically in 1945 both the US and Britain had surpassed the Germans in jet engine development and were surging ahead with ones that would outperform anything the Germans had on the drawing board, not to mention having many times the reliability. The Jumo 004 was really a piece of junk because of the lack of high temperature alloys Germany had. A 10 hour or less service life made it a near throwaway every time the aircraft it was on flew a sortie.
In missiles the US spent years trying to make something as good as the V-2.
Project MX 774: This started right after the US and Britain learned about the V-2. The starting point was wreckage recovered from launched V-2 missiles. Convair was contracted for the airframe. Rocketdyne the engine, Hughes Instruments the guidance.
Convair's engineer Charlie Bossart looked at the German airframe and rejected it as an awful design out-of-hand. He came up with the idea of using the skin of the missile as the pressure wall for the fuel tanks and eliminating a separate airframe. He also designed in a re-entry nose cone that eliminated having the whole missile re-enter.
Rocketdyne threw out the German use of graphite veins to control thrust direction for a swivel nozzle, something the German team couldn't get to work during the war. They cleaned up the German engine too. The result was a near 25% increase in available thrust at lower fuel consumption.
Hughs developed a far better guidance system using a combination of ground radar telemetry and internal gyros that gave the missile a better launch trajectory.
Over all MX 774 nearly tripled the payload and doubled the range of a V-2. The program was greatly slowed after the war ended. Had it continued this missile would likely have entered service in mid to late 1946.
That isn't something as good, it's far better. Aside from that, Bossart's airframe and integral tank design is used by everybody in ballistic missiles today.
How are they behind 10y in electronics?
In 1945 the Germans barely had a cavity magnetron in production. They didn't have travelling wave tubes at all. Paul Eisler in Britain patented a method of etching the conductive pattern, or circuits, on a layer of copper foil bonded to a glass-reinforced, non-conductive base in 1943. This became the printed circuit board. The biggest manufacturer of tubes for Germany in WW 2 was the Dutch Philips corporation.
Other things the Germans hadn't developed were miniature tubes. Bell labs would invent the first transistor in 1947. Had the war continued that likely would have happened sooner.
Basically, the Germans lacked the scientific knowledge base (fewer people working on developing electronics), had a disinterested leadership base (Göring for example complained once "Boxes with wires and tubes, who needs them..."), a reluctant industrial base (much of German electronics was being produced by foreign companies in occupied countries), and the lack of sufficient industrial capacity to manufacture the equipment.
In fire controls the Germans have nothing to match the SCR 584 radar and M2 90mm gun. This combination integrated the radar, fire controls, and guns into one system. The guns tracked automatically (the mounts are powered) slaved to the radar system. It proved so effective that the US reduced battery size from 6 to 4 guns and still got a improvement in kill rate.
The fire controls on the B-29 are another example. The Germans have nothing comparable. Yes, they tried remote turrets and fire controls on many aircraft never getting them fully satisfactory and usually just abandoning them because they didn't work.
Britain and the US both were developing the first real computers like the Bombe and Project PX that became ENIAC postwar.
No, a sub is very hard to find, an ESM equipped snorkel would detect radar emissions far sooner than the other way around, the Type XXI would make attacks submerged using passive equipment to aim the torpedoes armed with both passive and active guidance warheads. It was the first real modern sub.
The US and Britain were both hard at work developing and deploying means to hunt a fast underwater sub in 1945. The British developed Squid / Limbo, the US Weapon Alpha, both had scanning sonars in production, the first directional sonobouy had entered production in the US, a search method using sonobouys was developed (code named Judy), both were developing homing torpedoes. So, both nations were well aware of the potential threat the Type XXI posed. Also, you can bet that if it were enough of a threat the shipyards building them would have been targeted for a nuclear strike ending production for quite a while.

There is no Atlantic Wall, what for? I they can keep air superiority and have a huge army ready to squash any landing there i no need for large fortifications save for major ports.
The US and Britain clearly could out produce the Germans in aircraft. Fortifications are very much a German response to defense.
There are lots of new slaves available...
Slaves are not as productive as free labor and they tend to do shoddy work or even sabotage when they can.
Last edited by T. A. Gardner on 03 Mar 2015, 22:34, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3546
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#28

Post by T. A. Gardner » 03 Mar 2015, 19:09

JAG13 wrote:Sure, but that was the V-1, more airplane than missile, the real difficulty as the US soon found was to develop a viable rocket, in fact IIRC they failed until assisted by von Braun if I am not mistaken.
The US launched it's first JB-2 / Loon V-1 copy 60 days after the first V-1 was launched against England. Ford Motor Corporation and Willy's Overland were contracted to mass produce this missile and had the full production gone into affect would have had them making the equivalent of a year's worth of German production a month. The US and Britain could have potentially fired 10 JB-2 for every V-1 launched.
The program was largely cancelled when it was clear the war in Europe was won.

The V-2 was being improved on in project MX 774. As previously described it was a big improvement over the V-2 and owed little to German engineering or VonBraun. In fact, the postwar US missile program really owed little to wartime German science in this area. The US had three separate programs going: The US Army for short range ballistic missiles, the USAF for long range ballistic and cruise missiles, and the USN for ballistic and cruise missiles. VonBraun and the Paperclip scientists worked for the US Army first at Fort Bliss El Paso TX and later at Redstone Arsenal in Alabama. Some also worked later for NASA. The USAF and USN programs owed little or nothing to German wartime science.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/mx774.htm

http://www.postwarv2.com/mx774/mx774.html

Image

User avatar
JAG13
Member
Posts: 689
Joined: 23 Mar 2013, 02:50

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#29

Post by JAG13 » 05 Mar 2015, 18:02

T. A. Gardner wrote: An intercontinental bomber with a stand-off weapon (eg., guided or unguided missile) that can deliver the payload the last 50 to 100 miles to the target is a solution. In the 50's both the US and USSR saw that as one means of delivering a nuclear weapon successfully.
Yes, that is in the 50s.
The Germans had the Jumoo 004A by 1943, they spent a year trying to make it resource savvy AND reliable due to their lack of resources, if they can get them now from the USSR they wont be so constrained allowing them to progress faster than IOTL.
The US had the J35 in advanced development and it out performed the Henkel 011. Metrovick (Vickers) had the Beryl and other engines in development, RR was starting on the Nene. Westinghouse had the J34 in development.
Basically in 1945 both the US and Britain had surpassed the Germans in jet engine development and were surging ahead with ones that would outperform anything the Germans had on the drawing board, not to mention having many times the reliability. The Jumo 004 was really a piece of junk because of the lack of high temperature alloys Germany had. A 10 hour or less service life made it a near throwaway every time the aircraft it was on flew a sortie.
Using Russian resources they could have used the more reliable Jumo 004A and further development wouldnt have been hampered, as you correctly point out, by lack of resources ITTL, so the Germans would have been capable of holding to their advantage isntead of having to direct most of their efforts to try to come up with solutions to their lack of minerals.
Project MX 774: This started right after the US and Britain learned about the V-2. The starting point was wreckage recovered from launched V-2 missiles. Convair was contracted for the airframe. Rocketdyne the engine, Hughes Instruments the guidance.
Convair's engineer Charlie Bossart looked at the German airframe and rejected it as an awful design out-of-hand. He came up with the idea of using the skin of the missile as the pressure wall for the fuel tanks and eliminating a separate airframe. He also designed in a re-entry nose cone that eliminated having the whole missile re-enter.
Rocketdyne threw out the German use of graphite veins to control thrust direction for a swivel nozzle, something the German team couldn't get to work during the war. They cleaned up the German engine too. The result was a near 25% increase in available thrust at lower fuel consumption.
Hughs developed a far better guidance system using a combination of ground radar telemetry and internal gyros that gave the missile a better launch trajectory.
Over all MX 774 nearly tripled the payload and doubled the range of a V-2. The program was greatly slowed after the war ended. Had it continued this missile would likely have entered service in mid to late 1946.
That isn't something as good, it's far better. Aside from that, Bossart's airframe and integral tank design is used by everybody in ballistic missiles today.
In 1946, a full 2 years at the very least behind the Germans AFTER they used the V-2 for the first time AND the trials were not a success either, ITTL they are not hampered by lack of materials and can actually start looking at something far more interesting such as a A9/A10 ICBM.

So, basically, reverse engineered German stuff that was not ready for deployment even.

The first US satelite and man on orbit (or close to) got there in a Redstone rocket designed by von Braun, the same rocket was used for the first operational US ballistic missile as well.
How are they behind 10y in electronics?
In 1945 the Germans barely had a cavity magnetron in production. They didn't have travelling wave tubes at all. Paul Eisler in Britain patented a method of etching the conductive pattern, or circuits, on a layer of copper foil bonded to a glass-reinforced, non-conductive base in 1943. This became the printed circuit board. The biggest manufacturer of tubes for Germany in WW 2 was the Dutch Philips corporation.
Other things the Germans hadn't developed were miniature tubes. Bell labs would invent the first transistor in 1947. Had the war continued that likely would have happened sooner.
The Germans patented the cavity magnetron first and then went in a different direction that gave them a clear advantage early war, then the crazies intervened and prevented further progress, only to disrupt their own development when they got hold of a British magnetron...
Basically, the Germans lacked the scientific knowledge base (fewer people working on developing electronics), had a disinterested leadership base (Göring for example complained once "Boxes with wires and tubes, who needs them..."), a reluctant industrial base (much of German electronics was being produced by foreign companies in occupied countries), and the lack of sufficient industrial capacity to manufacture the equipment.
In fire controls the Germans have nothing to match the SCR 584 radar and M2 90mm gun. This combination integrated the radar, fire controls, and guns into one system. The guns tracked automatically (the mounts are powered) slaved to the radar system. It proved so effective that the US reduced battery size from 6 to 4 guns and still got a improvement in kill rate.
The Germans produced a large number of radars and used them effectively, they certainly werent 10y behind having started the war ahead of everyone else.

GEMA, Siemens, Lorenz, Telefunken and AEG produced mainly in Germany, they did subcontract, but their main capacity was home based.

The Germans had their own full RPC version of the 10,5cm naval flak mount (operating ones were partial RPC) and would have equipped its H class BBs, they dropped it along with the ships since their priorities were quite different. German Flak could fire under blind radar control since late 1941.
The fire controls on the B-29 are another example. The Germans have nothing comparable. Yes, they tried remote turrets and fire controls on many aircraft never getting them fully satisfactory and usually just abandoning them because they didn't work.
Britain and the US both were developing the first real computers like the Bombe and Project PX that became ENIAC postwar.
As you said, they did develop remote turrets, they used different solutions bypassing the parallax issue by using remote sights IIRC.
No, a sub is very hard to find, an ESM equipped snorkel would detect radar emissions far sooner than the other way around, the Type XXI would make attacks submerged using passive equipment to aim the torpedoes armed with both passive and active guidance warheads. It was the first real modern sub.
The US and Britain were both hard at work developing and deploying means to hunt a fast underwater sub in 1945. The British developed Squid / Limbo, the US Weapon Alpha, both had scanning sonars in production, the first directional sonobouy had entered production in the US, a search method using sonobouys was developed (code named Judy), both were developing homing torpedoes. So, both nations were well aware of the potential threat the Type XXI posed. Also, you can bet that if it were enough of a threat the shipyards building them would have been targeted for a nuclear strike ending production for quite a while.
As any USN submariner can tell you DE subs are VERY hard to find even today which is why the USN pays other navies to send their boats to engage in exercises year round since they are quieter than a SSN.

There is no Atlantic Wall, what for? I they can keep air superiority and have a huge army ready to squash any landing there i no need for large fortifications save for major ports.
The US and Britain clearly could out produce the Germans in aircraft. Fortifications are very much a German response to defense.
Its a economy of force measure necessary since the German Army was fully committed in Russia, not the case here.

Indeed, but the Germans would be using jets making bombers a bloody proposition.
There are lots of new slaves available...
Slaves are not as productive as free labor and they tend to do shoddy work or even sabotage when they can.
True, sadly they are also very cheap and plentiful.
Last edited by JAG13 on 05 Mar 2015, 20:03, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Re: Soviet collapse and all-out air war: Germany vs US and UK

#30

Post by BDV » 05 Mar 2015, 18:56

Interesting issues had Germany gone in a more cooperation-with-France direction rather than the prostrate-the-Gaul direction historically taken.

France definitely had ability to bring significant brainpower to the Continental Europe Compact war-industries, in either or all of artillery, high-velocity gun, small arms, electronics, and/or in aerospatial programmes...
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

Post Reply

Return to “What if”