What would it take to make a Secure Atlantic Wall?

[glenn239]

On this thread we have had a pretty full discussion about the ideas the Germans could have had for improving the Atlantic Wall per ce and the limitations , when facing an enemy who can pick the location to land. The place to deal with a landing force is when they are at sea, preferably a long way from land and before they disperse into LCTs and LCVP.

Yes, but this was of no use to the Germans, as it was impossible for them to contest the Allied advantage at sea.

What practical methods are there for deploying a active torpedo system? launchers ashore, or visible launchers off the coast dont sound right. Aicraft run back up against the same numbers problem. Are submersible barges practical? Say four of them with 24 torpedos each in the Seine Bay & a fifth to rotate for service?

A V-1 with a homing torpedo might do it.

[Aber]

A V-1 with a homing torpedo might do it.

Sharks with fricking lasers will be next on the list...

[RichTO90]

For me, this is still the best option, relatively easy to conceal, and VERY hard to hit:

Just use those old tank turrets or make some Pz III 5cm/L60 turrets, a simple and accurate one hit solution for most barges.

Stupid Germans; they took about 1,800 5cm L47 and L60 guns out of obsolete Panzer III and then mounted them in Behelfsockellafitte - if they only knew the proper way to use them was to construct entirely new tank turrets to fit them in. Heck, they were even too stupid to realize they could just plunk the old turrets from the Panzer III right onto a fortification to make an instant turret. :roll:

Gee, I wonder why they didn't do it that way?

[BDV]

Proximity fuses would help

[T. A. Gardner]

Proximity fuses would help

Well, let's just go full fantasy and give the Germans a few hundred of these...

[amcl]

Proximity fuses would help

Why would sharks with lasers need proximity fuses?

On a more serious note, torpedoes are probably not the answer. It took until the summer of 1944 for T10 Spinne wire-guided, operator-controlled torpedoes to be deployed, and then in very small numbers. The long-range, low-speed pattern-running T3d Dackel seems to have been quickly rushed out immediately after D-Day, and so presumably could have been produced much earlier had a requirement existed. Dackel wasn't enormously effective, but it was a relatively simple conversion of a standard electric torpedo and could have been produced in large numbers. However, finding sites may not have been simple and producing a more flexible weapon, capable of a greater variety of speed/range settings (Dackel appears to have been limited to a single 57000m@9kt setting) would have added time & complexity.

Cheers,

Angus

[BDV]

Proximity fuses would help

Well, let's just go full fantasy and give the Germans a few hundred of these...

Well, unlike those (which were a major failure even in the light "jagdtiger" version) proximity fuses worked just fine in 1944, just in different hands than Germany's. The fear that they could fall in German hands and be reverse engineered was a huge headache at the time and source of tension between frontline command and the deskjockeys.


Now shark-shooting supertorpedoes or torpedoeshooting supersharks is for another forum.

[Sheldrake]

On this thread we have had a pretty full discussion about the ideas the Germans could have had for improving the Atlantic Wall per ce and the limitations , when facing an enemy who can pick the location to land. The place to deal with a landing force is when they are at sea, preferably a long way from land and before they disperse into LCTs and LCVP.

Yes, but this was of no use to the Germans, as it was impossible for them to contest the Allied advantage at sea.

This thread postulates that the Germans had defeated the USSR, thus enabling the Germans to return to their unfinished business with the British. Freed from the need to wage land battles on a large scale on the Eastern Front the Germans could rebalance their forces in favour the air force and navy. The Luftwaffe would have returned to the channel coast in strength and they would have done their best to isolate the British Isles with U boars, submarines etc.

Would the USA have opted for "Germany First" if there was no Red Army in the game? The US Army only raised 100 divisions, which would be outnumbered by the Germans.

A Soviet collapse in 1941 or early 1942 might also mean that the Mediterranean might indeed be an Italian lake with Rommel in Alexandria and a German Panzer Gruppe threatening the oil fields of Persia and moving the fulcrum of operations further East.

A "vichy" rump of the USSR would have allowed the Germans to collaborate far better with the japanese. The US Navy might have faced some serious problems in the pacific with U Boat packs operating against as far as the West coast of the USA.

Had the Soviet Union collapsed things would have been very grim for the Allies in general and the British in particular.

[BDV]

Had the Soviet Union collapsed things would have been very grim for the Allies in general and the British in particular.

As Germany had proven completely unable to dominate the air above Britain in 1940, what would make it possible after the losses of a successful Eastern Campaign?

OTOH, a Germany that was successfull in defeating Soviet Russia, would likely demonstrate political and strategic abilities that would have the leadership of the AngloAmerican compact look for accommodation rather than confrontation.

P.S. Ergo, neither Germany would have unfinished business with UK nor vice-versa.

[Kingfish]

The Luftwaffe would have returned to the channel coast in strength and they would have done their best to isolate the British Isles with U boars, submarines etc.

The former would have no better luck than the first go round, not with a UK that has caught its breath from the BoB and improved its defenses.

As for the latter, that would take time to ramp up to a level where the UK LOCs were seriously threatened, but we have to assume the allies would reply in kind. With no Arctic and Malta convoys to deal with, substantial naval assets would be transferred back to the protection of the British isles and sea lanes.

[Sheldrake]

Had the Soviet Union collapsed things would have been very grim for the Allies in general and the British in particular.

As Germany had proven completely unable to dominate the air above Britain in 1940, what would make it possible after the losses of a successful Eastern Campaign?

OTOH, a Germany that was successfull in defeating Soviet Russia, would likely demonstrate political and strategic abilities that would have the leadership of the AngloAmerican compact look for accommodation rather than confrontation.

Well, the Battle of Britain was an afterthought to the 1940 conquest of Western Europe. Hitgler was half hearted at best and was already thinking about Barbarossa. The Germans had made no serious preparations for the amphibious landings. Their Navy was still recovering from losses in Norway and the airborne arm from the Netherlands.

By 1944 with the resources of Europe and a couple of years of preparation, even if the Germans could not invade the UK they could have made it impossible for the allies to achieve the degree of command of the sea and air to launch op Overlord.

A 1943 Op sea lion would be an interesting scenario.

[BDV]

Well, mankind would have a nice example of how to defeat an amphibious invasion, I reckon.

[Carl Schwamberger]

This thread postulates that the Germans had defeated the USSR, thus enabling the Germans to return to their unfinished business with the British. Freed from the need to wage land battles on a large scale on the Eastern Front the Germans could rebalance their forces in favour the air force and navy. The Luftwaffe would have returned to the channel coast in strength and they would have done their best to isolate the British Isles with U boars, submarines etc.

Would the USA have opted for "Germany First" if there was no Red Army in the game?

The Germany first, or Europe first policy was set when it appeared the Red Army & USSR were very near being eliminated. That is It seen as very possible ther ewould be no USSR, as wen know it, some time in in 1942 or early 43.

The US Army only raised 100 divisions, which would be outnumbered by the Germans.

Early 1942 the US made a conscious decision to trade off ground combat forces for a larger air force. While the German air forces peaked out at a little under 6,000 operational combat aircraft on hand the US peaked at over 15,000 operational aircraft, and cut its aircraft production six to eight months before the war ended. On the ground the US formed and manned a peak of 96 divisions (including six of Marines). It also equipped and supplied at least 16 divisions manned by French, Brazilians, Chinese, ... and in supply of ground combat equipment, ammunition, & miscl combat support provided the equivalent of a another half dozen divisions. More along those lines were planned in 1943/44 when the length of the war was not clear.

A Soviet collapse in 1941 or early 1942 might also mean that the Mediterranean might indeed be an Italian lake with Rommel in Alexandria and a German Panzer Gruppe threatening the oil fields of Persia and moving the fulcrum of operations further East. [/qutoe]

Might also be a even larger attritional sink hole of German military power. During 1943 Germany lost between 60% & 70% of its aricraft loses over the Mediterranean. The loss rate in the Med. & West was double that vs the Red air forces. Any air units sent from the USSR to the Mediterranean or the west will lose pilots and machines faster than previously in the east. By the summer of 1943 OTL the Allies had as many combat worthy aircraft in the Med as Germany possessed globally. 180,000 Axis soldiers surrendered in Tunisia because the combined German/Italian air forces could not hold a supply route open to them. If there is a attempt to concentrate vs the Allies in the Med or some other front, parity there is the best that can be hoped for & meanwhile the Allies attack with another portion of their air forces where the Germans have far less.

A "vichy" rump of the USSR would have allowed the Germans to collaborate far better with the japanese. The US Navy might have faced some serious problems in the pacific with U Boat packs operating against as far as the West coast of the USA.

By early 1943 the Allies were sinking German submarines faster than they could be built. Only by breaking off the battle was Donitz able to preserve his fleet.

Had the Soviet Union collapsed things would have been very grim for the Allies in general and the British in particular.

By mid 1944 the Germans have a vast ground force, mostly of second and third rate formations, largely dependant on horse draught and much of it lacking even that. 'German' manpower is waning & maintinance of this oversized military is dependent on non 'Volk' of questionable loyalty. If ther eis to any hope of gaining any industrial benefit from the conquests a significant portion of the German skilled labor (those who are still alive) will have to be released from military service. Fact is the number of battle worthy 'divisions' Germany can depend on would be in practical terms not even 200. Factor in the size and fire power of the Allied division or corps and the reality is the German ground forces have only slightly better than parity in mobile field armies.

By the latter half of 1945 the German air force will be in no better condition than OTl. Their core transportation system will be falling apart under Allied air attack. If necessary Japan can wait while the heavy bombers sent to the PTO do their thing over Germany. And last of course are the atomic weapons. At least six Plutonium devices were available OTL by December 1945. Production estimates for 1946 vary from a optimistic 36+ to a more realistic 18 - 24.

[T. A. Gardner]

By 1944 the US could have easily formed an additional 6 armored divisions and at least 6 infantry divisions using separate battalions in the ETO alone. A single US corps had more engineering capacity (in terms of what they could do in a period of time) than an entire German Army Group did.

By late 1943 the only German formations that really were offensively capable were panzer and panzergrenadier divisions and not always the later. They had a handful of good infantry divisions that could actually make a real defensive stand against an Allied assault. But, probably 80% of their forces were good for little more than occupation duties or holding "quiet" sectors of a front line.
If you look at say, Italy there was really only one good infantry division there (the Fallschirmjäger divisions like 1st are more akin to panzergrenadier formations than infantry divisions), Hoch und Deutchmeister.
AGC in mid 1944 had just the 78th Sturm division as a good infantry division. The 362nd on Omaha was another good infantry division. That didn't save it from being pretty much destroyed and losing that beachhead.

Most German infantry units were also very dependent on beute equipment rather than getting the "correct" German made stuff.

As for air power, any German use of jets will have a very temporary affect given the amount of effort the Allies (particularly the US) into getting their own. The USAAF had a whole fighter group (the 412th) flying jets (the P-59) by the end of 1943. Their mission wasn't to take the P-59 into combat but rather to learn how to operate and maintain jet fighters so that when they got introduced into combat the pilots and ground crew would be ready to use them.
The US also had a bunch of jet designs in progress that would have started going into production by the end of 1945.

[RichTO90]

This thread postulates that the Germans had defeated the USSR, thus enabling the Germans to return to their unfinished business with the British. Freed from the need to wage land battles on a large scale on the Eastern Front the Germans could rebalance their forces in favour the air force and navy. The Luftwaffe would have returned to the channel coast in strength and they would have done their best to isolate the British Isles with U boars, submarines etc.

Indeed it does, but that still leaves behind the nagging question of just how they manage that, especially considering they missed in the real world. So what can be postulated as a means of that success?

1. Alien Space Bats...
2. Soviet leadership being much stupider than they historically were.
3. A larger and more single-minded commitment of resources to the Ostheer.
4. ?

Of those, 3 seems most likely. However, it has problems in the long run too.

Say no commitment is made to rescue Mussolini's Great African Adventure IOT utilize 5. leichte and 15. Panzer, along with the air assets in the Eastern Campaign. What is the outcome then? Likely all of North Africa in British hands.

Say no commitment made to overthrow the Yugoslav government and/or aide Mussolini in his Great Greek Adventure. Now the southern Balkans are vulnerable to British amphibious raids and - quelle horreur - the Romanian oil fileds are vulnerable.

So it likely isn't just a plusing up on the Channel Coast that would be required, but also the same along the entire Mediterranean.

BTW, I'm not sure how undersea pigs will help the Germans...

Would the USA have opted for "Germany First" if there was no Red Army in the game? The US Army only raised 100 divisions, which would be outnumbered by the Germans.

As was noted, the U.S. Army actually "raised" 90 divisions and sustained 89, but without the requirement to build basically twice its ground forces inventory in order to supply the Soviet Union (although the British requirement remains) the U.S. can also "rebalance" their manufacturing manpower commitment...and has considerably more reason to utilize that roughly 10% of manpower exempted from service for various reasons.

BTW, Carl underestimated. At peak in March 1945, the USAAF had 33,352 combat aircraft on hand...add in the USN and USMC aircraft and you have a combat force approaching the size of all the other nations air forces combined.

A Soviet collapse in 1941 or early 1942 might also mean that the Mediterranean might indeed be an Italian lake with Rommel in Alexandria and a German Panzer Gruppe threatening the oil fields of Persia and moving the fulcrum of operations further East.

I mean this in a nice way, but you need to find a good map. To reach the Kirkuk fields from Ismailia is about 1,500 kilometers. To reach the Abadan oilfields is about 1,700 kilometers. To reach the Saudi fields is about 1,900 kilometers. In any case, you have to show how the Germans can get both - a German Russia as well as a German Mediterranean. They can only do it by robbing Peter to pay Paul - something has to give unless you want to haul in the ASB.

A "vichy" rump of the USSR would have allowed the Germans to collaborate far better with the japanese. The US Navy might have faced some serious problems in the pacific with U Boat packs operating against as far as the West coast of the USA.

Via the Trans-Siberian Railway? Seriously? And, again, you may want to look at some maps. How do "U Boat packs" with ranges at economical cruising of 4,000 to 5,000 nautical miles reach and prosecute war patrols on a coast about 3,900 nautical miles from their closest bases in Japan? How do the U-Boats get there....it was quite a feat getting the few Type IX that made the journey there. Finally, how does a Soviet collapse suddenly generate greater capability in the U-Boat Waffe, which by mid-1942 was obsolescent versus the growing Allied ASW capability - by early 1943 it was obsolete.

Had the Soviet Union collapsed things would have been very grim for the Allies in general and the British in particular.

Yes, but it remains questionable how such an event could occur and what countermeasures the Allies would then take.