Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1036

Post by KDF33 » 03 Feb 2013, 10:20

That's not very surprising, since the Germans were still fighting a general war against the USSR.

The Germans, for instance, could never effectively restore the Don Basin coal mines since they were right in the middle of the frontline during the winter - spring months of 1942, and then again from the winter retreat of 1943. The area was finally completely lost in September 1943. So the Germans really secured the area briefly, between July 1942 and January 1943, at a time when it lay directly in the middle of their supply lines to the Caucasus, and at a time when the economic exploitation of the occupied territories was obviously not the priority.

In the case of the iron ore of Krivoi Rog, the Germans hardly developed it, but then Germany's problem wasn't so much a shortage of iron ore in the first place as the ability to effectively smelt it into steel, i.e. coking coal (energy) and alloying metals (primarily manganese) production. Indeed, the Germans estimated in late 1940 that the maximum steel capacity of their Grossraum (that is, with an adequate energy supply) was 40 million tons, a figure they never attained.

The Germans did, however, exploit the resources of the USSR where it mattered the most for their immediate needs, i.e. they restored manganese production and imported massive amounts of the metal back for their own steel production. They also conscripted millions of Soviet citizens to replace German males in the civilian economy.

Since the POD of this discussion is an effective collapse of Soviet resistance, the historical limitations to German economic exploitation of the East no longer apply.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15588
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1037

Post by ljadw » 03 Feb 2013, 11:15

I disagree on the last sentence:

1)It would take at least 15 years before the economic exploitation of the conquered parts of the SU yield a profit :the transport problems would be insoluble,and Germany had not the means to exploit these territories:where would Germany get the hundred of thousands of technicians ?

About the transport problems : a German train could carry 400 ton,thus,to transport the insignifiant monthly figure of 100000 ton to Germany,every day 8 trains would be needed,and,as loading,going to Germany,unloading and returning would take at least 10 days,this would mean:80 trains every day .
And,it would be the same for the oil,etc,

2)If the war in the east was won,Germany would not (no more) need the coal /oil,etc of the east,because,because,what Germany obtained from the east,was consumed during the war in the east,and,if the war in the east was over,the war in the west again Britain would be over(which was the reason why the war in the east was started).
Whatever,millions of tons of "German" oil which were consumed in the east,would be available .


ljadw
Member
Posts: 15588
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1038

Post by ljadw » 03 Feb 2013, 11:22

Some figures for the coal production of the Donietz

The production restarted in november 1941,and at the end of january 1942 9000 tons were produced .
February 1942:6000
March:9500
April :30000
May:60000
August :90000
october:240000
december:392000
1943:350000 in january,february :182000,june:394000,july:455000

Compared to a German year production of 300 million of tons,=25 million per month,this is meaningless and it would remain meaningless even if the war in the east was won .

John T
Member
Posts: 1206
Joined: 31 Jan 2003, 23:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1039

Post by John T » 03 Feb 2013, 13:56

ljadw wrote:I disagree on the last sentence:

1)It would take at least 15 years before the economic exploitation of the conquered parts of the SU yield a profit :the transport problems would be insoluble,and Germany had not the means to exploit these territories:where would Germany get the hundred of thousands of technicians ?

About the transport problems : a German train could carry 400 ton,thus,to transport the insignifiant monthly figure of 100000 ton to Germany,every day 8 trains would be needed,and,as loading,going to Germany,unloading and returning would take at least 10 days,this would mean:80 trains every day .
And,it would be the same for the oil,etc,
1. There where other means of transportation of bulk volumes, inland waterways where already used for Romanian oil and both Germany and USSR had a large infrastructure in this sector. They are pretty useless during military operations but once you only need a steady flow of goods that can be channeled in larger volumes.

And why should they need to send all the ore to Germany ?
Why not rebuild the local infrastructure and eventually just deliver the complete tanks?

Cheers
/John

Marcelo Jenisch
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
Location: Porto Alegre

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1040

Post by Marcelo Jenisch » 03 Feb 2013, 15:43

Needless to mention that the Allies considerated the Axis to be a great problem for their interestes, and even national security. If the events developed like you wrote, KDF, I think that pressure would be maintened in Germany towards and air campaign. Even if this meant the bomber force being reduced and there were "colossal" fighter engagements. A peace deal with Germany could have been reached if the Germans proved so tought to beat. As for Japan, I don't think so. Asia was much of economic interest to the Alllies (perhaps Nationalist China would survive here), and they would not tolerate loose Asia to the Axis. Also, Japan directly attacked the US and Britain, so popular support to smash Japan was higher.

And there was also the atomic bomb, which I suppose it would be used against Japan when ready. This would open the German eyes to the destruction the Allies could have inflicted in their country. Germany would be developing it's atomic bomb as well, but would not have it first than the Allies. So, I don't think that Germany would invest in an agressive war against Britain and the US and risk face atomic (and later hydrogen) bombing. A Cold War scenario would be very possible IMHO. Maybe Germany could have allowed the government of France to trade with the Allies, which would easy the tensions significantly I suppose.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15588
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1041

Post by ljadw » 03 Feb 2013, 18:18

John T wrote:
ljadw wrote:I disagree on the last sentence:

1)It would take at least 15 years before the economic exploitation of the conquered parts of the SU yield a profit :the transport problems would be insoluble,and Germany had not the means to exploit these territories:where would Germany get the hundred of thousands of technicians ?

About the transport problems : a German train could carry 400 ton,thus,to transport the insignifiant monthly figure of 100000 ton to Germany,every day 8 trains would be needed,and,as loading,going to Germany,unloading and returning would take at least 10 days,this would mean:80 trains every day .
And,it would be the same for the oil,etc,
1. There where other means of transportation of bulk volumes, inland waterways where already used for Romanian oil and both Germany and USSR had a large infrastructure in this sector. They are pretty useless during military operations but once you only need a steady flow of goods that can be channeled in larger volumes.

And why should they need to send all the ore to Germany ?
Why not rebuild the local infrastructure and eventually just deliver the complete tanks?

Cheers
/John
You are joking of course:transporting the Caucasian oil to Germany by inland waterways :lol: :lol: :lol:

Rebuilding the local infrastructure :lol: :lol: it would take years and years,and,why should the Germans rebuild the local infrastructure ? Rebuilding the local infrastructure would be at the cost of the German infrastructure .There was nothing indispensable in the east .After the war in the east,the German industry could produce enough tanks .
The conquered territories in the east were an industrial desert,useless for the Germans,and would remain such a desert for a generation .
Germany did not need the east.

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1042

Post by KDF33 » 03 Feb 2013, 20:45

Hello ljadw,
1)It would take at least 15 years before the economic exploitation of the conquered parts of the SU yield a profit :the transport problems would be insoluble,and Germany had not the means to exploit these territories:where would Germany get the hundred of thousands of technicians ?

About the transport problems : a German train could carry 400 ton,thus,to transport the insignifiant monthly figure of 100000 ton to Germany,every day 8 trains would be needed,and,as loading,going to Germany,unloading and returning would take at least 10 days,this would mean:80 trains every day .
And,it would be the same for the oil,etc,
The figure of 15 years appears arbitrary and wrong. Regarding the transport problems, in summer 1943, just in Army Group Center's area, a total of 75 trains arrived daily. Assuming that Germany's residual presence in the East would require the use of the full train complement equivalent of HGN + HGS, this would mean that the Germans could carry 11 million tons in both directions in a year.
2)If the war in the east was won,Germany would not (no more) need the coal /oil,etc of the east,because,because,what Germany obtained from the east,was consumed during the war in the east,and,if the war in the east was over,the war in the west again Britain would be over(which was the reason why the war in the east was started).
Whatever,millions of tons of "German" oil which were consumed in the east,would be available .
Why do you believe that defeating the USSR would end the war with Britain? Britain's determination to continue fighting had nothing to do with the USSR being in the war.

Regarding the fuel savings from the shelving of the campaign in Russia, I don't think they would be as significant as you make them to be. This page indicates that in 1940, Germany consumed 1.8 million tons of motor gasoline and 1.3 million tons of diesel fuel. In 1942, when two out of three Army Groups were static, Germany consumed 2.1 million tons of motor gasoline and 1.5 million tons of diesel fuel, only 500,000 tons more than in 1940. So IMO Germany's "regular" fuel consumption was quite large.
Compared to a German year production of 300 million of tons,=25 million per month,this is meaningless and it would remain meaningless even if the war in the east was won .
The Soviet restoration work in 1944 demonstrates that this is not the case. Germany's relative failure at restoration probably has more to do with: 1. The coalfields were on the frontlines, 2. Germany suffered from a labor shortage in the coal industry, 3. The priority was not economic exploitation but fighting the war with the USSR.

Also note the big jump on annualized production between August 1942 (1.08 million tons), when the area had just been secured with Blau, and December 1942 (4.704 million tons), just before the German lines were breached and the area once again became the site of fighting. Note the decreasing production in the early months of 1943. This matches my argument that the coalfields could hardly be tapped before the summer of 1942 due to them being in the middle of the battle zone.

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

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1043

Post by Politician01 » 03 Feb 2013, 22:19

Lets calculate

The Germans had on average 150 Divisions in the east for every month of the war From June 41 to May 45
150 (Divisions) x 46,5 (Months) = ca 7000

Now lets see the war effort spent against the Western Allies

Average number of German divisions/Duration in Months

North Africa: 4x25= 100
Italy: 22x22=440
Western Europe: 60x11=660

Total: 1200
Total Eastern Front: 7000

So in terms of Soldiers, Tanks, guns ect the Western allies accounted for less than 20% of the German war effort in ground combat.

Even counted some 50 Divisions which would have been needed to guard the occupied USSR - the Western allies have practically no chance to invade Europe.

Also their losses in Aircraft - and Pilots would skyrocket due to ALL German fighters going to the West.

Unless the Western allies can somehow increase their war effort against the Axis by 400% they will have to settle for a stalemate.

Or if Germany delas with russia in 41 - they can attempt a 1942 Selion with A high sucess and conquer Britain and be done with it.

Marcelo Jenisch
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
Location: Porto Alegre

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1044

Post by Marcelo Jenisch » 03 Feb 2013, 23:15

It does not work like that, Politician. What Germany needed was from the Soviet resources, particularly oil and coal, and quickly convert them into fighting power. Just pick the historical German contingent of the East and employ it in the West would not guarantee that the Anglo-Americans would not defeat the WM. Actually, the Germans themselfs recognized that they would not have the upper hand in a long war with Britain and America if the USSR was not invaded (for example, Germany had a serious shortage of oil). The invasion of the USSR was aimed to provide Germany with the resources she needed to fight the Anglo-Americans. So, the key to the puzzle here is know if Germany would be able to explore the Soviet resources as planned.
Last edited by Marcelo Jenisch on 03 Feb 2013, 23:48, edited 4 times in total.

Marcelo Jenisch
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
Location: Porto Alegre

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1045

Post by Marcelo Jenisch » 03 Feb 2013, 23:38

The Wages of Destruction, Adam Tooze, page 410:
The territories that Germany had conquered in 1940, though they provided substantial booty and a crucial source of labour did not bear comparison with the abundance provided to Britain by America. The aerial arms race was the distinctive Anglo-American contribution to the war and it played directly to America's dominance in manufacturing. But though the disparity in aircraft deliveries was extreme it was not untypical. A similarly vast gulf was also evident in relation to energy supplies, the most basic driver of modern urban and industrial society. Whereas the Anglo-American alliance was energy rich, Germany and its Western European Grossraum were starved of food, coal and oil.The disparity with respect to oil was most serious. Between 1940 and 1943 the mobility of Germany's army, navy and air force, not to mention its domestic economy, depended on annual imports of 1.5 million tonsof oil, mainly from Romania. In addition, German synthetic fuel factories, at huge expense, produced a flow of petrol that rose from 4 million tons in 1940 to a maximum of 6.5 million tons in 1943. Seizing the fuel stocks of France as booty in no way resolved this fundamental dependency. In fact, the victories of 1940 had the reverse effect. They added a number of heavy oil consumers to Germany's own fuel deficit. From its annual fuel flow of at most 8 million tons, Germany now had to supply not only its own needs, but those of the rest of Western Europe as well. Before the war, the French economy had consumed at least 5.4 million tons per annum, at a per capita rate 60 per cent higher than Germany's. The effect of the German occupation was to throw France back into an era before motorization. From the summer of 1940 France was reduced to a mere 8 per cent of its pre-war supply of petrol. In an economy adjusted to a high level of oil consumption the effects were dramatic. To give just one example, thousands of litres of milk went to waste in the French countryside every day, because no petrol was available to ensure regular collections. Of more immediate concern to the military planners in Berlin were the Italian armed forces, which depended entirely on fuel diverted from Germany and Romania. By February 1941, the Italian navy was threatening to halt its operations in the Mediterranean altogether unless Germany supplied at least 250,000 tons of fuel. And the problems were by no means confined to the Reich's satellites. Germany itself coped only by dint of extreme economy. In late May 1941, General Adolf von Schell, the man responsible for the motor vehicle industry, seriously suggested that in light of the chronics hortage of oil it would be advisable to carry out a partial 'demotorization' of the Wehrmacht. It is commonly remarked that the Luftwaffe suffered later in the war because of the inadequate training of its pilots, due in large part to the shortage of air fuel. But in 1941 the petrol shortage was already so severe that the Wehrmacht was licensing its soldiers to drive heavy trucks with less than 15 kilometres of on-road experience, a measure which was blamed for the appalling attrition of motor vehicles during the Russian campaign. Shortages made themselves felt across the German economy. So tight were fuel rations that in November 1941 Opel was forced to shut down production at its Brandenburg plant, Germany's largest truck factory, because it lacked the petrol necessary to check the fuel pumps of vehicles coming off theassembly line. A special allocation of 104 cubic metres of fuel had to bearranged by the Wehrmacht's economic office so as to ensure that there were no further interruptions.
As for the possibility of Germany maintein it's alliance with the USSR, same book of above, page 450:
Though the continental bloc could certainly satisfy both 'ideological' and 'pragmatic' criteria, the advocates of a long-term alliance with the Soviet Union were never in a majority in Berlin and this too was as much for pragmatic as for ideological reasons. In the long term a genuine alliance would have involved an unacceptable degree of German dependence on the Soviets. As General Haider noted in his diary in December 1940: 'Every weakness in the position of the Axis brings a push by the Russians. They cannot prescribe the rules for transactions, but they utilize every opportunity to weaken the Axis position.' In a Eurasian continental bloc, it would be the central power, the Soviet Union, not Japan or Germany, that would ultimately occupy the dominant position.The Third Reich had no intention of slipping into the kind of humbling dependence that Britain now occupied in relation to the United States, mortgaging its assets and selling its secrets, simply to sustain the war effort. That this was the direction in which Germany might be headed was evident already in the spring of 1940. Just prior to the German offensive in the West, Moscow demanded as part payment for its raw material deliveries the construction of two chemicals plants in the Soviet Union, one for coal hydrogenation (synthetic fuel), the other to embody IG Farben's revolutionary Buna process (synthetic rubber).
The Soviet Union was to have full access to both the blueprints and the complex instrumentation necessary to monitor the high-pressure reactions. Not surprisingly, IG Farben balked and with the support of the German military the deal was blocked. But the fact that the Soviets could even make such demands indicates the seriousness of the German dilemma. The hugely increased volume of trade needed to sustain Germany's blockaded Grossraum was bound to give the Soviet Union ever-increasing leverage. By the autumn of 1940, Germany's dependence on deliveries of raw materials, fuel and food from the Soviet Union was creating a positively schizophrenic situation. In trade negotiations, German machine tools
were one of the means of settlement prized most highly by the Soviets. Such exports, however, were in direct conflict with the preparations of Germany's own armed forces for the invasion of the Soviet Union. Astonishingly, rather than interrupting the Soviet deliveries to prioritize the Luftwaffe, Göring in early October 1940 ordered that, at least until 11 May 1941, deliveries to the Soviet Union, and thus to the Red Army, should have equal priority with the demands of the Wehrmacht. Even in the immediate prelude to operation Barbarossa, Germany could not afford to do without Soviet deliveries of oil, grain and alloy metals.The willingness to engage in such bizarre compromises reflected the increasing concern in Berlin over the precarious situation of Germany'sraw material supplies.
As the military-economic office of the Wehr-macht concluded at the end of October 1940: 'Current favourable raw material situation (improved by stocks captured in enemy territory) will,in case of prolonged war and after consumption of existing stocks,re-emerge as bottleneck. From summer 1941 this is to be expected incase of fuel oil as well as industrial fats and oils.

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

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1046

Post by Politician01 » 03 Feb 2013, 23:49

Marcelo Jenisch wrote:It does not work like that, Politician.
It does very well work like that - the Germans dont necessarily need Russian resources - just the freedom to allocate 100% of their historical production to the west.

The Germans produced 80 000 aircraft from 1942-1944 around half went to russia.
An additional 40 000 aircraft - manned by the best german pilots - would have crushed the allied bomber offensive

Germany produced 40 000 tanks and spgs in 1942-1944 - around 3/4 went to Russia - an additional 30 000 tanks and spgs - supported by an additional 100 German divisions would have made an allied invasion impossible.

Marcelo Jenisch
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
Location: Porto Alegre

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1047

Post by Marcelo Jenisch » 04 Feb 2013, 00:51

Politician01 wrote:It does very well work like that - the Germans dont necessarily need Russian resources - just the freedom to allocate 100% of their historical production to the west.
How can you say this? The Germans did not have oil and coal. I just provided references showing this.
The Germans produced 80 000 aircraft from 1942-1944 around half went to russia.
http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.com. ... h-and.html

According to the link, the LW had 11,140 aircraft destroyed in combat operations in the Eastern Front. I'm looking for the number of planes lost in accidents and the number of planes replaced due to damage and end of airframe life, which you certainly must have. I would be glad if you provide me such informations. The number of German pilotos avaliable, graduated and lost in the East and West is another vital data, which again, you certainly must have and I'm interested. The same goes for Anglo-American pilots.
Germany produced 40 000 tanks and spgs in 1942-1944 - around 3/4 went to Russia - an additional 30 000 tanks and spgs - supported by an additional 100 German divisions would have made an allied invasion impossible.
It's news for me that only parked tanks can turn an invasion into impossibility. IIRC, with the invasor having air supremacy, and attacking the supply lines of the enemy and it's troops, it's army can move. And this is just what happened historically, it happened in the Barbarossa and in Normandy. Other thing: the invasion would come only when air supremacy was obtained and the German industry was severily bombing. This would give "leverage" to the Allies have even more material advantage.
Last edited by Marcelo Jenisch on 04 Feb 2013, 01:09, edited 4 times in total.

Mika68*
Member
Posts: 237
Joined: 20 Jan 2011, 17:41

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1048

Post by Mika68* » 04 Feb 2013, 01:02

Politician01 wrote:What if the German-Soviet alliance did hold a few years longer and Hitler decided to finish Britain of first?
Pearl harbour happens as in OTL and Hitler declares war on America.
Can the West win witouth the Soviet Union?

I think no.

Without a war against the USSR Germany can dissolve 50 out of its 150 Barbarossa divisions thus giving the German industry a huge injection in workforce and therefore production.

And even without the occupation divisions Germany would still have 100 first class divisions for combat.
Without all the aircraft and tanks and trucks and soliders ect that had to be sent to the eastern front, Germany can conquer Malta, and take Gibraltar, conquer North Africa and take over the Middle East.

U boat production would rise,possibly starving Britain into submition by 1942 or 1943.
The allied bomber offensive would have sustained much greater casualties than in OTL.

And the allies would have no hope of conquering North Africa or just setting foot on the European continent.
Facing an unwinable war would also have a great impact on morale.
Even if Britain would not be defeated it is very likely that it would agree to peace by 1943 or 1944.
I think same.
Soviet Union was very sigfinicant factor to won Germany.

But I think that Hitler's power was weakened and his super power was collapsed before 1960's because internal reasons. Guerillas all around of occupied countries and so on.
Maybe Hitler was murdered before 1950.

Marcelo Jenisch
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: 22 May 2011, 19:27
Location: Porto Alegre

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1049

Post by Marcelo Jenisch » 04 Feb 2013, 01:56

http://sturmvogel.orbat.com/LWJul42.html

The Germans never had more than 1000 single-engined fighters.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10055
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: Could The USA/British Empire have won on their own?

#1050

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 04 Feb 2013, 02:19

KDF33 wrote: Why do you believe that defeating the USSR would end the war with Britain? Britain's determination to continue fighting had nothing to do with the USSR being in the war.
Occasionally I've run across brief remarks on the Brit/US ideas about the USSR collapsing. From the autum of 1941 the idea was circulating & there are refrences to contingency plans laid on during late 1941 or in 1942. Locating these or summaries & taking a look at them might add something to the discussion here.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”