If Hitler stays on China's side during Sino-Japanese war?

[T. A. Gardner]

Now, one way I think the Germans could have really benefited from this in 1939 and post invading Poland is they try to work with the US on it. Let's suppose for a moment that the Germans offer to ship kitted Hs 123 or He 112 aircraft to China via the Trans-Siberian railway and get Stalin to agree to this. These go to Vladivostok then to the US CAMCO factory in Hangzhou. The Germans send some technicians and engineers to help set up the assembly process.

It might get sticky if the production has to retreat to Burma and Rangoon as it historically did, but there is a real prospect that sending obsolescent aircraft in kit form to China for assembly would both help the Chinese and be great propaganda for consumption in the US.

Given that CAMCO started in 1933, if the Germans were to get onboard with the US on this they could have sent say, Ar 86, He 51, and Hs 123 fighters there along with say, kitting He 70 or even maybe He 111 bombers. Maybe the Germans offer to work with the US to redesign these to use Allison V-1710 engines.

This could have been a potential "Keep the US out of the war in Europe" maneuver.

[History Learner]

With what?

Aside from that, once Britain, Russia, and the US are at war with Germany the point is moot as the Germans have zero means to deliver any aid.

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

[Futurist]

With what?

Aside from that, once Britain, Russia, and the US are at war with Germany the point is moot as the Germans have zero means to deliver any aid.

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

The US will still deliver Lend-Lease aid to the Soviet Union in this scenario, won't it?

[History Learner]

With what?

Aside from that, once Britain, Russia, and the US are at war with Germany the point is moot as the Germans have zero means to deliver any aid.

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

The US will still deliver Lend-Lease aid to the Soviet Union in this scenario, won't it?

Yes, but to quote from Denis Havlat's articles on Lend Lease, part 2, from the Journal of Slavic Military Studies:

Overall, the Western Allies were responsible only for a small fraction of the losses sustained by German infantry and armor between 1941 and 1943 (around 10 percent); however, their contribution in the destruction and occupation of the Luftwaffe was overwhelming. The same applies to their contribution in forcing the Germans to leave most heavy artillery in the Reich as anti-aircraft weapons, preventing them from being used as anti-tank weapons in the East. Without Allied military intervention, the Germans could have sent at least 2,000 additional tanks, some 5,000 additional 88 mm anti-aircraft guns, around 15,000 additional aircraft, tens of thousands of additional motor vehicles, and up to half a million additional soldiers to the Eastern Front in the years 1941–1943, which would have shifted the balance in their favor.​

Further on:

Without the need to fight in the Atlantic; to transport large amounts of troops, equipment, and supplies across the entire continent; and the necessity to defend against Allied bombing, Germany could have massively reduced its U-boat, locomotive, and anti-aircraft gun and ammunition production and converted at least part of these capacities into the production of more aircraft and equipment for land warfare. Additionally, without bombing, and the need to maintain a large enough army to fight on several fronts, there would have been less need to use forced labor in the factories, thus boosting production. Historically, Germany already outproduced the USSR in certain areas like locomotives, trucks, and even bombers, with 12,664 produced by Germany in the years 1941–1943 as compared to 11,359 built by the USSR.170 Without Allied intervention and Lend-Lease, Soviet margins in these areas would most likely have widened, while margins in areas such as tanks would have shrunk significantly. If Germany and its industry could have concentrated on one single front from 1941 onwards, it most likely would have vastly changed the outcome of the war in the East.

[Futurist]

Technically speaking, though, Britain is still going to be fighting Nazi Germany in the Atlantic in this scenario--with both Britain and the Soviet Union still getting Lend-Lease aid from the US. It's just that the US might very well not actually enter the war itself in this scenario. So, it's not like there's not going to be any fighting done in the Atlantic at all in this scenario.

[T. A. Gardner]

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

No, for the most part they didn't. Mao continued to get some support through Mongolia but the Chinese Nationalist support ended with the Sino-Russian border issues. There is no way for the Germans to ship by rail or sea once the war in Europe starts in 1939.

[History Learner]

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

No, for the most part they didn't. Mao continued to get some support through Mongolia but the Chinese Nationalist support ended with the Sino-Russian border issues. There is no way for the Germans to ship by rail or sea once the war in Europe starts in 1939.

Germany never supplied Mao, so I'm not sure what you're talking about here? As for German ties to the KMT, to quote from Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War by Christian Leitz, Page 135:

"For a time, and against Ribbentrop's express wishes, Goering remained clearly too keen to let the lucrative war material trade with China expire. When Goering finally ordered the cessation of arms exports to China in April 1938, contracts concluded prior to August 1937 were exempted."

Further:

"As late as 15 October 1939 Goering indirectly acknowledged that such exports had not yet ceased when he told Sven Hedin that 'we are not at all interested in the China of Chiang Kai-shek. We have furnished it with war materiel but are now going to stop these supplies.'"

Beyond this, as late as June of 1941, Germany was able to continue trading with Japan via the Trans-Siberian Railway; I see no reason the same could not happen with the KMT here, particularly given the Soviets would definitely be more happy to support such, given their strategic stance vis-a-vis Japan.

[T. A. Gardner]

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

No, for the most part they didn't. Mao continued to get some support through Mongolia but the Chinese Nationalist support ended with the Sino-Russian border issues. There is no way for the Germans to ship by rail or sea once the war in Europe starts in 1939.

Germany never supplied Mao, so I'm not sure what you're talking about here? As for German ties to the KMT, to quote from Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War by Christian Leitz, Page 135:

"For a time, and against Ribbentrop's express wishes, Goering remained clearly too keen to let the lucrative war material trade with China expire. When Goering finally ordered the cessation of arms exports to China in April 1938, contracts concluded prior to August 1937 were exempted."

Further:

"As late as 15 October 1939 Goering indirectly acknowledged that such exports had not yet ceased when he told Sven Hedin that 'we are not at all interested in the China of Chiang Kai-shek. We have furnished it with war materiel but are now going to stop these supplies.'"

Beyond this, as late as June of 1941, Germany was able to continue trading with Japan via the Trans-Siberian Railway; I see no reason the same could not happen with the KMT here, particularly given the Soviets would definitely be more happy to support such, given their strategic stance vis-a-vis Japan.

Russia did. We were discussing shipments by the trans-Siberian railway. The Germans lose that ability once the Russians and Japanese have their border clashes

[History Learner]

Shipments to China continued into 1939 even IOTL, IIRC, and could do so into 1941 using the Trans-Siberian Railway; this was done with Japan historically. Outside of that, the main effect is that this will likely prevent U.S. entry into the War, likely winning it for the Germans.

No, for the most part they didn't. Mao continued to get some support through Mongolia but the Chinese Nationalist support ended with the Sino-Russian border issues. There is no way for the Germans to ship by rail or sea once the war in Europe starts in 1939.

Germany never supplied Mao, so I'm not sure what you're talking about here? As for German ties to the KMT, to quote from Nazi Foreign Policy, 1933-1941: The Road to Global War by Christian Leitz, Page 135:

"For a time, and against Ribbentrop's express wishes, Goering remained clearly too keen to let the lucrative war material trade with China expire. When Goering finally ordered the cessation of arms exports to China in April 1938, contracts concluded prior to August 1937 were exempted."

Further:

"As late as 15 October 1939 Goering indirectly acknowledged that such exports had not yet ceased when he told Sven Hedin that 'we are not at all interested in the China of Chiang Kai-shek. We have furnished it with war materiel but are now going to stop these supplies.'"

Beyond this, as late as June of 1941, Germany was able to continue trading with Japan via the Trans-Siberian Railway; I see no reason the same could not happen with the KMT here, particularly given the Soviets would definitely be more happy to support such, given their strategic stance vis-a-vis Japan.

Russia did. We were discussing shipments by the trans-Siberian railway. The Germans lose that ability once the Russians and Japanese have their border clashes

Which occurred and ended in 1939, allowing for Germany to resume trading with Japan from 1939 to 1941 but even ignoring that, OP is outlining that Germany is taking the side of the KMT, not Japan?