War doesn't break out for five-six years. Who's in the best shape?

[T. A. Gardner]

The opposite actually. At the end of 1942 there was a factory, Rovers in Barnoldswick, expensively furbished, all tooled up and with a workforce waiting to get started but no product to get making. From the British OH, December 1942:
"The industrial position precipitated by the slow development [of the Whittle W.2.B. engine] was even more depressing. The production organisation built up by Rover's at their shadow factory at Barnoldswick, consisting of 1,600 operatives, scores upon scores of machine tools, and representing £1.5 million of capital investment, was lying virtually idle at a time when both both labour and machine tools were urgently needed elsewhere in the aircraft and engine programmes"

Yes, Rover diddled away production by constantly making small changes to the design and not bothering to actually produce any engines. Eventually, the Air Ministry got fed up with them and pulled production giving it to Rolls Royce. RR got things rolling and began producing jet engines.

[nuyt]

But can they loot another country after Czechoslovakia without a war? Hmm, difficult to see. Maybe a limited war with Italy to occupy the wealthy north and get naval bases on the Med? Could that be done, geopolitically speaking, without this leading to a new WW? My bet would be AH " taking care of" Benito and the rest of the world just watches...the hard working near-Teutonic Lombards, Piedmontese, Ligurians, Venetians, etc, with the great workshops of FIAT, OTO, Breda and Ansaldo will be put to work for Germany. And come to think of it, they probably would not have cared....

This could be an interesting scenario for an episode around 1940 of this "no war for 5-6 years" scenario:

Mussolini is assassinated in early 1940. The country descends in anarchy and communists appear to be taking over the streets. The three major European powers discuss the options. Germany quickly intervenes and occupies Northern Italy, restoring order with the consent of most of its population. Ongoing activities by communists will be crushed by German/Italian security forces. Simultaneously, France and Britain advance in Italy's colonies. Libya is divided roughly in half by them, while the Brits and French (from Djibouti) also advance in Somalia and Eritrea. The Ethiopians rise again. France occupies Sardinia.

The English and French Navies, aided by a German/Fascist Italian land force from the north close in on Rome and endorse the King, who accepts the situation and continues on the throne of a much weaker and smaller Kingdom of Italy, stretching from Tuscany to Sicily. The Italian Navy is reduced to a much smaller force and the biggest vessels are towed away by the Anglo-french fleet.

Northern Italy becomes a German protectorate, leaving a strong German army in place. The rump-Kingdom becomes an Anglo-french protectorate, with just some naval presence. The colonies are divided by France and Britain. Ethiopia is liberated and gets a port on the Red Sea. Unofficially, the north is turned into a German colony and AH does not intend to give it back anytime soon if at all. With such big spoils (ships, colonies, oil, a victory, more peace in our time) the British and French do not mind paying this price.

By September 1940 all is quite again in Europe and the Med and everything returns to normalcy. Italy has been eliminated from the scene and all three major European powers have strengthened their position at its cost.

The main scenario continues....

[Carl Schwamberger]

The opposite actually. At the end of 1942 there was a factory, Rovers in Barnoldswick, expensively furbished, all tooled up and with a workforce waiting to get started but no product to get making. From the British OH, December 1942:
"The industrial position precipitated by the slow development [of the Whittle W.2.B. engine] was even more depressing. The production organisation built up by Rover's at their shadow factory at Barnoldswick, consisting of 1,600 operatives, scores upon scores of machine tools, and representing £1.5 million of capital investment, was lying virtually idle at a time when both both labour and machine tools were urgently needed elsewhere in the aircraft and engine programmes"

Yes, Rover diddled away production by constantly making small changes to the design and not bothering to actually produce any engines. Eventually, the Air Ministry got fed up with them and pulled production giving it to Rolls Royce. RR got things rolling and began producing jet engines.

How much time was lost from this? That is does a combat worthy jet aircraft appear six weeks earlier, six months earlier, a year earlier?

[T. A. Gardner]

How much time was lost from this? That is does a combat worthy jet aircraft appear six weeks earlier, six months earlier, a year earlier?

My guess is roughly a year, maybe 18 months. I'd speculate that if Rover had started production immediately with the intent to improve the engine periodically as issues in service arose, the Meteor could have been in squadron service by the end of 1943, about a year earlier than actually occurred.
Part of the reason Rover was allowed to dither so long was Whittle's engine was seen as the less desirable, and almost marginal, design compared to Griffith's work at Metrovick then Rolls Royce in axial engines. While these were not close to operational, while Whittle's was, the Air Ministry put more resources and pressure behind the axial design than the centrifugal.

If you look at how quickly the US was able to produce a jet fighter, the P-59, it is clear that with early production of Whittle's engine the Meteor would have been flying at least a year earlier. Sure, neither the Meteor or P-59 had stellar performance but both were on par with the hottest piston engine fighters of late 1944. Flying in 1943, the Meteor would have been a great fighter in service.

[Gooner1]

The opposite actually. At the end of 1942 there was a factory, Rovers in Barnoldswick, expensively furbished, all tooled up and with a workforce waiting to get started but no product to get making. From the British OH, December 1942:
"The industrial position precipitated by the slow development [of the Whittle W.2.B. engine] was even more depressing. The production organisation built up by Rover's at their shadow factory at Barnoldswick, consisting of 1,600 operatives, scores upon scores of machine tools, and representing £1.5 million of capital investment, was lying virtually idle at a time when both both labour and machine tools were urgently needed elsewhere in the aircraft and engine programmes"

Yes, Rover diddled away production by constantly making small changes to the design and not bothering to actually produce any engines. Eventually, the Air Ministry got fed up with them and pulled production giving it to Rolls Royce. RR got things rolling and began producing jet engines.

How much time was lost from this? That is does a combat worthy jet aircraft appear six weeks earlier, six months earlier, a year earlier?

Whilst the Rover - Powerjets relationship developed into a fractious and unhappy one; Rover were experimenting with their own ideas without reference to Powerjets, Whittle was suspicious that they were trying to circumvent his patents, the delay was primarily due to engineering and design issues. From the OH 'Design and Development of Weapons':
"..the three most important inherent technical problems of the gas turbine. These were, first, surging; secondly reliability and performance of the rotary components; and thirdly combustion. The first of these problems was totally new, but its appearance in the W.2 and the W.2.B prototypes so delayed progress that the magnitude of the research still required on the second and third problem were not fully revealed until early 1942."
By the time the problems were mostly solved there was no longer such a pressing demand so the engines could be manufactured with a keen eye on reliability, something that cannot be said of the German jet engines. The first real mass production variant of the Whittle engine the W.2B/26 (ironically with a combustion chamber designed by Rover), which went on to be the Rolls Royce Derwent, had a service time between overhaul of 150 hours.
Could the UK have got a jet fighter into service earlier? Probably, if mass producing the W.2B/23 engine (the RR Welland), but the Meteor it powered didn't have any/much performance advantage over the RAFs existing piston-engined fighters and it couldn't have been used over enemy air space, for obvious reasons.

[nuyt]

Africa would be another matter, with few conditions for successful liberty struggles. But "independent" Egypt might see a rise in nationalism in the 1940s, incited locally or under foreign influence. An early Nasser might stand up. On a slightly different note, the people formerly known as Boers would work to regain their independence from Britain in the early 40s as well and as IRL the nationalists found a lot of inspiration in Nazi Germany. So, a Soviet inspired coup in Egypt and a German backed uprising in the Transvaal cannot be ruled out for 1945. If they succeed or lead to a quick independence of these countries is another matter. entirely. They might just be preludes for a wider war....

Taking the Egypt sub plot a bit further which is not as farfetched as it may seem:

From Wikipedia's Kingdom of Egypt page: "Britain used Egypt as a base for Allied operations throughout the region, especially the battles in North Africa against Italy and Germany. Its highest priorities were control of the Eastern Mediterranean, especially keeping the Suez Canal open for merchant ships and for military connections with India and Australia. The government of Egypt, and the Egyptian population, played a minor role in the Second World War. When the war began in September 1939, Egypt declared martial law and broke off diplomatic relations with Germany. It did not declare war on Germany, but the Prime Minister associated Egypt with the British war effort. It broke off diplomatic relations with Italy in 1940, but never declared war, even when the Italian army invaded Egypt. King Farouk practically took a neutral position, which accorded with elite opinion among the Egyptians. The Egyptian army did no fighting. It was apathetic about the war, with the leading officers looking on the British as occupiers and sometimes holding some private sympathies toward the Axis.[8] In June 1940, the King dismissed Prime Minister Aly Maher, who got on poorly with the British. A new coalition government was formed with the Independent Hassan Pasha Sabri as Prime Minister.
Following a ministerial crisis in February 1942, the ambassador Sir Miles Lampson, pressed Farouk to have a Wafd or Wafd-coalition government replace Hussein Sirri Pasha's government. On the night of 4 February 1942, British troops and tanks surrounded Abdeen Palace in Cairo and Lampson presented Farouk with an ultimatum. Farouk capitulated, Nahhas formed a government shortly thereafter. However, the humiliation meted out to Farouk, and the actions of the Wafd in cooperating with the British and taking power, lost support for both the British and the Wafd among both civilians and, more importantly, the Egyptian military."

Apart from this dangerous (to the Brits) sub current, that could have easily surfaced in a prolonged peace or by foreign agitation or subversion, there was the little problem of both an underground communist and islamist movement (same source):

"During the reign of King Fuad, the monarchy struggled with the Wafd Party, a broadly based nationalist political organization strongly opposed to British influence in Egypt, and with the British themselves, who were determined to maintain their control over the Suez Canal. Other political forces emerging in this period included the Communist Party (1925), and the Muslim Brotherhood (1928), which eventually became a potent political and religious force."

I see a lot of potential trouble brewing in the British empire during the peace of the early 40s...Egypt, South Africa, India and no doubt foreign Soviet, Nazi and American spies would have seen the same potential for subversion in this scenario...

[OldBill]

"But can they loot another country after Czechoslovakia without a war? Hmm, difficult to see. Maybe a limited war with Italy to occupy the wealthy north and get naval bases on the Med? Could that be done, geopolitically speaking, without this leading to a new WW? My bet would be AH " taking care of" Benito and the rest of the world just watches...the hard working near-Teutonic Lombards, Piedmontese, Ligurians, Venetians, etc, with the great workshops of FIAT, OTO, Breda and Ansaldo will be put to work for Germany. And come to think of it, they probably would not have cared...."

That's an astute observation. While the Allies were desperate to get Mussolini on their side pre war, they were also handicapped by their own failure to stop Italy in Ethiopia, and the public fallout. Then there is the problem of Spain, and Italian intervention there. The question isn't so much would Britain and France intervene to help Mussolini but CAN they do so. I'm guessing no, but welcome hearing what others think.

[Carl Schwamberger]

... Taking the Egypt sub plot a bit further which is not as farfetched as it may seem:

From Wikipedia's Kingdom of Egypt page: "Britain used Egypt as a base for Allied operations throughout the region, especially the battles in North Africa against Italy and Germany. Its highest priorities were control of the Eastern Mediterranean, especially keeping the Suez Canal open for merchant ships and for military connections with India and Australia. The government of Egypt, and the Egyptian population, played a minor role in the Second World War. When the war began in September 1939, Egypt declared martial law and broke off diplomatic relations with Germany. It did not declare war on Germany, but the Prime Minister associated Egypt with the British war effort. It broke off diplomatic relations with Italy in 1940, but never declared war, even when the Italian army invaded Egypt. King Farouk practically took a neutral position, which accorded with elite opinion among the Egyptians.[/ The Egyptian army did no fighting. It was apathetic about the war, with the leading officers looking on the British as occupiers and sometimes holding some private sympathies toward the Axis.[8]b] ... ... Farouk capitulated, Nahhas formed a government shortly thereafter. However, the humiliation meted out to Farouk, and the actions of the Wafd in cooperating with the British and taking power, lost support for both the British and the Wafd among both civilians and, more importantly, the Egyptian military." ...

Anwar Sadaat referred to this in his autobiography. He was a jr officer in the Egyptian Army then & described the officer corps all plotting their revolt when the Germans arrived. They could not do much else as the Egyptian battalions were infantry only with artillery AT guns, logistics support confined to a few training units. About all they could do was riot suppression. Or stand guard.

[nuyt]

Thanks, interesting stuff...!

[nuyt]

About the Italian subplot:

I forgot two other Italian territories: Albania (occupied in 1939) and de Dodekanese islands (acquired from Turkey in the early 20s).

Not sure what would happen to Albania in my scenario above, but most logical would be regained independence. Whoever becomes Albania's "protector" is open.

But AH could promise the Dodekanese to Turkey. After all the dozen or so islands (including the now famous Kastellorizo) were ceded by Turkey in a treaty with fascist Italy. Promising these back to the Turks might win AH their eternal friendship. Of course the Greeks as well as the Anglo-French combination might feel different about this.

After the breakup of the Italian Empire and the occupation of its northern provinces, the Germans plot their next move: the breakup of Yugoslavia. AH incites the Croats into rebellion and together with the Bosnians and the Hungarian and German minorities in Serbia's Banat province they rise. German and Hungarian military aid and "advisors" pour in and by 1941 there is an independent Croatia (a German protectorate), while the Banat is controlled by Hungary. Since this is mostly an "internal affair" the world does not intervene. Still no war, as per the assigned scneario.

Hungary just as in OTL remains a German vassal.

What will be the geopolitical consequences of AH's actions in the Balkans?

[nuyt]

That's an astute observation. While the Allies were desperate to get Mussolini on their side pre war, they were also handicapped by their own failure to stop Italy in Ethiopia, and the public fallout. Then there is the problem of Spain, and Italian intervention there. The question isn't so much would Britain and France intervene to help Mussolini but CAN they do so. I'm guessing no, but welcome hearing what others think.

Thanks OdlBIll, looking forward to further discussions!

[T. A. Gardner]

An interesting what if twist on Italy is that let's say that in 1943 - 44 they discover oil in Libya and begin drilling for production. Historically, Italy looked for oil there pre-war but found no deposits by 1940 when exploration ended due to the war. Here, the Italians continue to explore for oil, possibly bringing in foreign companies to expand this.
Given that there are large deposits in Libya it isn't too unreasonable that one or another is discovered with a few more years of searching.

Suddenly Italy has oil and not a small amount of it nearly on their doorstep. That would change a lot of things. Italy would likely suddenly take on a whole new level of importance for Germany and possibly even Europe as the oil is close to the continent. One would expect the French to start looking at their N. African colonies a lot closer for the possibility of oil there.

How would that play out? Would the Allies in a 1945 WW 2 starting war do more to bring Italy into the fold? Would Germany see N. Africa as a more important potential front in such a war?

[Carl Schwamberger]

An interesting what if twist on Italy is that let's say that in 1943 - 44 they discover oil in Libya and begin drilling for production. ... One would expect the French to start looking at their N. African colonies a lot closer for the possibility of oil there.

Based on what was going with French atomic research 1939-1940 I'm thinking they'd also be looking for Uranium ore.

[T. A. Gardner]

An interesting what if twist on Italy is that let's say that in 1943 - 44 they discover oil in Libya and begin drilling for production. ... One would expect the French to start looking at their N. African colonies a lot closer for the possibility of oil there.

Based on what was going with French atomic research 1939-1940 I'm thinking they'd also be looking for Uranium ore.

In 1935-ish, the Germans led the world in nuclear physics, the US wasn't even in the race. France, like Britain, Italy or Japan were all small players. By 1940, the US had become the world leader simply because fascism in Germany and Italy made all the top physicists flee. While everybody knew about Uranium and that it had some potential value, in the scenario we're looking at it wouldn't be nearly as high a priority as having a stable oil supply near home.

At least that's the way I see it.

[nuyt]

An interesting what if twist on Italy is that let's say that in 1943 - 44 they discover oil in Libya and begin drilling for production. Historically, Italy looked for oil there pre-war but found no deposits by 1940 when exploration ended due to the war. Here, the Italians continue to explore for oil, possibly bringing in foreign companies to expand this.
Given that there are large deposits in Libya it isn't too unreasonable that one or another is discovered with a few more years of searching.

Suddenly Italy has oil and not a small amount of it nearly on their doorstep. That would change a lot of things. Italy would likely suddenly take on a whole new level of importance for Germany and possibly even Europe as the oil is close to the continent. One would expect the French to start looking at their N. African colonies a lot closer for the possibility of oil there.

How would that play out? Would the Allies in a 1945 WW 2 starting war do more to bring Italy into the fold? Would Germany see N. Africa as a more important potential front in such a war?

Oil in Libya would not be a game changer much. No doubt the British and French each would have plans to capture the oil fields in case war breaks out for each of them with Italy. But we do not know what alliances will emerge.

For Germany the Italian oil is interesting but again no game changer.

First of all, there is no war in the 1940s, that means no huge armored columns penetrating deep into the Soviet Union, Egypt or France, so no need for millions of tons of extra gas as in OTL.

Secondly the Germans continue to be able to buy oil on international markets. Getty did not mind, he was in Berlin selling oil in mid 1941 (even when a European war HAD started years ago). But like Ford he did not mind selling to non-democratic regimes. Royal Dutch/Shell would probably keep on selling too, Sir Henry Deterding had been a big fan of AH and supported him. Though he died in 1939, his German subsidiary was too deeply involved in Germany by then. And Standard Oil supplied Germany too. So without a war, without war crimes and crimes against humanity, without public outrage in the US or elsewhere and without sanctions or boycotts, Germany could buy what they want, have friends in high places all over the world and stockpile.

Thirdly, The Germans would continue to rely on Romania's oil production and make sure that country remained at least German-friendly, with or without Antonescu's Iron Guard.

And lastly, AH had invested in the coal to oil surrogate (Ersatz) and that research would have continued after 1940 in this scenario, just as a back up plan.

But yeah, Italian oil might have been followed with interest as it would give Italy some autonomy and it would add a potential seller.

In case of peace, no doubt the Germans would be interested in smaller countries that had a lot of oil. They might have courted Persia and supplied them weapons and advisors. And no doubt they would have looked into opportunities to support any nationalists in British Iraq. Yes, there is a lead in OTL (from Wiki): " During World War II, the Iraqi government of Regent 'Abd al-Ilah was overthrown in 1941 by the Golden Square officers, headed by Rashid Ali. The short-lived pro-Nazi government of Iraq was defeated in May 1941 by the Allied forces in the Anglo-Iraqi War. "

So, without a war situation in 1941, the Golden Squares would have succeed, as there was no immediate military strategic reason for the Brits to invade. And German aid could have been flown in rapidly.

Like I said before, there would have been a lot of trouble for the Brits without a war... If the Egyptians and Iraqis would rise simultaneously in 1941, Gandhi would step up his demonstrations for independence and the Ossewabrandwag of the Boers resorts to guerilla, well, then it's steady in the ranks, lads!

From Wiki re the OB: " Members of the OB refused to enlist in the South African armed forces and sometimes harassed servicemen in uniform. This erupted into open rioting in Johannesburg on 1 February 1941; 140 soldiers were seriously hurt. More dangerous was the formation of the Stormjaers (Assault troops), a paramilitary wing of the OB. The nature of the Stormjaers was evidenced by the oath sworn by new recruits: "If I retreat, shoot me. If I die, avenge me. If I advance, follow me" (Afrikaans: As ek omdraai, skiet my. As ek val, wreek my. As ek storm, volg my). The Stormjaers engaged in sabotage against the Union government. They dynamited electrical power lines and railroads and cut telegraph and telephone lines. These types of acts were going too far for most Afrikaners, and Malan ordered the National Party to break with the OB in 1942. The Union government cracked down on the OB and the Stormjaers, placing thousands of them in internment camps for the duration of the war. Among the internees was future prime minister B. J. Vorster. At the end of the war, the OB was absorbed into the National Party and ceased to exist as a separate body."