The almost 20,000 ton Lutzow for a 10,000 ton CA is not an even trade by any metric, throwing in a 10,000 ton CL and it is by tonnage, if not taken in context, where the British have a lot more tonnage than the Germans. In terms of overall tonnage even adding in the carrier it's a net win for Britain proportionally, but it's the loss of the carriers capability that hurts more, they can afford to lose 3 extra cruisers better than one carrier
Speaking Doylistly, this is the equivalent of HMS Courageous being shanked two weeks into the war OTL
Canadian army and navy looking rather anemic. Let's hope they can ramp up into something potent.
The battle of the atlantic opens with a very dramatic showdown in TTL. Given how this battle ended, I wonder if it'll encourage the Kriegsmarine to try more coordination between surface ships and U-boats. BTW, is there historical basis for having a pocket battleship tow a U-boat for more range?
…On November 5th the governments of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia received messages from the Soviet Union. In light of the disturbed security situation the Soviet Union desired to make mutual defense treaties with them allowing Soviet Forces to be based within their countries for the defense of both sides. This was of course a smokescreen for an attempt to reduce the Baltic states to occupied puppets, probably as a prelude to annexation into the Soviet Union. The Baltic states after mutual consultation planned to refused the Soviet demands. While they were well aware they could not hope to stand off the Soviets, they hoped that Germany would intervene.
Had the Weimar Republic still been in existence that would have been a certainty, given the strong relationship the countries had with each other and the connections of the Baltic German aristocracy. Hitler’s ascension to power had changed that, his rhetoric had driven many conservative Germans into exile, and the Baltic states were a major destination for them, if there was any center of political opposition to Hitler it was located in the Baltic States and Finland. This fact had destroyed the relationship between the countries during the previous years. Despite this and the apparent deal with the USSR to partition Poland the Baltic states still believed that Hitler would back them up for purely pragmatic reasons. Occupying the Baltic states would remove the naval bottleneck the USSR faced in the Baltic and would give them another direction to threaten East Prussia from.
Hitler’s response to their pleas thus came as a total surprise. Hitler stated that he recognized the security concerns of the USSR in this troubled time and that he viewed the Treaty as reasonable. Facing the prospect of having to actually fight the USSR the Baltic states agreed to consent to the occupation on the 10th. They did however manage to achieve some symbolic concessions, reducing the size of the garrisons the USSR would maintain and the number of bases they would have access to, it still left their armies outnumbered in their own countries but not by as much…
…The Soviet occupation of the Baltic states lead to further condemnation, and yet that was all the direct consequences that Stalin would face. Britain and France had their own war to think of, Italy and the smaller states had no ability to do more and the United States and Japan no desire. Still it served to highlight the Soviet aggression that had been displayed in Poland and made everyone even warier of the USSR.
Nowhere was this more apparent than Finland, which moved to a heightened state of alert and began rapidly looking to strengthen their defenses…
-Excerpt From The Fall of Europe, Scholastic American Press, Philadelphia, 2005
…On December 1st at a meeting of the German Cabinet Hitler was given two courses of action on which direction to take the German War Economy. The British blockade was once more strangling the German economy, somewhat worse than in WWI despite being leakier due to greater German needs and the war economy needed to be adjusted to deal with that.
The first course of action suggested was to husband Germany’s limited resources to be used at maximum efficiency. This would provide for a defensive campaign of 2-3 years in length, depending on specifics, with a slow collapse in production as resources ran out. A majority of the cabinet backed this plan believing that there was no stomach in Britain or France for a long war
The other course of action was only included as a comparison and called for a 6-9 month expansion in production, followed by a 4-6 month managed collapse. It would provide the maximum possible resources for a short term offensive campaign but it would guarantee that if Germany did not win in eight to twelve months that it would lose within eighteen. This course of action proved convincing to Hitler, in his own words he would rather “plan to win quickly rather than to lose as slowly as possible.”
Orders were sent and the German war economy entered overdrive. Germany would win by September of 1941 or it would lose …
…The initial German plan for the planned invasion of France was functionally an updated version of the Schlieffen Plan used in WWI, accounting for new technology. It featured the exact same drive through central Belgium as had been used in WWI, with Panzers and paratroopers replacing cavalry and airpower supplementing the firepower of the frontline.
As was the standard practice the plan was repeatedly gamed out. Each time the results were a failure, with the invasion bogging down well before it reached Paris, and often being stopped well short of the area captured in the opening days of WWI. Given these repeated failures Hitler demanded a new plan and multiple groups of officers were assigned to come up with alternative plans. The most revolutionary of these was that of Walter Nehring.
The Nehring Plan, which may not have been Nehring’s work at all but that of his old mentor Oswald Lutz, called for a diversionary attack on Belgium with the main force being an armored attack through the Ardennes forest, substituting airpower for artillery to reduce supply requirements, capturing Sedan, then launching a hell for leather dash to Abbeville near the Channel coast with a large chunk of the Wehrmacht’s mobile forces. If successful this would completely cut off what was expected to be the vast majority of the Anglo-French mobile forces and leave them to be destroyed at Germany’s leisure. It was however enormously risky, and even the addition of a spoiling attack left the cream of the German Army hilariously vulnerable to being cut off and destroyed. Still it offered a chance to break the British and French in three weeks campaign, something no other plan could offer.
Nehring’s plan was too revolutionary to be adopted in November of 1940. However elements of it were incorporated into the first revision of Case Grey, with a Panzer Corps being deployed as a flanking element in the Ardennes, in addition to an expansion of the front into the Netherlands…
…By December 15th enough poor readiness reports had reached Hitler that he agreed to delay the implementation of Case Grey from January 10th to January 30th to allow more time to recover from the Polish campaign…
-Excerpt from The Iron Blooded Eagle, Germany in WWII, Bishop Press, New York, 2000
The Kingdom of Sweden
Basics:
Sweden is a constitutional Monarchy under the House of Bernadotte currently dominated by the Social Democrats. It was neutral in WWI and has been so since the Napoleonic Wars
Economy:
Sweden is a moderately industrialized nation. Its primary exports are forest products and iron ore, and its primary imports are petroleum products.
Land Forces:
The Swedish Army is a force of 100,000, 320,000 at full mobilization, organized in six active divisions. Swedish divisions consist of multiple regiments, which consist of two battalions.
The standard Swedish Rifle is the m/96 an upgraded derivative of the Mauser M1893 in 6.5x55mm Swedish. It comes in a number of variants, the most recent being shorter barreled carbine versions. Work is underway on a semi-automatic rifle.
The standard Swedish sidearm is the FN M1903 in 9x20mm Browning, liscense built in Sweden. The standard Submachine gun is the Thompson in .45 ACP, of which a few are used by MPs and the Life Guards Regiment.
The standard Swedish squad machine gun is the BAR, in a version with a quick change fluted barrel chambered in 6.5x55mm. The standard medium machine gun is a license built Browning M1917 rechambered in 8x63mm Swedish, supplemented by Schwarzlose chambered in the same caliber for reserves. Some units are receiving Browning M1919’s to replace the older water cooled weapons. For a heavy machine gun Sweden has a small number of M2 Heavy machine guns in .50 BMG.
For heavier weapons Sweden has a few AT rifles chambered in .50 BMG based on the Mauser design and a larger number of Solothurn 20mm Cannon in 20x138mm. For indirect fire Sweden uses 81mm Brandt Mortar clones. For heavy AT work Sweden uses their domestic Bofors 37mm/45 AT gun.
For AA work Sweden uses 75mm/52 Bofors guns for heavy AA, 40mm/60 Bofors autocannon for medium work and various machine guns for light AA, primarily older Schwarzlose. A 20mm Bofors AA Autocannon is being introduced into service presently.
Standard Swedish field artillery is a modern 105mm/24 caliber piece. It is supplemented by 75mm/22 M1929 mountain guns for units operating in rough terrain. Some older units still have 120mm/15 M1914 pre WWI era howitzers.
Heavier artillery consists of 105mm/42 field guns and 150mm/22 howitzers. Some older Krupp 15cm howitzers from before WWI remain in the inventory, as do older 100mm field guns.
Sweden has a small tank force. The oldest tanks are 50 license built Czech AH tankettes, 4.5 tons, armored against small arms they have a pair of 8mm machine guns and make 35 miles an hour.
Their newer tanks are domestic Landsverk S37, S39 and S40, varying only in detail. 9-10 ton vehicles they have a 37mm/45 and an 8mm MG, are armored against small arms and make 25-30 mph. About 100 are in service.
Their standard armored car is the P40 4x4 . It is 8 tons and has a 20mm cannon and 3 8mm machine guns, with armor against small arms. They make 45 miles an hour and 30 are in service.
The Swedish army is only lightly motorized and relies heavily on horse transport though a motorization drive is in progress.
Naval Forces:
Sweden has a relatively large navy for its size.
Their largest ships are coastal defense vessels, of which they have 8 with two more building. Under construction are the Jormundgandr and Fenris, 10,000 ton vessels being built to an Italain design. They have main battery of 6 283mm/45 in twin turrets, in an A X Y layout with X superfiring, along with 5 twin 152mm/53 with one in B position and the others on the wings, 8 single 75mm/50 AA, 4 twin and 4 single 40mm and 6 twin 25mm Autocannon. They make 25 knots, are protected against 6” fire at expected combat ranges, and will enter service in 1942.
In service are the 7500 ton Sverige, Drottning Victoria, Gustaf V and Svenskund. They make 23 knots and have limited protection against 6” fire at combat ranges. Their armament at present is 2 twin 283mm/45, 1 twin and four single 152mm/50, six 75mm/50 AA, two twin 40mm AA, and 10 25mm AA.
Older is the Oscar II, 4500 tons, 18 knots and only marginally protected against 6” fire at combat ranges. She has 2 210mm/44 in single turrets, 4 twin 152mm/50, 2 75mm/50, 2 40mm and 8 25mm AA at present.
Older are the Wasa, Tapperheten and Manligheten. They are 3600 tons, 17 knots and even more marginally protected. They have 2 210mm/44 in single turrets, 6 single 152mm/50, 2 75mm/50, 2 40mm and 6 25mm AA at present.
Sweden has a handful of proper cruisers. The Gotland is a 6000 ton Aviation crusier. She makes 29 knots and carriers up to 10 floatplanes, with minor protection from 6” fire. She has 3 twin 152mm/53 in a superfiring A B Y layout, 4 75mm, 8 40mm and 8 25mm AA, two triple 533mm torpedo tubes and room for 120 mines.
The Flygia is an armored cruiser of 5000 tons that makes 22 knots. She has 4 twin 152mm/50 in a diamond arrangement, 2 75mm/50, 4 40mm Bofors, 6 25mm AA and 2 depth charge throwers. She is only modestly protected from 6” fire at long range.
The Clas Fleming is a 1700 ton minelayer. She makes 21 knots with a combined diesel turbine plant using the diesels as gas generators, and has only marginal protection. She has 4 120mm/40 guns in single centerline mounts, superfiring, 6 25mm AA and carries up to 180 mines.
Ornen and Jacob Bagge are the oldest. Originally built as torpedo crusiers they have been rearmed with 4 twin 25mm and 2 40mm AA guns as cadet training ships. They are 800 tons, almost unarmored and make 18 knots.
Sweden has further expressed interest in purchasing a pair of used cruisers from the United States or Italy.
Sweden has 16 destroyers in service with 4 more building.
Oldest are 2 Wale type vessels. They are 400 tons with 4 75mm/53, 2 457mm tubes, a depth charge rack and 2 machine guns, they make 30 knots but are still triple expansion engine powered. The Hugin and Munin are newer variants of the class with turbine engines, similar characteristics but greater reliability.
The Wrangel and Wachtmesiter are enlarged to 450 tons for better seakeeping, twin torpedo mounts and to fit a 25mm AA gun.
The Ehrenskold, Nordenskold, Klas Horn and Klas Uggla are 1000 ton ships that make 36 knots. They have 3 120mm/46, 4 25mm AA, two depth charge throwers, two rails, 20 mines and two triple 533mm torpedo tubes.
Six 1100p ton Town class destroyers are in service with 4 more building. They have better range than their predeccesors and make 39 knots. They have 3 120mm/46, 4 40mm AA and , two depth charge throwers, two rails, 20 mines and two triple 533mm torpedo tubes. Of the four building, two are expected in 1941 and 2 in 1942.
Sweden operates 4 sub chasers of 400 tons that make 23 knots. They have 2 75mm/53, 2 40mm and 4 25mm AA and two depth charge throwers and two rails.
Sweden operates around 40 30 ton patrol boats with a 37mm AT gun as their main armament.
Sweden operates a small submarine force.
The oldest vessels are 3 500 ton Beaver class vessels, they have 4 533mm tubes, with 8 fish and a 25mm AA gun, they make 14 knots surfaced and 8 submerged. They have a very shallow test depth and are short legged. The Valen is a half-sister enlarged to 550 tons to carry 20 mines.
The 3 Dragon class are an 800 ton class with similar armament and performance characteristics to the Beaver class but greater range, retaining the shallow crush depth. They add a 105mm/38 deck gun.
The 3 Dolphin class are somewhat smaller vessels of 700 tons. They have shorter range but greater test depth and speed of 15 knots surfaced and 10 submerged, like the Valen they carry 20 mines, but only have a 57mm/55 DP gun on deck.
6 650 ton Sea Lion class vessels are in service with 3 more building. They have a speed of 16 knots surfaced and 9 submerged. They carry 4 533mm bow tubes with reloads, a twin trainable tube on deck, 2 40mm/39 AA and 2 machine guns.
Sweden has 3 250 ton Seeker class minesweepers, they make 10 knots and have a 57mm gun. Supplementing them are 8 Arholma class vessels, 400 tons, 18 knots with 2 105mm/40 and 2 25mm AA.
Sweden has a small Naval Air Arm and lacks a Naval Infantry Arm
Air Forces:
Sweden has a mid-sized air force of about 450 aircraft.
Sweden has about 150 fighter aircraft. Most common are 60 British Hawker Headsmen enclosed cockpit biplanes. Older than that are 50 SAAB Gyrfalcon, an open cockpit fixed gear biplane similar to the Bristol Bullfighter and thoroughly obsolete. 40 Italain CR 34 biplane fighters have been purchased as an emergency stopgap. Contracts with the US for more modern aircraft are being sounded out.
For light bombers Sweden has 60 Avro Antlion open cockpit biplanes. Sweden is sounding out the US for possible purchases of single engine dive bombers.
For heavier Bombers Sweden has 60 Ju-76 bomber variants bought from Germany. Negotiations are underway with Italy to license build a twin engine bomber design.
Sweden operates about 180 mixed trainer, transport and liaison aircraft of varying types. These are almost all of foreign make, with only some of the basic trainers being domestic.
Sweden operates about 20 single engine float planes for naval recon.
Sweden has a basic jet research program but lacks paratroopers
Weapons of Mass Destruction:
Sweden has a small program to develop Sulfur Mustard variants to use in artillery shells
Sweden lacks a nuclear or biological weapons program
Problems:
Sweden is easily isolated from world markets
Sweden shares the Baltic with Germany and the USSR
Sweden has had no combat experience since the Napoleonic Wars
-The Eve of War, the World on October 1st 1940, Eagle Press, Philadelphia, 2001
Edit: Well this weekend was a mess and this almost happened tomorrow. I asked twice last week if I was working today, Wednesday and Friday and was told no both times, then a half hour before I was going to leave I was told I was working today. Then I had to go to the church and fix the livestream graphics because someone turned off the system that is not supposed to be turned off. Ugh, well I still finished this
Theory:
Unlike a few other TLs where the world ends up in a three way Cold War between the American West, the Soviet Union, and a Nazi dominated Europe I think this world will see the Nazi Germany defeated and the world split between Capitalism and Communism.
EXCEPT the Soviet Union does slightly better and wind up with all of Germany, maybe Greece, and if not Turkey de facto control of the straits. This might explain why WW3 breaks out if the USSR is in a stronger position before MAD comes into play. Maybe to explain this success it does slightly worse in Asia with only half of China under Mao.
Alternatively all of Germany is under Allied control so a paranoid successor to Stalin becomes convinced that the West will finish what Hitler started unless they attack first
Thoughts?
Theory:
Unlike a few other TLs where the world ends up in a three way Cold War between the American West, the Soviet Union, and a Nazi dominated Europe I think this world will see the Nazi Germany defeated and the world split between Capitalism and Communism.
EXCEPT the Soviet Union does slightly better and wind up with all of Germany, maybe Greece, and if not Turkey de facto control of the straits. This might explain why WW3 breaks out if the USSR is in a stronger position before MAD comes into play. Maybe to explain this success it does slightly worse in Asia with only half of China under Mao.
Alternatively all of Germany is under Allied control so a paranoid successor to Stalin becomes convinced that the West will finish what Hitler started unless they attack first
Thoughts?
That's been the general vibe I've been getting. Also I've pondered a WWIII in the mid 50s TL before, and at that stage nuclear bombing can really only be done with bombers as ICBMs aren't quite ironed out yet. IOTL the west and the US in particular had a... large advantage in the air, so keeping most Soviet bombers from North America is somewhat feasible. Europe however could get absolutely pulverized given the shorter range, which could lead to the present day setup we've been told about.
That's been the general vibe I've been getting. Also I've pondered a WWIII in the mid 50s TL before, and at that stage nuclear bombing can really only be done with bombers as ICBMs aren't quite ironed out yet. IOTL the west and the US in particular had a... large advantage in the air, so keeping most Soviet bombers from North America is somewhat feasible. Europe however could get absolutely pulverized given the shorter range, which could lead to the present day setup we've been told about.
I also got the sense from a previous post that v-2 like rockets won’t be used for TTL WW2 so not only will the potential usage of missiles be delayed without wartime examples….BUT all the experiments, calculations, and tests needed to go from inaccurate short range rockets to ICBMs in enough numbers for MAD to take effect
Also it means delayed space exploration😢
Theory:
Unlike a few other TLs where the world ends up in a three way Cold War between the American West, the Soviet Union, and a Nazi dominated Europe I think this world will see the Nazi Germany defeated and the world split between Capitalism and Communism.
EXCEPT the Soviet Union does slightly better and wind up with all of Germany, maybe Greece, and if not Turkey de facto control of the straits. This might explain why WW3 breaks out if the USSR is in a stronger position before MAD comes into play. Maybe to explain this success it does slightly worse in Asia with only half of China under Mao.
Alternatively all of Germany is under Allied control so a paranoid successor to Stalin becomes convinced that the West will finish what Hitler started unless they attack first
Thoughts?
I don't see the USSR doing better than OTL- Stalin is more paranoid and killed Zhukov for making himself famous by defeating Japan at Khalkhin Gol, but they could still get a little more of Germany in the end if the WAllies shit the bed real bad, which they seem set up to do.
WW2 either goes worse for the Allies/Soviets or just goes on for 2-3 more years, BUT with the same overall result as OTL with the defeat of the Fascist powers (Germany, Italy, Japan) and the world quickly become divided between the Capitalist Democracies of the West (USA led with the remnants of Britain and France) and the Communist Dictatorships of the East (USSR, at least a portion of China and the regions of Europe occupied after the war).
British/French colonial empires collapse even worse than OTL.
A very temporary (in hindsight in-universe) Cold War phase occurs (for some reason I leaning towards the idea that it approaches 20 years, likely to mirror the time between WWI and WWII similar to something featured in Weber's Germany Timeline, but more generally leading to the theory that the 20th century witnessed a cycle of devastating war followed by 20 years of uneasy peace before the next conflict broke out), that erupts into World War 3 in the late-50's or mid-'60s.
Nuclear weapons are used but in a more "limited" manner due to delivery systems still being bombers and short-range missiles (say London is outside of Soviet missile range even if the silos are right on the German/Dutch border) with yields in the hundreds of kilotons/single digit megatons for the largest. Most are used "tactically" or against major cities too difficult to besiege.
USSR, and the Communist ideology in general, is defeated (read destroyed with Moscow and Leningrad irradiated craters amongst other cities) with a significant portion of Europe (Germany, France, Eastern Europe, and the Balkans) leveled worse than WW1 & WW2 COMBINED. Not sure what's happening in Asia with China and Japan, nor the Middle East.
The United States of America wins with only minor damage from the few Soviet nuclear bombs that were able to reach North America (Washington D.C. survives as do most of the major cities so maybe only 1 or 2 bombs hit places like Anchorage or outlying regions) though the military casualties and global chaos make it a very pyrrhic feeling victory even though America is now the sole global superpower.
As a final note either from how WW2 ended, or just in response to Communion being even more of a threat than OTL, some elements of Fascism survive into the modern age. Far less extreme in rhetoric and maybe lacking the anti-semitism and other racist views in favor of a more anti-communist pro-military platform and with little chance of gaining the White House and Congress.
The modern (meaning after 2000) sees America reign supreme over the world with its lands 98% undamaged, the most nukes, largest & most powerful military the world has ever seen with corresponding economic, technological, and cultural dominance over most developed nations......
At the cost of more WW1 casualties, a WW2 that ended with an even more damaged Europe/Japan and more dead Americans (and people in general), and a Cold War that became a Third World War that sees Russia and a good chunk of Europe destroyed with likely over a HUNDRED million dead (just throwing out a number to show how much worse round three will be while still allowing the world to survive).
Truly living up to the name Ghastly Victories
As a final note the more I think about TTL WW3 the more I wonder if it would share some elements with Harry Turtledoves The Hot War trilogy, or is that just me?
I don't see the USSR doing better than OTL- Stalin is more paranoid and killed Zhukov for making himself famous by defeating Japan at Khalkhin Gol, but they could still get a little more of Germany in the end if the WAllies shit the bed real bad, which they seem set up to do.
True so maybe it's not that the USSR starts round three because its STRONGER than OTL (or TTL's Allies) but because its WEAKER and therefore is driven to more extreme efforts in projecting its strength so nothing like the destruction wrought upon them by Nazi Germany ever happens again. Which sadly leads to that very outcome in the worse possible way.
This actually makes sense as part of the reason Stalin and his successors maintained Communist rule in Eastern Europe was to act as a buffer zone (first from invading armies, then for their nuclear missiles to reach Western Europe while preventing NATO missiles from reaching into the heart of Russia). If TTL sees a USSR that only has Poland and half of its OTL gains..... and a Communist China that only occupies the northern regions (my assumption please correct if wrong)...... and a unified, rebuilt Germany that could serve as a springboard to invade like the last two times......
Then maybe Moscow gets more paranoid that its better to strike first before its too late AND/OR Washington takes a hardline stance out of the belief that the Red Bear is too wounded to actually go through with it....
And finds out that though wounded, and killable in the end, is still able to give one last mauling to mark the 20th Century as the worst century in all of human history.
I mean it's kinda obvious the story is building to something like that when one carefully reads the updates. There's a lot of implications in the interwar updates that sound like Europe was basically wiped out after a 3rd WW. They've also implied that Germany at least will still lose the waras well. Personally I'm more of the Idea that the Soviet's have a worse time as I doubt they get their entire logistical train funded by Lend-Lease TTL I'm betting the demarcation line between East and West is close to the Vistula then Russia would ever be comfortable with.
Since people are speculating again I'm just going to put out this is basically 3 TL outlines awkwardly standing in a trenchcoat after mugging a fourth and fifth for loose ideas.
TL One is basically "US takes European level casualties in WWI"
TL Two is a Pacific War one based on an idea I never really saw anyone do yet
TL Three is me getting frustrated having read several timelines covering the same topic with the same POD all featuring two key players acting different than how they are described by people who knew them
Not going to talk about the other two, though Jim went over the outline for one for me at one point
I'm suspecting the USSR's going to a very tragic but mixed ending.
By that in general it's founding in this world has been way harsher, Stalin's killed far more people and seems more bloodthirsty. I'm actually very doubting Poland's going to exist as a state for the next 200 years soon, and would in fact explain a lot.
By that we know roughly the allies are going to have a lot less information on each other given how isolated their individuals conflicts are and seems the USSR is not getting land lease.
What if they see a much, much bigger USSR, it's false projections of strength and a leadership that either is lead by Stalin or a successors who's trying to climb down from the blood thirstiness and stabilize the state while being tough enough and they read it as a opportunity to attack or get's lead into a confrontation? After all what could be more tragic than a state that's trying to salvage itself after decades of abuse by one arch tyrant and ideology is failing but perhaps could be salvaged in different forms than be destroyed by the legacy of it's arguably worst statemen? Besides how severely Russia's going to be effected by nuclear war it's likely going to be better off than regional republics like Belarus or Ukraine.
That or assuming a lot less innocence on the US part, what if after decades of attempt at diplomacy, the butcheries of the world wars it experienced the American leadership has become cynical, aggressive, imperialist and somewhat broken men expecting the worst from the world and see the only target that challenge them is a threat and crush it?
After all we know even in the worst case of nuclear retaliation the US has a much better chance of surviving than the USSR in the OTL, here if it's earlier the US will have greater advantage. The first and second wars arguably from a US perspective happened as they failed to crush their enemies early enough at a much reduced cost, why repeat it for the third? In fact would explain the almost guilty tone and how it speaks about Germany.
I love this timeline and in my head-canon the world seems like its going to be FAT-level fucked up but the United States though cynical and bitter is going to be globally strident or at least GDI supreme for the foreseeable future since the majority of the publications seem to be in America (though I haven't gone thru to determine if me trusting my memory on that is truthful lol). I like the detail and realism of the whole shebang primarily and the regular posts keep me intrigued and entertained. So no complaints here :3
I love this timeline and in my head-canon the world seems like its going to be FAT-level fucked up but the United States though cynical and bitter is going to be globally strident or at least GDI supreme for the foreseeable future since the majority of the publications seem to be in America (though I haven't gone thru to determine if me trusting my memory on that is truthful lol). I like the detail and realism of the whole shebang primarily and the regular posts keep me intrigued and entertained. So no complaints here :3
Do you think WW3 will be a bit like Red Alert at the beginning (minus the more eccentric elements) with it being a European war between USSR and the Allies with America only coming in later (for the third time in a row) and nukes only being used at that point?
Maybe the Soviets using some atom bombs in a tactical role causes the US to launch a surprise attack as its entry move?
Since people are speculating again I'm just going to put out this is basically 3 TL outlines awkwardly standing in a trenchcoat after mugging a fourth and fifth for loose ideas.
TL One is basically "US takes European level casualties in WWI"
TL Two is a Pacific War one based on an idea I never really saw anyone do yet
TL Three is me getting frustrated having read several timelines covering the same topic with the same POD all featuring two key players acting different than how they are described by people who knew them
Not going to talk about the other two, though Jim went over the outline for one for me at one point
Fascinating peek behind the curtain. Is the idea for TL 2 the delayed Washington Naval Treaty, or is that one of the ideas mugged from timeline 4 and 5?
QUITE curious what TL three is, has the POD in question passed yet?
Do you think WW3 will be a bit like Red Alert at the beginning (minus the more eccentric elements) with it being a European war between USSR and the Allies with America only coming in later (for the third time in a row) and nukes only being used at that point?
Maybe the Soviets using some atom bombs in a tactical role causes the US to launch a surprise attack as its entry move?
The fact that I have yet to canonize into an actual daydream what is going to happen in WW2 and beyond is also a prime example of what I enjoy about TTL and how its written and that us how I say I really haven't thought about it lol
The first is somewhat unlikely since It's A Long Way To Nagasaki: The Anglo-Japanese War kinda-sorta covers it, but the Japanese Empire chooses the more cautious path and only attacks the European colonial empires in Asia, intentionally leaving the United States alone (with the "for now" being apparent to all). So you could get into a situation where, eventually, thanks to some international incident, the U.S. finally goes to war with Japan, but it's not the vengeful crusade of OTL. There's no Pearl Harbor or other sense of betrayal. It's a more "normal" war between two powers. That would lend itself to the anti-British/French vibe in the historical retrospectives ITTL, as the U.S. "gets sucked into" a Pacific War that it isn't keen on, functionally bailing out the European colonial empires in the process.
The second is more a variant on the first idea, but with the Imperial Japanese Army burning itself with that Soviet attack, the IJN and IJA manage to get on the same page, pursing a more "cautious" strategy... of going after British India. (Take out one enemy at a time, you see.) Because I don't think anyone has done a TL about the Japanese seriously going at India, even in an Underpants Gnome "clearly this will end badly WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?!" sort of way. Then, there's some of international incident, and America ends up in the war.
The third possibility is that America launches a surprise attack on Japan. I think I've only seen that done in a short one-shot TL, which saw America giving Japan an "atomic Pearl Harbor" with a five minute diplomatic warning. It seems unlikely: America ITTL seems more war-shy given alt-WWI, most any administration in this period would care more about Europe than Asia, and anyway how would you even arrange for such a thing given Congress still enforces its war powers?
The fourth possibility is the least likely. Which is to say, the U.S. and Japan end up allies in World War II. The problems with this are self-apparent.
…The Events leading up to the Soviet Invasion of Finland are a mystery on the Soviet side. Enough is known from various defectors and what little records exist that the USSR had been considering a military operation against Finland at least as early as 1938 and began seriously planning to conduct an attack on Finland before the ink was dry on the Commercial Treaty with Germany. This was of course in contravention to a 1933 Non-Aggression pact they had signed with Finland, guaranteeing peace until 1943, but Stalin did not care about that.
Rather than immediately invade however the Soviets first laid the diplomatic groundwork as they began stealthily moving military forces into position. On November 1st they publicly called for opening of negotiations with Finland over issues with the border. The Finns, not wanting war accepted the Soviet proposal and came to Moscow to offer reasonable concessions to avoid one.
They offered the municipalities in the southern portion of the Karelian isthmus and most of the Finnish islands of the Gulf of Finland not directly adjacent to the Finnish coast. This would effectively double the distance from Leningrad to the border and much improve the security situation of that city, something the Finns were aware was a major Soviet concern given it was only 20 miles from the border as it stood. The Finns were further prepared to offer economic concessions and possible territorial concessions in the far north.
The Soviets declared the Finnish offer insufficient and made a counter demand of their own. The Finnish border in Karelia would move to the point where Vyborg was within 20 miles of it, the Rybachy Peninsula would be ceded, giving the USSR command of the Petsamo Fjord and Finland would lease the Hanko Peninsula as an extraterritorial base for 30 years to the USSR. It is unknown if the Soviets intended this as an offer Finland would refuse, or if that was simply Stalin’s demands, in any case the Finnish government refused to consider the Soviet counter offer and ended that round of negotiations. They expected that this would be temporary and that another round of negotiations would start relatively soon…
…Finland was almost completely penetrated by German intelligence services from the beginning. It had formed with German aid, the royal family was German, there were massive German economic ties, its military had taken part in Weimar’s attempts as evading the Versailles treaty, leading to a large number of German officers serving within it and it had taken in thousands of German political exiles in the 1930’s. As a result of this Germany had a complete view of what was going on with the Finnish military and as part of their agreement with the USSR they shared everything.
The Soviet Union thus knew immediately that the Finns had launched a covert mobilization under the guise of refresher training at the start of November. They had complete details on the Finnish order of battle, that there were six divisions on the Karelian isthmus, two divisions north of Lake Ladoga and a brigade each in Lapland and North Karelia. They had a full map of the Finnish fixed defenses and knowledge of the delaying groups used and a complete inventory of Finnish stockpiles.
Therefore the Soviets were supremely confident that they could destroy the Finns in a short campaign. 3 Rifle and 2 Tank Corps were located on the Isthmus, 2 Infantry Corps, a Cavalruy and a Tank Division north of :Lake Ladoga, a Rifle Corps and Cavalry Division in North Karelia and a Mountain Rifle Corps in Lapland. This overwhelming force of a half million men was by the first week of December prepared to come down on the Finnish heads, all they needed was a justification…
…On December 10th a squadron of Fokker XIV bombers took off from an airfield on the Karelian Isthmus under the leadership of Captain Georg Bauer, a former Imperial German aviator serving in the Finnish Air Force. The bombers were carrying live munitions as part of a mission to respond to Soviet violations of the maritime border, or at least so the mission briefing said. At about 11:15, over what Bauer claimed was Finnish territorial waters they encountered a Soviet MO type subchaser and Bauer ordered an attack run. Not cleared for action the vessel did not even try to maneuver and it was struck multiple times, the small vessel quickly took on water and sank.
At 1:05 the Finnish planes returned to base and before the mission debriefing could occur Captain Bauer disappeared. Shortly thereafter inspectors from headquarters arrived wanting to know what was going on, why had Bauer taken live munitions on a training flight, violated Soviet territory and attacked a Soviet war vessel?
The answer from German records was that Bauer had ended up an agent of the Abwehr after his exiled Junker mistress proved to have tastes too expensive for his wallet to afford. Bauer had launched a provocation for the Abwehr, at the best of the USSR, and afterwards fled to an Abwehr safehouse before leaving the country with his mistress. Of course this course of events was not publicly known until after the war and was fervently denied by Communists even then.
The Communists of course claimed this as an unprovoked attack on Soviet territory and thanks to skillful stage management had enough foreign journalists nearby for coincidental reasons to prove beyond a doubt that Finland had violated Soviet territory and attacked a Soviet vessel. Finnish offers of recompense for this were refused as insufficient and on December 14th the USSR demanded that Finland withdraw its air forces from Karelia and its ground forces back 50 kilometers from the border, in addition to payment of reparations.
While Finland was willing to pay reparations they were not willing to see their border left bare to a Soviet offensive and refused the Soviet demands. In return on the 17th the USSR denounced the Finnish Soviet Non-Aggression pact as a farce in the face of Finnish aggression and severed their diplomatic relationship with Finland. War was now inevitable and on the evening of December 20th there was a firefight near the Kolla River, once more provoked by a German agent in Finland.
In response at dawn of the 21st Soviet guns opened up en masse all along the Finnish border…
-Excerpt From The Fall of Europe, Scholastic American Press, Philadelphia, 2005
The Commonwealth of Australia
Basics:
Australia is a self-governing dominion of the British Empire. It is currently under a coalition government led by the United Australia Party under Billy Hughes.
Economy:
Australia is primarily an agricultural and resource exporting country with a moderate industrial sector. It’s primary agricultural exports are wool, mutton and grain, while its primary mineral exports are gold, iron and coal. It is a wealthy country per capita.
Land Forces:
Australia has a small standing army of 5,000 along with 80,000 reserves, organized on the British pattern. Nominally speaking it has 5 divisions, infantry formations with integrated cavalry, though two divisions have seen their cavalry replaced with armored cars.
The Standard Australian rifle is the Lee-Enfield in .303, primarily the short model and license built in Australia. Older models of Lee-Enfield are in use by the reserves. Australia has no plans to adopt the No. 39 or No. 40 Rifle.
Australia’s standard Revolver is the Webley Mark IV in .38 though other .38 caliber revolvers are acceptable substitutions for officers. Older Webley models in .455 remain in storage. Some American Thompson Submachine guns in .45 ACP are kept for special duties.
The standard Australian Light machine Gun is the Charlton, a conversion of the Lee Enfield Rifle in .303. Australia uses the Lewis gun in .303 as a supplement for times when volume of fire is more needed than low weight. Australia intends to adopt the Holek in .303 British to replace the Charlton and Lewis once sufficient tooling is available to start domestic production. The standard Heavy machine gun is the Vickers in .303 British. Some consideration is being made to replacing the Vickers with the Rolik, however that would require adoption of a new Caliber which Australia is loath to do.
Australia’s infantry heavy weapons are the Boys .55 Anti-Tank Rifle and Mortars. The Standard Mortar is the 3.2” as a battalion weapon, with 2” mortars being issued as a company weapon, though that is not yet complete. Older 3” Stokes remain in storage.
Australia currently lacks towed AT weapons but purchase of the 2 pounder from Britain is planned.
AA is in the form of Vickers guns, Naval 2 pounders and 12 pounder AA guns from WWI. License production Bofors and 3.7”/50 AA guns is planned but has not occurred as yet.
Standard Australian field artillery is the 18 pounder and the 4.5” howitzer. These are upgraded but Pre WWI pieces and obsolescent with fixed trail carriages. Australia plans to replace them with 25 pounders as those weapons become available. Australia also has BL 60 pounders, and BL 6” Howitzers in storage as heavier weapons. Australia also makes use of 3.7” Mountain Howitzer for expected use in jungle conditions.
Australia operates about 30 Mark IV light Tanks as training designs, a preliminary to founding a proper armored corps. Australia plans on acquiring 30 Mark VIII Light Tanks before moving on to more powerful cruiser tanks.
Australia operates a variety of 2-4.5 ton scout cars with a machine gun and minimal armor in their armored car units. More powerful vehicles are planned to be built to replace them.
The Australian Army is relatively lightly motorized for its domestic motorization with only 4,000 motor vehicles, though this is planned to change rapidly. Full motorization is expected by the end of 1941 and they intend to license build British tracked carriers
Naval Forces:
Australia has a medium sized navy of about 12,000 personnel.
The most powerful ships are the four heavy cruisers Australia, Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne. These are 12,500 ton cruisers with 9 8”/50 main guns in triples in an A-B-Y layout with B superfiring. 10 4”/45 AA guns are carried in five twin mounts, one in X position, along with 4 quad 2 pounder AA guns and 4 quad .55HMG, plus two quad torpedo tubes. They are well protected, good seaboats, habitable and make 32 knots, with two float planes.
The next most powerful ships are the Sapphire class light crusiers Perth and Hobart. These are 7500 ton vessels with 4 twin 6”/50 in a conventional arrangement, 4 4”/45 AA, 3 quad .55 HMG and two quad 21” torpedo tubes. They are reliable seaworthy ships but only make 32.5 knots, have light protection against 6” fire and carry one float plane.
The Chatham class Cruiser Adelaide is the oldest cruiser in the RAN and a 5500 ton vessel. She has 8 6”/45 in pedestal mounts, 3 4”/45 AA guns, 10 .303 machine guns, two depth charge rails and 2 submerged 21” torpedo tubes. She makes 25 knots and has only marginal protection from 6” fire at combat ranges.
For smaller Units Australia has 6 V class destroyers bought from the RN. 1100 ton, 32 knot ships they have 4 4”/45, a 3” AA, 4 .303MG, two twin 21” tubes, two depth charge rails and two projectors.
To lead this squadron the RN has one flotilla leader, the Hughes, a 1600 ton 36.5 knot vessel. She has 5 4.7”/45, 1 3”/45 AA, 2 triple 21” torpedo tubes, a quad .55 HMG, two depth charge rails and two projectors.
An additional 8 1850 ton Tribal class destroyers have been ordered and the first 2 have started construction at Cockatoo Island.
The RAN has 5 sloops in service with two building for escort duty. The Moresby is a Racehorse class sloop form WWI, 1300 tons she makes 14 knots, has a 4”/40 low angle gun, a 3”/45 AA and 4 .303 machine guns, along with a depth charge rail and two projectors.
The remaining 4 sloops are Deptford class vessels, 1000 tons, 16 knots with 2 4.7”/45, 1 3”/45 AA, 6. 303 machine guns, 2 3 pdr saluting guns and a depth charge rail.
Under development is a 1,000 ton multirole corvette class, similar to the 900 ton British design but longer ranged and capable of being fitted for minesweeping. 12 are planned.
A pair of Hunt class minesweepers are in service, 700 tons, 16 knots with a 4”/40, a 3”/45 AA gun, 2 .303 machine guns and a depth charge rail.
Australia has an additional 3 500 ton Netlayers meant for laying ASW nets in their harbors, built to a British design.
Australia has no submarines, marines or naval aviation. Naval floatplanes are part of the RAAF
Air Forces:
Australia has a mid sized Air Force of about 300 aircraft in 24 squadrons.
Their fighter force consists of two squadrons of Hawker Headhunters and two of Avro Archers, an open cockpit biplane based on the Avro Antlion light bomber. They plan on replacing these with Gloster Glaives as an interim before the Westland Warhawk enters service.
The RAAF bomber force consists of four squadrons of Westland Wallaby Light bombers, something broadly comparable to the Avro Antlion but designed for Australian conditions. They plan on replacing these with license built Bristol Bullsharks and possibly variants of the CAC Challenger in a High-Low mix.
The RAAF operates two squadrons of Hawker Hoopoe variants as floatplanes for the warships of the RAN, and land based maritime recon.
For Maritime Patrol the RAAF has one squadron of Lockheed Longbow and one of Saunders Row Severn floatplanes. Long term plan is to replace both types with Short Sables as available.
The RAAF primarily uses British designed transports, trainers and lesion aircraft. They have recently begun license building British basic trainers and have just introduced a domestic advanced trainer based off an American design, the CAC Challenger.
Australia lacks high end aviation research and piggy backs of Britain. They lack paratroopers.
Weapons of Mass Destruction:
Australia maintains stockpiles of Lewisite and Mustard Gas. Deployment methods are artillery shell, aerial bomb and Livens projectors
Australia does not have a biological weapons program
Australia is a part of the British Nuclear Program
Problems:
Australia is located far away from Europe and North America.
Australia has little domestic military industry for its size
-The Eve of War, the World on October 1st 1940, Eagle Press, Philadelphia, 2001
The question really is how bad are the Soviets going to be fucked up by the Finns. But a German pilot in the Finnish AF acting on orders of German Intelligence to attack a Soviet subchaser as means to give the Soviets a CB against Finland was not something I saw coming.
and that us how I say I really haven't thought about it lol