Italy neutral in WWII: the post-war effects?

Check this out: What if: Mussolini stays neutral? ore this: What if: Italy accepts the Allied offer in 1940

Hi,

as steve mentioned, the butterflies from a neutral italy are HUGE.

Some points:
the mediterain has changed fundamentally.
No greco-italian war, in that italy needs help from germany -> this means no british forces that get slaughtered by the germans in the balkan-campgain
No africa-campagin, with its HUGE casulties for both sides, no learning curve for both sides
No "waste of submarines" in critcal times for the german navy -> this alone could bring 2-10 million tons of sunk allied ships MORE into the calculation
No huge casulties in surface ships for the british, but again also no lessons about the vulnerability of british ships against air attacks

Effects for
Greece: stay neutral -> no involvment in WW2
Yugoslavia: again - with no italian-greco war i cannot see the yugoslavs beeing so stupid to turn and switch to the allies - at last not in 1941. So no wear-and-tear for the mechanical parts of some important german armed forces, no costly partisan war
A peaceful yugoslavia mean that there will be no bloody civil war between the fractions, no german and italian anti-partisan warfare with many many casulties. Also no Tito (with no such war), means post war yugoslavia propably stay in the western camp, for sure no communist state.
Albania - the same - no war no conflict, no casulties

UK:
pros: Save lots of ships, even if most are old and "useless" in later campagins, they could be moved save through suez to the pacific war. If they get refitted in USA in 1942, the japanese have a much harder time, if not the british casulties in spring 42 could be SIGNIFICANT worse as OTL, maybe even some nice massacres - say Kidabutai slaughter a large naval unit, killing 2 carriers, 3 battleships, 5 cruisers, killing 10.000 sailors - all in a singlesided action. (still a defeat for japan, because they loose 50-100 planes and pilots in this. But - biggest butterfly - with such casulties the japanese maybe drop midway and change their overall campagin after that?)
- they could move more goods in a shorter trip - so here you have a positive reaction for the economy
they do not loose some excellent officers, have lesser casulties in men and material
no africa campagin, not loosing lots and lots of pilots and planes
-later the invasion in france-african areas would be very smooth and with lesser casulties - the germans could not hope to defend them in a sensitive manner.
- no italian desasters (in the island campgain they got asswhipped by the germans, in 1943!)
negative effects:
- no training in true naval landings (no sicily, no corsika, no italian invasion - this means they have no clue to fix their problems)
- their tank forces are as green as they could be - no learning curves, no clues about how to fight the german army (because last time in 1940 they got whipped to blood and - with invasion - they face a complete new army, with complete new armed forces)
- modern warfare scenarios - like attacking tank formations by air will not happen - no learning curves, no experiences -> less effective for the "true french campagin -> huger casulties later)

USA -
no positive effects
negative effects: their troops suck terrible, ZERO experience in modern combat. Zero experience in naval invasions of larger heavily defended areas in contestes airzones. That will tripple their casulties, some important battles would end in desaster instead of victories. VERY VERY bad for their combat results.

Italy:
positive effects:
- no destruction of a terrible war
- no civilwar like engagement in 1943-45 between facist/german and communist/allied supported troops
- no loss of their colonies - that will help em later (if they find oil in time)
- the facist system was bad, but better as Francos regime. So if Mussolini reach his 70ties you have that authoritarian but - in fighting the mafia- quite effective system. After the fall of the facists you could see a much better recovery of economics, hopefully without to much corruption. -> by the way this has ONE positive effect for the USA -> less mafia input in the USA after the war.
- they get rich by buying modern german weapon systems for ressources the germans lack.

Germany:
negative:
basically nil - it is a surprise, but you will see why i see it this way

positive:
no balkan-campagin -> this means no delay for Barbarossa (even if only 1-2 weeks), no wear and tear of the mechanical stuff -> that WAS important for breakdowns. If the german army in russia face 1/10 less breakdowns this means they could partly have 10% more tanks, more mechanized forces, guns, ammo, fuel at critical positions. THis alone could save em propably 20% of material they lost OTL (logistics have this effect). Better results for the german army -> more casulties, less escapes (in cauldron battles) for the russians.

no creta: VERY bad news for the russians. If the germans use their parachute-forces at the right spot this could bring "victory" in a strategic position (say in the Leningrad-area they could - combined with the next point) really take the spot! that would be the biggest butterfly of all. The transport forces are not gutted, no huge casulties in training personal that was normaly used to fly the Ju52-fleet in emergency cases. More trainers -> more better trained pilots -> more casulties for the enemies

no african campgain
- very very important. Because
a.) Rommel do not grow about his capabilities (he was an excellent corps comander, but nothing more)
b.) the germans have at last one armored corps more in 1941, later an armored army more
c.) the germans have many many more trucks to move stuff around -> this alone could bring the russians in worse conditions
d.) the germans loose less forces in the supply chain to africa -> means more material and forces in russia (bad news for the russians)
e.) the air force of the germans will be MUCH stronger
- around 50% more transport planes in 1941, around 150% more transport planes in 1942 and 1943
- the german airforce has 20-30% more bombers in use in 1941, 50% more bombers and fighters in use in 1942-43 and do not loose as many as OTL in the mediterain (just look at the casulty-ratio in the med and in russia... around 1:1,2 in the med, 1:5 in russia... )

The key is the transport flyers... in 1941 the germans fueled and supplied their armored tips by air... this means they broke through, run until their tanks were dry and they get refueld by air. in this scenario the germans could supply 4-5 armored tips more in the same time with double efficency. So they could propably move 100-200km more in the first month of the campagin, with the worse results for the russians.

My guess (crude) is the russians loose till december 1941:
Rostov permanently
the crimea completly, with a german bridgehead at the Kuban
Leningrad
the waldai-hights are included in german area, structurally sound, not the cholm-cauldron
the finnish and german forces reach the Onega-lake, cutting of the Murmansk-railway, threatening exhausted russian forces that could only fractional supplied (for the winter much higer casulties for the russians here)

Frontline could go (roughly)
ONEGA-Lake - Tscherepwetz (northern tip of the white lake), then along the wolga-river southwest to Dubna. From here south to the northern outskirts of moscau, reaching Dolbronuki. From here in a curve west from moscau to podolsk. From here into the east till again the mocswa is reached. Some area along the river, then south following the OKA river to Stupino, then south to Tula (but included in the german area). From here south/southeast in a rough line to LIPEZ, then Woronesh (OTL), from here along the Don to Osetrovka.
From here south to rostov, looking for favourite defence zone for Army group south.

The russians would loose 2 million MORE soldiers, the germans loose 200k less troops but more important the russians will NOT counterattack, they lack the strength to do so.

They are not beaten, they fill fight on and with western allied help (that will include armed forces - maybe the 8th army and 1-2 american armies) keep russia in the war.

But the germans also benefit in the atlantic battle - with all the subs not send to the med, they could - in 1942 kill even more allied ships, esp. american ships.
WIth no losses in the med in the air - and the russians loosing even much more planes (with less and less german casulties by the red air force) the defence of france is better -> so the british loose here more planes as OTL (but are still stronger as OTL because they do not suffer their huge casulties they had in the med, too).

With the USA sending more and more planes you have more intense battles above the netherlands and the coast of france, but the loss ratio is still in favour of the germans, with more pilots surviving the battles

In the end the western allies will invade - that would be a desaster - i bet they will have to be forced to try in 1942, because they fear a debacle in russia.
This will end very very bad (propably 300-400k captured forces), but they will come back - in 1944 and in much greater strength.
Hitler will ruin the better situation in russia, maybe another spot he demand impossible from his army that will fail him

Negative for humanity will be that the nazis could slaughter more slaves, jews and other "useless" people (as the nazis saw it), but in august 1945 instand sunrise will end the war.


Rommels "Africa-corps" and the many trucks would help in the east, Leningrad falling will improve german logistics MASSIVLY for the northern area, free a whole army and cuts of the murmansk-supplies. This - esp. in a critical phase (1941-42) could cost the russians in the 42-43-campagin, a desaster in 42 in france for the allies is a given,but it would save the russians the final defeat.


Postwar russia is much weaker, because it needed western armed forces fighting IN russia against the germans.
End of war could be in september/october 45

The pacific war could be changed too. With a desaster in late 42 in europe the allies lack the manpower in the pacific, so they do the better central pacific engagement and ironically end the war in early 45.

With this war ending earlier you could move more and more allied forces into europe - say Mussolini enters the war in late 44, allowing the allied pacific forces to enter the country and establish a new frontline for them in january45. At this time the allies are still in the normandy (if they invade here - again), but they also invade southern france in this time and break the germans in france - causing huge casulties in the retreat. Ironically Mussolini could be seen as the "hero" because he helped to end that war.

Hi,

no optimism from my side here.
It is just a matter of facts that the balkan-campagin costed the germans MASSIVLY in durability of their mechanic stuff. Because they had no time to check, fix and repair stuff that suffered by that operation - in that the fast german forces lacked OTL this ability. So the failure rate for german trucks, Sdkfz251 and esp tanks was in the first phases of Operation Barbarossa very high.

If you avoid this campagin you do NOT suffer these miles on the vehicles, so it is just logical that your motorized forces have a lower rate of failover. 

This alone means that the germans move faster, could reach points farer behind the russian lines, create more chaos and cause esp. higer casulties in the russian army.
In the same time you reduce your own casulties, because if you attack with 20 tanks instead of 10 you could achive your succsess with reduced risks. 

The next important point is the losses the germans suffered in the balkan campagin. Even if a quick victory, they loosed significant mechanic vehicles. So the germans have more firepower as OTL. Again - this helps em to cause more casulties and they loose less.

But what is often ignored - the net drain the Afrikacorps, later the African army costed in rare transport vehicles. These - in africa needed to move one armored corps could fed/move a whole tank army in russia. So the german forces would recive much more supplies as OTL, again in 1941 - in a time they really could push deep into russia

The huge casulties in transport planes the germans suffered at crete is another VERY important point. As mentioned the german army fueld/rearmed their tanks by air... with 200 more transport planes you could do that much better. 

the fact that you have another tank corps (basically the africa-corps) that would be used in the north (as it was originally planned) has the key factor in an easy german take of leningrad. 
OTL the germans had only one Panzerkorps, even if lead by Manstein, that was not enough and the slow infantry got the russians the chances to let em escape large numbers of forces, even with ammo, material and guns. With the second panzerkorps here, you could expect that the russians loose many more forces, in the same time (again) the germans have reduced casulties (again in their panzerkorps). So again russia loose much more and germany loose less.
For me an early August/late july-fall of Leningrad is VERY realistic in this scenario, add in 200-300k more lost russian forces before that, so the heavy and very bloody russian counterattacks in HG North would not be possible.

This has many effects (again - chain reaction)
1.) with Leningrad in german hands you free one german infantry army - this could move to the east and south east, pushing the second infantry army more to the south east. THat frees another bunch of troops in HG Center, that helps in their approach to moscau later on.
2.) with leningrad in german hands (quickly taken) the germans could early start to move supplies by the "german lake" - no subs, no heavies of the russians exist anymore, because their last port had been lost. 
This cause another important chain reaction, the supply problem. THe supply-line by rail for HG center also had to supply the southern part of the HG North, here this will not happen, because HG North is fully supplied by sea (and here no casulties by partisans could happen/delay stuff) Overall this helps HG Center, because it is better supplied (only their own supplies needed), better supplied forces fight better - could push the front deeper into the east earlier. 

As i wrote, i doubt the germans could take moscau, the fighting here would be bitter and sometimes would be frozen.
But again - the germans did not lack winter cloths, they lacked the transport capacity to bring em to the front.
With leningrad taken the HG north gets their cloths by Leningrad, HG center has more capacities and so many more winter cloths reach the german troops. This again has a positive effect for the germans.

There will be no "super stalingrad" in this time - the goal for winter 41 was Leningrad-Rostov and in the center moscau. Moscau will not be taken, but propably north and south of moscau germans would approach deeper. Maybe cut of some important rail roads. This make the counteroffensive impossible (esp. with the fall of Leningrad)

Leningrad taken also means that the tank factories here will NOT build tanks (T34, KV1) for the russians. Another huge loss for the russians in a critical time.

I mentioned allready that the germans would after Leningrad push beyond Schlüsselburg and the fins are not really needed. The moment Leningrad fell, the germans could operate at the Ladoga-lake, could bring own warships into the lake. In the same time the russians cannot do that. Again supplying forces in the north and east at the lake is now much easier for the germans.

The other aspect is the huge number of planes the germans have because they do not loose so many planes in africa. 
The british cannot compensate that, because most bombers and fighters that were very useful in africa have zero/reduced impact in france.

Mussolini would also bring forces to russia, on a volunteer-base... so expect at last one corps, maybe even an italian army in russia

The additional german subs, fighting the americans at the coast instead of hunting in very dangerous waters in the mediterain mean the british - later the USA suffer many more casulties.

That is no wank, that is simple numbers-play in a time VERY favourable for the germans.


Also the losses that got sunk in 1941/42 by the RAF/RN will not be destroyed, moving to russia. So again more reserves reach the frontline (partisan fighting was insignificant in 1941 in russia) and make the german forces stronger.

Comming into 1942 the germans would propably have many more forces (around 300k more soldiers), the russians are down 2 millions more, with less material, lower morale and deeper in russia.

With this the western allies would propably panic, because the one thing they feared was this: Stalin throws in.
So no invasion in 1943 but 1942, as an emergency case.

That is also a point why the pacific war will not work better for the british - this invasion (say july 1942) would be an desaster and the preparations for this would be active since january 1942 (after the USA entry in the war). You also could see - with some luck - a naval desaster, say QE is sunk with 15k US solders in heavy seas by a sub. More subs, a bit luck could achive this.

So the thing is simple - pure numbers and the wave-effect mean that for germany it is MUCH better in 1941/42 not to fight in the mediterain, the russians suffer worse and the british and americans will suffer with that invasion massivly because they lack the experience to fight the germans.

The air war could not pushed more, but because it is the only thing the british could do in 1941 and most of 1942 they will not do the "smart" thing, like closing the gap in the atlantic by heavies... these are needed to do something against germany

If you want to read about that - read Guderian. he blamed the "führung" for not delivering urgently needed 200 tank engines... engines they would not have needed without the balkan-campagin at all. 

In the pacific war the british could not use much things outside their subs (these could be a factor!) and their heavies (Cruisers, battleships, carriers).

But without the naval battles in the mediterain the british would have ZERO knowledge about how bad their air defence had been - i know you are a brit-fan, but facts are more important as wishful thinking.
No knowledge means the british - with MUCH more ships -> so much more agressive against the japanese will suffer terrible if they are attacked by air by a nation who knows how to do it.

With the 1942-invasion-desaster the allies will reduce the pacific war, but as i mentioned that would shorten it. No egomania by McArthur means the americans move by the central pacific, with defences in the imphal-area (for that the british would have an abundancy of products (they otherwise lost in africa against Rommel). The Imperial army airforce of the japanese would also suffer more because of this.


Finally - one example how things would change. OTL rommel demanded and got the modern 8,8cm-flak, the first 50 of them (in early 1942). unfortunatly, the ship that carried them got sunk.
If the panzercorps-rommel would recive them, these would propably shot down 200 russian planes and propably 200-500 russian tanks.
Or, if used at home, it would be bad news for british and american bombers in 1942/43. 

The positive effect for germany by NOT controlling (and do partisan fighting) of greece and the former yugoslavia and not to loose all the fuel they needed to carry to africa and then in africa to the frontlines has not been calculated till yet.
And another key factor -germany could buy strategic materials from italy, who could legally import it. Even italian weapons, say licenced mark4-tanks could be bought.

Hi,

you could answer me, that makes it easier to identify answers.

No - we disagree utterly about the impact in russia.

Propably you do not understand how much strain on the mechanized material of the german army the Balkan-campagin was. Even if you have NIL changes about africa, the german efficency is propably about 20-30% better in the first 2 months of Barbarossa.

Further, the german mechanized corps were completly fueled and armed by air. Even engines (the bottelneck for the barbarossa-campagin). 
With the full might of the transport planes that got lost in creta you could push the whole armored corps around 100-200km deeper into russia.

Then you miss the full armored corps in the north, that will cause a domino-effect down to moscau.
OTL they had one corps here, that was just to little. Manstein did "wonders", but with high risks and high casulties. with another panzercorps they crush the russians in a way it cannot be described. If the russians loose here 1-2 armies worth of combat troops more and early, the whole front is different. 

Add in the around 1000-1500 airplanes the germans needed for africa and that could be full used in russia. Esp. with all the advanced ground forces, the germans needed abundancy of in africa and so had a lack of them in russia.

No - you seem to lack the understanding how thin the germans were stretched with barbarossa and how deep the impact of no-balkan-campagin and no-africa-corps would be.

In 1941 the germans had - without the romanians and a slovakian division no foreign forces in their rooster. So no impact here.

Really - that is no wanking - in opposition i have tamed the succsess of the german army a bit.

It is - with our knowledge about Barbarossa - a given that Leningrad fell EARLY. This alone is a gigantic blow for the russians and a gigantic positive effect for the germans to feed/supply their forces in HG north. That gives you a positive effect for HG center, esp. in the critical phase of the war, as the hard fighting around Yelna happened. 

You also could move BOTH panzercorps from north to center, so the northern pincer that strikes against moscau is more then doubled in strength. It is very possible that the germans could push in the time they had good weather to moscau, instead of sit and wait for resupplying. If that happens, moscau would fall, too. 

And again, the impact of the german airforce, as mobile artillery crushing strongpoints of the russians was another decisive point in that campagin. If you throw in 1000 or more bombers and fighters, the russians lack even more so the possibility to counter the german moves. 

With lesser casulties the germans are overall stronger, inflictinig still 4:1 casulties at the russians, maybe even 6:1. Doing this mean the russians lack the ability to counterattack, as OTL. If they counterattack, they could not throw the germans back the same way they did OTL and the germans have much more forces - i mentioned ONE infantry army that was needed OTL at leningrad, maybe more.

Also, i gave the number of 200k less casulties for the germans, but also 2 million more for the russians in that campagin. This means the russians lack the needed numbers they used at their "Schwerpunkt-missions", the loss of Leningrad also means their largest tank factories will not be able to build tanks for the russians.


About the subs - the mediterain was - in 1941 a very bad place for the german subs. With no ports in the med the germans will not send em to this place. As you could see OTL, they did send em as the germans started to fight together with italy. 


The british will for sure benefit (a bit) by sending their ships through the mediterain, but unfortunatly they do not know if italy do not still attack. So i expect some forces are needed to look for the italians

The RN did nothing to improve their AA-ability from 1940 to 1941 and suffered badly around crete. The ships that were used were primary high-qualtiy ships, no cheapish workhounds for atlantic war. 
With japan making troubles i expect the british will - following their common logic - move their assets to the pacific, carriers and battleships, cruisers and destroyers. All completly unable to really fight a modern air war. 
As i mentioned, if the japanese send kida butai they will slaughter helpless british ships in a way worse as Pearl Harbour. 

The good thing the british will have are their subs, they had the "wrong" ones in the mediterain, whose were highly succsessfull. I expect the japanese suffer more here. 

The forces in africa will not completly be removed, but needed to control italian troops in abessina and lybia. Overall the british will need around 50% of the forces they used OTL in these regions, maybe more. I expect em to move forces from here to UK, to prepare the urgently needed invasion to help russia in spring 1942, who will die in france or end in a german prison camp here.

In the air war the additional pilots will help UK, but the planes they could use are mostly "Useless" in their airwar against germany. 

the same is nearly true for india - for sure more and better planes mean the japanese (i mentioned the problems the IJA would have) have a much harder time, but again i doubt the inital onslaught will be avoided here. 

For the germans another positive effect will happen - no 12th US airforce could attack from the south the Reich-defence, more is concentrated in UK, that was quite early at its limits for placing so many US planes here. To build up these bases cost time (it will be useful later), but the fear of russia be conquered will cause a desaster. 

THe germans suffered by not winning barbarossa (that is impossible in my eyes), but more so by the russian counteroperations in winter 41/42, that killed the general german ability to fight along the whole frontline (Case Blue was a minor operation compared to that)

Accumulated till autum 1942 you could expect 500k less german casulties and 5-6 million more russian casulties (dead, wounded, POW), so the russians lack in generally the ability to attack massivly at different sectors in the same time. That play into the hands of the germans, calm areas full of allies are in not so great danger as OTL (the german desaster at HG south was partly because the allies were helpless against russian strikes and suffered terrible casulties, stretching the german ressources thin and thinner).

With a much stronger german airforce, more tanks, more surviving veterans the germans are overall MUCH stronger in the east as OTL, esp. in 1942.
That is also bad news for the allies because with the failed invasion the germans could move more ground forces into the east after that or - worse - the produce much more stuff from everything, so they could resist the allied airstrikes better.

the many subs the germans send into the mediterain - that achived not much - will counter the positive effect of the open route through the mediterian for the british. 

Sorry, just read about the numbers and facts - if italy stay true neutral the germans gain a massive booster for all other sectors and the russians will suffer, the western allies, with green forces in france facing a much stronger german response in a more contested air mean they run into a desaster - with propably 1/2 of the used forces and many goods (and trucks, jeeps, tanks, guns etc) in german hands. 

We know that the nukes will end that, but in 1942 or - after the defeat in france - in 1943 the western allies will not know that. So they will try desperatly things that could work or would end badly. 

Yes, Hitlers hybris will reduce the huge benefits the germans gain by not beeing involved in the balkan/africa a bit, but in 1941/42 this will not have a huge effect.

So expect much more killed innocents people, esp. jews  by this.
The war would end by some nukes dropped and - with a worsen eastern front by the huge air strikes against germany (with B29 and propably generaly doubled numbers of bombers) the german logistics will break.

Generally - if the africa-corps of 1941 is used in 1944 against the russians, it has nil effect. In 1941 it gives you leningrad and establish a much more eastern frontline in general and 5-6 million dead russian soldiers more. Without the other effects by this.

Hi Steve,

really  you miss the important points and how significant they will influence the whole thing.

But - i never said that the germans would send subs into the med, that was sucide even with italian bases, they did not OTL until they started to fought in the mediterain. So here we agree to each other

Second, the Royal Navy was terrible unprepared for naval air war in 1941 and 1942, otherwise they would not run dry in AA ammo so quickly - that was a significant error they did not fix for some time. We disagree about the consequences about this. My opinion - if KidaButai engage a "strong" british fleet - the second is destroyed with basically nil casulties for KidaButai. No lessons about the war in the med would be learned, so the british would been even less prepared as OTL. 

We agree about the impact of the british subs, excellent and with working torpedos. 

About the logistics in russia.
You seem to lack the key point.
OTL the germans supplied their key elements (armored tips) by air. Without Creta you have more then doubled your transport capacity for the whole of the russian front. This means the german frontline forces who did 80% of the job in the first months will be much better supplied, that is a really bad news for the russians.

Second, you quoted the numbers for german airplanes (and you have to add also the casulties in the whole mediterain, the germans suffered, because these planes and pilots ALSO will be usable in russia). That is overall around 1/3 to 1/4 (depends on who you look) of the overall numbers in russia.
Consequence from this: more german bombers and fighters cause havoc in russia, killing more russian planes (reduce the ability to fight back), destroy more russian infrastructure (so the chance that some trains that OTL transported key industries to the east will be destroyed), kill more russian trains (that were in very short supply for the critical first 6 months of the russian campagin.

third, the germans advancing (and the 3rd divsion that rommel got in august will be ready in june 41 for russia - it was a logistical problem to move them to africa, no such problems for the advance to the border) with an extra panzer corps in HG north is a key difference, that means several russian armies (!) could not escape, that alone accelerate the german advance here. OTL they could have - with hindsight - still advance into leningrad and take it sometimes in july/august... here they will take it easily. 
The russians were struggling for survival, with more forces get destroyed/captures, they lack them to even man the frontline. So an easier advance for the germans. 

The well supplied forces will advance - they also could advance to the back (again - as long as a panzercorps is supplied by air they do not need any "supply-line" in a tradional sense - as the germans showed OTL, with half the transport planes as we have here). This means the russian forces who try to slow down the german advance will be shattered more often as OTL. THis means - bad news - another huge casulty for the russian army, a few thousend guns, tanks, etc. If that happens earlier as OTL, they got more and more static, that play into the german hands. 

Yes, the infantry will be forced to even march further, but esp. in the north that additional panzer corps mean leningrad fell in july/early august. That also mean the Oranienbaum-cauldron (of OTL) will be broken, because no longer they could get supplied by the leningrad forces by sea. 
THat is one follow-up-consequence of that scenario.

Still - without the Balkan-campagin you have less casulties (even if highly succsessfull it was a high-wear-and-tear-operation), so you need less repairs, less pauses in critical times for the german forces. Again this accumulate to better results for them and worse for the russians. So less resistance, less ability to counterattack. 

Then, you mentioned the russian tank- and weapon factories in Leningrad. Nope, the russians produced here around 20.000 tanks over the war, they moved em from here to all fronts. They "exported" em, in winter 41 - as they build a railroad above the ice - they moved 4000ts of war materials per day (to build these tanks), instead of feeding their people. That was a major point why so many died by hunger in that brutal winter. Not because the russians couldn´t fed em but they forced them to work to death under terrible conditions IN Leningrad. Don´t get me wrong, with germans easy catching leningrad the fate of the people would be worse - but i just want to explain how significant this would be.

Supplies was a key for that war. Yes. Very right.
But - OTL the germans achived what they did with half the transport planes, with one panzer corps less, with abundancy of war material lost in the mediterain (to the excellent british subs from malta). Here they will not loose them. So they are stronger.

With the HG north get its supplies from Leningrad, the germans could much better supply HG center, esp. in the critical phase of Tyhpoon. Again bad news for the russians. 

COuld the germans "win" Barbarossa in one 6-week-campagin. Zero chance for this, also with their brutal ideology they could never hope to "win", russia was to big.
But they could move the frontline 200-400km to the east, with no retreat in a fucking cold winter, loosing so many vehicles, special weapons and lots and lots of soldiers.

So coming 1942 the germans have one army more (18th) in the north, have one or two armies worth of soldiers less casulties till spring 42 and the russians have maybe only 70% of their combat capacity of OTL in spring 42. For sure they avoid their costly failure in the south in may, but overall the russians are still overall the passive part. 

If hitler dream about the oil, he will still move into the steppe, but he will have around 1000 planes more, esp. transport planes (no demjansk-cauldron add another 300 transport planes to his arsenal), so again his forces could be much better supplied "on the fly". 

Also, the british will be forced to have still significant forces in the med, because the do not trust Bennito M. With his colonies - and you can bet he will still rearm and put more and more forces into them - they are forced to look deeper into his forces.

Oh, after rereading my part about the subs i detected the mistake.
I meant this:
Germany do not send subs in the med, so the british have a much easier time to move stuff from suez to gibraltar - that will help em to save around 1-2 million tons of shipping. 
But the german subs in the atlantic, esp. in early 42, will cause huger casulties and have lesser losses themself. So the submarine force in 1942 will be even stronger as OTL. 

In the same time the british, later together with the americans will need to invade europe to remove the pressure on the russians, who would - for sure - cry for help in late 1941. So more "senseless" bomber attacks to make a show-of-force, with partly unpleasant results.

And - from spring42 on, a paniced SHAEF will plan and do the desaster invasion that cost so much for the allies. But - it will also help the russians to survive the critical year 1942. 

In the pacific the japanese will -if they encounter strong british forces - destroy em, but i also mentioned that with the need to prepare for the next invasion the allies will go the central pacific way and crush the japanese 1 year earlier.

For the allies it is not good, because they can only invade germany directly (self murderer), france (possible) , norway (to far away and only doable in 1944, then still to far away) or the dutch coast (heavily fortified, again self murderer).

So the germans will have informations about the invasion and could react to it. Still hitler could ruin this, the 44er invasion for sure, but in 1942 the allies will face a gigantic desaster, that also costs lots of light forces. 

You also seem to ignore how many forces the germans needed in the occupied countries of the Balkan, in 1942 these were around 250k.

So, my conclusion is this:
Russia suffers worse, they loose Leningrad, they loose in the south (because they need to move more forces to moscau to hold it) and the crimea.
OTL the germans lacked one panzer division properly fueld to take out the whole of the crimea, they had an understrenghed Stug-Battalion. I think it is safe to assume that this time HG south will have these forces.
Loosing the crimea is another blow for the russians with huge effects - this time in the south.

So the allies are forces to move even more supplies, weapons and propably armed forces into russia, even if the pacific war would not look good in the first 6 months of the war.

We also have not calculated the effect of germany trading strategic goods by italy or the other countries, even volunteer-forces could be send by greece or yugoslavia in the fight against "bolshewism"... 

another positive effect - less partisan action because more german forces could "hunt" them down behind the frontline. That will change, but the situation as OTL, as whole regiments of shattered russian formations hided in areas and started to fight the germans would be less often as OTL, with less airplanes the russians also could less often support em, etc... 

Nah, churchill was right as he answered "it is only fair" as the germans told him "this time we have the italians on our side". A net drain for them.

Oh, you missed another strategic point.
OTL the germans started quite late, june 22th. Without the balkan war you could start at last one week earlier, maybe 10 days.
These could - even with only "OTL"forces make the difference between "moscau taken" and a failed Operation typhoon. I ignored this, to many butterflies. 



Sorry, you really ignore the key points for this changed scenario... 

Yes, there would be situations in that the panzer corps need to wait for infantry. But if they had destroyed more armed forces before, taken more supplies because they were faster and better supplied as OTL, the infantry will face weaker russian forces. 

Esp. in HG north you would see ports opened earlier and - with leningrad taken "on the run" you get the best supply depot you could gain in ww2 in russia.  All mines you needed from the german side now could be delivered around UK, because - the baltic is a german lake with no hostile forces anymore... 

And unfortunatly the british gain forces and strengh in areas they could not use (yet) in europe, the australians would not send forces to africa, so they would protect better areas the japanese never could reach. With more ships surviving, the australians would demand more "protection" - as they did OTL, but this time they could get em, because no war in the mediterain.

Hi,

sorry - again you miss the key points about Barbarossa.

The numbers of planes the germans could use in 1941 AND 1942 are much higher as the list you made, because the germans had high casulties in the mediterain in planes. Here they do not fight the british but the russians, basically they slaughter them 10:1 or higher, reducing the impact of the russian air force and in the same time bomb more (esp. in the north). 

So you have doubled effect pro germans here.

The panzercorps in the north make the difference - OTL the germans moved slowly, after the one panzerkorps they had dashed in the most daunting move "ever" in military history. Here you have two, for an corps commander Rommel is nearly as suited as v.Manstein, so expect even more huge casulties and elementary retreat lines blocked.

Again you miss the important element of having enough transport planes to fuel these forces, enough spare parts to fix broken tanks and that these tanks and mechanized vehicles will not break down at all (no wear and tear in the balkan).

Also you ignore the point that the germans will have at last one more week in good weather, starting at 15th instead of 22th.

More forces, less casulties, more manpower (no occupation forces in the balkan), no highly needed fuel for tankers that get sunk in the mediterain. This is a huge impact pro germany in this scenario.

And no, with 2 panzercorps Leningrad will fall on the fly in july/first week of august. And this cause a chain reaction in the north, influencing the central area.

Comming into 1942 the russians - without counterattacking (or facing an even larger defeat as OTL the first 5 weeks of Barbarossa)face the chance to break down. So the pressure on the western allies to invade into northern france is to big. Because with germany "winning" here the allies do not see a chance to win the war (they would, but they did not belive that in 1942, even with far worser results for the german army).

That is plain logics that come to this result.
So an invasion in 1942 with the hope to achive surprise, causing a huge desaster, i think around august 1942, because in this time the germans would be moving still into the far east (hitler will try to take moscau in this scenario, propably fail, but in the same time (hybris) start a second operation, similar to case blue.
With more and more supplies by the allies (by persia and the far east) and propably moving ground forces they keep the russians in the war. Stalin would demand the invasion, he would get it in this scenario and it ends in desaster. But it would save in 1942 russia from german victory. 

THe british had only limited ammo for their AA guns, it is no accident that many british ships got destroyed by air after they had spent most/all of its ammo - compared to japanese or american ships who had not suffered these problems.

We agree to disagree about the impact of the british surface ships in the pacific war, the subs are a different thing.

No - it is just as simple. Without the italians in the war (truly neutral) the germans have much more positive effects, that do them a huge favour.

By the way, i mentioned the easier sea trade to UK with the open suez channel, but i mentioned also that the germans would have much more subs that could sink freighters in the atlantic, here they are much more valuable.
Oh, the germans suffered an "ace-loss" in spring 1941, not autum. 

Look,

you make some serious mistakes.

First - i do not explain why suddenly the germans win in 1941 in barbarossa, i made points why the germans
a.) will push deeper into the east AND keep the taken areas in the HG south, including them taking the whole of the crimea (with a small bridgehead in the kuban (but that is open to discuss). My answer/Explanation: german mechanical failures are lesser (no wear and tear, no casulties here in the balkan war and more spare parts). So the extra push to reach Rostow, with some bridgeheads above the Don are a given, the same is true for them taking the crimea - because OTL they lacked maybe one or two tank battallions to "take" the crimea, OTL they fully lacked that and so could only move in but were to slow to catch the running russians. Here - thy could take them out, just as they couldn´t OTL. 
See - only minor changes, but these remove a thread that costed in 1942 the germans dearly, with maybe 200k more prisoners for the russians, more material for the germans (usefull from spring 42 on). All for say 50 extra Ju52, 50 extra fighters, 100 extra bombers and maybe 100 more ready/repaired german tanks. Nothing else.

b.) in HG north the changes are fundamentally. As i tried to explain to you, with two instead of one panzer corps and with a lot more planes the germans would crush the defence lines, disrupt/destroy the retreat paths of the red army here and so many more russian forces who otherwise could escape because of the slow speed of the german infantry armies get sacked. With these removed forces the russians cannot counterattack in strength, so if the german forces reach their panzer corps (around the same time as OTL, just maybe 50-100km deeper in the east as OTL) these will reach AND take Leningrad on the run. All in late july/early august 41, removing the need to guard for the whole of 1941 these dangerous foes who produced a lot deadly tanks and - even as important costed the german airforce a lot bombers that got shot down/got damaged by the MASSIVE aa-defence of leningrad defence system. See - again one panzercorps (the "africa corps and rommel" and maybe 250 more tanks, 100-150 more transport planes, 100-200 bombers are enough for the germans to reach and take EARLY leningrad. With rommel AND manstein you could bet they would ignore orders NOT to take the city. After this you free 2 finnish corps (defending in the north of leningrad) and the following german infantry armies could push deeper into the east and southeast. You also get an excellent port, remove the threat of russian naval units, capture another 14 divisions in kronstadt (with another bunch of extra weapons you later could reuse) and you get the most important tank factories in leningrad. Propably partly intact. Maybe you start to build the engines (not the rest of the tanks), because these would be handsome 400hp-diesel-engines.  Who knows.

THis mean from september/october (latest) on you could move 2 panzercorps into the southeast, with a massive army moving east (slowly), removing more and more desperate fighting russian forces who try to stop the german advance, around 100-250km east of leningrad. With the port facitlies coming online you can now fully supply the whole HG by Leningrad. 

The consequences for this is, that HG center, who had to resupply parts of the HG north too can now supply ONLY HG center. 
By the way, the massive defeats of the russians in north also mean that the Waldai-hights get taken and propably also space in the east of this.  No winter-cauldron of demyansk with these very bloody and costly fights here.

c.) HG Center now is better supplied, again lesser wear-and-tear, more engines, better supplied (by air) tank forces... overall a better casulty-ratio FOR the germans. With Leningrad taken you also get most of the airforce for HG north in HG center, so the additonal lighter casulties overall in the air mean the airforce above HG center is now stronger, much stronger as OTL. 

This means the germans could push harder and earlier into the russian defence system around moscau, more to the north (propably behind moscau) and the south (again). 
Yes - if the russians retreat earlier in the south, they loose less around Kiev, but the timing is - with many factors similar to OTL - that these things happen basically in the same 2-3 weeks. 

North: Leningrad reached and taken, huge casulties here. Stavka forced to move reserves to stop the german advance BEYOND leningrad, also more forces to stop the finnish forces who know could operate north of leningrad with 2 extra corps and much better supply lines.
Center: 3 gigantic cauldrons, kiev and bryansk/wyjasma, removing basically everything the russians have to defend moscau. 
South - lack of defence forces (lesser reserves send here, because the critical events in north and center (the russians don´t get extra forces in this scenario) make the life easier for the germans here. So the push to rostov will happen AND crimea will be taken, with extra time for the careful Fieldmarschall to protect his long and now vulnerable defence lines. 

We do not calculate the Fallschirmjäger, who could also help the germans in some critical areas (but that would be to much looking in the scenario).

No - the forces the germans needed to control the taken areas in the balkan weren´t insignificant. For sure in 1941 they were not huge, but still they needed materials, no taken country was a surplus in logistics or material, all were a drain.
We still recognize the drain for africa, we still calculate that one panzercorps in africa used as much trucks and vehicles as 2 panzer armies in russia - these vehicles are now usable IN russia (so overall better transport capacity for the germans)

The subs - they will have more succsess - not in the sense of "killing millions of tons in 1941", but in the sense of "having 20-50 more subs fighting in the atlantic" mean they will kill more ships, stretch the british defence methods (but also the surplus of usable ASW-forces will be busy to fight these subs). So no big plus for the germans but also no plus for the british.
Comming early 42 you have not 3 german subs at the US coast but propably 25, so the slaughter in the furyhouse will be much greater. 
THat is allready 1942, not 1941. But these subs will keep the british busy - even with less succsess as in 1940 german subs of 1941 were no pushovers.

I also mentioned that most of the materials the british used in africa has no positive impact in the war against germany in europe.
The fighters lack the range, the bombers are - if used in daylight attacks just cannon fodder and the rest will be outdated in late 1942 (wit shermans reaching the british forces). 

So - again - the germans have a MUCH better frontline in december 1941 in russia, are well supplied in the north (Leningrad), but also massive better in the center (even if they will not be able to push through the defences of moscau - it is a difference if you cannot break their lines or if you are pushed back 200km).

With much more casulties the russians need the reserves (they used to get wasted in their winter operations of 1941) to bolster their defence lines, they will not, repeat not be able to launch full scale operations. This compensate maybe with 40% the bigger casulties they suffered earlier, 1,2 Mio casulties otl will be say 400k, so 800k = 40% of 2 million extra dead/captured soldiers.
The problem : No Leningrad = no massive tank production of superior tanks, no easy distribution of supplies from murmansk south (germans will cut this route for sure)

So i think the counter operations would be very limited, basically they will try to remove the germans from the moscau-outskirts, maybe the wolga-dams in the north and maybe tula in the south (if they achive this)

The germans - not suffering their massive casulties, esp. in vehicles as they did OTL in winter41 are much stronger in spring42.
They gain more and more better airplanes, have no demjansk-cauldron (and another bloodshed for their transport planes) and the allies will fear another german sommer operation, this time one that will "kill" russia.

This means they have to do something, urgently. That is the scenario of the 1942-invasion, the americans were so prone and the british so deadly against. But they knew that the war is "done" if they do not keep the russians IN the war. 

So i think they will do their invasion, no Watchtower in the pacific (propably not necessary) and no Torch. Green US-divisions and the trained and removed british forces will be thrown into the normandy - not because they belive they win but because they know they have to delay a german operation to crush finally the russians.

The SHAEF had these plans, even OTL would have been a desaster, this scenario here is worse.
But - such invasion mean the germans have to remove their best armored forces, who will have casulties, they have to withdraw 80% of their air force to break the allies. Say 3 months it will cost, but this means the russians gain the needed half year pause - from late summer to spring 43. In that time they could dig in, dig in and get their army rebuild. 


About japan - the japanese could not risk one pilot, they were doomed the second they started it. But the british aren´t needed there. India is save, but the malayan campagin would end similar. No british wonders here, to arrogant, stupid and bad lead they were. And the planes they will have here are better - so the japanese have higher casulties, but the british lacked anything in their colonies - to much to change for that thing.

Later - say in late 42 or early 43, things will move, i think british subs would kill 2-3 carriers, 2-3 battleships and maybe 3-8 cruisers more as the US subs did, just because their subs were better and had working torpedos. Later (43) the british could send so many so good and usable planes that the hell they did in 45 would be ready in 44 against the japanese in impal. But we talk about 1941/42.

the russians would ALSO demand direct help, the british forces in the persian area could be used - even if they could not defend properly against german forces.

Last thing: OTL the germans were forces to use massivly allied nations, because they suffered so terrible in winter 41. Here, they still will use em, but more in the backyards, hunting and killing partisans.
They also have much more weapons, so their allies will be better equipped, esp. the romanians.

Oh, some things i forgot.In 1942 the germans don´t need so many subs in the arctic, also no airplanes. Why? Because no PQ-convois will be send (with murmansk and - spring 42 archangelsk) cut of they aren´t needed here. That is another net gain for the germans.