575
Captain
There is no Purgatory for warcriminals - they go directly to Hell!
Posts: 2,730 
Likes: 4,106
|
Post by 575 on Dec 9, 2021 19:29:33 GMT
I really like the Swedish providing AA-guns for the Norwegians even if they well know they might need them soon mainly in light of the defeat of the German Mountaintroops at Narvik and holding back the German advance.
The Swedish General Staff will well know they are in the fighting to some degree by now but as shown in Finland during the Winter War they will be quite aggressive.
Oh and let us hear the Swedish king lament the damned politicians going to war with his beloved Fuhrer!
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Dec 12, 2021 22:18:07 GMT
Is Italy joining the German side in this thread?
|
|
DMZ
Chief petty officer
Posts: 145
Likes: 243
|
Post by DMZ on Dec 13, 2021 8:38:44 GMT
Is Italy joining the German side in this thread? Battle of France will continue as IOTL with similar outcome, at least until mid-June. So Italy will declare war to France, Norway was far away and I doubt Mussolini ever care about it. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Dec 13, 2021 18:15:56 GMT
Is Italy joining the German side in this thread? Battle of France will continue as IOTL with similar outcome, at least until mid-June. So Italy will declare war to France, Norway was far away and I doubt Mussolini ever care about it.
Ah that confirms this isn't related to the other thread where France may well survive the German onslaught.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Dec 13, 2021 18:46:57 GMT
Battle of France will continue as IOTL with similar outcome, at least until mid-June. So Italy will declare war to France, Norway was far away and I doubt Mussolini ever care about it. Ah that confirms this isn't related to the other thread where France may well survive the German onslaught.
, do not give him any new ideas. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Dec 14, 2021 14:26:10 GMT
Ah that confirms this isn't related to the other thread where France may well survive the German onslaught.
, do not give him any new ideas.
How dare you attempt to suppress ideas/discussions! Do you think your God Emperor Xi? 
Seriously I was assuming DMZ, was treating this as a separate thread but there are clear possible interconnections where one incentive for the allies to decide to fight on in Norway is as a result of France doing significantly better against the German onslaught. For which something like his dramatically improved ADA would be a possible route.
Steve
|
|
DMZ
Chief petty officer
Posts: 145
Likes: 243
|
Post by DMZ on Dec 14, 2021 15:08:32 GMT
Seriously I was assuming DMZ, was treating this as a separate thread but there are clear possible interconnections where one incentive for the allies to decide to fight on in Norway is as a result of France doing significantly better against the German onslaught. For which something like his dramatically improved ADA would be a possible route. Indeed, as long as Allies hold out at Sedan and prevent Germans to encircle them in Belgium, Churchill won't abandon in Norway. And after the fall of Narvirk, if the frontline is in Bodø - Fauske, there are plenty of reasons to stay in Norway or, at least, to help Nowegians to resist. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Dec 14, 2021 15:10:42 GMT
Do you think your God Emperor Xi? [/div] [/div][/quote] No i am a lord, the forum my land and everybody who is a member is a peasant destined to post as much as hours have in a day. |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jun 5, 2022 23:25:56 GMT
Indeed, as long as Allies hold out at Sedan and prevent Germans to encircle them in Belgium, Churchill won't abandon in Norway. And after the fall of Narvirk, if the frontline is in Bodø - Fauske, there are plenty of reasons to stay in Norway or, at least, to help Nowegians to resist. But the question remains - What is happening after June 30th, 1940 in this scenario? Norway at this moment appears to be in a divided situation. Italy has joined the Axis side The French situation is similar up to mid-June. What exactly has happened in France and the French Empire between Italy's June 10 declaration of war, and June 22, the date of the OTL French armistice, and June 30th? What is happening to everyone and every place in the world between June 30th 1940, and say, June 22, 1941? |
|
DMZ
Chief petty officer
Posts: 145
Likes: 243
|
Post by DMZ on Mar 26, 2023 13:46:46 GMT
"DMZ IS BACK"
June 30 - A major raid by two Bleinheim squadrons based at Banak/Lakselv on the Hattfjeldal and Trondheim/Værnes fields. The bombers took off under the midnight sun after refueling at Bardufoss. Heading south after the Lofoten, they enter into the dark over the sparsely populated area of the Svartisen glacier south of Bodø. Their emerging from the rising sun on Hattfjeldal is not a complete surprise for the Germans but the meagre local anti-aircraft means do not prevent a destruction of the wooden runway while a part of the attackers continue discreetly their flight a little more in the East near the Swedish border towards Værnes which they reach at sunrise once more. With the sun at their backs, they made a devastating pass on the Luftwaffe aircraft parked here before escaping northwards at full speed, pursued by a flock of Me-109s that would make them pay dearly for their affront. Hattfjeldal is out of action for a while and some twenty aircraft are burnt out at Værnes, five Bleinheims are missing and three are badly damaged, mainly due to the Flak.
June 30 - Start of the operation Alphabet to withdraw British troops. All their weapons are transferred to the Norwegians. Only the Independant companies, the AA artillery regiments and the RAF remain.
June 30 - Refusing the armistice, the Polish Independent Carpathian Rifle Brigade, General Stanisław Kopański, stationed in French Syria and Lebanon, moves to Palestine with nearly 4,000 men.
July 1st - Considering that Poland is not formally at war with Italy, its government in exile asks the British to repatriate the Independent Carpathian Rifle Brigade to Britain to fight in Norway.
July 2, 3 and 4 - Operation Catapult: seizure of French ships in Great Britain, bombardment of the fleet at Mers-el-Kebir, immobilisation of the fleet at Alexandria.
July 5 - After an exchange with the Norwegian government, the War Cabinet agrees to re-equip and transport to Harstad the independent Carpathian Rifle Brigade. It will replace the French forces there. The Podhale Independent Rifle Brigade, currently at the front, would then be placed in reserve to be re-completed and re-equipped.
The Polish Navy destroyers (ORP Burza (Wicher class), ORP Błyskawica (Grom class), ORP Garland (G-class)) will be dedicated to the protection of Norwegian waters together with the two remaining Nowegian destroyers (the modern HNoMS Sleiplner (Sleipner class), the very old HNoMS Draug (Draug class 1910) which has to be reinforced with AA guns before sent back to Norway).
Polish air squadrons in formation will also be sent to relieve the RAF. No. 302 "City of Poznan" Polish Fighter Squadron (Poznański) on Hurricane will be based at Bardufoss, No. 300 "Masovia" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Mazowieckiej) on Fairey Battle will go to Alta/Elvesbakken, it will be reinforced by No. 301 "Pomerania" Polish Bomber Squadron (Ziemi Pomorskiej) at Banak/Lakselv also on Fairey Battle at the end of July. Finally No. 303 "Kościuszko" Polish Fighter Squadron (Warszawski imienia Tadeusza Kościuszki) on Hurricane will be based in August on Elvenes field.
Taking into account the results of the June 30's raid and the distances to be covered in Norway, a transformation of Squadron 300 and 301 on Bleinheim is envisaged. They will take over the planes of the British squadrons when they'll leave Norway.
The Norwegians of the RNoAAS will be re-equipped with Gloster Gladiators, their squadrons being based on Elvenes airfield, then Skånland/Evenes which will have to be consolidated and Andenes/Andøya which is to be built on the island of Andøya north of Harstad, as well as Bodø if the runway can be repaired and the airfield protected by a reinforced AA defence. The 40 or so Curtiss 75s (P-36s) still to be delivered, possibly supplemented by ex-French H-75s, will be based at Nordbotn, near Tromsø, where construction has begun at the request of the Norwegians, and will gradually replace the Gladiators on the other airfields.
While waiting for the 36 Douglas A-33 attack aircraft ordered from the United States to arrive towards the end of the year, a dozen Blackburn Skua aircraft will be loaned to the Norwegians.
The Kirkenes airfield, close to the border with Finland and furthest from the front line, will be used for reserve and training purposes.
The RNoNAS will continue to use its seven remaining Heinkel He 115 seaplanes (two of which were seized from the Germans) from Tromsø floatplane base for maritime patrols until the spare parts run out. Discreet contacts will be made with the Swedes, who operate a dozen of them, to try to obtain parts as needed. They were completed, for shorter distance missions, by the 24 Northrop N-3PB Nomads ordered from the United States but which were not available before spring 1941.
The Curtiss 75, Douglas A-33 and Northrop N-3PB were all equipped with the same Wright GR-1820-G205A engine.
At the end of August, only the Royal Navy will be called upon in Norway to escort the convoys and possibly supplement the air cover depending on the weather conditions, as the land is more often under rain or clouds. One aircraft carrier, one cruiser and their destroyer escort will be necessary and sufficient. The HMS Glorious and the HMS Furious will remain dedicated to this task in turn.
|
|
DMZ
Chief petty officer
Posts: 145
Likes: 243
|
Post by DMZ on Mar 26, 2023 13:55:00 GMT
Indeed, as long as Allies hold out at Sedan and prevent Germans to encircle them in Belgium, Churchill won't abandon in Norway. And after the fall of Narvirk, if the frontline is in Bodø - Fauske, there are plenty of reasons to stay in Norway or, at least, to help Nowegians to resist. But the question remains - What is happening after June 30th, 1940 in this scenario? Norway at this moment appears to be in a divided situation. Italy has joined the Axis side The French situation is similar up to mid-June. What exactly has happened in France and the French Empire between Italy's June 10 declaration of war, and June 22, the date of the OTL French armistice, and June 30th? What is happening to everyone and every place in the world between June 30th 1940, and say, June 22, 1941? June 1941 is a little too far away at this stage  but let's try to continue the exploration. As already stated, no change in France and its Empire until June 22nd as Norway is far away and nobody cares about due to the fall of France. But after the armistice, Narvik and Bodø will come back under the spotlights and the effect could be quite similar to the Free French resistance at Bir Hakeim in May-June 1942, draining some more people to England and speeding up some territories to join General de Gaulle. The first to join was the "Domaine Français de Saint-Hélène" on June 23rd, it will be the same in this Time Line. The same for Nouvelles Hébrides on July 22nd. But the AEF (Afrique Équatoriale Française : Tchad, Cameroun français, Congo and Oubangui-Chari, OTL end of August) will be easier to convince with the fight continuing in Norway and could swift a little bit earlier under the lead of Félix Éboué. The rest of the French colonies will likely act as IOTL. |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jun 4, 2023 2:23:42 GMT
Well, how will Hitler apportion what he has to throw out in the late summer and fall of 1940, going into the winter of that year, against Britain and Norway, and with what effect?
Although there will be geographic and weather obstacles during the seasons ahead, the Germans will have greater freedom to concentrate on punishing and squashing the Norwegian remnant from July 1940 onward.
Would it still exist as we turn the page into the new year, 1941? It if it takes until the spring to finish off Norway (or not finish off a lasting north Norwegian redoubt), does this interfere with Axis Balkan operations or the deployment of the Afrika Korps?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jun 4, 2023 10:09:49 GMT
Well, how will Hitler apportion what he has to throw out in the late summer and fall of 1940, going into the winter of that year, against Britain and Norway, and with what effect? Although there will be geographic and weather obstacles during the seasons ahead, the Germans will have greater freedom to concentrate on punishing and squashing the Norwegian remnant from July 1940 onward. Would it still exist as we turn the page into the new year, 1941? It if it takes until the spring to finish off Norway (or not finish off a lasting north Norwegian redoubt), does this interfere with Axis Balkan operations or the deployment of the Afrika Korps?
That would depend on both what Germany is capable of and also what other players can and decide to do - or attempt? Expect Italy to still try and conquer Greece and probably get a bloody nose initially but with the commitment in N Norway does Britain send forces to Greece? [Or possibly simply Metaxas doesn't die when he did]. In which case Hitler might not intervene and Italy probably slowly grinds down the Greeks by sheer weight of numbers or Hitler still does to secure his southern flank before Barbarossa. [Since he was paranoid about the Polesti oil fields and a British intervention in the region]. I take Barbarossa as a given barring massive changes as Hitler was so ideologically committed to it and the destruction of the USSR.
If Britain is seeking to maintain a N Norway bastion then does it had the resources spare for Operation Compass and/or actions against Italian East Africa? If only one which does it choose? You could see a prolonged sitskrieg on the Egyptian border if Britain is committing what spare forces it has to E Africa and between inability to project supplies forward and the drain of a prolonged Greek campaign Italian forces just bunker down in their outposts just across the border into Egypt as OTL.
Just a thought with this scenario - if Greece is slowly devoured by Italy, probably with the final straw being Bulgaria jumping in against the Greeks would Britain seek to maintain a Greek remnant in Crete and possibly some of the other Aegean islands? That could have both benefits in terms of forward bases and problems in terms of having to supply the position in the face of Axis air pressure in mainland Greece and possibly also sea operations.
At sea Britain is going to be more drained as its going to have to supply the Norway bastion and also protect those supply lines. Which will be vulnerable to subs, air units based in southern Norway and possibly raids by German surface ships. Something like one of the twins let alone Bismarck when available could mean every convoy needs substantial heavy gun escort even if their just a threat. It may become a bit easier when the Soviets are attacked as supplying them by the Arctic route is going to be easier also German forces operating from N Finland could still be a problem.
Elsewhere how does the other big players react, especially Japan, the US and possibly Stalin, who might be even more complacent or possibly approach Hitler offering support against Norway, which of course would mean a Soviet presence in N Finland at least? Would Adolph be willing to throw the Finns to the dogs - especially if possibly he's expecting to crush the Soviets withing a year? It would make for a complex Soviet/western relationship if the two are hostile belligerents when a German back-stab occurs. Although I suspect such an approach from Stalin is unlikely as he wants Britain to tie up the Axis as long as possible.
There might be more sympathy in the US for Britain helping to defend Norway but probably funds are going to be drained at a more rapid rate so its probable that Lend-Lease might have to come in a little earlier. Although its less likely TTL that Britain will be aiding Greece directly or performing operation Compass which showed that Britain could take the offensive, which boosted moral in Britain and probably support in the US.
Japan is unlikely to make any dramatic steps at the moment but Britain could be forced to close the Burma road somewhat longer - albeit that the OTL closure was largely during a period when not only was there the greatest fear of an invasion of Britain by Germany tying down resources but also during the monsoon period so the route was largely unusable.
One other option is possibly the continued resistance of the Norwegians could prompt more resentment at Vichy France and hence some more French colonies going Free French earlier? In terms of Germany how does Hitler allocate resources? Does he give an higher priority to seeking to force Britain to terms - by air attack and threat of invasion - or clearing up the Norway bastion - or being Hitler decide to do both? Does either of the two latter routes make a difference to the war over Britain as I would expect at least some level of attack on Britain.
Anyway don't know what other issues might come up but a few ideas that come to mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Jun 4, 2023 22:48:07 GMT
In which case Hitler might not intervene and Italy probably slowly grinds down the Greeks by sheer weight of numbers I am glad you acknowledge this is the likely outcome rather than some permanent great victory saving their homeland or even liberating Albania. Many would prognosticate that, but that ignores that the Greeks were finally pushed back from Albania by the time the Germans intervened, and that numbers and naval superiority account. It overplays the Italian incompetence/cowardice/bad luck meme to the point of almost racism. The Italians did terribly because they planned and prepared terribly. When battlefield 'feedback' became clear they gradually got their caca together and began to perform in line with their relative material superiority. If Britain is seeking to maintain a N Norway bastion then does it had the resources spare for Operation Compass and/or actions against Italian East Africa? If only one which does it choose? You could see a prolonged sitskrieg on the Egyptian border if Britain is committing what spare forces it has to E Africa and between inability to project supplies forward and the drain of a prolonged Greek campaign Italian forces just bunker down in their outposts just across the border into Egypt as OTL. Great points- If choosing, I think the British would probably regard the forward most Italian positions, East Africa, as most dangerous, most achievable to conquer. would Britain seek to maintain a Greek remnant in Crete and possibly some of the other Aegean islands Possibly, but the British would have to invest naval and air resources into this fight in a serious way before the Italians invested serious naval, air, and ground resources on Crete and got around to capturing on-island airfields. I acknowledge the Italians had plenty of other grinding work to do before that, and the British would be capable of interfering with their ops in Crete or the Cyclades, but the Italians don't need to follow a strict operational order necessarily. It may become a bit easier when the Soviets are attacked as supplying them by the Arctic route is going to be easier also German forces operating from N Finland could still be a problem. This brings up a great question - would the Germans be operating from N Finland, without possessing N Norway and GLOCs and SLOCs across it? I don't doubt Berlin would press hard to get Finland back into the war, and Finland may still fall in to a continuation war, but if Germany can only supply Finland through the Baltic and not the Arctic, wouldn't it more likely make its combat sector of Finland *southern* Finland rather than northern Finland? Of course that presupposes that concentrated German attacks, featuring heavy firepower and maneuver from already occupied Norway, possibly by sea, possibly by airborne, or possibly forced through Sweden or Finland or granted by the Soviet Union, don't wipe out the northern Norway redoubt before Barbarossa is even launched. I mean, might we see a spring 1941 occupation of Sweden to get at Norway and guard against the chance of Swedish betrayal? Elsewhere how does the other big players react, especially Japan, the US and possibly Stalin, who might be even more complacent or possibly approach Hitler offering support against Norway, which of course would mean a Soviet presence in N Finland at least? Would Adolph be willing to throw the Finns to the dogs - especially if possibly he's expecting to crush the Soviets withing a year? It would make for a complex Soviet/western relationship if the two are hostile belligerents when a German back-stab occurs. It certainly would make for short and long term complications for the Norwegians, Allies, Germans, and Soviets, even while giving the Germans some short-term advantages. One option not involving throwing Finns under the bus would involve simply allowing Nazi aircraft and ships to use Soviet territory as additional vectors of attack on the redoubt, although I don't know how decisive that would be. One other option is possibly the continued resistance of the Norwegians could prompt more resentment at Vichy France and hence some more French colonies going Free French earlier? Could be interesting. - It would be most dramatic if it cause a really big or important one like Indochina or Syria-Lebanon, or West Africa to flip. Earlier flipping of New Caledonia, Martinique, Tahiti, or St. Pierre isn't *that* big a deal, even though it's not nothing. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jun 5, 2023 16:04:23 GMT
In which case Hitler might not intervene and Italy probably slowly grinds down the Greeks by sheer weight of numbers I am glad you acknowledge this is the likely outcome rather than some permanent great victory saving their homeland or even liberating their homeland. Many would prognosticate that, but that ignores that the Greeks were finally pushed back from Albania by the time the Germans intervened, and that numbers and naval superiority account. It overplays the Italian incompetence/cowardice/bad luck meme to the point of almost racism. The Italians did terribly because they planned and prepared terribly. When battlefield 'feedback' became clear they gradually got their caca together and began to perform in line with their relative material superiority. If Britain is seeking to maintain a N Norway bastion then does it had the resources spare for Operation Compass and/or actions against Italian East Africa? If only one which does it choose? You could see a prolonged sitskrieg on the Egyptian border if Britain is committing what spare forces it has to E Africa and between inability to project supplies forward and the drain of a prolonged Greek campaign Italian forces just bunker down in their outposts just across the border into Egypt as OTL. Great points- If choosing, I think the British would probably regard the forward most Italian positions, East Africa, as most dangerous, most achievable to conquer. would Britain seek to maintain a Greek remnant in Crete and possibly some of the other Aegean islands Possibly, but the British would have to invest naval and air resources into this fight in a serious way before the Italians invested serious naval, air, and ground resources on Crete and got around to capturing on-island airfields. I acknowledge the Italians had plenty of other grinding work to do before that, and the British would be capable of interfering with their ops in Crete or the Cyclades, but the Italians don't need to follow a strict operational order necessarily. It may become a bit easier when the Soviets are attacked as supplying them by the Arctic route is going to be easier also German forces operating from N Finland could still be a problem. This brings up a great question - would the Germans be operating from N Finland, without possessing N Norway and GLOCs and SLOCs across it? I don't doubt Berlin would press hard to get Finland back into the war, and Finland may still fall in to a continuation war, but if Germany can only supply Finland through the Baltic and not the Arctic, wouldn't it more likely make its combat sector of Finland *southern* Finland rather than northern Finland? Of course that presupposes that concentrated German attacks, featuring heavy firepower and maneuver from already occupied Norway, possibly by sea, possibly by airborne, or possibly forced through Sweden or Finland or granted by the Soviet Union, don't wipe out the northern Norway redoubt before Barbarossa is even launched. I mean, might we see a spring 1941 occupation of Sweden to get at Norway and guard against the chance of Swedish betrayal? Elsewhere how does the other big players react, especially Japan, the US and possibly Stalin, who might be even more complacent or possibly approach Hitler offering support against Norway, which of course would mean a Soviet presence in N Finland at least? Would Adolph be willing to throw the Finns to the dogs - especially if possibly he's expecting to crush the Soviets withing a year? It would make for a complex Soviet/western relationship if the two are hostile belligerents when a German back-stab occurs. It certainly would make for short and long term complications for the Norwegians, Allies, Germans, and Soviets, even while giving the Germans some short-term advantages. One option not involving throwing Finns under the bus would involve simply allowing Nazi aircraft and ships to use Soviet territory as additional vectors of attack on the redoubt, although I don't know how decisive that would be. One other option is possibly the continued resistance of the Norwegians could prompt more resentment at Vichy France and hence some more French colonies going Free French earlier? Could be interesting. - It would be most dramatic if it cause a really big or important one like Indochina or Syria-Lebanon, or West Africa to flip. Earlier flipping of New Caledonia, Martinique, Tahiti, or St. Pierre isn't *that* big a deal, even though it's not nothing.
In agreement with what you say. E Africa would be seen as a greater threat than a few isolated and static Italian camps in the western desert. Also that while trying to maintain Crete for an independent Greece government would have some attractions it would be bloody expensive to maintain.
If the Norway bastion holds out then that does complicate the situation for Finland as while they would want to join a war against the Soviets to regain their lost territories and secure themselves somewhat against new aggression but if that means war on their northern border with the western allies and their neighbour then that would be an issue for some. Also if Hitler tries a winter, or even spring invasion of Sweden to secure control of Scandinavia its likely to be costly, both in military and diplomatic terms and also because I could see the Swedes denying at least some of the assets Germany hopes to control by demolition/destruction. - I can't see Stalin allowing any real numbers of German forces at all into the Murmansk region and IIRC they would have to cross Finnish territory to get to Norway - unless using amphibious attacks, which so far north is likely to be very risky.
Also agree that if any French colonies go FF earlier then a lot depends on which ones and when. It could actually be a serious complexity if say FIC were to flip - possibly prompted by pressure from Japan for access to it - which would put Britain in an awkward position with Japan! Definitely however FNA or more likely FWA would be a useful gain, especially if the latter included the Dakar region where there are a number of ships, a very useful naval base and IIRC a fair amount of French gold which had been evacuated to there before France itself fell. Syria would be useful as avoiding a potential trouble point but less relevant in the longer term.
Steve
|
|
but let's try to continue the exploration.