oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Jan 9, 2024 16:39:27 GMT
D-Day June 6, 1943 Had this idea for a while. As some of you know the US tried to convinced Winston Churchill and His majesty’s Brass an early landing on Europe was the best way to win WW II. IMHO, the Brits were right but I must admit I am no expert on this. So this ATL is far more fiction, at present, than it will become as I Research this subject.
I am open and welcome your comments. I promise I will think long and hard about what you are generous enough to share with me. BUT, as usual, I warn you I am writing this and therefore will decide to use or ignore you based on how your opinion works with my NARRATIVE.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 9, 2024 16:45:31 GMT
D-Day June 6, 1943 Had this idea for a while. As some of you know the US tried to convinced Winston Churchill and His majesty’s Brass an early landing on Europe was the best way to win WW II. IMHO, the Brits were right but I must admit I am no expert on this. So this ATL is far more fiction, at present, than it will become as I Research this subject.
I am open and welcome your comments. I promise I will think long and hard about what you are generous enough to share with me. BUT, as usual, I warn you I am writing this and therefore will decide to use or ignore you based on how your opinion works with my NARRATIVE. Had to go true some pages but i found a 2016 thread i once made called: What If: the Allies Had Invaded France in 1943Which reads like this: On a mid-spring morning in 1943, 160,000 Allied troops storm ashore in Normandy to create the “Second Front” long desired by American strategists and long demanded by the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. In the days that follow, additional Allied divisions pour into the beachhead while the Germans attempt to throw the invaders back into the sea. Overhead, hundreds of Allied and German fighters vie for control of the air. Assisted by artificial harbors constructed in the waters just offshore, the Allies win the “battle of the buildup,” creating an enclave the Germans cannot breach. And, thanks in no small measure to the new P-51 Mustang—a superb fighter with extended range—the Allies also win a crushing victory over the Luftwaffe.
Hammered by massive Soviet assaults on the Eastern Front, the Germans are unable to transfer enough troops to prevent an Allied breakout. By late autumn, the Allies have raced across France and reached the Siegfried Line along Ger-many’s western border. Trapped in a vise between the Eastern and Western Fronts, Germany capitulates in the spring of 1944.
The above scenario is based upon two revisionist works, both published in 1980: 1943: The Victory that Never Was by John Griggs, and Walter S. Dunn Jr.’s Second Front Now: 1943. Grigg and Dunn argued that by postponing an invasion of northwest Europe until the spring of 1944, the British and Americans committed a major strategic blunder that delayed the defeat of Nazi Germany by at least a year. Rather than commit to large-scale operations in Sicily and Italy, they should have executed Operation Roundup, the initial Allied conception for a 1943 invasion of France.
Although some historians scoffed—one reviewer sneered that Grigg “has been swept out of reality into a Cloud Cuckoo Land”—others were more respectful. The two authors made a reasonable case for Roundup’s feasibility. They pointed out that the Allies possessed adequate sealift capacity—the July 1943 landing in Sicily was actually somewhat larger than the D-Day invasion in June 1944. The Western Allies had a total of 63 divisions potentially available for a cross-Channel landing and buildup. The Germans had just 44 divisions in France, most of which were either badly under strength or “static divisions” devoid of mobility.
The Allies already had on the drawing board the artificial harbors that historically aided the buildup after D-Day. They had already designed the specialized armored vehicles used in the historical invasion. And the British had already discovered that the American P-51 could outperform every other propeller-driven fighter of the war, thereby supplying the air cover needed to protect the invasion.
If the Allies had the ability to execute Roundup, why did they not seize the opportunity? Dunn offered the far-fetched theory that the Western Allies intentionally postponed a cross-Channel attack so that the totalitarian regimes of Germany and the Soviet Union would bash each other’s brains out. Much more plausibly, Grigg painted a picture of strategic drift. When Roosevelt arrived for the Casablanca Conference, he had not rejected the possibility of a 1943 invasion. Nor had Churchill. But the prime minister allowed himself to be swayed by Field Marshal Alan Brooke, chief of the imperial general staff, who was the real advocate of a Mediterranean strategy—but whom Churchill could of course have overruled.
The Americans, for their part, allowed themselves to be persuaded that before other major operations could take place, the German enclave in Tunisia must be crushed. This did not occur until May 1943—coincidentally the same month in which the Allies formally agreed to defer a cross-Channel attack until 1944. But in effect, the agreement simply ratified a decision that had already been made by default. Had the Allies kept their attention focused on Roundup, Grigg argued, they could have contained the Germans with fewer troops and relied upon the naval interdiction of supplies to compel a surrender (which the German commander Hans-Jurgen von Armin stated would have occurred by June).
Morris Janowitz, the dean of military sociologists, praised Grigg’s analysis as a strong example of the ways in which institutional and organizational factors can undermine the realization of a nominally agreed-upon objective—in this case the concentration on defeating Germany first (far too much manpower and shipping went to the Pacific to be consistent with this goal), by means of a cross-Channel attack at the earliest possible moment. That was a notable achievement. Some-times the value of a counterfactual is to illuminate dynamics that a simple historical narrative would have overlooked.
But both Grigg and Dunn overlooked some key factors that would make a 1943 invasion—and certainly a swift defeat of Germany—less viable. First, serious planning for a cross-Channel attack did not begin until March 1943. True, a committee had begun to consider the matter in the summer of 1942, but it was soon forced to turn full attention to plans for Operation Torch. It is highly unlikely that an invasion could have been planned and successfully executed in a few short months.
Second, even if one postulates that robust planning for Roundup continued from mid-1942 onward, in early 1943 American troops were ill-trained and far less prepared for combat than they would be in 1944. Third, it is unlikely that the Allies would have hit upon a command arrangement that, historically, proved vital to D-Day’s success: the appointment of a supreme commander with full authority over all ground, naval, and air forces. It is likely that neither Eisenhower nor anyone else would have amassed enough credibility by mid-1943 to wield sufficient clout for the role. Without that authority, it would have been impossible to induce the chiefs of the American and British strategic bombing efforts to suspend their air campaign against Germany long enough to execute the so-called Transportation Plan—the limiting of the Wehrmacht’s ability to rapidly reinforce coastal areas through the destruction of key bridges and railroad marshaling yards.
Thus, although it is possible, even probable, that Roundup would have secured a foothold in France, that is all that would have occurred. It would not have achieved the breakout and decisive victory that historically followed the D-Day invasion.
|
|
oscssw
Senior chief petty officer
Posts: 967
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by oscssw on Jan 9, 2024 16:56:46 GMT
Thanks The Rock that will be of help.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 9, 2024 17:09:30 GMT
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jan 9, 2024 22:33:05 GMT
I made a thread on the issue, back in 2016, where I argued that an attempt in 1943 would almost certainly end in failure and a decision to try it was possibly the last practical non-ASB decision that might result in a less than total defeat for Nazi Germany. Digging back its here if any help.
|
|
575
Captain
There is no Purgatory for warcriminals - they go directly to Hell!
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 4,106
|
Post by 575 on Jan 10, 2024 10:22:35 GMT
Looking forward to the Narrative. I have accumulated some related stuff - have a look, if You like: Having found Dale Cozort's old web-page which contain a take on a delayed D-Day for two weeks I decided to do a scenario for SPIs much lauded Battle for Germany game/simulation but researching the subject I found that due to time the day would have to be shifted either a month forward or backwards. The Para's needed a full Moon to be able to something on the ground and the invasion fleet a high tide to get stuff ashore which lead me to this which is a Moon phase calender 1900-2035; invasions past and future made possible. Next up the Allied Airforces - the Mustang III/B - C, didn't become operational untill around year turn 1943-44. It is needed to bring the Airwar around to defeat the Luftwaffe (Big Week and stuff). The British had been building Landing Craft since 1939. The US were soon following suit - I have/had somewhere on the PC a statistic of Allied Landing Craft production during WWII. If I find that I'll be back. Archieved web-page with some USN info and the modernized site.
|
|
575
Captain
There is no Purgatory for warcriminals - they go directly to Hell!
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 4,106
|
Post by 575 on Jan 10, 2024 10:43:04 GMT
Not the page I was looking for but at least the US production no's table 99 for Landing Craft.
|
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Jan 10, 2024 14:38:59 GMT
The U.S. learned more on how amphibious operations from the Pacific. Well technically, Operation Torch was an amphibious landing as well. I read from an article in 2016 that the Battle of Tarawa in 1943 is where the U.S. learned lessons on how to conduct the D-Day landings.
Meanwhile, the timeline For All Time has the Allies conducting D-Day in 1943 with disastrous results.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 10, 2024 18:48:27 GMT
Meanwhile, the timeline For All Time has the Allies conducting D-Day in 1943 with disastrous results. I would agree. Among them the Luftwaffe is still a force as there is no massive strategic bombing campaign that in OTL crippled the Luftwaffe’s fighter force, making the Normandy invasion possible, also in OTL in the weeks before D-Day, the Eighth Air Force hit German troop concentrations, airfields, and transportation targets, i do not see that happening in a 1943 landing.
|
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Jan 11, 2024 3:26:05 GMT
Meanwhile, the timeline For All Time has the Allies conducting D-Day in 1943 with disastrous results. I would agree. Among them the Luftwaffe is still a force as there is no massive strategic bombing campaign that in OTL crippled the Luftwaffe’s fighter force, making the Normandy invasion possible, also in OTL in the weeks before D-Day, the Eighth Air Force hit German troop concentrations, airfields, and transportation targets, i do not see that happening in a 1943 landing. The Dieppe Raid in 1942 showed how formidable the Atlantic Wall would be. For a D-Day to happen in 1943, we might need a POD that slightly alters WWII. Perhaps the U.S. has more experience with amphibious warfare, increased production of Higgins Boats, LVTs, and LCTs, and an earlier increase in the military with focus on both aircraft and amphibious warfare assets.
|
|
575
Captain
There is no Purgatory for warcriminals - they go directly to Hell!
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 4,106
|
Post by 575 on Jan 11, 2024 8:06:57 GMT
I would agree. Among them the Luftwaffe is still a force as there is no massive strategic bombing campaign that in OTL crippled the Luftwaffe’s fighter force, making the Normandy invasion possible, also in OTL in the weeks before D-Day, the Eighth Air Force hit German troop concentrations, airfields, and transportation targets, i do not see that happening in a 1943 landing. The Dieppe Raid in 1942 showed how formidable the Atlantic Wall would be. For a D-Day to happen in 1943, we might need a POD that slightly alters WWII. Perhaps the U.S. has more experience with amphibious warfare, increased production of Higgins Boats, LVTs, and LCTs, and an earlier increase in the military with focus on both aircraft and amphibious warfare assets. The Dieppe Raid did that but the Atlantic Wall wasn't the 1944 wall by June 1943 as Rommel hadn't been appointed commander of defences and initiated improvements.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jan 11, 2024 16:17:24 GMT
The Dieppe Raid in 1942 showed how formidable the Atlantic Wall would be. For a D-Day to happen in 1943, we might need a POD that slightly alters WWII. Perhaps the U.S. has more experience with amphibious warfare, increased production of Higgins Boats, LVTs, and LCTs, and an earlier increase in the military with focus on both aircraft and amphibious warfare assets. The Dieppe Raid did that but the Atlantic Wall wasn't the 1944 wall by June 1943 as Rommel hadn't been appointed commander of defences and initiated improvements.
True but not only are the allies a lot weaker in terms of numbers and quality than OTL 44 but the Germans are almost certainly going to be stronger than OTL 43. Both because they have more forces available than OTL because their not having to commit forces to Italy and the Balkans as OTL but also because its going to be clear an attack across the channel is coming so expect some build up as a result of that.
|
|
575
Captain
There is no Purgatory for warcriminals - they go directly to Hell!
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 4,106
|
Post by 575 on Jan 11, 2024 17:43:45 GMT
The Dieppe Raid did that but the Atlantic Wall wasn't the 1944 wall by June 1943 as Rommel hadn't been appointed commander of defences and initiated improvements.
True but not only are the allies a lot weaker in terms of numbers and quality than OTL 44 but the Germans are almost certainly going to be stronger than OTL 43. Both because they have more forces available than OTL because their not having to commit forces to Italy and the Balkans as OTL but also because its going to be clear an attack across the channel is coming so expect some build up as a result of that.
I looked up Rommel just to check on dates - actually before being sent to OB West he had a few days in Greece! Seems the Germans were really in the dark as to where the Allies would hit them. Though once the Med settles down quiet the Germans begin guessing - still I expect Hitler to insist on strong defences of Norway. The thing about D-Day was that quite a number of SS and Wehrmacht Panzer Divisions were there recovering following the winter battles in Russia post Op Zitadelle during July.
Also the Germans have just lost more troops in Tunesia than they did at Stalingrad and the Soviets is going to keep on the offensive. They also lost a lot of transports - OTL Hitler decided prior to the Invasion of Sicily to have Operation Zitadelle jump off during July. It was the German Panzer Divisions that had been involved in that and subsequent fighting i Russia that was sent to rest in France - though if the Allies land in Normandy/France 6 June 1943 those formations that was going to Zitadelle may go west instead and present the Allied landing with a much better equipped adversary. So what happens when the Soviets realize the pressure is off?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Jan 12, 2024 19:06:11 GMT
True but not only are the allies a lot weaker in terms of numbers and quality than OTL 44 but the Germans are almost certainly going to be stronger than OTL 43. Both because they have more forces available than OTL because their not having to commit forces to Italy and the Balkans as OTL but also because its going to be clear an attack across the channel is coming so expect some build up as a result of that.
I looked up Rommel just to check on dates - actually before being sent to OB West he had a few days in Greece! Seems the Germans were really in the dark as to where the Allies would hit them. Though once the Med settles down quiet the Germans begin guessing - still I expect Hitler to insist on strong defences of Norway. The thing about D-Day was that quite a number of SS and Wehrmacht Panzer Divisions were there recovering following the winter battles in Russia post Op Zitadelle during July.
Also the Germans have just lost more troops in Tunesia than they did at Stalingrad and the Soviets is going to keep on the offensive. They also lost a lot of transports - OTL Hitler decided prior to the Invasion of Sicily to have Operation Zitadelle jump off during July. It was the German Panzer Divisions that had been involved in that and subsequent fighting i Russia that was sent to rest in France - though if the Allies land in Normandy/France 6 June 1943 those formations that was going to Zitadelle may go west instead and present the Allied landing with a much better equipped adversary. So what happens when the Soviets realize the pressure is off?
That is the interesting question as to with no Operation Torch or later events in the Med there will be a hell of a lot of butterflies.
In the scenario I mentioned earlier the worst case scenario would be that the western powers invaded France prior to Zitadelle prompting Hitler to call off the attack and sending some of the forces west which in turn prompts Stalin to switch from defence to attack. Then while the Red army are still struggling through German defences the western landings collapse into a costly failure allowing the Germans to send further forces east. In that case and with Stalin possibly feeling betrayed by the western powers there is the danger of a separate peace being agreed, or at least western-Soviet relations being a lot cooler than OTL and the entire war in Europe possibly being set back a year or so.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,369
|
Post by lordroel on Jan 12, 2024 19:07:40 GMT
I looked up Rommel just to check on dates - actually before being sent to OB West he had a few days in Greece! Seems the Germans were really in the dark as to where the Allies would hit them. Though once the Med settles down quiet the Germans begin guessing - still I expect Hitler to insist on strong defences of Norway. The thing about D-Day was that quite a number of SS and Wehrmacht Panzer Divisions were there recovering following the winter battles in Russia post Op Zitadelle during July. Also the Germans have just lost more troops in Tunesia than they did at Stalingrad and the Soviets is going to keep on the offensive. They also lost a lot of transports - OTL Hitler decided prior to the Invasion of Sicily to have Operation Zitadelle jump off during July. It was the German Panzer Divisions that had been involved in that and subsequent fighting i Russia that was sent to rest in France - though if the Allies land in Normandy/France 6 June 1943 those formations that was going to Zitadelle may go west instead and present the Allied landing with a much better equipped adversary. So what happens when the Soviets realize the pressure is off?
That is the interesting question as to with no Operation Torch or later events in the Med there will be a hell of a lot of butterflies.
In the scenario I mentioned earlier the worst case scenario would be that the western powers invaded France prior to Zitadelle prompting Hitler to call off the attack and sending some of the forces west which in turn prompts Stalin to switch from defence to attack. Then while the Red army are still struggling through German defences the western landings collapse into a costly failure allowing the Germans to send further forces east. In that case and with Stalin possibly feeling betrayed by the western powers there is the danger of a separate peace being agreed, or at least western-Soviet relations being a lot cooler than OTL and the entire war in Europe possibly being set back a year or so.
Also what you mentioned will result in no invasion of Italy for a while.
|
|