This may be a longshot... but here goes.(Details of Hitler's death deleted)
Goering had been designated as Hitler's successor at theGoering gets informed of the following:
beginning of the war, and in November 1940 is at just about
the zenith of his power and reputation.
So he takes over with no real opposition.
What follows?
lesliem...@gmail.com
Rich Rostrom
- Goering's OTL rivals are now his subordinates. Consequently, he may be less inclined
to favor Luftwaffe-centric policies and adopt a more combined-arms approach.
The Luftwaffe was still Goering's "baby", so I'd suggest that with him now in charge of
the Reich, there would have been more emphasis on experimental aircraft with more
of them going into production.
This is both good and bad for Germany, as while better aircraft are... better, the cost
and time involved in getting them into action means fewer conventional aircraft.
On Sunday, 6 November 2022 at 13:43:20 UTC-4, Rich Rostrom wrote:
This may be a longshot... but here goes.
(Details of Hitler's death deleted)
Goering had been designated as Hitler's successor at the
beginning of the war, and in November 1940 is at just about
the zenith of his power and reputation.
So he takes over with no real opposition.
What follows?
Goering gets informed of the following:
- The UK is out of Europe. Italy is fighting the UK in North Africa, and it looks as though they are struggling.
- The Battle of Britain is over, but the Luftwaffe has the winter to learn its lessons and gear up for Round 2, which Goering wants.
- The USSR is rearming, Goering is not aware by how much, but he is aware. Stalin is also making some territorial "suggestions" that involve a lot of Soviet expansion. For the short term, Hitler tried to get them to expand into British-held Middle East and India. I see Goering trying the same policy, minus Ribbentrop.
- Germany is dependent on the USSR for oil and other raw materials. His generals offer the prospect of a 3, maybe 5 month victory, but this may change depending on how extensively Stalin arms.
- The U-boat campaign is at a lull, with the RN convoy system in place. Donitz is proposing a new "wolf-pack" tactic, to counter this.
The way I see it, Goering has two clear options: See if he can knock out the UK next year, or invade the USSR and knock that out by winter.
On 3/29/23 12:34 PM, lesliem...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 6 November 2022 at 13:43:20 UTC-4, Rich Rostrom wrote:
This may be a longshot... but here goes.
(Details of Hitler's death deleted)
Goering had been designated as Hitler's successor at the
beginning of the war, and in November 1940 is at just about
the zenith of his power and reputation.
So he takes over with no real opposition.
What follows?
Goering gets informed of the following:
- The UK is out of Europe. Italy is fighting the UK in North Africa, and it looks as though they are struggling.
As of November 1940, Italy has moved a short distance into Egypt, and
the British have not counterattacked. OTOH Italy has invaded Greece.
- The Battle of Britain is over, but the Luftwaffe has the winter to learn its lessons and gear up for Round 2, which Goering wants.
The battle for air supremacy si over (Germany lost), but the Blitz is
going full steam. At some point Goering will try again to break Fighter >Command.
- The USSR is rearming, Goering is not aware by how much, but he is aware. Stalin is also making some territorial "suggestions" that involve a lot of Soviet expansion. For the short term, Hitler tried to get them to expand into British-held Middle East and India. I see Goering trying the same policy, minus Ribbentrop.
Very likely.
- Germany is dependent on the USSR for oil and other raw materials. His generals offer the prospect of a 3, maybe 5 month victory, but this may change depending on how extensively Stalin arms.
Some of them. Others are much less sanguine. Starting a second front
while Britain is undefeated doesn't seem like good idea, except to
someone with a severe case of victory disease. OTL, Goering was strongly >opposed to BARBAROSSA, but never dared say so to Hitler.
- The U-boat campaign is at a lull, with the RN convoy system in place. Donitz is proposing a new "wolf-pack" tactic, to counter this.
Losses are already biting, and the spring of 1941 will be devastating.
The way I see it, Goering has two clear options: See if he can knock out the UK next year, or invade the USSR and knock that out by winter.
IMHO Goering won't attack the USSR. He'll try to bomb Britain into >submission.The Blitz will continue indefinitely. He'll also try to
get Spain into the war. I've read somehwere he disliked Franco;
maybe he orchestrates a coup to replace him.
(rest of post deleted)- Germany is dependent on the USSR for oil and other raw materials. His generals offer the prospect of a 3, maybe 5 month victory, but this may change depending on how extensively Stalin arms.Some of them. Others are much less sanguine. Starting a second front
while Britain is undefeated doesn't seem like good idea, except to
someone with a severe case of victory disease. OTL, Goering was strongly opposed to BARBAROSSA, but never dared say so to Hitler.
On Thursday, 27 April 2023 at 10:44:53 UTC-3, Rich Rostrom wrote:
(stuff deleted)
- Germany is dependent on the USSR for oil and other raw materials. His generals offer the prospect of a 3, maybe 5 month victory, but this may change depending on how extensively Stalin arms.
Some of them. Others are much less sanguine. Starting a second front
while Britain is undefeated doesn't seem like good idea, except to
someone with a severe case of victory disease. OTL, Goering was strongly
opposed to BARBAROSSA, but never dared say so to Hitler.
(rest of post deleted)
OTL, Goering didn't have the information Hitler had.
Hitler deliberately kept information compartmentalized
within competing ministries so that he alone had the big
picture, not to mention he could lie to his subordinates
in order to further his own preferred course of action. I
agree Goering was not as reckless as Hitler, but he may
change his tune once he sees how Stalin is exploiting the
war against the UK.
That's the problem with the UK at the moment. Goering may
be convinced he can win, but sooner or later he is going
to realize he is fighting a war of attrition...
...where broadcasts of lopsided victories...
...will be overshadowed by
knowledge of missing sons, boyfriends, and husbands...
not to mention the continued rationing.
Also, the people Goering chooses to staff his government
are going to matter. IIRC, Goering's staffing of the
Luftwaffe was poor enough for at least one historian to
list it as a factor for Germany losing the BoB. Granted,
Goering should be able to replace Ribbentrop with someone
more trustworthy, if not more competent. How is Goering
going to get rid of Himmler without bloodshed?
Does Goering trust Bormann?
Goebbels should be easy enough to trust, or at least monitor.
Does Goering keep Hitler's "Divide and Rule" approach as a--
guarantee of personal safety, or does he risk allowing
freer information among his own inner circle so people
could better offer informed courses of action? What about
the Holocaust?
I don't see what additional information would make invadingAs Hitler's successor, Goering is going to receive Stalin's demands to alter the Neutrality Pact to allow Stalin to expand westward. He is going to get reports of increasing Soviet forces on the border.
the USSR more desirable.
The Blitz was also a battle of attrition, as was the Battle of the Atlantic. North Africa might allow a chance to Blitz the British there, but from what I've heard of Goering's view, he wanted to knock the UK out of the war as directly as possible. He saw North Africa as Italy's problem, so I do not see much support for an Afrika Korps.That's the problem with the UK at the moment. Goering mayThe BoB was a battle of attrition, but by November 1940 it
be convinced he can win, but sooner or later he is going
to realize he is fighting a war of attrition...
was over and the Blitz was on. Bomber Command was attacking
Germany, but at this time it was relatively ineffective.
To the Germans, the British would issue exaggerated claims of Luftwaffe effectiveness, partially as a means to get them to listen, and also as a means of encouraging them to continue the BoB....where broadcasts of lopsided victories...The British government issued wildly exaggerated claims
of bombers shot down.
(rest of post deleted)Does Goering trust Bormann?Bormann is nothing without Hitler.
To the Germans, the British would issue exaggerated claims of
Luftwaffe effectiveness, partially as a means to get them to listen,
and also as a means of encouraging them to continue the BoB.
Historically, the British weathered the storm.
In this ATL, the Germans had a string of spectacular victories under
Hitler, and now with Goering at the helm, the war would start to fall
into a war of attrition.
On 5/9/23 10:27 PM, lesliem...@gmail.com wrote:Perhaps not as the BBC, but the British did exaggerate Luftwaffe effectiveness in certain areas to the Germans. The example I was given was one Luftwaffe raid where the Germans claimed to have crippled an RAF air base for 1 week while shooting down 10 fighters. The British broadcast to the Germans that the airbase was crippled for 2 weeks and 20 RAF fighters were shot down.
To the Germans, the British would issue exaggerated claims of????
Luftwaffe effectiveness, partially as a means to get them to listen,
and also as a means of encouraging them to continue the BoB.
In BBC broadcasts to Germany?
How would this be be separate from otherThat depends on who gets which message. It is one thing for the British to broadcast news of a crippled air base to Germany, while it is quite another to give a few choice representatives a tour of the airbase and show how functional it really is.
British government statements? In this period, Britain was frantically working to keep the support of the US, hold the support of the
Dominions, win over support in French colonies, encourage resistance
in occupied Europe, and deter neutrals from supporting Germany or even joining the Axis. Exaggerating the effects of the Blitz would work
against all those goals.
And the British did not want the Battle of Britain to continue. By mid- September, Fighter Command was on the brink of collapse.By mid-September, Air Group 11 had more fighters than the Luftwaffe opposing it, with around 2.4 pilots per aircraft as opposed to the Luftwaffe's 1.8 ratio. Yes Fighter Command was exhausted, but the Luftwaffe was bled white.
When ChurchillIt started mid-September, while the Battle of Britain was raging, and was launched with the side purpose of reducing German casualties, as Goering hoped he could attack undefended areas in the UK and thus suffer fewer casualties.
ordered the "retaliation bombing" of Berlin, it was with the conscious expectation that Hitler would redirect German attacks from RAF bases
to British cities, especially London. He said "London can take it."
The Blitz was _not_ part of the Battle of Britain.
...in large part to the unsustainable casualties the Luftwaffe was suffering.Historically, the British weathered the storm.Germany called off the Blitz
and sent the Luftwaffe against the USSR....in June 1941. Even if Goering continues BoB round 2, it will be after the UK has had months to recover, and it has recovered faster than the Luftwaffe. Goering overestimated the Luftwaffe's effectiveness, and is likely to repeat certain mistakes he made in the original BoB.
This occurs after the Italians suffer their string of setbacks in North Africa. Granted, this keeps the UK off the continent proper, but it stops at the sea shore, much like it did with Napoleon. Again, aside from keeping the UK off the continent, this does not knock the UK out of the war, and Goering is faced with BoB round 2, or Barbarossa and all the resources a quick theoretical victory would provide.In this ATL, the Germans had a string of spectacular victories under Hitler, and now with Goering at the helm, the war would start to fallThere's no particular reason why the Balkans/Greece campaign of 1941
into a war of attrition.
should not play out as OTL: another spectacular victory.
Perhaps not as the BBC, but the British did exaggerate Luftwaffe effectiveness in certain areas to the Germans. The example I wasCite? How _did_ Britain "broadcast" this misinformation to the Germans?
given was one Luftwaffe raid where the Germans claimed to have
crippled an RAF air base for 1 week while shooting down 10 fighters.
The British broadcast to the Germans that the airbase was crippled
for 2 weeks and 20 RAF fighters were shot down.
...in large part to the unsustainable casualties the Luftwaffe > was suffering.Cite? British nightfighters were minimally effective in 1941; their AI
Every source I have ever read says that the Blitz was halted because the >aircraft were needed for BARBAROSSA.
On 5/21/23 1:13 PM, lesliem...@gmail.com wrote:My source was a WW2 veteran who led an AAA unit during WW2. He was a guest lecturer in a history course I took in University.
Perhaps not as the BBC, but the British did exaggerate Luftwaffe effectiveness in certain areas to the Germans. The example I wasCite?
given was one Luftwaffe raid where the Germans claimed to have
crippled an RAF air base for 1 week while shooting down 10 fighters.
The British broadcast to the Germans that the airbase was crippled
for 2 weeks and 20 RAF fighters were shot down.
How _did_ Britain "broadcast" this misinformation to the Germans?It was by radio. The British broadcast their propaganda to the Germans both directly (think of an Allied version of Axis Sally), and via "rogue" broadcasters, who actually worked for the British (One was a supposedly disgruntled, rather foul-mouthed, old German officer who criticized Hitler's performance, while repeatedly referring to Churchill as "that drunken Jew-loving bastard.").
This example is the British telling the Germans they did better thanYep, part of the reason was to get the Germans to listen to British propaganda sources, either knowingly or unknowingly.
they thought they had.
What was the actual damage to the base and actual RAF aircraft lost?Unknown, the lecturer stated that as an example of British propaganda starting to gets its act together (Step 1: Encourage the intended audience to listen and believe).
_Possibly_ the British did something like this to encourage the Germans...or, since the British claimed the base was out of action, it would encourage the Luftwaffe to concentrate on other, hopefully harder targets. Initially, there were RAF structures vulnerable to air attack that the British scrambled to harden.
to repeat an ineffectual attack.
https://www.historynet.com/battle-of-the-beams-the-time-germany-devised-an-invisible-weapon-that-could-devastate-britain/...in large part to the unsustainable casualties the Luftwaffe > was suffering.Cite?
British nightfighters were minimally effective in 1941; their AIFrom the above webpage:
radar was primitive and GCI was also in its infancy.
Every source I have ever read says that the Blitz was halted because the aircraft were needed for BARBAROSSA.That was one reason, but it wasn't the only one.
It was by radio. The British broadcast their
propaganda to the Germans both directly (think of an
Allied version of Axis Sally), and via "rogue"
broadcasters, who actually worked for the British (One
was a supposedly disgruntled, rather foul-mouthed, old
German officer who criticized Hitler's performance,
while repeatedly referring to Churchill as "that
drunken Jew-loving bastard.").
At the start of May 1941...
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 08:58:38 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
2 files (6,679K bytes) |
| Messages: | 265,062 |