sabaton_

Operation "Unthinkable", yes it was unthinkable

About the nukes: in May 1945 the USA had 0 nukes, remember the first test of a nuke happened until July 1945, they had only 1 and built another 2 in August, only 2 (those dropped over Japan). Then they started a "mass production" but it was slow, no more bombs were dropped over Japan because there were not any other nuke until september, but the war was over by september, they could launch a massive nuclear attack against the soviet union until 1946.

Also, a nuclear attack was possible against Japan because the japanese air power was crippled. Meanwhile in 1945 the air power of the soviet union was really big, they had tons of planes and could prevent those B-29 from reaching Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in reality another nuclear bomb was ready for 19 august, probably destined to Kokura, the original target of Fat Man. We also know of the existance of a list of intended targets to hit 12 cities with nuclear attacks trought septmber and october. Probably for 1946 US would have a fairly big arsenal to attack URSS most important cities. Also about russian capability of stopping a nuclear attack ,  well spitfire griffon, and P51s fully outperformed any soviet fighter

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would America bomb Russia? Considering the disposition of forces it is more likely they would use a nuke on a Soviet troop concentration.

 

Little was known about the radiation and fallout of the nukes in 1945. I could easily see the Americans using a nuke in Germany to stop a break out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bellezza03 said:

 well spitfire griffon, and P51s fully outperformed any soviet fighter

Not really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bellezza03 said:

at the intended flight altitude of B29s hell yes

Only the most common types. The soviets did have unicorn planes that could compete.  Not to mention the griffon spitfire did not have the range to escort b29s anywhere.  

 

I will agree on the long term though because after time said aircraft will cease to exist due to their low numbers and the western allies will have air superiority at high altitude.  Low altitude could be a different story though since the soviets can compete with the western allies very well there.

Edited by fufubear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, sabaton_ said:

About the nukes: in May 1945 the USA had 0 nukes, remember the first test of a nuke happened until July 1945, they had only 1 and built another 2 in August, only 2 (those dropped over Japan). Then they started a "mass production" but it was slow, no more bombs were dropped over Japan because there were not any other nuke until september, but the war was over by september, they could launch a massive nuclear attack against the soviet union until 1946.

Also, a nuclear attack was possible against Japan because the japanese air power was crippled. Meanwhile in 1945 the air power of the soviet union was really big, they had tons of planes and could prevent those B-29 from reaching Russia.

No they couldnt because all the B29 had to do was to take off from France climb to 10k meters and no russian planes would have been able to catch it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tantor57 said:

No they couldnt because all the B29 had to do was to take off from France climb to 10k meters and no russian planes would have been able to catch it there.

They had high altitude planes you know.  They weren't in large numbers but they did exist.

Edited by fufubear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fufubear said:

They had high altitude planes you know.  They weren't in large numbers but they did exist.

 

Which ones? I can recall only MiG-3, but that was a antiquated and mediocre design that was, by 1945, used only by few reserve units if at all, and high altitude version of Yak-9 which was very undergunned for the task.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fufubear said:

They had high altitude planes you know.  They weren't in large numbers but they did exist.

Yes they had planes that could perform between 6 and 8 k but the B29 could very well decide to fly above 10k for safety in which case, no russian piston plane could ever catch it, or they would burn all their fuel in the ascension

Edited by Tantor57

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Sarin said:

 

Which ones? I can recall only MiG-3, but that was a antiquated and mediocre design that was, by 1945, used only by few reserve units if at all, and high altitude version of Yak-9 which was very undergunned for the task.

 

43 minutes ago, Tantor57 said:

Yes they had planes that could perform between 6 and 8 k but the B29 could very well decide to fly above 10k for safety in which case, no russian piston plane could ever catch it, or they would burn all their fuel in the ascension

They had p47s and I am counting prototype planes that could be rushed into production so any of the late mig prototypes (i220, i120, etc), yak 3 vk 108,  yak 3u, and yak 9pd.  Even then their late war planes like the La 7, yak 9u, and yak 3 vk 107 were not too terrible at high altitude.  With coordinated attacks they can bring down a b29 carrying a nuclear payload. The issue would come up for mass bomber formations which would just have to be solved by capturing the closest airfields.

Edited by fufubear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like most historical what-if's there is so much hindsight here.

 

The fact is neither side was ready or willing, too many unknowns on the ground at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, bellezza03 said:

Well in reality another nuclear bomb was ready for 19 august, probably destined to Kokura, the original target of Fat Man. We also know of the existance of a list of intended targets to hit 12 cities with nuclear attacks trought septmber and october. Probably for 1946 US would have a fairly big arsenal to attack URSS most important cities. Also about russian capability of stopping a nuclear attack ,  well spitfire griffon, and P51s fully outperformed any soviet fighter

Nope. The La-7 and the Yak-3 were very good planes. They inflicted heavy losses to the Luftwaffe. 

 

Marcel Albert, second top french ace, said that the Yak-3 was superior to the Spitfire and the P-51.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sabaton_ said:

Nope. The La-7 and the Yak-3 were very good planes. They inflicted heavy losses to the Luftwaffe. 

 

Marcel Albert, second top french ace, said that the Yak-3 was superior to the Spitfire and the P-51.

Yak3 with 580 km/h of speed at deck with engine that at medium alt start dying superior to griffon spits and 51D30s? Nope. Especially at combat altitude of B29s yak3 would be food of a mk14.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, bellezza03 said:

Yak3 with 580 km/h of speed at deck with engine that at medium alt start dying superior to griffon spits and 51D30s? Nope. Especially at combat altitude of B29s yak3 would be food of a mk14.

 

You seen the fuel load on a MK14? Also why would British Spits escort American B29s?

 

Spitfire was an interceptor/air superiority fighter, never an escort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Fallenkezef said:

 

You seen the fuel load on a MK14? Also why would British Spits escort American B29s?

 

Spitfire was an interceptor/air superiority fighter, never an escort.

Considering untinkable as a jointed US/UK attack...it s possible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sabaton_ said:

Nope. The La-7 and the Yak-3 were very good planes. They inflicted heavy losses to the Luftwaffe. 

 

Marcel Albert, second top french ace, said that the Yak-3 was superior to the Spitfire and the P-51.

As low altitude air superiority fighters yes ;) They were also very well suited to Russian doctrine which was fighting low even during bombing raids. Luftwaffe just like the allies had planes more suited to medium high altitude than low altitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just two points for the plane discussion,

1.) How effective would the VVS have been in intercepting the best trained and oiled strategic bomber Fleets of the war, the USAAF and the RAF if they could not even intercept the only German bombing offensive before Operation Citadel in 1943 where the Germans lost only 6 Bombers (losses due AA fire included) while dropping 1050 tons of bombs in several runs on the Gorki tank factories?

2.) How did the VVS would have intercepted the high altitude Bomber Formations without high octane fuel, which was delivered mainly by LL, forcing the pilots in flying at max at travel speeds?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Stop Lend-lease.

> Big week  every railway hub from eastern Germany to the eastern border of Poland, with the VVS track-record of being completely incapable of managing few Luftwaffe units since the second half of 1942, this with a focused will of USAAF and RAF might even have a worse effect that it had on Luftwaffe

>  Watch Soviets trying to hold onto one front for their dear life, and then opening others in Manchuria, Croatia, Austria/Slovenia and Iran to their oil fields.

 

Really, forgetting the fact that Allies wanted to go home, Soviet union could optimistically hold onto european territories for about 6 months tops, and another year to transport the whole Soviet union to stone age, and you dont even need nuclear bomb.

 

RKKA sterngth in january 1945.

 

4a855c86f55b.jpg

 

Soviet union would be incapable of facing Royal navy, nevermind the US navy.

 

RAF had 5 600 fighters in Britain and North-western Europea and 2 300 fighters in mediterranean airforce, and about 3 squadrons of jet Fighters. They could stand-up to VVS by themselves while USAAF could run their own thing destroying deep infrastructure and soviet industry, with some input from British bomber command.

 

And we all know how war goes when you have numerically and/or technically inferior airforce and navy compared to you enemies.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that Allies would face logistical issues of their own, especially regarding the bomber force. B-29 squadrons weren't deployed to Britain, and B-17 and their escorts would have to be moved to east France, low countries and Italy, maybe even Denmark if they'd cooperate, in order to reach Soviet industrial base. That would take some time. Early on, allies would be vulnerable to "blitz", until the Soviets totally wore themselves out. Then it would probably be easy to wear down and beat down the Sovier Union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Don't forget that Allies would face logistical issues of their own, especially regarding the bomber force. B-29 squadrons weren't deployed to Britain, and B-17 and their escorts would have to be moved to east France, low countries and Italy, maybe even Denmark if they'd cooperate, in order to reach Soviet industrial base. That would take some time. Early on, allies would be vulnerable to "blitz", until the Soviets totally wore themselves out. Then it would probably be easy to wear down and beat down the Sovier Union.

 

fig-10.jpg

 

As I said, USAAF and bomber command would be entirely capable of destroying the whole soviet European infrastructure all the way back to USSR, except for North-Eastern Poland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bellezza03 said:

Considering untinkable as a jointed US/UK attack...it s possible

It really wasn't.  The Spitfire could not go far at all even with drop tanks.  Really no European fighter could go really far except for dedicated escorts and those had poorer performance.  The main escorts would be mustangs and N thunderbolts. 

2 hours ago, _Sev_ said:

2.) How did the VVS would have intercepted the high altitude Bomber Formations without high octane fuel, which was delivered mainly by LL, forcing the pilots in flying at max at travel speeds?

The high octane fuel they received was 100 octane.  It wouldn't have made a difference if they didn't have it since I doubt the Russians had worse fuel quality than Japan that relied on 87 or 

92 octane.

7 hours ago, bellezza03 said:

Yak3 with 580 km/h of speed at deck with engine that at medium alt start dying superior to griffon spits and 51D30s? Nope. Especially at combat altitude of B29s yak3 would be food of a mk14.

Yak 3 vk 107, vk 108, or yak 3u.  All either prototyped or entered service by 1945.  If there was any chance of war they would have been developed and produced more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, fufubear said:

It really wasn't.  The Spitfire could not go far at all even with drop tanks.  Really no European fighter could go really far except for dedicated escorts and those had poorer performance.  The main escorts would be mustangs and N thunderbolts. 

The high octane fuel they received was 100 octane.  It wouldn't have made a difference if they didn't have it since I doubt the Russians had worse fuel quality than Japan that relied on 87 or 

92 octane.

Yak 3 vk 107, vk 108, or yak 3u.  All either prototyped or entered service by 1945.  If there was any chance of war they would have been developed and produced more.

p51 H and F8F...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bellezza03 said:

p51 H and F8F...

Neither were in Europe and the yak 3 vk 108, yak 3u, and La 7 m71 could probably handle those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fufubear said:

The high octane fuel they received was 100 octane.  It wouldn't have made a difference if they didn't have it since I doubt the Russians had worse fuel quality than Japan that relied on 87 or 

92 octane.

well atleast for the FW 190 D-9 int heir service the russians used a fuel of lower grade than what the germans used which negatively effected the speed iirc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.