Markus Becker Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Had Spain come in on the German side, we would have seen strategic bombing of Spain by Commonwealth and US forces based in the UK and possibly N. Africa. Quite possibly also carrier strikes against coastal cities on the Atlantic side,... Bomb what? Spain didn't have a lot of industry by any standard. It's much further away. 500+ miles vs. 200+. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 If Germany invades Spain the whole WW2 takes a different turn, because with forces in Spain, they can not attack Russia. Without an Eastern Front the allies have a much harder nut to crack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Had Spain come in on the German side, we would have seen strategic bombing of Spain by Commonwealth and US forces based in the UK and possibly N. Africa. Quite possibly also carrier strikes against coastal cities on the Atlantic side,... Bomb what? Spain didn't have a lot of industry by any standard. It's much further away. 500+ miles vs. 200+. Well, we did, steel in Bilbao, and Barcelona was also a center of industry (including Hispano Suiza as an aircraft engine builder). The blockade would stop production of steel in the North as the best coal came from Wales with Asturias a second best with a very vulnerable sea line. Lack of POL was a real killer anyway. As Ken mentions, you can have Barbarossa or Spain but not both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Becker Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Ok, but how much(or little) was that compared to the German industry? Which was also much closer. The entire Ruhrgebiet and the Saarland are ~300 miles away from the UK. Bilbao is 430, Barcelona 600. That's some long round trips where you have to carry more fuel and thus less bombs. Oh, actually it's more like 500/750 unless you fly over occupied France. Bombing looks inefficient and not necessary with an effective blockade in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn239 Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Any bomb dropped on Spain is one not dropped on Germany. Any carrier raiding Spain is one not opposing the IJN in the Pacific. Relying on Vichy defenses in North Africa proved catastrophic for the Axis in Libya and Tunisia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Well im not sure going all the way to Spain would be quite such a problem when we had 4 engine bombers. Its often forgotten, Bomber Command went a lot further, to Italy, and actually had a lower loss rate for its trouble because the Vichy and Italian Air Defence System wasnt a patch on the German one. If you look up period photos of Bomber Command aircraft, the Italian raids are marked by Ice Cream cones. Im not sure what the Spanish Air Defence system was like in this period. Clearly it had some good aircraft, but Id be surprised if they had good medium AA guns, or had much in the way of radar cover before the Americans started arming them in the 50's and 60's. So if we DID have to bomb Spain, we would likely do what we did over Italy, bomb from low altitude, in which a smaller bomb load is a moot point. Would we have bothered? Maybe in support of a landing, but strategically, like Italy, bombing the peripheries of the Axis were less relevant than hitting the interior. The exception to that would probably be Northern France, but the French did have a highly developed defence industry. Not to deprecate the Spanish, but for the most part clients of someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Werb Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 Had Spain come in on the German side, we would have seen strategic bombing of Spain by Commonwealth and US forces based in the UK and possibly N. Africa. Quite possibly also carrier strikes against coastal cities on the Atlantic side,... Bomb what? Spain didn't have a lot of industry by any standard. It's much further away. 500+ miles vs. 200+. Pretty, historical cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marek Tucan Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 According to the research and works of the late Javier Tussell, Franco amazingly retained interest in joining the Axis as late as early 1943. Retained interest in joining Axis or in shaking down Germany for resources? If Germany invades Spain the whole WW2 takes a different turn, because with forces in Spain, they can not attack Russia. Without an Eastern Front the allies have a much harder nut to crack. It may also motivate Stalin to do some more pressure on territorial gains or even try to invade German territory and snatch the rest of Poland. Any bomb dropped on Spain is one not dropped on Germany. Any carrier raiding Spain is one not opposing the IJN in the Pacific. Relying on Vichy defenses in North Africa proved catastrophic for the Axis in Libya and Tunisia. Any bomb dropped on Spain makes Spanish allies request support, pointing out on the long, vulnerable coastline... Bombs dropped on Italy also were not seen as waste. Also... Would there be a threat of the civil war reigniting with Allied support? In any case Vichy France would turn into Slovakia - German troops pasdsing through will become a "softer" target for Resistance and when attacks increase, Germany would eventually probably try to take over even without Allied landings in Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Estes Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 I'm puzzled by the mention of carrier strikes on Spanish cities. Nothing of the sort took place until 1945 in the Pacific, and then only because there was nothing still floating for the USN/RN to sink. CVs have remarkably weak potential against land targets, especially the ones that can fight back. To some extent this condition continues to the present day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Werb Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 I'm puzzled by the mention of carrier strikes on Spanish cities. Nothing of the sort took place until 1945 in the Pacific, and then only because there was nothing still floating for the USN/RN to sink. CVs have remarkably weak potential against land targets, especially the ones that can fight back. To some extent this condition continues to the present day. Sorry, I didn't mean area bombing cities, but coastal shipping, ports, factories and point targets might well have been targeted. CVs can also turn up where least wanted/expected which would make the need for 360 air defence even greater. There were quite a few carrier strikes vs coastal targets in ETO, particularly in Norway and partly as a way of working up for PTO. I live close to one of the main FAA training bases for Air Wings headed to the Far East - we had Corsairs here in Orkney late war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobu Posted October 19, 2017 Share Posted October 19, 2017 (edited) If Germany is willing to pay the heavy cost in resources, troops and time to invade/bribe Spain to settle the question of Gibraltar, then Suez would be the next logical target. Should the Wehrmacht succeed in capturing, the IJN's Indian Ocean options become interesting. Edited October 19, 2017 by Nobu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Unless they spend a few years improving Libyan infrastructure to support a much larger army in Africa, the British could sit at the Alamein line forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 The British could sit at El Alamein for the reason that the Germans an Italians were not able to reinforce, let alone support their troops that far forward. If you concede the Western Med to them, you make that one hell of a lot easier to do. yes, maybe even as far forward as Benghazi or Tobruk they would be able to bring supplies in. And there is no reason to think the 8th Army would do any better at holding an established position against a well reinforced German crop than the Soviets were able to do. Distance worked for the British because they could dominate the sea. Take that sea dominance away, and the British position in North Africa is shagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam_S Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Good luck getting much into Tobruk while the Royal Navy still has a base in Alexandria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Tobruk might be a bit far forward, but Benghazi isnt. And I dont believe that, if the Italians could dominate the Western Med, they would have found it so hard to supply as far forward as El Alamein over land. After all, we were doing it in 1942 post offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Becker Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 About Italian naval operations. They'd get a lot easier with Malta and all of Spain in Axis hands but the shortage of POL will remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yama Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 According to the research and works of the late Javier Tussell, Franco amazingly retained interest in joining the Axis as late as early 1943. Without benefit of hindsight, it wasn't obvious at that time in what dire state Axis cause was, unless you were one of the very few people 'in the know'. Also there were lots of wishcasting amongst Axis aligned nations. For example even in early 1944 there were prominent people in Finland who believed that once the summer comes, "Panzers will start rolling East again". Sorry, I didn't mean area bombing cities, but coastal shipping, ports, factories and point targets might well have been targeted. CVs can also turn up where least wanted/expected which would make the need for 360 air defence even greater. There were quite a few carrier strikes vs coastal targets in ETO, particularly in Norway and partly as a way of working up for PTO. There were, but most of the time the outcome wasn't that great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 About Italian naval operations. They'd get a lot easier with Malta and all of Spain in Axis hands but the shortage of POL will remain. True, but the capcity of the RN to resist the Italian navy is much weakened if we lose Gibraltar. Access to Spain opens up a LOT of sea ports they can bring in trade from South America. I seem to recall there was some oil capacity in Venezuela that might have been opened up, if they had weakened the RN's ability to blockade trade with Europe. I mean we have Sierra Leone, which is an inadequate base. Then we have the Bahamas, right on the other side of the Atlantic. And then far south we have the Falklands. Right in the middle is a hell of a lot of ocean we will have something of a job blockading, let alone covering with MPA's. Particularly if the Germans get access to the Canary Islands. Spain entering the war, whether invaded or more likely changing sides, pretty much throws a spanner in the works for how the battle of the atlantic works. And that works or our trade, but it also works for trade coming into Italy and Germany. As I say, just my view. Id be the first to admit its not my area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Becker Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 "Access to Spain opens up a LOT of sea ports they can bring in trade from South America. I seem to recall there was some oil capacity in Venezuela that might have been opened up, if they had weakened the RN's ability to blockade trade with Europe." Not sure if more ports matter with a distant blockade in place. You could use fast-ish AMC because of their higher endurance. Blockade breakers might have a less difficult time but I doubt that would matter in the grand scheme of things. It's not like regular and secure trade. Canary Islands? They are in the Med. Do you mean the Azores? How could Germany get control of them given the RN's huge numerical superiority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Canary islands are in the Atlantic off the coast of Morocco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobu Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 El Alamein was decisive in any timeline, to the point where I am beginning to think that had that line been broken and followed up with operations to exploit by all 3 Axis powers, the British Empire might have asked for terms in late 1942. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 We were discussing them on Page one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Becker Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Canary islands are in the Atlantic off the coast of Morocco.Indeed. I mixed them up with the Baleares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Dont feel bad, I keep getting the Canaries and they Seychelles mixed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETAC21 Posted October 20, 2017 Share Posted October 20, 2017 Tobruk might be a bit far forward, but Benghazi isnt. And I dont believe that, if the Italians could dominate the Western Med, they would have found it so hard to supply as far forward as El Alamein over land. After all, we were doing it in 1942 post offensive. Supplying El Alamein was a problem of overland transport and enemy air interdiction rather than sea supply, most of which got through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now