Vorticon, al any of us can do is read as much as we can about the events that took place, check for consistency/reality, and draw our own conclusions. Even for those amid the fighting at the time this is true, as no one person would be privy to all the facts about any given situation of much conseqience.
There's a lot of dross about, both in books and in films; EVERY source caries with it the baggage of its creator, their biases, their understanding, their commitment to truth, their intent in producing their work... even having read a great many books about the second World War over more than two decades, I am still uncovering facets new to me.
With regard to a possible invasion of England by Germany, the problems were fourfold:
1. Lack of adequate transport shipping
2. Lack of an adequate strategic bomber
3. Lack of an adequate long-range fighter
4. A disorganised economy and confused leadership that wasted resources left right and centre.
The German fleet could not have withstood the Royal Navy in a large scale encounter without air supremacy. The Luftwaffe did not have that air supremacy for a number of reasons. The one most ofte quoted was the fatal mistake of callng off the attacks on forward fighter airfields in England to attack London instead, but there were other factors.
If the German economy had been properly mobilised for war under a leadership that was more unified an coherent inpurpose, the LW would have had more planes and crew to man them, and the English may have lost the BoB anyway.
If Hitler and others in the hierarchy hadnt been so sure that all they needed was a TACTICAL air force to support the German army, then perhaps the 109 would have been equipped with drop tanks earlier, and other long-range fighter types than the Bf110 would have been developed. Had the Ju89 and Do19 been developed rather than cancelled, Germany would have had a first class 4-engined bomber force well before the UK and USA (an experimental derivative of the Ju89, the Ju390, did in fact fly with a few KM of New York from France during the course of the war).
The Japanese were already suffering from trade sanctions that were crippling their ability to fight when they attacked Pearl Harbour. They had ben fighting a war in China for several years already, don't forget. From their viewpoint, WW2 didnt start at Pearl Harbour, it started much earlier. Japan needed to obtan fresh resources in order to keep its economy going, and militarily it saw the way to do that was by grabbing off large chunks of SE Asia and Indonesia.
That would necessarily involve attacking the overseas possesions of several Eurpean countries, however, and almost inevitably the USA would get drawn into the conflct. So Pearl Harbour was, militarily, a sensible attempt to strike such a devastating blow against the US fleet that the USA might be persuaded to stay out of any further fighting. The Japanese were unlucky in that the US carrier fleet wasnt there when they attacked, and in that they misjudged the charatcer of America as a state, expecting them to be much more wary of going to war than they were.
Had the Japanese not attacked Pearl Harbour, the Amercans might have been slower to get nvolved in the war, but almost inevitaly WOULD have been involved anyway. Thus Pearl harbour was a calculated risk that went astray, not stupidity, m'dear.
An interesting point is to consider whether, if Germany had succeeded in invading mainand Birtain, Russia would have still been able to fight off the Germans anyway. Given the size of the country and its natural resources, I rather think they would have. They might have take a year or two longer to do it, but I think 1946 would have seen the Red Army in Berlin anyway.
Mind you, to some extent that depends on what would have happened in North Africa and the Middle and Far East. Would the US have stepped in to help Britis/Empire forces defend Egypt and use Egypt as a base to conduct raids against Axis-held Europe? Would the Western Alies have been invading Italy as the Russians started pushing the Germans back into Poland and the Balkan States, leaving Britain the last Axis-held country to be liberated?
Anyway, that you're keen on history is good, Vorticon, just try to be a little more thoughtful in your postings and you ont get laughed at. With regard to your comments about aircraft, the thing to bear in mind is that the MA in AH bears very little resemblance to actual WW2 conditions. WW2 pilots couldnt grab whatever plane they liked whe they liked, and their utility was governed by hard physics, not the limitations of tryong to program a virtual reality. WW2 pilots flew as if their lives depended on it - because they DID depend on it. Not many people fly like that in the MA!
Good luck with both your flying in AH and your studies of history!
!
Esme
