Not sure why you would think US lacks experience after losing at Midway.
US would still probably attack Guadalcanal IMO or New Guinea.
Russians would crush Japanese attack. Imagine the Japanese trying to deal with T-34s on the steppes. Their army just isn't suited to fighting the Russians. The Russians just wouldn't crush the Germans as quickly. Also, the 500,000 troops the Japanese sent to Russia would completely strip their Pacific holdings, making US offensives relatively easy.
lwd wrote:In addition both plans resulat in even greater fuel expenditures by the Japanese but don't do anything to increase (at least in the short term the fuel supplies).
minoru genda wrote:I think that a Japanese invasion in depth of Russa from the East would be a big mistake. Just look at a map and see the incredible distances. The distance from Manchuria to the Urals is three times the distance from Berlin to Moscow, and the Japanese army is not a modern army like the German or Russian. That said I think the Japanese could've launched a limited attack against the Russians in the Far East. They could've taken the rest of Sakhalin Island with ts oil reserves, Vladivostok, and other coastal areas along the Russian coastline.
winterfell wrote:To put it clear. I don’t expect the Japanese to reach Ural Mountains in few month time. I would rather expect them to conquer Soviet Far East. However, the psychological effect of that would be shattering. I believe that perspective of war on two fronts (with possibility of hardly any help from the UK and the US) would result in crumbling of the USSR.
winterfell wrote: .... I am just believing that joint German-Japanese action in 1942/43 could result in defeat of the Soviet Union.
BTW I also believe that for Japan starting war with the USSR in 1941 would be a lesser gamble than starting war with USA as they done in reality.
Amare1 wrote:.... It can go either way, agree?
Amare1 wrote:Right. But look at a couple of factors: Japanese here have the finest aircrews ever. US is rather less experienced and their aircraft still aren't any match for the Japanese types.
Out of the US aircraft, which do you think can make serious damage to the Japanese fleet? SBDs of course, but B17s, P39s, TBDs and other types they had here... no way.
Amare1 wrote:Losses over Midway were few, if you're not taking USMC Reports seriously. The Japs lost, as I can recall, nine planes, and five more were damaged beyond repair, correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm counting on some 50-60 planes lost in this Japanese victory at Midway...
For F4F, it was a good plane but not a match for Japanese pilots from 1942 flying A6Ms...
In 1943 the better US pilot school and more flight hours began to take over, but only F6Fs and F4Us started to really turn the tide to the US.
And can I mention that Japanese victory would definetly affect the capture of a downed Zero at the Aleutians and its use to make F6F trully superb?
The first production aircraft off the line, designated F6F-3s, flew on 3 October 1942
captured intact by the Americans in July 1942....On September 20, 1942, Lieutenant Commander Eddie R. Sanders took the Akutan Zero up for its first test flight
Come on, P-40 equal to Zero, are you serious?
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests