Alternate Bismarck Campaign

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
ScudAg56

Re: Alternate Bismarck Campaign

Post by ScudAg56 » Fri Apr 12, 2013 1:05 am

I think if the Japanese had really wanted to be a good ally with Germany, they would have allowed one of their fast fleet carriers patrol in the Atlantic. Imagine the headache the Royal Navy, with their antiquated naval aircraft, would have had against the Akagi with Zeros, Vals and Kates. The Bismark confrontation was the last of its kind, becoming archaic by the attack on Pearl Harbor a few months later.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7605
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Alternate Bismarck Campaign

Post by RF » Fri Apr 12, 2013 6:14 pm

There are logistical problems with operating IJN ships in the Atlantic - supply and lack of bases for a start.

Consider also that the Japanese didn't have any fleet carriers to spare - they were grossly overstretched to even operate in the Indian Ocean.

Substantial Japanese forces in the Atlantic would also provoke a US reaction. The US Navy had a substantial force in this theatre, regardless of threats in the Pacfic.

What would have more realistic is an Axis grand strategy, knocking off their oppenents one by one by means of co-ordinated worldwide operations. If the USA is the prime enemy then the USSR has to be kept tied up with non-aggression agreements (no Barbarossa); Britain has to be knocked out of the war while the US is still neutral.

The reality is that all three Axis powers had their own agendas and failed to properly collaborate. In essence WW2 was actually two separate wars fought at the same time. Either could have happened without the other.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Post Reply