An alternative title of WITP

[Sardaukar]

One good option would also be accelerated aircrew training for IJN. Saburo Sakai mentions in his book "Samurai" that 90 % of those booted out of pre-war training by minor "offences" or faults were 10 times more better pilots than replacements IJN got during years (If I quote right..just from memory). "What if" with larger "good quality" but not "great quality" pilot supply for IJN to add to historical replacements during years as option might be also good. Even 1944 those pre-war trained IJN pilots that were left were **** good.

Cheers,

M.S.

[U2]

Originally posted by Sardaukar
One good option would also be accelerated aircrew training for IJN. Saburo Sakai mentions in his book "Samurai" that 90 % of those booted out of pre-war training by minor "offences" or faults were 10 times more better pilots than replacements IJN got during years (If I quote right..just from memory). "What if" with larger "good quality" but not "great quality" pilot supply for IJN to add to historical replacements during years as option might be also good. Even 1944 those pre-war trained IJN pilots that were left were **** good.

Cheers,

M.S.

Hi
This is quite possible to do and isnt that what they have in the new scen 19(?) in UV that came with the patch. The Jap replacement pilots are better than in other scenarios.
Dan

[Kitakami]

Originally posted by Spooky
To sum up, we could have 2 geo-political scenarios :
* No China involvement
* Japan-USSR friendship

and at least 3 changes of doctrines :
* Carriers instead of BB
* Accelerated Aircraft R&D
* Emphasis on convoy & ASW

Spooky

All,

I think a more plausible scenario would have been a Japan-USSR war, not Japan-USSR friendship.

Now, the strategic implications of that, I leave to the experts, but it would (maybe):

1. Affect the outcome in the European Eastern Front during the first winter and maybe beyond that. Would that have consequences in the PTO?

2. Change the US's public perception of Japan, particularly if they pulled out of China (but not from Manchuria).

3. Change the resource base of Japan's industry, with raw materials that had but a short water trip to make (Korea to Japan).

Thoughts?

[mogami]

Greetings, It has been said that the allies knew they defeat the axis because:

Germany was a country with industry but no resources and Japan was a country with resources but no industry.

The Army wanted Manchuria for the resources (but no oil)
and China for food.

The Navy wanted the SRA for the oil.

One of the very few ships sank by submarines early in the war was the transport carrying the few Japanese oil field experts and the limited amount of oil field equipment. The result was that Japan was never able to get the oilfields up to full production and it took more time for each increase. Consider what it would do if Japan is able to construct cracking plants right at the oilfields.
Not only would production oil gasoline and av gas be easier the load on the transport system would be lessened. (as is Tankers have to first carry raw oil to Japan then the fuel to where it is required. Traffic to Japan would only be what Japanese industry and home Island military required all other transport would be between oil centers and depots.
The Army would not give up China, the goverment would not give up China (the Chinese went hungry but fed Japan)

There are resources controled by USSR within range of Japanese however there were too few units to spare even after Germany and USSR went to war. Count the divisions Japan used in WW2 outside of China. The Russians could match this twice over and not miss it. (This army would not contain much offensive power but the lack of railheads means the Japanese will not be able to move very fast since Japan has no mobile formations and the defense can shift to meet the threat) They held the units in the East till after the US was in the war.

In 1945 the Russians massed 3 moblie armys hundreds of miles from a railhead and smashed the Japanese.

[U2]

Hi Mogami

I think your observations on a possible Russo-Japanese war is correct. The infantery based Jap army was ill prepared for a more mobile enemy on a vast frontier. Just take a look at the border dispute that became a limited war in 1939 between these two countries and we see why.

The point you made about the Japs not being able to get the oil flowing from the start(also thanks to sabotage to some wells before capture) is very true indeed.

Dan

[Kitakami]

I think the point I am trying to make is:

What would have happened in the German Eastern Front if the Siberian Armies had not arrived to reinforce due to being tied down in a border war with the Japanese?

And, if Germany would have succeeded taking Moscow and advanced beyond their historical gains,

How would that have affected Japan?

[RevRick]

How about no Washington Treaty? That ought to really mix up the game play - and call for a whole bunch of new ships on the ways.

Or, FDR gets involved earlier and calls for the Two Ocean Navy and gets it in 1938-39 instead of 1940.

Postulate changes in the European War - both ways. If the Brits are knocked out of the effort in the Pacific - that makes the US position much more untenable. If Australian forces are held up in North Africa - they aren't available for home defence, etc.

[Kitakami]

I'd love to see such things, yes.

I would give the feel that the PTO was not isolated, but part of a greater effort of trully worldwide proportions.

Question is, how to implement it? Would it be hard to code them in such a way so that a player could set a certain amount of toggle buttins and the engine takes all that into account when deploying forces at start?

That would really be interesting.

[U2]

Originally posted by Kitakami
I think the point I am trying to make is:

What would have happened in the German Eastern Front if the Siberian Armies had not arrived to reinforce due to being tied down in a border war with the Japanese?

And, if Germany would have succeeded taking Moscow and advanced beyond their historical gains,

How would that have affected Japan?

Hi

Moscow taken (severe blow to morale not only because its the capitol but that Stalin himself would have fled in the face of the enemy) and no Siberian forces ( forces that helped to stop Operation Typhoon and then went on the offensive ) would have been a disaster for Russia and the war might/would have taken a different turn.
If we play with the idea that Russia would have surrendered everything west of the Urals and was kept as a country east of it then it would have given Japan an easier target for sure. I'm just toying with the idea that Germany would not have occupied the entire Sovietunion because the strain it would be on Germany and its armed forces. This could be used in a hypotetical scenario.
Thoughts?
Dan

[Kitakami]

Originally posted by U2


Hi

Moscow taken (severe blow to morale not only because its the capitol but that Stalin himself would have fled in the face of the enemy) and no Siberian forces ( forces that helped to stop Operation Typhoon and then went on the offensive ) would have been a disaster for Russia and the war might/would have taken a different turn.
If we play with the idea that Russia would have surrendered everything west of the Urals and was kept as a country east of it then it would have given Japan an easier target for sure. I'm just toying with the idea that Germany would not have occupied the entire Sovietunion because the strain it would be on Germany and its armed forces. This could be used in a hypotetical scenario.
Thoughts?
Dan

I agree on both accounts.

There was no way Germany would have been able to occupy all of the USSR. And if they had been lenient in their occupation policies in the Ukraine, they would have had an easier time ruling it.

Japan, after such a German victory, would have had an easier time picking up Siberian resources (which at this point I am not able to quantify), and thus might have improved her strategic position.

You are right this would make for an interesting hypothetical scenario.

[U2]

Originally posted by Kitakami



You are right this would make for an interesting hypothetical scenario.

Hi Kitakami

Thanks for the reply and that you agreed with me:) Not only would Russia's forces been demorilized but they would have lost the oil fields in Kaukasus, bred basket of the Ukraine and many industries. How much could they possibly have left to defend Siberia? This could be interesting but hard work. How much of east Russia is on the map itself?
Dan

[Sun Tzu]

Originally posted by Spooky


In fact, some of the more important WITP aspects such as user interface, naval & air combat reports, naval combat code, ... are tested (and improved ) through the UV patch

But an interesting debate would be : what alternative scenario for WITP (as the #19 scenario from Rich in UV) ?

A first suggestion is a IJN doctrine change in the 30's with the replacement of the Yamato Class BB by some more CV.

Maybe also a stronger emphasis on aircraft R&D with an advanced availability of some planes ...

What would be great is to give Matrix 2 or 3 alternative scenarios ... and the changes it would induced ...

Any suggestion ?

Spooky

O.K., here's my 2-cents:

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE (COUNTERFACTUAL) COMBINED FLEET

Part I: Homma got his gun

Nov 1914: Tsingtao was capture by Anglo-Japanese force, and so did the German islands of Micronesia; Emden was sunk; after the victorious Battle of Coronel, Vice Admiral Graf von Spee left South Pacific for South Atlantic. There was no more Central Power force in Pacific Ocean, what should Japan do next?

IOTL they refused to send troop to Europe. In this TL, some people in IJN and cabinet made an argument: if Japan wanted to earn respect from the European Powers, they needed to take an active part in the European War. A pro-war newspaper republished the infamous Kaiser Wilhelm II's “Yellow Peril?painting. Which stirred up some popular support for sending combat force to Europe.

The result: IJN sent pre-dreadnought Kashima and Katori, a seaplane carrier, two armored cruisers and a destroyer squadron to the Med. While battlecruiser Kongo, an armored cruiser and a destroyer squadron were joining the Grand Fleet at Scapa Flow (they were too late to participated Battle of Dogger Bank).

Feb to Mar 1915: Japanese Med. force took part in Dardanelle campaign, sadly for Allies. It was still a disaster; Katori struck a mine and sunk (better flood control could had save her), along side with two British and a French pre-dreadnought. Later, a U-Boat sank Kashima (could had been save, ditto Katori). There was a minor Japanese Naval Infantry force took part in the Battle of Gallipoli. They made no difference but their bravery impress the ANZAC force. On the brighter side, IJN Wakamiya, the seaplane carrier which made the very first carrier strike at Tsingtao in 1914, launch a successful raid on Messudieh battery, put it temporary out of action and avenged the loss of French pre-dreadnought Bouvet.

From summer of 1915: IJN sent a combined air squadron to Western Front. But the first Japanese Ace didn't born until winter 1915. At the time, German Fokker E. "Eindecker" monoplane fighters rule the sky.

May 1916: Battle of Jutland. Kongo was the assigned to Beatty's force. But she was sunk due to magazine explosion, which was a direct result of sloppy damage control. However, her accurate 14-inch gunfire was the key factor of the sinking of Derfflinger and Seydlitz. Meanwhile Japanese destroyer squadron fought the minor crafts melee with élan, but something was wrong in their torpedo doctrine, Japanese, with one DD lost of their own, sank only one German destroyer. The ATL Battle of Jutland was view as a tactical draw and strategic victory for Allies.

Sept 1916: another minor Japanese Naval Infantry force took part in the Battle of Somme, they suffered heavy loss, but like Gallipoli, they won a lot of respect. Meanwhile, back to the home front, the press tended to be report the heroic exploits of the Navy in Europe. Army didn't wanted the Navy stole all the lime light, announced to sent an Army Crop and an Army Air Group to the Western Front. At the home front, the Japanese aviation industries got an earlier head start than OTL.

1917: U-Boat warfare heated up. RN asked for more IJN help, Japan sent even more destroyers plus Horyu (for detail see below) to Atlantic (IOTL, during April 1917, 14 destroyers with cruiser flagships were based at Malta playing an important and efficient part in anti-submarine convoy escort [http://www.naval-history.net/WW1NavyJapanese.htm]). At home, Horyu (fictional, didn't built IOTL), an enlarge version of IJN Wakamiya, was built. Upon arrival at April 1917, (with BEF and Canadian force) the "Dai Nippon" Crop launched a courageous but also costly frontal assault on Vimy Ridge and captured it. In November, "Dai Nippon" Crop fought along side with BEF in the Passchendaele offensive. They suffer heavy loss with very little different was made however. In December, Battleship Fuso and Yamashiro joined Grand Fleet at Scapa Flow (ironically USN Battleship Division 9 arrived Scapa at the same day).

Early 1918: "Dai Nippon" Crop took a heroic stand during German Spring offence (Sorry, a certain German corporal name Adolf Hitler wouldn't had his head chop off by a obscure Japanese Army officer's samurai sword during intense hand to hand fighting in the Japanese trench) at Ypres. They were impressing by German "Stromtropper" tactic and their sub-machine guns.

19 July 1918: HMS Furious launched seven bomb-loaded Camels to attack the Zeppelin shed at Tondern (as IOTL). One of the pilots was an exchange Japanese officer name Yamaguchi Tamon. The Landing Signal Officer of HMS Furious was also an exchange Japanese officer name Yamamoto Isokuru. The strike was a success, two airships was destroyed.

Late in the War: As a liaison offer, Yamamoto did take part of the RN’s planning of the ambitious 120 carrier-based planes raid on Schilling Road. As IOTL, the plan was cancelled due to lack of resources. But some historians argued that was the origin of the Pearl Harbor attack.

12 Nov. 1918: In a "Victory Banquet" on HMS Renown, Yamamoto met retired Admiral of the Fleet Jacky Fisher who proclaims: "The carrier is the warship of the future" (Which he did believe IOTL).

____________________________________________

Part II: The Centre could barely hold

1919: Japan got almost all she wanted at Versailles, just as OTL.

May 1919 - July 1921: Yamamoto became a junior naval officer Washington D.C. Japanese Embassy (as IOTL). He got a wind of General Mitchell's plan to sink some old battleships by aerial attack. He went down to the Chesapeake Bay and watched the demonstration. He knew what the USN old guards thought: "For Christ sake those ships didn't move at all!" On a long voyage back home during Aug. 1921, Yamamoto reflected on the Ocean Liner: "If only those target ships were radio controlled..."

1921: In the Washington Conference, Japan insisted on complete the building of Tosa. American wanted her to be scraped and 27,500-ton replacement for the Kongo would be built (so that Japan would waste more time and resource). British were caught between a rock and a hard place: on one side general public were quite pro Japan ("They lend us a helping hand at our darkest hours"), back down on American demand might mean alienate voters in the future; OTOH British Foreign Office was realistic, they knew their nation owed American Bankers a great deal of debts, if the US broke off the Conference and start an Unlimited Naval Building Race, it would be unthinkable disaster for the Empire. Finally they offer an olive branch. While Japan could finish Tosa, America could complete the USS Washington (BB-47, the third Maryland class. BB-56 in the future would be named as USS Oregon, but that was another story) in the price of scrapping USS Florida (BB-30); while RN built one more Nelson class (Finally named HMS Fisher as a memory for "The Father of Dreadnought"), but scarp a Iron Duke class early and scarp a “R?class battleship in 1930. Japan thought that Tosa could outclass the extra Maryland and Nelson class, accepted it. America thought that trade the old USS Florida for new USS Washington wasn't a bad idea at all, also took the offer.

1922: Five Powers Pact replaced Anglo-Japanese Alliance. But British signed a ten years non-aggression pact with Japan. Old German Dreadnought Helgoland was sold to Japan at cut price. Another ten years Anglo-Japanese trade pact that favorable to Japan was also signed. All of them were done as the compensation to the termination of Anglo-Japanese Alliance.

Early 1923: When Oldenburg, Helgoland sister reached Japan, it was sold for break up at once. This time, before Helgoland arrival, Yamamoto proposed to redid the Mitchell's test, but the different was: Helgoland would be converted into a moving radio controlled target. In the secret excise in the North Pacific off Hokkaido, Hosho's carrier based bombers attacked Helgoland first, most IJN Admirals believed that the carrier strike would be merely soften up and slowed down Helgoland a little bit. However one of the bomb hits strike directly at the boiler room (in retrospect, it might be just a lucky hit). When the Battle-line arrived (which brand new flag ship of Combined Fleet - Tosa - fired her guns first time in anger), Helgoland was already dead in water. Furthermore the weather of the day was far from satisfactory, it was proved that carrier plane wasn't "fair weather flying toy". Sure the "Battleships Admirals" could point out at the lack of AA fire and damage control party, but IJN "Air Admirals/Officers" did had a stronger argument than their American counterpart. RN and USN Intelligent did know that Helgoland was sunk as a target, but they didn't know the bombing.

Between 1923-29: the Japanese "Jazz Age" was even more polarize, on one hand Japan had a stronger tie with the West, OTOH some Japanese expect even more in the Washington Conference. While Japan got a little bit better deal than OTL, some Japanese nationalists was even more disappointed. However Japan in this TL had a stronger air power, in IJN, there were more believers in carriers (more old guards died in the Great War than young turks). While Tosa was allowed to build, the rivalry between "Fleet Faction" and "Treaty Faction" was not as bitter (Kato Kanji, leader of "Fleet Faction" IOTL, had been dead during Battle of Jutland in this TL. So the Faction was not as powerful. On the other side, Kato Tomosaburo, the leader of "Treaty Faction", lived two years longer than OTL. He was dead of cancer in 1925 instead of 1923. For this reason, "Treaty Faction" had a stronger power base). Also Great War veteran combat pilots form both Army and Naval Air Arms from a "Blue Sky Society" which was the first ever bi-service secret military society in Japan (they play a role in the Japanese arm force politic not unlike the "Dixiecrat" in the US politic before 1960's IOTL - a bridge between two rival group), the stories of Japanese ace pilots during the Great War was well known, more Japanese young men and children dreamt to became pilot than OTL.
After the Great War, Japanese sailors had a batter damage/flood control and fire fighting skill than OTL (in 1916, Kongo was the pride of IJN. The tragic loss of that very ship was a painful lesson. The importance of damage control became part of the tradition of IJN, though they were not as sharp as late WWII USN). However, the U-Boat lessons were slowly forgotten (IOTL when the WWII erupted, even RN and USN were ill-prepared for the new round of submarine warfare).

Among all Japanese Great War Veterans, many of them had a sober view of Total War, some of them even witness the performance of American troop, they knew that GI was not a bunch of spoiled play boys who would never did well in battlefield. While almost all other armies of the rest of the world viewed the tommy guns with disdain during 20's, IJA did brought some, reserve engineered and mass produce them without obtain the license to produce (they guess the US government would never allow it. IMHO I don't know how big the impact will this be. IOTL only their paratroop got sub-machine gun). In post Great War IJA there was even a visible Moderate Faction, but they were still minority (especially in Kwantung Army), they tend to be friendly toward "Blue Sky Society" and the Navy. Throughout 1920's the Japanese arm forces' political balance of power could be hold.

Japan in the 1920’s (no matter IOTL or IATL) was also a decade of political liberation; sadly most new breed politicians view it as a fast lane of easy fortune. As a result, a series of bribery and corruption scandals were exposed. Young people were disappointed; they regard Western style democracy as "
decadent".

To be continue (I'm still working on Part III. For more discussion of this topic click here: [http://www.alternatehistory.com/Discussion/] under the topic ofImperal Japanese (Air) Navy)

Cheer

Jonathan

[Fred98]

Well, if the Japanese avoid China and remain friends with Russia, there is no need for oil. No need at all.

There would not be a US oil embargo and there would be no Pearl Harbour.

The Japanese would be free to head across Burma and conquer India or instead conquer Australia. Or send troops to aid their ally – Russia in the struggle against the Nazis.

The US would never get involved. Unless of course there were a ‘Tokyo Bay”.

“Tokyo Bay – October 24th 1942, a day that will live in Infamy” or something like that