AHC WI B ritain and France attack Nazi Germany effectively in September 1939?

[Derek Jackson]

Suppose on September 1st (according to a plan made in the Spring of 1939 large numbers of RAF aicraft are deployed in France. The ultimatums run our at Midnigt 2-3 September. Large numbers of German aircraft are destroyed on the ground by noon September 3rd

Given where German forces are and how busy they are could this have had a large impact?

If the Germans lose before the Holocaust What happens to Germany?

 

[arctic warrior]

Hmm, where would they get the guts for doing such? Or rather Goverments willing to run the risk?

The first major RAF attack on a Luftwaffe Airfield was 19-20 March 1940 of Hörnum, Syld, Wadden See island. 50 A/C of No 4 and 5 Group and 10 A/C of 10. Sqd attacked the base with loss of only 1 aircraft due to FLAK. Major damage to the Airfield was claimed.. 21 March a photoreconnaisance flight was done to document the damage - well very slight.

During Operation Weserübung - occupation of Denmark to get at Aalborg Airfield in North Jutland and campaign in Norway - RAF 21, 24 and 26 April 1940 bombed Aalborg Airfield. During each attack one aircraft was lost due to FLAK. Minor damage incurred.

The reality was that RAF couldn't hit a barndoor at two feet distance in a corridor at the time. There would be very little effect of such raids - unfortunately. Luckily the Luftwaffe FLAK wasn't much better at their job!

If such is carried out and the Luftwaffe transfer Fighter units to the West the follow-up raids may encounter another defence; at the 19 August 1940 RAF raid at Aalborg Airfield the Germans had Bf-109E Fighters on station which in cooperation with FLAK units at the site shot down 11 of 12 attacking Bristol Blenheims. It would be the Killing Fields with the RAF at the receiving end.
You need escort fighters and Pathfinders at night and possibly day too to mark objectives. Its just too early in the war. Unfortunately.

 

[marathag]

The reality was that RAF couldn't hit a barndoor at two feet distance in a corridor at the time. There would be very little effect of such raids - unfortunately. Luckily the Luftwaffe FLAK wasn't much better at their job!

Bombs hitting the wrong part of Germany would still be better than dropping leaflets for the first 6 months of the War

 

[David T]

There was a limited French offensive. That much more was possible before the collapse of Poland is doubtful, as Michele has endlessly pointed out both in soc.history.what-if and here. https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/france-and-britain-really-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655192
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/france-and-britain-really-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655269
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...y-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655499

WI: France invades Germany in 1939

soc.history.what-if.narkive.com

​

 

[ennobee]

Regardless the fact that without offending neutral Belgium, the only way the combined Anglo-French force could enter Germany would be through a narrow corridor in Saarland and Bavaria where, with Austria now a part of the Reich they would be open to attack from three sides.... Regardless the fact that not only the politicians of that time but also half of the global population

 

[Garrison]

There was a limited French offensive. That much more was possible before the collapse of Poland is doubtful, as Michele has endlessly pointed out both in soc.history.what-if and here. https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/france-and-britain-really-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655192
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/france-and-britain-really-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655269
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...y-invade-germany-in-1939.254232/#post-6655499

WI: France invades Germany in 1939

soc.history.what-if.narkive.com

​

I think a lot more was definitely possible, if a more aggressively minded commander like a Foch or De Gaulle had been directing the attack. The Siegfried Line defense's were thinly manned and we know that the Polish campaign revealed some serious issues with the performance of the Wehrmacht that had to be addressed before they turned west. Added to which is the immense drain on the German stockpiles of munitions created by Poland, they would have run out of some items if they had been forced into a serious fight on two fronts. if you added in the RAF dropping bombs instead of leaflets, regardless of accuracy, and Germany could have been in serious trouble. At the very least they might have had to postpone an offensive in the west until the summer of 1940, which would have had its own dire consequences for their chances of victory.

The catch is of course where does this infusion of energy and resolve come from? It would take something drastic to persuade the French to push on, maybe if Goering did something stupid like order the Luftwaffe to bomb Paris at the opening of hostilities?

 

[ennobee]

Regardless the fact that without offending neutral Belgium, the only way the combined Anglo-French force could enter Germany would be through a narrow corridor in Saarland and Bavaria where, with Austria now a part of the Reich they would be open to attack from three sides.... Regardless the fact that not only the politicians of that time but also half of the global population

Oops, did I post that? I thought I deleted it when I ran out of time.

What I wanted to say was:
Regardless of the geography with Neutral Belgium in the North and neutral Switzerland in the South forcing the attack through just a small opening, the problem is not defeating Germany, it is what comes afterwards. Despite the Nuremberg laws, and the general sense of things to come, the Nazis were not yet the maniacal racist killing machines they would be in 1944. If they were invaded in 1939, even as a response to them breaking every treaty on the books, in the eye of the world they would be the good guys with England and France being the aggressors.

 

[Belisarius II]

The RAF wasn't capable of a major air offensive against Germany in 1939.

 

[Belisarius II]

Oops, did I post that? I thought I deleted it when I ran out of time.

What I wanted to say was:
Regardless of the geography with Neutral Belgium in the North and neutral Switzerland in the South forcing the attack through just a small opening, the problem is not defeating Germany, it is what comes afterwards. Despite the Nuremberg laws, and the general sense of things to come, the Nazis were not yet the maniacal racist killing machines they would be in 1944. If they were invaded in 1939, even as a response to them breaking every treaty on the books, in the eye of the world they would be the good guys with England and France being the aggressors.

After breaking the Munich Agreement in March 1939, and occupying Prague, signing a pact with Stalin, and then invading Poland just who would think Britain & France were the aggressors?

 

[MKD]

Surely just commit properly to the Saar offensive. There is a suggestion the Nazi couldn't respond adequately due to being engaged in Poland. I am not sure the BEF could help much tbh.