Author Topic: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration  (Read 51444 times)

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2019, 05:09:22 AM »
Some historical background on the US Military in 1940 (thus presumably when one would see any US entry into WWII):

YEARARMYNAVYMARINESCOAST GUARDTOTAL
1940
269,023
160,997
28,345
458,365
1941
1,462,315
284,427
54,359
1,801,101
1942
3,075,608
640,570
142,613
56,716
3,915,507
- included to give feel for expansion post war entry, though the US entering voluntarily rather than post attack might not witness this sort of rapid expansion

As far as equipment goes:

The main tank was the M2 light tank (in the M2A2 or M2A3 versions with .50 machine gun, not the later M2A4 with 37mm gun) along with the similar sized M1 Combat Car:




That said, one could possible see a rapid development of the M2A4 version though I doubt one would see a significant number in service until 1941 at the earliest.

These would be supported by the M2A1 / M3 / M3A1 Scout Car:



And a few 37 mm M3 as a dedicated anti-tank gun (noting this was just entering service in 1940):



On the Howitzer front you had the 75mm Pack Howitzer M1 (though by 1940 there were only 91 in service):



Along with the Canon de 155mm GPF (only 24 in service at the time):



and 155 mm Gun M1 Long Tom just entering service:



When war broke out the US Army Air Corp (it only became the US Army Air Force in mid 1941) had approx 3,305 aircraft in a state of readiness, while the Navy had about 3,000 aircraft ready.  For the USAAC though, of its 1,500 combat aircraft, only 800 were rated as first-line.  By comparison, the RAF had 1,750 first-line aircraft and the German Luftwaffe 3,750.  Of these, the main types were:

B-17:  In the real world the USAAC received 39 B-17Bs in 1939–40, 18 B-17Cs in 1940, and 42 B-17Ds in the first quarter of 1941.  Even if one therefore pushed the 1941 delivered into 1940 (not a definite thing because there would be a need for factory capacity), one might see some 57 - 100 odd available in 1940;
B-18 Bolo: Some 350 in service;
A-17: Some 400 in service;
DC-2/3 (as C-32/C-39):  Approx 24 in service;
P-35:  Some 100 odd in service;
P-36:  The main fighter in terms of numbers with some 200 in service;
P-38:  Only just entering service;
P-39:  An initial order for 80 aircraft had been placed in only August 1939 so would have just been entering service; and
P-40:  Only just entering service.

The USN was probably the best equipped though as to what this may have offered in 1940 for a largely European continental war is debatable.  Leaving out the Battleships therefore, if one considers the carriers, then really just the following available in 1940:

USS Lexington (CV-2)
USS Saratoga   (CV-3)
USS Ranger (CV-4)
Yorktown   (CV-5)
Enterprise (CV-6)
USS Wasp (CV-7):  Just commissioned and probably able to be rushed into service.

These would have carried a mix of the following:

Grumman F2F:  Would have been exiting service but still an option if needed;
Grumman F3F:  The main fighter in service but only with about 140 odd in service at the time;
Brewster F2A Buffalo:  Probably the best (potential) type available at the time with some 11 F2A-1s and 43 F2A-2s available to the USN/USMC;
Grumman F4F-3:  Maybe available but only if rushed into service;
Vought SB2U Vindicator: maybe some 150 in service; and
Douglas TBD Devastator:  some 130 in service.

One has to remember though that the USN's main focus was the Pacific with Japan so would have been unwilling to commit more than about 2 - 3 of the carriers to any European War.

Generally, I would argue that any early entry to WWII by the US would only really see them using what was already in service in 1940 and in limited numbers at that.  Therefore, they would not have made a great contribution and in fact, may have even wanted to utilise some of the European equipment.  Moreover, without some sort of Casus belli I can't see a significant ramp up in either production/recruitment /introduction of new types that was later generated by the Pearl Harbour attack.

« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 01:31:25 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2019, 11:19:13 AM »
Done well.   Comprehensive report.  :smiley:

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2019, 05:40:47 PM »
What he said  :smiley:

Offline Kelmola

  • Seeking motivation to start buillding the stash
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2019, 09:00:53 PM »
The main tank was the M2 light tank (in the M2A2 or M2A3 versions with .50 machine gun, not the later M2A4 with 37mm gun) along with the similar sized M1 Combat Car:
That said, one could possible see a rapid development of the M2A4 version though I doubt one would see a significant number in service until 1941 at the earliest.
In OTL, M3 Lee went to production in July 1941 and M4 Sherman in February 1942 (prototypes were ready in March and September 1941 respectively), so considering that M3 and M4 programs would have been rushed in case of a 1940 war M2A4 would have been an extremely short-lived interim type even if it had been rushed in turn.

Quote
B-17:  In the real world the USAAC received 39 B-17Bs in 1939–40, 18 B-17Cs in 1940, and 42 B-17Ds in the first quarter of 1941.  Even if one therefore pushed the 1941 delivered into 1940 (not a definite thing because there would be a need for factory capacity), one might see some 57 - 100 odd available in 1940;
B-18 Bolo: Some 350 in service;
A-17: Some 400 in service;
DC-2/3 (as C-32/C-39):  Approx 24 in service;
P-35:  Some 100 odd in service;
P-36:  The main fighter in terms of numbers with some 200 in service;
P-38:  Only just entering service;
P-39:  An initial order for 80 aircraft had been placed in only August 1939 so would have just been entering service; and
P-40:  Only just entering service.
B-18, A-17 and P-35 would have been obsolete in the European front already.

P-38 was still in the prototype stage, not entering service until well into 1941 and even then had its share of teething troubles. Takes a lot of handwaving to get that into service much earlier in combat capable form or shape than it did in OTL. Accelerating P-39 and P-40 procurement and development in the interim would be a more realistic solution.

Quote
The USN was probably the best equipped though as to what this may have offered in 1940 for a largely European continental war is debatable. 
Grumman F2F:  Would have been exiting service but still an option if needed;
Grumman F3F:  The main fighter in service but only with about 140 odd in service at the time;
Brewster F2A Buffalo:  Probably the best (potential) type available at the time with some 11 F2A-1s and 43 F2A-2s available to the USN/USMC;
Grumman F4F-3:  Maybe available but only if rushed into service;
Vought SB2U Vindicator: maybe some 150 in service; and
Douglas TBD Devastator:  some 130 in service.
As long as they stayed on the sea, they were pretty modern, but trying to eg. support battles over France from the sea or trying to fashion a troop landing would have been a recipe for disaster. Against land-based opponents, F2F and F3F would have been obsolete (cf. the horrific losses Gladiator units suffered over the continent), Vindicator and Devastator were almost there too (remembering how Battles fared). Then again, Swordfish (admittedly, it was not used ashore).

F2A-1 was arguably the best version of the Buffalo: the de-navalized -1 the Finns used (239) gave a good showing of itself well into 1942 (and by sheer necessity was kept in service until 1944!), whereas the -2, -3, and 339 were overweight for their wing loading and engine power (and to top it off, they were used against Zeroes of all things, and with bad tactics at that). Even the -1/239 was not really a match for 109 or Spit, but certainly for Hurricane or MS406. With a 1939 start the bulk of that subtype would not have been sold to Finland, but if the US entry is around the fall of France, that ship had literally sailed.

F4F-3 was the best of the Navy bunch and could have been rushed as production started in February 1940 in OTL.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 09:02:34 PM by Kelmola »

Offline Steve Blazo

  • The man likes white plastic...weird.
    • flickr
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2019, 11:35:04 PM »
Don’t forget about the M2 medium tank, produced from 1939-1940. Never used in World War 2, but with an early entry …..
If I can get the right models in time, I am going to scratch one together.





As I walk through the valley of death,
I have no fear, because I am the meanest mother*ucker in the whole valley.
- Gen. George S. Patton

Offline Kelmola

  • Seeking motivation to start buillding the stash
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #30 on: October 08, 2019, 12:06:15 AM »
Whoops, I should learn to read more thoroughly, as above I commented on medium tanks when the original post was about light tanks... but anyway, the comment regarding M2A4 light tank being an even short-lived design in an ATL than in OTL still stands, because M3 Stuart started production in March 1941 even in OTL.

In 1939 and early 1940 the M2 twins would realistically be the only choice, but towards the end of 1940 it might be plausible to see the fist rushed non-obsolete replacements roll off the lines, depending on how early the war started and how much resources were poured into tank development.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #31 on: October 08, 2019, 01:32:53 AM »
Two types I forgot to include though which would have been still available in 1940:

Boeing P-26
Martin B-10
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #32 on: October 08, 2019, 01:36:12 AM »
Don’t forget about the M2 medium tank, produced from 1939-1940. Never used in World War 2, but with an early entry …..
If I can get the right models in time, I am going to scratch one together.


Hadn't forgotten.  I left it out as the US Government contracted for production in August 1940 for 1,000 vehicles to be produced at a rate of 100 a month and to be delivered by August 1942.  Therefore, without some definite rushing, it would probablybe too late to see action in 1940 in France.

That said, please do try to scratch build one  I would love to see it.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 01:37:49 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline taiidantomcat

  • Plastic Origamist...and not too shabby with the painting either!
  • Full Member
  • Stylishly late...because he was reading comics
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #33 on: October 08, 2019, 03:13:24 AM »





A lot to think about in this thread  :smiley:
"They know you can do anything, So the question is, what don't you do?"

-David Fincher

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #34 on: October 08, 2019, 05:03:15 AM »
Two types I forgot to include though which would have been still available in 1940:

Boeing P-26
Martin B-10


RP-26 from year ago would qualify.  Here is link to help with inspiration.

http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=8314.msg148852#msg148852


Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2019, 06:12:36 AM »
Bell Airacuda was flying in 1940.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #36 on: October 08, 2019, 08:58:59 PM »
Until this topic arose I didn't realise just how much the US benefited from two extra years to prepare.  I knew it helped but didn't realise how much until everyone started listing the equipment types and numbers actually available in 40/41.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #37 on: October 08, 2019, 09:59:38 PM »
Without those two years US ground forces, especially, may have been more of a hindrance to the Allies than a help, until the US economy kicked into war-production gear.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #38 on: October 08, 2019, 10:21:05 PM »
I wonder how much influence the British Purchasing Commission had made during that two years. Quite a few of the 'old' war story books I have always have some mention about the BPC, in Fly For Your Life (which is about Bob Tuck's exploits) there's quite a bit about his time in the USA during that period.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #39 on: October 09, 2019, 12:08:02 AM »
I wonder how much influence the British Purchasing Commission had made during that two years. Quite a few of the 'old' war story books I have always have some mention about the BPC, in Fly For Your Life (which is about Bob Tuck's exploits) there's quite a bit about his time in the USA during that period.

Them and US liaison officers in the UK and Egypt etc. Detailed information on just about everything was made available to the US, in fact even detailed battle plans and logistics information was provided to US liaison officers in Egypt who reported it in detail to Washington through State Dept. channels (which was intercepted by the Germans and contributed to Rommel's successes in North Africa).

The UK was desperate for equipment and production capacity the US was the best source for both, it was in their best, short term, interests to give the US access to everything they had.  End result was the US had their own strengths but ended up pretty much being handed the best of what everyone else had to offer as well.

I believe if the US had joined the war earlier they would have been more reliant on British technology and experience as they would not have had the time to develop many of their own designs.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #40 on: October 09, 2019, 01:57:08 AM »
The state of the US military at that stage vs the size of it only a few years later is quite telling.  By 1945 the numbers were:

ARMY             USN             USMC      COAST GUARD             TOTAL
8,267,958   3,380,817   474,680            85,783                 12,209,238

That reflects a bit over a 3550% increase!!!

Re equipment etc, I also agree that the US forces may have found themselves outmatched.  This does raise some interesting possibilities too:  if they entered the war without a clear casus belli such as that given later by the Pearl Harbour attack and if they were caught up in the general rout of the Allied forces as witnessed in the real world in 1940 with remnants escaping along with the British at Dunkirk, I wonder if this might have actually swayed public opinion back home to pull out altogether and perhaps just focus on the Japanese/Pacific theatre.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2019, 02:01:46 AM by GTX_Admin »
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #41 on: October 09, 2019, 02:11:49 AM »


In the real world the first flight of the XF4U-1 was made on 29 May 1940 with formal USN acceptance trials for the XF4U-1 commencing in February 1941.  However the USN did not receive the first production F4U-1 until 31 July 1942, and indeed, the type was not declared "ready for combat" until the end of 1942.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #42 on: October 09, 2019, 04:49:40 AM »
The state of the US military at that stage vs the size of it only a few years later is quite telling.  By 1945 the numbers were:

ARMY             USN             USMC      COAST GUARD             TOTAL
8,267,958   3,380,817   474,680            85,783                 12,209,238

That reflects a bit over a 3550% increase!!!


And that was just the USA, how the heck did the Axis powers figure they were going to win taking on the rest of the world  -----  :-\

Offline kim margosein

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #43 on: October 09, 2019, 11:24:54 AM »
Evan, I see you read Operation Shatterhand also  I think that makes you, me, and the author's mother.  Now, what happens with an early entry into WWII?  No Pearl Harbor, and no gotcha opportunity for the carrier admirals.  The Iowa and Wisconsin are completed, but the New Jersey goes with 18 inch guns.  The drydock spots for the Missouri, Illinois, and Kentucky are used to begin construction of the first three Montanas, also with18 inch guns. ( The US Navy had some knowledge of the Yamatos, and they were very concerned).  Regarding armor, as of January 1940 the M2 light and medium tanks were not all that out of line with contemporary west European or Japanese armor. 

Offline kim margosein

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #44 on: October 09, 2019, 11:39:20 AM »
JCF, you have a solid point on a causus belli.  The US took over military occupation of the sovreign, neutral nation of Iceland from Britain in mid-1940, the Icelandic government protesting all the way.  The US also occupied and fortified Greenland in 1941, pressuring the Danish ambassador to agree to it, against specific instructions from Denmark.  The US was selling the allies military equipment on credit, with the US Navy escorting the convoys that delivered it.  A German U Boat sank a USN destroyer in October, 1941.  Any of this could be considered a causus belli, yet no war was declared.  I guess neither side felt they were ready.

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #45 on: October 09, 2019, 07:23:26 PM »
Evan, I see you read Operation Shatterhand also  I think that makes you, me, and the author's mother.  Now, what happens with an early entry into WWII?  No Pearl Harbor, and no gotcha opportunity for the carrier admirals.  The Iowa and Wisconsin are completed, but the New Jersey goes with 18 inch guns.  The drydock spots for the Missouri, Illinois, and Kentucky are used to begin construction of the first three Montanas, also with18 inch guns. ( The US Navy had some knowledge of the Yamatos, and they were very concerned).  Regarding armor, as of January 1940 the M2 light and medium tanks were not all that out of line with contemporary west European or Japanese armor.

An early entry would likely have had to opposite effect with either the North Carolinas or the South Dakotas being standardised, i.e. likely no Iowas and definitely no Montanas, likely also no Essex or Midways, just repeat Yorktowns.  The Standardised destroyer likely would have been the Benson not the Fletcher and there likely would have been no Sumners or Gearings.  Same with the Cruisers, forget the Baltimores and Cleavlands, think Wichitas etc.

I strongly suspect the adoption M-1 Garand and M-1 Carbine may well have been delayed or even cancelled, while the Sherman would probably have been more like a Ram than it turned out in reality.  The only positive is it is likely combat experience, as opposed to interpreting the experience of others, may have resulted in the Tank Destroyer Doctrine never being adopted and the number of organic AT within regiments and divisions being increased, also likely the number of independent tank battalions supporting the Infantry divisions.

Sadly, no Mustang, or B-29 for that matter, likely no B-26 or A-26.  The war would have been fought with what was available and while new gear was developed it would have taken longer to get into service, because the existing designs would have filled the production capacity coming on line.  Just look at the UK and the 2pdr for example, its replacement had been designed and accepted but desperation meant production couldn't be switched over as something was better than nothing.

Offline Kelmola

  • Seeking motivation to start buillding the stash
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #46 on: October 09, 2019, 08:13:29 PM »
An early entry would likely have had to opposite effect with either the North Carolinas or the South Dakotas being standardised, i.e. likely no Iowas and definitely no Montanas, likely also no Essex or Midways, just repeat Yorktowns.  The Standardised destroyer likely would have been the Benson not the Fletcher and there likely would have been no Sumners or Gearings.  Same with the Cruisers, forget the Baltimores and Cleavlands, think Wichitas etc.

I strongly suspect the adoption M-1 Garand and M-1 Carbine may well have been delayed or even cancelled, while the Sherman would probably have been more like a Ram than it turned out in reality.  The only positive is it is likely combat experience, as opposed to interpreting the experience of others, may have resulted in the Tank Destroyer Doctrine never being adopted and the number of organic AT within regiments and divisions being increased, also likely the number of independent tank battalions supporting the Infantry divisions.

Sadly, no Mustang, or B-29 for that matter, likely no B-26 or A-26.  The war would have been fought with what was available and while new gear was developed it would have taken longer to get into service, because the existing designs would have filled the production capacity coming on line.  Just look at the UK and the 2pdr for example, its replacement had been designed and accepted but desperation meant production couldn't be switched over as something was better than nothing.
What gave the US an unique advantage is that it had vastly more production capacity than the UK, so it could add production for newer types without disturbing the production of existing types. Sure, in cases where something was perhaps not the best but adequate (as the 75mm gun on Shermans in OTL really was, considering the small numbers of Tigers actually encountered) production and logistics would not have been risked for minor improvements only, but if something were totally inadequate for its job (as the 2pdr was) it would be replaced at earliest opportunity. Even better if the new entry is produced by another company than the one making the existing product.

M1 Carbine would probably be skipped, sure, but M1 Garand was already in mass production since 1937. Having those production lines back-converted to produce M1903 Springfields would have been more difficult than simply opening new 1903 production lines with old tooling to supplement the Garand (as was actually done in OTL), never mind that throwing away thousands of perfectly useful rifles would have been stupid. What this means is simply that second-line troops would use either Springfield or SMG's.

A-26 might be in peril, I'll give you that, but I disagree on B-26 and B-29. B-18 production line had been closed already and it was obsolete, so the US would have needed a medium bomber and B-25 and B-26 were already in development for that exact specification. True, Martin would have probably put out more of its Maryland & Baltimore lights before starting B-26 production, but they were not really going to cut it in the long run.

B-29 was also a necessity, as B-17 and B-24 simply did not have the range to bomb Japan (at least not with any sort of useful payload) from available bases.  It was certainly not a finished article in OTL either but was pressed into service anyway, eating away production capacity from the true and tested B-17. The latter one was kept in production too, because it was adequate choice for ETO (and more cost effective at that).

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #47 on: October 09, 2019, 09:05:00 PM »
To a considerable extent it depends on when, where & how much of a shock to the system the casus belli that forces the early US entry into the war is.

It, obviously, has to be pretty traumatic but, if it doesn't completely paralyse the country, then the US is still relatively isolated from the main regions of conflict & still able to ramp up its industrial power.

Obviously, again, much of this would be impressed into producing what was available but the US's isolation would have allowed it more freedom to experiment & develop new equipment. The P-51 would be something that would have, I believe, proceeded, as the British had approached NA to produce Spitfires in early 1940 & the first (experimental) airframe (minus engine) was rolled out in about September, although it may never have received the Merlin. The M-1 Garand was the standard US Army service rifle from 1936, so ramping up production & standardising it across all services is a given, as in the RW. The M1 carbine (or something very much like it) would have been produced for the same reasons as the RW weapon.

Armour would have been slower to develop, as the US would have only the invasion of France (perhaps) to base its development, without the benefit of observations of the North African campaign. However, real combat experience may have resulted in a better tank (not that the M4 was bad, despite propaganda to the contrary) &, more importantly, a better tank doctrine, albeit a little later than in the RW.

The real telling point would be how fast the US economy could switch from peace-time production to full-scale war production, rather than the slower ramping up that they had between September 1939 & December 1941.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #48 on: October 09, 2019, 09:49:58 PM »
An early entry would likely have had to opposite effect with either the North Carolinas or the South Dakotas being standardised, i.e. likely no Iowas and definitely no Montanas, likely also no Essex or Midways, just repeat Yorktowns.  The Standardised destroyer likely would have been the Benson not the Fletcher and there likely would have been no Sumners or Gearings.  Same with the Cruisers, forget the Baltimores and Cleavlands, think Wichitas etc.

I strongly suspect the adoption M-1 Garand and M-1 Carbine may well have been delayed or even cancelled, while the Sherman would probably have been more like a Ram than it turned out in reality.  The only positive is it is likely combat experience, as opposed to interpreting the experience of others, may have resulted in the Tank Destroyer Doctrine never being adopted and the number of organic AT within regiments and divisions being increased, also likely the number of independent tank battalions supporting the Infantry divisions.

Sadly, no Mustang, or B-29 for that matter, likely no B-26 or A-26.  The war would have been fought with what was available and while new gear was developed it would have taken longer to get into service, because the existing designs would have filled the production capacity coming on line.  Just look at the UK and the 2pdr for example, its replacement had been designed and accepted but desperation meant production couldn't be switched over as something was better than nothing.
What gave the US an unique advantage is that it had vastly more production capacity than the UK, so it could add production for newer types without disturbing the production of existing types. Sure, in cases where something was perhaps not the best but adequate (as the 75mm gun on Shermans in OTL really was, considering the small numbers of Tigers actually encountered) production and logistics would not have been risked for minor improvements only, but if something were totally inadequate for its job (as the 2pdr was) it would be replaced at earliest opportunity. Even better if the new entry is produced by another company than the one making the existing product.

M1 Carbine would probably be skipped, sure, but M1 Garand was already in mass production since 1937. Having those production lines back-converted to produce M1903 Springfields would have been more difficult than simply opening new 1903 production lines with old tooling to supplement the Garand (as was actually done in OTL), never mind that throwing away thousands of perfectly useful rifles would have been stupid. What this means is simply that second-line troops would use either Springfield or SMG's.

A-26 might be in peril, I'll give you that, but I disagree on B-26 and B-29. B-18 production line had been closed already and it was obsolete, so the US would have needed a medium bomber and B-25 and B-26 were already in development for that exact specification. True, Martin would have probably put out more of its Maryland & Baltimore lights before starting B-26 production, but they were not really going to cut it in the long run.

B-29 was also a necessity, as B-17 and B-24 simply did not have the range to bomb Japan (at least not with any sort of useful payload) from available bases.  It was certainly not a finished article in OTL either but was pressed into service anyway, eating away production capacity from the true and tested B-17. The latter one was kept in production too, because it was adequate choice for ETO (and more cost effective at that).

Look at today to see what I was talking about, the war on terror killed the Comanche, M-8 rifle, Crusader SPG, Bradley replacement, AAAV replacement, possibly also the DDG 1000.  This is stuff in development that the military was keen on bringing into service or increasing holdings of that was cancelled or production ended early i.e. the F-22, because an active conflict required the substantially increased defence budget to be spent of stuff the troops needed in the field immediately.

The navy got more Arleigh Burkes but only three DDG 1000s and no CG replacement, the Army and Marines got thousands of MRAPs, UAVs and UCAVs but no new scout helos, I could go on.  When you have troops in the field, ships at sea and aircraft over targets you need the best that is available, not the better stuff that's two to five years off.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: U.S. Enters WWII Early (1940) GB Inspiration
« Reply #49 on: October 09, 2019, 11:12:11 PM »
The difference is that the US hasn't swung its economy into full war-production mode.

The counter to that, of course, is that they haven't fully mobilised for war, either.
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."