PDA

View Full Version : UK contribution to operation Olympic??



CapStratos
11-10-2009, 12:30 AM
What if the allies never had the Atomic Bomb, and Operation Olympic was to be completed?? Which part the british should play on this invasion?? Maybe the RN helping the USN, but what about the RAF?
Could the RAF used the Halifax and Lancaster from Okinawa? And what about fighters? Any idea??
Thanks!

TheGrunch
11-10-2009, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by CapStratos:
What if the allies never had the Atomic Bomb, and Operation Olympic was to be completed?? Which part the british should play on this invasion?? Maybe the RN helping the USN, but what about the RAF?
Could the RAF used the Halifax and Lancaster from Okinawa? And what about fighters? Any idea??
Thanks!
Well, I guess Lancasters or indeed Lincolns would have had the range to do it from Okinawa (it's about 1000mi there and back), and from what I hear the Japanese were pretty far behind in the field of radar, so night raids against them might have been easier than those over Germany. Tempests had the range with drop-tanks, and Sea Furies would have been in limited service by then on carriers. In fact, the RAF Fury contract might not have been cancelled. I suppose the de Havilland Hornet might have been rushed into service a bit quicker, as well, because it was the only thing the RAF had up their sleeves that had a decent range, as far as I know.

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-10-2009, 03:25 AM
http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/bww2/lancast/lancast-11.jpg

Lancaster in Tiger Force colours.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Force_(air)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

TheGrunch
11-10-2009, 03:42 AM
"Tiger Force was to have been based on Okinawa and would have used Avro Lancasters, Avro Lincolns (the latest development of the Lancaster) and Consolidated Liberators"
Sweet, two out of three. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Scolar
11-10-2009, 03:50 AM
I woulda been a race to see if the Brits and Americans could make any headway into Japan before the USSR steamrollered right through right?

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-10-2009, 03:59 AM
The Soviets would probably have left the U.S & Commonwealth to Japan while gobbling up Japanese possesions in Asia. Expanding upon what was done before Hiroshima and Nagasaki forced a surrender. (IMO).

TheGrunch
11-10-2009, 04:29 AM
Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
The Soviets would probably have left the U.S & Commonwealth to Japan while gobbling up Japanese possesions in Asia. Expanding upon what was done before Hiroshima and Nagasaki forced a surrender. (IMO).
I think you're right. A massive Russo-Chinese super-state.

CapStratos
11-10-2009, 05:19 AM
Thanks for the links, any idea if exist something similar to Tiger Force for fighters?

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-10-2009, 05:28 AM
A bit 'rusty' on this, read up on it years ago - I *think* the RAF had plans to use P-47s and P-51s, but wars' end saw the order cancelled. As an aside, The P-47s used by the RAF in the far east had the best combined accident and combat safety record of any aircraft used by the RAF in WWII. I remember that. There was also a jet-powered flying boat designed for use in the far east.

CapStratos
11-10-2009, 05:52 AM
Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
A bit 'rusty' on this, read up on it years ago - I *think* the RAF had plans to use P-47s and P-51s, but wars' end saw the order cancelled.
Time to search some late war P51D and P47N RAF skins!! Any idea??

Choctaw111
11-10-2009, 06:49 AM
This is a very interesting topic, and to be honest, I have never really given it much thought. Now I have something to entertain my mind with today.
On the other hand, how many are alive today from the millions of lives saved back then by this massive operation never taking place?

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-10-2009, 07:41 AM
Would have been a terrible bloodbath wouldn't it? Not that A-bombs are a picnic.

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-10-2009, 09:51 AM
Originally posted by CapStratos:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
A bit 'rusty' on this, read up on it years ago - I *think* the RAF had plans to use P-47s and P-51s, but wars' end saw the order cancelled.
Time to search some late war P51D and P47N RAF skins!! Any idea?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/p47d72cb_4.jpg

http://www.hyperscale.com/2007/galleries/images/p47d32sp_seac3.jpg


http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/19966/normal_P-47%2060Squadron%20RAF%20Surabaya%209_11.jpg


Interesting: apparently Tempests were on the way:-
http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/lo...d-thunderbolt-ii.cfm (http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/london/collections/aircraft/republic-p-47d-thunderbolt-ii.cfm)

CapStratos
11-10-2009, 10:30 AM
USAAF P-47N coming back to Ie Shima...

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b212/Capitanstratos/grab0000-42.jpg

Interesting about the Tempest, are they the mark we use in game??

AndyJWest
11-10-2009, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
Would have been a terrible bloodbath wouldn't it? Not that A-bombs are a picnic.

There is little reason to doubt that an invasion of the Japanese mainland would have led to horrific losses on both sides, but it is possible that the Japanese might have surrendered without an invasion being necessary. With the US submarine fleet preventing almost all cargo vessels from getting through to Japan from their remaining overseas conquests, the economy was on the verge of collapse, if not already fatally wounded. A continuation of the blockade until a Japanese surrender could quite possibly have led to large-scale civilian casualties too, through starvation, but I'd have thought that the death toll would have been lower than that from any invasion.

TS_Sancho
11-10-2009, 11:35 AM
I am under the impression by the time of the atomic raids the B29 bombing campaign had already destroyed almost all worthwhile strategic targets in mainland Japan.

It would have been pointless for the UK to deploy a large 4 engine bomber force to the pacific, there were no targets left.

As far as starving Imperial Japan into submission, lack of food and supply made little difference in the tenacity of the Japanese defenders any time before in the pacific theatre and judging by the insanity that took place in Okinawa would have made no difference in expediting the surrender of the mainland.

It took something radical to convince the Japanese to unconditionally surrender and suffer the allied occupation of their homeland and that was the atomic bomb.

TheGrunch
11-10-2009, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by CapStratos:
Interesting about the Tempest, are they the mark we use in game??
No, they were Tempest IIs with the Centaurus engine. From Wikipedia:
"A total of 452 Tempest IIs were built, including 136 basic Mark IIs and 316 "Fighter Bomber Mark IIs" (FB II). They were built mostly by Hawker and generally with Centaurus V engines, and of that number 300 were completed after the war. The Tempest II, despite its slightly improved performance and better reliability, never saw combat.

Tempest IIs produced during the war were intended for combat against Japan, and would have formed part of a proposed British Commonwealth long range bomber force based on Okinawa, Tiger Force. The Pacific War ended before they could be deployed."


Originally posted by TS_Sancho:
It would have been pointless for the UK to deploy a large 4 engine bomber force to the pacific, there were no targets left.
I'm not sure that's true at all. I'm pretty sure the huge troop concentrations and large concentrations of aircraft ready for kamikaze sorties on the invasion fleet would have made a worthwhile target even for the heavies.

Woke_Up_Dead
11-10-2009, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
The Soviets would probably have left the U.S & Commonwealth to Japan while gobbling up Japanese possesions in Asia. Expanding upon what was done before Hiroshima and Nagasaki forced a surrender. (IMO).

I understand that Stalin was planning on invading the Japanese mainland after quickly capturing Manchuria. Soviet talks with US diplomats hinted at some sort of 50/50 occupation arrangement similar to that in Germany, which of coursed angered the Americans who at that point have been fighting the Japanese for years, and not days like the Soviets. The Soviets already took the Kuril islands from Japan.

Given the timing of the Soviet declaration of war on Japan (right between the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings) and the apparent fear of the Soviet invasion, it can probably be said that the Soviet threat was as much of a motivation for Japan to surrender than to the US as the bombs were, if not more so. In fact several Japanese diplomats have said as much in their memoirs.

So assuming that the Japanese would not surrender without the bomb and despite the threat of American and Soviet invasion, the western allies would have probably met the Soviets somewhere half-way on the Japanese mainland. It would have been an interesting and potentially explosive encounter, especially seeing that unlike the war in Europe, the Soviets were not really needed to finish Japan and the Americans in particular would have felt that they were intruding. Could make for an interesting "what-if" IL-2 campaign.

Buzzsaw-
11-10-2009, 07:36 PM
Salute

The Royal Navy had a complete Naval Battlegroup of 12 Carriers and numerous battleships in the Pacific which would have been used in Operation Olympic. At the time of the Japanese surrender, it was being used to attack Japanese assets in the Singapore and Indonesia areas.

The Australian Airforce would have re-deployed its assets to Okinawa to assist in Operation Olympic.

Some people do not realize that Operation Olympic was only the first stage in the invasion of Japan. Olympic was the invasion of Kyushu, the southern smaller island, which was defended by approx. 6 Japanese divisions. Olympic was scheduled to capture only the southern half of Kyushu, just enough to provide good bases for the next phase which was:

Operation Coronet, the invasion of the Japanese main island, at the Kanto Plain. (Tokyo) The main island was defended by 15 Japanese divisions, and would have been a much harder nut to crack.

Operation Coronet would have included a Commonwealth Infantry Corps, including British, Canadian and Australian Infantry divisions. An estimated 25 divisions in all, the majority being American would have been committed.

British Troops would have simultaneously been invading Singapore, Thailand and Malaya. And of course, they had 20 divisions committed in Burma.

The Japanese had an estimated 10,000 planes to committ in Kamikaze attacks against Olympic and Coronet, by comparison, there were 2000 Kamikazes committed against Okinawa. There were expected to be huge losses in American and British shipping.

In both Kyushu and the main islands, the Japanese had recruited more than 1 million militia all healthy men aged 1560 and women 1740, armed with nothing better than muzzle-loading muskets, longbows, or bamboo spears. They were expected to sacrifice themselves to divert American firepower from the regular Japanese troops.

Anyone who looks carefully at the plans for Olympic and Coronet, and the scale of the fighting comes quickly to understand that the Atomic bombs actually saved lives. If the invasions had gone through, there would have been enormous casualties, most on the Japanese side.

As far as the Soviets were concerned, they did not have the amphibious capability to invade. The only way they could have gotten ashore was if the Americans assisted them. Even the limited coastal assets the Japanese navy had remaining would have massacred any Soviet invasion fleet, which would not have included much in the way of dedicated invasion craft, ie. the Soviets would have been reduced to unloading from freighters, suicidal in the face of a defence.

PanzerAce
11-10-2009, 07:57 PM
WUD, what would stalin have used to invade the mainland? As far as I've found, the Japanese still had a fair number of surface combatants, while the Russians had none that were of note. Also, I don't think Russia had the amphibious capability to put enough troops on the ground and keep them supplied. I'd give more credence to the idea that they would have taken as much of manchuria/china as possible, and left the islands to the US>

Airmail109
11-10-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by TheGrunch:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkIX:
The Soviets would probably have left the U.S & Commonwealth to Japan while gobbling up Japanese possesions in Asia. Expanding upon what was done before Hiroshima and Nagasaki forced a surrender. (IMO).
I think you're right. A massive Russo-Chinese super-state. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Somehow doubt even the Russians would be able to hold onto China.

Airmail109
11-10-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
This is a very interesting topic, and to be honest, I have never really given it much thought. Now I have something to entertain my mind with today.
On the other hand, how many are alive today from the millions of lives saved back then by this massive operation never taking place?

Well, are there not reports that Japan was on the verge of surrendering anyway?

Buzzsaw-
11-10-2009, 08:28 PM
Salute

The Soviets had no intention invade China, China was a part of the Allied Alliance, the Kuomintang had treaties with the Soviets.

What they would have done was continue to secretly supply the Communist Chinese armies, meanwhile consolidating in Korea and Manchuria, removing all the Japanese heavy industrial machinery they could, and shipping that back to Soviet areas.

Despite its huge armies, the Soviet Union was an exhausted state in 1945, half its territory had been devastated by the German occupation and the fighting, they had lost 27 million people out of a population of 180 million, and they were in serious debt.

They needed to consolidate and control the gains they had made in Eastern Europe, and rebuild their own economy.

Wasting time and resources trying to attack Japan was not on their priority list. They were content to occupy the Kuriles, they had troops there anyway.

Woke_Up_Dead
11-10-2009, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw:
As far as the Soviets were concerned, they did not have the amphibious capability to invade. The only way they could have gotten ashore was if the Americans assisted them. Even the limited coastal assets the Japanese navy had remaining would have massacred any Soviet invasion fleet, which would not have included much in the way of dedicated invasion craft, ie. the Soviets would have been reduced to unloading from freighters, suicidal in the face of a defence.



Originally posted by PanzerAce:
WUD, what would stalin have used to invade the mainland? As far as I've found, the Japanese still had a fair number of surface combatants, while the Russians had none that were of note.

How did the Soviets capture the Kurils, how did they succeed with amphibious landings in Crimea? By improvising, doing things on a shoestring, taking lots of casualties in the process. Not nearly as well planned and effective as D-Day or Iwo Jima, but it worked for them. Such an approach would have likely been enough for them to at least carry out their planned invasion of Hokkaido, the northern-most island which was protected by less than 3 Japanese divisions, all facing the wrong way (east, towards the Americans). After that, who knows?

Low_Flyer_MkIX
11-11-2009, 12:36 AM
Interesting stuff. Would have made for a much more appealing 1946 game, don't you think?

R_Target
11-11-2009, 03:28 AM
Originally posted by Aimail101:
Well, are there not reports that Japan was on the verge of surrendering anyway?

The moderate members of the "Big Six" on the Supreme Council were seeking a negotiated settlement only on Japanese terms. The rest were intent on continuing the war.