I was just wondering how the war would play out if it contained neither A-Bombs, nor V2s. Surprisingly, both these weapons are fairly easy to do, kill a few more people in the Spanish flu (Arthur Jeffrey Dempster and F. W. Aster for the Nuke, Goddard and von Braun for the rocket), and you can delay both weapons by years, perhaps long enough that neither sees any real use in WW2. So how would the war play out without these incredibly expensive projects?
WW2 w/o A-bombs and V2s
- Thread starter MattII
- Start date
Deleted member 6086
The V-2 was a big nothing, and I say this as a space/rocketry afficionado. More people died building it than were killed by it.
Post-war it was extremely influential, though - the Redstone missile (which was also the booster for the first suborbital American space flights) was directly based on it.
Removing the V-2 program may add some resources to the Germans but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what they need to even slow the two Allied juggernauts that are the Soviet Union and United States to a meaningful degree, much less stop or even reverse it.
Removing the atom bomb has bigger implications in that it could extend the Pacific War which has massive repercussions upon both Japan and East Asia as a whole.
Removing the atom bomb has bigger implications in that it could extend the Pacific War which has massive repercussions upon both Japan and East Asia as a whole.
Agreed, but it was a hole they threw money and resources into, so now those can be spent elsewhere.
Butterfly the V2, it probably greatly improves anti-aircraft research of jets, as Hitler is going to demand that money and resources on some sort of war-changing super weapon.
No A-Bomb means more US deaths invading Japan. Ironically, butterfly both away and you buy the Axis a few months (though the Nazis may gain weeks at most).
No A-Bomb means more US deaths invading Japan. Ironically, butterfly both away and you buy the Axis a few months (though the Nazis may gain weeks at most).
It gets demonstrated on some North Koreans and Chinese, and then probably gets demonstrated against the Chinese again in border disputes with the USSR. It opens a scary can of worms. With the WW2 ending with an A-Bomb, it sort of closed the book on using the A-Bomb, reminding us of how horrific WW2 was. Using the A-Bomb to win minor conflicts does not have the same effect and in fact will lead to a lot of deaths.
However, a MAD policy (i.e. USSR threatens to use nukes if the US drops another Nuke on China, and creates a stand off that we may back off from) could pre-empt this.
However, a MAD policy (i.e. USSR threatens to use nukes if the US drops another Nuke on China, and creates a stand off that we may back off from) could pre-empt this.