D-Day

[Grey_Fox]

Not really. German troops were better motivated than their opponents and could pull off amazing feats even when ridiculously outnumbered.

I can't do detail at the moment, (gotta be at airport in 6 hours), but the lessons of the Battle of the Somme fundamentally changed military doctrine in the UK after WWI.

Didn't help the BEF in France in 1940...

[rotorgun]

As for the effectiveness of the German army and its superiority over the allies on the tactical level, I believe any knowledgable person would agree that there was no comparison. It was numbers that ultimately beat them for sure. One must admit that Soviet tank design had gone far ahead of anything the allies produced, but was not descisive against the Germans alone. In the west, I must remind myself that Britain, France and America faced only 1/4 of the German Army. But for allied control of the air, Germany would have defeated them. This is rather humbling to admit for an American, raised as I was on the myths of invincibility created by our victory. But for a few mistakes....Mein Gott!

I believe that Hitler would have turned his Panzer resreve east as soon as he felt he had sufficiently secured the Atlantic Wall. A failed D Day could have brought about a peace agreement with Hitler exchanging France (except for the Rhineland areas occupied prior to the war) and the Low countries for military aid against the Soviets. The Allies might have accepted the offer to minimize the political damage of such a defeat. It is doubtful, given Hitler's megalomania, but possible. The Generals would have been in a better position to argue for such a course. With the combined forces against the SU, a push into Germany would have been impossible for them.

Those who underestimate the superiority of the Soviet Armies tank designs should try to match the American late war Shermans and Pershings against the Soviet T 34 85's, JSI and JSII heavy tanks in a wargame. In equal numbers, and make no mistake, the Sovets had plenty, there is no competition. Only allied aircraft had technical superiority over Russian planes. Even then, it was not marked by this stage in the war. Perhaps the A Bomb would have been used in Europe as well against the Russians?

[Pannonian]

As for the effectiveness of the German army and its superiority over the allies on the tactical level, I believe any knowledgable person would agree that there was no comparison. It was numbers that ultimately beat them for sure. One must admit that Soviet tank design had gone far ahead of anything the allies produced, but was not descisive against the Germans alone. In the west, I must remind myself that Britain, France and America faced only 1/4 of the German Army. But for allied control of the air, Germany would have defeated them. This is rather humbling to admit for an American, raised as I was on the myths of invincibility created by our victory. But for a few mistakes....Mein Gott!

Compare with Operation Bagration in the east which took place at roughly the same time. Pages 57-61 contains a nice summary of the Soviet doctrine of "Deep Operations" and its implementation at this stage of the war.

http://cgsc.leavenworth.army.mil/car...ubs/connor.pdf

[Kraxis]

The original T-34 could have matched the Sherman (better gun, lesser armour and superior mobility), the 85 version was upgunned and armoured so that the Sherman would feel like it was facing a Panther. But unlike previously, there would be hundreds of these tanks (in fact they would be as numerous as the Allied tanks).

But the Allies had training on their side.
If you look at the battles in Lorraine between Allies Shermans (and some Tank Destroyers) and German Panthers you will se that the Allied tankers were simply better educated. That would be a huge advantage when facing the horribly trained Russian tankcrews.
But I think it would have been a rude shock for the Allies to fight the Russians.

[Lord Winter]

I think like everyone else the Russians would have over ran Germany and probably gulped up most of northern/western France, with the allies sallying from Italy and possibly another landing in Normandy, thus taking south France. Then i think the soviets would turn east like they did historically after V.E. and declare war on japan. Quite possibly the allies would then make peace with Japan and open a second front on Russia with the added man power freed up from the pacific.
After that who can say? It would have been a terrible war of
with Germany changing hands many time, huge bombing raids by the allies and probably a blockade too.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

It would have been difficult for the Germans to have defeated the Normandy landings -- but not impossible. Greater success at Omaha beach, a rapid night counterattack while the British and American forces were still unlinked, a greater degree of success in shrugging off the impact of the paratroopers. Germany might have eked out a win while the Allied lodgements were too small for their greater logistics to be brought to bear.

If defeated, the Wermacht would have been reasonably sure that another invasion could not be mounted for some time, possibly as much as a year. This would have placed greater reserves at the disposal of commanders in the East and slowed, albeit not halted, Soviet gains that year. The Atlantic Wall would still have required many troops, and only a Wermacht commitment of nearly 100% of all forces might (and only might) have stopped the Sovs.

But slow the advance of the Soviets 6 months, maybe longer, and I think you do see the first nuke used on Germany rather than Japan as a means of wiping out the Leadership and preventing the feared Bavarian redoubt.

[Kraxis]

I'm certain the Allies might have redoubled their efforts in getting the landings in Southern France going. So perhaps it might happen strengthened and earlier. This would force teh Germans to keep her troops in France, but southern France wouldn't be as easy to supply so the Allies couldn't put much pressure on Germany.

Grmany wouldn't be able to send too much to the East.