Anglo-Japanese War: Questions

[Colonel Autumn]

I'm sketching out a plan for a TL featuring a Pacific War without the USA and a British Empire that's free to expend it's forces completely on Japan.

Which force was stronger? Which force would win?

 

[Lee-Sensei]

I'm sketching out a plan for a TL featuring a Pacific War without the USA and a British Empire that's free to expend it's forces completely on Japan.

Which force was stronger? Which force would win?

I don't know how you'd keep the US out of it, but Japan would win. Any war between these two would take place primarily in the Pacific and the British have a globe spanning Empire to police.

 

[alspug]

The Royal Navy was far larger with excellent ships and men . The single biggest weakness was in the Royal Navies Aircraft carriers and their aircraft . The Royal Navy had built it's aircraft carriers for a Mediterranean conflict from 1936 onwards . This sacrificed plane count for survivability . No Japanese dive bombers carried a big enough bomb to kill them . The Japanese torpedo bombers are a different kettle of fish altogether .

If I was commanding the Royal Navy in such a war I would send my submarine force to take the battle to the Japanese and to attrite them until I could get a decent battle going . If Great Britain was not contending with a land war against Germany and Italy at the same time the resources needed to build carriers quickly would have been found .

 

[mcdo]

I'm sketching out a plan for a TL featuring a Pacific War without the USA and a British Empire that's free to expend it's forces completely on Japan.

Which force was stronger? Which force would win?

It hugely depends on when. The IJN of 1942 was a far different beast than the one of 1936, for example. In 1942, assuming butterfly nets ensure naval development is largely the same, I think Japan could win a short war. Longer wars, as well as earlier or later ones, may well favor the UK.

You say that the US is not in the war, but what are they actually doing? Are they true neutrals? Do they sell oil to Japan? Do they sell weapons to the UK? Are they willing to sell anything to everyone, or nothing to anyone?

Finally, why did this war start? How serious are the two sides? In many scenarios, the UK could win by enforcing a blockade, or using submarine interdiction, but are they willing to fight a long war, a la the Pacific War? Or, on the other hand, are both sides hoping for a quick victory, and a big naval victory here or there will decide the issue? Are they going to war with the navies they have? In certain time periods, that would favor Japan, but if this is a years-long conflict in which the Brits can build up their forces over time, that obviously favors them.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Again this depends on what POD frees Britian - ie no war in europe (the implication is that this is the case)?

And when does this war happen?

But what it boils down to is the worlds largest Fleet vs the 3rd largest

In the early 30s Britain beleived that Japan was the major threat - they planned accordingly hence why they built HMS Ark Royal - the threat subsequantly changed and the need for carriers that could survive in a littoral environment within range of land based Aircraft (IE Med/North Sea).

Had the belief that Japan would be the next potential enemy (and not Italy and Germany) perisisted then I think you would see a number of additional Ark Royal class carriers and / or the push to build larger hangered armoured carriers and with far less need for the RAF to monopolise aircraft construction you would see a better development of carrier aviation (Sea Spitfire in development from 1938?)

Also no war in Europe there is no need for masses of escorts and I cannot see the Japanese conducting USW against Britains Merchant marine although I can see the reverse happening to Japan.

This frees up masses of Construction capacity in the UK which = Lots of Modern DD, CLs and probably the Lions.

How do the 2 fleets stack up - OTL Britain has an very large advantage

In OTL 1941 Britain had 10 Carriers - incuding 4 very Modern ones and the 3 Courageous class which were at least useful.

In OTL 1941 Britain had 15 BBs (3 Modernised + 3 Modern) and 3 BCs (1 Modernised) - and none of them were bad ships.

Britains Cruiser Fleet was large and comprised some very well balanced designs

Edit: Ive totally ignored Britains advantage in airpower which wold be quite significant

Its Modern Fleet DDs were also pretty impresive and the number of Fleets dds was very large.

In 1941 IJN had 10 Carriers (Edit: they had 6 with 2 working up) with a very impressive Air Arm + a very impressive Land based maritime attack element

10 BBs (all modernised to some extent but no modern ship) + the 2 Monsters being completed

18 CLs and 18 CCs

So with the exception of the Air element Britain out numbers and out matches Japan and any long term war of attrition will result in them losing

Now where do they fight? And why?

Britain can project Power out of Singapore, where is the IJN Basing from?

Britain can support its fleet with the largest Merchant fleet in the world Japans would face severe interdiction from British USW

Outside of any individual clash I see the British having the advantage.

 

[King Augeas]

I'm sketching out a plan for a TL featuring a Pacific War without the USA and a British Empire that's free to expend it's forces completely on Japan.

Which force was stronger? Which force would win?

That's the critical point, really. That just turns it into a contest of industrial strength and Japan isn't winning that. However, in reality, the British would never be completely "free" to focus on Japan, and the question of things like oil supplies from the USA, USSR, France or DEI to Japan would greatly alter things.

Also, what are the war objectives? It's quite hard for Japan and the British to actually fight over much, on a 1940 basis. Hong Kong is vulnerable, but Malaya is shielded by French Indochina and the Philippines, and drawing France into the war just makes things unfair. If we give Japan bases in French Indochina, then an attack south into Malaya is possible, but that requires something rather serious to have happened in Europe, probably violating the concept of being free to concentrate on Japan.

The British are quite capable of defending Malaya and Singapore once reinforcements arrive, particularly since the implied non-involvement of the Dutch means that they can't outflank Singapore by occupying Sumatra. If that offensive fails then Japan basically can't win. But that doesn't mean that the British can easily force Japan to the table, given the logistical difficulties of projecting power to Japan itself and the "unconventional" Japanese attitudes to war. Blockade is the best option, but could be negated by Soviet or American support for Japan.