Richard of Eastwell was a commoner who claimed to be the son of Richard III

Richard III was killed by Lord Stanley`s men at the Battle of Bosworth Market ( Bosworth Field ) 22, August 1485

The Duke of Buckingham , Henry Stafford rose in revolt in October 1483 and wanted to replace Richard with Henry Tudor on the throne . Henry prepared to invade England from exile in Brittany , but Buckingham was captured and executed on 2, November 1483 , Henry retreated from his planned invasion . Richard III did indeed survive 1483 .

You may be thinking of Sultan Mohamed Shah Aga Khan III. He was weighed in diamonds on March 10, 1946, in Bombay (now Mumbai), which is in India, not Africa.

The Soviets would have won. (Remember Russia was just one part of the USSR)
The only thing that your scenario would bring to the US are shame, humiliation and pariah status.

Had the French, British and Americans attacked the USSR they would have lost, and lost badly.
The Soviets had more men, more tanks, more artillery, more aircraft in the Battle of Berlin alone than the entire US army in Europe. And the Soviets were simultaneously fighting from the Baltic to the Balkans - their army was massive.

Without using atomic weapons - there would be a rapid, and humiliating defeat of the Anglo-Franco-American forces. They were facing the most battle-hardened troops, the largest army, the best tanks and the largest air-force of WWII. The Soviets would have pushed them back into the sea.

Using atomic weapons - global revulsion of all things American. The US forced to retreat back to its borders - the economy in perpetual downturn.

The long term outcome would be (even if the FR-UK-US forces managed to push the Soviets out of Eastern Europe) that the three countries would be seen as war-mongering pariahs. The Soviets would be the good guys. The US would not have been able to muster the UN forces over the North Korean invasion of South Korea, Vietnam would have been communist in 1954, and the US would be viewed, even now, as a turncoat, treacherous state that few countries would deal with - much like North Korea now. Communism would be the dominant economic and political model in all of Europe, and much of the rest of the World.

The consequences of such a ludicrous action would be devastating to the British, French and Americans - thank God that no one took Patton or Churchill seriously.

Quite possibly - though that wouldn't have narrowed things down to enable him to pinpoint the exact invasion area. He also may have failed to predict the inventions of Percy Hobart.

But in any case, even given a free hand, he would never have intended to operate German armour on the beaches. He wanted to pin the Allies down on the beaches, and use his armour to counter-attack at any point where they broke through the first line.

I would class as essential for a serious empire historian...

Lawrence James history of the British Empire
Robin Neillands - a Fighting retreat (only post empire)

A lighter alternative - Dennis Judd - Empire.
Even lighter - Jeremy Paxman - Empire (have not read just seen series).

Specific breakdowns if you want more even more detail...

Thomas Packenham - The Boer War
Lawrence James - Scramble for Africa
Lawrence James- The Raj

Easy reading - Stuart Laycock - All the countries we've ever invaded.

Books on the history of the british army and navy will help you understand the ascendancy from the Kingdom of England and its first colony to the fullest extent of the empire.