WI/AHC: Armada Of 1779 Goes Forward?

Kung Fucious · Oct 20, 2014

What it says on the tin. The Armada of 1779 was a joint Franco-Spanish plan to invade the British Isles during the American Revolutionary War. The plan was to seize the Isle of Wight, and use that as a staging ground in order to invade England proper, including the naval base at Porstmouth (which the French planned to occupy post-war). Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on whose side you favor), the Spanish forces which were meant to link-up with the French forces, before the invasion proper, were delayed, causing the French to burn through their supplies and diseases to spread throughout the fleet (which than later spread to the Spanish flee once they arrived). Because of that delay (and for a variety of other reasons), the invasion was called off.

So, as the saying goes, what if it's not? What if the Spanish had arrived on time, or barring that, what if the invasion had gone ahead? What would the knock-on effects be? Would a successful (or hell, even just attempted) invasion of the British Isles by the French and Spanish helped to avert their eventual collapse?

Talmanes · Oct 20, 2014

Well, assuming the Spanish arrive on time, that doesn't butterfly disease, and might even contribute to its faster spread. You still go forward with this invasion, and there becomes a very real chance the invaders are hampered by illness - including of major commanders. It could turn into a very bad day for the French and Spanish to the point they rethink their support for the rebels.

Kung Fucious · Oct 20, 2014

Talmanes said:
Well, assuming the Spanish arrive on time, that doesn't butterfly disease, and might even contribute to its faster spread. You still go forward with this invasion, and there becomes a very real chance the invaders are hampered by illness - including of major commanders. It could turn into a very bad day for the French and Spanish to the point they rethink their support for the rebels.

Would it though? From my understanding the disease outbreak was only due to the delay caused by Spanish. If they were to arrive on time, would that not prevent the outbreak?

Also, even if there had been the outbreak of disease in the invasion force, the invasion still could have gone ahead as planned.

Indicus · Oct 20, 2014

Well, what I think would occur is that the alliance would temporarily take some part of England, before being forced off, and a quicker American Revolution as a result.

Gurroruo · Oct 20, 2014

If the French supply themselves faster and leave port on the same day as OTL then disease and scurvy won't afflict them.

without the disease d'Orvilliers will feel more confident. That way when they reach the Channel he gives the orders for the troops to cross the Channel. Soon enough tens of thousands of French troops will be on British shores. Using the initial surprise the invasion can score some easy victories and no doubt seize Plymouth. Meanwile the armada defeats Hardy as Hardy tries to return to Britain. Using the momentum they could threaten London if they are in a position to take London then you could see the British negotiating an earlier peace with the French and Spanish. The Spanish would be favorable towards this they could probably negotiate for Gibraltar and Mobile maybe even Florida. The French would be less so this was more a prestige war for them. However I'm certain if the British thought they were truly in danger the they could offer something to persuade the French.

This would have interesting butterflies on the world. The French might be given enough in reparations to pay off much of their debt which would result in the French Revolution (yes it will still occur) being less of a big deal as conditions wouldn't be as bad.

In the Americas if the Allies withdraw earlier then the British will have more resources to fight the Americans. This could result in the British actually beating down the rebellion or at the very least retaining the south.

Summary:

POD: French get fully supplied
d'Orvilliers has confidence to give orders to transport troops
Invasion wins several quick victories and takes Plymouth
Hardy is defeated as he tries to return to Britain
As Britain is still in shock invasion army threatens/takes London
British make peace with France and Spain offering generous terms
British now fully focused on rebellion and fully motivated due to major prestige loss counterattack and beat down rebellion

cubefreak123 · Oct 20, 2014

Gurroruo said:
snip

Why would the French and Spanish not include the Americans though? It would look really bad on the French's part to short-change an ally (albeit a new one) and supporting the nascent US takes a good chunk of land, resources, and people away from Britain.

Faeelin · Oct 20, 2014

cubefreak123 said:
Why would the French and Spanish not include the Americans though? It would look really bad on the French's part to short-change an ally (albeit a new one) and supporting the nascent US takes a good chunk of land, resources, and people away from Britain.

Agreed. Not including America makes no sense. America was supported beacuse the REvolution was perceived as a way to strike a blow at the British aspirations to global hegemony.

Gurroruo · Oct 20, 2014

cubefreak123 said:
Why would the French and Spanish not include the Americans though? It would look really bad on the French's part to short-change an ally (albeit a new one) and supporting the nascent US takes a good chunk of land, resources, and people away from Britain.

Simple: money. The French economy had been bleeding for years and the French government knew this war would cost aswell, but the French could not let an opportunity pass like this one. So they went to war with the British. With the armada being successful they can gain a victory, but they can't have a complete victory, because the war in the colonies still has the British in a nice position and if the war in Britain draws on too long the French army will be stuck there in the winter.

The fact of the matter was invading Britain was not the smartest move because if it failed it would cost the French a lot, but if successful it would cut off the amount of time the Allies had to operate against the British.

Supporting the Americans also means supporting democracy. Even though it isn't as bad for France as for Spain it is still bad for France. And the other European powers recognized this a simple prestige war for France, so dropping the Americans wouldn't hurt France's image to much among the Europeans.

The Netherlands who would probably have been most opposed to the French dropping the Americans like that had yet to join the war and at this point were very much neutral with some Ally leaning policies.

chornedsnorkack · Oct 21, 2014

If the French win in Britain, how long would it take till the British forces in colonies wither from lack of supplies?

Also, which way would George III flee? Hanover? Halifax? Calcutta?

Gurroruo · Oct 21, 2014

chornedsnorkack said:
If the French win in Britain, how long would it take till the British forces in colonies wither from lack of supplies?

Also, which way would George III flee? Hanover? Halifax? Calcutta?

Some months, but that requires not only the French to be willing to fight into the winter, but winning in the winter

York

Faeelin · Oct 21, 2014

Gurroruo said:
Simple: money. The French economy had been bleeding for years and the French government knew this war would cost aswell, but the French could not let an opportunity pass like this one. So they went to war with the British. With the armada being successful they can gain a victory, but they can't have a complete victory, because the war in the colonies still has the British in a nice position and if the war in Britain draws on too long the French army will be stuck there in the winter.

Britain's financial position would collapse, as would its warmaking ability. How viable would the Bank of England be if its specie is being carried off to France, for instance?

France's goal was to partition the British Empire; given a crushing victory like you are positing here, it would do it. I don't know why they would surrender and leave Britain in a stronger position ATL than they did in OTL after several more years of war...

Mike · Oct 21, 2014

cubefreak123 said:
Why would the French and Spanish not include the Americans though? It would look really bad on the French's part to short-change an ally (albeit a new one) and supporting the nascent US takes a good chunk of land, resources, and people away from Britain.

The problem is Spain did not want American independence while France did. Spain feared that an independent 13 Colonies would then turn on the Spanish NA colonies. Future events would prove Spain right. Spain actually offered to stay out of the war if Britain returned some former Spanish territories (I forget which). Britain refused and so Spain joined France on the condition that they do an invasion of Britain. France then begrudgingly accepted plans for an invasion of Britain in order to get Spain and her still formidable navy onside. France had wanted a low-risk, high reward strategy by taking away British colonies in the Caribbean and India while letting the British keep Canada so that the USA and Britain could potentially remain at loggerheads.

There is also the problem that France did not want to piss off Britain too much. France feared Russian expansion into Europe and so she needed to court allies like Britain and her powerful navy in order to check Russian ambitions.

Gurroruo · Oct 21, 2014

Faeelin said:
Britain's financial position would collapse, as would its warmaking ability. How viable would the Bank of England be if its specie is being carried off to France, for instance?

France's goal was to partition the British Empire; given a crushing victory like you are positing here, it would do it. I don't know why they would surrender and leave Britain in a stronger position ATL than they did in OTL after several more years of war...

That's if France managed to take London, which would be extremely difficult given the fact that by that time the British would have mustered a very large force for the defense of London.

As mic as France wanted to do that, they couldn't do that without some serious luck. This invasion was counter productive. It sliced the amount of time the French and Spanish had to operate and seize British lands. This invasion basically gave the French 4 months to win the war or miserably lose in England. They couldn't just withdrawal after wrecking a part of England, this was an endgame move.

Basically unless the French take London they are going to have to go for a more limited peace territory exchange wise, but bigger money wise.

However if London is taken its a total victory for the Alliance. The British economy will be wrecked and the center of power destroyed. They would probably be able to get Gibraltar, Florida, and maybe even the Bahamas for Spain and some land in. India or maybe even Canada for France, and then independence for the US

chornedsnorkack · Oct 21, 2014

How would 18th or 19th century British Navy´s capability to guard the English Channel fare if French hold both Plymouth and Portsmouth? Or what happens if the French march south around London being too well defended for a frontal attack, but do take Rochester?

Tordenskjold · Oct 21, 2014

Gurroruo said:
However if London is taken its a total victory for the Alliance. The British economy will be wrecked and the center of power destroyed. They would probably be able to get Gibraltar, Florida, and maybe even the Bahamas for Spain and some land in. India or maybe even Canada for France, and then independence for the US

It'd be interesting how that might affect the revolution? Maybe a Franco-American alliance would change the discourse on Monarchy in the US enough for Washington to accept the crown, possible as a counter-weight to a much more powerful Kingdom of France. If the French can indeed get Canada back this could lead to tensions with the Americans about the question of manifest destiny and who has the right to what land, not to mention the already discussed animosity of their ally spain towards the rising 13 colonies.

Gurroruo · Oct 21, 2014

chornedsnorkack said:
How would 18th or 19th century British Navy´s capability to guard the English Channel fare if French hold both Plymouth and Portsmouth? Or what happens if the French march south around London being too well defended for a frontal attack, but do take Rochester?

Currently Hardy is out in the Atlantic

Think Hannibal

Tordenskjold said:
It'd be interesting how that might affect the revolution? Maybe a Franco-American alliance would change the discourse on Monarchy in the US enough for Washington to accept the crown, possible as a counter-weight to a much more powerful Kingdom of France. If the French can indeed get Canada back this could lead to tensions with the Americans about the question of manifest destiny and who has the right to what land, not to mention the already discussed animosity of their ally spain towards the rising 13 colonies.

It would be interesting

chornedsnorkack · Oct 21, 2014

What do you think would the British Army and Navy, and Tories in Americas do when they hear of London and English naval bases having fallen?

Would they prefer to make their terms with Americans, who are fellow Englishmen, or with French and Spaniards in London?

Gurroruo · Oct 21, 2014

chornedsnorkack said:
What do you think would the British Army and Navy, and Tories in Americas do when they hear of London and English naval bases having fallen?

Would they prefer to make their terms with Americans, who are fellow Englishmen, or with French and Spaniards in London?

They will fight on hoping to turn the war around in America

That's a tough question

chornedsnorkack · Oct 21, 2014

Gurroruo said:
They will fight on hoping to turn the war around in America

Um, without admiralty and shipyards in Britain?

Gurroruo · Oct 21, 2014

chornedsnorkack said:
Um, without admiralty and shipyards in Britain?

They aren't about to surrender, most of the regular armies will maintain there positions