Apart from hull numbers, and plane numbers on those hulls, AGAIN first flew in 1937, even if you have German-Japanese industrial/military relationship being much more than OTL, the idea that an aircraft that goes into service in 37 in another country will be available to a German navy in...
It first flew in 1937, unless you are suggesting a huge amount of foresight by the Germans, its not getting into service in Germany per WW2 and maybe not until a couple of years in depending on circumstances, like for example Germany being unwilling to accept its shortcomings like lack of armour...
I’m not saying subterfuge for trying to create some sort of carrier capability, I’m just saying that building anything the size of Alex and Saratoga are going to stand out a mile as breaching the Treaties in 1934. Will all the other parties ignore that?
Those were Treaty changed Battlecruisers, its much more likely to be something smaller and Treaty compliant even assuming they were to start in the 20's and get away with it, otherwise even after Hitler, they are breaking the Naval Treaties and the UK isn't likely to sign up to the Anglo-German...
Even assuming a far greater level of Japanese-German interaction and support, going from effectively no navy to an effective Carrier based navy in the years after Hitler came to power but before 1939 would almost be ASB.
It’s been discussed before, with the general view of it not really ending up being anything better for the Reich and arguably worse even with large amounts of hindsight. You are still going to need sufficient heavy escorts to protect the carriers particularly in the North Sea (HMS Glorious for...
I’m not sure about your idea of numbers given the IVF had been formed and somewhat equal amounts of men from “the South” served in the war as well, giving both sides trained people, remember the Free State was able to scale to nearly 100k for the National Army for the Civil War from basically...
The conscription crisis was in WW1, not sure how you think that needs a Pre1900 POD to avoid, Westminster had avoided bringing it in for much of the war, some more effort from Dublin Castle to be even a little bit good at their jobs might have flagged to the Cabinet the landline they were about...
Lots of different fallouts from the OP, I mean first off the idea of A Northern Ireland was already pretty fixed in U.K. policy by the start of WW1, so trying to create a situation where that doesn’t happen is the first issue. After that there’s more complications, I mean if the war goes worse...
That’s one take on things, but frankly ignores the plenty of structural and political positions that were all U.K. in how the U.K. economy developed post war and the shape of the RN, it also ignores things like how much Marshall funding the U.K. got for example.
I think that’s a bit of an assumption tbh, I mean we have the OTL level of investment/performance of British/Commonwealth forces to base there reactions on. I think first it would depend on who might be in charge and how aggressively they planned for an attack (ie would it be another Percival...