Sir John Valentine Carden Survives. Part 2.

[GrahamB]

Steel Meteor?

Yes, the post mentioned Leyland was making Meteor engines from scratch out of steel instead of aluminum alloy like the others.

While I do like Meadow's use of new parts to make whole engines instead of refurbishing used ones, the Steel Meteors from Leyland should prove even more reliable. Honestly I expect only the Perkins diesel Meteor to do better but I suspect they've also used the Leyland engine as a base.

 

[Bougnas]

Yes, the post mentioned Leyland was making Meteor engines from scratch out of steel instead of aluminum alloy like the others.

While I do like Meadow's use of new parts to make whole engines instead of refurbishing used ones, the Steel Meteors from Leyland should prove even more reliable. Honestly I expect only the Perkins diesel Meteor to do better but I suspect they've also used the Leyland engine as a base.

Well, steel is more about reducing cost, aluminium parts will not be very different in durability by themselves since they are scaled for the same performance. But it's fine enough. Well, strictly speaking cast iron (what is generally used for engine) gives more room for extra power but it's kinda offset by the redesign needed to get proper cooling as heat transfer will not be as good as aluminium if done blindly.

 

[Spartan-G257]

John Carden was aware that the Russian desire for diesel powered Valiants would probably mean, if the Victor was exported to Russia, that offering a diesel version would be necessary.

Let them keep the Valiant, they need not the Victor.
By the time the Victor is good for use they'll have little use for it. As they'll have their T-34 or T-34/85 and even if the 85 is later the T-34 and Valiant should be enough for their needs.

They need not see where Britain is heading in tank development any more than that.

 

[CB13]

Let them keep the Valiant, they need not the Victor.
By the time the Victor is good for use they'll have little use for it. As they'll have their T-34 or T-34/85 and even if the 85 is later the T-34 and Valiant should be enough for their needs.

They need not see where Britain is heading in tank development any more than that.

It's an interesting thought to ponder - Do you make up an excuse to not to deliver Victors to slow the Soviet advance towards Eastern Europe (and Poland in particular) given Stalin's intention to occupy it.

I certainly would....

 

[CB13]

Well, steel is more about reducing cost, aluminium parts will not be very different in durability by themselves since they are scaled for the same performance. But it's fine enough. Well, strictly speaking cast iron (what is generally used for engine) gives more room for extra power but it's kinda offset by the redesign needed to get proper cooling as heat transfer will not be as good as aluminium if done blindly.

I'm assuming they'll be building to marine engine specifications which the UK has a lot of experience with, so shouldn't be too much of a challenge, should it?

 

[Seawolf]

Do you make up an excuse to not to deliver Victors to slow the Soviet advance towards Eastern Europe (and Poland in particular) given Stalin's intention to occupy it.

Indeed, British tanks played a large role in the Soviet advance...

 

[focus9912]

It's an interesting thought to ponder - Do you make up an excuse to not to deliver Victors to slow the Soviet advance towards Eastern Europe (and Poland in particular) given Stalin's intention to occupy it.

I certainly would....

Hmm, perhaps the talk to them that the unsuitability (due to a lack of power) of the diesel engine makes the Victor unfeasible.
If they really have to eventually supply them with Victors, why not include a turbo on the diesel engine (as a pretense for overcoming the lack of power) and basically reduce the rate of advance of the Russian army due to reliability issues. /s


Actually it would be a bit hard to come up with an excuse.

 

[MrCharles]

Regarding the fitting of an external MG for the commander, why not just use the BESA again? The production lines for the gun and the ammunition already exist for the exclusive use of the RAC, and there must be plenty of spares on old tanks being withdrawn from service or being scrapped as unrepairable. Fabricating a modification kit to allow iron sights to be fitted can’t be that hard, can it?

 

[Sam R.]

Sir John Carden was aware that the Russian desire for diesel powered Valiants would probably mean, if the Victor was exported to Russia, that offering a diesel version would be necessary.

Sir John is thinking as an engineer. As an engineer he has the implicit social and political knowledge that the top of the range tank is likely to be exported to a junior coalition partner against the continental enemy.

Do you make up an excuse to not to deliver Victors to slow the Soviet advance towards Eastern Europe (and Poland in particular) given Stalin's intention to occupy it.

One problem here is that whether Britain could bleed its way to Gdansk? Or to put it another way, that Poland's security was of an equally essential interest to the Soviet Union as Belgium and Holland's security were to the United Kingdom in 1815. "Britain ensures Poland is in her sphere of influence come the defeat of Germany" is fascinating in itself but would probably require measures greater than Sir John.

yours,
Sam R.

 

[CB13]

Call it 77mm HV then; that's what they did IOTL...

They could just use the American naming convention and call M1.

Hmm, perhaps the talk to them that the unsuitability (due to a lack of power) of the diesel engine makes the Victor unfeasible.
If they really have to eventually supply them with Victors, why not include a turbo on the diesel engine (as a pretense for overcoming the lack of power) and basically reduce the rate of advance of the Russian army due to reliability issues. /s


Actually it would be a bit hard to come up with an excuse.

How about: "We took our best prototype Diesel engine all the way to trials, but it failed. We're hoping to develop a suitable alternative in the next 12-18 months. If on the other hand you have a Diesel engine you'd like us to use, send us samples and blueprints and we could potentially cut that time in half. Until then we'll continue to honour our promises with the Diesel Valiant Tanks."

 

[MattII]

There's also the question of whether the ships themselves can unload the Victors, or whether it will take dockside cranes to do it. If it's the latter, that's another compelling reason to delay sending them, the amount of trouble they'd be to unload.

 

[Salamander]

Hm, I thought the prototypes would have ironed out most of these issues...

There are considerable challenges converting a prototype model to a production model. The pre-production models are used to identify the issues arising from this process including, but not limited to, quality control, the most efficient method of assembly, and many other things.

 

[Ammonios]

Looking forward to seeing the Perkins diesel work the kinks out, but Leyland has done well in making their Steel Meteor.
Great update, the Victor is looking like a real beast this early in the war!

Hello,

There might be a solution for boosting diesel engines...

A history of turbocharging | Mitsubishi Turbocharger

www.turbocharger.mtee.eu

 

[Triune Kingdom]

The importance the British place on reliability of their tanks ITTL, is very satisfying to read I will not lie. That we have several preproduction models being made availlable for testing, seeing how interchanging of individual components is received and what lessons they do or do not learn from it.

Though, considering ITTL course of events, where Valiant itself (while an excellent tank) was not anything revolutionary, in itself. It was an evolution IMO, where majority of its components have existed in some form or another before, and have had time to mature individually. We are seeing this too, and while some German tanks may have superiority in some "hard" factors even over Vickers Victor, better use of armour by the British, as well other developments doctrine and equipment wise, and greater time spent testing and refining the design could result in some German advantages over their British (and Allied forces in general) being lessened or even gone entirely.

Not to lie, I like a good argument over particular calibers, one learns a huge amount, but there is much more to a tank then just its gun. Sherman is an excellent example of that, likely joined by the Valiant ITTL. The ability of Valiant to be fitted with rebored 6pdr/75mm is an advantage to be sure, it allows Valiant to stay relevant on the battlefield, especially now that British have finally getting guns capable of firing both decent AP and decent HE round. Very much in line with PzIII and IV, where it might be getting outmatched by newer enemy vehicles, but a tank is a tank, especially considering rough technical parity on both sides.

Do not think what they might do to our tanks, think what our tanks can do to our enemies. It matters suprisingly little (OTL or ITL) how much "superior" German tanks are to their enemies, if their enemies infantry divisions have more (and perhaps when taken as a whole superior) tanks then German Panzer Divisions cca. 1944.

Great work Allan, this has become one of my favourite TL, dare I say perhaps better then "Shipshape"? Maybe it is a more narrow area of history we are dealing with, instead of you rewriting first few years of WW2, while having to also deal with plethora of other changes, be they political, technical or of some other kind. Not to mention having a lot of people pulli g in each and every direction. Either way excellent work so far!

 

[Bougnas]

I'm assuming they'll be building to marine engine specifications which the UK has a lot of experience with, so shouldn't be too much of a challenge, should it?

Shouldn't be. In fact the US wanted to do the same thing to the Ford GAA but cancelled the program for some reason (maybe aluminium was no longer a problem).

---

In this time period turbos are too impractical for use in tanks, superchargers are what you need. Properly-made ones do not degrade reliability.

 

[kelgar04]

Shouldn't be. In fact the US wanted to do the same thing to the Ford GAA but cancelled the program for some reason (maybe aluminium was no longer a problem).

---

In this time period turbos are too impractical for use in tanks, superchargers are what you need. Properly-made ones do not degrade reliability.

Eh aside from some high stress parts like a turbo charger impeller, the majority is made of steel-alloys, and iron are used in marine engines to keep them cheap.

 

[yulzari1]

Ahhh…. Can people stop talking about rebored 6 Pounders to 75mm. They were never rebored. The 75mm was much the same as the 6 Pounder but was new made with 75mm barrels.

 

[StevoJH]

Well, steel is more about reducing cost, aluminium parts will not be very different in durability by themselves since they are scaled for the same performance. But it's fine enough. Well, strictly speaking cast iron (what is generally used for engine) gives more room for extra power but it's kinda offset by the redesign needed to get proper cooling as heat transfer will not be as good as aluminium if done blindly.

I'm assuming that the reference to a "Steel Meteor" was actually referring to using a cast iron block, not steel.

Rather then using an aluminium block to save weight like I am assuming that the Merlin would have used.

 

[Bougnas]

I'm assuming that the reference to a "Steel Meteor" was actually referring to using a cast iron block, not steel.

Rather then using an aluminium block to save weight like I am assuming that the Merlin would have used.

Yes.

 

[kelgar04]

I'm assuming that the reference to a "Steel Meteor" was actually referring to using a cast iron block, not steel.

could be talking about the main stress parts they talk about in the engine like the crowns and the liners. Anything in an engine that isn’t going to be under stress like the sump and the like will be cast iron.