License built copy?

The walk behind can be left in the shed all winter, and no need to feed and water it when not working

Mechanization on US farms freed up 1/3 of the acreage that had been set aside for fodder, and now could be used for crops that could be sold
Far more profitable to buy fuel monthly than have to grow hay and recover straw from the wheat for the draft animals
If you can get the fuel, sure. That may be more an issue in Germany.
 
Collective farms? That'll go down well with the conservatives.
Funny enough, a "conservative" started this. Yes, the guy who was more proud of his aristocratic title than he was ever of his military rank.
"In 1925, Strachwitz and his family moved from their palace in Groß Stein to their manor in Alt Siedel, because of personal differences with his father, who remained in Groß Stein. Between 1924 and 1933 Strachwitz founded two dairy cooperatives which many local farmers joined. In parallel he studied a few semesters of forestry. He used his knowledge to influence the Silesian forest owners to sell their wood to the paper mills. He continued to use his influence in Upper Silesia to modernize forestry and farming. His ambitions were aided by his presidency of the Forstausschuss (Forestry Committee) of Upper Silesia and his membership in the Landwirtschaftskammer (Chamber of Agriculture).[20] Strachwitz completely took over his father's estate in 1929, first as the General Manager and then as owner, with full responsibility. This made Strachwitz one of the most wealthy land and forest owners in Silesia. Along with the palace in Groß Stein he owned a lime kiln and quarry in Klein Stein—present-day Kamionek—and Groß Stein, a distillery in Groß Stein and Alt Siedel.[21][Note 4]"

I don't suggest these things randomly, you know.
 
Cooperating to buy machinery was pretty common in Western Canada at least. It wouldn’t have to be a formal cooperative.
 
Cooperating to buy machinery was pretty common in Western Canada at least. It wouldn’t have to be a formal cooperative.
Nazis could have encouraged it, seeing as one of their own was pretty successful with his cooperatives.
The Panzergraf joined the Nazis and SS in 1931.
My biggest question is why he didn't join the Waffen SS, instead choosing to remain with the Wehrmacht.
 
Nazis could have encouraged it, seeing as one of their own was pretty successful with his cooperatives.
The Panzergraf joined the Nazis and SS in 1931.
My biggest question is why he didn't join the Waffen SS, instead choosing to remain with the Wehrmacht.
Better prospects? The early Waffen SS was a small, under equipped, under trained organisation with little prospect of ever being more than a couple of regiments. If you were looking for a future high level command the Army would have seemed the better option.
 
Better prospects? The early Waffen SS was a small, under equipped, under trained organisation with little prospect of ever being more than a couple of regiments. If you were looking for a future high level command the Army would have seemed the better option.
Ok good point, I forgot that the Waffen SS only became a de facto branch of the Wehrmacht in 1943, after their conscription efforts. (Which ironically also ruined the quality of the Waffen SS, because many of these conscripts would desert or mutiny in less than a year's time)
 
Collective farms? That'll go down well with the conservatives.
Not the same.
Cooperatives were popular in the Midwest, and that was filled with conservatives.

My Grandfather, who Farmed from the era Horses, to Steam, to Kerosene Tractor era- and his neighbors worked a deal like this.
Not every farmer could afford a big Steam Traction Engine, so a guy in the County who did get one, would plow and harvest his neighbors fields for a cut of the harvest.
So he thought that a great deal, until prices came down enough on gasoline tractors to buy his own.

Even though a Cooperative was in many ways, exactly like a Union, the Farmers didn't see it that way, as each Farmer was his own boss. His own Company, with him, the Wife, and his Kids as workers. Union? that for some foreign born City Slicker, not the honest, hard working Farmer

But a small company didn't have the same bargaining power with a manufacturer as larger ones, so you got Cooperatives so they could get better prices on Seed, Feed, Fertilizer and Gear.
 
Doing a Woodgas powerd IC engine, or external combustion Steamer isn't a problem. Germans had plenty of Coal
I mean, since they managed to make a woodgas powered Tiger I in OTL, I think a couple 1000 woodgas powered 20hp tractors shouldn't be too hard.
There goes the trees though.
Wonder if the Lorax is going to protest, though I would hope that he keeps his mouth shut for his own sake.
 
I mean, since they managed to make a woodgas powered Tiger I in OTL, I think a couple 1000 woodgas powered 20hp tractors shouldn't be too hard.
There goes the trees though.
Wonder if the Lorax is going to protest, though I would hope that he keeps his mouth shut for his own sake.
Using coal in place of wood is great for gasifiers, as there is less moisture than wood
 
Not the same.
Cooperatives were popular in the Midwest, and that was filled with conservatives.

My Grandfather, who Farmed from the era Horses, to Steam, to Kerosene Tractor era- and his neighbors worked a deal like this.
Not every farmer could afford a big Steam Traction Engine, so a guy in the County who did get one, would plow and harvest his neighbors fields for a cut of the harvest.
So he thought that a great deal, until prices came down enough on gasoline tractors to buy his own.

Even though a Cooperative was in many ways, exactly like a Union, the Farmers didn't see it that way, as each Farmer was his own boss. His own Company, with him, the Wife, and his Kids as workers. Union? that for some foreign born City Slicker, not the honest, hard working Farmer

But a small company didn't have the same bargaining power with a manufacturer as larger ones, so you got Cooperatives so they could get better prices on Seed, Feed, Fertilizer and Gear.
Some people were still doing it when I was farming. It is often pretty informal. They all put up money for the machinery and spend the life of it arguing over who gets to use it when. But it can work out alright. Especially when done by a couple of smaller guys.
 
Is there any reason you couldn't use bottled Coal Gas?
Sure, very similar to LPG tanks, but that's a liquid.
Woodgas is a mix of Carbon Monoxide and Hydrogen gases, so will need to be compressed to get a decent fuel load.

It's only 2400 to 4400BTU/lbs depending on the gasifier. Propane is 21500. To store it, will need to be heavily compressed

2000psi, that around 600,000 BTUs worth of fuel, for an equivalent of 5 gallons of gas
So that means thicker tanks, but that a 60 pound tank- and regulators to get down to the few PSI needed to run in the carburetor
 
The US seem unable to design a medium sized fleet carrier at a reasonable cost, so perhaps the US could build the CVA01 under licence.

1598053811855.png
 
Big carriers are a more efficient use of tons and $. I am sure someone around here has the current aircraft/ton ratios.
You build medium because you aren't allowed to build big.
 
It's not that the US can't design a medium carrier, it's that the USN fights tooth and nail against them and will do anything possible to sabotage the design.
So true!
Look at the RAND article. It compared a Cold War CVN strike load and how small carriers could not match it.

The real question is a 40 plane alpha strike is “current” with the transition to full PGM loading starting the start of GULF War 1?

This is before drones, stealth and future IA pilotless wingman.

How often do CVN use the full potential of the system this century? What percentage of time does it use or need it?

Considering the shortage of carriers and the threat of anti-ship (cruise and ballistic, future hypersonic!), are mega CVN viable?

If you do need that traditional alpha strike, is it better to use multiple carrier groups, and have robustness against loss (enemy or self, eg deck fire / crash)

Why didn’t the RAND study look at a mid sized nuclear carrier and not slow STOL or hybrids?
 
Last edited:
It's not that the US can't design a medium carrier, it's that the USN fights tooth and nail against them and will do anything possible to sabotage the design.
The USN doesn't always get what it wants, if it did the USS American and JFK would both be nuke powered and the massive Midway refit would have worked out better and cheaper for example. I don't know about 'sabotage' as much as loading up the ship so that it becomes so expensive that a supercarrier is a better deal.

Big carriers are a more efficient use of tons and $. I am sure someone around here has the current aircraft/ton ratios.
You build medium because you aren't allowed to build big.
So true!
Look at the RAND article. It compared a Cold War CVN strike load and how small carriers could not match it.

The real question is a 40 plane alpha strike is “current” with the transition to full PGM loading starting the start of GULF War 1?

This is before drones, stealth and future IA pilotless wingman.

How often do CVN use the full potential of the system this century? What percentage of time does it use or need it?

Considering the shortage of carriers and the threat of anti-ship (cruise and ballistic, future hypersonic!), are mega CVN viable?

If you do need that traditional alpha strike, is it better to use multiple carrier groups, and have robustness against loss (enemy or self, eg deck fire / crash)

Why didn’t the RAND study look at a mid sized nuclear carrier and not slow STOL or hybrids?
Big carriers represent better value for money and bang for the buck, that's why the British wanted the 54,000t CVA01 not one of the smaller study options. But that doesn't make it cheap.

However when it comes to designing a medium sized fleet carrier I think the British would be able to design a cheaper ship than the Americans simply because the Americans have more cash and that comes out in their design philosophy. The CVV cost something like $1.5 billion, I doubt contemporary CVA03 would cost ~700 million pounds.
 
Top