Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

It wouldnt be a that hard to send a indian corps , a austrlian divison and a british divison even if its relativly lightly equipped i imagine ? Then add the like 50-80 tanks with like 30 - 40 matildas , 30 -40 valiants and some light tanks and a decentish commander whose remit is to defend the place to death and he has power over the civilians . And percival becomes the staff officer for it for his local knowledge in the fall of 1940?

I still think that italians should declare so you dont get even stranger ww2 , i think they might have invaded yugoslavia instead then. And the british dont get to open a front a distract the germans with otherwise , unless u want to do a greece based campaign for some reason ?

Basicly if this happens then bombers commands argument for even further resources would start to make abit more sense since only airstrikes are taking the fight to the enemy if italy doesnt come in cause honestly pre like 43 bomber command was almost better be turned into the coastal command to fight with the uboats instead to be honest. And people are forgetting if the nazis took moscow wich might be possible if instead of doing their balkan adventure before barbarossa and not being somewhat distracted with the desert campaign aswell might be just enough resources to maybe take moscow. The italians could also send a army or even two for barbarossa if they arent distracted with their disintegrating empire aswell wich isnt good .

Honestly , not getting a mussolini declaration against france and the germans leaving the balkans to them in exchange for even further help for barbarossa is a TL idea if people dont mind writing a victiorious german timeline to be honest :/
 
Every morning the same having to read through pages of comments! Thanks for your interest troops.
I think we may be getting ahead of ourselves with no fall of France, Italy not declaring war, and digging foxholes in Singapore's golf course! A few extra tanks in the hands of the same people, I don't believe will make that much of a difference in the short term. The lessons of defeat were very painful, but in many ways necessary for the Army. There were a lot of early retirements/sideways moves after Dunkirk of officers who just weren't up to scratch. To really change the battle of Arras needs a fundamental change in British command, communications and control; training; doctrine; all arms cooperation; and some help from the RAF, and that frankly is ASB in May 1940.
Again just a couple of specific points:
Was welding part of the OTL plan for new plants for Leyland and EE or is it an influence from Vickers and co.'s example?
The Covenanter was originally meant to be of welded construction, but LMS couldn't do it, so it got heavier riveting. The road wheels were meant to be aluminum, but the Air Ministry took it all, so it got heavier steel wheels. The engine was meant to produce over 300hp, but didn't really, which meant it wasn't powerful enough for the extra weight, and since the engine overheated, and the cooling system was in the wrong place, so it didn't go well.
Did anyone else spot the interesting little nugget that the 180 Matilda Is (40 more than OTL) are going to be ready by early 1940? How many more will find their way to France is up for debate, but if it's (as I suspect it will be) a significant increase, that's bound to upset the Germans something fierce.
That goes back to 3 June 1937: "What General Elles proposed was ordering 120 A11s immediately; then order another 60 in 1938 along with the first 60 A12s; then order another 120 A12s in 1939 once they were in production. This would provide the RTC with three battalions of infantry tank A11 by the end of 1939 and three with the A12 by the end of 1940. In addition to the infantry tanks, ordering 120 A9s this year would give the other two RTC battalions the tanks they desperately needed, and hopefully be fully equipped by the end of 1939." It brings the 8 RTR into play...
Yeah im also suspecting that the british might do a serious offensive thanks to arras success and to hopefully atleast in their minds to rescue the french . Basicly trying to do the germans what germans did to the 2nd rate french units for a week or two hopefully. ...
As I mentioned above, the British doing a serious offensive needs Skippy the Alien Space Bat to lend a hand.
Allan
 
Being a a design under the Ministry of Supply's leadership, the Perkins Lion is easier to get into mass production than the Meteor which was constrained by its Merlin origins. This means that any company that built Meteors OTL is likely to start with Lions first: Rover, Leyland, Meadows. This allows the British to get a good engine in mass production much earlier than the Meteor, and it is better than early British engines. Nuffield may be against it in Crusader, but the other companies making Crusaders will certainly try to use it. If it is compatible, it may even see service in some Crusaders before production switches over to another Cruiser.

The one problem is, if Lion is the go-to powerful engine option, it is unlikely that Meteor is even made. And without making a lot of changes that will take quite a lot of time and likely lead to a new engine altogether, it probably won't exceed 500hp when supercharged. This leaves Britain without a truly powerful engine. I have no doubt that a successor to the Lion can be designed but it may appear a good deal later than OTL Meteor, too late to shape the mid-war tank designs.

A W18 is a simple option, but engines beyond 12 cylinders have been exceedingly rare in tank design, and probably for good reason, for one this engine should be much longer than the Meteor, which could lead to oversized tank designs.
 
Every morning the same having to read through pages of comments! Thanks for your interest troops.
I think we may be getting ahead of ourselves with no fall of France, Italy not declaring war, and digging foxholes in Singapore's golf course! A few extra tanks in the hands of the same people, I don't believe will make that much of a difference in the short term. The lessons of defeat were very painful, but in many ways necessary for the Army. There were a lot of early retirements/sideways moves after Dunkirk of officers who just weren't up to scratch. To really change the battle of Arras needs a fundamental change in British command, communications and control; training; doctrine; all arms cooperation; and some help from the RAF, and that frankly is ASB in May 1940.
Again just a couple of specific points:
It's not just 'a few' extra tanks, you yourself said there'd be something like an extra 100 or more A9s and 10s, and they'll be more reliable vehicles. Not to mention all the A11s, which are not only more reliable, but much better armed as well.

The Covenanter was originally meant to be of welded construction, but LMS couldn't do it, so it got heavier riveting. The road wheels were meant to be aluminum, but the Air Ministry took it all, so it got heavier steel wheels. The engine was meant to produce over 300hp, but didn't really, which meant it wasn't powerful enough for the extra weight, and since the engine overheated, and the cooling system was in the wrong place, so it didn't go well.
Well it's dead now.

That goes back to 3 June 1937: "What General Elles proposed was ordering 120 A11s immediately; then order another 60 in 1938 along with the first 60 A12s; then order another 120 A12s in 1939 once they were in production. This would provide the RTC with three battalions of infantry tank A11 by the end of 1939 and three with the A12 by the end of 1940. In addition to the infantry tanks, ordering 120 A9s this year would give the other two RTC battalions the tanks they desperately needed, and hopefully be fully equipped by the end of 1939." It brings the 8 RTR into play...
OTL the A11 was in production until August 1940. Now I'm not sure how many were produced per month, but I'm willing to bet that they had fewer than 120 in France by the time of the invasion, whereas here they have 180 (at least 50% more), and again, this A11 is more reliable, and far better armed.

As I mentioned above, the British doing a serious offensive needs Skippy the Alien Space Bat to lend a hand.
Allan
Depends how many more tanks you have. OTL Gort figured he didn't have the forces ITTL, the extra 100+ cruisers and 60+ Infantry tanks might change that.

Being a a design under the Ministry of Supply's leadership, the Perkins Lion is easier to get into mass production than the Meteor which was constrained by its Merlin origins. This means that any company that built Meteors OTL is likely to start with Lions first: Rover, Leyland, Meadows. This allows the British to get a good engine in mass production much earlier than the Meteor, and it is better than early British engines. Nuffield may be against it in Crusader, but the other companies making Crusaders will certainly try to use it. If it is compatible, it may even see service in some Crusaders before production switches over to another Cruiser.
Losing the Liberty can only do good things.

The one problem is, if Lion is the go-to powerful engine option, it is unlikely that Meteor is even made. And without making a lot of changes that will take quite a lot of time and likely lead to a new engine altogether, it probably won't exceed 500hp when supercharged. This leaves Britain without a truly powerful engine. I have no doubt that a successor to the Lion can be designed but it may appear a good deal later than OTL Meteor, too late to shape the mid-war tank designs.
Carden is something of a visionary, so I'm sure he'll be looking around for a new engine before it's needed.

A W18 is a simple option, but engines beyond 12 cylinders have been exceedingly rare in tank design, and probably for good reason, for one this engine should be much longer than the Meteor, which could lead to oversized tank designs.
Not that much longer. The lion has three banks of four cylinders, not two of six. Total length of the Lion (Lion II) is 57.5", so adding an extra 50% brings that up to 86.25" long, compared with 88.7" for the Merlin (Merlin 61).
 
Last edited:
The Covenanter was originally meant to be of welded construction, but LMS couldn't do it, so it got heavier riveting. The road wheels were meant to be aluminum, but the Air Ministry took it all, so it got heavier steel wheels. The engine was meant to produce over 300hp, but didn't really, which meant it wasn't powerful enough for the extra weight, and since the engine overheated, and the cooling system was in the wrong place, so it didn't go well.
To be fair, according to LMS' calculations, riveting only increased weight by 100kg and the steel road wheels by 80kg total (4 wheels that are 10kg heavier). It appears that the increase in armor basis to 40mm was the main driver of extra weight. The Crusader did it better because it had an extra pair of roadwheels, so it was regularly uparmored and upgunned.
The engine was worse yes, the manual states about 280hp generally, not the 300 intended. Cooling was worse than on the pilot because it had a larger engine compartment it seems, and the change in production to the crash gearbox instead of the Wilson reduced space to fit the large ventilation fan intended. Covenanter III fixed most of the overheating issues, but the lack of that pair of roadwheels and the limited engine power killed any major upgrade.

Crusader, in spite of the lack of space to fit air cleaners internally, bad cooling in early models, and the limitations of the Liberty at least had that upgrade potential, which is why it wouldn't make sense to update the Covenanter. Had the Meadows engine been a V, or had it been more powerful enough to use a larger tank to properly fit everything, things would have been different.
 
Depends how many more tanks you have. OTL Gort figured he didn't have the forces ITTL, the extra 100+ cruisers and 60+ Infantry tanks might change that.
Just because the extra tanks have been built doesn't mean there has been time for them to be issued to units and the those units to be adequately trained in their use. Britain has 1 armoured division being organised in the UK and better tanks or not it won't be ready for combat in time to serve with the BEF in Northern France.
 
Just because the extra tanks have been built doesn't mean there has been time for them to be issued to units and the those units to be adequately trained in their use. Britain has 1 armoured division being organised in the UK and better tanks or not it won't be ready for combat in time to serve with the BEF in Northern France.
Per the article, production for the A11 is likely to be completed in January 1940, so at least three months (that for the very last vehicles off the line, more time for the earlier units) to get issued, train the crews and ship them over before everything kicks off.
 
Last edited:

Orry

Donor
Singapore needs to be defended at the Kra Isthmus in Thailand



Meanwhile in Britain......

They had special rules for playing during an air raid........


This Incredible List Of Golf Rules From WWII England Tells You What To Do If You Get Attacked By Nazis While Playing​

Tony Manfred Feb 2, 2012, 1:39 PM



vintage golf photo

Library of Congress via Flickr Richmond Golf Club in Surrey, England didn't let a few Nazi bombs ruin the funfor players during the Battle of Britain in 1940.

Instead of suspending play, the club drew up a list of seven rules the keep players in check during and after enemy attacks.

  1. Players are asked to collect Bomb and Shrapnel splinters to save these causing damage to the mowing machines.
  2. In competitions, during gunfire, or while bombs are falling, players may take cover without penalty for ceasing play.
  3. The positions of known delayed-action bombs are marked by red flags placed at reasonably, but not guaranteed safe distance therefrom.
  4. Shrapnel/and/or bomb splinters on the Fairways, or in Bunkers within a club’s length of a ball may be moved without penalty, and no penalty shall be incurred if a ball is thereby caused to move accidentally.
  5. A ball moved by enemy action may be replaced, or if lost or destroyed, a ball may be dropped not nearer the hole without penalty.
  6. A ball lying in a crater may be lifted and dropped not nearer the hole, preserving the line to the hole without penalty.
  7. A player whose stroke is affected by the simultaneous explosion of a bomb may play another ball from the same place. Penalty, one stroke.
 
Singapore needs to be defended at the Kra Isthmus in Thailand



Meanwhile in Britain......
Of course. But that means invading a neutral country. And UK was rather susceptible to public opinion in those days. the nasty people invaded neutral countries, we don't.
They did have a plan , Matador, to do this but until there was positive confirmation the Japanese had landed on Siam, approval for the execution was denied. Politics and diplomacy doncha know, old boy!
 
Of course. But that means invading a neutral country. And UK was rather susceptible to public opinion in those days. the nasty people invaded neutral countries, we don't.
They did have a plan , Matador, to do this but until there was positive confirmation the Japanese had landed on Siam, approval for the execution was denied. Politics and diplomacy doncha know, old boy!
Britain would do it if they thought they had to. They were on their way to invade Norway but the Germans got there first, and invaded and occupied both Iceland and the Faroes.
 
Last edited:
I think the chance of a major British success leading to big changes in the Battle of France (IE the French winning) are as Churchill and Fisher would say 'A chimera'. Arras was nothing more than a localised counter attack, it wasn't some big offensive, it was a punch aimed at the German's nose to make him stop and in that it did succeed, but its not going to suddenly make the best French troops which are now cut off in Belgium suddenly move to attack, they were disorganised and cut off from their supplies and the will of French political and top military leadership is already crumbling. By Arras it was basically over, all bar the shouting and nothing's going to change that.

An improved Battle of Arras for the UK will buy them time. Nothing more.
 
They had special rules for playing during an air raid........


This Incredible List Of Golf Rules From WWII England Tells You What To Do If You Get Attacked By Nazis While Playing​

Tony Manfred Feb 2, 2012, 1:39 PM



vintage golf photo

Library of Congress via Flickr Richmond Golf Club in Surrey, England didn't let a few Nazi bombs ruin the funfor players during the Battle of Britain in 1940.

Instead of suspending play, the club drew up a list of seven rules the keep players in check during and after enemy attacks.

  1. Players are asked to collect Bomb and Shrapnel splinters to save these causing damage to the mowing machines.
  2. In competitions, during gunfire, or while bombs are falling, players may take cover without penalty for ceasing play.
  3. The positions of known delayed-action bombs are marked by red flags placed at reasonably, but not guaranteed safe distance therefrom.
  4. Shrapnel/and/or bomb splinters on the Fairways, or in Bunkers within a club’s length of a ball may be moved without penalty, and no penalty shall be incurred if a ball is thereby caused to move accidentally.
  5. A ball moved by enemy action may be replaced, or if lost or destroyed, a ball may be dropped not nearer the hole without penalty.
  6. A ball lying in a crater may be lifted and dropped not nearer the hole, preserving the line to the hole without penalty.
  7. A player whose stroke is affected by the simultaneous explosion of a bomb may play another ball from the same place. Penalty, one stroke.
Civilisation is nothing without rules
 
A W18 is a simple option, but engines beyond 12 cylinders have been exceedingly rare in tank design, and probably for good reason, for one this engine should be much longer than the Meteor, which could lead to oversized tank designs.
Why would a W18 using the Lion architecture as a starting point be any longer than a Merlin/Meteor? It's essentially three four cylinder engines running on a common crankcase.

They'd be basically adding two cylinders onto the Lion, which according to Wikipedia, is 57.5 inches long. Expanding it to three banks of six cylinders is basically going to add 12-15 inches onto that, when you consider the bore of a Lion is 5.5in. That gives you roughly a length of approximately 72 inches length for the W18, which is still shorter than the Merlins 88.5in. That should mean that the crankshaft of the hypothetical engine (W18 Tiger?) is going to be inherently less susceptible to crankshaft whipping than a Merlin derived engine.

Sure, the Lion derived engine is going to be about 12in wider than the Merlin, but you're still getting a 36 litre capacity engine compared to the Meteor's 27 litres. That extra capacity should allow Perkins to make up the inherently lower power output of a diesel.

Edit: On further reflection, I suspect that the Merlin numbers include the supercharger in its total length, but even without that, it isn't going to be all that different in length.
 
Last edited:
Britain would do it if they thought they had to. They were on their way to invade Norway but the Germans got there first, and invaded and occupied both Iceland and the Faroes.
And Iran. Plus France was technically neutral at the time of Mers-el-kebir according to one of its governments.

I believe they even got as far as giving the order for Operation Paul to go ahead, so it was only due to lack of resources that Sweden missed out on a British torpedo and mine attack against Umeå which would have been interesting to say the least.
 
And Iran. Plus France was technically neutral at the time of Mers-el-kebir according to one of its governments.

I believe they even got as far as giving the order for Operation Paul to go ahead, so it was only due to lack of resources that Sweden missed out on a British torpedo and mine attack against Umeå which would have been interesting to say the least.

Yes the idea that Britain could not act in its own self interest with on occasion with the most brutal off efficiency - ignores the greatest fact of all

The sun never set on the British Empire - which was a good thing because nobody would trust them in the dark
 
A W18 is a simple option, but engines beyond 12 cylinders have been exceedingly rare in tank design, and probably for good reason, for one this engine should be much longer than the Meteor, which could lead to oversized tank designs
Three banks of Six, vs the original Four, so shouldn't be any longer than Meteor, two banks of Six
EDIT: Ninja'd
 
Every morning the same having to read through pages of comments! Thanks for your interest troops.
I think we may be getting ahead of ourselves with no fall of France, Italy not declaring war, and digging foxholes in Singapore's golf course! A few extra tanks in the hands of the same people, I don't believe will make that much of a difference in the short term. The lessons of defeat were very painful, but in many ways necessary for the Army. There were a lot of early retirements/sideways moves after Dunkirk of officers who just weren't up to scratch. To really change the battle of Arras needs a fundamental change in British command, communications and control; training; doctrine; all arms cooperation; and some help from the RAF, and that frankly is ASB in May 1940.
Again just a couple of specific points:
Allan

Have to agree that the best Britain can hope for is a more orderly withdrawal from France based on a more successful Arras. It is one thing to have more tanks, quite another to have the troops to both man and support them. The OTL battle of Arras was in reality more of a heavy raid given the small(ish) size of the British force involved. Britain will likely be in a position to be able to make a more effective assault the penetrates deeper but wont have the troops to both secure the gains and continue to advance.

Some of the changes that having more tanks will have an affect on are.
  1. The invasion scare will likely be much reduced. The likely more orderly withdrawal from the continent along with more equipment brought back and already at home lessens the panic. Add to that the increased rates of production already happening of good quality equipment (Valiant's etc) mean Britain will likely feel it is able to give itself some breathing room.
  2. The fact Britain is likely going to feel it has space means it can spend some time trying to rationalise and plan ahead it's equipment procurement. That means it can look at what it really wants (say tanks with the 6pdr) and what can be adapted to suit it's needs and focus on getting those into production or developed. That could see the Crusader for instance have a much shorter life due to it being unable to take a 6pdr in a 3 man turret and a potential replacement being around sooner.
  3. The fact that their is likely going to be a not insignificant amount of now second rate tanks around means that as production of Valiant's in particular and other newer tanks really ramps up then Britain will likely feel it has the ability to send equipment to secondary theatre's.
Now those Secondary theatre's, what are those. Well everyone has already mentioned the far east but their is another more likely first destination. Crete. Occupied by Britain when Italy invaded Greece in October 40 and a perfect destination for some Matilda I's, A9's & A10's. Putting some more tanks on Crete giving the defenders more punch and mobility makes it's fall much less likely and perhaps means it remains Greek. Just picture the Fallschirmjager landing on the airfields, trying to dig in then seeing a Matilda I chugging their way lobbing 40mm HE merrily. After Crete the far east is the likely next stop for all the spare tanks.

A few questions from the last post.
With the Valiant showing it can take the 6pdr already that is likely to get the idea of 6pdr tanks into the minds of the MoS/Army now. Even if not a priority it is likely that at least some thought will be given to future tanks that can take the 6pdr either through upgrade like the Valiant or as a new design. Could we see a more limited run on cruiser tanks (infantry tanks see below) like the Crusader as they cant easily take the 6pdr. Could we also see development or at least design of new cruisers started that can take the 6pdr sooner?. This could play out in interesting ways, particularly once the HV Vickers shows up.
How much are the RTR guys liking the pom pom? If the say enough good things about it and it gives good service in France is their a possibility it shows up in other tanks, namely the Matilda II as that cant be up gunned to take the 6pdr and as the Valiant comes into more widespread use it does fill the role of the Matilda II in a better package so it's not worth keeping going with both in the same formations, it's either one or the other. That could either see Matilda II going out of production sooner or being sent in greater numbers to Crete as well as being sent out east far sooner. If the second one happens and it gets the pom pom then the Matilda II could well see production for the whole war in limited form.

Hope you don't mind the long, rambling, far looking posts.
 
Top