Armored vehicles without WW1

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

How would armored vehicles evolve without the war to really drive their development? All nations had armored cars pre-war and several men even had the idea of using caterpillar treads with rotating turrets on an armored chassis, but technology and ideology did not allow for these to truly be experimented with before the conflict.
So without the war and the large military budgets in the pre-war era continuing, what path would these take?
Also, remember that aircraft were too developing and would likely eventually suck up large amounts of funding, especially once radio technology allowed them to become very useful in spotting and command and control.
 

LeX

They would probably be developed by the early 20s in OTL form, then modified a bit after testing and usage in low-level conflicts. When a high-intensity war comes up, you'll see the massive improvement (as in WW2) of tanks.
 

Deleted member 1487

http://www.landships.freeservers.com/burstyn_tank.htm
This particular tank, information on which I have gathered from other sources as well, seems to have been put on the back burner OTL and by the 1920's ITTL would likely be revisited by either the Germans or AHs as better engines and suspension become available.

As to wheeled vehicles, their limitations are plainly obvious, so the caterpillar idea is bound to catch on ITTL sooner rather than later, especially if armored cars continue to develop. Russia seems to have been a pioneer in this regard before and during WW1. Maybe more halftracks and mechanized troop carriers before full on armored fighting vehicles. Perhaps early IFVs?
 

BlairWitch749

Banned
Russia and Austria where already on the "armored tractor" route prior to the war breaking out anyway. If WW1 is avoided they would still evolve for use in colonial conflicts or secondary power conflicts that would inevitably emerge
 

Don Lardo

wiking said:
As to wheeled vehicles, their limitations are plainly obvious, so the caterpillar idea is bound to catch on ITTL sooner rather than later, especially if armored cars continue to develop. Russia seems to have been a pioneer in this regard before and during WW1. Maybe more halftracks and mechanized troop carriers before full on armored fighting vehicles. Perhaps early IFVs?
Click to expand...


I think the armored car => halftrack => fully tracked progression you suggest in the most plausible course.

Without WW1 or other wars, some of the European powers are still going to have an increased interest in armored cars fairly shortly. Among others, Britain is going to be facing civil disorder in Ireland over Home Island, Austria-Hungary has the renewal of Ausgleich looming, and internal turmoil in Tsarist Russia is always on the simmer. The uses of armored cars in the colonies, especially India, are many also.

The armored artillery tractors other posters mentioned will be a parallel development path which will eventually merge with armored car-to-tank path. The increasing weight of larger artillery pieces during this period, plus their shell and supply needs, are already making mechanized haulers more attractive than horses. It is just a small step from an armored tractor pulling a gun to an armored tractor carrying a gun.

As you've suggested, we might see vehicles which resemble "IFVs/APCs" and "armored artillery" before we see vehicles which resemble "main battle tank".
 

Deleted member 1487

Once deployed in significant amounts the matter of doctrine for these vehicles does come to mind.
Historically the early models were used in the war in separate units to support infantry advances and any early models that I've discovered have their inventors discussing only using them as infantry support/breakthrough vehicles. Burstyn mentioned even using his 'tank' to frontally assault artillery positions, though obviously this would be very problematic.

Personally I wonder if cavalry divisions might adopt these and eventually see them converting to mechanized formations that include armored cars, half tracks, and fully armored fighting vehicles.
The trend OTL was toward motorization, but as these vehicles become more advanced we could see AFVs and IFVs formed in units together independent of cavalry to spearhead advances, especially if artillery becomes tracked (which it did during WW1 actually), as Don Lardo mentions, then we can see experimental all mechanized/motorized units by the 1930's.
http://www.hartziel.de/index.htm?/_typen/chamond.htm
 

Son of Songun

Banned
There was an Austrian patent for a tracked vehicle with a turret in 1910 I believe. I would actually be surprised if there are any major delays in development.
 

Deleted member 1487

Son of Songun said:
There was an Austrian patent for a tracked vehicle with a turret in 1910 I believe. I would actually be surprised if there are any major delays in development.
Click to expand...

http://www.landships.freeservers.com/burstyn_tank.htm
That would be the vehicle. It was dropped pre-war for a number of reasons, but the Germans were even approached pre-war with the design. Given better engines and more funding from the Germans in the late 1910's to 1920's and a design ahead of its time will be good to go in number even by the late 1920's.
SP artillery is naturally evolving anyway, so it is a matter of time before this happens even without a war. Its just a matter of when and how much support it receives in the era of aircraft and radios.
 

Sior

Banned
The Levavasseur project was an early project for a tank designed in 1903 by the French Captain Levavasseur of the 6th Artillery Battalion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levavasseur_project

Lancelot Eldin De Mole CBE, (March 13 1880 - May 6 1950) was an Australian engineer and inventor.
In 1912 De Mole submitted an idea of a tracked armoured vehicle ("chain-rail vehicle which could be easily steered and carry heavy loads over rough ground and trenches") to the British War Office; in June 1913 he received a reply that his idea had been rejected.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancelot_de_Mole
 

Deleted member 1487

Thanks for the info.
So when do people think we'd see armored divisions and mechanized corps? I think about the early 1930's, but prior there would be motorized divisions and armored cavalry units with SP artillery.
 

BlairWitch749

Banned
wiking said:
Thanks for the info.
So when do people think we'd see armored divisions and mechanized corps? I think about the early 1930's, but prior there would be motorized divisions and armored cavalry units with SP artillery.
Click to expand...

It depends on what kind of secondary/colonial conflicts emerge AND if whatever butterflies away WW1 happens to butterfly away the arms race between Germany and the UK

It could be the 20's with the right stimulus or it could be delayed pretty considerably
 

Deleted member 1487

BlairWitch749 said:
It depends on what kind of secondary/colonial conflicts emerge AND if whatever butterflies away WW1 happens to butterfly away the arms race between Germany and the UK

It could be the 20's with the right stimulus or it could be delayed pretty considerably
Click to expand...

The Anglo-German arms race was based on the naval race; Britain never tried to keep up with the German army. The naval race ended in 1912 when the Germans couldn't financially support further building as the need for army build up became apparent. The German army league finally got the middle class behind it and the army to liberalize in letting the middle class into leadership positions in the more prestigious branches like the field artillery and infantry.
After that the build up started and Germany in 1916 was supposed to have an additional 3 corps. More expansion was desired and would occur because the arms race with Russia and France was now really picking up.

AH after settling accounts with the Hungarians in 1917 (the first desired act of Franz Ferdinand) was likely to have increased army spending from then on and all of it focused on the K.u.K. army instead of split between 3 separate forces (Honved and Landwehr).

Russia was getting ready to beef up its military and France was still witnessing fighting with the liberals and conservatives over the army.

The big seismic change was going to happen in the 1920's when Italy was probably going to defect away from the triple alliance and Romania would get a Entente-favorable king who would abrogate the secret treaty with AH. From that point on AH is surrounded by hostile powers and needs to spend to keep its military able to defend its borders.

The point is that there will be a bigger continental arms race in the 1920's as Germany and AH are more isolated and surrounded by hostile powers.
 

rast

wiking said:
The naval race ended in 1912 when the Germans couldn't financially support further building as the need for army build up became apparent.
Click to expand...

This is the usual Anglo-American misconception. For the Germans, there never was a naval arms race. They had a ship construction plan adorsed by the parliament, and they were sticking to it.
Thus, the naval arms race was a very one-sided British affair, where they imagined they were competiting with the Germans, who had no clue about this and were just doing what their naval laws told them.

It is true, however, that by 1912 the focus of military spending in Germany went back to the army - because of the enormous Russian increases expected.
 

BlairWitch749

Banned
wiking said:
The Anglo-German arms race was based on the naval race; Britain never tried to keep up with the German army. The naval race ended in 1912 when the Germans couldn't financially support further building as the need for army build up became apparent. The German army league finally got the middle class behind it and the army to liberalize in letting the middle class into leadership positions in the more prestigious branches like the field artillery and infantry.
After that the build up started and Germany in 1916 was supposed to have an additional 3 corps. More expansion was desired and would occur because the arms race with Russia and France was now really picking up.

AH after settling accounts with the Hungarians in 1917 (the first desired act of Franz Ferdinand) was likely to have increased army spending from then on and all of it focused on the K.u.K. army instead of split between 3 separate forces (Honved and Landwehr).

Russia was getting ready to beef up its military and France was still witnessing fighting with the liberals and conservatives over the army.

The big seismic change was going to happen in the 1920's when Italy was probably going to defect away from the triple alliance and Romania would get a Entente-favorable king who would abrogate the secret treaty with AH. From that point on AH is surrounded by hostile powers and needs to spend to keep its military able to defend its borders.

The point is that there will be a bigger continental arms race in the 1920's as Germany and AH are more isolated and surrounded by hostile powers.
Click to expand...


Substitute entente for UK and my point stands... my bad
 

jaybird

Without trench warfare, mobility would have been prized over armour - the natural evolution for Napoleonic cavalry. At first, it would be the light cavalry re-equipping with armoured cars with one or two machine guns to fight colonial wars, soon followed by motor-towed guns for the horse artillery. Heavy cavalry would follow later, likely with halftracks armed with multiple machine guns and light cannon. It would be very possible for the infantry tank to be completely skipped, with a straight development of the cavalry tank into the main battle tank.
 

Deleted member 1487

jaybird said:
Without trench warfare, mobility would have been prized over armour - the natural evolution for Napoleonic cavalry. At first, it would be the light cavalry re-equipping with armoured cars with one or two machine guns to fight colonial wars, soon followed by motor-towed guns for the horse artillery. Heavy cavalry would follow later, likely with halftracks armed with multiple machine guns and light cannon. It would be very possible for the infantry tank to be completely skipped, with a straight development of the cavalry tank into the main battle tank.
Click to expand...

I would think so too. As the Ottomans would become the world's major supplier of oil, would all the fuel for these vehicles then come via ship or the Berlin-Baghdad rail line with Serbia acting as a pipeline to Austria-Hungary and taking a cut of the profits?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top