Go Back   Alternate History Discussion Board > Discussion > Alternate History Discussion: After 1900

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old February 13th, 2012, 10:44 AM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
Very interesting development with the Sirroco/Cyclone. I can see a lot of very smug Frenchmen when the time comes to mothball the U.S. Essex class.
Excellent name for British Sirocco- Cyclone.
Thanks.

Well, I doubt that the French will want Essex carriers, after all, they do have 2 allmost brand-new Clemenceau carriers. And France will need money for other things...

Also, I don't see Essex as better than Clemenceau class...
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old February 13th, 2012, 10:47 AM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by LutiiChell View Post
Currently in the Cardiac Care Unit having had a heart attack in the early hours today. Already had surgery and a stent inserted into a coronary artery. Wont post more right now as Ill get a slap for using a mobile in here.

Are you sure that your "dicky ticker" can handle next post?


Just kidding, later will be few updates...

And if you weren't kidding about heart attack, I wish you a speedy recovery.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old February 13th, 2012, 04:59 PM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
I was taking my cues for the Sirrocco/Cyclone from the link I posted earlier on this thread, along with the Essex class thing. The US Navy did try to sell these off IOTL but there were no modern fighter jets small enough.

The scenario mentioned there has more extensive sales of the Cyclone to countries such as Canada and the Netherlands to create a fully functional airwing for the Essexes (which could probably remain in service for as long as the Midway or even the Forrestall Class). This scenario could lay the groundwork for US/Entente rapprochement in the 70s. Which the French willof course milk for all it's worth.

Last edited by Some Bloke; February 13th, 2012 at 05:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old February 13th, 2012, 05:08 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Meanwhile in Middle East

After pulling Anglo-French and Israeli units from Canal Zone and Sinai and arrival of UNMF clearing of Suez Canal soon began. By middle of April 1957 it was over. That eased oil supply situation in UK and France since their ships now could travel much quicker route trough the Canal.

In Egypt, as Provisional Government has promised elections for Constituent Assembley were held in May. 300 deputies were elected. Largest number of seats, 135 won National Republican Party led by general Naguib, second largest was Wafd Party ( 100 ) led by Mustafa Nahhas and third was Communist Party of Egypt ( 30 ) and various smaller parties. Muslim Brotherhood was banned so it didn't take part at the elections.

After meeting of Constituent Assembley it was clear that if new Constitution was to be made that cooperation between NRP and Wafd was necessary. So, new Constitution established republic, with strong President, but Council of Ministers was responcible to the National Assembley. New Arab Republic of Egypt was to be moderatly secular country.

After that presidential elections were held where general Naguib became again, President of the Republic. He made a coalition with wafd party so leader of Wafd party Mustafa Nahhas became Prime Minister, again.


Mustafa Nahhas Pasha
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old February 13th, 2012, 05:19 PM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
Semi Presidential then?
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old February 13th, 2012, 05:24 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
I was taking my cues for the Sirrocco/Cyclone from the link I posted earlier on this thread, along with the Essex class thing. The US Navy did try to sell these off IOTL but there were no modern fighter jets small enough.

The scenario mentioned there has more extensive sales of the Cyclone to countries such as Canada and the Netherlands to create a fully functional airwing for the Essexes (which could probably remain in service for as long as the Midway or even the Forrestall Class). This scenario could lay the groundwork for US/Entente rapprochement in the 70s. Which the French willof course milk for all it's worth.

I wonder would then Cyclone enable countries as Australia, Canada and Netherlands to retain their Majestic class carriers?
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old February 13th, 2012, 05:25 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
Semi Presidential then?
Yes, something like that. A compromise between NRP and Wafd.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old February 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
Retaining the Majestic class? Possibly at least in the short term, but I forsee some debate on the subject (bigger carrier, more flexible/independent power projection etc).

Some of the things on that site made a lot of sense but others were very obviously only there for rule of cool (Concorde as a strategic bomber being the most obvious).
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old February 13th, 2012, 06:56 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Lennox-Boya Report, part 1

Colonial Secretary Alan Lennox-Boyd was ready to present his preliminary report to the Cabinet on the issue of giving independence to various colonies in British Empire.

Lennox-Boyd started by saying that this preliminary report contains only proposals for destiny of major British colonies while the issue of smaller colonies and relations with protectorates will be dealt in next report.

Lennox-Boyd said that some former British colonies have allready gained their independence, like India and Pakistan in 1947, Ceylon and Burma in 1948, Sudan in 1956 and Ghana and Federation of Malaya this year.

That meant that following larger colonies were still part of British Empire: Gambia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, British Cameroon, Rhodesia, Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland ( comprising three colonies: Southern Rhodesia, Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland ), Botswana, Tanganyka, Kenya, Uganda, British Somaliland, British Guiana, Sarawak and North Borneo.

The general plan was to have free elections for Legislative Assembley in each colony during 1958 except where such elections were allready made, like in Nigeria. Legislative Assembley will have legislative power, together with Governor, while the Governor will have executive power. After 3 years, in 1961 will be held another elections and after that elections these colonies will become self-governed, with local Governments and Prime Ministers, while UK will have responsability for defence and foreign affairs.
Finally, after three years, in 1964 all colonies will have right to hold a plebiscite where they will have the option to continue with current status for another 5 years or to become dominions ( independent Commonwealth Realms ).

Majority of Cabinet approved the plan but some die-hard imperialists were of opinion that these countries were not ready for independence so soon and that more time for development of these countries is necessary. Eden and his Chancellor of the Exchecquer said that, while tham might be true, Britain has no money to invest in these countries for another 20 or 30 years and that each of these countries is actually net-loss of money for Britain.
Eden also said that greatest value of these countries is their natural wealth as oil or different minerals, but that some of them don't have any important resources, like Nyasaland or Gambia and that from the British point of view it would be better that they newer became part of Empire in the first place. Eden said that he is confident that British companies will retain their concessions in these countries for exploatation of their natural resources and Britain doesn't needs anything more from these countries. Also, it is better to part with these countries peacefully and relativly under our own terms, than have long guerilla-warfare like the French now have in Algeria from where they will have to go, sooner or later, and will have bad relations later with these countries.


British Empire in 1957 ( red colour ) ( only larger colonies )
Former colonies ( pink colour )

Link on map, for better resolution: http://www.dumpt.com/img/viewer.php?...u7ph6wcjre.png
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".

Last edited by abc123; February 13th, 2012 at 06:57 PM.. Reason: .
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old February 13th, 2012, 07:39 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
Retaining the Majestic class? Possibly at least in the short term, but I forsee some debate on the subject (bigger carrier, more flexible/independent power projection etc).

Some of the things on that site made a lot of sense but others were very obviously only there for rule of cool (Concorde as a strategic bomber being the most obvious).

After more careful reading now I see that you meant Essex class as a replacement for Majestic class.

Intresting idea, but Essex had much ( 2-3 x ) larger crew than Majestic. And if A-4 could operate in Majestic class, than Cyclone ( that is about 1,5 m longer and has 1 m wider wingspan ) should also be good enough for them, and that could really extend their life.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:47 PM
lukedalton lukedalton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Italy
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by abc123 View Post
After more careful reading now I see that you meant Essex class as a replacement for Majestic class.

Intresting idea, but Essex had much ( 2-3 x ) larger crew than Majestic. And if A-4 could operate in Majestic class, than Cyclone ( that is about 1,5 m longer and has 1 m wider wingspan ) should also be good enough for them, and that could really extend their life.
But a cheaply and widely distributed Essex is cool, image every NATO nations (and other big allies of USA) with his carrier and all the competition for equip and update them.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:59 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukedalton View Post
But a cheaply and widely distributed Essex is cool, image every NATO nations (and other big allies of USA) with his carrier and all the competition for equip and update them.

Cool yes, but not plausible.
Maybe Australia, Brazil, Canada and India. Maybe even Spain, but I doubt, there's a reason why Spain and Italy had no such carriers and why today they don't have them.
Japan and West Germany- impossible ( political reasons ), actually Italy too.
Netherlands also impossible, they are too small, if they keep Karel Doormann it is big thing for them.
Phillipines, Malaysia, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Thailand are REALLY unplausible.
Iran, hmm, maybe, but Iran had allready laaarge defence spending, I doubt that they could buy carriers too.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old February 13th, 2012, 09:10 PM
Shaby Shaby is offline
Kicked
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Flagship "Undefeatable" of the Battlefleet Ib
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by abc123 View Post
Iran, hmm, maybe, but Iran had allready laaarge defence spending, I doubt that they could buy carriers too.
And Iran has absolutely zero reasons to own a carrier.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharlin View Post
'Oh damn...knew we forgot something! GUYS! WE NEED TO BUNG A CARRIER DESIGN TOGETHER ASAP!'
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old February 13th, 2012, 09:27 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaby View Post
And Iran has absolutely zero reasons to own a carrier.
Not only Iran, but OTOH, since Shah was... well, Shah, I wouldn't be surprised that he in 80s ( if he remained in charge ) asks USA to sell him a carrier.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old February 13th, 2012, 09:51 PM
lukedalton lukedalton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Italy
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Japan and West Germany- impossible ( political reasons ), actually Italy too.
Netherlands also impossible, they are too small, if they keep Karel Doormann it is big thing for them.
For Italy it was more burocratic infighting between the Navy and the Air force on who will control the aircrafts that blocked the aquisition of a carrier till the end of the 70's, the moment the situation was resolved the Giuseppe Garibaldi and later the Cavour were equipped with AV/8 and in the future with the F-35, damn if the civilian/military nuclear program go as planned it will be a nice adjunt and some can see all that as a counterpoint to the UK/France predominant position in Europe.
Spain and Portugal can be interested in this kind of vessel with their colonial empire still existent; Taiwan and South Korea can be done just for the scare that will give to China and North Korea and all the tension who will bring.
Yes i see the Shah order some Carrier just to say that he own some
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old February 13th, 2012, 10:04 PM
The Oncoming Storm The Oncoming Storm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fighting the system from within
Posts: 1000 or more
The Shah's military build up was primarily so he could play the role of regional superpower, Imperial Iran's interests were in deterring any Soviet aggression and being able to intervene in any regional conflicts, as they did in Oman in the mid 1970's, land based air power was probably sufficient to meet their needs. They were under the American strategic umbrella so they had little real need for maritime power projection. Of course had he stayed in power then the Shah may have wanted some kind of "big ship" this may have been a helicopter carrier but it's possible he may have bought a Harrier Carrier and some Sea Harriers. I just can't see them buying a big deck carrier for all the reasons previously outlined.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old February 14th, 2012, 05:05 AM
Some Bloke Some Bloke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1000 or more
That still leaves Canada, Australia, Brazil and India (the latter may even be up for 2). In any case, an extra partner involved the EEC right from the off could have consequences on coordinated defence policies (although offering the deal to ex Axis countries could scupper the deal, the French couldplace an embargo on Cyclone sales to these countries).
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old February 14th, 2012, 04:20 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukedalton View Post
For Italy it was more burocratic infighting between the Navy and the Air force on who will control the aircrafts that blocked the aquisition of a carrier till the end of the 70's, the moment the situation was resolved the Giuseppe Garibaldi and later the Cavour were equipped with AV/8 and in the future with the F-35, damn if the civilian/military nuclear program go as planned it will be a nice adjunt and some can see all that as a counterpoint to the UK/France predominant position in Europe.
Spain and Portugal can be interested in this kind of vessel with their colonial empire still existent; Taiwan and South Korea can be done just for the scare that will give to China and North Korea and all the tension who will bring.
Yes i see the Shah order some Carrier just to say that he own some
About Italy, operating Garibaldi with complement of 800 and operating Essex with complement of 3000 isn't quite the same thing. IMO Italy has no enough money for that. IMO Garibaldi is just what doctor prescribed for Italy.
Portugal has no money. Spain did operate Dedalo, but operated them as Harrier carrier and Dedalo had complement of 1100, far below Essex. IMO Principe de Asturias is also perfect tool for Spain too, because they really have no need for carrier, except glorious naval past and their wish of proving that they are still major naval power.

Taiwan doesn't needs an aircraft carrier. Same with South Korea.
Iran also doesn't needs them, but as Shah didn't had any problems with spending money on defence projects and actually had money, they could buy one.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old February 14th, 2012, 04:24 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Bloke View Post
That still leaves Canada, Australia, Brazil and India (the latter may even be up for 2). In any case, an extra partner involved the EEC right from the off could have consequences on coordinated defence policies (although offering the deal to ex Axis countries could scupper the deal, the French couldplace an embargo on Cyclone sales to these countries).
IMO Cyclone sales to Italy and Germany will happen ( if they don't buy American airplanes instead ) but there will be no licence manufacturing of Cyclone in these countries.

Cyclone could make Majestic class carriers atractive again ( with decent airgroup od say 12 Cyclones, 4 Gannet, 2 SAR helicopters, 4-6 ASW helicopters ) so IMO major owners of Majestic class will not buy Essex class except if they have no smarter thing where to spend their money.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old February 14th, 2012, 05:16 PM
abc123 abc123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Panavia Cyclone

As the work on establishing Panavia consortium progressed, partners were more and more aware that their aircraft could easily be the best selling European aircraft of all times. So they decided that Cyclone will have more versions: A- air force, single seat fighter-bomber, B- air force, twin seat training aircraft, NA- naval single seat fighter-bomber, NB- naval twin seat training aircraft and R- air force recconaissance aircraft.

They also discussed in the event of foreign orders where will aircrafts be assembled. So the decided that for all ex-French colonies aircrafts will be assembled in France and for all ex-British colonies aircrafts will be assembled in UK. France also got orders from Latin America and Europe, while UK get orders from Middle East and rest of the world.

In meanwhile, headquarters of new joint-stock company Panavia Corporation SA was established in Paris.
__________________
"And remember, Mr Churchill, that in the next war the Italians will be on our side".
"Well, that's only fair. We had them last time".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.