Churchill dies on Nelson October 1939

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Nelson_(28)
On 30 October she was unsuccessfully attacked by U-56 near the Orkney Islands being hit by three torpedoes, none of which exploded.
When this attack was made Churchill and the admiralty leadership were onboard. The ship was anchored and all three hit the battleship dead on. Had all three torpedoes exploded it would have likely ended like the Royal Oak, which sank in about 7 minutes after being hit by three torpedoes while at anchor in Scapa Flow in September, likely sinking with Churchill and the admiralty.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml
In another incident on October 30, the U-56 under Wilhelm Zahn spotted the battle group Nelson, Rodney and Hood. Carefully eluding the escorts, Zahn attacked and fired three torpedoes at Nelson, and heard two of them thump harmlessly on the target’s side. Worse yet, the third torpedo detonated prematurely and alerted the escorts. Zahn was so demoralized by the incident that Donitz granted him extended leave upon his return.

http://uboat.net/history/torpedo_crisis.htm
The Admiral was proven once again correct. On October 30th Kapitänleutnant Wilhelm Zahn of U-56 sighted in his area a truly juicy formation: the battleships Rodney, Nelson, the battle cruiser Hood (later blasted by the Bismarck) and a dozen destroyers. With great daring and skill, Zahn eluded the destroyer screen and struck Nelson with a salvo of three. The impact pistol torpedoes clearly slammed against the ship's hull and…simply fell apart. The commander was so depressed by this misfortune for which he was not to blame in the least that Dönitz took him off active duty for a while.

http://acepilots.com/ships/nelson.html
31 Oct 1939 - On board Nelson, The First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill, and First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Dudley Pound, discussed the use of the main fleet bases at Scapa Flow, Loch Ewe and Rosyth. They determined to return to Scapa in the spring of 1940 when its defenses would be complete.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andrew.etherington/1939/10/30.htm
A contingent of the British Home fleet, the battleships HMS Rodney (29) and Nelson (28), the battlecruiser HMS Hood (51) and escorting destroyers, is sailing just west of the Orkney Islands north of Scotland. A high level conference is being held aboard Nelson; the attendees are Commander-in-Chief Home Fleet, Admiral Sir Charles Forbes, the First Sea Lord, Admiral of the Fleet, Sir Dudley Pound, and First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill. The German submarine U-56 finds herself in the middle of the fleet and fires three torpedoes at Nelson; two of them strike the ship but fail to explode. (The Germans are having torpedo problems.) U-56 escapes unharmed.

What happens next? Do the British then not conduct the Norwegian operation (a Churchill plan)? What happens when the Chamberlin government falls, who replaces him (wikipedia suggests Halifax, but there had to be other options, right?)?
 
Unless she went down faster than anticipated, I am guessing that Churchill death there would be highly unlikely. Sub torpedoes were unable to inflict such damage to sink capital ships (especially battleships) in such way.

Having said this, the Allies may be even a bit better off as some of the more hare brained schemes came out of Churchill's kitchen. Whomever got to inherit Neville, would have little choice but to continue the war as accepting Hitler's terms after June 1940 would be tantamount to capitulation, something no British government would lightly accept.

Halifax is not likely candidate and without Winston, there was Eden as possible choice or someone else from the Churchill crowd.

Also, the German torpedoes were notoriously unreliable at that point in time.

As for Norway operation it was a logical thing to do for the Allies and they would do it with or without him. Future prime minister may however face some issues if crisis similar to Singapore or Tobruk happen. He may not command same level of respect Churchill and may lose vote of confidence in the House of Commons.
 
Last edited:

Riain

Banned
Nelson was a very different beast than the unmodernised Royal Oak, chances are she would have survived 3 torpedo hits long enough to save much of the crew.
 

Deleted member 1487

Halifax is not likely candidate and without Winston, there was Eden as possible choice or someone else from the Churchill crowd.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Eden#World_War_II_.281939.E2.80.9345.29
In September 1939, on the outbreak of war, Eden, who had briefly rejoined the army with the rank of major, returned to Chamberlain's government as Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, but was not in the War Cabinet. As a result, he was not a candidate for the Premiership when Chamberlain resigned after Germany invaded France in May 1940 and Churchill became Prime Minister.[19] Churchill appointed Eden Secretary of State for War.

Who else from Churchill's crowd that was in the war cabinet?
AFAIK Halifax was the only option in the war cabinet that people could agree on besides Churchill.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Royal_Oak_(08)#Sinking
Reloading his bow tubes, he doubled back and fired a salvo of three torpedoes, all at Royal Oak,[54] This time he was successful: at 01:16 all three struck the battleship in quick succession amidships and detonated.[62][63] The explosions blew a hole in the armoured deck, destroying the Stokers', Boys' and Marines' messes and causing a loss of electrical power.[64] Cordite from a magazine ignited and the ensuing fireball passed rapidly through the ship's internal spaces.[64] Royal Oak quickly listed some 15°, sufficient to push the open starboard-side portholes below the waterline.[h] She soon rolled further onto her side to 45°, hanging there for several minutes before disappearing beneath the surface at 01:29, 13 minutes after Prien's second strike.[65] 833 men died with the ship, including Rear-Admiral Henry Blagrove, commander of the Second Battle Squadron. Over one hundred of the dead were Boy Seamen, not yet 18 years old, the largest ever such loss in a single Royal Navy action.[66] The admiral's wooden gig, moored alongside, was dragged down with Royal Oak.
 

Deleted member 1487

The torpedo defence systems would surely have been much different though.

Such as?


Also here is the Chamberlain war cabinet, the only people that could take over when Chamberlain left office:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_War_Ministry
Upon the outbreak of the war, Chamberlain carried out a fullscale reconstruction of the government and introduced a small War Cabinet who were as follows:

Neville Chamberlain - Prime Minister and Leader of the House of Commons
Sir Samuel Hoare - Lord Privy Seal
Sir John Simon - Chancellor of the Exchequer
Lord Halifax - Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs
Leslie Hore-Belisha - Secretary of State for War
Sir Kingsley Wood - Secretary of State for Air
Winston Churchill - First Lord of the Admiralty
Lord Chatfield - Minister for Coordination of Defence
Lord Hankey - Minister without Portfolio
Changes[edit]
January 1940 - Oliver Stanley succeeds Leslie Hore-Belisha as Secretary of State for War.
April 1940 - Hoare swaps Lord Privy Seal with Wood for Secretary of State for Air. Lord Chatfield leaves the Government and the office of Minister for Coordination of Defence is abolished.
 
Such as?


Also here is the Chamberlain war cabinet, the only people that could take over when Chamberlain left office:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_War_Ministry

From Naval Weapons:

A more questionable British innovation occurred in 1917, when HMS Ramillies of the Revenge Class, received external blisters containing “water excluding materials” in the form of closed metal tubes 8 and 9 inches in diameter, and wood pulp. The theory was that these materials would preserve buoyancy by preventing water from filling the entirety of the void. It was also hoped the torpedo would expend much of its energy crushing the tubes. In reality the wood pulp became waterlogged and rotten, eliminating its usefulness and the tubes appear to have been of no value. HMS Ramillies and HMS Resolution were both severely damaged by torpedoes in World War II, and HMS Royal Oak capsized from at least two hits (maybe three) in Scapa Flow.



The British Nelson Class of 1922 was the first Treaty-limited design, but used a conventional layered TDS. However, the Nelson’s belt was placed inboard of the side shell, permitting torpedo blast to travel up the exterior of the armor yet still destroy the skin of the ship, possibly permitting flooding over the top of the TDS.

Nelson would also have better compartmentalisation being a new design and layout. While she may very well have been lost if all 3 hit and detonated I don't think it would have been a rapid loss like Royal Oak. Also while at anchor she might have been in more readiness than Royal Oak.
 
Have to find details on the September '41 torpedo attack, that would tell us a lot about Nelson's torpedo defences.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Appeasers

The guilty men were:

That leaves:

Leslie Hore-Belisha - Secretary of State for War
Winston Churchill - First Lord of the Admiralty
Lord Chatfield - Minister for Coordination of Defence
Lord Hankey - Minister without Portfolio


Given the recent deaths that only leaves Lord Chatfield or Leslie Hore-Belisha as a last resort the Hankey. As a Sec of State, Hore-Belisha is the likely candidate. Army biased by the last job? You can count on a Jew to be anti-Nazi.
Hore-Belisha showed considerable intelligence and drive in government, although his intense energy tended to alienate traditionalist elements who resented his status as an 'outsider'.
 
Last edited:
From Naval Weapons:



Nelson would also have better compartmentalisation being a new design and layout. While she may very well have been lost if all 3 hit and detonated I don't think it would have been a rapid loss like Royal Oak. Also while at anchor she might have been in more readiness than Royal Oak.

Due to the Admiralty on board. What is the possibility of Churchill not abandoning ship and helping out with the damage crew ?
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Eden#World_War_II_.281939.E2.80.9345.29


Who else from Churchill's crowd that was in the war cabinet?
AFAIK Halifax was the only option in the war cabinet that people could agree on besides Churchill.
Regardless of that article's implication, there wasn't actually any rule that the successor would have had to come from within the 'War Cabinet'...

But as Halifax was in the Lords, established practice would (as he's said to have acknowledged IOTL) have ruled him out as PM.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Nelson_(28)

When this attack was made Churchill and the admiralty leadership were onboard. The ship was anchored and all three hit the battleship dead on. Had all three torpedoes exploded it would have likely ended like the Royal Oak, which sank in about 7 minutes after being hit by three torpedoes while at anchor in Scapa Flow in September, likely sinking with Churchill and the admiralty.

http://www.uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml


http://uboat.net/history/torpedo_crisis.htm


http://acepilots.com/ships/nelson.html


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/andrew.etherington/1939/10/30.htm


What happens next? Do the British then not conduct the Norwegian operation (a Churchill plan)? What happens when the Chamberlin government falls, who replaces him (wikipedia suggests Halifax, but there had to be other options, right?)?


it would have sank faster than 7 minutes because the ship was under way; in all likelyhood three direct hits would have capsized her with very high loss of life (especially with frigid conditions/weather/fear of additional attacks to hamper rescue efforts)
 
Unless she went down faster than anticipated, I am guessing that Churchill death there would be highly unlikely. Sub torpedoes were unable to inflict such damage to sink capital ships (especially battleships) in such way.

Having said this, the Allies may be even a bit better off as some of the more hare brained schemes came out of Churchill's kitchen. Whomever got to inherit Neville, would have little choice but to continue the war as accepting Hitler's terms after June 1940 would be tantamount to capitulation, something no British government would lightly accept.

Halifax is not likely candidate and without Winston, there was Eden as possible choice or someone else from the Churchill crowd.

Also, the German torpedoes were notoriously unreliable at that point in time.

As for Norway operation it was a logical thing to do for the Allies and they would do it with or without him. Future prime minister may however face some issues if crisis similar to Singapore or Tobruk happen. He may not command same level of respect Churchill and may lose vote of confidence in the House of Commons.

barham when underway was struck by three fish and took 75 percent dead without the conditions that Nelson was sailing in
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
I forget how many interesting POD threads have been hijacked by debating the likelihood of the POD, can someone remind me?
It matters not a jot how likely you think it, this POD is the initial premise of this thread. If you think the premise unlikely, what do you want with this debate other than to close the thread down?


220px-1929_Duff_Cooper%2C_Unionist.jpg

Duff Cooper (held Hore-Belisha's post before him, but resigned over appeasement)
Cooper returned to ministerial office as Financial Secretary to the War Office in 1931, then as Financial Secretary to the Treasury in 1934, he was elevated to the Cabinet as War Secretary in 1935, and promoted to First Lord of the Admiralty in 1937. He completed a biography of the British military commander Douglas Haig during this period. The most public critic of the Prime Minister of the day Neville Chamberlain's appeasement policy inside the Cabinet, he famously resigned the day after the 1938 Munich Agreement made with Adolf Hitler. On doing so he said, "War with honour or peace with dishonour," he might have been persuaded to accept, "but war with dishonour--that was too much." [9] Fellow appeasement critic and Conservative Party MP Vyvyan Adams described Cooper's actions as "the first step in the road back to national sanity." Cooper later took a prominent role in the famous Norway Debate of 1940, which led to Chamberlain's downfall.
By now Cooper appeared in German propaganda as one of Britain's three most dangerous Conservative warmongers.
The other two being Churchill and...

220px-Leo_Amery_1917.jpg

Leo Amery
Among his directorships were the boards of several German metal fabrication companies (representing British capital invested in the companies), of the British Southern Railway, the Gloucester Wagon Company, Marks and Spencer, the famous shipbuilding firm Cammell Laird, and the Trust and Loan of Canada. He was also chairman of the Iraq Currency Board. In the course of his duties as a director of German metal fabrication companies, visiting factories, Amery gained a good understanding of German military potential. Adolf Hitler became alarmed at this situation and ordered a halt to non-German directors. Amery spent a lot of time in Germany during the 1930s in connection with his work. He was not allowed to send his director's fees out of the country, so he took his family on holiday in the Bavarian Alps. He had a lengthy meeting with Hitler on at least one occasion. He also met at length with the Czech leader, Benes, the Austrian leaders Dollfuss and Schuschnigg and Benito Mussolini of Italy.
In the 1930s, Amery, along with Winston Churchill, was a bitter critic of the appeasement of Nazi Germany, often openly attacking his own party. Being a former Colonial and Dominions Secretary, he was very aware of the views of the dominions and strongly opposed giving Germany back her colonies, a proposal seriously considered by Neville Chamberlain.
On the rearmament question, Amery was consistent. He advocated a higher level of expenditure, but also a reappraisal of priorities through the creation of a top level cabinet position to develop overall defence strategy, so that the increased expenditures could be spent wisely. He thought that either he or Churchill should be given the post. When a ministry for the coordination of defence was finally created under a political lightweight, Sir Thomas Inskip, he regarded it as a joke.

When the war came, Amery was one of the few anti-appeasers who was opposed to co-operation with the Soviet Union in order to defeat Nazi Germany. This came from a lifelong fear of Communism.

It is commonly believed that, when Neville Chamberlain announced his flight to Munich to the cheers of the House, Amery was one of only four members who remained seated (the others were Churchill, Anthony Eden and Harold Nicolson).
No Lend-Lease via Britain would be an interesting change. What would the Cambridge Five make of that?
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Regardless of that article's implication, there wasn't actually any rule that the successor would have had to come from within the 'War Cabinet'...

But as Halifax was in the Lords, established practice would (as he's said to have acknowledged IOTL) have ruled him out as PM.

Apparently no one was willing to challenge Halifax's premiership due to his peerage.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._F._L._Wood,_1st_Earl_of_Halifax#Churchill_as_Prime_Minister
Churchill as Prime Minister[edit]
On 8 May 1940, Chamberlain's government survived a motion of no confidence brought about by the deteriorating military situation in Norway. The Government, with a majority in the House of 213, won the vote with a majority of 81. Thirty-three Conservatives and eight of their allies voted with the opposition parties and 60 abstained. Churchill, who had never had a good relationship with Chamberlain and had only grudgingly been appointed First Lord of the Admiralty, nevertheless mounted a strong and passionate defence of Chamberlain and his Government in the debate preceding the vote.[6]

Under ordinary circumstances, the result of the vote would not have been a disaster; but at a time when the Prime Minister was being strongly criticised by both side of the House and there was a strong desire for national unity it was catastrophic.[7] After the vote, Chamberlain asked to see Churchill. He told him that he felt dejected and did not think he could go on. Chamberlain stated that he would attempt to form a coalition government with the Labour and Liberal Parties. Churchill was opposed to this.

At a meeting the following day attended by Chamberlain, Halifax, Churchill and the co-leaders of the Opposition Labour Party (Clement Attlee and Arthur Greenwood), Chamberlain asked the Labour leaders if they would agree to serve in a coalition government. They replied that they doubted whether this would be possible in a government led by Chamberlain, but that it might be possible with a different Prime Minister. But before they could officially answer they would need to consult the rank and file members of the Labour Party, then at their annual conference in Bournemouth. They were asked to telephone with the result of this consultation by the following afternoon.[8]

Churchill's own account of these events, written six years later, is misleading. It describes the events of the 9th as having taken place the following day, and the description of Chamberlain attempting to persuade him to tacitly agree to Halifax's appointment as Prime Minister does not correspond with Halifax's having expressed his reluctance to do so to Chamberlain at a meeting between the two men on the morning of the 9th.[9]

In his memoirs, Halifax later wrote:

I had no doubt at all in my own mind that for me to succeed him would create a quite impossible situation. Apart altogether from Churchill's qualities as compared with my own at this particular juncture, what would in fact be my position? Churchill would be running Defence, and in this connexion one could not but remember the relationship between Asquith and Lloyd George had broken down in the first war... I should speedily become a more or less honorary Prime Minister, living in a kind of twilight just outside the things that really mattered.

The Labour leaders telephoned at 5 p.m. on the 10th to report that the party would take part in a coalition government, although this had to be under the leadership of someone other than Chamberlain. Accordingly, Chamberlain went to Buckingham Palace to tender his resignation, recommending King George to ask Churchill to form a government.[8] On doing so, one of his first actions was to form a new, smaller, war cabinet by replacing six of the Conservative politicians who had been in the previous body with Greenwood and Attlee, and retaining only Halifax and Chamberlain.

Churchill's political position was weak; although he was popular with the Labour and Liberal Parties for his stance against appeasement in the 1930s, he was mistrusted by many members of the Conservative Party, nor would he have been the choice of the King.

Halifax had the support of most of the Conservative party and of King George, and was acceptable to the Labour party. His position as a peer was a merely technical barrier given the scale of the crisis, and Churchill reportedly was willing to serve under Halifax. As Lord Beaverbrook said, "Chamberlain wanted Halifax. Labour wanted Halifax. Sinclair wanted Halifax. The Lords wanted Halifax. The King wanted Halifax. And Halifax wanted Halifax." The last sentence was incorrect, however; Halifax did not want to become Prime Minister. He believed that Churchill's energy and skills as leader of a desperate cause were superior to his.[10] Like Chamberlain he served in Churchill's cabinet, frequently exasperated by Churchill's style of doing business.
 

Deleted member 1487

I forget how many interesting POD threads have been hijacked by debating the likelihood of the POD, can someone remind me?

It matters not a jot how likely you think it, this POD is the initial premise of this thread. If you think the premise unlikely, what do you want with this debate other than to close the thread down?

There are plenty of interesting butterflies from Churchill being dead:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1940_War_Cabinet_Crisis
The May 1940 War Cabinet Crisis was a confrontation between Winston Churchill, newly appointed as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Viscount Halifax, the Foreign Secretary, which took place early in World War II. Halifax believed that in view of the successful German invasion of France and the encirclement of British forces at Dunkirk the United Kingdom should try to negotiate a peace settlement with Adolf Hitler. Churchill disagreed, believing "that nations which went down fighting rose again, but those which surrendered tamely were finished" and that Hitler was unlikely to honour any agreement. Moreover he believed that this was the view of the British people. Between 25 to 28 May, Churchill and Halifax fought to bring the British War Cabinet round to their own point of view; by 28 May it seemed as if Halifax had the upper hand and Churchill might be forced from office. However Churchill outmanoeuvred Halifax by calling a meeting of his 25-member Outer Cabinet, to whom he delivered a passionate speech, saying "If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground",[1] convincing all present that Britain must fight on against Hitler whatever the cost.
 
Surely that requires Nelson to suffer the catastrophic detonation like Barham, would the range have to be the same?

A warhead is a warhead

Torpedoes were set to run deep and hit the lowest parts of the hull, forgetting even the shockwave damage, the pressure changes created by the underwater explosions cause massive damage to the keel

three direct hits would break her back, no amount of brilliant compartmentalization will withstand that kind of damage
 
Top