Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Valiants would at least be better than the T-26's and the BT-7's, that's for sure. Not sure about the specific details, but those latter two tanks were... not good.
Better ergonomics than the T-34 too, if not quite as much punch from the gun.

But overall, better tanks on either side won't have all that much effect on Barbarossa, since it was far more down to Soviet incompetence, which won't be helped by having a few extra tanks.
 
Balanced out by the fact that Britain will likely be shipping them Valiants instead of the dross they did OTL. Heck, the Valiant might be good enough that the Soviets actually pay attention to the design and learn from it.
The Americans will be looking carefully at all this as well. I'm guessing no M3 Grant as we knew it, as the design gets changed or even ripped up and started again. They started to produce them in August 1941 IIRC.
 
Better ergonomics than the T-34 too, if not quite as much punch from the gun.

But overall, better tanks on either side won't have all that much effect on Barbarossa, since it was far more down to Soviet incompetence, which won't be helped by having a few extra tanks.
Sad but true.
 
The Valiants would at least be better than the T-26's and the BT-7's, that's for sure. Not sure about the specific details, but those latter two tanks were... not good.
They were decent enough in their day, but their day had long passed by 1941 and really all resources should have been shoved into building nothing but T-34 as fast as possible.
 
They were decent enough in their day, but their day had long passed by 1941 and really all resources should have been shoved into building nothing but T-34 as fast as possible.
The problem is, the early T-34s are decidedly poor vehicles. They're cramped, with terrible vision, and abysmal reliability.

I wonder if the Soviets will allow a few REME units in to help with training the repair crews and provide feedback on what could be done to improve their performance in Russian conditions.
 
Last edited:
Better ergonomics than the T-34 too, if not quite as much punch from the gun.

But overall, better tanks on either side won't have all that much effect on Barbarossa, since it was far more down to Soviet incompetence, which won't be helped by having a few extra tanks.
So the expectation is that the invasion will go as OTL, then?
 
Speaking of, I wonder if those tanks could be shipped east to Malaya...

Honestly, they're probably going to give the captured German tanks to friendly government in exile forces (or as aid to the Soviets); it'll be an enormous hassle for British forces to handle tanks designed by a different nation; even the measurement systems are different.

Far better to send obsolete British tanks like the A10, Matilda I, Vickers 6-ton, and the like; though they'll suffer much of the same issues as the German tanks they'll be somewhat easier to actually make use of, being British rather than German.
 
Hello,

Good story so far. Would the nickname "Desert Rats" be applied to a different unit ITTL? Also, does it now seem likely that Generals Alexander and Montgomery will be assigned to a different theater of operations?
 
So the expectation is that the invasion will go as OTL, then?
Pretty much. Better tanks don't change much overall.

Honestly, they're probably going to give the captured German tanks to friendly government in exile forces (or as aid to the Soviets); it'll be an enormous hassle for British forces to handle tanks designed by a different nation; even the measurement systems are different.

Far better to send obsolete British tanks like the A10, Matilda I, Vickers 6-ton, and the like; though they'll suffer much of the same issues as the German tanks they'll be somewhat easier to actually make use of, being British rather than German.
Well as long as some tanks get there in the end.
 
Barbarossa was almost always going to happen after France fell. Grofaz told his flunkies to start planning it all out in the Autumn of 1940, even before the Battle of Britain was over.
Yeah, true.

The big question now is now since the Mk. 1* variant of the Valiant is now showing its oddities, I wonder when the Mk. 2 and the Victor will come into play.
 
Gariboldi's thinking is sensible since Sirte cannot be held. Let's see what the response from the HQ in Italy will be.

The Italians are left without any motorized divisions- the Trieste hasn't arrived yet. Ariete in OTL Crusader had 137 M13/40, I have no idea how many they have at this point. I am under the impression that Ariete was reconstituting in June 1941 after the severe losses they experienced in Compass. If they fight in June they will be less effective than OTL Crusader because they will lack months of training.
 
Speaking of, I wonder if those tanks could be shipped east to Malaya...
No need - British Production both being producing better AFVs, more of them, with improved quality control, better production of spares and not ITTL including 1700 odd Covenanters

Plenty of British built tanks available for 2nd and tertiary theatres, not to mention US production not being as desperately required and therefore that too slightly improved over OTL

No need for half ruined German and Italian AFVs with limited spares and the speedometer in Metric
 
So, Rommel did get out with 60 whole tanks. One cannot help but think that in this timeline, his reputation will at best be that of a moderately competent infantry commander, albeit one who needs a superior with a cool head holding a short leash.

Will O'Connor be considered a 'memetic badass' in this timeline?
 
Last edited:
So, Rommel did get out with 60 whole tanks. One cannot help but think that in this timeline, his reputation will at best be that of a moderately competent infantry commander, albeit one who needs a superior with a cool head holding a short leash.
And half of them are Pz Is and IIs, presumably.

Also I think he lost the 88s and the PzJ Is too.
 
For all everyone loves to dump on Rommel, I don't think the German Army will blame him too harshly. He was not launching some wild charge into the desert while ignoring his logistics - he had the bulk of his forces solidly established in a prepared defensive position and the flanking counterattack from 15th Panzer was straight out of the textbook.

Ironically, it's the British who have pulled off a major victory by splitting their forces and sending an armoured spearhead on a deep strike into the enemy's rear areas with its flanks wide open and no supply lines to speak of.

Put another way, given that neither his intelligence nor his reconnaissance assets had warned him of the outflank and he believed that he was facing a Corps-level attack from the East, what should Rommel have done? The Italian view that he should have abandoned the Nofilia position and gone scuttling back to Sirte without waiting to be attacked is unlikely to find favour with the Heer. (Gen Gariboldi's belief that the Trento infantry division, with no support closer than Sirte, could somehow have managed a delaying action and orderly withdrawal against a numerically superior enemy with a massive advantage in armour suggests that someone hasn't learned the lessons of Operation Compass).

I suspect that the blame, at least in the German Army's eyes, will be applied to the Italians (for holding back the Ariete) and the Luftwaffe (for failing to spot the multi-division flanking force as it drove over tens of kilometres of open desert).
 
...

I suspect that the blame, at least in the German Army's eyes, will be applied to the Italians (for holding back the Ariete) and the Luftwaffe (for failing to spot the multi-division flanking force as it drove over tens of kilometres of open desert).
So what you mean is, everyone else's Reports will blame the Italians and the Luftwaffe; Göring's Report will blame the Italians, and thus, somehow, fault will be assigned to the Italians and the Kriegsmarine.

Edit: Upon further consideration, I think Göring would actually blame the lack of Paratroopers.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top