A Blunted Sickle - Thread II

[Ryan]

has the Polish-Czechoslovakian confederation been given any serious consideration in TTL?
OTL it was supported by the polish government in exile and was given some support by the Czechoslovakian government in exile (most of the lack of support for it on the Czechoslovakian side seems to come primarily from Benes and his pro-soviet leanings) and the idea was only quashed when Stalin put pressure on Czechoslovakians because he saw such a state as a threat to his future sphere of influence in eastern Europe.

 

[KACKO]

has the Polish-Czechoslovakian confederation been given any serious consideration in TTL?
OTL it was supported by the polish government in exile and was given some support by the Czechoslovakian government in exile (most of the lack of support for it on the Czechoslovakian side seems to come primarily from Benes and his pro-soviet leanings) and the idea was only quashed when Stalin put pressure on Czechoslovakians because he saw such a state as a threat to his future sphere of influence in eastern Europe.

OTL Sikorski approached Benes already in 1939. But negotiation were slow and only in November 1940 come common announcement that they will negotiate possibilities of future political and economic association. In Early 1941 common group was created.

But support from Czechoslovak, especially Benes was lukewarm.
Interestingly Masaryk and Slovak member of Czechoslovak exile Milan Hodza were supporting it. Interestingly in France Hodza had more influence then Benes in French circles. Hodza founded Slovak narional comittee in France in early 1939 and was closely working with Osusky.

OTL Benes went so far as handing secret documents from negotiations to Soviets!

 

[naraht]

A thought looking at the map... Deciding what to do with Memel will be interesting. It is unlikely to be given to the Soviets, and the Germans are likely to lose East Prussia, but should it end up Polish? Could there be a figleaf of it being the Lithuanian part of a Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?

 

[pdf27]

Why would the Slovaks be denied Petrol? The Slovak would have been viewed as the second closest nation to the 3R diplomatically (surpassed only by Denmark which doesn't have any choice) but officially Neutral in the war. The Slovaks would been able to trade with nations that could sell them petrol, wouldn't be *that* constrained by anyone in what they can buy and sell and have probably been the county to make the most money smuggling in and out of the 3R.

Take a look at how well that worked out for Holland in WW1. The Slovaks are to all intents and purposes inside the blockaded zone, the entente are well aware just how precarious the German fuel situation is and that if the Slovaks got some petrol the Germans would demand it on the spot, and it would be handed over. There will be some smuggling, but it'll be a drop in the ocean compared to needs.

This will be very stable Czechoslovakia.
Well what they will do? Execute 50% of Slovak Population as Nazi collaborators? That was app. number of Slovaks which voted for HSLS pre war. What will be definition? Everybody involved with Slovak Republic government? Well again that will be tough and huge number. Even OTL when Slovakia collaborated much more with Nazis, majority of Slovaks were able to reenter Czechoslovak services, including military personnel. Including Jan Reznak, 32 victories from Eastern Front and guy couldn't even claim part in Uprising as he never made it (or didn't want to) to center of Uprising.

And as you said in posts before hardly French or British will want to bleed to really help Czechs in prosecuting Slovaks. Can be used as a threat though.
Prosecution of Slovaks will just bring very unstable Czechoslovakia.

Yep. The French and (to a lesser extent) British are just demanding help with menaces at the moment. If they get turned down there is no way that they'd actually do very much after the war, apart from maybe giving Benes a free hand to ban/persecute separatist parties.

Disaster? Will they be expelled from Slovak territory? Will Allies sent them to concentration lagers or as communist did to Uranium mines in Sudetenland? Again this barely happened even OTL during communist!
Either there will be Czechoslovakia or independent Slovakia. Slovaks were cheating and had chips in both sides.

Good for them. Two things to remember though:

• They don't know what happened in the OTL future, so "it can't be as bad as a terrible future which will never happen" isn't much of a selling point.
• Their main chip on the Entente side has just turned up and is pressing them to take a particular course of action...

I guess he will pretty well as one of your posts post war was talking about post war Czechoslovakia.

It isn't canon until I publish it, and it was in a spoiler tag...

But anyway even with Slovak independents, it was still Czechoslovak government in exile. Only Czech government which existed was collaborating with Nazis in Protectorate. Czech Government army (app 6 battalions), Czech Police etc at Protectorate etc.

True. That was sloppy use of language on my part.

However for Czechoslovakia to really have future Osusky needs to succeed. Slovakia may be even suppressed but without genocide, Slovaks will eventually try to separate again. How long can Czechs keep Slovaks suppressed. Even communist came with Federalization in 1968. And as history showed... Slovaks did it again.

Long term, yes. Short term it will probably not fall to pieces.

Well there were 2 refineries in Slovakia - Apollo in Bratislava and one in Dubova plus some strategic reserves in central Slovakia. OTL used during Uprising.
Slovak Romania relations were pretty good. Also there were oilfields close to Bratislava. Not big but I would guess big enough to supply military demand - Slovak army had only few units fully motorized.

They might be able to hoard enough to run a short motorised campaign. The Romanians aren't going to be shipping them significant amounts of crude oil however - and the Gbely oil field appears to be tiny.

Here's a map of the operations of 24-25 December. In just two days of fighting the British have already made it halfway to Berlin. Army Group B is much too overextended and immobile to put up much of a defense. Even with the poor weather coming it appears that the Third Reich's end will be in a matter of weeks rather than months.

It also nicely illustrates the massive problem the Germans have got - they've got enough men to put up a serious fight against one of their great power enemies, but only if that enemy fights on a ground of the German's choosing. If anything else happens, they are now weak (and immobile) enough that they're facing disaster.

A thought looking at the map... Deciding what to do with Memel will be interesting. It is unlikely to be given to the Soviets, and the Germans are likely to lose East Prussia, but should it end up Polish? Could there be a figleaf of it being the Lithuanian part of a Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?

I think Stalin may have something to say about that...

 

[MiniaAr]

Regarding Memel, if the Allies are fast enough, isn't there a slight chance that East Prussia becomes detached from Germany and forms a 4th Baltic state (the only independent one), aligned with the entente as a forward base against the USSR?

I don't believe that Germany is getting partitionned, but East Prussia could be an exception to this. Basically saying to the East Prussians: "Either you accept this and you can keep skipping German in your country, or you're getting displaced and Poles/Russians are going to live in your houses."
If I remember correctly, there was talk of a "East Prussian SSR" in OTL in case Stalin didn't want to strengthen Poland too much and would like a convenient place to deport his own German minority.
This would be something similar, except that ITTL the Allies get to implement their own plans with another allied/buffer state at the border with Russia alongside Poland. And this also has the advantage (from the Entente POV) of not requiring mass expulsions of Germans.

After WWII OTL, Germany and Austria were successfully detached. ITTL, with an Entente victory without Russian help, how possible would it be to have a 3rd German-speaking state in Europe (Germany, Austria, Prussia), forever banned from seeking unification?

 

[ngf]

A thought looking at the map... Deciding what to do with Memel will be interesting. It is unlikely to be given to the Soviets, and the Germans are likely to lose East Prussia, but should it end up Polish? Could there be a figleaf of it being the Lithuanian part of a Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?

I expect that the Soviets will "liberate" Memel from German occupation as soon as it becomes clear that Germany is collapsing. Memel is just too far away for the Entente to do anything about it and the risk that either Britain or France would do anything beyond sending a nasty letter of protest are tiny. This risks of triggering a war goes up rapidly, however, if Stalin tries the same for East Prussia or German-occupied Poland.

 

[pjmidd]

Regarding Memel, if the Allies are fast enough, isn't there a slight chance that East Prussia becomes detached from Germany and forms a 4th Baltic state (the only independent one), aligned with the entente as a forward base against the USSR?

I don't believe that Germany is getting partitionned, but East Prussia could be an exception to this. Basically saying to the East Prussians: "Either you accept this and you can keep skipping German in your country, or you're getting displaced and Poles/Russians are going to live in your houses."
If I remember correctly, there was talk of a "East Prussian SSR" in OTL in case Stalin didn't want to strengthen Poland too much and would like a convenient place to deport his own German minority.
This would be something similar, except that ITTL the Allies get to implement their own plans with another allied/buffer state at the border with Russia alongside Poland. And this also has the advantage (from the Entente POV) of not requiring mass expulsions of Germans.

After WWII OTL, Germany and Austria were successfully detached. ITTL, with an Entente victory without Russian help, how possible would it be to have a 3rd German-speaking state in Europe (Germany, Austria, Prussia), forever banned from seeking unification?

Given what the Germans will have done in Poland, East Prussia is going to be losing its German population and most if not all ending up Polish, the Poles would see it as too much of a risk otherwise.

 

[ngf]

If the Force de Raid head to the far east, they would go to Singapore not Indochina. The grand strategy is essentially that the South China Sea is a giant mousetrap - lots of friendly air, radar and submarine cover, and the Japanese have to go into it to fight the Entente fleets. Putting any significant modern forces into Indochina is asking for them to be sunk in detail against locally superior forces in a surprise attack. That just isn't possible in Singapore.

Knowing the lessons from the OTL I can see the argument for keeping the battleships Strasbourg and Dunkerque at Singapore, but at this point ITTL would either the British or the French recognize the true vulnerability of their battleships to carrier-based aircraft? After all, in the OTL weren't the British confident that ground-based air support would be sufficient to protect Prince of Wales and Repulse?

This also begs the question of how far has the naval doctrines of the British and French evolved to this point. Do they still view the battleships as their main capital ships, with the aircraft carriers as useful auxiliaries, or have they switched over to the view that aircraft carriers are now the main capital ships of the fleet, with the battleships now providing only a supporting role? I do suppose that the year-long concentration of the British carriers at Singapore will have given them the opportunity to experiment with new naval tactics. I can foresee an exercise with Force X playing the role of the Japanese and trying to sneak up on Singapore, perhaps even attaching a British aircraft carrier or two to Force X to see how this changes the situation. But in the end, with the lack of the hard experience from the OTL, would exercise results be enough to convince the battleship admirals that their time has past? The world wonders.

Even if the French did recognize the vulnerability of their battleships, wouldn't it still be useful to keep some scouting force based at Cam Ranh Bay? In this role, which do you think would be more useful, the older heavy cruisers or the more modern light cruisers? Perhaps an argument can be made that Force X stays. Also, would the British consider forward basing their submarines at Cam Ranh Bay?

 

[marcinL]

A thought looking at the map... Deciding what to do with Memel will be interesting. It is unlikely to be given to the Soviets, and the Germans are likely to lose East Prussia, but should it end up Polish? Could there be a figleaf of it being the Lithuanian part of a Polish Lithuanian commonwealth?

Maybe it could become some Free Lithuanian State a la Taiwan, if allies manage to get there first, of course.

 

[ngf]

Notes on French Naval Aviation (Aéronavale)

Here are some notes on French naval aviation in the OTL that may of use for TTL. At the start of the war, the air wing of the Béarn (Flotille F1A) consisted of two fighter squadrons (AC1 and AC2, equipped with obsolete D.376 fighters) and two scout bomber squadrons (AB1 with obsolete PL.101, and AB2 with slightly more modern V.156F dive bombers). At the start of hostilities, the Béarn was declared to be too slow for operational service and it was decided to disembark these squadrons and reequip them with more modern aircraft. These squadrons remained land-based throughout the conflict.

Here is Aéronavale’s OOB as of June 1940 in the OTL. (Note: the squadron numbers reflect the renumbering regulation of 8 June 1940, which did not actually become effective until 1 August):

Fighter squadrons:

• 1AC – equipped with 12 Po.631
• 2AC – equipped with 12 Po.631
• 3AC – equipped with 12 MB.151
• 4AC – forming (possibly with MS.406)
• 5AC – forming with MS.406

The French had ordered 81 G.36A fighters (F4F-3 “Wildcat”) from the US to reequip these squadrons. It was anticipated that the Joffre and Painlevé would be equipped with Dewoitine D.790 fighters, a navalized version of the D.520.

Carrier-capable scout bomber squadrons:

• 1AB – equipped with 12 V.156F dive bombers (Vought SB2U “Vindicator”)
• 2AB – equipped with 12 LN.401 dive bombers
• 3AB – equipped with 12 V.156F dive bombers
• 4AB – equipped with 12 LN.411 dive bombers

In early 1940, the French had ordered 90 Curtiss H.77F dive bombers (Curtiss SBC-4 “Helldiver”, not to be confused with the Curtiss SB2C "Helldiver") from the US. It was anticipated that the Joffre and Painlevé would be equipped with Bréguet Br.810 attack aircraft, derived from the Br.693.

Flotille F1H, embarked on the sea-plane tender Commandant Teste:

• 1HB – equipped with 11 Laté.298 torpedo bombers
• 2HB – equipped with 10 Laté.298 torpedo bombers
• 1HS – equipped with 6 L.130 scout aircraft
• (former HC1 – disembarked and reequipped as squadron 3AC)

In my opinion, ITTL Commandant Teste would be a useful addition to FIC.

Land-based bomber squadrons:

• 1B – equipped with 9 Leo.H257, transitioning to Martin 167F (Glenn Martin “Maryland”)
• 2B – equipped with 9 Leo.H257, transitioning to Martin 167F
• 3B – equipped with 9 Martin 167F
• 4B – equipped with 9 Martin 167F
• 5B – equipped with 3 Farman F.233.4 (4-engine ex-civilian mail planes)

The French had ordered a total of more than 200 Martin 167F for use by both the Armée de l’Air and Aéronavale.

Seaplane torpedo bomber squadrons:

• 1T – equipped with 10 Laté.298
• 2T – equipped with 10 Laté.298
• 3T – equipped with 10 Laté.298
• 4T – equipped with 10 Laté.298

Exploration (long-range patrol) squadrons:

• 1E – equipped with 7 Br.521 “Bizerte” seaplanes
• 2E – equipped with 6 Br.521 “Bizerte” seaplanes
• 3E – equipped with 6 Br.521 “Bizerte” seaplanes
• 4E – equipped with 4 Laté.301/302 seaplanes
• 5E – equipped with 6 Br.521 “Bizerte” seaplanes
• 6E – equipped with 5 Laté.521/522/523 seaplanes
• 7E – equipped with 5 LeO H.257bis (which replaced 6 Loire 70 seaplanes destroyed during an Italian air raid)
• 8E – an experimental squadron to test prototypes of Potez-CAMS 141, Laté.611, and Bréguet 730. The Potez-CAMS 141 was the only aircraft delivered before the armistice.
• 9E – equipped with 4 Br.521 “Bizerte” seaplanes
• 10E – equipped with 3 Farman F.222 bombers, but planned to be equipped with Consolidated PBY “Catalina” seaplanes
• 11E – equipped with 5 LeO H.470 seaplanes
• 12E – planned to be equipped with 4 LeO H.246 seaplanes being manufacture for Air France
• 14E – equipped with 6 Martin 167F

In early 1940, the French ordered 30 Consolidated PBY “Catalina” from the US.

Surveillance (short-range patrol) squadrons:
18 squadrons equipped with of a variety of short-range seaplanes. These squadrons were numbered with the first character corresponding to the Maritime Region (numbered 1 through 4 for France and North Africa, and number “8” for squadrons based overseas) where they were stationed, the second character always the letter “S”, and the final character being the sequence number within the region. For example, Escadrille 3S4 was the fourth surveillance squadron in Maritime Region 3. There were 5 squadrons based overseas, of which Escadrille 8S1 was the only one in French Indochina (at Cat-Lai near Saigon), equipped with 10 Po.452.

 

[ngf]

Here is some background information on the French forces in Indochina in the OTL.

Division du Tonkin (DT)
Reconnaissance (light armor and armored cars):

• Détachment Motorisé du Tonkin (DMT)
• Détachment Motorisé de la Légion (DML)

Infantry :

1st Brigade

• 5e Régiment Étranger d’Infanterie (5e REI)
• 19e Régiment Mixte d’Infanterie Colonial (19e RMIC)

2nd Brigade

• 9e Régiment d’Infanterie Colonial (9e RIC)
• 3e Régiment de Tirailleurs Tonkinois (2e RTT)

3rd Brigade

• 1er Régiment de Tirailleurs Tonkinois (1er RTT)
• 4e Régiment de Tirailleurs Tonkinois (4e RTT)

Artillery :

• 4e Régiment d’Artillerie Coloniale (4e RAC)

Division de Cochinchine-Cambodge (DCC)
Reconnaissance :

• Détachment Motorisé de Cochinchine (DMC)

Infantry :

• 11e Régiment d’Infanterie Colonial (11e RIC)
• Régiment de Tirailleurs Annamite (RTA)
• Régiment de Tirailleurs Annamite bis (RTA bis)
• Régiment de Tirailleurs Cambodgiens (RTC)

Artillery :

• 5e Régiment d’Artillerie Coloniale (5e RAC)

Brigade d’Annam-Laos (BAL)
Reconnaissance :

• Détachment Motorisé d’Annam (DMA) (armored cars)

Infantry :

• 10e Régiment d’Infanterie Colonial (10e RIC)
• 16e Régiment Mixte d’Infanterie Colonial (16e RMIC)
• Bataillon de Tirailleurs Montagnard du Sud-Annam (BTMSA)

Coastal Artillery Units

Haiphong

• 6x 138mm guns
• 3x 155mm guns
• 1x twin 90mm model 1926 AA gun
• 6x 25mm Hotchkiss AA guns

Tourane (now called Da Nang)

• 2x 130mm guns
• 4x 90mm guns
• 6x 25mm Hotchkiss model 1939 AA guns

Cham Ranh Bay

• 1 battery with 4x 138mm model 1910 guns
• 1 battery with 3x 138mm model 1881 guns
• 1 battery with 4x 75mm model 1908 guns
• 1 battery with 4x 75mm model 1881 guns
• Upgrade plans for the waterfront defense called for Maginot-style fortifications of:
  • A double turret with 2x 203mm model 1940 guns
  • 4x 152mm model 1931 guns under mask and rotary platform
  • 6x 90mm AA model 1939 guns in three double turrets
  • 12x 37mm AA model 1941 in double carriages
  • 4 turrets for ground defense twinning a 47mm gun and two 7.5mm machine guns
  • 8 locations for 105 and 155mm towed artillery pieces to be set up by colonial wartime artillery
• Upgrade plans for the defense of the arsenal consisted of:
  • Four Maginot-type ouvrages each equipped with a 25mm gun and a 7.5mm machine gun, four twin 47mm guns, two 7.5mm guns, and two 81mm mortars.
  • Anti-air defenses of 12x 25mm Hotchkiss model 1939-40 guns in double carriages
• Plans to upgrade the anti-aircraft defense of the naval air base

Cape St. Jacques (approaches to Saigon)

• 2x 75mm guns
• 8x 105mm guns
• 8x 138mm guns
• 3x 240mm guns

 

[ngf]

Armée de l'Air in French Indochina

To round out my posts, here is some information on the AdA's disposition in FIC in the OTL on the eve of Japanese occupation of northern Vietnam in September 1940.

Fighter squadrons:

• EC 2/595 - 9x MS.406 (Hanoi)
• EC 2/596 - 7x MS.406 (Hanoi)

These aircraft were Chinese purchases ordered in 1938 that the French impounded at Haiphong and used to fight the Thai's in the Franco-Thai War (Oct 40 -31 January 1941)

Bomber squadrons:

• EB 2/41 - 4x Farman 222 (Hanoi)
• EB 2/42 - 6x Potez 542 (Saigon)

Reconnaissance squadrons:

• ER 1/41 - 9x Potez 25 (Pursat, Cambodia)
• ER 1/42 - 9x Potez 25 (Pursat, Cambodia)
• EO 1/595 - 7x Potez 25 (Dong Hoi, Annam (near the south end of the Gulf of Tonkin))
• EO 1/596 - 6x Potez 25 (Torane, Annam (now called Da Nang))
• allocated to Groupe HQs - 3x Potez 631C (Hanoi) - impounded Chinese purchases

Seaplane squadron:

• Esc. 1/CBS - 8x Loire 130, 2x CAMS 37, 2x CAMS 55

In January 1941, the German armistice commission granted permission for 23 Hawk H-75s and 44 Curtiss SBC-4s to be transferred to Indochina from Martinique, but Japanese pressure prevented their delivery.

I presume that ITTL that the AdA's position in FIC in significantly improved from this. Also, I doubt that the Franco-Thai War would have occurred ITTL, but that's up to pdf27.

 

[HJ Tulp]

That is only the DEI squadron. There were more units fighting the Germans and Italians. I've tried to gather up a list of all Dutch units on 10 May 1940 that were available or under construction.

Commissioned:

2 Java-class light cruisers.
1 De Ruyter-class light cruiser.
2 Tromp-class light cruisers (note: this includes HrMs Jacob van Heemskerck which was towed to England in May 1940 and completed there as a AA cruiser).
8 Van Galen-class destroyers
7 Colonial submarines, build in the 1920s
4 Colonial submarines, build in the 1930s
5 'European' submarines, build in the 1920s
4 submarines, build in the early 1930s
6 submarines, build in the late 1930s

Note: I have not included all small and auxilary units.

Under construction:

2 Eendracht-class light cruisers, laid down in 1939.
2 Gerard Callenburgh-class destroyer, nearly completed (note: this includes HrMs Isaac Sweers which was towed to England in May 1940 and completed there)
1 Gerard Callenburgh-class destroyer, laid down early 1939.
1 Gerard Callenburgh-class destroyer, launched in October 1939.
3 submarines, nearing completion
6 minesweepers, nearly finished with construction at Amsterdam.
3 MTBs, almost ready for launch in 1940.

Now there will certainly be some delays and some damage done during Fall Gelb, but I do think that the Dutch government will decide to finish these ships, even in England if possible. For one thing they know that the Indies will have to be defended and also because the surface units will be needed to escort convoys to the Netherlands and fight German litoral units.

To expand on this:

With the Southern Chinese Sea pretty much blocked by the MN and RN, the IJN might decide to launch a counter-clockwise invasion. So, instead of starting by invading French Indochina or Malaya, the invasion will culminate there and start in the eastern part of the Dutch East Indies, originating from Truk. This was considered OTL as well. For the Japanese the benefit would be that they sidestep the Allied battlefleet and could conquer (air) bases along the way. If they do this it means that the IJN will, at first, be confronted by the Koninklijk Marine (RNN).

The doctrinal development of the Royal Netherlands Navy will be interesting and can go two ways.

1. The deployment of the French and British heavy units to SEA does somewhat vindicate the position of the 'navalists' ('big'-gun lobby), who had spend the Interbellum claiming that all that was needed against the IJN would be light cruisers as the Japanese would need all their heavy units to counter those of the RN/USN. OTL those heavy units were primarily engaged in the ETO, ATL this is not so. In navalist logic this means that the DEI squadron will be able to defend the East Indies quite handidly, especially considering the ATL additions. Theoretically there could be as many as 7 light cruisers and 12 destroyers available.
2. However, the Dutch government could very well demand that the surface units are mainly concentrated in the mainland to protect the all important convoys that supply the country, its citizens and its army. In that case what is left of the submarine-lobby might be able to win the day after all. Theoretically there are as many as 17 (!) submarines available for service in the DEI (though some might be detailed for (practically useless) interdiction of German-Norway convoys as OTL). This means as many as four separate submarine divisions (consisting of three submarines each) will be available. With (most of) the surface units in Europe, the road is open for wolfpack-style operations against the IJN.

Which one of these two roads are taken depends a lot on the situation in Dutch politics. About the only thing we can be sure about is that Premier De Geer is gone at this point. The man might have been an OK prime-minister in times of peace, in times of war he certainly was not. He is going to loose his nerves either in May 1940 or during the occupation of Paris. Who is going to replace him is a big blur, as is the rest. We can't just assume that Gerbrandy will take over as per OTL as the situation is totally different. Queen Wilhelmina wil have more influence than before the war, but will NOT have the immense power as OTL, as the Cabinet will still be in full contact with Parlement. It might be Gerbrandy after all but his party, the ARP, had not done very well in the elections of 1937, it was in fact the third party after the RKSP (Catholics) and the SDAP (Labour). De Geers party, the CHU (Protestant) was fourth though. There might be someone else from the CHU but it could also be someone of the larger parties. Hell, there is a small chance that Colijn might become prime minister again!

 

[Jellico]

Knowing the lessons from the OTL I can see the argument for keeping the battleships Strasbourg and Dunkerque at Singapore, but at this point ITTL would either the British or the French recognize the true vulnerability of their battleships to carrier-based aircraft? After all, in the OTL weren't the British confident that ground-based air support would be sufficient to protect Prince of Wales and Repulse?

This also begs the question of how far has the naval doctrines of the British and French evolved to this point. Do they still view the battleships as their main capital ships, with the aircraft carriers as useful auxiliaries, or have they switched over to the view that aircraft carriers are now the main capital ships of the fleet, with the battleships now providing only a supporting role? I do suppose that the year-long concentration of the British carriers at Singapore will have given them the opportunity to experiment with new naval tactics. I can foresee an exercise with Force X playing the role of the Japanese and trying to sneak up on Singapore, perhaps even attaching a British aircraft carrier or two to Force X to see how this changes the situation. But in the end, with the lack of the hard experience from the OTL, would exercise results be enough to convince the battleship admirals that their time has past? The world wonders.

Even if the French did recognize the vulnerability of their battleships, wouldn't it still be useful to keep some scouting force based at Cam Ranh Bay? In this role, which do you think would be more useful, the older heavy cruisers or the more modern light cruisers? Perhaps an argument can be made that Force X stays. Also, would the British consider forward basing their submarines at Cam Ranh Bay?

Everyone from Jacky Fisher on knew the aircraft carrier's day was coming. Much like the flying car it was a matter of a bunch of technologies coming together to get the when.

For navies in the 30s the issues were budgets and treaties. Everyone knew 3 carrier's were better than 2 but who had the money and hulls to get them together to work the bugs out every 5 years as tech moved on?

To be blunt yes. The RN was playing around with the concept of mass carrier strikes in the 30s. The first big carrier mission planned by the RN was a raid into 1919 Wilhelmshaven. So the ideas are there.

As for land based aircraft? In 1941 they eat naval aircraft for breakfast. We just had a thread about Zeros in the Battle of Britain telling us why.Then there is the whole radar and control thing. The Japanese were flat out putting radios in Zeros.

The real question is how seriously the Allies are taking the far east. If they are being starved of hardware and knowhow the potential for a disaster is there. OTOH with no invasion panic the RNs aircraft are going to be current and there is no call for the best of them to be tied down in Europe.

I am rambling now but I can't see a way for Japan to pull out a win. Operating from China they are too far away with an opforce that can afford losses and trade space for time if they need to.

 

[Astrodragon]

Another question is wheter the British carriers have any real experience operating togheter as a single force ?

Yes.
In the 30's, they practiced with groups of up to three carriers.

 

[Driftless]

Will any of the Western powers had an equivalent of the AVG flying against the Japanese in China at this point?

 

[HJ Tulp]

Will any of the Western powers had an equivalent of the AVG flying against the Japanese in China at this point?

Once the war in Europe is over I could see quite a few volunteers/mercenaries joining the KMT.

 

[Driftless]

With the Southern Chinese Sea pretty much blocked by the MN and RN, the IJN might decide to launch a counter-clockwise invasion. So, instead of starting by invading French Indochina or Malaya, the invasion will culminate there and start in the eastern part of the Dutch East Indies, originating from Truk. This was considered OTL as well. For the Japanese the benefit would be that they sidestep the Allied battlefleet and could conquer (air) bases along the way. If they do this it means that the IJN will, at first, be confronted by the Koninklijk Marine (RNN).

The Japanese might also consider the possibility of the French and British jumping into the fight alongside the Dutch but after some parliamentary debate. So, the French and Commonwealth (Britain, Australia, New Zealand) would not be joining the fight on day one, which would theoretically give the Japanese time to establish footholds in the DEI. The Japanese leadership might look at the pre and early war examples of Czechoslovakia and Poland as indicators of limits of commitment?

 

[ngf]

The Japanese might also consider the possibility of the French and British jumping into the fight alongside the Dutch but after some parliamentary debate. So, the French and Commonwealth (Britain, Australia, New Zealand) would not be joining the fight on day one, which would theoretically give the Japanese time to establish footholds in the DEI. The Japanese leadership might look at the pre and early war examples of Czechoslovakia and Poland as indicators of limits of commitment?

With the commitment of major portions of the British and French fleets to the Far East specifically to send a message to Japan and the fact that the Dutch are already fighting as a member of the Entente makes this an implausible scenario.

 

[HJ Tulp]

The Japanese might also consider the possibility of the French and British jumping into the fight alongside the Dutch but after some parliamentary debate. So, the French and Commonwealth (Britain, Australia, New Zealand) would not be joining the fight on day one, which would theoretically give the Japanese time to establish footholds in the DEI. The Japanese leadership might look at the pre and early war examples of Czechoslovakia and Poland as indicators of limits of commitment?

With the commitment of major portions of the British and French fleets to the Far East specifically to send a message to Japan and the fact that the Dutch are already fighting as a member of the Entente makes this an implausible scenario.

I agree that the bonds between the Entente and the Netherlands are much tighter than OTL. There will not be a policy of 'Allied in Europe, Neutral in Asia' in this timeline. Given the trade-relationship between the Netherlands and Japan the Japanese might think/hope otherwise though.