Sir John Valentine Carden survives.

[DrakonFin]

Germany and Finland attempted to cut the railway and they did bomb it but they never reached it or actually cut it. It was situated in the Arctic and well defended. It was the major lifeline for UK and US Lend-Lease.

Strictly speaking, the Finns did reach and capture a part of the original Murmansk railway, hugging Lake Onega around Petrozavodsk. They held this bit of the line until 1944. The Soviets had just in 1941 completed a northern branch along the White Sea from Belomorsk to Obozersky, though, and thus could continue traffic from and to Murmansk. The Finns and Germans made several small raids against the railway between Belomorsk and Murmansk, and could damage it to disrupt traffic temporarily, and to derail trains, etc, but this generally amounted to just harassment. In early 1942 the Finns had a plan to attack Belomorsk with significant forces to cut the northern branch there, but then this attack was not given the go-ahead by Mannerheim because it would have a) taken more troops and resources than the Finns could afford, and likely led to unacceptably heavy losses and b) led to Finnish relations with the Western Allies deteriorating as much as to make the US declare war against Finland.

We can say that for both practical and politico-diplomatic reasons, since late 1941 Finland was not serious about trying to cut the Murmansk railway.

 

[kelgar04]

I am aware of the importance, my grandfather visited a couple of time with the Copeland. He was a dems gunner abound her. But they also went to archangel which he was not a big fan of. I should actually read up a bit more on the convoys, as I don’t know what drove them to use archangel.

If memory serves it was the same reason as the first world war it was easier to get to than the alternatives and the port could be open most of the year expect winter.

 

[DrakonFin]

I am aware of the importance, my grandfather visited a couple of time with the Copeland. He was a dems gunner abound her. But they also went to archangel which he was not a big fan of. I should actually read up a bit more on the convoys, as I don’t know what drove them to use archangel.

I believe the reason for using Arkhangelsk as well as Murmansk was simply the fact that you can get more in through two ports than just one. As the capacity of the Murmansk railway was limited, as well as warehouse space in Murmansk, etc, it made sense to send a part of the convoys to Arkhangelsk, too. The latter port was also further away from the front lines, while Murmansk was more threatened by the enemy. That would have been a consideration, too.

Remember that Arkhangelsk is on the White Sea which will ice up in the winter, while Murmansk on the Arctic Sea is free of ice around the year. So Arkhangelsk was comparatively more useful in the summer, Murmansk in the winter.

 

[Paulo the Limey]

Whatever makes you happy so you can way that awesome COVENANTER WINS flag

The pair of you come across really poorly in this exchange, hell in this whole thread. Way too much nationalistic pride clouding judgement.

 

[allanpcameron]

Yeah retconning the ammo to 420 mm is a thing to consider apparently for the author for the 3 inch gun or 505 mm cause the 620 mm thing was strange when proposed .

Busted!

 

[allanpcameron]

@allanpcameron a quick question if you don't mind. What was the reason for the 2500ft/s MV of the proposed 3" gun ITTL. I have always assumed it was because that was the velocity of the Vickers 75mm HV that got canned. Am I correct?

You sound as if you've gone down a rabbit hole. Your Google-fu and mine look about the same. I saw 2500ft/sec on two different sites (which didn't look they copied from one another). So that's the figure I used.
It's just a story. The minutiae of ammunition isn't really the point, except that it isn't obviously nonsense.
Allan.

 

[MarcH]

You sound as if you've gone down a rabbit hole. Your Google-fu and mine look about the same. I saw 2500ft/sec on two different sites (which didn't look they copied from one another). So that's the figure I used.
It's just a story. The minutiae of ammunition isn't really the point, except that it isn't obviously nonsense.
Allan.

Think I fell down a sinkhole last night pal, then fell back in when I was trying to climb out.

So to keep it brief my basic thinking is and has been.

• When Vickers started working on the 3" Tanks kill tanks was still king for Britain.
• Stands to reason then that the gun they design, to be as attractive as possible would be as good a hole puncher as possible.
• Given the dual purpose requirement you make the HE round as good as possible given the AP performance.
• That was why I was looking at the 77mm HV as a comparison, particularly after I am sure I saw you make mention of it.
• I think on Balance Vickers would have used the 20cwt 420mm case from the off, it was already being built in Britain and is easier to manhandle in turrets, particularly from a 1939 perspective. The only reason not too is if the 505 does have a slightly larger capacity so better AP performance but that is a bit weak probably.
• The 75mm HV has always been a bit of an oddity to me, why Britain would choose that calibre has always been a puzzle. Fletcher has asked the same thing.
• My suspicion is that either Britain figured they are getting boat loads of 75mm either way so may as well make it better or they were hoping to entice the Americans with the new gun. It just seemed so out of place for what Britain was doing before and after.
• Either way what happened with that gun is likely less relevant to what Vickers would have done ITTL when compared to the 77mm. That gun was the return to type for the British.

So that's just about where I have gotten too. Still don't know what the bloody hell the Finns were up too though.

 

[Atrophied]

Yeah the gun you proposed but with the 420mm case since its still manufactured and its manufacturing can probably be increased should be the solution rather early rather than doing a strange finnish caliber of the 3 incher is the solution .

But what about my idea instead of a marginal upgrade to the 17 pounder by the royal artillery what about doing a 20 pounder instead ? So that vickers cant whine about duplicating effort and i imagine they can also offer the 3 incher in the anti tank role aswell for better logisitics as a argument , they could still build a few hundred of vickers anti tank guns as a stopgap while 20 pounder production is getting set up. The 20 pounder can be used in a mark 2 or mark 3 victor and a centurion equilevant tank aswell hopefully ?

And how does the 20 pounder gun compare to 17 pounder?Mainly penetration and weight wise?

 

[Lascaris]

There is a story, recounted by the Greeks that the Italian tanks were bolted together and apparently used to shake themselves apart on the mountain roads from Albania to the Greece. This seems to have occurred in front of a British witness. I remember reading about it in a history of the Greek Campaign. Personally, I hope it wasn't true...

Never seen it in Greek sources. Actually Papagos due to the lack of any large numbers of AT guns had insisted in following mostly mountain paths / was more timid in his advance after the battle of Korytza. Which given the actual performance of the Italian armor during the war (tanks completely failing against the 75mm guns the Greeks had turned to dual role, or easily getting immobilised by obstacles and then getting captured or destroyed.) was probably unfortunate.

Well come to think of it the Greeks in 1939 had placed an order for 14 tanks (Mark Es if memory serves) and wanted at least a regiment. How likely is that TTL they received more given increased British production? After all 50 tanks had been delivered to Turkey.

 

[Bougnas]

Think I fell down a sinkhole last night pal, then fell back in when I was trying to climb out.

So to keep it brief my basic thinking is and has been.

• When Vickers started working on the 3" Tanks kill tanks was still king for Britain.
• Stands to reason then that the gun they design, to be as attractive as possible would be as good a hole puncher as possible.
• Given the dual purpose requirement you make the HE round as good as possible given the AP performance.
• That was why I was looking at the 77mm HV as a comparison, particularly after I am sure I saw you make mention of it.
• I think on Balance Vickers would have used the 20cwt 420mm case from the off, it was already being built in Britain and is easier to manhandle in turrets, particularly from a 1939 perspective. The only reason not too is if the 505 does have a slightly larger capacity so better AP performance but that is a bit weak probably.
• The 75mm HV has always been a bit of an oddity to me, why Britain would choose that calibre has always been a puzzle. Fletcher has asked the same thing.
• My suspicion is that either Britain figured they are getting boat loads of 75mm either way so may as well make it better or they were hoping to entice the Americans with the new gun. It just seemed so out of place for what Britain was doing before and after.
• Either way what happened with that gun is likely less relevant to what Vickers would have done ITTL when compared to the 77mm. That gun was the return to type for the British.

So that's just about where I have gotten too. Still don't know what the bloody hell the Finns were up too though.

I don't understand why the 2500 fps figure keeps being brought up, as IIRC it was 2650 fps for the 75 HV, resulting in 87mm @30° @1000 yards/m penetration so slightly better than the 3" 20cwt on the Churchill GC. Using the 75mm caliber made sense since the 17pdr was just entering production while the Brits could get a supply of 75mm projectile through the US, with the 3" 20cwt 12.5 pound shell likely being rare.

What I never got is why the British didn't fit that in a Sherman concurrently with the Cromwell, or even if the latter failed to take the gun? Surely it would have been a better fit than a 17pdr and still an improvement in performance, indeed similar to the US 76. Did they not want to waste the M3 guns that were delivered in Shermans (but then why not sell the idea to the Americans or ask for gunless Shermans once it's known the 75 HV gun will be fitted?)?

 

[allanpcameron]

18 November 1940. Jamshedpur, India.

Sir Alexander Roger tried to fan himself, but the heat of the steel works, coupled with the heat of the day, was sweltering. Having been sent by the Ministry of Supply to look at the current and possible industrial capabilities of India, the Tata steel works was in many ways the center-piece of Indian Industry.

His guide had walked him through the various processes and parts of the steel mill, and, probably seeing Roger’s discomfort, headed back to the office where cold drinks and at least some semblance of coolness awaited. Sir Alexander Roger was still technically the Chairman of the Tank Board, and when the guide was talking about bullet-proof plate that was being made, Roger’s ears pricked up.

This was a subject about which Roger had become familiar with during his tenure on the Tank Board. He pressed the Tata manager about the quality and quantity that the steel works was capable of. The answer was somewhat surprising, it was of a higher quality and quantity than he had expected.

In his briefing notes while sailing to India he’d read that the British Indian Army, like the army at home, had been in the process of mechanising their cavalry regiments. One of the army staff officers accompanying the tour, was able to inform Roger that an Armoured Division had been formed, roughly along the same lines as the British Armoured Division. It was being formed with two Armoured Brigades (six cavalry regiments), but instead of a support group, the Indians had chosen to have a Motor Brigade.

This Motor Brigade was the furthest along in its readiness. There were plenty of trucks to carry the infantry, and part of the reason for producing bullet-proof plate was experiments were going on to adapt the lorries coming from Canada into an armoured vehicle. The only other armoured vehicles were some Vickers made Indian Pattern Light Tanks and various armoured cars. There was just about enough to cover training, but equipping an Armoured Division was going to be a struggle.

It was a struggle that Roger was all too familiar with. He had a conversation later with some of the local Civil Servants and business people about the possibility of building tanks in India. The reality was that there just wasn’t the skills and technical resources to be able to build tanks. Rogers had wondered about shipping out some of the jigs and tools that had been making the A13MkII in the LMS and Mechanisation and Aero Ltd factories. There were now being replaced to build the Matilda and A15. If Tata could make the steel, would it be possible to ship out the engines and transmissions, the other parts that couldn’t be made locally, and then assemble them in India? There was some huffing and puffing, but the consensus was that it would just be a few steps too far.

In that case, where India’s Armoured Division would get its tanks from was going to be a problem. The numbers of tanks being produced in British factories were equipping the British Armoured Divisions. The Canadians were quite advanced, but their output was for themselves and then for Britain. The orders for American designed and built tanks wouldn’t be available for a year at the earliest. The Australians were just at the stage of working out how to get started. The Indians needed around 500 tanks, but there just weren’t that many anywhere.

The only solution could well be to focus, as the South Africans were doing, on making armoured cars and scout vehicles. The Marmon-Herrington all-wheel drive kits that were being used in South Africa to build an Armoured Car, which Roger had seen on his stop-over at the Cape, were also being used on the lorries coming from Canada. It was entirely possible that the two country’s individual efforts were complimentary. The British, Canadian and American effort to build tanks would eventually be enough to equip all the Empire Armoured Divisions, how long it would take, was another matter.

NB Text in italic may or may not be different from OTL. Rogers made this trip to India, and I am guessing that he probably went to the Tata mill. As to the question, was it ever considered to set up a tank factory in India? I suppose someone must have thought about it, and reached the same conclusion as here that it wasn't feasible.

 

[pjmidd]

Never seen it in Greek sources. Actually Papagos due to the lack of any large numbers of AT guns had insisted in following mostly mountain paths / was more timid in his advance after the battle of Korytza. Which given the actual performance of the Italian armor during the war (tanks completely failing against the 75mm guns the Greeks had turned to dual role, or easily getting immobilised by obstacles and then getting captured or destroyed.) was probably unfortunate.

Well come to think of it the Greeks in 1939 had placed an order for 14 tanks (Mark Es if memory serves) and wanted at least a regiment. How likely is that TTL they received more given increased British production? After all 50 tanks had been delivered to Turkey.

Don't know about the story either but Italian tanks being of bolted construction , at least for hulls, up to and including the M13/40 is true

 

[kelgar04]

This much heavy industry the empire is trying to spread around is impressive as to building tanks in India you could build the engines and transmissions in South Africa? Or maybe look at sending people to Britain or Canada to learn how to make them then send them back to India with the tools? Or would that take to long?

 

[Icedaemon]

So India will be more or less as OTL, but perhaps with more inter-empire cooperation from the get-go meaning that Tata armoured plate ends up on Australian-made tanks, of which some end up serving in the Indian armoured brigades?

Given the discussion on the A15's being second-line tanks, the discussion on the British Empire still being short on tanks and the self-propelled guns still being on the drawing boards, I can definitely see that at least the self-propelled AA gun (wherein the RA was less happy with the prototype) might eventually go into production based on the A15 chassis.

Speaking of modifying vehicles, what's Percy Hobart up to these days? Has his OTL conflict with Wavell occurred already?

Regarding the Nuffield tanks: Might they in this timeline, with Vickers being their 500 pound gorilla competitor, start naming their tanks with an 'M for Morris' naming scheme, if the Matilda II name did get stuck?

Proper Bridging tanks was the solution, but the Germans loved that engineering challenge to make an entire 56 ton tank submersible.

Much like everything is air-droppable at least once, most things are submersible at least once.

I think it was in this thread that we earlier had a fun discussion on what should arm a British Ratte. I am not saying this was a good or serious idea (it wasn't), but the thought of something the size of a destroyer with a single battleship size gun in a comically large turret rolling across the North German plain does make me chuckle.

This is still a British tank design thread. Rather than a hypothetical British Ratte, we should be focusing on a giant pykrete Landing Ship Tank.

 

[Rickshaw]

18 November 1940. Jamshedpur, India.

Sir Alexander Roger tried to fan himself, but the heat of the steel works, coupled with the heat of the day, was sweltering. Having been sent by the Ministry of Supply to look at the current and possible industrial capabilities of India, the Tata steel works was in many ways the center-piece of Indian Industry.

His guide had walked him through the various processes and parts of the steel mill, and, probably seeing Roger’s discomfort, headed back to the office where cold drinks and at least some semblance of coolness awaited. Sir Alexander Roger was still technically the Chairman of the Tank Board, and when the guide was talking about bullet-proof plate that was being made, Roger’s ears pricked up.

This was a subject about which Roger had become familiar with during his tenure on the Tank Board. He pressed the Tata manager about the quality and quantity that the steel works was capable of. The answer was somewhat surprising, it was of a higher quality and quantity than he had expected.

In his briefing notes while sailing to India he’d read that the British Indian Army, like the army at home, had been in the process of mechanising their cavalry regiments. One of the army staff officers accompanying the tour, was able to inform Roger that an Armoured Division had been formed, roughly along the same lines as the British Armoured Division. It was being formed with two Armoured Brigades (six cavalry regiments), but instead of a support group, the Indians had chosen to have a Motor Brigade.

This Motor Brigade was the furthest along in its readiness. There were plenty of trucks to carry the infantry, and part of the reason for producing bullet-proof plate was experiments were going on to adapt the lorries coming from Canada into an armoured vehicle. The only other armoured vehicles were some Vickers made Indian Pattern Light Tanks and various armoured cars. There was just about enough to cover training, but equipping an Armoured Division was going to be a struggle.

It was a struggle that Roger was all too familiar with. He had a conversation later with some of the local Civil Servants and business people about the possibility of building tanks in India. The reality was that there just wasn’t the skills and technical resources to be able to build tanks. Rogers had wondered about shipping out some of the jigs and tools that had been making the A13MkII in the LMS and Mechanisation and Aero Ltd factories. There were now being replaced to build the Matilda and A15. If Tata could make the steel, would it be possible to ship out the engines and transmissions, the other parts that couldn’t be made locally, and then assemble them in India? There was some huffing and puffing, but the consensus was that it would just be a few steps too far.

In that case, where India’s Armoured Division would get its tanks from was going to be a problem. The numbers of tanks being produced in British factories were equipping the British Armoured Divisions. The Canadians were quite advanced, but their output was for themselves and then for Britain. The orders for American designed and built tanks wouldn’t be available for a year at the earliest. The Australians were just at the stage of working out how to get started. The Indians needed around 500 tanks, but there just weren’t that many anywhere.

The only solution could well be to focus, as the South Africans were doing, on making armoured cars and scout vehicles. The Marmon-Herrington all-wheel drive kits that were being used in South Africa to build an Armoured Car, which Roger had seen on his stop-over at the Cape, were also being used on the lorries coming from Canada. It was entirely possible that the two country’s individual efforts were complimentary. The British, Canadian and American effort to build tanks would eventually be enough to equip all the Empire Armoured Divisions, how long it would take, was another matter.

NB Text in italic may or may not be different from OTL. Rogers made this trip to India, and I am guessing that he probably went to the Tata mill. As to the question, was it ever considered to set up a tank factory in India? I suppose someone must have thought about it, and reached the same conclusion as here that it wasn't feasible.

The Indian solution in OTL was the Carrier, Wheeled Indian Pattern.

This was widely used by the Indian, New Zealand and to a lesser extent Australian Army. It was based on a Tata Steel body with CMP chassis.

 

[Machiavelli Jr]

This much heavy industry the empire is trying to spread around is impressive as to building tanks in India you could build the engines and transmissions in South Africa? Or maybe look at sending people to Britain or Canada to learn how to make them then send them back to India with the tools? Or would that take to long?

Too slow to build up expertise in that way I think, and far more efficient to get India building (and exporting) armoured cars, armoured lorries and perhaps Universal Carriers, which are a much smaller (but still considerable) step for their industrial base than modern tanks.

 

[Schlock]

Yeah the gun you proposed but with the 420mm case since its still manufactured and its manufacturing can probably be increased should be the solution rather early rather than doing a strange finnish caliber of the 3 incher is the solution .

But what about my idea instead of a marginal upgrade to the 17 pounder by the royal artillery what about doing a 20 pounder instead ? So that vickers cant whine about duplicating effort and i imagine they can also offer the 3 incher in the anti tank role aswell for better logisitics as a argument , they could still build a few hundred of vickers anti tank guns as a stopgap while 20 pounder production is getting set up. The 20 pounder can be used in a mark 2 or mark 3 victor and a centurion equilevant tank aswell hopefully ?

And how does the 20 pounder gun compare to 17 pounder?Mainly penetration and weight wise?

According to Hogg, when they were looking at the successor to the 6pdr, one of the earliest options considered was an 8pdr gun, but it was discarded as being an insufficient improvement over the existing 6pdr. The Vickers 3in HV tank gun is likely going to have a shell weight of around 12-15 pounds, so if the same logic is applied as OTL, I think a 17pdr is going to be ruled out as being insufficient an improvement.

Some flavour of 20 pdr on the other hand is probably going to be seen as an acceptable increase in capability, so I wouldn't be surprised if that is what we see for the Victor follow-on design.

 

[GrahamB]

I approve of India-pattern armoured car production. If you can't get a tank, a good armoured car is good enough. If the drivetrains can be sourced from Canada, Australia, or South Africa (I'm dubious on that last one, but only out of ignorance of SA's auto industry) and the armoured bodies built in India, I think you've got a good basis for motorizing India's regiments, even if you can't give them tanks as you might like.

 

[Atrophied]

The 420mm diameter should have some manufacturing be a thing and expanding exisisting lines is alot easier rather adopting a foreign caliber ,especially before the americans come into play wich is over a year away seems a rationale to follow.

The issue was in a recent update the author mentioned that the royal artillery was looking at the 17 pounder as a solution more or less to the vickers 3 incher wich is just a very marginal upgrade here is my argument . So my suggestion is a 20 pounder gun instead wich would probably also fit into later mark victors and whatever the centurion equilevant tank should make sense and noone has mentioned it before as a antitank gun option but mainly cause the 17 pounder was a rather good gun .

I know the 17 pounder was a good antitank gun but im imaging 20 pounder should be even better and it is also a upgrade for future tanks aswell wich is a good idea . Cause i think vickers would probably look at either 88 or 90mm guns themselves but if 20 pounder is a good anti tank gun and its HE round is good then designing a late mark victor and its successor around that would make sense aswell wich is a nice option with a mark 2 centurion being a 88 or 90mm gun ?

Here vickers is about to become alot more important than in otl thanks to them building the two main tanks of ww2 in the valiant and victor so they might be listened to alot more than usual so not doing a competitior in the 3 inch range and going abit up seems like the solution to me for the anti tank guns. Vickers can offer their gun as a antitank gun is another argument against the 17 pounder and this could be produced in some numbers while they are setting up the 20 pounder line as a stopgap solution as a reaction to tiger / panthers?

 

[Derek Pullem]

I took that upgrade in a different way - I read it as RA saying 3" M1931 isn't good enough and we need a TTL 17 pdr equivalent. That may be a case of Not invented Here but the probability of the M1931 based guns being available late 1941 compared to 1943 at the earliest for 17 pdr suggests that a good enough now (M1931) is better than waiting for the best (17 pdr).