alternatehistory.com

I've heard it suggested so many times that, for the french, they're navy was DOOMED e.c.t. What is forgotten is that French navel technoligy and shipbuilding was in many cases far superior to the Britsh, who relied on old techniques and aging ship construction sites. Frances ships were faster, sleeker and caused havoxc on british shipping.

What they mainly lacked was morale, good officers and good training. During the american war of independence, the french navel officers were on a par with the british, with many willing to be creative and aggresive. The battle of the chesapeak bay is an example of this, with the WAY overcautions british commander making tonnes of mistakes-and the french commander doing a few things right. Of course, during the revolution this breed of elite officers was wiped out or driven into exile, replaced with formally first mates with no real experiance as officers,let alone commanding a whole ship and to compound this the navy was subject to constant meddling by first the succesive revolutionary govorments then, worst of all, by Napoleon.
They often sent the navy in costly, pointless operations.

And yet this dosnt explain the whole picture. After the " battle of the gloroius first of june" in which both fleets took awful casulties and the french fleet and its vital convey escaped, it could be viewed as a french victory! Even after succesive victories a series of appalling operations and the lack of success of blockaids made many people believe that the initive in the Mediterranean sea had firmly passed to the french and spanish. And not all french or spanish officers were bad or incompetent by any measure-indeed, the french commander at trafalgar, Pierre-Charles Villeneuve was seen as a very good commander who was simply a victaim of bad luck that made him cautios and fatalistic and non stop interferance by napoelon-who only increased his cautuion.

so, my challenge is this:
1: What was the main detriment in the french navy and what key advantage that the British fleet possesed that gave them the advantage.

2: How could this be reversed or changed so that trafalgar ends in a frtench victory or at least, a draw in which most of the combined french and spanish fleet escape and the brits lose more ships ( oh and nelsons still killed for good measure.)

3: in the event of either a bloody draw or french victory, what is the long term result. Obviously a french invasion of britain and everyone speaking french is ASB-but thats not to say that it dosnt mean eventual french victory as the britsh are unable to effectivly blockaid or block napoelons advance saftley.

I am convinced that the french COULD win trafalgar-but it may take a not a small amount of change several years prior, be it navel reform or the untimelty death of one of the men involved ( not neccisarily nelson) to do so.

So make it convincing and good luck!
Top