What is the OTL sequence of events?
- Experimental Mechanised Force 1927-29
- Tank Brigade 1931
- Mobile Force in Mersa Matruh 1936
- Mobile Division in Britain 1937
- Mobile Division (Egypt) 1938
Is this it?
What difference would the production of a decent batch of Medium MkIII, perhaps ~80 to replace the Medium MkI from 1933? These were pretty fast, double the speed of the MkII, and a more modern design.
How would the Mobile Division develop with a regiment of new, fast tanks? Or would they have been sent to Egypt to be part of Mobile Force in 1936 instead? Would another batch would another batch be produced when it was decided to re-arm?
The problem was the French........ The Brits followed their lead for way too long...
Britain had what 4 Divisions during Peacetime during the 30s in Britain?
...
By 1939 with all the build up with Munich etc what size would it be ? (with conscription to boost numbers and far more well trained officers and NCOs than OTL) Say 8 infantry and 4 Armoured Div ?
This force might have a significant effect in 1940 with 8 more months after it has landed to grow even bigger ? (apart from its potential effect on the Saar Offensive) Does it stop the FoF or just make a bigger pile of equipment on the sand on the 4 June ?
But that's what you get if you only supply an almost insignificant part of the land force, you have to follow what the major part wants to do....
Realistically a peacetime commitment to deploy a BEF to France throughout the 20s and 30s would mean that GB send a much larger (and better) force in 39 and therefore gets much more say in the planning of what will happen.
In WWI GB sent six infantry divisions and five cavalry brigades initially and built it up rapidly.
If you have similar sized force prepared to land in France during the 30s
(say 4 infantry and 2 Armoured Div ?)
By 1939 with all the build up with Munich etc what size would it be ? (with conscription to boost numbers and far more well trained officers and NCOs than OTL) Say 8 infantry and 4 Armoured Div ?
This force might have a significant effect in 1940 with 8 more months after it has landed to grow even bigger ? (apart from its potential effect on the Saar Offensive) Does it stop the FoF or just make a bigger pile of equipment on the sand on the 4 June ?
As for all this simply resulting in a similar number of better tanks being abandoned in France - well at the end of the Day the BEF represented only 10% of the Allies during the battle
The BEF might only be 10% in numbers OTL but it was a much higher % of actual effective units due to a large % of the French/Belgium/Dutch army's being old reserves B and C class etc with limited ability.
ITTL the expanded BEF will be of a similar (or better) standard to OTL BEF just significantly bigger due to a realistic plan to fight in Europe and all that implies. This means that it might well be much closer in size to the Active French army say, 8 infantry and 4 Armoured Div Regular deployed in Sept 39 with a build up of 12 TA Inf and 2 more Armoured Div deployed and ready prior to German invasion? (I'm assuming that if you increase the size of the army in mid 30s you will increase the number of both equipment produced and officers/NCOs trained and that will then feed into making growth much easier in the late 30s ?)
With 26 Div (16 more than OTL?) you would probably have a effect on the battle simply by displacing some of the French units ie B series would take the place of C who would be displaced to rear line strategic reserve.
If the British army deploys twice as many active divisions in May 1940 then all bets are off!!
The BEF might only be 10% in numbers OTL but it was a much higher % of actual effective units due to a large % of the French/Belgium/Dutch army's being old reserves B and C class etc with limited ability.
...
Good question
Britain had what 4 Divisions during Peacetime during the 30s in Britain?
ITTL the expanded BEF will be of a similar (or better) standard to OTL BEF just significantly bigger due to a realistic plan to fight in Europe and all that implies. This means that it might well be much closer in size to the Active French army say, 8 infantry and 4 Armoured Div Regular deployed in Sept 39 with a build up of 12 TA Inf and 2 more Armoured Div deployed and ready prior to German invasion?
With 26 Div (16 more than OTL?) you would probably have a effect on the battle simply by displacing some of the French units ie B series would take the place of C who would be displaced to rear line strategic reserve.
IIRC in our timeline the Mobile Force was seen as the lead unit since Italy's growing conflict with Abyssinia had people feeling that region as the most likely to see fighting break out plus there was more free space to train. If the Experimental Armoured Force stays in existence then I could see a progression of it continuing to evolve, a second formation being raised when after their crushing the opposition at the annual army training manoeuvres several years running it's pointed out they really need an equal opponent to train against and it showing just how powerful they are in comparison, the first gets sent out to Egypt when things in Africa start hotting up, then when re-armament starts in earnest a third armoured division is raised in the UK in the late 1930s. Two, and later three, armoured formations seems like the largest number feasible both financially and organisationally within the army to me.A Mobile Force is raised in Egypt during 1936 but this includes mostly older tanks and 60 odd Rolls Royce Armoured cars but is the start of the Mobile Division in Egypt - by 1940 it has some of the latest equipment but mostly older tanks and more modified armoured cars with the bulk of the New Tank's and other tracked vehicles going to the 3rd and subsequent Mobile divisions.
As I've said on other similar threads a 'universal' tank was what the army specifically wanted, it was only after the failure of the A6 and follow-on A7 tank development programmes at the start of the 1930s due to their not having a powerful enough engine to meet the performance requirements that they went for the infantry-cruiser split as a solution. Get the right people to pick a decent engine - and there were several to choose from, my favourite being the Rolls-Royce Kestrel aero-engine - and you're good to go. You're still likely to see light tanks but more in the reconnaissance role where they're suited.I would like to think that by 1939ish continuous development would see a resonable 'Universal tank' design rather than a mix of Light, Infantry and Cruiser tanks.
I think it's more likely you'd see I and II Corps made up of an armoured division and two infantry divisions with III made up solely of infantry, how motorised the infantry are, IIRC the British army was the most heavily motorised/mechanised force in existence at the time, is a question. Doesn't require much of an increase in manpower merely re-employing it.Well without making the BEF any bigger we are still looking at 9 Divisions in 3 Corps effectively being the principle fighting components of the BEF. But with the POD of our Mobile force continuing and lets say effectively becoming 1st Division at some point in the mid 30s we might see 3 Corps each with 1 'Mobile division' and 2 Motorised Infantry Divisions - each corps would also have its own Reconnaissance Regiment which would also have benefited from improved development of the mobile force.